Conservative Democrats break ranks on health care

[Akoto]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama on Friday acknowledged the tough going for his health care overhaul in Congress but rejected the notion the legislation is doomed if lawmakers fail to act by August. "I never believe anything is do or die," Obama said.

"We're closer to that significant reform than at any time in recent history," Obama told reporters at a news conference in Italy. "That doesn't make it easy. It's hard. And we are having a whole series of constant negotiations."

Conservative Democrats are demanding significant changes before they will support a sweeping health care overhaul, forcing the House to join the Senate in stalling Obama's top domestic priority.

The "Blue Dog Democrats" group released a list of demands on the eve of House Democratic leaders' planned unveiling of their final bill Friday. The bill release was pushed back to Monday at the earliest and Democratic leaders agreed to devote Friday to meetings with the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs to work through their concerns.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_OVERHAUL?SITE=ALOPE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Deja Q]

1. I thought that the reform was so important, it had to be done by year's end?

I've obviously kept out of the media by doing real shit, like going back to school part time, but whatever...

Edited: Typo

[kenfrequed]

8. Uhm

What are you saying?

That reform is or isn't important?

In either case there is little excuse for just obstructing, I mean don't the republicans already have that covered?

[walkaway]

2. Every Democrat who votes against a public option should be...

on a list and that list should be used to hammer them until they are hounded out of office. The American people need to be made aware they are voting people into office who do not have their best interests at heart.

republicans seem to enjoy voting for politicians who lie to them. I think Democrats should be smarter than that.

[elocs]

5. The trouble is that if they are hounded from office a Republican would likely replace them.

Their districts may only be marginally blue and they probably know that to take too many moderate or Liberal Democratic positions would lead to their defeat in the next election. As hard as it is to swallow, I would prefer a Blue Dog Democrat who votes with Democrats even half the time as opposed to a Republican who never votes with the Dems. When you take an all or nothing position, too often you end up with the nothing end of the stick.

[Abq_Sarah]

13. Targeting blue dogs

Isn't a wise move for the reasons you point out. I'm sure they do their own internal polling on these issues and they know if they defy the will of the voters, they'll be out on their butts in 2010.

[Chulanowa]

16. Health care isn't a "Liberal Position"

I would prefer a Reoublican who acts in the interests of his constituents than a Democraft who acts in the interests of corporate sponsors.

[elocs]

19. Correct, but there are many other issues which are "Liberal issues"

and a Blue Dog Dem knows full well that to support them too often would cause them to lose their seat to a Republican who could be counted on to seldom, if ever, support any Democratic bills or issues. So you could conceivably have a Republican who does support Democratic health care positions, but does not support much of anything else which Democrats might propose.

[Chulanowa]

20. I look at it like this

If an area is so red that they'll boot a Democrat if he takes liberal positions... then that area would have elected a Republican in the first fucking place. The whole "I have to be conservative because I'm in a conservative area" is junk, if those people wanted a Con, they would have elected a Republican. What it is is a bunch of sellouts making money at the expense of hteir electorate and the country as a whole.

[elocs]

21. Because you claim it is "junk" does not make it so. That is simply your opinion.

Unfortunately, Democrats are not always the best at being pragmatic or dealing with reality as it really exists, but believe that reality should be what they really want. I have not found life to be that way.

[Chulanowa]

24. Never pretended it was anything else.

However, I'm applying simple logic to the situation. If I want to buy butter, why would I buy margarine? If I wanted a conservative, why would I vote for the Democrat? Are you going to tell me that in these red areas the Democrat is more conservative than the republican?

Now there are a few logic-defying things to consider - voter apathy and nepotism, for two. But, generally speaking, people who don't want their reps taking liberal positions will vote Republican. Ergo the fact that there's a Democrat holding the office would seem to imply the locals are more keen on at least a centrist position. When the Democratic politician then defends a strong conservative record by claiming he might get booted out by the voters if he takes a liberal position on things, I call it junk. The fact that he is holding office instead of whoever the Republicans fielded against him would generally imply that the voters did not want a Republican agenda-holder in that office.

Unfortunately, pragmatists are not always the best at understanding logic or dealing with reality in a manner consistent with facts.

[KamaAina]

22. Where would you find one? The 1950's, maybe?

I would prefer a Reoublican who acts in the interests of his constituents

Or maybe a district gerrymandered so everyone in it makes $250K a year? :shrug:

[Chulanowa]

25. Just saying I'd prefer that one, given the choice

Didn't say there actually WAS one, just countering the whole "I'd go with the halfassed Democrat over the Republican he mirrors perfectly" meme

[No Elephants]

3. A list of demands? The DNC and non-dog Democrats, from Obama on down, have

to preach to these clowns. No campaign funds, fundraising events or the like from the Democratic Party, no personal appearances during campaigns from other famous Democrats, except for Democrats primarying them.

These are not blue dogs. They are pink dogs. Let them look to the RNC.

[bertman]

9. Exactly right, No Elephants. These folks are so worried about their positions that they

are forgetting that the national party can make or break them in the next election. The DLC didn't hesitate to use its strong-arm tactics on Progressive Dems during the campaign, so let's see some "muscle" being used on these bastards.

[robinlynne]

12. I wish. They welcomed Lieberman with open arms.

[Jefferson23]

4. The republicans of the future. Once the neocons and social conservatives

have faded into the sunset for good, this group of Dems will be the replacement.

[pattmarty]

7. Totally agree. The "new" Dem party should look more like..............

.......the old FDR days, Bernie Sanders, Kucinich, Lee, etc. These are the people that will REALLY be on OUR side.

[Ian David]

6. They're not "conservative," they're paid-off. n/t

[supernova]

10. Meat from the article

Here 's what the Blue Dogs are arguing about. We don't know how to counteract it if we don't know what their concerns are.

"The message that was sent was heard loud and clear," Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pa., a member of the group, said Friday. The group's concerns were the need for more cost containment measures, protections for small businesses and a focus on rural health care.

....

Among the Blue Dogs' concerns is the shape of a new public insurance plan that would compete with private insurers. House leaders envision making payment rates to providers in the plan some 5 percent higher than Medicare payment rates. Blue Dogs say they can't support any link to Medicare rates, which they say pays well below market rates and varies unfairly around the country.

That puts House leaders in a tough spot since many liberal Democrats are insistent that a new public plan be linked to Medicare

Hrrm. Well if their beef is that it would't reimburse at a high enough rate. That merits consideration. But I still think linking it to Medicare (and ultimately folding Medicare and Medicaid into it) is a good idea.

[EndElectoral]

11. Conservative and Democrat is an oxymoron. These guys are Centrists and should have their own party

These damn people are neutralizing the Progressive agenda, and many on the far right feel the same way about their agenda.
We keep compromising until we lose our identity to these people, and then true liberals are blamed becasue we failed to get health care or anything substantial passed. It's very frustrating.

[RainDog]

14. democrats should withhold money from the national democratic party so that

they can give money directly to progressive candidates - those now in office and those who run against blue dogs.

we can break ranks too and demand changes too.

[harun]

15. I was upset about this but if you read it you will see it is nothing to worry about

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/07/blue-dogs-we-cant-support-health-care-reform-without-significant-changes.php?page=1


It looks to me anyway like simply something they can point to and say look we want to keep the tax payer burden down, not much else in there.

[Odin2005]

17. Translation of Obama's statements: "These Blue Dogs are a bunch of Bastards!"

[deutsey]

18. Of course they do. Morons.

:evilfrown:

[HughMoran]

23. Blue dogs should be made green

soylent green that is.

[Arkana]

26. A "list of demands"?

With allies like these, who the FUCK needs enemies?!

[PassingFair]

27. Fuck the BlueDogs.

Now is the time when we see the
depth of the criminality of the
"New Dems".

If the "New Dems" join with the
Progressive Caucus (the largest
caucus in the House), the Blue
Dogs will be left howling outside.

Call your DLC representative NOW,
and make sure they're on the side
of Public Option and President Obama.

Let's not make it anonymous or easy
for them.