Freedom Line Blog

This morning, the Senate invoked cloture on its scheme for government-run health care.  Under Senate rules, there will now be 30 hours of debate divided equally between the two parties, and then there is a strong possibility that the Senate will pass the legislation.

For Majority Leader Harry Reid, getting to this point was no easy task.  The typical horse trading that takes place on Capitol Hill was on overdrive lately as Leader Reid had to beg, borrow and deal to buy off each cynical Senator.

As much as the media and politicians on the Hill excoriated Governor Rod Blagojevich for selling President Obama’s old Senate seat, buying votes is a common occurrence in the nation’s capital.

As this piece from Politico demonstrates, what happens in Senate chambers typically borders on bribery.

For example:

• Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), who was once emphatic in his opposition to ObamaCare, got $45 million in federal funds for Medicaid expansion in Nebraska.   Other states were not fortunate enough to have an undecided Senator provide their state with the perks of federal largesse.

• Independent/Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (VT), who was previously opposed to the legislation, was awarded $10 billion in new funding for community health centers.

• Senator Nelson (D-NE) and Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) garnered an excise tax carve-out for their states; all other states will be forced to pay the tax.

• Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) received perhaps the most persuasive legislative nugget, a $300 million federal gift to Louisiana for Medicaid expansion.

In an attempt to rationalize this border-line legislative bribery, Senator Reid opined, “You’ll find a number of states that are treated differently than other states.  That’s what legislating is all about.  It’s compromise.”

Buying off votes = compromise?  Selling a Senate seat = felony?

Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) just announced that he will support the Senate health care bill, seemingly handing Majority Leader Harry Reid and President Obama the 60 votes needed to pass the legislation by Christmas.

According to The Washington Post:

Asked if he had secured the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters, ‘It seems that way.’

The Senate is expected to work its way through a series of procedural motions over the next few days, with a vote on the legislation scheduled the evening of Dec. 24th. A conference with the House to produce a final bill would likely extend into January, Senate aides said.

Majority Leader Harry Reid this morning released his manager’s amendment to the Senate health care bill.  Read it here.

The Majority Leader is still planning to hold the first cloture vote on the bill as early as 1:00 a.m. Monday morning.

A new Research 2000 national survey is out today showing a liberal revolt against the Senate health care “reform” bill.  The survey of 800 likely voters, commissioned by the ultra-liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy for America, found that only 33%of those polled favor health care reform that includes an individual mandate but no public government-run insurance option – essentially the Senate bill.  56% of all likely voters surveyed opposed such “reform.”

Hey, Mr. President.  How’s that strategy of “pass something, anything, regardless of what the people want” working out for you?  The Senate may end up passing a health care bill that an overwhelming majority of your liberal base opposes.

HT: KosTV

What’s Paul Krugman’s advice to liberals like MoveOn and Howard Dean upset over current health care negotiations in the Senate?  Pass the Bill.

It seems that liberals like Krugman want a bill just for the sake of passing a bill.   Politics and not principle appear to be his main motivation, which is strange coming from an economist and college professor.

Ideological purists like Howard Dean and MoveOn object to Harry Reid’s version of reform.  But why?  The current Senate bill supposedly lacks the government-run public option that liberals have been salivating over for the past year.  What remains from Senate negotiations is a hodgepodge of mandates, new regulations and higher taxes.

The one issue both sides of the aisle should agree on during the holidays is that the current health care bill is awful; it’s really really bad.

Conservatives and libertarians should hate the bill because it contains hundreds of billions in new taxes, an unconstitutional mandate for individual health insurance, an expensive employer mandate, costs over $2 trillion and it does nothing to bend the health care cost curve downward, among many other reasons.

Liberals should hate the bill because it (supposedly) contains no government-run public option, politically connected health care companies practically drafted the legislation, PhARMA supports it, socialist Senator Bernie Sanders doesn’t, it fails to cover 100% of the uninsured and it doesn’t bend the health care cost curve downward.

Dr. Krugman may attempt to use his perch at the New York Times to rally progressives toward a final health care push, but the ugly truth is that health care reform has become the product of Washington, D.C. politics.  That’s never a good thing.  President Obama rallied against Washington-style politics during his campaign but it appears that his bill and his political strategy have embraced the zero sum ultra-partisan approach that he derided so frequently in the past.

Dr. Krugman’s headline should have been “Kill this Bill.”

Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) is one of the few good guys on Capitol Hill.  He and Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) have taken the lead to stop government-run health care in the Senate.  In fact, they’re using every procedural tool under the sun to defeat the Senate’s disasterous version of “reform.”

According to The Hill newspaper, DeMint is even prepared to go so far as to slow debate and force Christmas Eve votes.  As DeMint noted, “I think it’s our responsibility to stretch this out because every day we do we have time to tell Americans what’s in it.”

For those of you looking for something interesting to watch over the holidays, the Senate will likely be in session on Christmas Eve.

This is the final push against government-run health care.  If you haven’t done so already, call your Senators at 202-224-3121 and tell them to oppose the Senate health care bill.

HT: Townhall.com

The Senate can be a magical place sometimes. Taking advantage of a clever procedural tool, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) has forced the upper chamber to read a 767-page amendment out loud.  (One has to feel sorry for the people reading the amendment.)

Senator Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) introduced his single-payer amendment to the health care bill but Senators DeMint (R-SC) and Coburn put their foot down.  They are now using all available procedural tactics to kill the bill, even if they have to kill the voice of a few Senate staffers in the process (a worthy sacrifice).

Senator Coburn commented, “We’re going to understand what single-payer is all about and read the bill.”

If you’d like to understand more about socialist health care, click here or here.  More of CFIF on health care here.

***Update***

Senator Coburn did battle once again with Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and the exchange was priceless.  Senator Coburn asked that Senators fully read and understand the bill before they voted.

Senator Baucus, we’ll say, was less than optimistic about the comprehension level of his colleagues. The video (one minute mark) displays our nation’s sad state of affairs.

barbaric:   (1) Of, relating to, or characteristic of barbarians.   (2) Crude or unrestrained in taste, style, or behavior.

Perhaps California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is simply desperate to retain some element of his fading spotlight as he drifts toward political retirement?  After all, we live in the age of reality TV, in which even self-embarrassment such as White House party-crashing is an acceptable price for publicity.

Sadly, that possibility would be preferable to the possibility that he’s simply lost what remained of his intellectual bearing.

Appearing today on ABC’s Good Morning, America, Schwarzenegger attempted to outdo even the Obama White House on the topic of climate change absurdity.  Even though he has presided over California as it has hemorrhaged jobs and descended to economic basket-case status, partly due to costly state environmental policies, he denied any contradiction between the global warming agenda and economic prosperity, saying, “we in California have proven it over and over that you can protect the economy, and you can protect the environment.  I don’t think you have to choose.  I think it is nonsense talk to say ‘let’s talk first about the economy.'”

Apparently oblivious to the Climategate scandal surrounding the global warming activists at Britain’s University of East Anglia, he went so far as to say that on the issue of global warming, we should “pay more attention to the universities.”  And ignoring California’s catastrophic loss of jobs to surrounding business-friendly states, Schwarzenegger continued, “in California, the biggest job creation is in green technology, we have seen an increase there of over 36%, we have been increasing the amount of jobs in all those different areas.”

Perhaps most preposterously, the man who played Conan the Barbarian had the audacity to label anyone who rightfully questions man-made global warming hysteria as “still living in the Stone Age.”

No, Governor Schwarzenegger, you’re the one who has continuously regressed back to the Stone Age with such profoundly mindless comments as these during your tenure.  What a sad, sad spectacle for a once-promising political newcomer and purported reformer.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D – Nevada) appeared on the verge of tears on the Senate floor yesterday, lamenting criticisms lodged against him.

His complaint?  That those big, bad, meanie Republicans had the audacity to question his personal judgment in scooting off to a Louisiana fundraiser, even while he threatens to keep the Senate in session into the holidays to address healthcare legislation.  Voice cracking, he feigned heartbreak that criticisms against him could become so “personal.”  He professed an inability to fathom how supposed “friends” from across the aisle could “embarrass or denigrate” him in such a cruel, cruel manner.

This is the same Harry Reid who, just three days earlier, compared opponents of his healthcare legislation to those who defended slavery and opposed the Civil Rights Act.  Never mind that the Republican Party originated from opposition to slavery, or that Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act in higher proportions than Democrats.  Factual realities are apparently no more relevant to Harry Reid than is a sense of personal decorum and judgment.

In this way, he is like the proverbial boy who murdered his parents only to later plead for mercy as an orphan.  He started a fight, but didn’t like it when his targets fought back.  In less than one year, Nevada voters will have their opportunity to render judgment on Reid’s plea.  According to the latest polls, they are apparently unamused.

In this week’s Freedom Minute, CFIF’s Renee Giachino explains how passage of ObamaCare will mean higher taxes, fewer jobs and less freedom for America’s youth.

Watch the video below:

No, the munchkins didn’t proclaim this, but the liberal Huffington Post did.

The supposedly good news (for Republicans, libertarians, Whigs, patients, taxpayers and moderate Democrats who like their current office space) was reported today by Ryan Grim.  He noted sarcastically, “The public health insurance option died on Thursday, December 10, 2009, after a months-long struggle with Senate parliamentary procedure.  The time of death was recorded as 11:12 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.”

Apparently Nancy Pelosi read the political tea leaves and noticed that voters simply won’t tolerate a government-run public option.  When questioned, it took Pelosi about two-hundred words to essentially say that the House would accept the Senate “compromise” to drop the public option in exchange for lowering the eligibility age for Medicare enrollment.

But make no mistake.  This is no cause for celebration.

Some Democrats are actually excited, hoping that expanding an already financially strapped Medicare system will pave the way for a true single-payer socialized system.  Indeed, as Brian Faughnan of RedState.com noted earlier today, the idea is actually the brain child of Howard Dean, who proposed a similar plan during his 2004 presidential bid.   And why is Dean, who is a strong proponent of a single-payer system and has been critical of his fellow Democrats for not going far enough in their efforts to put the government in charge of your health care, supportive of this so-called compromise?  As Faughnan writes:

The reason Dean likes this compromise – the reason he proposed this compromise – is that he would rather have the government bureaucracy in charge of people’s health care plans than private insurance companies. That’s one point of view. Some may agree with it; others not. But it seems the real value of this proposal to Dean is that it ‘moves the ball’ toward a single-payer health care system.”

Though Democrats might be using phrases like “deficit neutral” or “budget neutral,” there is no doubt that the current Senate health care bill will greatly expand the size and scope of government.

In fact, the 2,074 pages of text create more than 70 new government programs.

Among the highlights/low-lights:

• Medicaid Global Payment System Demonstration Project.

• Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program.

• Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality.

• Community-Based Care Transitions Program.

• Patient Navigator Program (Are patients going to need a program to “navigate” health care reform?).

• Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (rationing).

Full list here.

HT: reason.tv

That seems to be the solution from Senate Democrats seeking to broker a political path toward government-run health care.

With the public option running low on support, Senate Democrats are now floating a plan that would lower the age for Medicare enrollment to as low as 55.

According to Senate Democrats, even though Medicare has $89 trillion in long-term unfunded liabilities, adding a few million patients to the ledger shouldn’t be a problem.  Brilliant thinking.

More of CFIF on health care here.

The Senate, currently debating health care, held a rare Sunday session.  Beyond the normal bloviating, Senators did take at least one consequential vote.

John Ensign (R-NV) introduced an amendment that would have limited trial lawyer contingency fee amounts in medical malpractice cases.  Predictably, the amendment was overwhelmingly voted down, 32-66.

It appears that the trial lawyer lobby remains strong in the Senate.

The U.S. Senate this afternoon voted 42-58 to reject an amendment, sponsored by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), that would have sent the Senate health care “reform” bill back to the chamber’s Finance Committee with instructions to strip out nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts.  In other words, 58 Senate Democrats reaffirmed their desire to cut Medicare by nearly a half trillion dollars.

Democrats Jim Webb and Ben Nelson voted with all Senate Republicans in favor of the amendment.

As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement sent out immediately following the vote:

If anyone had any question about the Democrat plan to use Medicare as a piggy-bank to fund their new government programs, those doubts are now gone. 58 Democrats just voted to reject a common-sense proposal to protect senior’s health care from a half-trillion dollars in cuts to Medicare.  Only in Washington would anyone have the nerve to claim that such drastic cuts won’t harm the very program millions of seniors have paid into for years and now rely on.” 

As the Senate continues to debate the future of health care in America, the California Medical Association handed the White House a blow today when it announced that it would oppose the current health care bill.

The California Medical Association has more than 35,000 physicians, the second largest state-based group in the nation.   Though the American Medical Association (AMA) is still supportive of the House version of “reform,” state medical associations in Texas, Florida and Georgia have all joined to oppose a government takeover of health care.

Their main objection is reimbursement rates under Medicare.  The Senate bill is set to slash physician reimbursement under Medicare by 40%, and as a result, most doctors would simply refuse to take Medicare patients.

As Dr. Dev GnanaDev noted, “If doctors can’t see you, the only choice you have is the emergency room, which is a very bad way to get healthcare.”

Let’s hope the AMA joins with California doctors to oppose the Senate bill.

Taxpayers are doing their part to defeat government-run health care by marching, calling Congress and urging others to get involved.

Senator Judd Gregg, someone with direct power to defeat ObamaCare, now has a legislative blueprint for stopping the Senate’s version of health care “reform.”

Among the highlights:

• “Hard” Quorum Calls – requires at least 51 Senators to be present in the Senate chamber for any substantive debate on health care.

• Reading of Amendments and Conference Reports in Entirety – with 2,000 pages to read, it would take days.

• Senate Points of Order – delays legislative business because the Senate is required to take two roll call votes to dispense with a point of order.

• Filibuster by Amendment – until Harry Reid invokes cloture, Senators may offer an unlimited number of amendments.

• Motion to Instruct Conferees – Senators may offer an unlimited number of motions to instruct the Senate’s conferees.

You can do your part to defeat government-run health care by calling 202-224-3121 and telling your Senators to vote “No” on the Senate bill.