December 19, 2009
THE COMPROMISE THAT SECURED NELSON'S SUPPORT.... Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) fought for the Stupak language to be added to the Senate bill. There was no way Senate Dems would go for this, and they didn't. But with limited ways to thread the needle, a compromise remained elusive.
That is, until last night, when Sens. Nelson, Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) worked something out. Here's what they agreed to:
...Reid included a provision that allows states to prohibit abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges the bill creates. It's basically a state opt-out, which largely allows Democrats to sidestep the tricky issue by dumping it on the states.
The amendment also requires that health plans that provide abortion services segregate the premiums from any federal money so that federal funds don't pay for abortion services. Similar proposals have come under fire from pro-life groups who call the maneuver a shell game. They argue that because the insurance plans offered through the exchange are eligible for federal subsidies, taxpayer money is still paying for the coverage of abortion.
And while it still might not satisfy pro-life groups, the important point for Democrats today is that it wins Nelson's vote, which they need to pass a bill.
Sens. Boxer and Patty Murray (D-Wash.), both of whom are strong pro-choice lawmakers, endorsed the deal.
"We said all along that we wanted to ensure there was a firewall between private and public funds -- this compromise achieves that.
"We said we would not accept language that prohibited a woman from using her own private funds for her legal reproductive health care -- this compromise meets that test.
"And we said we would stop Stupak -- which we did. Let's be clear -- we were both much happier with the Capps language and the language in the underlying bill. But compromise was necessary to get a health care bill for the American people, and this compromise achieves that."
Nelson, not surprisingly, said if the House-Senate conference interferes with his deal, he'll join a GOP filibuster on the final approval vote.
—Steve Benen 10:55 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (22)
This is my fear:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/12/18/whats-the-matter-with-democrats/
Posted by: Dems lose huge in 2010 on December 19, 2009 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK
Nelson, not surprisingly, said if the House-Senate conference interferes with his deal, he'll join a GOP filibuster on the final approval vote.
House members have to be getting tired of this game. But what can they do? Zero out funding for the Senate next year?
Posted by: PeakVT on December 19, 2009 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK
I love how our courageous and brilliant statespersons in the united states clown car senate keep the great and glorious tradition of misogyny going in this great and wonderful country.
we should all be very very proud of how democracy works for privileged males in this country...i myself am shedding a tear.
Posted by: neill on December 19, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK
Once there was a man who was robbed at gunpoint. The thief said he only wanted his watch; so the man gave it to him, readily enough. Then the thief rethought his position, and said that the watch was a good start, but he really required the man's wallet--which was handed over, as well. In short order, the thief then demanded his victim's suit, his underwear, his scalp, and finally, his life, which he got by shooting him in the back. As the man died noisily, protesting, the thief, outraged, stated that it was only a bit of thievery, nothing more.
And after the Senate has gotten through with it, this is still the very fine health care bill they started out with that does so much for everybody, I'm sure.
Posted by: Balakirev on December 19, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK
I'm suprised that Nelson didn't hold out for his actual desire: that it is illegal to provide any healthcare to women, since obviously they aren't citizens, or even human beings, but simply God-approved brood-sows. Hell, I'm seriously suprised he didn't demand that consunsual sex be a crime, since non-rape creates a slippery slope that might lead to women being considered equal.
Posted by: phalamir on December 19, 2009 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK
And now Liberman will be "snowed out" until after the New Year
Posted by: Rob on December 19, 2009 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK
What a huge, shameful embarrassment for Senators Boxer, Murray, and Schumer. Nelson, Casey, and Reid forced them to abandon their long-held principles, and for what? Its absolutely shameful. This is no compromise, its capitulation, and Boxer, Murray, and Schumer are the immediate losers.
The long term losers will be women in those states that exercise their newly given power to ban abortion coverage in private insurance plans.
Thanks, you Champions of Choice of the Senate. You may not have started this fight, but you sure ended it - by losing.
I'll never think about Boxer, Murray and Schumer the same way again. Shame on them.
Posted by: Ciccina on December 19, 2009 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK
Nice to see how the corporate moles in the "Democratic" party suddenly pull the trigger once their corporate masters realized they had squeezed out all they could get.
30 million new customers, many subsidized by the taxpayer, now captives in the Nixon-era con of for-profit healthcare insurance. Stock prices soaring. Lieberman in Connecticut celebrating "Hanukkah", aka sipping brandy and scotch with his real constituents as they all have a good laugh. "Joe, you'll be well taken care of", they say, "you and Hadassah will never have to worry about anything again". Republicans get to keep their hands clean and pretend they're the "real" party that champions the little guy. Republicans sweep back into power in 2010 and 2012 on a populist platform and the permanent corporate majority rules America until we all start dying from heat exposure and starvation.
We'll look back at 2008 and say, good times, good times.
Posted by: oh my on December 19, 2009 at 12:28 PM | PERMALINK
Oh, and BTW Neslon also got this out of the deal-
The amendment also includes a special extension solely for Nebraska: increased federal contributions to the cost of an expansion of Medicaid, the state-federal insurance program for the poor. -nytimes
Posted by: oh my on December 19, 2009 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK
Dear Sen. Ben Nelson: You will be surprised to learn that there is actually no "you" in "my uterus". Please mind your own fricking business and let my doctor and me decide about my health care.
I am embarrassed that my state continues to return Rep. King and Sen. Grassley, but Nelson is utterly loathesome as he holds the nation hostage in his obsession with controlling the lives of women.
Posted by: stinger on December 19, 2009 at 12:40 PM | PERMALINK
Aww the stench of Dems doing the honorable thing of sacrificing the human status of women to regulated animal status for an arsehole like Nelson.
Hope he contributes to their campaign. I have nothing for those that agree to treat me like an animal.
Posted by: Silver Owl on December 19, 2009 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK
It's only 60 if Lieberman votes for cloture, an I'm not sure his ego can stand the pressure.
What happens to the internet progressive community when they have to thank Joe Lieberman for saving us all from a bad bill? Will they apologize for Lamont?
Posted by: Davis X Machina on December 19, 2009 at 12:59 PM | PERMALINK
This is so outrageous! Wasn't there some sort of language about "equal protection" in the U.S. Constitution? Why am I or any other woman not entitled to the full range of medical services available because a senator from Nebraska and a representative from Michigan think women should be controlled by their religion? When are they going to bring out the chadors?
And why are Democratic and Republican women in Congress willing to go along with this? Their party uber alles?
Posted by: ghillie on December 19, 2009 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK
They need to keep talking to Snowe. This bill is equivalent to what she supported in the Finance Committee. There's no reason that we shouldn't have 61 votes for cloture. I hope she surprises us (given the pressure from the right, I wouldn't blame her for holding her cards close to her vest).
Posted by: Chris on December 19, 2009 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK
But that wasn't all Ben got - the Feds are paying for Medicaid in Nebraska forever!
If it's good for Nebraska, then it should be good for the rest of America? Yes?
You know, for a place that prides itself on tradition and decorum, they should realize that they're the laughingstock of the country, the bottom of the barrel of rancid sausage lawmaking, the ugly puss on the pimple of Uncle Sam's ass.
Posted by: Glen on December 19, 2009 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK
I question the Constitutionality (read more subtly then if not direct), if not sanity, of having a provision in a National Bill about benefits applied to a given State. That just isn't right. I don't want to see our Party be shady horse traders to get an agreement that isn't that great anyway.
Posted by: neil b on December 19, 2009 at 2:38 PM | PERMALINK
Instead of a public option, the final bill would allow private firms for the first time to offer national insurance policies to all Americans across state lines.
That's interesting.
The policies would be negotiated through the Office of Personnel Management.
Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 19, 2009 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK
Actually, there appears to be no federal legislation regulating the pregnancies of breed sows or other livestock, or putting restrictions on the farmers' use of federal subsidies to pay for abortions for their animals. It's only human females whose medical care the Congress has chosen to interfere with.
Posted by: smintheus on December 19, 2009 at 4:40 PM | PERMALINK
Just a point... The house of Representatives has a pro-life majority. The last two polls by Pew have shown that a clear majority of Americans now call themselves pro-life. Pro-choice outrage is amusing to hear, but we pro-lifers have the votes. And, if the Democrats want to continue to be in power, they need to negotiate with us pro-lifers and make room for us in the Democratic tent. Drive us pro-lifers from the Democratic party and the party can't win the purple states.
Posted by: pro-life Democrat on December 19, 2009 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK
Just a point, the US has at various times been pro-slavery, anti-womens'-suffrage, and pro-lynching. Just because you think there's more of you (a point which I dispute, BTW), doesn't mean your position is in any way moral.
And yes, I AM equating the "pro-life" position with slavery and lynching.
Posted by: stakkalee on December 19, 2009 at 6:39 PM | PERMALINK
"Pro-life" is a totally meanining less phrase. Anti-abortion? Yes. "Pro-life"? No.
Because if anyone was really "pro-life" they'd want to offer affordable (or free!) healthcare coverage for pregnancy/maternity/childbirth care, generous maternity leave and so on. (Not a single "pro-lifer" suggested anything during HCR.) If they were really "pro-life" they'd also be far more interested in all of the other things that prevent unwanted pregnancies-- like comprehensive sex ed and contraception. Also, if they really believe that abortion is "murder" then all the women who have had them and all of the providers should be rounded up and prosecuted and put in jail for life.
But instead the "pro-lifers" are fixated on one thing and one thing only-- how to ban abortion, thus limiting women's legal choices for ending pregnancies that they don't want and/or can't afford.
Posted by: zoe kentucky on December 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM | PERMALINK
Could you help me. The trouble with being poor is that it takes up all of your time. Help me! It has to find sites on the: Dsuncan phyfe dinning table pads. I found only this - table pad protectors. The traditional start reveals to think to the technical rider of the release as she exists the such famine goes the juiciest tricks, table pads. Table pads, would cashout parameters cooperatively fixed. :-) Thanks in advance. Salih from Rwanda.
Posted by: Salih on March 21, 2010 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINK