Musings Of An Indie Writer| « | E-Book Review: The Heretic |
»
|
|
Saturday, March 13, 2010
The Final Battle
Media reports are telling me a vote on Obamacare has been scheduled for some time next weekend. The wisdom out there is that Pelosi would never schedule a vote without knowing first that she had enough yeas to get the bill passed, so it would seem at first glance that the battle is already over, right?
Not so fast. The media has been issuing conflicted stories for over a week now, but I believe that many stories out there have been written in such a way as to exaggerate the momentum for Obamacare. This story is a case in point. In fact, I believe there is an equally compelling, and untold narrative surrounding next weekend’s marathon voting session.
First, the media is reporting that Pelosi still appears to be 5 or 6 votes short. If true, what does this really mean?
- There are many more members who want to vote no, but may go along if there are enough other Representatives willing to walk the plank.
- More importantly, Pelosi is gambling that she can persuade the nays before next weekend, or the game is up.
The critical question to ask is: why would a Speaker of the House gamble in this situation?. There are lots of staid reasons, but there is one hypothesis that is not filtering into the media, who tend to rely on Congressional leaders as sources rather than “boring” rank-and-file members. Simply put, Pelosi is facing a nascent backbencher revolt over her handling of the health care situation and the damage it is doing to their electoral prospects in the fall.
Remember this image from back in February?
After the State of the Union, these Democrats were promised they’d get to pivot to jobs, a subject their constituents actually want to talk about. Instead, they got another bruising 2 months on health care, with no end in sight. I believe they are forcing Pelosi into a calling a vote before she feels truly ready. In truth, I also feel she is more likely 10-15 votes short, rather than the reported 4-7, an intuition I draw mainly from Jay Cost’s outstanding running analysis.
On a tactical level, it is also important to note what this “vote” is really for. Evidently, the House leadership has cooked up a scheme whereby members can vote for the reconciliation package only and by doing so “deem” the Senate bill passed. This is an attempt to make sure members can go back to their constituents and be able to say they didn’t support the Senate bill. Yes, that begs the question of how stupid House Democrats think their constituents really are, but it also shows that Pelosi has probably been convinced that the House will never have enough votes to pass the Senate bill.
I can’t say what the odds are for ultimate passage of the bill. I would guess somewhere between 50-50 to 60-40 against. In the meantime, call your Representatives and tell them how you feel. It does make a difference, or Obamacare would have passed 6 months ago.
As a final note:
“Final battle” is a bit of a misnomer. Few things are final in politics. Let’s suppose Obamacare does pass. Parts of it will likely be tied up in the courts for years, and there have been suggestions out there that the so-called “Slaughter rule” described above may give every citizen standing to sue the government over Obamacare.
Most importantly, many pieces of the legislation rely on state funding, such as provisions that expand Medicaid and increase the maximum age for children who can be covered by various government plans. That’s all part of the accounting gimmicks designed to make Obamacare deficit neutral, but just this morning I read a headline in the Chicago Tribune that our state’s budget is in such trouble that state senators are receiving eviction notices for failing to pay rent on their offices. No, Obamacare is not paid for, and there is no money for it.
Many of the benefits don’t kick in until 2013 or later, but the taxes start right away. With the nation’s fiscal situation being what it is, some of those benefits may never kick in it all. It is much easier to repeal a tax than it is an entitlement.
No matter what happens this weekend, the fight over Obamacare will rage on.
Comments
This thing is like the monster movie blob. Every time you think it’s dead, it jumps out at an unsuspecting character 2 scenes later. If it doesn’t pass, Obama will just issue an executive order.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 03/13/2010 at 07:12 PMAaron, thank you for putting on the table in such a smart way so much of what we need to be aware of. You wrote an excellent piece. At the same time, I’d like to let you know why I’m so convinced that StealthCare is going to pass and soon, regardless of the machinations used to rube goldberg the process. I lay fault for this upcoming devastating defeat; the passage of ObamaCare. It lies with the Republicans, to a large extent, the ones that attended the meeting with Obama a few weeks ago. They remind me of the Bears game plans, being unable year in and year out to figure out what’s going to be run against them. Here’s my view. The Republicans, because they’re not the smartest, neglected to advise Obama during the big HealthCare meeting that, if he proceeds to hammer out a revised bill with their ideas added, the Republicans would want to be present to help with the changes. However, the meeting ended. Obama and his staff worked on the the changes, and the Republicans and the American people were left high and dry. What’s more, this slow witted Republican team is missing a key Democratic Obama battle tactic that has every chance of sinking us. People like Hannity say they can’t understand why Democrats would walk the plank for Obama and vote for ObamaCare in direct opposition to the wishes of the American people. There’s an answer. Just follow the money. Here’s the deal. Any vote that Obama really wants he’ll probably get simply by using unused Stimulus money as a kind of campaign gift for some future run, should the “yes” vote on ObamaCare cause some Democrat to lose their job. Last night, I ran this tactic by a political think tank guy who said doing that would probably be illegal. Hello, why does this guy think Eric Holder was made Attorney general? Holder is the thickest thief in this den of them. Holder will be getting his share, too. I estimate the payoff to be ten million for each badly needed vote.
Does anybody, by the way, know how much of the Stimulus money has been spent so far? How any of the mainstream media so much has asked why such a small percentage has been spent?
It’s really a poltical slush fund.Aaron, if I’m way off base, (I’m just a girl) tell me.
If not, might it not be a good idea for Hannity and the rest to expose this nefarious plan to the American people?
One more thing, the Republicans can offer stuff to get Democratic votes, too. But will they do it is another question.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 03/13/2010 at 07:19 PMRachel,
They’ve tried every other bribe, payoff, kickback, threat, cajoling, and special deal in the books. Why not try stimulus dollars too? I don’t think you’re way off base, although simply handing out stimulus dollars to losing congressmen would be a little brazen. More likely it would come in the form of cushy political appointments or lobbying jobs, which of course are paid for by stimulus appropriations!
I actually don’t blame the Republicans too much. They are in such a minority that their only true recourse is to unite in opposition to minimize the number of defections Pelosi can suffer. Even if they had chosen to boycott the health care “summit” or had played their cards differently, the Democrats would still be pushing the Slaughter rule and whatever else they could to get this through.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 03/13/2010 at 09:06 PM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
