Skip to comments.A memo on what happened in Mass., and how Dems should proceed
Posted on 01/22/2010 7:56:34 PM PST by La Lydia
This memo was just distributed to all Senate chiefs of staff:
From: Adam Green, co-founder, Progressive Change Campaign Committee -- on behalf of the PCCC, Democracy for America, and Credo Action
RE: The right lesson from Massachusetts & the path forward on health care
We wanted to make sure you saw the Massachusetts Research 2000 poll, reported on by the Wall Street Journal, NBC, Politico, Huffington Post, TPM, and others. It polled critical 2010 swing voters: the 18% of Obama voters who returned to the polls and voted for Republican Scott Brown.
On health care, they oppose the Senate bill because it "doesn't go far enough" and a whopping 82% support the public option.
On the economy, by 2 to 1 they think Democrats have put special interests ahead of folks like them -- and by large margins think stronger regulation of Wall Street is more important than cutting spending.
And 57% say Democrats are not "delivering enough on the change Obama promised."
Why did they vote for Scott Brown? They are angry and want Congress to fight on their side against entrenched power. Scott Brown pretended to be a populist, so he won.
Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, and Mark Penn are telling Democrats to learn exactly the wrong lesson: Slow down. Give Americans less change.
It's not an accident that each of these men have crashed presidential campaigns into the ground. Don't listen to them -- their thinking got Democrats into this political mess. Voters want bold populism, and if Democrats don't give it to them Republicans are ready to pretend they will.
The best thing Democrats could do in 2010 is fight big corporations like insurance companies and Wall Street. On health care, the path forward is obvious:
Step 1 -- The Senate passes a "reconciliation" bill with the popular public option and other budget-related fixes to the original Senate bill on issues like the national exchange and excise tax. This takes only a simple majority.
Step 2 -- The House passes both the original Senate bill and final reconciliation bill back-to-back and sends them to the President.
Step 3 -- A signing ceremony takes place that Democrats and voters can be proud of.
What would this "public option through reconciliation" strategy achieve? A popular public option, 30 million new Americans insured, pre-existing conditions provisions, a national exchange that "gives people access to the same kind of plan Congress gets," and all the other insurance industry reforms Democrats have been pushing. All without worrying about Joe Lieberman's vote.
Plus, Democrats would be popular -- for finally taking on insurance companies by passing the public option. Again, among the swing Obama voters, only 32% support the current Senate bill but 82% want a public option.
All the old arguments against using reconciliation are gone. It's now the only way to pass a comprehensive health care bill, building off the Senate's prior work. And once reconciliation is being used, the Senate has the votes to pass a public option.
After Massachusetts, passing the public option is a no-brainer -- it's populist, it's good policy, and it's what 2010 swing voters want.
That's why in the 48 hours after the Massachusetts election, over 150,000 people signed a petition advocating the "public option in reconciliation" strategy. More are signing literally every minute, and our three organizations will deliver these signatures to you in the near future.
Thanks for your time.
Self deluded boneheads, I love it.
Just so I have this correct, angry MA voters put a republican in Ted’s old seat, a Republican whose declared platform was to vote against healthcare, because the Dems were aggressive enough?
This isn’t a pundit, this is one of their STRATEGISTS who is advising Democratic senators on what to do next! Double drat!
If these libtards are this clueless they shouldn't run a lemonade stand much less a country.
My only response to this blatant stupidity is that if 0Bozo's agenda is so overwhelmingly popular, why does the vote need to happen on Christmas eve in the dead of night?
The “Progressive Change” buffoons still don’t get it.
Delusions are irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, that are highly resistant to change even when the delusional person is exposed to forms of proof that contradict the belief. Non-bizarre delusions are considered to be plausible; that is, there is a possibility that what the person believes to be true could actually occur a small proportion of the time. Conversely, bizarre delusions focus on matters that would be impossible in reality. For example, a non-bizarre delusion might be the belief that one’s activities are constantly under observation by federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies, which actually does occur for a small number of people. By contrast, a man who believes he is pregnant with German Shepherd puppies holds a belief that could never come to pass in reality. Also, for beliefs to be considered delusional, the content or themes of the beliefs must be uncommon in the person’s culture or religion. Generally, in delusional disorder, these mistaken beliefs are organized into a consistent world-view that is logical other than being based on an improbable foundation.
In addition to giving evidence of a cluster of interrelated non-bizarre delusions, persons with delusional disorder experience hallucinations far less frequently than do individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder .
Unlike most other psychotic disorders, the person with delusional disorder typically does not appear obviously odd, strange or peculiar during periods of active illness. Yet the person might make unusual choices in day-to-day life because of the delusional beliefs.
Read more: Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults, withdrawal, drug, examples, person, people, used, brain, personality, effect, women http://www.minddisorders.com/Br-Del/Delusional-disorder.html#ixzz0dPBaadMS
Go sign that PETITION ! Think of it politically as loaning a match to a political party that wants to immolate itself?
I keep thinking about the UK’s Official Monster Raving Loony Party, and Monty Python’s Silly Party (plus its wing nuts in the Slightly Silly Party and the Very Silly Party). “The Very Silly candidate split the Silly vote.”
The Senate passes a “reconciliation” bill with the popular public option and other budget-related fixes to the original Senate bill on issues like the national exchange and excise tax. This takes only a simple majority.
WHAT the hell is a reconcilliation bill. I know they could use the nuclear option, I know what that is.
Yes, they can. I was monitoring DU on Tues. night. Someone posted a poll asking where they should go now (after Brown's victory). One person said move to the right. 72 people said move to the left. Seriously! (There were a few other choices that collectively garnered about 30% of the votes.)
Please, don’t let this get any attention. Let them believe this.
Obama. Full steam ahead!
Is this ‘Humor’ or ‘Satire’ ??? Please let it be either, because if the Dems really want to go down this road they may find a very steep cliff at the end of it and it ain’t gonna be a pretty sight on the bottom ......
So you're saying I'm not?
I'm not sure I'd like to meet the guy that came up with this example.
It is a budget bill (inevitably a budget deficit bill) that, under the rules, is not subject to filibuster and may not be amended. Anything attached to the reconciliation bill goes through as is, voted up or voted down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.