I don’t see how you could get Collins and Snowe to make what be demagoged as a vote against a popular woman’s health care issue. This was not a hill to demand they die on, I’m not sure what Vitter’s vote was about.

Let’s see what happens with this afternoon’s amendments on Medicare: if any Republicans defect to support Bennet’s red herring Potemkin amendment or votes against McCain’s amendment to recommit, then we’ve got a major beef with our Senate leadership

Why is it that our Senators suck so badly at what they do?

From http://www.lifenews.com/nat5722.html

AUL staff attorney Mary Harned has released her own analysis of the amendment and concurs with NRLC that it presents problems.

“The Mikulski amendment, in pertinent part, requires group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance to provide coverage for and not impose cost sharing requirements on ‘preventative care’ for women ‘as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA),’” she explained.

“While this amendment does not explicitly require abortion coverage, it also fails to explicitly exclude it,” Harned warned.

“The HRSA could categorize abortion as ‘preventative care’ and would therefore recommend coverage for abortion by all qualifying private plans,” she explained.

It seems like passing this amendment makes it *less* likely the whole bill will get to 60 votes (or pass the House again).

Better that this one pass than the Murkowski amendment which would actually make the bill’s final passage *more* likely…

… opposing these Amendments only works if you can peel off enough Democrats to make it a non-party line vote.

Otherwise, you’d still get the improvements to the bill (long term kill-the-bill strategy aside, ostensibly good things) that Republicans went party-line to oppose — not good. Seems too easy to demagogue in 2010 if you can’t get enough Democrat support. Or, am I just missing something?

or vote for are those that the vast majority of Democrats will vote against.

When you have 54% of the people opposed and only 38% in favor, I don’t see how the Democrats gain by being able to say Republicans killed the bill.

There was some high comedy watching bits and pieces of this.

- You can imagine the confusion in discussions comparing the competing bills from Mikulski and Murchowski.

- Harkin said there was no “rush” here because his committee had hearings and votes … about a bill that was tossed by Reid.

- Cardin kept talking about the “underlining” bill.

- The women on both sides were falling all over themselves praising the women on the other side.

- They must have to replace the mike cover after Mikulski is done spitting into it.

- Voinoich said he was going to continue to cry (pause) that the emperor had no clothes. I about lost it.

- Sanders used the opportunity to rail on Bernanke.

On the bright side…

- Thune raised the issue they should all be hitting on: that Obama promised a $2,500 reduction per family which has disappeared.

- Brownback called out Mikulski, saying that if she said her amendment didn’t mean abortion would be covered, then it shouldn’t be a problem for her to add language to it making that explicit.

- I forget who it was reminded over and over the hypocrisy of how the Democrats threw a hissy fit when Republicans in the past had proposed a reduction of $10B in Medicare over 5 years, while now they see no problem in claiming to cut $500B.

It’s a good old boys and girls club and everyone on the right is always nice and the democrats will most likely play that niceness card right into governmentcare.

I’m in Houston, Texas and we have wonderful Hutchinson telling us she’s holding off on going full throttle into the Tx governor race because she’s doing everything she can to stop healthcare first.

If I was in her shoes, that would include having as many people in the Senate gallery mocking the democrats, holding protests outside the capital, the white house and the VP house daily, coming into the senate chamber dressed up as a politician with money coming out of every pocket or a senior citizen with treatable diseases, holding speeches to anyone with a microphone and encouraging people to call in to congress on any show that would have me.

It’s too bad i’m not wealthy or I’d be running for her seat now; doing just that because she won’t.

I’m going to love when this passes as i’m going to drink for 3 days straight as I figure out how to cope with what I know everything it’s going to do to so many Americans.

Ok, off the rantbox.

I’ve said this many times before…

NEVER underestimate the GOP’s uncanny ability to self-destruct.

Sometimes, I wonder if the Grand Ole Sheep Party has been infiltrated by wolves.

Ned Reck

Seems like an odd vote for someone who’s got a tarnished reputation already and is up for re-election this term.

Mikulski’s passed 61-39
Murkowski’s failed 41-59

This means that Byrd has been wheeled in, so Reid must be afraid they’ll need him to try to press the right button.

And it means there was one crossover in each case if all else was party line. Someone above said it was Vitter (!) on the first one and I’d guess it was Nelson on the second. I don’t see it yet at Thomas.gov unless I’m looking in the wrong place.

If any Republican EVER wants another dollar, Kill The Bill.
No compromise
No excuses
Kill The Health Care Bill
Or we will find another way, and other folks to represent us.
Tick, Tock.

Nelson and Webb voted with the Republicans.

I am heartened that the Mikulski amendment passed.

We are on a knife’s edge with ObamaCare, and we always were. This die was cast from the moment the Democrats secured 60 seats in the Senate. The only way for this bill to be killed is for it to be made as evil, noxious, and loathsome on the surface as possible. Make the language as expensive and authoritarian as they can. Turn as many of the American people against it as possible. Make it as difficult as possible for certain Democrat Senators to vote for cloture to end debate.

We’re down to the wire; we only have 40 seats; we’re not completely sure about a few of those votes, but there is a chance of picking off some Democrats. The Republicans will have to go for broke and bite the bullet on some really awful stuff, like an amendment that will provide for abortion as a “preventative” issue of women’s health (and that is precisely what the Mikulski amendment does), if there is to be any hope. ‘Cause if any kind of kindler, gentler version of ObamaCare gets out of the Senate, it’ll be rewritten in conference anyway, into something that would make Stalin proud.

On Bill Bennett’s radio show this morning, Jon Kyl said “our strategy is not going to be slowing down the bill… We want to have lots of amendments.”

Erick has accurately sniffed out the Republican strategy on this bill.

That this amendment can open the door to MANDATING that every insurance plan could be forced to cover abortions is not getting enough attention: http://www.lifenews.com/nat5726.html

1. The Senate version with Mikulski’s amendment is irreconciliable with the House version with the Stupak amendment. I don’t see how the bill passes unless the Senate amends the Mikulski amendment further. The Dems may try to strip the Stupak amendment in conference committee, but it won’t pass the House that way.

2. We should all be highlighting the abortion issue as it breaks Obama’s pledge and the Democrats are again talking out of both sides of their mouths on this.

3. What is Casey doing voting for this? Didn’t he run as Pro-Life? We need to rein him in before Schumer does. He should be co-sponsoring Nelson’s version of the Stupak amendment.

Thomas reports it as consideration of PelosiCare, rather than as a separate ReidCare bill. Are they trying to bounce this back and forth and not get it to committee? Or is that the way they normally list it when it will end up in committee?