Comments on: If A Senator Votes for Cloture, She is Voting to Pass Health Care

By: jeffreywturner

jeffreywturner — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:35:10 +0000

With Lieberman on record as prepared to filibuster the public option, and probably 30 or so Dem senators determined to include the public option at any cost, only about half the GOP senators will need to vote with them to keep the public option in the bill, thereby ensuring the bill’s ultimate failure to pass.

By: Menlo

Menlo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:16:16 +0000

They will not have that excuse, and it will be interesting to see whether one or more members of Congress lied, or if one or more cave on something they spoke vehemently against (but never pledged to oppose). Because one or the other will have to happen for the bill to pass.

I only hope Republicans have the sense to vote down any amendment that removes or weakens a so-called “public option.”

By: jeffreywturner

jeffreywturner — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:34:47 +0000

The bill is full of horrible crap.

I was just making sure that I understood correctly, that the FINAL bill, whatever would actually become law if passed, would be required to pass the 60-vote hurdle.

This is important, because it means that the Lincoln, Landrieu, etc. won’t be able to use the “that wasn’t in the bill when I voted for cloture on it” excuse.

By: ColdWarrior

ColdWarrior — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:57:46 +0000

What is “5??
When someone uses “5? as a posting title, or some other derivative, such as “55555? or “5!” or “5**5?, they are ranking the comment/diary as a “5 out of 5?. In the olden days of RedState, it was possible to rank comments and/or diaries, but that capability was removed due to (as I understand it) some abuses that occurred. When someone ranks your diary or comment as a “5?, it’s a compliment.

Read all about this and the other Redstate lore and “how tos” here:

http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/11/19/the-redstate-how-to/

I recommend you bookmark that. I have!

Thank you.
ColdWarrior

By: Menlo

Menlo — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:47:59 +0000

They need 60 votes to begin debate (planned Saturday and will pass), 60 votes to end debate, and if they don’t do it as a budget bill (unlikely), they’ll need another 60 after conference. However, the Senate can only amend it before the second vote.

By: Menlo

Menlo — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:35:38 +0000

While it will have to clear those additional hurdles, and they will have to make a so-called “public option” a trigger or some other mechanism to get it to pass, you make a mistake in making this “public option” seem like a worse part of the bill than anything else. The “government takeover” is actually STRONGER with this “exchange” that they are setting up.

All they do is contract out a “public option” to the big insurance companies and use your taxpayer dollars to fund the companies. The income tax increase (if you don’t have government insurance) will still be there. The government will still fund it once premiums exceed a certain percentage of one’s income. Who knows what they will do should premiums on all policies reach the cost of the taxable “Cadillac” plans.

To think the “public option” would crowd out the insurance companies under their setup is delusional. It will likely cost people more and carry a stigma people won’t want. People will buy government-funded, government-mandated, and government-written policies in the “exchange” administered by “private” insurance companies. The insurance companies become de facto agencies of the government.

The “public option” is no worse than any other part of the bill.

By: jeffreywturner

jeffreywturner — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:08:45 +0000

So then, you are saying that whatever comes out of conference MUST pass the 60-vote hurdle at least once.

If this is the case, then passing it without the public option and slipping it back in during conference will not get them around the 60 vote requirement on the public option.

If this is the case, and we are to believe Lieberman and the Maine ladies, then the public option (bka the government takeover) is dead.

By: louisiana

louisiana — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:39:15 +0000

Bayoubuzz.com to read about the bind LA is in regarding medicaid payments. Type in medicaid in their search box. Of course it in NO WAY excuses her behavior should she decide to vote to proceed or votes for this bill in any form.
She’s already bragging about getting between 100-300 million for LA on her website. I guess she thinks getting this bribe money justifies pimping herself out.

By: louisiana

louisiana — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:12:28 +0000

Had to go out of town right after I posted. You’re exactly right! Guess I can’t add very well with my brain on fire. I’m just so frustrated that she is so obviously being bought, and could care less about her constituency.

By: memez

memez — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:30:26 +0000

What is meant by 5555, please?

By: momtotwo

momtotwo — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:15:53 +0000

If enough people went to DC tomorrow and caused a traffic jam, the Senators wouldn’t be able to get there to vote at 8:00.

By: reelman

reelman — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:16:58 +0000

LANDRIEU: ARROGANT POLITICAL WHORE
“The Louisiana Purchase: $100 Million Payoff to Buy Sen. Landrieu’s Vote…” Nov 20, 2009.
==========
Our democrat senator Mary “I use my Daddy’s name for political reasons” Landrieu sold her vote once again…this time senator Reid bought her services (vote) for $100 million tax dollars to La.
What did the state get? $100 million for Medicaide…
What did America get? Nationalized Health Care (by a bankrupt gov-meant) that funds abortion, covers illegals and creates over a hundred unelected boards and panels to ration your heath care. A huge bill that you aren’t allowed to read and will drive up costs as all gov-meant things do. A bill that does not address portability, tort reform or buying across state lines. A bill full of fines and penalties for not buying insurance. A bill where nobody wins but federal employees who are exempt!
It does not matter to political whores what the nation wants or if America is more than broke…political whores are like that.
What can you expect from a person that refuses to use her married name (political reason of course), has the welfare crowd bussed to the polls and votes about 90% of the time as a tax & spend liberal but pretends to be a moderate?
What can you expect from a coward that refused to have voter meetings in large enough buildings to avoid the challenge of defending her votes (or her party)?
What can you expect from an avowed Catholic who votes the anti-Catholic line year after year (like Pelosi)?
What can you expect from a “public servant” who is always “making up her mind” (for months) bill after bill till the very last (to avoid being challenged…like a coward would) instead of taking a stand?
What can you expect from a snake that winks and nods to vote reasonably for the people about 5% of the time (when not needed for the bill to pass) so she can run on those few votes the next time?
Just another disgusting member of the (14% approval) royal congress living in selfish socialist Oz land.

http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish

By: earlgrey

earlgrey — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:06:37 +0000

I think they will go for trigger. They are letting Lieberman take the heat for opposing the public option and then they’ll all support the trigger as a compromise.

By: writeblock

writeblock — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:40:04 +0000

…is that once amendments are proposed, things change. If the trigger option is adopted, for instance, Snowe might vote for cloture. Lieberman might also go for the trigger option. Nelson won’t, especially if they reject a stronger pro-life amendment–but that would still mean passage–unless somebody like Bayh sided with Nelson–which is a possibility. Then there is Lincoln who is politically at risk…In other words, voting to proceed means added potential for passage, but it’s not at all certain.

By: writeblock

writeblock — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:27:05 +0000

…not on the bill itself. He will probably join with the GOP on the second cloture vote.

By: IJB

IJB — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:26:18 +0000

See here:

Conference reports are privileged. And in the Senate, a motion to proceed to a conference report is not debatable, although Senators can generally filibuster the conference report itself. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 limits debate on conference reports on budget resolutions and budget reconciliation bills to 10 hours in the Senate, so Senators cannot filibuster those conference reports. (2 U.S.C. § 636, 2 U.S.C. § 641e.)

You can’t amend them, and though go right to debate (motion to proceed not necessary), but the debate on them can be filibustered.

Only ‘reconciliation bills’ can’t be filibustered.

By: writeblock

writeblock — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:24:39 +0000

…by way of constitutional challenges in the Supreme Court. Passage of this bill would not be the end of the legal conflicts. And you’re right. We have more to resent than the original founders suffered under King George. This is a similar threat to liberty itself–only worse. It is a step toward rationed care and governmental intrusion into the most private aspects of our lives. People are near the explosion-point as a consequence.

By: writeblock

writeblock — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:16:43 +0000

…there’s a lot of posturing to achieve maximum political advantage. Landrieu is a good example of how the game is played. Her state was rewarded lavishly for her supposed indecision. By the same token, there are those senators who are not bribable because a yes-vote would put them at political risk back home. The unknown is whether voting one’s liberal ideology supercedes committing political suicide. I personally doubt it. This is one issue that can’t be ducked. It’s an issue people know and care about. It can’t be fudged by voting trickery. And few senators will be willing to fall on their swords to help a flailing president who just dropped below 50% in the polls.

By: Sean Davis

Sean Davis — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:13:29 +0000

Before the Senate can begin debate on any measure, it must move to proceed to that measure. And a motion to proceed is debatable, which means that it is filibusterable.

Once the Senate moves to a bill, that bill is actually debatable, which means that it can be filibustered. If cloture is invoked on that bill (the filibuster is killed), the Senate must then vote on final passage.

So here is the process (I’m ignoring any amendments that may be offered to the bill): vote on cloture on the motion to proceed (60 votes), vote on the motion to proceed (51 votes or a majority), cloture on the underlying bill (60 votes), final passage of the bill (51 votes or a majority).

By: Richard Mullins

Richard Mullins — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:11:09 +0000

and I’m sure by that time I’ll have my airline going in Lake Charles. I’ll vote against her for sure anyways.