So, If HCR Was Dependent On Having A 60 Vote, Filibuster-Proof Majority, Then I Have A Question

[Yavin4]

If the ONLY way that HCR was ever going to be passed was to have a 60 vote filibuster-proof majority, then was Arlen Specter's switch the Dems also a part of that plan? Also, were they certain that Franken would prevail in the recount?

I ask this because when 2009 began, the Dems were looking at a 59-41 vote majority in the Senate at best with a strong possibility that it was going to be 58-42. Thus, if the early 2009 Senate vote expectations held, what would have been the strategy to get HCR passed? Because after tomorrow, just re-use that strategy.

In a sense, all that tomorrow may mean is that we go right back to where we were at the beginning of 2009, a Dem WH, a 59-41 vote majority in the senate, and a majority in the house. In fact, we'll be better off than we were at the beginning of 2009 where a 58-42 majority was a strong possibility.

Bottom line is this, if Obama and the Dems attempt to use the possible loss by Coakley as a reason to do nothing, then the American people will punish the hell out of them. They're not going to buy the 60-vote majority nonsense.

Leaders lead.

[Clio the Leo]

1. Which is why they're not planning to do nothing....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x133420

[Yavin4]

2. Good News!

Let's see it get done.

[IndianaGreen]

3. The 60-vote thingy was a pretext to avoid having a public option

Our bought-for government knows who butters their bread, and it ain't the people.

[TheWraith]

4. "Leaders lead." And backseat drivers spout platitudes.

Please explain in detail the procedures to pass comprehensive healthcare reform with an ongoing filibuster and many provisions that cannot go through reconciliation.

[Yavin4]

7. No, You Explain How It Was Going To Be Done A Year Ago When the Count Was 58-40

I posted that question in my OP. Please answer it.

[CTLawGuy]

14. use "leadership"

duh :eyes:



:sarcasm:

[Yavin4]

25. See My Post #23

I came up with three ways to get HCR reform done. That is, if the Dems in the Senate truly want HCR.

[Ozymanithrax]

5. The talk I've heard is ways to pass the bill fast if she looses...

I don't think they feel that loosing on this one is an option.

[gravity]

6. The plan originally was to go bipartisan

and at least get a republican or two.

[PolNewf]

8. Memory issues?

Leaders lead...sanctimonious bullshit.

At the beginning of 2009 the WH was trying to get a few Republican votes for exactly this reason. Tomorrow ends the healthcare debate for at least a generation if not forever, it doesn't reset to the beginning of 2009. At the beginning of 2009 the Republicans were semi-contrite for fucking up the country and there was some hope they would work with Dems to get something done.

Now at the beginning of 2010 the Republican denial strategy has become obvious and it has worked, aided by those on the left. There is no reason for Republicans to let anything get done. They can block everything and Dems will still be blamed, just as they have been for the last year. They might, if your lucky, allow Obama to pass tort reform, offshore oil drilling or abortion restrictions but I suspect that is as far as they will go to work across the isle.

When Martha Coakley loses tomorrow (most likely scenario - Nate Silver now gives her a 25% chance) I think for Dems in 2010 and Obama in 2012 their fate has been sealed barring a Republican death or retirement. Unless the economy turns around much faster than is expect it is going to be a frustrating 3 years followed by scary 4-8 Republicans years.

Perhaps the left in the US can't govern in reality as they can't seem to get their heads out of the clouds. This board, and especially firedoglake, have shown me that the repugs do not have the monopoly on dumb or crazy and they at least have some discipline, something the left defintely needs.

[Yavin4]

9. Voters Punish Leaders Who Cannot Get Things Done

You can call it "bullshit" all you want, but in the end, it's not Firedoglake or DU that decides elections, it's the people.

And, when you cannot produce tangible results that IMPROVE the lives of Americans after having an 18 vote lead in the Senate, then you FAILED as a FUCKING LEADER. END OF STORY.

As I said, LEADERS LEAD.

[PolNewf]

13. There goes my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader

The things I'm seeing at Firedoglake and DU are politically poisonous. Look at what it has done to DU.

"True Progressives" need to come to grips with the reality of your two party system. "Punishing" leaders who didn't\couldn't go as far or as fast as you wanted by electing or allowing the election of repugs is beyond short sighted.

The disastrous 8 years of Bush should have taught the "True Progressives" this lesson.

Leaders on the left in the US needs to be a miracle workers to deal with the left's stupidity and self destructive tendencies while also fighting the repugs.

[CTLawGuy]

16. It's the democrats' fault that the Repubs

gum up everything with filibusters?

Please explain.

[Yavin4]

24. If The Republicans Had A 60 Vote Super Majority and Then Lost One Seat

Do you think that would deter them from doing whatever they want to do? Do you think that they'd go into panic mode?

[CTLawGuy]

29. if the dems had 41 hard core liberals

and didn't care the harm that was being caused to American government from their obstruction, then yes, the Rs would panic.

[ChiciB1]

30. And I Must Add... The Left Aren't the Ones Who Are Screwing Up Either!

Blue Dogs & DLC have some sticky fingers in here and "the left" wanted to keep BIG PHARMA, Insurance Companies and Corporatism OUT as much as possible!

They are the winners with this HCR Bill!

Yes, LEADER'S LEAD, and I'm NOT seeing much LEADING! Someone could have been busting a few noggins, and pounding some tables. If they were, it sure didn't "trickle down" to "we the people!"

THE LEFT, my you know what!!!

[CTLawGuy]

15. wish I could recommend a post

Spot On!

[krawhitham]

10. They didn't assume the all repukes would vote against it

They stick together, unlike what the Dems did during Bush's terms

[Unvanguard]

11. They thought they would get more bipartisan support than they got. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

12. So, you're saying it was a pipedream the whole way then?

Because, well....Come on man!!!

We were never ever going to get a comprehensive bill through and nobody planned to either.

[Unvanguard]

18. Not at all. Specter, obviously, ended up supporting it.

And it was not unreasonable to expect that Snowe or some of the other centrist Republican Senators might have gone along with a moderate bill, as the Democrats would need anyway because of the number of conservatives in their caucus.

It seems pretty clear that the intensity and unanimity of the resistance to Obama's legislative aims on the part of the Republican Party took the administration by surprise.

[whistler162]

17. One word Cloture......

"cloture - The only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter, and thereby overcome a filibuster. Under the cloture rule (Rule XXII), the Senate may limit consideration of a pending matter to 30 additional hours, but only by vote of three-fifths of the full Senate, normally 60 votes. "

[ShortnFiery]

19. Then with 51 votes in the Senate choose - MEDICARE FOR ALL! eom

[grahamhgreen]

22. + 1, or 2...

[DCBob]

20. i think few anticipated the total lock-step obstruction from the Republicans

Most Dems including Obama, expected to get at least 2 or 3 Repubs to vote with them.

[uponit7771]

21. K&R, I was thinking the SAME THING while coming into work...we just go back to where we were...

...before Spectar jumped ship and reconciliation should be back on the table IMHO..

[Yavin4]

23. If The Senate Dems Are Committed To HCR

They can get it done with a 59-41 lead in the Senate. They could go through reconciliation. They could use the nuclear option. They can strike a huge deal with Olympia Snowe or another senator.

The idea that they cannot get ANYTHING done with a 18 vote majority is fucking laughable.

[CTLawGuy]

28. Response

(1) not everything in the health care bill can get through reconciliation. See the "Byrd Rule."

(2) you didn't like it when the Rs threatened to do it, so why is it an acceptable option now? Besides, we won't be in the majority forever. The Rs are thanking their lucky stars right now that they didn't go through with it when they were a majority.

(3) they may have to do this, and you wouldn't like what comes out, if anything.

[Yavin4]

33. If The Filibuster Rule Didn't Stop Bush's Odious Policies

Then what the hell good is it anyway?

[CTLawGuy]

34. it didn't because we didn't have 41 hard core liberals

in the senate.

[ChiciB1]

32. +1000... We're Being Taken For A Ride, But The Ferris Wheel Got Stuck

on top and we can't find a way down!! What's happening is a crock!

[hulka38]

26. It is utter nonsense. Good post Yavin4.

[Armstead]

27. But,biut,but we really need a 61 vote majority...a 65 vote majority.....

[ChiciB1]

31. Hey You Leftie... Haven't You Gotten The Message???

It's all your fault, and I guess mine too!!
:sarcasm: :nuke: