Scrambling for Votes, Democrats Face Uphill Climb to Pass Healthcare Reform

I thought about this yesterday and was very intrigued by it. I like the comparison, but at the end of the day it isn't really valid. Senate rules are in place that allow the Senate to filibuster preventing a vote. That is different than the House members trying to pass law without voting at all in order to save their political hides.

It saddens me that there are apparently enough democrats to pass this bill that they think is vital to America's future but they refuse to do so because it will interfere with their political ambition. I never have a problem with a politician voting a particular way because they believe it to be the best thing for America, but just to keep their jobs? Pathetic.

What they need to realize is that democrats were swept in to power given a mandate. If Obama and Congress fail to deliver health care reform because a few of them are afraid they will lose their seats, they may find that down the line the blowback costs them all their seats anyway. I can only imagine how disenfranchised the democratic base is going to feel if after all the energy and money and soul they poured into Obama and the rest of the dems this time around they are repaid with a yellow bellied Congress that fails to deliver their promise.

 

Great post and 100% accurate.

 

Rumors about Kucinich voting yes for the bill have proven true.

 

I love Kucinich. He's a raging wacko liberal, but guess what? The man is full of integrity. He'll go on any show and debate his views with decency and respect for his opposition. I think, to his own detriment at times, he strives to be as honest as a politician can.

Hey Dennis, tonight I'm going to watch Independence Day just for you bud.

 

I don't know. How can he be "full of integrity" while he says, this isnt the bill i want, but i'll vote for it? Especially after having his one-on-one persuasion sessions with the pres and pelosi, where he is undoubtedly is getting a little kickback in some form

 

Maybe he is afraid that this the best and only shot at any health care reform with the impending elections and feels he has to bite the bullet? That doesn't show a lack of integrity to me.

 

If that was the standard, nothing would ever pass. Pick any issue and you won't find 2 House members or 2 Senators that want the exact same thing. Ultimately, it's not a decision of whether it's the ideal bill - it's a decision of whether the US with the bill would be in better shape than the US without the bill, because those are the two options/outcomes available.

 

just answer the *****in question

"So Jorge (sic) < edit, Mojmanimo > are senate republicans now willing to have an up or down vote on the original bill? ... They've been threatening the filibuster from the beginning and now they insist on a vote. "

 

Civil Rights reform wasn't very popular either and cost the Democrats the south. Do you think they should have run away from that too because it was not popular?

Sometimes doing the right thing and the popular thing are not the same.

 

you can't be this silly to think that everybody has to get what they want for them to vote with "integrity"? they're over 300 house members, that's a ridiculous standard. that's why its called politics

 

I just gained a bit of respect for him. IMO, he was floating in Nader narcissist territory for a while.

 

Love it!

Mojo's got nothing left!

 

I love the political cartoons. I hope Mojo keeps them coming. They make me laugh and I don't get to see them very often outside of this site.

 

Last week Michael Moore on Countdown was talking about how you have to respect Republicans for when they feel they receive a mandate they go in Congress guns blazing.

I think there is a medium between the two, I think its good that there was honest debate (at least among democrats). But to not eventually have some resolution would be pathetic

 

It's also political disaster in my mind for them. Maybe I'm just a fool, but it seems to me that if they fail to pass healthcare reform, they are toast in 2010 (maybe anyway) AND 2012. It is going to kill a lot of the passion that got them their majorities if it turns out that they are too limp to actually govern.

I know I know, they can talk about Republican obstructionism. That only has so much credibility though when you had the white house and majorities (including a temporary super majority) in both houses. I mean Obama is a gifted politician, but good luck trying to spin your failure to govern with the entire legislative power under your control as the fault of the minority.

 

I felt this way until yesterday. I am a disaffected democrat (pretty much in a serial way). I do not respond to their membership cards and only get involved once in a while (beyond writing my own letters to my reps, etc).

So yesterday, a couple of complete looneys are in my neighborhood holding hitler-obama signs and calling for impeachment. Yes, impeachment. And they said to me "impeach now!" And I said "get bent. you just made some money for the democrats." And so seeing the kind of absolute insanity rising up with the tea-party types will drive people like me back to the incompetent but earth-based democratic party, maybe more strongly than ever.

I mean, even Duluth looks good when you're on Lake Superior in a bad, bad storm.

 

unfortunately, Obama has outsourced the pilot's job on the Edmund Fitzgerald to Nancy Pelosi.