The Mukulski amendment to the health care legislation passed 61-39.

The fixing of the bill has begun.

The GOP strategy is playing right into the hands of the those wanting universal, socialist health care.

From the diaries, by Erick. Rick Scott is the head of Conservatives for Patients’ Rights and knows what he’s talking about.

What are we up to now, six different names for the public option? Let us count the ways desperate Democrats have tried to re-brand, re-tool, re-name or re-invent what is, by all accounts, a plot that will ultimately force millions of Americans into the waiting arms of government health care bureaucrats.

During the 2008 campaign, the public option was described as “government-run plan similar to Medicare.” Whoa…really? The same Medicare plan that cannot now meet its own financial obligations and is projected to be come up short by $38 trillion by the time the youngest Americans will need it? No wonder we haven’t heard that description much lately.

After the presidential inauguration, talk of the public option steadily picked up steam, reaching a fever pitch in August when senior citizens were shouting down their elected officials and canceling their AARP memberships in droves, and while Tea Party activists were getting their fingers bitten off at town hall meetings - all due to strong opposition against any form of government-run health care.

Read More →

Friends, it is as bad as I feared. The Republicans are playing so nice with the Democrats in the Senate that they are improving the health care bill so it can pass.

Here is an email from Don Stewart in Senator Mitch McConnell’s office:

The Leaders just locked in a unanimous consent agreement for four amendment votes tomorrow.

There will be votes on the Mikulski and Murkowski amendments in the morning at 11:45. The McCain motion to commit (on the half-trillion dollars in Medicare cuts), and a Sen. Bennet amendment, will have votes at 2:45.

As Sen. McConnell noted on the floor, Republicans offered to vote on the Mikulski and Murkowski amendments this evening. But despite all the “obstruction” talk from Democrats today, there was an objection on the Democrat side to having those votes tonight.

As Sen. McConnell just said on the floor about the Murkowski/Mikulski amendments: “our side of the aisle, the Republicans side of the aisle, was prepared to vote on both of those amendments tonight, and then a problem developed on the other side.”

Let me know if you need any further information

Why was “The Republican side of the aisle prepared to vote on both of these amendments tonight?” Or tomorrow? Or ever? Why would we help the Democrats pretend to fix their unfixable bill.

The GOP and Democrats are putting up several amendments, all designed to “improve” the bill:

• The Democrat Mikulski amendment purports to ensure mammograms are covered, but actually ensures abortions are covered.
• The Republican Murkowski amendment response to the Mikulski amendment ensures mammograms are not cut and beefs up pro-life protections.
• The Republican McCain vote sends the bill back to Finance Committee to restore funding to medicare.
• The Democrat Bennett amendment responds to the McCain vote by ensuring no one ever loses their medicare.

Whoopideedoo. While I’m glad the Democrats are now fighting it out amongst themselves, the GOP is not really helping the fight for freedom here.

If Mikulski and Bennet pass tomorrow, Democrats will argue that they have fixed the Medicare and mammogram issues. Why are we in such a rush to allow Democrats to vote on their amendments to fix the bill? This is a unanimous consent request. All Senators are responsible for this disaster. Will anyone stand up and say “I object?”

House version (Via Instapundit):

Congressmen John Carter[*] (R-TX) and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) yesterday introduced the Geithner Penalty Waiver Act, requiring that the IRS assess the same penalty against U.S. taxpayers that came forward in the UBS tax fraud investigation as paid by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for failing to pay taxes on his IMF income — zero.

Pretty self-explanatory, isn’t it? I like Rep. Carter. And not just because of his name.

Senate version (Via Don Surber):

In their first shot at the measure this week, Republicans decided to try to strike at the heart of how Democrats plan to pay for the $848 billion measure by attempting to eliminate the proposal’s almost $440 billion in Medicare cuts.

But instead of offering a conventional amendment, they decided to use an esoteric procedural tactic that would send the bill back to committee with instructions to eliminate the cuts. If successful, the GOP’s gambit would force Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to use time-consuming procedures and hold another filibuster-killing vote on whether to restart debate on the bill.

That takes it off the floor, requires another committee vote, delays the bill, and ticks off Senate Democrats.  The ‘delays the bill’ part is probably the most important thing, here: health care rationing just isn’t popular these days.

Moe Lane

PS: Arcane procedural tactics are fun, but they’re no substitute for a Congressional majority. Reverse the Vote.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

This is frustrating.

The Senate Republican Conference is giddy that its first amendment to the health care legislation is to preserve the bloated Medicare bureaucracy. The Senate Democrats want to do what they always accuse the GOP of doing and cut Medicare. The GOP is apparently giddy at the opportunity to rub the Democrats’ noses in their Medicare cuts.

So now the GOP is using its first amendment to reaffirm the Democrat theory that Medicare cannot be cut and cuts even to the rate of growth of Medicare are also wrong.

The GOP could have, by chance, offered up the Stupak language, which has not yet been inserted. The GOP could have offered up an amendment to split the Democrats up front. The GOP could have done nothing and moved on to let cloture fail, thus killing the bill. Instead, Democrats and Republicans will no doubt join hands and vote to put the money back in Medicare, making it a grand bipartisan exercise.

What next? A GOP amendment to guarantee breast cancer screenings in the legislation?

Having started from the presupposition that the health care legislation is going to pass, the GOP seems to be signaling it will work to “improve” the legislation just enough to overcome a filibuster.

The legislation has 57 votes already. The GOP does not need to offer amendments to improve the bill — they need to bring it to a vote and kill it. Preening for cameras and favorable press coverage is going to get the bill to 60 votes and a signing ceremony.

*Yes, I realize these are all motions to recommit the bill to committee, which will never pass. So they aren’t trying to improve the bill, this a pure messaging/posturing exercise, but it doesn’t help to stop the bill. Since I assume we’re trading amendments (one GOP amend vote, then one Dem, and back and forth) every lame GOP recommit amendment we rush to do gives Dems another chance to fix their bill and cobble together 60 votes.

The Wall Street Journal reports Joe Lieberman is digging in his heels. He will filibuster any health care legislation that contains a public option, even if the legislation allows states to opt-out.

Lieberman has been a thorn in the side of the left ever since they decided to challenge him back in 2006. In that year, the left beat Lieberman in the Connecticut Democrat Primary. Lieberman decided to stay in as an independent in the general election and won. With a number of his long time Senate friends endorsing the Democrat in 2006 because the man had a “D” next to his name, Lieberman has been his own man ever since.

Lieberman retains his Senate committee chairmanship and the privileges of being a Democrat member of the Senate. That may change soon as Harry Reid is staking his reputation on passage of the health care legislation.

Back in the old days, people would at least look ashamed when caught being bribed, but not Mary Landrieu. It’s being called the Louisiana Purchase. Senator Harry Reid put a provision on the health care plan that originally called for $100 million to be funneled to Louisiana exclusively.

Mary Landrieu refused to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed to the health care debate. Reid raised the offer to $300 million and Mary proved she wasn’t a cheap date after all — she took the increase, voted for cloture, and then bragged about the $300 million bribe.

In a statement sure to be repeated by Republicans endlessly over the coming weeks of Senate health care debate, the senator flaunted the inclusion of the provision. “I will correct something. It’s not $100 million, it’s $300 million, and I’m proud of it and will keep fighting for it,” Landrieu told reporters after her floor speech. “But that is not why I started this health care debate; I started this health care debate for all the reasons I just mentioned in my statement” on the floor.

Sixty Senators voted to proceed to debate health care. There will be another shot at stopping it through filibuster.

Mary Landrieu, after getting $300 million in the bill for Louisiana, voted for it.

Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas not only voted for it, but now favors a public option.

Voters will remember.

Along the way, there seems to be divisions shaping up within the Democratic Party. Amendments will be offered to try to patch up differences.

Republicans should exploit this. Drag out consideration of the bill as those divisions grow, then offer amendments to exploit the divisions.

As I have said before, if Republicans work to improve the legislation, they presuppose its passage. Instead, the GOP should plan for the destruction of the bill by offering amendments designed to divide and fracture the Democrat coalition.

If you’re wondering where health care dollars go in this country, the invaluable Phil Klein reminds us:

Raymond Raad, a resident in psychiatry at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center and co-author of a new Cato study, presented evidence showing that the United States leads the world in the development of drugs, medical devices, and other advanced treatments. For instance, between 1969 and 2008, 57 of the 97 Nobel Prizes in medicine and physiology — or nearly 60 percent — were awarded to people who did their research in the U.S., and nine of the top 10 medical innovations between 1975 and 2000 were developed here. But … once these products are developed in the U.S., they become widely available and improve health care outcomes around the world.

Read the whole thing, and remember: that’s the system the Democrats are trying to tear down and replace with one more like the European countries that depend almost as heavily on American medical and pharmaceutical innovations as they do on American military protection. In both cases, the arguments for the superiority of a European model that is unsustainable on its own depend on somebody else assuming the role of America. And nobody’s volunteering for the job.

From the diaries, by Erick. Call 202-224-3121 right now.

People. Today should be a busy day since the Statists have once again scheduled a cowardly, nightime, weekend vote on healthcare.

Contact your Senators today urging them to vote ‘No’ tomorrow night to even begin debate. We can kill this thing tomorrow night if they can’t get 60 votes.

I just sent this to Senator Webb in Virginia, who being a veteran who fought for liberty and freedom I hope would still be open minded about this bill.

Senator Webb,

I am writing you to encourage you to vote ‘No’ on the Senate health care coming up for debate tomorrow night.

Vote ‘No’ so debate cannot proceed.

Vote ‘No’ to end debate should debate proceed.

Vote ‘No’ on the bill should it ever come up for a final vote.

You see, this bill is simply un-Constitutional. Nowhere in the founding document does it empower Congress to mandate the free (for now) citizens of this great country to purchase a product or service. Not the Commerce Clause. Not the ‘general welfare’ language. Nothing.

Not.A.Word.

I would encourage you and the junior Senator from our great Commonwealth to look back in time to 2 1/2 weeks ago, where the people of this great state overwhelmingly voted against the leftist policies of the junior Senator when he was Governor, and Gov. Kaine, and President Obama. The people of this country want MORE freedom not less. MORE opportunity not less and this health care bill robs the people who are the engine of this economy their ability and desire and means to produce and grow our economy. People want to be free and independent. You, of all people being a decorated veteran, should know this since you bravely fought for the very freedoms and liberties this bill would take away.

Resist the urge to vote with your leftist colleagues. Vote with the people you represent. Vote to kill this bill.

The people will not forget a ‘Yes’ vote in 2012.

Thank you.
Stephen Halsey

There is a study out today that is damaging to the Democrats efforts to pass health care in the Senate.

On Saturday, when constituents cannot contact their Senators’ offices because they’ll be closed, the United States Senate will vote on a cloture motion to debate the health care legislation.

This is important — a vote in favor of cloture on the motion to proceed (a parliamentary issue) is, in effect, a vote for the health care legislation. Why? Because Harry Reid has enough votes to pass the health care legislation by a simple majority, but he does not have the 60 votes necessary to proceed to debate, any Senator voting for cloture is voting for the health care plan.

Roll Call reports that according to the Congressional Research Service, “[a] study of Senate voting patterns shows the chamber has approved more than 97 percent of all bills subject to a cloture motion to begin debate — a finding that could undercut Democratic efforts to paint a key health care vote on Saturday as procedural.”

In fact, “since 1999 the Senate has approved 97.6 percent of all bills when lawmakers first voted to begin debate.”

Some Senators, like Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, want the health care legislation to pass, but know politically she would lose if she voted for it. So unless pressure is brought to bear on her and others, she may vote “yes” on cloture for the motion to proceed and then try to hide behind a no vote later.

We cannot let that happen. Call your two Senators all day today and demand they vote no on the motion to proceed. The phone number to call is 202-224-3121.

It is now the House of Representatives’ turn to further enable Obamacare. Later today, the House will vote on a $210 billion “doc fix” that is not paid for and would dramatically add to the deficit. Similar legislation was blocked in the Senate by a vote of 47 to 53 after Redstate readers took to the phones to stop it. 13 Democrats joined with all Republicans in standing with taxpayers.

Here is a refresher. The bill is a payoff to a powerful lobbying group—a $210 billion package for the American Medical Association. The funding is not offset and would dramatically increase the deficit. Democrats are betting that the bill will prove politically impossible for most Congressmen, including Republicans, to oppose as it addresses the number one priority for most doctors over the years—the fact that Medicare doesn’t reimburse them enough. By considering the “doc fix” apart from overall healthcare reform, Democrats remove a major cost to that package. As Senator McConnell said when the bill was before the Senate, “This is so transparent. They’re taking this issue out of health care, suggesting that we spend a quarter of a trillion dollars, not pay for it, so that they can then argue, the very next week potentially, that this trillion-dollar health care bill is paid for.”

The strategy is simple. Payoff the docs, make your bill appear to cost less, and force Republicans to choose between their doctors and the fiscal health of the nation.

Read More →

Via Instapundit, HHS Secretary Sebelius is trying to do some damage control on the recent ’suggestion’ that women stop getting routine mammograms before they’re 50:

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, meanwhile, told women to ignore the new advisory recommendations for now.

“The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations. They do not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government,” said Sebelius in a written statement.

“Our policies remain unchanged,” she said of the federal government. ” Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.”

A statement that is very comforting… until you remember that the Democratic party’s goal is to establish governmental control over the health care insurance industry.  Who here thinks that an insurance company already grimly aware that they exist on governmental sufferance might feel the need to ‘change its mammography coverage decisions’ to reflect current state medical policy?  Particularly if there are consequences for not being in compliance with all the laws, regulations, rulings, and opinions that bureaucracies generate more or less automatically.  And if the government doesn’t like the idea that people are going to instinctively assume that said bureaucracy is willing to ‘encourage’ ostensibly-private entities to follow bureaucratic dictates, then perhaps the government might like to consider reining in its bureaucrats.  As publicly as it can manage.

I’ll end by noting that this is all an inevitable by-product of the health care rationing bill; it is, in fact, why I call it that.  More people covered, better service, lower costs: in the best-case scenario, pick any two.  In the scenario that we’re going to get, if this passes?  We’ll get the first one, and the current ruling party will muck up the second while flagrantly ignoring the third.  That’s because the first one is easy, and can be done by lazy people.  The other two require work to accomplish.

Moe Lane

PS: Ed Morrissey reports that there are no oncologists on the task force that made the ‘recommendations.’  I really, really hope that this isn’t actually true.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

There is still much to learn about the Senate health care plan, but we know a few things already.

The Senate bill does not have a price tag. The Democrats are touting a cost of $849 billion, but that number is a fabrication.

From Please click here for the rest of the post.Roll Call we learn that “one Senate Democratic leadership staffer acknowledged that the cost estimate did not even represent an official preliminary score from the CBO but was a representation of “preliminary feedback” that Reid has gotten from the nonpartisan Congressional agency.”

In other words, we do not know how much it will actually cost.

We also know that the Senate has severely weakened the pro-life language of the legislation. It comes no where close to the Stupak amendment language.

We also know that the legislation purports to cut the deficit. How? By massive and painful tax increases, including raising the payroll tax on medicare.

Finally, we know that now some Democrats are leaning against a vote on the “motion to proceed.” Any Senator who votes for the motion to proceed is, in effect, voting for the legislation. Harry Reid needs all sixty of the Democrats.

This is significant:

Senate Democrats have abandoned plans to use a fast-track parliamentary strategy to avert a threatened Republican filibuster and pass a health care overhaul — a signal that they are considering major policy concessions to moderates.

The most significant of these could be restructuring or dropping altogether a proposed

government-run insurance plan — the so-called public option — that many liberals consider a necessary part of the overhaul.

One possible fallback is a proposal by Thomas R. Carper, D-Del., to create a government-sanctioned insurance plan that would be available only in states deemed to lack affordable private insurance plans. Under Carper’s plan, the insurance plan would be structured as a private nonprofit entity, run by a board appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate…

Read More →

That was Rep. Stupak’s (DEMOCRAT) blunt response to David Axelrod’s assertion that the pro-life language currently in the health care rationing bill would be ‘adjusted.’ Stupak’s having none of it:

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) pledged on Tuesday morning to defeat healthcare reform legislation if his abortion amendment is taken out, saying 10 to 20 anti-abortion-rights Democrats would vote against a bill with weaker language.

“They’re not going to take it out,” Stupak said on “Fox and Friends,” referring to Senate Democrats. “If they do, healthcare will not move forward.”

See Hot Air for the video. Stupak claims to have more than enough votes to shut down any final version that removes his amendment, which is both false and true. It’s false because the closeness of the original vote reflected a lot of horse-trading on the individual Member of Congress level; theoretically, the Speaker of the House could simply pressure the Democrats who got to vote ‘no’ last time to vote ‘yes’ this time.  It’s true because one of the reasons that they were able to get a final vote was because while the Stupak amendment was scored by NRLC, the final bill was not.  Strip out Stupak, and a vote for health care rationing becomes a vote for federal funding of abortions.  The NRLC pretty much cannot not score that appropriately.

I close with this observation: this situation for the Democrats is pretty much entirely due to the decision by House Republicans to oppose the health care rationing bill en masse.  They’re doing that because the Congressional Democratic leadership decided to shut out everybody except themselves and various outside lobbyists when it came time to put this monstrosity of a bill together.  And because the President didn’t intervene when it became clear that the process was disrupting his narrative, we’re now at the point where the Democratic party has to decide which side of the abortion debate is safer to infuriate.

But don’t feel bad for them: after all, they didn’t learn a blessed thing from their mistakes over the ’stimulus’ and cap-and-trade.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Under the unique rules of the United States Senate, a member of the body may insist legislation actually be read before a vote is cast on the legislation.

After threatening to do that, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) has now confirmed the health care bill must be read. Republicans will also try to filibuster the health care legislation. The Democrats will need 60 votes to proceed, which they will try to get sometime around Friday.

Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Ben Nelson (D-NE), and Bill Nelson (D-FL) are key votes on this. If those three Democrats vote to end the filibuster, they are, in effect, voting for passage of the health care legislation — voting to end the filibuster and against final passage is a clever way Democrats up for re-election have found to pass bills they love, but know they cannot support.

They ensure the legislation has enough votes to pass by a simple majority and then vote to end the filibuster, which requires a super majority. Then these erstwhile Democrats vote against the legislation’s actual passage knowing it will pass even if they vote no.

I suspect voters will remember these tricks next year and punish them.

By almost 300 billion.

CMS: House health bill will hike costs $289B

The House-approved healthcare overhaul would raise the costs of healthcare by $289 billion over the next 10 years, according to an analysis by the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

This would be infuriating, if I had taken seriously in the first place the notion that an interventionist, intrusive government program was capable of saving the taxpayer money.

Moe Lane

PS: For extra points, watch as the Democrats suddenly decide that CMS must be ignored.  As opposed to, say, 2004.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

From the diaries by Erick

As you well know, Speaker Pelosi’s version of President Obama’s signature healthcare overhaul passed the House by a razor thin margin of 220-215 late Saturday night.  Seldom have more Americans been more aware of a piece of legislation passing Congress, as news of this historical occasion filled newspapers, blogs, and email and twitter accounts from coast-to-coast over the weekend.  Ironically, final passage was delivered largely by pro-life Democrats, who earlier in the evening got their wish on an up-or-down vote on an amendment that would prohibit federal funds from being used to pay for abortions or to pay part of the cost of any healthcare plan that covered abortions.  The amendment passed easily, by a vote of 240-194.

This vote was the culmination of six straight months – and many would argue years or decades – of negotiations, maneuvers, and secret deals.  Keep in mind, dear reader, that we are talking about a dream come true for most Democrats, and all liberal Democrats.  The House of Representatives actually passed fundamental and even transformational reform of the American healthcare system.  Never mind that H.R. 3962 creates at least 111 new federal boards, commissions, and bureaucracies, or that it raises taxes by $766 billion over 10 years, or represents a federal government takeover of 1/6th of the American economy – these are all considered good things by the Democrat leadership and most rank-and-file Democrat members.  Even better news for liberals, House passage of this bill comes at a time when Democrats fully control the U.S. Senate and have a White House unalterably committed to the same goal.  One would expect House Democrats and liberal sympathizers to be jubilant on their accomplishment. What could possibly stop them from signing healthcare reform into law in mere weeks?

Read More →

What do Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the September 11th terrorist attacks, and uninsured 20 year olds have in common?

In Barack Obama’s America, they both go to jail — but the terrorist has to be convicted first.

Consider this an open thread.