Rockefeller Won't Vote for Baucus Health Bill

[Alhena]

Source: The Hill

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.), the second-ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, will not vote in favor of the healthcare reform bill his panel's chairman will introduce Wednesday, he told reporters Tuesday.

"There is no way in its present form that I will vote for it," Rockefeller said during a conference call co-hosted by the liberal Campaign for America's Future.

Rockefeller's rejection of Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus's (D-Mont.) proposal, outlined more than week ago, is not a surprise. The West Virginia Democrat, who is the chairman of the panel's Health Care Subcommittee, has not been included in the bipartisan negotiations that produced the framework for Baucus's proposal. Throughout the process, Rockefeller has been highly critical of Baucus for offering too many concessions to Republicans in hopes of winning bipartisan support for the bill.


Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/58845-rockefeller-i-wont-vote-for-baucus-health-bill

---

It looks like we're heading down the path of using the Budget Reconciliation process with 50 votes in the Senate. I just don't see 60 Senators agreeing on either a conservative or progressive health care bill. The downside of reconciliation is that the bill is subject to numerous procedural objections and whatever bill survives those objections sunsets and has to be re-enacted in five years. So it won't seem as much like a momentous victory to pass a bill via reconciliation- the battles will have to be re-fought later. I am hoping a progressive bill can get 60 votes and thus be "permanent" but I'm not sure that the Landrieus and Bayhs of the Senate will go along with that.

[grantcart]

1. This has been my secret dream

That Baucus would get no Republican votes and that some Democrats in his own committee would not vote for it.


As to your speculation on Reconciliation there is another option - As long as no Democrat crosses the aisle to support a Republican filibuster - which should result in severe caucus repurcussions - they can have an up or down vote and pass with 50 Senators.

Anything that passes will be permanent because they will need 60 votes to undo it.

[Alhena]

5. Bayh said he'd play ball on cloture in the first Senate vote, not the second

so as to allow the bill to pass the Senate and go to conference with the House. However, Bayh said in the interview I saw that once the final bill comes before the Senate again, he will not support cloture on a bill he disagrees with because that would be tantamount to voting for the bill itself.

So I'm not sure we can count on the conservative Dem Senators to play ball on procedural votes.

[grantcart]

7. Then he should be stripped of his committee assignments and excluded from the caucus

I do not think that he would stand up to that kind of pressure.

[Mass]

2. Good. I would hope he is not the only dem on the Finance Committee to do so/

[emulatorloo]

3. I doubt many Dems will support Baucus's ridiculous bill. Worth reading Harkin's quote:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/58147-harkin-public-option-wont-be-a-deal-breaker

Harkin: Public option won't be a deal breaker

The new chairman of the Senate HELP Committee said a public option won't be deal breaker for moderate Democrats.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who just replaced Ted Kennedy as head of the committee, said his centrist colleagues might accept a bill with a public option even if they aren't crazy about it.

"Some of my colleagues may not like a public option, but they like all the other things and I don't think they'll vote against the bill just because it has the public option in it," Harkin said on MSNBC.

[Bolo Boffin]

4. It's just a Chairman's Mark - there will be amendments.

But I agree that a public option needs to be in there.

[BrklynLiberal]

6. I cannot believe that these Blue Dogs are still trying to win Repuke votes!!!

When will they realize that no matter how many concessions, compromises, and downright sellouts they offer, the repukes will NEVER vote for health care reform...in any form whatsoever....
The Dems might as well go all the way and try for the single payer format!!!!

:mad: :puke: :crazy: :silly: :wtf: :spank: :grr: :nuke: :banghead:

[Buns_of_Fire]

9. The Blue Dogs couldn't care less either way.

They're looking at their prospects for re-election. Everything else is secondary.

And they can't see that the same rebubbalickins they're sucking up to now are going go be calling them everything but Children of Satan in just another year. (On edit: In the House, that is. For some of the Blue Dog Senators, we're going to have to wait a couple more years to remove their re-election prospects altogether...)

[Oak2004]

17. Are they trying to win Republican votes?

Are they really trying to win the votes of Republicans, or are they trying to use bipartisanship and the Republicans as an excuse to craft the right-wing corporate giveaway they really crave?

[kenfrequed]

8. Feh-procedural objections

Oh well its a damn sight better than it being fillibustered out of existence.

[Zorra]

10. 60 Senators will not agree on any progressive legislation because a significant

number of Senators are only in the Senate to represent corporate intersests, some specifically to represent the interests of the health insurance industry.

Corporations financed Bu*h Dog campaigns in order to infiltrate the Democratic Party with their own employees in order to render the Democratic Party ineffective, thereby insuring that the corporate owned republican party retains major influence in government despite overwhelming Democratic majorities.

Make no mistake, Bu*h Dogs are traitors that do their little nasties to our country because corporations have paid them very well for their Machiavellian services.

[ArcticFox]

11. Huh?

What are you talking about? 50 votes requires another vote in 5 years?

[Alhena]

12. Read up on the budget reconciliation process- most bills take 60 votes

to pass in the senate. The budget reconciliation process allows certain measures to pass with 50 votes, but there are many limitations on the process, including five year sunset provisions for acts which are not budget neutral.

[groundloop]

13. OK, I'm a bit ignorant on something...

Why is the finance committee writing a healthcare bill, as well as the HELP committee?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. Because each of the committees has an oversight function.

Later, the multiple shitty bills will be rolled into one big ball of dung.

[Alhena]

15. LOL- great description of what lies ahead

[SpartanDem]

16. Good for him someone on that committee needs to stand up to Baucus