Writer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:25 PM
Original message |
Are there enough votes in the senate to pass a compromise bill WITH a PO? |
MNDemNY
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:30 PM
Response to Original message |
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:31 PM
Response to Original message |
2. A Snowe-written triggered PO w/ Nelson-getting abortion language (?) |
Writer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. Well... whatever it is, I'm wondering if there's enough votes in the senate to pass a |
Clio the Leo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. I think Snowe would vote for a trigger... |
|
.... if she could do it after Christmas (or are you talking about a conference bill?)
But Lieberman WONT vote for a trigger ..... unless it's on an alternating Tuesday .... I think.
HOWEVER .... theoretically, if you had something that Snowe would vote for, ..... oh, what's the other ones name .... Flake? The other Senator from Maine .... I'm drawing a blank ..... theoretically, if you had Snowe's vote you wouldn't need Lieberman's and if you had Flake's vote, you wouldn't need Nelson's.
hmm.......
|
liberalmuse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Yes, but we can't leave Snowe and Lieberman behind. |
|
They are our most valuable assets! :eyes:
|
Writer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. Do we need a supermajority? n/t |
rwheeler31
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:33 PM
Response to Original message |
6. We still need 60 to get to the vote. |
Writer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. I don't think cloture should require 60 votes. |
|
They might as well just vote on the bill in that case.
|
AndyA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:38 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Here's what will pass: |
|
1. Keep the status quo, but require EVERYONE to have mandatory insurance*.
*Unless you're old, then you go to Medicare; or if you have pre-existing conditions that will cost a lot of money to cover.
If you aren't wanted by the insurance companies, you have Republicare, which means you go to the emergency room if you get really, really sick. But the best option is to not get sick. And if you do get sick, die quickly.
Sadly, that is what would pass with a wide majority.
|
Laelth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-16-09 07:58 PM
Response to Original message |
9. It doesn't matter. We need this bill to go down in flames. |
|
The current system is unsustainable, and everyone knows it. Change will come, eventually, UNLESS we pass the disastrous bill that's currently on the table.
California will probably pass single-payer on its own in 2011. All they need is a Democratic Governor. The legislature has already passed the bill. Schwarzenegger vetoed it. Once California has single-payer, most (if not all) states will follow suit.
It's likely that if we pass a new law now, the new law will preempt single-payer, i.e. the Federal law will preempt state law and prevent states from enacting a single-payer system.
THIS is what the health insurance companies fear. THIS is what brought them to the bargaining table. THIS is why they are not fighting Obama's tepid reforms, and THIS is why it is extremely important that we do not pass any health insurance reform bill this year.
Let's not settle for a bail-out of the health insurance industry. Let's insist on the eradication of it. In all likelihood, California will lead the way in 2011 ... if we can just give them time.
Canada got its single-payer system one province at a time. That seems to be the way it will have to happen in the U.S.
:dem:
-Laelth
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 09th 2024, 04:46 AM
Response to Original message |