Salon on the Loneliness of Max Baucus

Thursday, September 17th at 1:45AM EST

5 Comments

In the end, after months and months of negotiations aimed at winning bipartisan support for a healthcare reform bill in the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus was all alone on Wednesday as he announced his draft proposal. He stood, looking lonely, in front of a backdrop that could have accommodated his entire so-called Gang of Six — if, that is, the talks had worked out. As it was, he showed up as a Gang of One. But don’t tell Baucus his work had come to naught. “No Republican has offered his or her support at this moment,” he admitted. “But I think by the time we get the final passage in this committee, you’ll find Republican support. This is a bill that should enjoy broad support.”

[SNIP] GOP leader Mitch McConnell dismissed the plan outright: “Only in Washington would anyone think [it] makes sense, especially in this economy.”

Many Democrats were even harsher. “We can do better,” said Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat who was cut out of the negotiations even though he’s on the Finance Committee. Russ Feingold, of Wisconsin, called it “healthcare reform in name only.” . . .

Baucus had managed, it seemed, to produce bipartisan unity after all — but against, not for, his bill. The whole point of the exercise had been to get Republicans on board, and they walked away. Baucus himself had said, last week, that a deal was there to be had, but “it comes down to a matter of political will.” The GOP turned out not to have it. But Baucus still sounded surprised to finally learn that.

“We’ve debated this thing — we’ve met over a hundred hours,” he said. “I forget what the total is. There are no real policy deal-breakers. It just — it’s more getting more comfortable with what all this is.”

5 Comments Leave a comment

Baucus Bill Isn't The Only Bill We Should Worry About

ggross56 (Diary) Thursday, September 17th at 3:22AM EST (link)

We should also worry about the Bennett bill, too. The Lady Logician explains why here.

"no real policy deal-breakers"?

JSobieski (Diary) Thursday, September 17th at 8:33AM EST (link)

This kind of thinking is the end result of Hail to the Moderates—an absolute lack of any kind of critical thinking.

Baucus believes his plan is reasonable solely because it is “to the right” of all the other plans pushed by Democrat. He has no ability to actually look at the core issue—that insurance will become less affordable once the federal government starts regulating what is a sufficient plan.

My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.

STOP THE MADNESS!

A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!

This Thing is DOA

reaganiterepublicanresistance Thursday, September 17th at 8:40AM EST (link)

It is starting to look like they can’t get this thing passed with or without a public option… because everyone figured out it’s a nationalization with draconian rationing in effect… anything else portrayed is just BS

Note that whenever Obama, Emanuel, or Gibbs are asked about why polls show SO many people oppose their misguided Cap-n-Trade and Obamacare proposals, they ALWAYS segue-right-into “we need to educate the public…”.

LOL- save your breath- Constitutionally-aware patriots don’t take lectures from Marxists.

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com

The Reaganite Republican

Constitutionally-aware patriots don’t take lectures from Marxists

izoneguy (Diary) Thursday, September 17th at 8:58AM EST (link)

Heh, what a racist!!!

LOL, – you are correct!!

Obama is failing not because he is black – but because he is a Marxist!

If you call someone a Marxist is that racist as well?

What would you call that – Macist???

The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.

Uh, Salon? It looks like you made a mistake in your copy.

The_Gadfly (Diary) Thursday, September 17th at 9:31AM EST (link)

Let me help you fix it.

You released:

Baucus himself had said, last week, that a deal was there to be had, but “it comes down to a matter of political will.” The GOP turned out not to have it. But Baucus still sounded surprised to finally learn that.

What you should have released was:

Baucus said last week that a deal was there to be had, but “it comes down to a matter of political will.” No need for the self-referential. He’s only a committee chairman, not someone with omniscience. Some might even question whether or not he has any expertise.The GOP turned out to have it, while the Democrats are divided. You need to stick to the facts, and not simply assume that the position you advocate for in opinion columns is the only option. Democrats are fully in favor of some sort of federal government intrusion into the insurance business. Republican are fully against it. Well, there are a small number of people in both groups who have some sympathy for the other side, but only at the margins and a only very small number or people. The most important point here is that IF Democrats were united on insurance reform, Republicans wouldn’t be able to stop it. It is the disunion of Democrats which is causing the bills to fail. The rest of the line is good. And as a racist* card carrying extreme right winger I must confess I was as surprised as Baucus was that no senatorial Republicans were taking the “bipartisan” bait this time.

*Libs have been using this one for so long I decided it is time to go Jarhead on this label. If all it denotatively means is “someone with whom I disagree but against whom I can provide no logical argument” then I will proudly accept it. If you ever want to go back to it’s original meaning (as found here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racist) with the connotation of someone who is outside the pale of acceptable behavior, let me know and I will drop it. Yeah, Jimmy finally pushed me over the edge on this one.