I was wondering when someone was going to say it. Republican Senator Judd Gregg finally did. Via The Hill:
“They’re using reconciliation to pass the great big bill,” Gregg said during an appearance on CNBC. “Once they pass the great big bill, I wouldn’t be surprised if the White House didn’t care if reconciliation passed. I mean, why would they?”
Seriously, why would the House trust the Senate?
“If you’re in the House and you’re saying, ‘Well, I’m going to vote for this because I’m going to get a reconcilation (sic) bill,’ I would think twice about that,” Gregg said. “First because, procedurally, it’s going to be hard to put a reconciliation bill through the Senate. Second because I’m not sure there’s going to be a lot of energy to do it, from the president or his people.”
“In my opinion, reconciliation is an exercise for buying votes, which, once they have the votes they really don’t need it,” he said.
Bait and switch, baby. It’s not like the unsuspecting and unprepared Democrats haven’t already seen plenty of that already.
“The plan, as it comes from the Senate, hangs out every Democrat who’s running for office to dry — including the president, in 2012, because it makes him defend a plan that isn’t in effect essentially yet,” Dean said during an appearance on the liberal Bill Press Radio Show. – The Hill (–updated–)
The House progressives fell for Pelosi’s Stupak deal, which he’s still pushing in the face of taking health care down, because Mr. Stupak cares for cultural issues first, the sign of a true right-winger. If the House falls for the Senate’s trust me political purr on reconciliation it’s not like they weren’t warned.
Simultaneous passage of reconciliation and the Senate package is the only hope for the House, which Gregg is betting won’t happen.
But Gregg’s warning hiss to the House is a GOP talking point with punch, because it actually rings of truth while playing into the House’s historic distrust of the Senate. Slick play.
I hate it when wingnuts are right.
(shakes fist at the cold, uncaring sky)
heh-heh…
Quite a spider to the fly scenario going here.
I would like to refer you to Ellen R Malcom’s comment on Blanche Lincon at the EMILY’s list web site that explains why they do not support her relection. It has to do with her supporting bills that do not protect women’s reproductive freedom. The current healthcare bill is even worse for women. I am glad they are taking this stand.
http://emilyslist.org/blog/surprised_about_blanche_lincolns_fight_for_survival_im_not/
Yeah, I received that via email. But seriously, it took them long enough, SueTexas. Lincoln’s views on hcr are not new.
Thanks for posting the link for everyone to see.
Maybe the various liberal groups are busting out of the “veal pen” that Jane talks about.They have all been neutered by Obama. Maybe now they will start to realize if they want to keep their base they better stand for some things.Naral will never recieve another donation from me,NOW never has.PP does very good work locally and I work with them but national better start challenging the Blue Dogs and other anti choice Dems.
Taylor,
I agree that there are many groups that it takes WAY too long to wake up and realize that they aren’t walking the talk. I was a supporter of EMILY’s list in the early days but then decided to make my own decisons on where to send my money. I have supported many candidates all over the US and have to say my biggest disappointments were Katheleen Selibus and Janet Napolitano. Although I don’t care for many of Nancy Pelosi’s actions I do think she has done a remarkable job getting Obama’s desires through the house. It is just to bad that what has come out has been so horrible to women.
Judd Gregg is a pretty darn slick operator and I imagine he got a close up impression when he was leading Obama around the mulberry bush over his commerse appointment. I am sure he has had a few laughs about that.
Did anyone see Krista Freeland float the idea from the WH that the MA loss was an act of God and not their fault,this morning on MJ?? After all they had that seat until Ted Kennedy died?? Have you ever heard anything so ridiculous??? Does that mean they paid NO ATTENTION to what was happening there? Unbelievable! Like Taylor says political malpractice.
SueTexas are you familar with Jane Hamsher’s veal pen theory? She thinks early on Obama influenced all the funding sourses to not give to any liberal groups who challenged him or his policies. Haven’t you noticed the lack of push back from the usual actors? I kept thinking where are all the liberal groups during the early part of HC? Why is the only voice we hear Obama’s? Well, like veal they are being kept fat and dependent and penned up.Hopefully, some of them will begin to awaken soon.
This is a conspiracy theory that deserves a round of applause. My theories are small and insignificant compared to this “mother of all conspiracies.” Well done. Or are you all calling this something else? Peace
The Repugs are vicious for sure and as far as power plays goes this is a good one. Well played Mr Gregg! But one wonders who he is trying to “stick it to” this time. By saying the obvious he’s put the House Progressives on notice, the one or two of them that exists, that they can’t trust the Senate. If they vote for this mess and get up and cry later when the Senate fails to hold up its end of the bargain the “I told you so’s” will be deafening. But I wonder if they are the true target – I’m thinking the Senate is where this is pointed – its a real call to put up or shut up.
Essentially he’s reminding the House that they need to force the Senate to go first and he and I don’t believe they will – there is way to much cowardice in the Senate to do this. Has anybody noticed how the sequence of events is starting to get muddled? First it was gonna be the Senate to act by passing a reconciliation bill then the House would first pass the Senate’s original bill quickly followed by the fixer bill – the one the Senate passed via reconciliation. The Big O would sign the Senate bill first then the reconciliation bill and all would be happy in the Universe. Now, things are much more amorphous – they are talking about the House going first then the Senate would pass the reconciliation bill. Its a small change but seems significant to me -
I have to take issue with the slams against Stupak. I personally am pro-choice, but I know way too many people (whom I like and admire and respect) who are vehemently opposed to abortion to lump those opposed to abortion as right-wing nutcases. It’s a deeply held, very, very important principle (at least to the people I know). For those who are opposed to abortion, it will never do to have federal funds go to fund abortions. Never. It’s completely contrary to their life view.
And they should not be eviscerated because it is not our life view. Add the stupid language. Then talk.
That’s fine Beth but shouldn’t they at least respect the wishes of the opposition? Why do they have to be coddled and catered to and not others?
Everybody pays for things they dont agree with in the federal budget. How many people actually want to pay for the war in Iraq? I’m sure it’s certainly NOT a majority. Until we figure out a way for everybody to only pay for what they want to pay for everybody has to pay for things they don’t agree with.
A very fine take on the Stupak bill, Nancy Pelosi and the Council of Catholic Bishops.
That the Leader of House democrats allowed the Stupak monstrosity is unsuppportable. This is a stealth attack on Women’s rights and puts us back further as a result of ironically a Democratic witch and a weak POTUS.
The healthcare bill being bungled and bumbled is a mess. It mandates we buy through corporate insurance, it gives us no right to import drugs, stops generics from reaching the market, does not allow Medicare to bargain for drugs, and basically does nothing for years. 2014? Ridiculous. 2700 pages of jumbled misunderstood and poorly explained parts that make up this bill.
But Stupak in the House, and Nelson in the Senate were permitted to do end runs on RoevWade, and POTUS says not a word, nor the women representatives and senators.
As it stands this bill is unsupportable and should be reborn in a good woman’s womb.
Ga6th — not using federal money to fund abortions has been accepted policy for probably decades. It’s decided upon, it’s worked. I would argue that it’s vastly different than the Iraq War, simply because abortion is a different issue. I understand that we pay for things we don’t want. I, for example, think it’s ridiculous that I should have to pay for Michelle Obama’s staff of 22. I think she should get a staff of, oh say, max of 5. But I still have to pay. It’s not the same as funding abortions on the public dime because, as I said, abortion is different. You know as well as I do that abortion is a litmus test for many politicians.
Why not use the Stupak language in the Senate bill.