But Democrats are in charge right now. If they didn't let Stupak's admendent come up for a vote, it wouldn't. The GOP is certainly toxic, but this problem exists solely due the house democratic leadership's failings. This trash should have never been considered, it is sludge and avarice writ large. Dems in congress should be ashamed.

that Stupak is a Democrat, right?

considering the Senate's more conservative than the House, I'm not confident.... My Spidey-sense is telling me the Conference Comittee will leave it in....

-5.75,-4.05
"God gives men a brain and a penis, and only enough blood to run one at a time." -- Robin Williams

from this administration, no matter how it gets spun. They can't guarantee it will be pulled so as far as I'm concerned they can kiss my ass - starting with Oberstar.

Kucinich voted no?

Tom Robinson

The Cleveland Leader, November 8

Cleveland area Congressman Dennis Kucinich has long been one of the strongest voices for health care for all but was one of 36 Democrats who voted no on H.R. 3962 the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Kucinich explained his "no" vote on his website that read:

After voting against H.R. 3962 - Affordable Health Care for America Act, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today made the following statement:

“We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system.

“Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick.

Voluntarily. To show solidarity.

And note that this bill had the full backing of the AMA, which fought Medicare tooth and nail in 1964.

purist progressives seem irate. I don't get it.

You know, if progressives (I thought I was one but my card must need a new stamp) think the AMA is corrupt, and the insurance industry is corrupt, this puritancal line of thinking starts to make most everyone wrong in America. Pretty soon the whole nation sucks.

I am so stuck on a soapbox of "Where is your coalition?" Where is the progressive coalition for single payer, no insurance industry involvement, full government funding? There isn't any coalition to pass progressive healthcare legislation. Or maybe this bill passed last night *is* the progressive healthcare legislation for the year.

I have nearly as progressive a congressman in Seattle as Dennis Kucinich: Jim McDermott, who's actually a doctor. He's way left of Obama on this, and has been for many years. But he voted for this measure. If he hadn't, I bet he'd have a serious primary opponent next year.

Tom Robinson

if progressives (I thought I was one but my card must need a new stamp) think the AMA is corrupt,

Check.

and the insurance industry is corrupt,

Check.

this puritancal line of thinking starts to make most everyone wrong in America. Pretty soon the whole nation sucks.

Well, to judge by established results...

...check.

This a 'betrayal' they should have their head examined. This victory was huge. It forms the backbone and path to healthcre reform that will provide coverage to 50 million more Americans mostly children. Amazing. One of the best moments for congress. This has been 80 yeArs in the making.

It forms a backbone alright, on the backs of women.

Yes, I have a wife. And I've supported choice since it was voted in by initiative in Washington State three years before Roe v. Wade. That's about forty years of supporting abortion-on-demand.

Please don't question people's feminism or support for women's right to choose because they support this healthcare compromise, Tina. This is exactly the puritanism that can sink the left; the Republicans relish these squabbles, and want to drive every wedge they can into the Democrats' wide coalition.

Tom Robinson

the Republicans relish these squabbles

Still don't care what Republicans think.

scotjen: ..This a 'betrayal' they should have their head examined. This victory was huge. It forms the backbone and path to healthcre reform that will provide coverage to 50 million more Americans mostly children. Amazing. One of the best moments for congress.

I was questioning scotjen since I wondered if he considered the implications for women in his putting it on his best moment in congress list. This wedge was caused by a democrat not a republican and I do not have to be quiet and take one for the team, especially for a crappy watered down plan. And I do not need my head examined! This is not about puritanism its about core democratic principles.

What's funny to me is all day yesterday Pelosi and a few others were assuring us that members of this Democratic pro-life coalition would vote for the bill as long as they were allowed an up or down vote on the amendment. Out of 40, only 1 ended up voting for the main bill. LOL

would the Democrats drive a wedge into their own issue? And Ian's (i believe it was him) analysis that if the Stupak amendment makes into the final bill it will set a precedent on abortion coverage. Granted, it is not, as far as i know, a terribly expensive procedure. Still, it's the thought that counts.

...

At this point I hope it dies in the Senate. I've been against this thing since Obama started holding private meetings with insurance companies, promised drug companies there wouldn't be price controls and single-payer was off the table.

Hell, at this point I hope Republicans take the majority next year. If Congress is gonna fuck me, it's somewhat understandable when I'm getting fucked by the right party.

"Progressives for Republicans" office?

Man, I don't get this. As soon as Republicans take over Congressional committees, any chance of progressive legislation is structurally doomed. Why would you want that?

Tom Robinson

So you're setting up the "Progressives for Republicans" office?

Yes, by staying home.

As soon as Republicans take over Congressional committees, any chance of progressive legislation is structurally doomed. Why would you want that?

Because there is no progressive legislation going through Congress with Democrats in control. Sorry man, still can't get over the bailout that nearly every Democrat voted for except true progressives and a few token loonies like Ron Paul. And they're not done bending us over on that front:

Sarbanes-Oxley was passed, almost unanimously, by a Republican-controlled House and a Democratic-controlled Senate. Now a Democratic Congress is gutting it with the apparent approval of the Obama administration.

The House Financial Services Committee this week approved an amendment to the Investor Protection Act of 2009 — a name George Orwell would appreciate — to allow most companies to never comply with the law, and mandating a study to see whether it would be a good idea to exempt additional ones as well.

I understand there's hope that the amendment won't make it if/when the Senate and House versions are reconciled, but the way the Democratic Party has been acting since it amended FISA last year makes me question why any liberal/progressive/Democrat keeps giving this party the benefit of the doubt.

The party of FDR is dead. Stop hoping.

Sotamayor is the same as Roberts? Wilderness bills the same under Obama as Bush? Think we'll invade two more countries while a Dem is in the White House? And you think Dems support lesbians and gays just like Republicans??

I've worked with Russians, Venezulans, Filipinas, and Lebanese now living in America -- all legitimate immigrants -- who love this country in ways you seem to have scrapped. They don't hold this sort of cynical broadbrush assessment of those who are governing. They are delighted to live in such a free country with such choices and such discussions.

I can't believe I have to give this kind of pep talk. But please don't stay home and hand it over to fascists -- a few more votes for Gore in 2000 and Bush never would have been president.

There is a difference between these parties, and it's huge.

Tom Robinson

I don't know why you're mentioning Sotomayor, but now that you have, choosing her is another example of "the left" appeasing the right. Besides, every time 21 Century Democrats or whomever call me for money they don't wanna hear me "whine". I'm the new, new radical leftist. Huzzah!

It seems the fascists will run government no matter how I vote. Really, if Democrats aren't going to live up to the GOP Communist meme they shouldn't bother. Compromise is another word for corporate giveaway.

Sotamayor is the same as Roberts? Wilderness bills the same under Obama as Bush? Think we'll invade two more countries while a Dem is in the White House? And you think Dems support lesbians and gays just like Republicans??

I've worked with Russians, Venezulans, Filipinas, and Lebanese now living in America -- all legitimate immigrants -- who love this country in ways you seem to have scrapped. They don't hold this sort of cynical broadbrush assessment of those who are governing. They are delighted to live in such a free country with such choices and such discussions.

I can't believe I have to give this kind of pep talk. But please don't stay home and hand it over to fascists -- a few more votes for Gore in 2000 and Bush never would have been president.

There is a difference between these parties, and it's huge.

Tom Robinson

Tangentially related. Bottom line, big pharma and big insurance made out big time. This isn't soicalism, it's fascism, pure and simple.

The money shot: 1/2 of the bailout money could have paid all mortgages on every home loan in the USand all credit balances on every credit card...

This is more of the same. Fraud.

I did inhale.

..., they will make out as well as the health insurance companies. The new money the health insurers take in doesn't go into "research & development" or "raw materials" to "expand production". All that new money from mandatory coverage will go to executive pay and to Wall Street. Yeah..., they will have to hire a few more office assistants to count the money as it passes through their hands on the way to the Banksters.

This is every bit as much a give-a-way to the Banksters as it is to the health insurance companies.

Democrats are the worst sort of scum; they go which ever way the wind blows (or so they think). I'll give republicans only one thing; as fucked as they are they do make principled stands on issues and drive them hard. Dems are unprincipled whores.
Loved your post and it's SPOT ON!