Does nobody remember that when it comes to the ACA...

They worked on reconciliation, and then they went back on everything

The U.S. House of Representatives was safely Democratic as a result of the Nov. 4, 2008, elections by a margin of 257 – 199; the Democrats had gained 21 seats from the 2006-07 Congress. The real interesting ACA political dynamics began during the November 2008 U.S. Senate elections.

Going into the 2008 elections, the Senate consisted of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and two Independents (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) who caucused with the Democrats. When the smoke cleared from those elections, the Democrats picked up eight seats to increase their majority to 57-41 (although Democrat Al Franken’s recount victory was not official until July 7). With the two Independents, the Democrats were one vote shy of the supermajority magic number of 60 they needed to ward off any filibuster attempts and move forward with broad healthcare reform legislation.

But on April 28, 2009, the dynamics changed when Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Spector changed parties, giving Senate Democrats that coveted 60th vote.
Now the Democrats had a safe majority in the House and a filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 in the Senate. That scenario lasted only four months before fate intervened. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died on August 25, 2009, leaving the Democrats, once again, with 59 seats (counting the two Independents). Exactly one month later, on September 25, Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed interim senator from Massachusetts to serve until the special election set for January 19, 2010 – once again giving the Democrats that 60th vote. But the intrigue was just beginning.

There didn’t seem to be an urgent need for Democrats to reconcile both bills immediately, because the Massachusetts special election (scheduled for January 19, 2010) was almost certain to fall to the Democrat, Attorney General Martha Coakley. After all, no Republican had been elected to the U.S. Senate from the Bay State since Edward Brooke in 1972 – 38 years before! But in yet another twist of fate, Republican Scott Brown ran his campaign as the 41st senator against ObamaCare and shocked nearly everyone by winning the special election by 110,000 votes.
That left House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama in a dilemma. Everyone assumed that the Christmas Eve 2009 Senate bill would be tweaked considerably to conform more with the House bill passed two months previously. But now that strategy wouldn’t work, because the Democrats no longer had the 60th vote in the Senate to end debate. What to do? They decided to have the House take up the identical bill that the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. It passed on March 21, 2010, by a 219 – 212 vote. This time, no Republicans came on board, and 34 Democrats voted against. President Obama signed the ACA legislation two days later on March 23.

The fact is we needed every Democratic vote to pass the ACA because not only did no republican vote for it, but lieberman, both nelsons, one in Florida and one in Nebraska, Blanch Lincoln, birch bayh made it clear they would not vote for Medicare for all, or single payer, and we needed every vote just to get what we have today

it was Evan Bayh, not his father. He was the antithesis to his father. He was the dagger in hearts of Democrats in the Indiana.

"The fact is we needed every Democratic vote to pass the ACA because not only did no republican vote for it, but lieberman, both nelsons, one in Florida and one in Nebraska, Blanch Lincoln, birch bayh made it clear they would not vote for Medicare for all, or single payer, and we needed every vote just to get what we have today."

The ACA that we ended up with is just as conservative as the most conservative Democrats at the time... which is Republican-lite.

need a big tent.

stupak retired after

the 17 Democrats in the House under Stupak creating a scene unless a line was added to the bill that is already always added anyway. But to underscore it, Pelosi offered a "memo" be included to point out that yes, the "Hyde Amendment" (nonsense) was included.

and voting for, what, 9 months? Basically the Republiclans stole the first year of his term. Another Democratic senator during this time got sick, went home and never came back. Turbulent year.

which is why the ACA-PPA is the way it is.

Here is an interesting running commentary series on his role during that year of crafting and drafting the ACA, from the prospective of Baucus' Senate Finance Committee (just ONE of at least 6 committees working on the bill), that directly controlled the "financial" aspects of the Senate versions (NOT the House versions) of the ACA - https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/baucus_watch_archive.php

Specifically here is where single-payer was torpedoed by him - https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/baucus_watch_part_ix.php



I spent over a full year following the ACA on CSPAN, CSPAN2, and CSPAN3 (all of which showed the various hearings going on simultaneously in both chambers - at least 6 of them). Each committee would offer their draft legislation and the idiot media would suddenly jump up and pick out a single committee's version and declare that ONE committee's draft mark-up was "THE BILL", as if that single committee's draft was the final version.



What had to happen at the end of this initial process was that they had to create a Joint Committee to consolidate and reconcile the House and Senate versions and then bring that back to their respective chambers to vote on and that is what happened in December to get something "on the books".

In the spring of 2010, because Democrats no longer had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, they were able to use the tool of "Reconciliation" to craft the final budget piece that had not been included in the original ACA, and this involved the Senate taking a bill that had already passed the House, because that is the only way the Senate can proffer a bill that involved money (the House MUST "originate" these because they have the "power of the purse" ). And in this case, they used a bill that involved Student aid, and tacked on the healthcare budget outline to it, to create the "Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010", which was signed in March 2010 as an amendment to the Affordable Care Act passed the previous December.

mandate and penalty were always part of the plan to force everyone eligible to sign up. Don’t think it was introduced by GOPers.

It wouldn't have even made it past all Senate Democrats, which you couldn't afford to lose one or the bill tanked entirely.

I think a public option is the likeliest of all to actually pass in Congress

When Democrats did the ACA, we couldn’t even get a public option through the Democrats.

In essence, Baucus blocked Single Payer -



and Lieberman blocked the Public Option -




And to get the 60 votes to pass "something", the compromises had to happen.

--Baucus and Lieberman-- who made mincemeat out of the ACA. NOT the (implied "all" or "most" ) "Democrats".

I.e., the other 58 Democrats (and Indies like Sanders) weren't doing that.

get a public option through the Democratic caucus that we had at the time.

who were our "Susan Collinses". Without the filibuster, it would have been easy peasy.

Plenty of people wanted to keep their insurance as it was, and it was important that they be able to do so, albeit subject to the regulations that would improve all insurance, such as mandated coverages, etc. Single payer was to be an alternative option for those who wanted it.

I had every intention of going directly to single payer. I expected that over time, as it was demonstrated to consistently be better and less expensive, more and more people would move to it. Of course. Which is why the Republicans and Lieberman were determined to kill it.

to fix it. It also saved my daughter's life. Had the states passed the Medicare expansion, way more would be insured.

All the fuss over a hundy?