Political Discussions
The Senate Finance Committee
Posted by ReneMonroe • 10/13/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: health care reform, senate finance committee
The Senate Finance Committee has passed their version their bill regarding health care reform. What does everyone think about this?
User Comments
-
Three things.
1. Largely non-important. There's still a long way to go.
2. At least it doesn't have a Public Option
3. One more nail in the coffin for Snowe. Time to send some contributions to someone who'll challenge her.-
I agree that it is largely non-important in the sense of what the final bill will look like.
I disagree slightly on the public option.
As for Senator Snowe, she is not going anywhere. She is known for breaking away from her party the way she did today. This will only help her, not hurt her. Maine is just like New Hampshire on these things. The party of the person does not matter, merely what they fight for and how they vote.
She is pretty much safe. She could go off and say something completely off the wall and still retain her seat. Just like Barney Frank. He is a complete idiot but he does his job well in fighting for the people he represents and what they want. Thus why he keeps getting elected. -
I agree, Rene. Northern New Englanders have a strong independent streak, and Maine definitely likes to go its own way. It's not for nothing that Ross Perot garnered some 30% of the vote in Maine 1992. Of course, times change, but Maine's independence seems to be alive and well. And Senator Snowe is no fool.
-
-
I've decided the actual content of the bill in these committees is probably not all that important. What the Senate does as a whole is what matters, and the Senate as a whole has more in support of a public option than against, though not the magic 60.
I wonder if the magic 60 is even necessary. One idea I've heard is that maybe Reid could get Democrats to agree on voting for cloture but voting whatever their conscience says on the actual bill.-
I think I heard something similar. I believe Sen. Reid could use reconciliation to simply make it a majority vote. However for some reasons certain democrats are seeking bipartisanship not that its a bad thing. However dems are there to do a job. I say majority rules. Dems won the election, they should put through what they want. If they put through crap (and some of it will be just that) then they will pay for it the next election cycle comes. Same goes for republicans.
-
-
Yay for bipartisanship!!!-
One republican senator does not qualify as bipartisanship. Although I am not complaining about it either.
-
That was sarcasm rene. Of course 1 "GOP" senator doesn't qualify for bipartisanship.
-
sorry, I didn't realize there was sarcasm there. I guess my sarcasm meter must be broken.
-
-
The part I think is funny is that they are saying it was bi-partisan. Only one republican voted for it. How can that be bi-partisan?-
Considering it didn't have a public option and it wasn't just Democrats, it can hardly be called the opposite of bipartisan, that is, partisan. Since our language only allows for those two possibilities, it was per definition bipartisan.
Frankly, though, I think bipartisanship is overrated. The Democrats should just get on with the business at hand. If that means making one or two Republican senators happy to get the vote count right, so be it. -
this lukewarmness is what makes their base disengage, i believe
-
-
By the way, as I understood Snowe yesterday, she was not necessarily committed to that version of the bill by any stretch of the imagination. She had merely voted yes so that the process can continue, because that's what she understands her constituents want to have happen.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
