home

Plan B

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 09:51:19 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'll write about Massachusetts tomorrow. Tonight I see Josh Marshall is melting down because of this:

Two high-profile progressives--Reps. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)--said the only way they could sign on to the Senate bill is if it was accompanied immediately, or even preceded by, a separate bill, making a number of major preemptive changes to what they regard as an inferior package.

"It would have to be so quick that they happen at the same time," Weiner said. [...] We've gotta recognize we have an entirely different scenario tomorrow." "You should do the other stuff first and then pass the Senate bill," Nadler told me. "I don't see how I could vote for the Senate bill," otherwise.

I applaud Weiner and Nadler. This is smart bargaining AND smart politics. Plan B CAN NOT be just pass the Senate bill. Massachusetts should teach us that. I'll explain why tomorrow.

Speaking for me only

< Upset Central: Brown Beats Coakley for Mass. Senate Seat | Why Conservatives Shouldn't Get the Credit For Coakley's Defeat >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Plan B | 75 comments (75 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Great point (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 09:54:26 PM EST
    Renewed relevance of the progressive block.

    Watching Marshall freak-out (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by kidneystones on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:01:01 PM EST
    and then scream at everyone to just 'CALM the FRAK DOWN and SHUT-UP, why don't you!' had been one of the best parts of the evening. Lovin' it.

    I agree, this is a great time to stick to the WH, the insurance companies and big pharma. Kill the existing bill, make jobs the priority: as in actually hiring some people, and turn HCR over to Feingold and company for prepare something progressive and practical.

    See? Alliteration.

    That's not my Plan B (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:02:44 PM EST
    Nor is it what Weiner and Nadler said.

    Parent
    Looking forward to your post. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by kidneystones on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:15:34 PM EST
    I don't expect to agree with all of it.

    I personally think HCR at the national level is dead. I'd love to see Dems with some spine come up with a better alternative. Or kill the bill.

    Un-employment doesn't drop to 8% or lower by August, Dems can say adios to 2010 and 2012.

    Here's a question. Would a GOP economic team look any different from the current one? That, IMHO, is the problem.


    Parent

    You've got plan B just right (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by NealB on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:23:41 PM EST
    Democratic leadership should be way ahead of you on this to set the wheels in motion tomorrow morning.

    Yet again, another great opportunity for the Democratic supermajority in Congress. I expect them to blow my mind. Tomorrow. Crack of dawn.

    Parent

    I'm all ears (none / 0) (#7)
    by Klio on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:05:36 PM EST
    and will tune in tomorrow, then.

    Parent
    You're going to suggest (none / 0) (#8)
    by observed on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:06:43 PM EST
    expanding Medicare and the other options you have approved as being palliative, but not reform.


    Parent
    I'm am going to suggest (5.00 / 5) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:07:46 PM EST
    for bargaining for the best deal you can get and, if you think it is not good enough, then walk away from the table.

    Parent
    ah, Dems have guts. (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by observed on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:21:22 PM EST
    I hope so.
    Maybe one day you can explain why Republicans take lots of risks, and principled stands---even commit major crimes to advance their agenda---while Democrats can't even stiffarm Olympia Snowe?


    Parent
    I'm not saying they WILL do it (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:25:39 PM EST
    I'm saying they SHOULD do it.

    The only time Dems did what I suggested was when Rahmbo was overruled in 2006 and Dem ran against the Iraq War.

    Parent

    Stick a fork in it, (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:15:31 PM EST
    This awful HCR bill is done.  Over.  Fini.  

    Jim Webb has already said there will be not be another vote in the Senate until Brown is seated.  The House doesn't have the votes to pass the current Senate bill.  

    Will they start over or just give up?  I have no idea.  If forced to guess, I'd say they'll pass something or other but it will be next to nothing.  

    What a shame, an entire year wasted while unemployment grows.  It's the economy, STUPID.  

    Erza Klein and Rachel Maddow (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:25:21 PM EST
    Are on television now saying that is election means that democrats MUST pass a health care bill this year or they're all dead meat.  Oh really?  Gee, I thought this loss in MA said something else entirely.......................silly me.  

    MA voters interviewed on NPR (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:31:35 PM EST
    before the polls closed:  we don't want federal government growing bigger, intervening more in our lives, costing us more money.

    Parent
    They never interview (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:33:47 PM EST
    the people who decided not to go vote.

    Parent
    Do you expect to find out the demographics (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:40:03 PM EST
    re who didn't vote?

    Parent
    Bingo. (none / 0) (#32)
    by shoephone on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:40:59 PM EST
    Though turnout was big, I'll bet there are plenty who did not show up at the polls.

    If only Dems were interested in learning something from them.

    Parent

    How would reporters find the voters (none / 0) (#39)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:56:51 PM EST
    Who are at home and not voting?  

    Parent
    Voter Interviews (none / 0) (#46)
    by Dave B on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 11:06:56 PM EST
    They never seem to find a Democrat to interview either.  I read that over 20% of Democrats voted for Brown.  Wouldn't you think they would be searching out those folks to hear what they have to say about it?

    Of course not, darn Liberal Media!

    Parent

    Well, Rachel was talking with (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 12:32:35 AM EST
    Howard Dean just as the polls were closing and early results were starting. He said some pretty lame things ... she must have believed him.

    They really, really don't want to admit what's happening ... so much youtube, so little time.

    Parent

    The spin is (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by robotalk on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:34:34 PM EST
    the have to pass the health bill in 30 days to staunch the bleeding from this loss.

    That means the Senate Bill unchanged. Watch and see.

    And that is death for the dems in 2012.

    Oh, brother... (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Anne on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:58:10 PM EST
    the Dems are still thinking that all they've suffered is a bloody nose, when, in fact, they are bleeding out internally.

    I don't know how much longer I can be associated with the kind of stupidity that thinks passing the Senate bill is the answer, when it may well have been the reason Coakley lost tonight; call me whatever you want, but I have a very low tolerance for stupid. [which may be obvious from some of my comments...]

    Parent

    I agree (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by NYShooter on Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 01:11:10 AM EST
    It wasn't just one issue that sunk Coakley; I don't think it was even about Coakley. The voters don't get to write an essay explaining their vote; they only have two choices: "D" or "R."  It's like when a prosecutor, or defense attorney, forces a witness to answer a question: Yes or No? Neither one may express what the witness feels but it's the only 2 choices they have.

    The Mass. Voters sent a message the only way they could. And the message was a complete repudiation of Obama and the Democratic leadership, and how they squandered the good will of the voters of 2006 and 2009.

    Obama can't come back from this because the problem isn't mechanical that can be fixed with a tweak here and a twist there. The vote was an expression of the complete and total betrayal that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have shoved down our throats.


    Parent

    Not going to happen (none / 0) (#38)
    by BrassTacks on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:53:46 PM EST
    To many scared Congressmen who have to run in 10 months for them to agree to vote for the Senate bill.  

    I agree, if the actually did that it would be the death knell for the party in this  year and in 2012.  

    Parent

    I'm not expecting much from my new Rep (none / 0) (#44)
    by nycstray on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 11:06:05 PM EST
    (he's long time, I'm moving to his district) The district went Hillary, but he was a Super and went Obama. {Sigh} My Rep here is very safe, but feisty, so hopefully she'll join in with Wiener's voice.

    Parent
    Some Dem Senators have been aware (none / 0) (#57)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 12:36:38 AM EST
    this year's election could have them fighting for their jobs because of the administration, too. The plea's for money have been quite revealing.

    I have shot off a short and sweet email to mine already this evening to make sure she understands how I view the MA voter results and that I will be watching the campaigns like any good Indy... listening carefully to all candidates.

    Parent

    Mine knew in Autumn there'd be one less (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ellie on Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 02:08:09 AM EST
    ... supporter getting their backs. The partei doesn't have the instinct or smarts to swiftly course-correct (unlike the Grand Old Lizard Brain, which just sets its sights and plows ahead).

    And oh yeah, any sign of Rahmbo tonight, ridiculing and baiting the base? Funny, that.

    Parent

    Plan B to include transparency (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Cream City on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:58:01 PM EST
    for more than 72 hours?  And about the campaign promise that it all would be on the toob, that went down the toobs today.  In response:

    The American Society of News Editors (www.asne.org) today protested the lack of transparency on the health reform negotiations. Here's an excerpt from their protest:

        We agree with other journalism groups and open government advocates who have decried the amount of debate and negotiation over the America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that has occurred away from public view....
        "It is now clear that there is an inexcusable level of secrecy surrounding this landmark legislation, especially as the current proceedings are likely to produce the final version presented to all members of Congress. To so profoundly affect the American public through closed-door proceedings is an affront to one of the core values of Democracy."
        ASNE reminds congressional leadership that public trust in the final result -- no matter what that result is -- will be maximized by openness.

    The media are turning. . . .

    Wow, mixed emotions. (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Teresa on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 11:10:45 PM EST
    I hate the Senate bill almost as much as no bill at all. I do wonder though, is there anyone here who has been rejected for insurance at any price (not that I could pay it) due to a pre-existing condition?

    I have a limited liability policy through the state of TN. It's fine for normal doctor visits & does allow me to see a neurologist but only six specialist visits of any kind per year. But if I follow my family history of heart trouble at a not so old age, I'm in a world of hurt. Where do you go when you have a little bit of insurance but only enough to pay for the simplest of surgeries?

    I'd like to see them do away with pre-existing conditions even if it means throwing my dreams of health care reform down the tubes for now. Then, I'd have to figure out a way to pay the outrageous premiums unless they were required to accept me and also charge me at the normal rate for someone my age.

    It really hurts to see us throw away this chance. I don't mean the election tonight but the chance we had to truly reform health care. We live in such a backwards country to consider ourselves to be the greatest of all. I'm not a bit proud to live where health care needs are not taken care of.

    I have, but I was lucky (none / 0) (#66)
    by suzieg on Wed Jan 20, 2010 at 03:27:54 AM EST
    that my state (Texas) offered insurance through a risk pool which is excellent insurance coverage at a high price - close to $17,000 yearly. I battled cancer three months after enrolling and had nothing refused or questionned. I was cut off unexpectedly during my chemo treatment when an illegal stole my identity and I was accused of fraud but thankfully got it resolved quickly.

    Parent
    Josh said something earlier (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:00:15 PM EST
    I agree with:

       No question this was a terribly run campaign. Not just that, an irresponsibly run campaign. Yes, it's the national climate. It's a lot of stuff that's going on today. But I don't have much question that another Democratic nominee would have come out with a much better result. I really believe that.

    Coakley was the wrong candidate.

    Unfortunately (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:01:57 PM EST
    MA Dem primary voters did not agree with you and Josh.

    Not even sure what the point of Josh's comment even is.

    TO me that is as meaningful as wondering how Hillary would have done as President.

    See didn't win. Neither did Capuano.

    Parent

    Read Jane (none / 0) (#14)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:15:58 PM EST
    who defends Coakley, but agrees she lost because of changing her position on the abortion part of the health care bill.

    Coakley's drop in the polls started when  they demanded she bow down and kiss the feet of President Ben Nelson over abortion:

    Coakley's lead dropped significantly after the Senate passed health care reform shortly before Christmas and after the Christmas Eve "bombing" incident. Polling showed significant concerns with the actions of Senator Nelson to hold out for a better deal. Senator Nelson's actions specifically hurt Coakley who was forced to backtrack on her opposition to the abortion restriction amendment.

    I remember that as the turning point as well, see my post here, Martha Coakley's Bait and Switch on Abortion.  That was post-primary and unable to recover from.

    Parent

    Capuano supported the bill (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:18:41 PM EST
    in the primaries. And lost.

    Funny how people forgot that.

    Parent

    So he didn't have to flip-flop? (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Cream City on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:33:25 PM EST


    Parent
    He would not have had to (none / 0) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 10:34:38 PM EST
    True.

    Parent
    Oh, my goodness (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 11:01:26 PM EST
    With respect, Jeralyn, Jane is flat-out wrong about this.  This is heavily Catholic Massachusetts, there's wide ambivalence about abortion and she'd probably gain as many votes as she lost for that one sliver of an issue, to the extent that it registered at all with the vast, vast majority of voters.

    I agree entirely that the flip-flop on the hc bill is what started the stampede to Brown, but it's all the other stuff in the bill and the ugly way it's been done that had the main impact.

    Parent

    I