Whatever the euphemism Obama uses: "up-or-down vote" or "a-simple-majority" (the hypocrisy given the how the Democrats reacted to a possible Senate rule change on filibusters specifically with respect to judicial nominees early in Bush's second term), there is no doubt about this being unprecedented and a majoritarian abuse of power. It is difficult to rationalize what distinguishes this health care reform bill from any other Senate bill that would require a normal filibuster-proof majority, ensuring the need for the majority to negotiate with the minority. The fact that Obama is doing so after months of polls showing a decisive thumbs-down on the plans and in particular after Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts, where he specifically campaigned as the 41st vote against the Democratic Party Health Care Bill, is, in my view, one of the most arrogant decisions ever made by a President.
It is even worse when you review this extract from Obama on tape from October 2007:
You've got to break out of what I call the sort of 50 plus one pattern of presidential politics which is you have nasty primaries where everybody's disheartened and beaten up. Then you divide the country 45 percent on one side, and 45 percent on the other, and 10 percent in the middle and (unintelligible) and Florida behind. And battle it out and then maybe you eke out a victory of 50 plus one. Then you can't govern. You know, you get Air Force One, I mean there are a lot of nice perks for being president. But you can't, you can't deliver on healthcare. We are not going to pass universal healthcare with a 50 plus one strategy. We're not going to have a serious, bold energy policy of the sort I proposed yesterday unless you build a working majority.Obama has already broken promises on accepting public financing during the general election campaign (when he discovered he could raise more cash than McCain), on earmarks, and a post-partisan Washington. In furthering this pattern of deception, he has broken his word with the American people and a basis of trust and good faith in negotiating with the opposition.
I'm also getting tired of Obama's political spin on the issue. He mentions that the House version of health care "reform" won by a majority and the Senate with a "supermajority". What he doesn't say are the bills are substantially different from each other, e.g., the question of a public option, financing ("soak the rich" vs. Cadillac health care plan taxes), abortion, etc. He also doesn't mention only 1 Republican vote was cast in support of either bill, and he couldn't pass the same Senate bill today with Scott Brown in the Senate. These bills have to be reconciled, but given the fragile nature of the Senate bill compromise among progressive and centrist Democrats, Obama needs the House to pass the Senate bill, which has drawn significant opposition from progressive and centrist House Democrats. Thus, they are talking about a complementary bill which would be Senate concessions to the House, e.g., on abortion. (In my view, if that complementary bill is subject to the filibuster, the Senate GOP should declare any complementary bill will be filibustered--otherwise, this essentially would allow the Democrats to work around Scott Brown's decisive vote as if the January election didn't mean anything.)
[March 7 edit:] According to the Washington Post, this fix-it will be precisely the reconciliation bill. What the Democrats are essentially doing is a workaround to major legislation that abuses process, i.e., strips minority rights in dealing with reconciled bills. Standalone, the Christmas week Senate bill would never pass the House. If the present Obama-moderated bill, currently the basis of House/Senate legislation, would be presented to the Senate, it would be successfully filibustered, because all Obama does are fine-tuned cosmetic changes--essentially scrub some of the most egregious deal-making that Republicans have criticized, e.g., the Cornhusker kickback, and include some weak variations of certain Republican ideas, such as tort reform. So what the Democrats will do is get the House to pass the Senate bill into law (with Obama's signature--not a problem), while simultaneously abuse the budget reconciliation process to do policy reconciliation. The Democrats are already engaging disingenuous political spin by putting the cart before the horse, i.e., equating policy changes with budget reconciliation, claiming policies have budgetary considerations. This is an unethical loophole which would set a precedent by allowing majority-controlled Congresses to bide their time to pass divisive policy legislation of their choice.
On the Cool Side
Well, some prudish neighbor in a New Jersey neighborhood complained about this rather inspiring ice sculpture of the Venus de Milo from New Jersey resident Elisa Gonzalez, and police were called to have the snow maiden covered up...
I'll let the Rolling Stones articulate my response:
How Inept is the RNC?
Politico got a copy of a presentation made by the RNC Finance Director at a fundraising retreat; a key slide, shown above, has spawned outrage by Democratic partisans everywhere (given the fact that the Democrats engaged in comparably disrespectful fear-mongering behavior during the years of the Bush Administration and GOP-led Congress, I'm not really concerned over their crocodile tears). I will say that this is fairly pathetic and juvenile; Michael Steele, if the best you can do is rely on negative, amateurish, adolescent nonsense, you are going to blow a historic opportunity: the American people want problem-solvers and an end to partisan bickering, ideological grandstanding, political spin, and kicking major problems (entitlement solvency, the massive public debt, etc.) down the road.
No, Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are not socialist or evil--just progressive, incompetent, and clueless. They have no idea of opportunity costs, the law of unintended consequences and moral hazards; they don't understand what fundamental factors underlie business and job growth.
I understand negative campaigns work, but they don't help you govern once you're elected. If you're going to mock the Democrats, be a little creative, e.g., "Poor Barack! He can't help it--he was born with someone else's silver spoon in his mouth."
Political Cartoon
IBD cartoonist Michael Ramirez provides a public service, an Obama health care bull chip-to-taxpayer translation:
Quote of the Day
Never cut what you can untie.
Joseph Joubert
Musical Interlude: Father and Daughter Songs
Neil Sedaka (with daughter Dara), "Should've Never Let You Go"
Frank Sinatra (with daughter Nancy), "Something Stupid"
Nat King Cole (with daughter Natalie), "Unforgettable"
Elvis Presley (with daughter Lisa Marie), "In the Ghetto"
