Will Grijalva Join the Party of "No"?

[Clio the Leo]

.... in voting AGAINST the health care bill?

Call him and tell him not to be a Boehner. ;)

Phone: [phone]

Key House Liberal “Leaning” Towards No On Health Reform

“As I weigh it, I think — for me — a ‘no’ vote is something that I continue to lean toward,” Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz., the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told Salon in a brief interview off the House floor Wednesday. “Especially the last additions — that was kind of a slap in the face for all of us who fought for the public option.”

If you’re trying to rescue the public option, this actually seems pretty counterproductive. After all, the best — probably the only — hope for resuscitating it is to somehow get it included as part of the reconciliation fix, either by adding it to the package or by slipping it in via an amendment.

We now know for a fact that Dems will take a vote on the package of proposals Obama has put forth. Hard to see how the public option’s prospects are helped by the defeat of this package, now that the die is cast. A separate vote on pieces of reform later? Yeah, right.

To be sure, House liberals have repeatedly threatened to bail on the proposals, only to swallow hard and support them in the end. That said, this time the margin for error is even tighter, so if even one additional liberal bolts, it’s a big deal.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/key-house-liberal-leaning-towards-no-on-health-reform/

[IndianaGreen]

1. Enough appeasement of the GOP and the corporate Dems!

This is a bad bill!

[Clio the Leo]

2. then join the teabaggers and tell him to vote AGAINST it...

.... let's have a contest .... see who wins?

[IndianaGreen]

4. Coffee Party

Senate's HCR is an anti-worker bill and a bailout of the evil Big Pharma and Big Insurance.

[RBInMaine]

18. Please save it. We start with this then work to improve it over time. Get real.

[Sebastian Doyle]

28. Yeah, how's that NAFTA horseshit working out for ya?

They told us they would fix that, and 18 years later, it only sucks infinitely more ass than it did originally.

[Hansel]

33. Okay, then just keep the status quo. See how that works out for ya? nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

34. The status quo sucks. Further enabling the criminal insurance industry with mandates would suck more

You cannot be both the problem AND the solution. Anybody who disagrees that the insurance industry is the problem, would have to either be insane, or on their payroll.

[Hansel]

38. If the status quo sucks then don't advocate for it.

Where in my post does it say that I disagree that the insurance industry is the problem. They are. One of many. But the bill is still a start and if it doesn't pass, you can rest assured they will simply be more emboldened to charge more and provide less. To ramp up their screwing of their customers because they will KNOW that no one is going to stop them.

It's not as though the insurance companies are going to stop operating because this bill is not passed. They'll just keep rolling on with business as usual. Increased premiums every fricking year and higher deductibles. And business after business deciding they can no longer afford to offer it.

NAFTA created a flood gate to job outsourcing that didn't exist prior to its passage. However, passing this bill is not going to suddenly create insurance companies that screw it's customers. They're already doing that all on their own. Passing this bill will start the long overdue regulation of insurance companies and it will assure 31 million people who don't have insurance now (and for whom we are all paying for their overcharged emergency room or advanced disease health care) will get more affordable care at an earlier stage in the disease process.

If the bill doesn't pass, there is nothing to improve upon, because there is no way that they are going to go from nothing to single payer. This is a step and a big one. Too bad it's not perfect. Welcome to the real world.

[Sebastian Doyle]

40. So where's the path from mandatory corporate coverage to single payer?

Trick question. There is no such thing, and there is absolutely no intention of there ever being such thing. Once everyone is forced to pay a corporation for the rest of their goddamned lives, the DLC will claim "problem solved" and the subject of REAL reform will never be brought up again.

The Hacker/Dean approach was a reasonable compromise. You have a true Public Option open to anybody who wanted it. The insurance companies are allowed to exist, but they have to compete with the Public Option. Which means they either clean up their act and do so, or they lose their customers. It would have put the choice of plans on the citizen, and the choice of playing fairly or not playing at all on the insurance corporations.

That is a fair and equitable way of approaching this, and it should be the LEAST we should settle for.

[joeybee12]

3. I think his concern is that the senate will say they'll go for reconciliation,

then won't. I wouldn't trust the bastards either.

[IndianaGreen]

5. The Senate is a miserable failure as an institution

and is not to be trusted!

[saracat]

7. Exactly.

[RBInMaine]

19. Enough ! Let's at least give them a chance before the INSANE bashing starts. Now go to Freepland.

[Hansel]

29. It's loaded with them tonight. Obama's speech must have them on edge. nt

[saracat]

6. Raul is correct about HCR but Apparently he had no choice about the house bill.

He did not support Stupak. He supported HCR and a public option.He likely regrets his vote because of what the Senate has come up with. you got me going for a bit. I should know that you will alweays maniplate events for your own ends .

[ProSense]

8. So you agreed with his vote for the House bill containing the Stupak amendment

on principle?

[saracat]

9. He voted for HCR. He did not support Stupak

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/grijalva-vows-to-fight-trigger-opt-out-stupak-amendment.php

[saracat]

10. Grijalva fought Stupak.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/grijalva-vows-to-fight-trigger-opt-out-stupak-amendment.php

[Clio the Leo]

17. IF he votes no this time.....

... he'll be walking hand in hand with Stupak to HELP the GOP.

Hopefully he WON'T.

But we have to keep calling. It's one thing for a sell-out Blue Dog to betray Americans in need of their help ... it's sad to see a good progressive considering doing the same.

[saracat]

20. I asked him to vote no. Unless there are changes. And he knows me and the

support I have given the Democratic Party and ALL our Democratic congresspersons. I am going to say the same to our other folks. Sorry.Only with Stupak /Nelson removed and a public option. Do not TRUST the Senate.

[Clio the Leo]

31. Nelson's Nebraska kick back was killed just before Scott Brown's election...

... Stupak, unfortunately, is another matter.

There's no way to qualify your vote. You cant vote No* (*because the bill wasn't progressive enough) or No!

Any Dem who votes "nay" will have their name recorded in the annals of history among the GOP who tried to destroy the Democratic party for their own political needs .... regardless of what was best for the country as a whole.

[saracat]

46. Sorry. Thats BS. All that will be recorded is a NO vote, which is against a bad bill.

But if they can FIX the bill, that is another thing.I am just saying do NOT trust the Senate to do so.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

25. Grijalva voted for the House bill, which contains the Stupak amendment.

Know your facts before you try your hand a lame name calling.

[saracat]

47. Because they had no choice. You are misleading as usual. Raul

campaigned against Stupak. He voted for the house version because he trusted the Senate NOT to include anything resembling it. He feels betrayed. He doesn't want to be fooled again and I don't blame him. I spoke to a friend of mine in his DC office today and said I would totally support a NO vote and suggested he stick to his guns. Blue Dogs get whatever they want and so do Repugs.it is past time liberals get something too. I posted the link to Raul's opposition to Stupak.

And I suggest you learn facts as well,you did a fine job with the anti abortion clause in the current Senate Bill. You might look at this post for some facts and ALL the links you can dream of. This is what is really going to happen to choice with this crap Bill.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7839511

[laughingliberal]

49. "And I suggest you learn facts..."

You do realize to whom you're responding here, don't you? No doubt this will be ignored as are all facts which support any opposing view. I predict :crickets: will be the response to your reply.

edited spelling error

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

11. I called and asked him to keep up the good fight and that I appreciated all the good work he does.

I also asked that they continue to fight any version of Stupak.Including Nelson if it goes to reconciliation.

[jefferson_dem]

12. Call Grijavala and tell him to not side with the teabaggers.

It's time to stand with Americans and get health care reform done.

[Cha]

14. I called my blue dog rep and asked him

not to be afraid of those who get brainwashed by hateradio and fauxsn00ze..and cnn.

[Clio the Leo]

16. Shameful how we have a GOOD Dem possibly voting the SAME WAY...

.... as Bart Stupak, huh?

[DFLforever]

35. I think he's trying to keep feathers ruffled on reconciliation

measures.

I don't believe he would actually vote no. He's knows better than we do that if this bill fails, they'll never get another one.

[saracat]

21. Call your own states reps. Leave ours alone.

[jefferson_dem]

41. Fuck that.

I'll call them all.

[brentspeak]

24. I'll call and congratulate him on not supporting the health insurance industry w/ our tax dollars

[Hansel]

26. Really? You prefer just supporting them with your non-tax dollars.

I'm sorry but your argument is lame. You're going to pay the insurance companies either way. You're just going to pay them more if there is no reform.

One way or another you are going to pay.

[brentspeak]

30. Uh, nice try

It's called "strong public option" and "no mandate".

[Hansel]

32. Not a try. A fact.

Like I said, you'll be paying more to the insurance companies if it doesn't pass than if it does, even in its current form.

There's not going to be a strong public option and there, unfortunately, will probably be a mandate. There might be a public option, but it will not be strong.

You can rest assured that you are going to pay insurance companies and tax dollars for government funded health care at an exponentially higher rate if this bill fails. If not, our health care industry will collapse under the weight. It will simply embolden the insurance companies, medical care and medical equipment providers because they will know absolutely no one is going to stop them. This bill would at least place some limits on them.

They have been trying to pass health care for decades. Once it's pass and that hurdle has been leaped and the world doesn't come to an end, it will be a hell of a lot easier to pass bills to improve it. And maybe pass a strong public option. But in this political climate, you're not going to get exactly what you want so you would be better off opting for something that will start that ball rolling.

Of course if you want to pay more to health insurance companies with no regulatory controls on them because you didn't get what you wanted this time around, that's your choice. I prefer the bill be passed.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jefferson_dem]

42. Hope you enjoy your purity...

The rest of us will work for progress.

[frylock]

13. unrec

[Moosepoop]

15. Rec

[angelicwoman]

23. They're called the party of No because they almost ALWAYS say no

Grijalva would say no only in this occassion, or only in a few occassions, if he votes against the health care bill. So your language is misleading.

[Nikki Stone1]

27. Unrec--this bill is a disaster

..

[freddie mertz]

36. Unrec. I have no problem with this patriotic public servant sticking to his guns.

PS I call flamebait in the wording of the OP.

[Hansel]

39. zzzz...

[Arkana]

37. Well, when HCR goes down to defeat in the House and the GOP

laughs and cavorts in victory once again, I'm sure Mr. Grijalva will sleep soundly at night with his principles.

This "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude is to be expected from the Republicans. I'm disappointed to hear it from a so-called "progressive".

[jefferson_dem]

44. He'll dream of sugar plum fairies, magic wands and pretty ponies...

:boring:

If the Rep votes against this bill, I hope he's primaried and gets kicked to the curb.

[freddie mertz]

45. Ever consider that progressive Dems might have been brought in to all these discussions?

That might have been a good idea at some point along the way.

[laughingliberal]

50. Now, you're just being unreasonable

Of course, progressives who wanted to see some type of real reform will be blamed if HCR is defeated. Couldn't be that the bought off elected officials who wrote a horrible bill would be held accountable.