I have serious doubt that the House will be as friendly to this after their recess as they are now.

These folks in DC are trapped in a bubble. Lets see the reality of the Bill's 30% approval rating sink in on them.

Do tell about the rumors, Steve. President Nelson sounds like he's already threatening the conference committee.

Please, please someone televise the lack of Republican senators in attendance while the bill is being speed-read to an empty chamber, and explain why that makes a complete mockery of their objections that the bill has to be read aloud at all.

speaking for corporate america, which owns most of y'alls asses, wealth and souls:

We think the feelings of accomplishment and bravado all the Villagers in Washington are gonna gush and spew all over you everywhere is good enough cover -- as usual -- for the slow realization that we just drank your milkshake, again, wont dawn on you jaspers for a long long long long LONG time -- if ever.

thanks, suckers!

I'm with Kuttner: hold your nose, pass it, and build on it later. There's no reason to believe that if we let this go now, we can come back next year and get something better. It just doesn't work that way.

Play the long game. Social Security, as first passed in the 1930s, was barely and outline of what it later became. But it was a start.

thanks for laying it out so clearly Steve.

When do they return from recess for the House to give it's input?

They are doing speed reading, are they not? And if the reading is fast enough, how will they know if pages are skipped shortening the time interval even more?

"Baby-killing, Grandma-killing Socio-fascist Democrats declare war on Christmas Eve," in 3...2...1...

GOOD, let them work right up to and during and after Christmas EVE...that's what they are paid for...they get plenty of "time off"...and were it up to me they ALL should sit there while these amendments are being read so they would know what is in them (as if they could focus that long without a camera on them)...!!!! I am completely mystified why our illustrious media hasn't just kept running Obama's criteria as laid out in the speech to Congress (those things he said WOULD be there in a bill he signs)...and it should be in print/video/whatever over and over to remind all what MUST be thee for a bill to be SIGNED!!!!!!!!! Like that will happen...I know...

What Kuttner and all the others seem to forget is that once you pass a "reform" bill with mandates and no public option, there's no way to reopen the debate later. Big business will already have their Christmas gift, and there will be no incentive to force them back to the table unless we hold something back from this bill that they really want.

No public option? No mandate, or no deal.

Thanks for spelling out the time-line, but could you please extend it through the steps that are needed to get the thing through conference and into a final vote? Specifically, I know that no further amendments are allowed post-conference, but is there debate in which pseudo-filibusters are possible unless there are 60 votes to shut down the filibuster? Or do both bodies proceed immediately to an up-or-down simple majority vote, making those sorts of actions impossible at that stage? (Sorry, I ought to know this stuff....)

Tee-hee. At first I misread it as "Manger's Amendment," which seemed to be laying it on a little thick considering the likelihood they're going to vote on Christmas eve.

Regardless, I'm just glad things are looking back on track. We need to pass this now, tinker and improve it later. As Harkin said earlier on teevee-- this isn't the end of health care reform, this is only the beginning.

"...even if that means keeping members voting literally on Christmas Eve." Steve Benen.

If the members of Congress don't like the occasional bit of overtime, I'll gladly take it.

So lets hope this thing gets through, putting up with all the Repub bullshit this time.

THen, in 2010, can the Dems start acting like grown ups? First, make ALL bills appropriations related, so it would be 50+1 and thus, leave off every F***ing R, and the "moderate" dems?

Then, lets start combing every appropriations bill for earmarks, etc., and strike every LAST earmark FROM EVERY GD state with two republican senators. I live in one - I can start the list tonight. TX, MS, SC, UT, WY, ME, etc. - screw em. They want to bog down the process, pout, and act like babies, fine. Stick it to them hard. See if they like that.

If health care is passed, the R's lose. It's easy to miss the forest when we've been looking at the trees for so long. The Republicans have conducted a scorched-earth policy. Working with RW Dems, they've weakened the bill. But they tried to kill it, and they didn't, and time is running out. So if it passes, they lose. Losing is contagious. It could well lead to fractures within the R party, and it gives profound momentum to progressives. Bill passage should be recognized and leveraged.