Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ben Nelson on CNN now saying democrats could have gotten whatever they wanted with reconciliation

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:22 AM
Original message
Ben Nelson on CNN now saying democrats could have gotten whatever they wanted with reconciliation
Edited on Sun Dec-20-09 11:23 AM by no limit
that's why he agreed to a compromise. Are you fucking kidding me? This guy has some balls coming on TV telling us the democratic party could have done whatever the hell they wanted but instead came out and decided to gut the bill for corporate interests so that they could get 60 votes. These people are whores.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. He also said both sides hate him.....
like going home and the family dog biting him. Oh woe is me. He's not telling the truth, can you see him saying no to reconciliation? Without a doubt!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. The point is he is a United States Senator admitting reconciliation was a very real option
so real it made him agree to a compromise he wouldn't have otherwise agreed to.

So why did reconciliation always seem to be off the table?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Why would you believe him?
What has he done to say he would support reconciliation? I see nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. You are missing the point, he doesnt need to support reconciliation
they would have the votes without him. The point simply is that reconciliation was a very real option, an option the democrats refused to use or even threaten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. You can't get insurance company reforms in reconciliation,
if I understand correctly. And there are probably several other things. I think Nelson is mistaken to say Dems could have gotten "everything we wanted" by reconciliation.

And reconciliation is probably still an option for some things, like expanding Medicare. But if Dems try to do too much that way the republicans will get some PR mileage out of "Democrats abusing the budget process" or some shit like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. You expand medicare to everyone you dont need insurance reforms.
Plus you can push reforms in reconcilation based on what I read in the means of taxes on insurance companies for certain practices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. It takes 60 votes. He is one of those 60.
Who else would have voted for it? Snowe? I thought the threat to use it was always there...at the end. Not during negotiations. Was that a mistake? Yep. But then you also can't put some things into the bill because it has to be budget oriented.....or this is how I understand reconciliation, and I can be totally wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no limit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Reconciliation does not require 60 votes, it requires 51.
Reconciliation uses the budget to pass legislation which can not be fillibustered. That in itself has some limits but as said it can be used to expend medicare and medicaide as well as an arsenal of other things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. It doesn't take 60 votes to start reconciliation?
I know it means that it only requires 51 votes on legislation after the reconciliation is started. But to start it? If that's true then it would be used constantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
15. Good. Asshole
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
2. Thinking this through - there was NEVER any negotiating with the
Edited on Sun Dec-20-09 11:35 AM by Phoebe Loosinhouse
Repubs, and the Dems were only negotiating with themselves, this can be truly said to be a Democrat only bill. If it is true that they could have rammed through a much better result through reconciliation, then we have ourselves only to blame.

I agree with Feingold who said that we got the bill the President wanted in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. FEINSTEIN said that?
I know that Feingold did, but that would be kind of a mind-blower from Diane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. No, you're right - Feingold - I will correct
Edited on Sun Dec-20-09 11:36 AM by Phoebe Loosinhouse
It would be a mindblower from Feinstein - she is on my permanent s@#tlist due to the Project Censored story on her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
5. Just confirms that there was never
A need to create this monster of a bill
in the first place.

They'll have to revisit this bill for a generation
to get it close to right.
The stupid burns but it won't burn them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. No. As ever, it burns us.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
13. Nelson is even dumber that I could have imagined
He cover up his deceit with a lie - amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Ben Nelson, a Ner'do'well who finally has the center stage...
is doing backflips trying to stay in the limelight.

His moment in time has finally arrived.

Kill this bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-20-09 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
19. It's not too late to use reconciliation to suppliment the current
bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 02:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC