Mercury Rising 鳯女

Politics, life, and other things that matter

«
»

How Many Other Dems Have Been Hurt By This?

Posted by Phoenix Woman on January 19, 2010

In the wake of Martha Coakley’s losing Teddy Kennedy’s Senate seat to Scott Brown, wanna know what’s really sad?

If Obama and Rahm and Harry had gone with reconciliation from the beginning, rather than pretended that they need 60 votes just to blow their noses, Martha Coakley’s polls wouldn’t have nosedived because of her being forced to back the sellout to Ben Nelson:

— Coakley’s lead dropped significantly after the Senate passed health care reform shortly before Christmas and after the Christmas Eve “bombing” incident. Polling showed significant concerns with the actions of Senator Nelson to hold out for a better deal. Senator Nelson’s actions specifically hurt Coakley who was forced to backtrack on her opposition to the abortion restriction amendment.

I have to wonder: How many other Democrats have been hurt by this? (We know that Vic Snyder was running neck-and-neck with his GOP opponent as recently as November; now, of course, he’s retiring in the face of cratering poll numbers.)

If the Democrats had used reconciliation from the start, they only would have needed 51 votes (50 plus Biden) to get a bill through the Senate. Furthermore, as Jon Walker points out, it would have prevented the bill from being trashed and allowed the conservative Democratic Senators and Lieberman to avoid having to back a bill they still didn’t like even after it was trashed to their specifications.

Oh, and while the White House (through their surrogate Steny Hoyer) is trying to pretend the ‘rush’ strategy is viable, that’s not an option, as Jim Webb wants no part of it for starters.

So guess what, Rahm? Either use reconciliation (as even Chris Van Hollen admits could be done) and get the decent bill we could have had from the start, or dump HCR rather than risk pissing off the PhRMA folk with whom you have a “deal”.

Your choice, bud.

This entry was posted on January 19, 2010 at 11:22 pm and is filed under big money, Democrats, Edward Kennedy, Election Day, Obama Administration, Rahm Emanuel. Tagged: . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

6 Responses to “How Many Other Dems Have Been Hurt By This?”

  1. the farmer said

    January 20, 2010 at 6:18 am

    Congratulations FDL/HCR fail-tard. Enjoy your new Overton Window salesman.

    I see by your outfit that yooo are a cowboy…

    *

    • Phoenix Woman said

      January 20, 2010 at 9:52 am

      I’ve scanned your comment to find anything that substantively addresses anything in my post — and found nothing. Did you actually have something to say? Something backed up by, y’know, facts?

      Take your time. I’ll wait. ;-)

    • Phoenix Woman said

      January 20, 2010 at 10:27 am

      I’ve posted this in the comments section of your blog, since your comment is a recapitulation of your post. I’m also crossposting it here in case it doesn’t make it through your moderation:

      Except, as Jane pointed out (and as I mentioned in the post which you apparently didn’t read before you dropped your comment in it), she backed Coakley and also reconciliation, which now Chris Van Hollen has admitted was always an option (and which is the only way the bill would get passed, as no Republican was going to vote for HCR any way no matter how much it was watered down).

      In fact, as I also mentioned in the post which you apparently didn’t read, Coakley’s own staff have said that she was twenty points up on Brown as recently as last month — until she was compelled to defend the indefensible Ben Nelson amendment to the Senate bill. This is something Teddy himself would have had a tough time finessing, so it’s hard to blame Coakley for it (though some are trying).

      It’s not just Coakley that’s being hurt by the Senate bill, either. From http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/01/20/fdl-statement-on-health-care-reform/:

      A new FDL/SurveyUSA poll of NY-01 shows how Lieberman’s bill is affecting the race in that district, one of many that the Democrats are at risk of losing in the next election.  Incumbent Tim Bishop would have a narrow lead over GOP challenger Randy Altschuler if the race were held today in a contest that was rated “lean Democratic” by Cook’s Political Report.

      People were pretty evenly split when asked if they supported  a bill with a mandate to buy private insurance, with 50% saying it’s a good idea and 44% saying it’s a bad idea. Support fell dramatically when they were told that they would be fined up to 2% of their income for failure to comply, with 40% saying it’s a good idea and 57% saying it’s a bad idea. But when the option to buy into a government-run Medicare program was added, 63% of likely voters (66% of independents) supported it and 33% opposed even with the fine. Even support among Republicans shot up 23%.

      Polling done for HCAN last September found similar results nationally, indicating that likely 2010 voters “oppose a mandate to purchase private insurance by 64% to 34% but support a mandate with a choice of private or public insurance by 60% to 37%.”

      The bottom line: By hewing to a 60-vote threshold which never stopped Bush from getting what he wanted, and by valuing an agreement with PhRMA over actual reform (to be sure, keeping PhRMA from running Harry and Louise ads 24/7 is an understandable wish), Obama and the Dems helped Martha Coakley lose yesterday — and are hurting other Democratic candidates as well. You can continue to blame the messenger, but it won’t change the situation.

      January 20, 2010 10:17 AM

  2. joel hanes said

    January 20, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    So guess what, Rahm? Either use reconciliation (as even Chris Van Hollen admits could be done) and get the decent bill we could have had from the start, or dump HCR rather than risk pissing off the PhRMA folk with whom you have a “deal”.

    Five bucks says he’ll dump HCR.

    Rahm is not a liberal,
    and apparently regards liberalism as a crippling infirmity,
    akin to leprosy.

    • Phoenix Woman said

      January 21, 2010 at 9:17 am

      Ah, but Rahm’s whole being is focused on the myth that not having a signed HCR bill is what doomed the Democrats in 1994. (He somehow doesn’t see screwing the base — as he did with NAFTA and various other sellouts he pushed during Bill Clinton’s first term — might have been a wee bit more important in that regard.)

      But yes, the game plan is still “punch the hippie”: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2010/01/20/left/index.html

      • Kassandra said

        January 23, 2010 at 10:36 am

        Rahm needs to go back to a real Democratic school. I’m afraid he has embraced Reaganomics so thoroughly that he may actually think its a GOOD idea to turn America into a banana republic.
        Gads! First Cheney, now THIS guy running the country into the ground.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

«
»