A flame to a moth is nothing compared to the attraction of a television camera to a United States senator, and yesterday this anthropological fact of political life was -- as though it needed to be -- proven once again, as the full comedy troupe of Max Baucus & Friends made its much-awaited and splashy debut.
And boy is it a good thing the show's headliner, Max himself, had already marked up a bill and toiled so faithfully with his five fellow gang members for roughly a year; now they have only a bit more than 500 amendments to ponder before the end of the week.
Headlining was Max, but actually starring, or so I thought, was Iowa's Mr. Sunshine, ranking committee member Chuck Grassley. I didn't catch all of his act, but what I did see on C-Span was the most disingenuous folderol I've heard since Republican speeches tumbled in pseudopatriotic unison onto the Senate floor in support of the coming Iraq disaster.
Grassley's chief contention seemed to be that he was very, very sorry, but his mighty efforts at warm bipartisanship had become unsustainable once -- get this -- the White House insisted on a public option and in general a wholesale government takeover of our cherished private health-care system.
Plus -- and keep in mind this is one year later, or decades later, depending on how you look at it -- the Republican senator decried as "appalling" the Democratic pressure to wrap things up. "Impatience has won out," droned Grassley, looking and sounding every bit the part of Neil Simon's Al Lewis. "They have put moving quickly over moving correctly." Later in the committee meeting John Kerry offered the responsive revelation that "only in Washington can this be called a rush."
What followed from other Republicans was more of the same. Jon Kyl, for instance, intoned melodramatically that the bill before them is a stunning assault on liberty, while another lamented the Democratic strangulation of Medicare -- yes, that's just like those Democrats -- and pretty much all of them, of course, warned of apocalyptic taxes.
From the Democratic side of discontent, my favorite was Oregon's Ron Wyden, but only because he really seemed to rankle Max Baucus as he railed against the lack of real choice in his chairman's bill. Wyden didn't mention the public option as part of his desired choice (his own bill, after all, promotes a private system of purchasing pools), yet even if he had, it seems to me he'd be right.
One of the major flaws of the public option, as presently conceived, is that it's public, all right, but not much of an option. If you're being mercilessly gouged by an employer-based plan and you want out, that's tough, because, as Wyden put it, "You're "stuck." You can't jump to another.
If (and when) this Congress fails on the public option -- but can, say, eliminate preexisting-condition exclusions and cap out-of-pocket expenses (and maybe even expand Medicaid) -- that would be a conspicuous gift for private insurers. That doesn't mean, however, that Senate liberals will, or should, abandon the accompanying progress: a gift for insurers, yes, but also a gift for millions of Americans who cannot now obtain health insurance or are bankrupted because of caps.
It would, in my opinion, be unforgivable for liberals to deny vast improvements because of gross imperfections. Take what's possible and run. Come back after 2010 -- with maybe a larger progressive caucus? -- and shoot for a genuine public option: Medicare for all who want it.
Meanwhile, Mr. Baucus is puffed as a peacock over the possibility of a "triggered" public option. "In an interview with The New York Times ahead of Tuesday’s 9 a.m. start of committee action," as the Times reported yesterday, Baucus "talked about ... how a fall-back provision for a public health insurance plan could be the trick to push the bill through the Senate with 60 votes."
"Trick" is the right word; it's more of a political salve -- or should I say bone thrown to a dog -- than a cost-containment fix.
Still, a trigger could perhaps cause a few fireworks; conservative Dems are as horrified by helpfully creeping socialism as any Republican, and the promise of their abhorrence almost makes a proposed trigger worth the effort.
But it won't compare to the coming battles for how to pay for this whole shebang. Baucus' fiscal re-tweaking will thrust even more havoc onto an already disheveled scene, and then there are the two unlike Senate bills to be merged, and then all that voting and conferencing and filibustering and maybe reconciling and perhaps even honor-bound fisticuffs.
So take heart. If you intensely dislike the health-care-remedy routines that you see emerging from the larger comedy troupe of the United States Congress, they may all wind up going nowhere, anyway. That's what solid Democratic majorities will often buy you.
I Knew It
I knew you whiny loudmouths couldn't back up your talk with facts. pppffftttt
hahahaha
Of all the fish i ever caught, catfish were the slimiest, with the biggest mouth. And they always go for the stinkbait!
the catfish and the carp make a great slimey duo.
those are irefutable facts!
HAHAHA. "dipwad"........hehehehe
But It's Not Funny
Listening to windbags talk about compromising while not acknowledging that every day that goes by is a day where people only have the ER, or "charity" is not acceptable. How many stories must one hear; how many phone calls and letters must be sent. I've done all that. I have heart trouble, no insurance for nearly 12 years, bought my heart meds overseas and ration them; my older sister has breast cancer and spends her time between chemotherapy fighting with her insurance company. She is sometimes too weak to go through hundreds of papers designed to deny her treatment. She must be a lawyer first and a patient last. No one here has mentioned this issue is a moral one. Compromise is not an option; it is not about suggesting that universal medical care is socialism. People like John Boehner and his ilk (including Blue Dog Democrats) should have a chance to experience these things without the wonderful benefits their overstuffed carcasses enjoy. Wall Street is already constructing a "trading market" similar to credit default swaps based on betting when people will die. Is this what America really wants? Because if it's up to those people, the middle class will be starved out of existence and we will go back to the wonderful days of selling what is left of our homes for firewood and begging for food. I truly don't think that is exaggeration. "Sausage Making" is just fine for other issues, not human lives. And by the way, WHO PAYS for those of us who are too young for Medicare, not poor enough for Medicaid and use the ER as the primary care physician? The taxpayers.
That's the way it's supposed to be for everyone...
Only the tax payers should pay for healthcare. The insurance companies should be shut down. That eliminates a useless money pit.
Developing - toxic food factories are no longer being tolerated by a growing population of localvores. Now people will stay healthy well into old age, which eliminates the pharmaceutical industry too!
Doesn't it feel great to live a long, happy, prosperous life and have money left over to pass on to your heirs?
Just give up already
That seems to be the theme in your postings on this issue Mr. Carpenter. Its all just the usual silly business in congress thats never going to change, so we should just let it all go down the tubes and shut up. Thats what soild democratic majoritys do, right? It may all be just entertainment to you, a good source of witty comments to fill the huge lack of substance in your writings. Never any suggestions for how to win, just watching the fight is fine? Well I dont think so. And apparently, neither do most of the readers here. I wont call for your ouster from this site. I believe everyone has the right to express their opinion, even when you cant really tell just what their opinion is. Thankfully, there are some true liberals in the house of reps, and enough of us out here in the world, to keep up pressure on those who would sell out the people. It is beginning to have an effect on the debate, and is injecting a little spinal fluid into some of our "leaders". Wether it will be enough is yet to be seen. Its a powerfull enemy we have to fight, but fight we will, in spite of your defeatist talking points. The Baucus plan is DOA. Trying to force a mandate on people who cant afford to buy insurance from thieves would be political suicide, and a pointless giveaway to said thieves, so hopefully it will die a quick death. I know you think (or portray yourself as thinking), that we should accept a couple crumbs while the money men get the cake, but thats not gonna fly. The crumbs being offered will be meaningless in the face of an insurance industry bolstered and emboldened by the forced enrollment of 47 MILLION more people. After demonstrating their ability to steer the system to this conclusion, there will be nothing they wont try to get away with. So, alas, no. We wont accept the crumbs. There will be a bill, and it will have real reform. It will come out of the house and not the senate, because time is on the side of the people, and as more time passes, they figure it out. The language is already beginning to change and the polls are showing more people tuning into what is really going down. The white house and senate know this. Thats why the rush to get the insurance company bailout passed. The republicans think slowing this down will kill reform but they are wrong. It will allow real reform to be passed, and will knock them in the dirt for a long time, so for once i agree with the republicans. Slow down and let the corporate whores get off the bus, then they can legislate.
Dip Wads
Jesus Christ on a bicycle, will you whiny-assed holier-than-thou-ever-wert self-professed "real progressives" simply offer up one piece of real evidence where P.M. has said that he is against the public option or single payer? In the name of all that is holy, will you piss-pants neoprogressives document one instance when he has urged anyone to give up.
This is throw down time. All of his blogs are readily and publicly available. Just search the sons-of-bitches and give one piece of evidence that does not require everyone reading it to interpret your so-called evidence to "know what he really means".
Put up or shut up.
Dip wad?
hahahahahaha. you really are amusing. calling us names will REALLY show us. I didnt "accuse" your hero of anything other than surrender. how would you define it? I dont give a rats ass what hes for or against. If hes going to write about it he should "put up or shut up". And I certainly dont give a rats ass what you think! Speak when your spoken to. Nuff said. BTW, being a tiny minority on this subject, it may be you who should troll elsewhere.
Carpy's baubles, bangles and beads
As the progressive movement continues to make measurable advances in the war against the upper 1% plutocracy and their multinational corporations, Carpy continues to root for the dark side.
Buzzflash, why in heaven's name to you continue to allow this DINO troll to publish his depressing propaganda on your website? How much longer do your readers need to discredit and embarrass him until you finally get the message?
By the way, how's the fundraising going this month?
Get rid of P M Carpenter
The main reason that many [such as myself] have stopped supporting your Website is because of idiots like P M Carpenter on your payroll. Let me know when you have removed his ignorant highness from your feeding trough and I will be back with bells on and wallet open. Can you not see how this kind of drivel [above] is dragging you down?
BTW, Rupert Murdoch [and other corporate warthogs] massively supports the right-wing media -- not the trailer-trash that subscribes to it. The question is: Why does Buzzflash.com continue to support right-wing nincompoops like P M Carpenter?
Right Winger?
P.M. Carpenter is a right winger? Are you nuts?
Anything to the left of progressive ideology is the right wing
Technically, Carpy is a DINO. But make no mistake, his opinions are most certainly not on the left, unless you consider the Blue Dog DINOs as being on the left.
Politics have drifted so far to the right that only those on the far left are truly on the left.
Whose Definition?
So who decides how to define progressive ideology?
Carpenter's greatest sin has been to play umpire for the healthcare legislation and make some predictions the so called "real progressives" do not want to hear. He might be right, and he might be wron. I have not heard him support the Blue Dog agenda.
As best as I can piece together, as of today, the self-annointed "real progressives" have chosen to make healthcare the be-all and end-all of all political criteria. Specifically, being for the public option makes one a "real progressive" and being for single payer care makes one a "real-real progressive". Given those definitions, I am self-annointing myself as a "real-real progressive' who has wanted a single payer system for forty years.
I am also anointing myself as the "highest tenured real-real progressive" which authorizes me to call you "johnny-come-lateley progressives" a bunch of whiny, sniveling brats who cannot bear the load of someone making a prediction you do not like. Go throw your temper tantrums elsewhere, and the let the grown-ups talk.
Spoken like a true uncivil, unhinged DINO
You just don't get the irony of your temper tantrum against nonexistant progressive temper tantrums. Our progressive arguments are logical and relevant. They are not emotional rants as you incorrectly characterize them.
Actually, Carpy's greatest sin is doing everything he can to discredit and disempower the progressive movement in favor of the upper 1% plutocracy and their multinational corporations.
Why do you feel it is so wrong to fight for passing legislation that benefits WE THE PEOPLE instead of big business?
Why is it that you, along the rest of the right, including the DINOs just don't get it?
Deranged
I'm right winger??
For 20 years I have been a publicly self-professed Socialist. My first vote for president was for the communist candidate. You need to import some oxygen into your planet.
When have I or P.M. said it is wrong to fight for the public option or for single payer? I have been fighting for it for 40 years, you nit wit. Making an objective assessment that we are losing this battle at this time is not the same as saying quit, you SINO (sane in name only). In fact, I have urged repeatedly on this site and others for people to contact their senators and congressmen to demand these things. Unlike the braying jackasses like you, I have organized friends and family to make these contacts and have met with my representatives.
The irony is that you think you have a grip on the body politic.
Please find a clinicly sane adult to read this to you and explain it to you. Then swallow your meds when the nice nurse brings them to you.
You need Jack Nicholson's Anger Management Therapy
Either that or a long time out. You discredit yourself with juvenile name calling, strawman arguments, and misquoting of my comments.
Although, I certainly do agree with the title of your last comment. It really is "deranged."
Huh?
Other than knocking down everyone of your supposed arguments, where is the error in mine. All you offer iis ad homenim attacks which is all you ever offer.
As for anger management, I was laughing the entire time I posted the previous post and this one. You nit wits have nothing. You never ever address any of the arguments that are made.
SINOs indeed. :-)
Passive aggressive much?
Knocking down my arguments with name calling ad hominem mudballs can hardly be called civil, rational rhetoric.
You are completely discredited by your illogical, overly emotional, rant, again.
Judo
This is like watching one hundred judo fighters going after each other all at once. Good times.
Herding Cats
In the U.S. Senate --- that's what it is.
The House -- a different animal. They took care of business --- months ago.
P.M., I disagree that a bad bill is better than no bill.
A bad bill would be the same as no bill.
Anything that allowed the insurance companies to increase their profits, and their customer base, is a gift to the insurance companies - and it would be a bad bill. Not a help at all to the American people who are uninsured, or underinsured -- or what most insured are: the "you really don't know what this covers" -- even when you pay your premiums --- in full and on time. You are at the mercy of an insurance company that is in the business to make money..and will raise your rates on a whim, ... not pay claims.... and cdrtainly not to provide decent health care.
Not Change....Not even slight improvement over what is already available...... that people can't afford to buy.
So, herding cats is what they do in the Senate.
If it weren't that people are dying because of the status quo, and the inaction of their lawmakers...... it would almost be funny hysterical. As it is.... it's like watching a train wreck. As horrible as you know it's going to be... you can't help yourself. You watch.
More Like Hearding Fat Cat K Street Lobbyists
Lobbyists are so much easier to heard. All the senators have to do is start talking about writing another bill and the lobbyists come a running with bags of leagalized bribe money in hand (actually wheel barrow)!