Hold me Mommy! I can't take much more of this!

And then, when all this democrat kabuki is done, they take down the Stars and Stripes and run up the Kenyan flag.

Hey, wait. I'm not entirely convinced this is the best deal we can get. Can we just start over again?

Now see, Al, that is exactly what I was talking about. That Kenya bullshit was old before the teabaggers even started using it. Be more creative with your satire.

including one recognizing the 65th anniversary of the Battle of Iwo Jima

Perhaps the Republicans, so long accustomed to voting against reality, will demand that the bill should state that it's actually the 100th anniversary. It's the 100th anniversary or we filibuster!

I'm not sure that Boehner could have looked any more like a clown during his comments. I liked Ed Schultz's comment afterwards - something along the lines of, "that speech could haunt Republicans for generations". We should be so lucky.

Al, it's Republicans like you that have ruined the Republican Party. You put the stink of decay and the aura of desolution on yourself and your fellow right wing UnAmerican cronies.

Al, it's Republicans like you that have ruined the Republican Party.

"Al" is only a parody, but he does speak for the Republican party, unfortunately.

I would not vote for the bill. Simply because of the way congress operated.

First, the House will vote on the Senate version of health care reform. This 15-minute vote is slated to start around 10:15. -- Benen

At 23:30, they were still "wrapping up", bless their hearts.

ceebee, I half-agree with you. The Republican congress-people were total a-holes from start to finish. I'd be ashamed of them if I were you, too.

Bleh. At *22*(not 23):30... 's what happens when you divide your time between the 'puter and the can, due to severe tummy aches.

oh, exlibra, so sorry you are in dire straits. Hang in there...

Thank you qwerty, I didn't know. I'll address my thoughts to John Boehner then. I think they fit him to a T.

And so now according to Boehner and the rest of the crew, the end of democracy will occur in 3, 2, 1, . . .

What??

And at 10:45, the House reaches the 216th vote to concur in the Senate Health Care Reform bill.

Thanks.

No, no, no. It is the long awaited Apocalypse!! in 3, 2, 1...

The latest scoop is "pass," so it looks likely US history will be made tonight. (Yes, "US" since every other industrial nation already has some sort of national health care/insurance plan!) So maybe it's best now to meditate on how good a Bill it is. The summary link below is from Reuters, which at least used to have a rather good reputation (esp. on facts per se.) Although many of us are not fully satisfied with the Bill, let's remember the Democratic Party had to fight lots of obstacles. There was the death of prime mover Ted Kennedy. There was having just enough votes to block filibusters, and even that with narcissistic Lieberman. There was misinformation and vileness from the Faux machine and the teabag dick army, and the MSM didn't do their jobs either.

And if things stink afterwards, there will be pressure to do better. We'd love to see a public option or better, but Democrats have to get credit for getting this far. No need to give up on pushing for more progress. If the result disappoints, they'll be pressed to make better so we can hope. Maybe they can still add HR 4789 sometime, to enable PO after the fact.

Reuter's Factbox

In less than hour and a half (EST) it'll be my 55th birthday!

Thank you President Obama!!

Death panels for everyone!

34 Dems crossed, no Repubs. Cao stuck with Boehner.

THE SENATE BILL HAS PASSED!!!

Thanks to Steve "Pass. The. Damn. Bill." Benen for his advocacy on behalf of HCR--especially after the election of Scott Brown in MA. Undoubtedly, his contributions have had an impact, and I for one appreciate his passionate efforts.

Viva Steve Benen!

Now let's get busy primarying the 34 MoFo's who crossed party lines and voted against healthcare for 32 million Americans.

Since abortion is a non-reason, Cao's change of vote is one of those "well, no reason to believe in you" moments. Diogenes had better luck than those who look to the right of the aisle.

man. I don't care what you all think. This is f***ing cool. Sure it ain't what a lot of folks wanted, but HC for almost all americans! No denials! THIS is why I pounded the pavement October, 2008.

See Dems? IT is kinda cool winning, ain't? USE IT BABY, USE IT. Pass Fin. reform. Energy bill. c'mon, those should be easy compared to the trash you put up to get this passed....

"Hey, wait. I'm not entirely convinced this is the best deal we can get. Can we just start over again?"

That comment's going to seem a hell of a lot less funny to you in about 6 months.

HAH-ha! [/Nelson Muntz]

Now, let the GOP run on repeal. In fact, when they don't, the Democrats should dare the chickens to do so.

A number of progressives have been turned off but Democratic fecklessness and outright gullibility over the past year, but the Reptiles can't stand feeling like losers, and as of today, they are.

Thanks, jcricket, @22:43; it's *all better* now :):):):):)! I think I'll be able to watch the Repub pumpkinheads explode with perfect equanimity and in total comfort.

Yes, we can! And, as our son -- who called from CA about 3 minutes after the vote was complete -- said: "we did!"

I might even be able to think about supper, now :)

They passed the damn bill! A big step forward, and I think Nancy Pelosi deserves a lot of credit for threading the needle, but of all the presidents who have called for universal healthcare--TR, FDR, JFK, LBJ--it's BHO who saw it through.

Hmmm ...

::sits quietly::

Well ...

::listens carefully:

Strange. America still exists. Guess the GOP was wrong, eh?

;-)

That comment's going to seem a hell of a lot less funny to you in about 6 months.

no it won't, but you'll still be a miserable asshole in 6 months, and 6 years, and forever.

I'm crying as I type this. I am so proud of my Dems.

Oh, yeah... Thinking long term (like: tomorrow).. Who *were* the 34 drips? I don't think I have the strength to Google 'em up...

Dammit, I just got killed by a death panel. They really didn't wait at all.

Well, they passed. The. Damn. Bill.

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a wimper

cool.

Remember when Jim DeMint said that this would be Barack Obama's Waterloo?

He was right. Obama is Wellington.

I think all the protesters against the health care bill could have saved themselves time and money by skipping D.C. and spending time in their state capitols and county court houses. Because the only way you're going to defeat nationalized health care is through decentralization. The use nullifcation and interposition on many of the items in the bill are already taking place in many states across the country and continue against many of the convoluted parts of this bill.

The court fights should be interesting. But the important thing to remember is that decentralists don't have to rely on a pity-poor GOP and their minority strategy of oppose everything and their mostly incompetent politicians. We have other means now to advance our agenda.

and reconciliation bill just passed the House as well. all three votes are now completed. on to the Senate and the WH. Thanks, Speaker Pelosi, for once again doing your part.

Got something better than just a list of the 34 SOBs. Got a chart, which lays it all out -- who voted how in November vs today, who got how much from the industry, how many uninsured in the district... the whole nine yards. And, although I've only skimmed the list so far, it looks like some of them were really good guys (and gals) -- wouldn't be bought, despite quite impressive amounts that were thrown at them...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/votes/house/finalhealthcare/?hpid=topnews

It was Waterloo allright. But it turns out Obama was in the role of Wellington and the Republicans were the... FRENCH!!!

whatever gets you through the night, Mr. Scallon. but i have no idea how you think state nullification would ever hold up.

just a hint: you buddies Boehner & crew can't really spend a year complaining about how this bill impacts 1/6th of the national economy, argue about whether Americans go elsewhre or other nationals come here for care, discuss the freedoms of insurers from federal antitrust law, or to make certain profits, or for customers to shop across state lines and then end up in court arguing. . . that the Commerce Clause doesn't apply?

Sorry, this is one of the easiest Commerce Clause cases ever. There is no problem with jurisdiction here, and no way state nullification survives.

Why is it now just after this passed suddenly the name on my bank account changed to "all americans"? The socialism we have feared has come to pass!

Oh, wait. That didn't happen.

Did the votes overlap in the two bills? Who was the 220th vote here?

Al @11:25 pm:
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a wimper

OK, Al, that's a bit better. Some more creativity, and not directly off of Redstate or Palin's facebook page. Try to keep it up.

"no it won't, but you'll still be a miserable asshole in 6 months, and 6 years, and forever."

You're probably right at that. In 6 months when the dems have done poorly in the november election you'll be scratching your head. You seem to lack the introspection to realize that betraying your own base and giving huge gifts to hated industries is a bad way to get people to support you.

And yeah I *will* be miserable. I'll be at a point where I can't afford meds for my MS and so it'll just be a waiting game for my immune system to start eating my central nervous system. But I'll get to pay a big chunk of change to the insurance companies and when they refuse coverage you'll no doubt insist that that didn't hap[pen, couldn't happen, since you actually wrote down on a piece of paper that they couldn't.

The dems chose to sell out health care reform in favor of campaign contributors. And because of that my lifespan is probably going to be shortened by a good 10-15 years, and there's about 50-50 odds that within the next 10 years I won;t be able to walk. My kids, 9 and 11, are going to get the great character building exercise of watching their father deteriorate a piece at a time.

Sooner or later it will be time to divorce my wife to save her from the medical bankruptcy that you idiots think you've gotten rid of because you couldn't take the time to read your fucking bill. God knows how long I'll be able to keep a job, it depends a lot on in what order the immune system decides to attack the brain.

So yeah. Being condemned to a slow degeneration, in which I get the fantastic choice of forcing my loved ones to watch or pushing them away and spending my years in dwindling capacity until I either freeze to death in an alleyway or end up in a nursing home having my ass wiped by underpaid nurse, does make me pretty miserable.

Having it done by the people who were supposed to be on my side, and who promised real reform, makes it almost unbearable. Particularly when all they had to do was expend the effort to read the bill and they'd have known the lies were... lies.

So congratulations on your oh so pragmatic victory over people who needed and thought they might have gotten help from you. Oh, and fuck you, sincerely.

Out of curiosity, how many times are you going to repeat the same, tired, long-ago-debunked nonsense?

Oh, and this:

"Oh, and fuck you, sincerely."

Thank you, but no. My taste in partners does not include people who enjoy wallowing in morbid superiority. You'll have to go with your hand instead of me.

Cao stuck with Boehner.

And thus ends the short political life of Joseph Cao. It was going to be tough for him to get relected anyway but he and Boehner absolutely guaranteed that he has zero chance.

As someone suggested previously, Cao should have voted yes and switched parties the second he pushed the button. Now he's walking toast.

"Out of curiosity, how many times are you going to repeat the same, tired, long-ago-debunked nonsense?"

When are you going to realize that saying "nyuh-uh" is not actually debunking anything?

Have you read the bill?

No tlaloc - fuck you. You're asserting, without evidence, that the law won't work. Because you're so damned bitter and set in your narrative that you would lose face if you actually, you know, tried to work and ensure that it got better. I call your scenario utterly wrong under the bill that just passed. What you're describing, however, *is* pretty close to reality *without* it. But you can't see it.

Instead you and the destructive online holier-than-thou progressives prefer some imaginary perfect bill over something that can actually get enacted into law.

I'm sick of the sniveling, I'm sick of the backbiting, and I'm sick of so-called progressives who are so hung up on purity tests and anger that they can't tell a good thing from a bad one.

Saints (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) be praised.

If the sun doesn't rise tomorrow, I'll know they were right.

I've never been much of a fingernails-on-the-chalkboard kinda guy, so I sincerely hope that I get some modicum of a respite from the pathetic Right's continual anti health care reform rant.

A big collective, fuck ya, for getting our foot wedged in the door of something genuinely aimed toward...progress.

First, I'll say again that I am sorry to hear that you have MS. Your fears are understandable. However, you might take a look at what the bill offers. Or you can wring your hands over what the insurance companies might do.

INSURANCE MARKET REFORMS: Starting this year, insurers would be forbidden from placing lifetime dollar limits on policies, from denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions, and from canceling policies because someone gets sick. Parents would be able to keep older kids on their coverage up to age 26. A new high-risk pool would offer coverage to uninsured people with medical problems until 2014, when the coverage expansion goes into high gear. Major consumer safeguards would also take effect in 2014. Insurers would be prohibited from denying coverage to people with medical problems or charging them more. Insurers could not charge women more.

SUBSIDIES: The proposal provides more generous tax credits for purchasing insurance than the original Senate bill did. The aid is available on a sliding scale for households making up to four times the federal poverty level, $88,200 for a family of four. Premiums for a family of four making $44,000 would be capped at around 6 percent of income.

You're probably right at that. In 6 months when the dems have done poorly in the november election you'll be scratching your head.

Not really. Everyone here expects the Democrats to do poorly. That's what happens in an off-year election like this, after historical gains in previous years. Since they would have done worse if this bill had not passed, I'm afraid that your handwringing is for naught. Nice try, though.

You seem to lack the introspection to realize that betraying your own base and giving huge gifts to hated industries is a bad way to get people to support you.

You seem to lack the introspection to realize that caving in and passing nothing demoralizes your base and the independents you need even more and gains you jack shit. You also seem to completely fail to understand the thrust of this bill and its impact on the voters. You also seem to completely fail to understand the history impact of this bill, as it, once and for all, firmly places the federal government in the center of U.S. health care, granting a role to the federal government that it has never had before.

The Democrats won the debate and will be reaping the rewards in years and decades to come, particularly as the problems with the current proposals are fixed, one after the other.

But I'll get to pay a big chunk of change to the insurance companies and when they refuse coverage you'll no doubt insist that that didn't happen, couldn't happen, since you actually wrote down on a piece of paper that they couldn't.

As compared to what we have today?

The dems chose to sell out health care reform in favor of campaign contributors. And because of that my lifespan is probably going to be shortened by a good 10-15 years

Man, what a load of bullshit, as is the rest of your rant. You don't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about and you're striking out at the very people who would be most inclined to sympathize with you, had you been more reasonable.

An appeal to emotion, by the way, is a classic logical fallacy, one used when you cannot muster any rational arguments to support your view.

So congratulations on your oh so pragmatic victory over people who needed and thought they might have gotten help from you. Oh, and fuck you, sincerely.

Same to you, I'm sure.

Oh, and Tlaloc? You also completely fail to understand that the failure to pass this bill means that you get nothing. Zero. Zip. Nada. There is no second act on HCR, not for years, perhaps not for decades. If you're serious about HCR, this bill absolutely had to pass.

"No tlaloc - fuck you. You're asserting, without evidence, that the law won't work."

Have you read the bill? The evidence is right there in black and white- no attempts to make the regulation anything but a joke. No attempt to even pretend there is an enforcement mechanism, any punishment for breaking the "regulation", or any money set aside to catch and punish those that do.

But you'd know that if you read the bill.

"Instead you and the destructive online holier-than-thou progressives prefer some imaginary perfect bill over something that can actually get enacted into law."

The only reason it couldn't have gotten enacted is because of douchebags like you and obama selling us out. It was very doable, but obama didn;t want it and you guys do whatever dear leader tells you.

Fuck you.

It's established and admitted now by obama that he met with insurance companies and pharma companies and gave them whatever they wanted from the start to keep them from killing reform. Insurance companies got him to take single payer off the table. Pharma killed drug reimportation, etc. Read the glenn greenwald article above if you don;t believe me (or more likely haven't bothered to pay attention).

That's why we got jack shit- obama wanted campaign contributions. To pretend we couldn't get better than this bill with big majorities in both chambers and a popular president during a time of economic upheaval is retarded. We absolutely could have- if obama had only tried.

"First, I'll say again that I am sorry to hear that you have MS. Your fears are understandable. However, you might take a look at what the bill offers."

I know what the bill does because unlike you I went and read the damn thing. It's not that hard. Yes it's 2000 pages but it uses large margins, big font, and lots of paragraph breaks. I rad it in one night.

Try reading it. Or at least the first section which deals with all the big ticket things. Then tell me where exactly the enforcement mechanisms are for the regulations. I know they aren't there, but hell maybe I'm wrong, and since you are oh so certain that they are there you should be able to point them out and very quickly shut me up.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

It was very doable

No, it wasn't, which is why your anger is so badly misplaced. That's the reality we live in; deal with it.

I know what the bill does because unlike you I went and read the damn thing

So have we, Tlaloc, which is why we know that much of what you're spouting is either bullshit or worst-case scenarios that bear no resemblance to reality.

Did the votes overlap in the two bills? Who was the 220th vote here?
Posted by: Joe on March 21, 2010 at 11:43 PM

Lynch. Voted "no" on the Senate bill but "yes" on reconciliation package. Doubt that the half-choke is going to change anyone's opinion of him.

"Oh, and Tlaloc? You also completely fail to understand that the failure to pass this bill means that you get nothing. Zero. Zip. Nada. There is no second act on HCR, not for years, perhaps not for decades. If you're serious about HCR, this bill absolutely had to pass."

Right on the first part, completely wrong on the second.

Yeah if the bill failed I'd be stuck with the status quo- which completely sucks. But on the other hand with the bill passing it's worse than the status quo and thenre's no chance of fixing it because the insurance companies have all of the power now. They're about to be enormously enriched (as in to the tune of $50 billion a year or so) which massively expands their ability to lobby. Plus they're officially the government solution. Not Non-profits. Not single payer. No medicare. It;s the insurance companies that are the default starting point for any future "fix", which means nothing can get fixed.

SO of the two possibilities if you're serious about HCR, this bill absolutely had to fail. But it didn't. So we're screwed.

"So have we, Tlaloc, which is why we know that much of what you're spouting is either bullshit or worst-case scenarios that bear no resemblance to reality."

Okay paul, you get the same deal as AK liberal. Point out in the bill the enforcement portion of the regulations and I'll happily shut up.

Give me a quote and the section number. I'll wait. Hell I'll give you a link to the bill if you want.

Here's the URl of the senate bill:

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf

Just let me know when you find all those enforcement provisions for rescission and the other regulations.

Funny thing, Tlaloc: You're simply asserting that elements which take place in years, can't possibly work. I can invent the same problems with the unicorn single-payer plan or the magic pony public option. That's the part that really antagonized me: the absolute certainty at a parade of horrors - which describe the status quo, for heavens sake - all projected on the new bill under the conviction that things will not only go badly but that they can't be adjusted in any way.

Basically, you detest Obama, and thus you wouldn't believe that anything he supported could be any good. So the actual bill doesn't matter. Folks who don't have the same attitude are obviously not persuaded, and in fact are genuinely angry. Enough so to lose their temper - which I did, and for which I apologize.

"the absolute certainty at a parade of horrors - which describe the status quo, for heavens sake - all projected on the new bill under the conviction that things will not only go badly but that they can't be adjusted in any way."

How are you going to adjust them? The dems completely sold out to the current insurance companies. Now that they are a 100x more powerful you think the dems will develop spines?

"Basically, you detest Obama..."

Well I do now. Previously I was pretty indifferent to him except in so much as i distrust any charismatic politician.

"So the actual bill doesn't matter."

YES THE ACTUAL BILL FUCKING MATTERS. God fucking damn it. The bill matters because the bill is what's wrong here. No amount of pretending I'm a closet racist changes the fact that this bill fucks people over. Just read the fucking thing for once. It's supremely obvious that the regulations aren't worth anything. They didn't even try to make it convincing, because apparently you guys will blindly repeat "bans rscission" like zombies no matter how obvious the truth.

Geez, I wander in for the first time all evening and you peeps are feeding the troll -- and not just feeding him, but giving him large amounts of sugar and caffeine. Did we not discuss this?

Seriously, Tlaloc has nothing to offer but misplaced and unregulated rage. He is totally unable to hear anything but his own voice. Skip over him.

Now about that speaker of the house, and about that whip...mmmm, mmmm. How about that?

Here's Tlaloc, earlier today:

[...] you're just either an idiot whose emotional buttons have been pushed or a douche trying to push the buttons of others.
Posted by: Tlaloc on March 21, 2010 at 3:28 PM

And, @11:50PM, there he is again... pushing every button he can think of.

[Enough already. Maybe you would be happier commenting at FireDogLake? --Mod]

Shortstop and exlibra: yup, you're right. Tlaloc goes into the troll-to-be-ignored file.

I'm incredibly happy that the democratic party passed this historic bill, and also that they stepped back from committing political suicide by doing so.

Peace out.

Talking Points Memo on my question:

"Three Democrats had different votes on the Senate and reconciliation bills. Rep. Jim Cooper (TN) voted for the Senate bill and against reconciliation. Reps. Jerry Costello (IN) and Stephen Lynch (MA) voted against the Senate bill but for reconciliation."

Right on, Marc. You may have a piece of the chocolate espresso cake I just baked. I know you can handle it.

"Shortstop and exlibra: yup, you're right. Tlaloc goes into the troll-to-be-ignored file."

Funny how that always ahppens when I ask supporters of the bill to just provide some evidence of their claims. That's when they suddenly decide I'm a troll to be ignored.

They NEVER seem to get around to actually backing up their claims.

Funny that.

Almost makes you suspicious...

Joe --I think it was Lipinski (IL) and not Costello (also of IL, not IN) who voted against the bill but for reconciliation.

Tlaloc, let's suppose that you are completely correct and every last hideous thing that you envisage starts to happen. What if anything would we have gained? Well, we just enshrined the principle that national health is a federal responsibility for which federal solutions should be applied. If the system starts to get too expensive or to not work for people, then there will be a push to fix it, and the logical fixes will be the things that by all rights should have been in the dang bill from the get-go. Nonetheless, the onus will be on fixing national health care, not dismantling the system or merrely trying to ignore the problem of the uninsured. However, we don't have to wait for problems to arise: we can go to the polls, talk about the good things in the bill, talk about how we managed to get something through despite all the special interests and the lobbyists and the obstructionist republicans, and ask for voters to send more and better dems to Washington so that we can improve the bill and put in the really good things that the nasty republicans wouldn't let us consider, like better enforcement so that the good things in the bill really do happen.

so that's half an hour and no evidence forthcoming from the bill's supporters. Surely it isn;t that hard to just find the enforcement in the bill? I gave you a direct link. You can do a word search to immediately go to the section on rescission (it's 2712 if I remember right).

Should I just go ahead and assume no bill supporter can or will bother to support their blind allegiance to this monstrosity?

sorry, shortstop, but you know i always have to make at least one effort. . .

Tlaloc, you keep saying there is no enforcement mechanism; I think that is at best premature and at worst wrong.

At pp. 390-391, the existing enforcement mechanisms in 42 USC 300gg-22 are preserved (although renumbered) and expanded to cover the defined categories of plans in the HCR bill.

While the penalties are small (regarding individuals; if the company has a broad practice that is in violation it would add up very quickly), they are today -- with the preservation of the mechanism, you are no worse off in that the "new" protections are exactly as enforceable, no more no less, than the protections you now have. So if the enforcement is equal, more protections should always be better than fewer.

But it is actually better than that. First, the express ability of a state to use compliance as a criteria to market in that state is potentially huge if a state insurance commission has any backbone. And this (and the corresponding power of regulators over the exchanges) will be even more compelling because the exchanges will create mass markets the insurers, for economic and PR reasons, will want access to.

But the final part of this, and where you are premature at best, is that you know this stuff well enough to know that much of the detail will be left to HHS regulations and end up in administrative code, not statute. And in that regard I would say you are not only no worse off but much better off with the Obama admin writing those rules than any Republican and even most recent plausible Democratic options.

I happen to disagree that, given the elected officials we have, that we could have done much better. You point to the "large majorities," but the numbers themselves don't case votes, the individuals do, and a great many of the individuals hardly had the appetite for the modest reforms that were made. But I think you are just wrong that there are "no" enforcement mechanisms; a review of those mechisms suggests that the situation is made no worse by the HCR bill, and in fact there is the potential for improved leverage both through access to exchanges and through new rules promulgated to enforce the new protections.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! N. Wells is paying attention to MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! Now I get to screech mooooooooooooore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CAUSE I'M FUCKING INSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANE!!!!!!!!!!!

@tomeck, I prefer to think of this as Obama's "Dancing Queen", rather than his "Waterloo"

"Well, we just enshrined the principle that national health is a federal responsibility for which federal solutions should be applied"

No we didn't. What we just enshrined is the idea that people have to buy insurance from private companies. The only role of the fed in health care is to punish you and me if we don't fork over cash.

"If the system starts to get too expensive or to not work for people, then there will be a push to fix it, and the logical fixes will be the things that by all rights should have been in the dang bill from the get-go."

Except the insurance compnaies will be vastly more powerful then and be able to kill any reform. We had everything on our side this time and w got nothing. Next time it'll be way worse. Unless and until the system crashes. Then we'll have a chance to fix things. But the cost!

" However, we don't have to wait for problems to arise: we can go to the polls, talk about the good things in the bill, talk about how we managed to get something through despite all the special interests and the lobbyists and the obstructionist republicans, and ask for voters to send more and better dems to Washington so that we can improve the bill and put in the really good things that the nasty republicans wouldn't let us consider, like better enforcement so that the good things in the bill really do happen. "

Read the glenn greenwald article above. We didn;t get this through despite special interests. We got this through FOR special interests. Obama negotiated with them from the start (and in violation of his campaign promise) and got them to sign off on what they would be okay with. And that's the bill we have.

tlaloc - I took the bait and skimmed through the bill. As you know, since you've already complained about the details of it, rescission is flatly prohibited except for deliberate fraud. As far as enforcement, authority is granted through the Secretary of Health and Human Services, while State Agencies also have regulatory authority in ways that are difficult to summarize. So, either rescission will be practically prohibited, because each such act will lead immediately to court injunctions; or eventually HHS or state agencies will create a mechanism to stop this.

You seem to be wallowing in grief, and also possibly nuts, but let's ask a few practical questions:
- What's wrong with amending this bill to add enforcement provisions later? Is this the last bill, ever?
- Have you written to your representatives with your concerns?
- Have you written to Sec. Sebelius?

You seem to be certain that things will turn to shit, and maybe you're right -- but what have you done to stop it?

"At pp. 390-391, the existing enforcement mechanisms in 42 USC 300gg-22 are preserved (although renumbered) and expanded to cover the defined categories of plans in the HCR bill. "

Did you notice that falls under the section that says:
"VIOLATION OF PARTICIPATION OR CONTRIBUTION RATES.
In the case of a group health plan, the plan sponsor has failed to comply with a material plan provision relating to employer contribution or group participation rules, pursuant to applicable State law.’’;"

In other words even if you're right it has nothing at all to do with enforcing the regulations on rescission or pre-existing conditions or anything else we care about.

OK_dem

We all have our preferences and you're certainly welcome to yours. I just like the idea of casting Republicans as French. That's gotta hurt.

"rescission is flatly prohibited except for deliberate fraud. "

Which is useless as fraud is the excuse insurance companies always use.

"As far as enforcement, authority is granted through the Secretary of Health and Human Services, while State Agencies also have regulatory authority in ways that are difficult to summarize. So, either rescission will be practically prohibited, because each such act will lead immediately to court injunctions; or eventually HHS or state agencies will create a mechanism to stop this."

Yeah. Or they won't. According to the LA Times, just 3 insurance companies rescinded the insurance of 20,000 people in four years. That's 5000 a year, for those with math phobia. Somhow saying "authority is granted through the Secretary of Health and Human Services, while State Agencies also have regulatory authority in ways that are difficult to summarize" leaves me less than convinced that they are capable much less interested in tackling that.

Where's it spell out the punishment for violating the law? Where's the earmarks for getting the enforcement in place? They earmark money to get the exchanges set up int he bill, and to set up various metrics but not a dime for enforcement?

The government would have to add dozens if not hundreds of lawyers, apparently all working probono to begin with.

Tlaloc - so in other words, no, you've done nothing, but you like to complain. Sucks to be you, I guess.

Cool alias, though. Love the Nahuatl.

"- What's wrong with amending this bill to add enforcement provisions later? Is this the last bill, ever?"

You really think the battered and ball-less dems are suddenly going to take on the insurance companies now that they are so much more powerful?

"-Have you written to your representatives with your concerns?"

Nope. I'm not under the delusion that one person makes any difference in a system this large. Nor am I under the delusion that congressmen care more about their constituents than they do the party machine that keeps them in power. The only way to stop this was to convince enough dems that it was a boondoggle, but the kool aide was tasty and widely indulged in.

"- Have you written to Sec. Sebelius? "

*snort*
Right now I wouldn't piss on obama if he were on fire. Let's just say I don't have a great deal of trust for the administration he runs at this point.

"You seem to be certain that things will turn to shit, and maybe you're right -- but what have you done to stop it?"

The only thing I could. I tried to help people who were ostensibly on my side see they were making a terrible mistake. And then when that became clearly impossible I descended into bitterness and abuse and scorn, oh god I've got a hell of a lot of scorn here.

Tlaloc: Read the glenn greenwald article above. We didn;t get this through despite special interests. We got this through FOR special interests.[/quote]You don't get it. Even if your version were true (though it really isn't), it wouldn't matter. "Getting something despite the special interests" is a message that sells, and can be used to send Dems back to Washington stronger and more numerous, to finish the job properly.

""Getting something despite the special interests" is a message that sells, and can be used to send Dems back to Washington stronger and more numerous, to finish the job properly."

What makes you think this isn't exactly what they wanted? They chose this bill. they chose to sell out to the special interests and the "pro-lifers." Send them back to washington in greater numbers and we'll get more of the same- more bailouts, more TALK about regulation of industry (without ever actually doing anything about it).

Screw that.

Tlaloc - get a new hobby, then, because your interest in politics only makes you miserable.

"Tlaloc - get a new hobby, then, because your interest in politics only makes you miserable."

No shit. And that's exactly what's happeneing. I've vowed to myself never to vote for another politician. I'll vote on bills only. Means I don't have to worry about this kind of betrayal.

So a reliable dem voter, one who was quite engaged in politics, is turned off of politics altogether. I guess we'll see how many Obama voters suffer similarly come November.

technically I suppose I could still vote *against* a given politician. Might feel strangely cathartic to vote against obama come 2012.

The part about Iwo Jima was relevant. If legislation can be compared to military battles, the Democrats have won their own Iwo Jima, raising the American flag over Capitol Hill against stiff (mostly Republican) opposition.

So a reliable dem voter, one who was quite engaged in politics, is turned off of politics altogether. I guess we'll see how many Obama voters suffer similarly come November.
Posted by: Tlaloc

in democratic (little d) politics, you rarely get everything you want. you get what you can take; you want more, you got to work for it. it's a continuous process there are few people who wanted this bill drafted the way it is, and that includes the people who did the drafting. but it does open the door to further reforms, perhaps one day a single-payer system. you can quit if you want to but that tells me that you aren't committed to reform.

Suddenly, America has discovered the wheel. Congratulations!

"Baby Killer"

Who was that village idiot who yelled it? According to talkingpointmemo, Joe Wilson (famous Congressional yeller) denies it; another Republican who was fingered denies it, but said it came from in back of him, from the area of the Texas delegation - and it had a southern accent.

I'm guessing the screamer may have been Congress's worst Aggie joke: Louie Gohmert. Seriously, it sounds like him.