Gibbs just said the Senate bill is NOT dead, implying the House still could pass Senate bill

[jenmito]

without Scott Brown's input. (It was in response to a direct question about whether or not it's still possible that the House could sign the Senate bill as-is). This was regarding Obama's comment in the ABC interview where he said the Senate won't have ANOTHER vote before Brown is sworn in. That bothered people here.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. our health is important

we have got to do something

[jenmito]

5. And Gibbs said as much.

[flamingdem]

2. Good. HRC loss = Republican gain, bigtime nt

[dgibby]

3. He also said that the WH didn't see the loss in MA coming.

Not the most reliable source for info,imo.

[jenmito]

10. Well, he said later that Obama was surprised starting weeks ago when the polls showed

Coakley starting to slip in the polls.

[livetohike]

4. They could wait until Brown shows up to take his seat, as the

Pres. requested and then go ahead and pass the Senate version in the House. Then chip away at making improvements in the future :-). If we can get more Dem. senators elected in 2010, that is.

[jenmito]

6. They don't even HAVE to wait for Brown for the HOUSE to pass the bill that

the Senate ALREADY passed. That wouldn't be leaving Brown out, nor MA unrepresented. Very slick.

[livetohike]

14. I think what you just said makes good sense and I hope that

is what they do. Pass this thing and move on (for now).

[jenmito]

16. Thanks...

I'm hoping that's what they do.

[DrToast]

7. I suspect that at this point, nobody really knows what the hell is going on

It's going to take a few days for the dust to settle to see where we're at on health care.

[derby378]

8. The House will never pass the Senate bill as is

They'll force some major concessions, including some form of "public" option.

[jenmito]

11. Yes they will. As long as they say they'll try to instantly fix it through

reconciliation.

[freddie mertz]

9. Message control very sloppy today. They had no plan B in place, obviously.

[Clio the Leo]

13. No, the press had no plan B....

.... with the speed at which things are moving on Capitol Hill, there was clearly a plan B.

[freddie mertz]

20. So, what was that plan exactly?

What Gibbs described, or what Obama talked about?

[jenmito]

22. Their plans were

to either have the House pass the Senate bill (which it looks like they will do since that wouldn't "leave out" the new senator), to rush the final bill through before Brown got seated, or to get Snowe as the 60th vote.

[freddie mertz]

26. That's three plans, not one.

[jenmito]

30. Their Plan B was the House signing the Senate bill. But they also had a Plan C and a

Plan D.

[freddie mertz]

33. Are you sure of the order?

Do you work in the WH, or just get the calls direct from Rahm or David?

[jenmito]

36. It was repeatedly discussed on MSNBC before Brown even won. n/t

[freddie mertz]

40. By whom? O'Donnell or Maddow?

I stopped watching this week.

Couldn't take it.

[jenmito]

45. It was a "full screen" list that all of the anchors read. Chuck Todd and other White House

correspondents said the preferred way was for the House to pass the Senate bill.

[freddie mertz]

53. Well, that seems it might be toast today. nt.

[CreekDog]

12. You may be right, but that's not the point

The point is they did not know what they were going to do

They don't know what they are going to do now

And it sure seems like they didn't do a damn thing about it in the meantime.

Caught looking is what it's called.

[jenmito]

15. How could they know what they're gonna do unless they had ESP and knew

Dems. would come out right after Coakley lost and make such negative statements about the way the bill should go?

[CreekDog]

17. Oh my God? Are you kidding me? You think I'm talking about ESP?

Everyone knows this has been been close all along.

One lost vote here or there could imperil the whole thing.

You don't need ESP to have a Plan B in case Robert Byrd can't vote, or Teddy Kennedy's vote is not aviailable, or Joe Lieberman bolts.

They did not have a Plan B. The party simply didn't have one, so the messaging is all messed up, with everyone saying different things and the Administration saying well, maybe this or maybe that.

Having a Plan B for when you lose 1 critical vote doesn't require ESP, it requires planning.

The idea that they didn't do it is maddening. (and stupid)

[jenmito]

18. Nope. They DID have a Plan B...

and a Plan C and a Plan D. What they DIDN'T have was the foresight to know a few Dems. would come out right after the election against doing anything before Brown was sworn in.

[freddie mertz]

21. Obama now says HE wants to wait too.

It is all very confusing. :crazy:

[jenmito]

23. Right-he doesn't want MA to not be represented...

which it won't NOT be if the House passes the already-passed Senate bill.

[freddie mertz]

25. Um, Kirk is still there right now.

[jenmito]

27. I know. So?

[freddie mertz]

29. Mass is legally represented.

[jenmito]

34. Not by the "will of the people" who just voted. A few Dems. in congress want Brown sworn in

before anything else in the Senate is done.

[freddie mertz]

37. Fine. I don't support the current bill anyway.

Especially the ultra-shitty Senate version.

I hope the House stops it, and they get some good things like Medicare buy-in, etc, through one at a time, in reconciliation.

[jenmito]

41. They may pass the current bill AND

"get some good things" through a "patch" done by reconciliation.

[freddie mertz]

43. I don't believe anything they say anymore.

I think that is a widespread opinion, too.

Which is another reason we lost Ted's seat.

[Teaser]

32. "What they DIDN'T have was the foresight to know a few Dems. would come out..."

"What they DIDN'T have was the foresight to know a few Dems. would come out right after the election against doing anything before Brown was sworn in."

Then, I humbly submit, they have not done their homework. Everyone knows the Democratic Congress is rife with weasels, kvetchers, and showboaters. Everyone.

[freddie mertz]

35. What they didn't have was "foresight," period.

Clueless in DC.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. So now all power lies not in the Senate, but it the House

where key members have been treated with a lack of respect for a year? Told 'we're keeping track' and that sort of thing. House members who are defending their seats, and who know they will be Martha if they vote for this lousy bill their constituency hates?
That should go well.

[jenmito]

24. They will not "be Martha" if they vote for this bill. They will "be Martha" if they don't pass

this bill. Martha lost because she ran a lousy campaign (when she was running at all).

[freddie mertz]

31. Many will lose either way.

Dem political strategy this year has sucked, big time.

[timeforpeace]

28. What else do you expect him to say? It's all up in the air. They didn't see this coming.

[jenmito]

38. If you don't believe it, why did MSNBC just report that Pelosi WILL have a vote

on the Senate bill with certain conditions?: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=140078&mesg_id=140078

[totodeinhere]

39. Of course the Senate bill is crap, so it's a moot point. n/t

[freddie mertz]

42. Aye, that's the rub.

The bill stinks, an everybody knows it, which is one of the big reasons Ted's seat went to a naked Republican man.

[quiller4]

44. It isn't crap though it has some flaws. The AFL-CIO issued a statement

today that they would support house passage of the Senate Bill and quick modification using the reconciliation process to modify the Cadillac tax

[totodeinhere]

46. I just saw Rep. Lynn Woolsey saying on Countdown that the House won't pass the Senate bill as is.

End of story.

[jenmito]

47. NOT "end of story." If, as I said in another thread,

the Senate Dems. give the House a separate piece of legislation in return called a "patch" on the budget-related issues in the original healthchare bill which would alter things like the "Cadillac tax" and the scope of mandates, those in the House now against it will pass it.

[totodeinhere]

48. But the Senate Dems can't guarantee that. If they couldn't get those things in the original bill,

what makes you think they can get it in a followup, especially with one less vote? And some of those things cannot legally be addressed with reconciliation. I agree with Rep. Anthony Weiner who said today that this bill is dead. And I say good riddance.

[jenmito]

49. They only need 50 + Biden. You're obviously a "KillTheBiller" so you HOPE

it's dead. Weiner did NOT say the bill is dead. He did not say he wouldn't vote for it, either. He was leaving things open with his wording.

[totodeinhere]

50. Yes, you've got my number and I wear it as a badge of honor.

That bill is crap. It's a giveaway to the big insurance companies and it's everything that the Liebermans of this world could want. If we could get bona fide HCR that will actually save some lives, it would be a much different story. And I'm convinced that if that had happened Coakley wouldn't have lost.

And BTW, there are some parts of that bill that involve other than budgetary issues, and for those things they cannot use reconciliation, and therefore they would need 60 votes, not 51. That is unless Uncle Harry grows some balls and dumps the filibuster rule, but that ain't gonna happen.

And even if they do try to use reconciliation, the GOP can still block it with filibusters because all procedural votes would still need 60 votes. Yes, the final vote would just need 51, but they may never get there. Lawrence O'Donnell gave a very good explanation of that yesterday on MSNBC, and as a former Senate staffer he should know.

[jenmito]

51. Suprise surprise!

The bill is much better than nothing. But your obsession with the idea of "giveaways to the big insurance companies" blinds you from seeing the good the bill will do. Lieberman just said we should slow down AGAIN. If he were so thrilled with it, he wouldn't still be trying to stop it. Same with Webb and Bayh. Coakley lost because she ran a terrible campaign.

And BTW, the reconciliation would only be used for budgetary issues.

[totodeinhere]

52. No, she lost for more reasons than a terrible campaign.

See this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=141094&mesg_id=141094

According to the poll I just linked to, the voters wanted a more progressive agenda than they were getting, so they voted for Brown in protest.