Dean talks with Sam Stein at Huff Post today. Says Dems in trouble over health care bill.

[madfloridian]

Interesting interview.

Dean: Dems 'In Deep Trouble' On Health Care, The Only Options Are A Bad Bill Or 2010 Losses

"I think if you passed the Senate bill tomorrow it would be OK. But then the problem is they don't have any defense for their members in 2010," Dean said, noting that the public option would not become operational until 2014. "On the other hand, if they drop the public option , I think they lose seats."

"So this is really tough. I didn't anticipate being in this position. I thought it would pass. Maybe Harry has some magic up his sleeve. But I don't see how he gets those four votes (Sens. Joseph Lieberman (Conn.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.)) without compromising the bill," Dean concluded. The former Vermont governor warned that if the party allowed the four moderates to further water down the bill (or defeat it altogether) it could lead to primary challenges or a drop in fundraising from the party's base.

"If you have members refusing to vote for Reid on procedural issues you will have a revolt in the party," Dean said. "What is the point of having a 60-vote margin? This is going to be death for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Why would anyone donate to them if they're supporting candidates who defeat the Democratic agenda?"

Pretty tough language.

More:

There was, he insisted, an out clause. Reconciliation -- the budgetary maneuver that would allow portions of reform to be considered by an up or down vote -- "looks better every time," Dean said. "Someone has to say, at some point, we need to pass a bill." Reid has hinted that reconciliation is an increasingly unlikely proposition.

One of the loudest champions of a public plan, Dean has rarely expressed such pessimism about the state of play in the Senate. But even aides on the Hill admit that the path forward to gathering the 60 votes needed to stop a Republican filibuster is immensely challenging.

[depakid]

1. Dean seems to be noting that the Republican wing of the party and its apologists

are looking for excuses. Again.

That's about all we ever hear from them. Reasons why they can't get something done.

[Cleita]

2. I'm afraid he's right.

I'm so disappointed in how this is shaping up so far. If Congress had started with single payer, then the compromise could have been the open to everyone public option, but since the insurance companies and PhRMA are running the show, we basically are going to end up with the deck chairs being rearranged on the Titanic or a Pyhrric victory.

[karynnj]

7. Not true

It is silly to think that starting with something that very obviously did not have anywhere near the support needed would get you to a different conclusion.

If you said you would only pay $5000 for a 2008 BMW, would that that let you end up with the car at a lower point or would the dealer refuse to even discuss it?

The fact is, if we could get exactly what is in the Senate bill, it would be the biggest expansion of medical insurance since the 1960s. I know that is not single payer or anything that could easily lead to it, but it is not a Pyhrric victory.

[madfloridian]

9. Not silly.

I remember how we excused the yes votes for Iraq...all kinds of excuses.

Then we excused yes votes for the bankruptcy bill and the FISA bill....and along the way we gave up women's rights.

I felt so much enthusiasm in 2003, but they have talked me down by the careful, dispassionate language and rhetoric.

They wanted the party to not do anything that would cause people not to vote for them.

They got it. That is a Pyrrhic Victory. They wanted to get funds so as not to need their traditional constituents...that got that finally with this majority.

There is a great irony to that.

[karynnj]

10. Huh? I was szpeaking of her first sentence that said that starting at SP, they would end in a better

I don't know anybocy who excused the yes votes on any of the bankruptcy bills. The IWR was in 2002 - and Dean was on record with some pretty aggressive talk back then and he had said he favored Biden/Lugar, there is no Sept/Oct comment of Dean's that he was against the IWR, unlike Gore and Obama. The majority of Democrats voted against the FISA bill.

In addition, the Senate refused to give up abortion rights. I resent that you appear to equate woman's rights with abortion rights. Does the fact that the Senate bill gets rid of the ability of insurers to charge women more than men (something Kerry got included in teh Finance bill) not count? The fact is that that provision may save a woman as much as the an abortion would cost out of pocket!

[madfloridian]

11. I resent that you don't....

equate women's rights with abortion, that is.

Why don't you?

You said:

"I resent that you appear to equate woman's rights with abortion rights."

And I am not going the Biden Lugar route again. I have written tons about it through the years, and I am done. We should have won in 2004, we did not.

And we are paying for it now.

[karynnj]

15. I think that there are many components of women's rights

abortion is just one part out of many - yet you wrote as if it was the only important issue. Things like equal pay for equal work, women's pension rights, women's health (which includes more than abortion) are important too. The fact is that the Senate bill preserves the status quo on abortion. Why not write abortion rights when that is what was meant.

As to 2004, in December 2004, Dean polled double digits behind Bush, worse than generic Democrat. Kerry actually polled even or ahead of Bush in early 2004. Dean was not subjected to whatever Bush would have done to smear him. Contrary to some here, I doubt he would have handled it better than Kerry. Kerry never complained that he didn't like being a pin cushion - and he took a hell of a lot more than Dean did. The fact is that the weekend before the election, a Gallup poll showed 59 % said the country was going well. Given that Kerry did incredibly well - and, in fact, had the election been fair he would have won.

The fact is YOU thought Dean would win the primaries, yet in the first real contest, Iowa, he came in a poor third - twenty percent behind Kerry. The fact is there is nothing to suggest that Dean would have suddenly become a better candidate and a front runner in the general election. Kerry was not just the most likely win of the candidates in a race the Democrats were never favored in, he was the most liberal of those running. Dean would not have been as incredibly good on foreign policy as Kerry was in the first debate.

[madfloridian]

16. The fact is I am tired of fighting. The primaries are long over.

We lost.

As to abortion rights, they are part and parcel of the complete rights of women.

[bobbolink]

20. "part and parcel of the complete rights of women."

Which poor women lost years ago.

But that didn't seem to matter.

It only seems to matter when it affects muddleclass women.

[karynnj]

26. Who was it that brought up 2002? If you bring it up to me - expect me to reply

Nothing in either bill makes abortion less legal and the Senate bill carefully maintains the status quo. The Senate bill will eliminate the higher premium for women than men on individual plans. It greatly reduces the out of pocket cost for women overall purchasing individual insurance. You ignore this savings which, annually, is greater than a cost of an abortion, which hopefully is a rare occurance. The difference in your interest in these two things indicates that it is not the cost to women, but a validation of abortion as an acceptable alternative to an unwanted pregnancy. My point is that abortion needs to be seen as controversial, because it is, and be put in perspective.

[pokercat999]

28. The only reason abortion is controversial is the fact that

a bunch of non-players, the church, government and politicians have their collective noses where they don't belong. They have no standing in the decisions made by any adult woman about her body. And guess what, until the fetus is out and unhooked it's still part of her body and she should have complete autonomy about that subject.

Yeah, I'm a man that will never have any skin in the game even if my wife should decide to have an abortion it's her body. Although I might try to convince her to carry to term, it should, in the end, be her decision and only her decision that prevails.

[karynnj]

31. I support abortion rights, but the fact is that it is more than the

church and politicians, who have a problem with it. There is a big block of people, not all Republican, who are against abortion in most cases. It is controversial because two groups of people have diametrically opposed opinions on it. (By the way, your opinion would be opposed by a huge majority of people as it says your wife may kill the baby a few days before birth when it is viable - I doubt you really meant that.)

Here is an archive of the polls on it (ignore the top as if you want as it is FOX). http://pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
The fact is that more than half the country does not want abortion paid for by tax payer dollars. The Sanet bill is as liberal as you can get and be in line with that.

[pokercat999]

36. What happens when viability is the day after conception? With

the advances in medical technology, especially with projected advances in micro-tech in the next 25 years, this is going to be the reality. Science may advance to the point where eggs and sperm placed into a mechanical womb will be possible, with zero birth defects, practically zero fatality rate and the physical attributes chosen from a menu. What then, in that brave new world, just around the corner in time? How will that play out politically? My guess is that the advances in science will make todays arguments about abortion very quaint.

[karynnj]

37. I would nver say that anything is technologically impossible in the future,

but those possibilities are scary to me. I really do not think that things will ever go to that extreme.

[xxqqqzme]

30. Sorry but a woman's right to

make her own healthcare decisions, including pregnancy termination, is a cornerstone of women's right. I don't need state or federal legislators sitting in a exam room w/ me telling my doctor what he can or cannot recommend for my health issue. Years ago there was a bumper sticker that read 'If you can't trust me with a decision, how can you trust me with a child?' Failure to see this cornerstone continually attacked w/ chisels and hammers, is very shortsighted.

[karynnj]

33. I did not say it wasn't - I said it was 1 of many things that are women's rights

(ie apples are fruit, but fruit is not just apples.

Not to mention, the Senate bill does not change that right at all.

[Kermitt Gribble]

19. "biggest expansion of medical insurance since the 1960s"

You got that right - the ins cos are getting tens of millions of new customers. Though, I know that's not what you meant, as a "centrist".

[karynnj]

34. I am not a centrist - with quotes or without them

I am a liberal and have been since the early 1960s.

[dflprincess]

3. It's their own fault

The Democrats had the chance to pass meaningful reform and secure their majority - instead they chose to concoct a way to largely protect the status quo and try to convince us it's reform.

Now we're suppose to believe that they need to pass "something" now and they'll fix it later. If they can't pass a decent bill with the numbers they have today, how can they possibly be serious about thinking they'll improve on it "someday"?

I swear, when they're not in front of the cameras they must spend a lot of time laughing about how gullible they think we are.

[cutlassmama]

5. they don't have time to laugh. They are busy taking pay offs from big pharma and ins. co.'s

[zoff]

22. And I'm going to be too busy on election day.

[inna]

29. Exactly. It's all Kabuki theater, I'm just disgusted with the political process at this point. nt

[cal04]

4. Dean: Senate health bill 'watered down'

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69125-dean-senate-healthcare-bill-watered-down


Former Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that Senate Democrats' healthcare legislation is so diluted it threatens the party's 2010 chances.

Appearing on MSNBC, the former Vermont governor and outspoken proponent of healthcare reform charged Democrats were "playing with dynamite in terms of dividing the party.”

"The big problem is the policy. This thing has been pretty watered down," Dean said during the interview, noting the House bill was "better" than the "decent" Senate bill. "Right now, it's about as watered down as it can get and still be a real bill. For example, there's really no insurance reform in this bill, already."

Dean's unequivocal prediction on Monday echoes a round of criticism that liberal Democrats have already lobbed at the Senate's healthcare reform bill, which cleared a key test vote on Saturday.

[dflprincess]

6. "there's really no insurance reform "

There's no health care (or access to care) reform in it either.

[madfloridian]

14. I was surprised when he mentioned the cost of pre-existing.

I thought there would be controls for that.

[democracy1st]

8. no leadership whatsoever from the WH, Goldman Sachs has not only owned this admin but

looks like they are on their way to destroying it

[PHIMG]

13. +1

The Democrats have to be damaged as much as the Republicans to maintain the 50/50 split the elite use to such great effect.

[madfloridian]

12. From The Hill today....a true statement.

"Obama's absence from the 2010 ticket, combined with the party's "watered-down" work, could disenfranchise the party's liberal base, perhaps keeping it from heading to the polls, Dean warned."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69125-dean-senate-healthcare-bill-watered-down

[placton]

17. there ain't no maybe about it

and Dean is wrong about one thing - in '12, after Obama fights a primary, I ain't gonna vote for him either. I support already the idea of getting him off the ticket - this ain't the party I have worked for since JFK. I dont want the GOP, but Obama and the Dems in Congress are just GOP by another name.

[bertman]

23. ^^What placton said!!^^

[pattmarty]

18. I really get out of some of the "progressives" here at Du.................

.........They slammed Kucinich for his at least principled vote against the House (abortion) bill. But everybody always loved "Dr" Dean. Now Dean says that the bill even as it stands now is a piece of shit and whoa, everybody starts piling on Dean for slamming a "good" bill. When your "heroes" start calling something by it's real name, as they are starting to do now, you would think that one would start thinking maybe it's a piece of shit.

[Jim Sagle]

21. Dean is both a progressive and a realist; Kucinich, not so much.

Unlike Kucinich, Dean will settle for half a loaf. But they took the whole loaf away then vacuumed the rug to make sure no crumbs were left behind.

[freebrew]

27. If it looks like shit,

and it smells like shit,
it's probably SHIT.

I may be staying home on election day myself.
The Dems have become repubs, and it stinks, like shit.

[bertman]

24. Looks like our vaunted "Democratic unity" is already fraying at the edges.

:rofl: :rofl:

With love,

The snarkmaster

[madfloridian]

25. Rachel's producer tonight said Dean would be guest host tomorrow night.

That surprised me as I had the impression he was not fond of guest hosting.

Should be interesting.

[gateley]

32. Man - this says it: " "What is the point of having a 60-vote margin? ..."

We all worked so hard to get the Dems elected so we had that 60 vote insurance, and somehow they've fucked it up. We're still asking "how high?" when they say "jump!"

What is our fucking problem??

[madfloridian]

35. Dean to interview Bernie Sanders on Rachel Maddow tonight.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/blog/politics/labels/Gov.%20Howard%20Dean.html

"Sen. Bernie Sanders is expected to be on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show tonight, interviewed by guest host Howard Dean.

Two guys from Burlington, Vt., getting together on the national airwaves.

Sanders' office says the senator will be appearing via satellite from outside his Church Street office. He’ll be on the top of the show, a little after 9 p.m."

[WilliamPitt]

38. They only have to defend nine. The GOP has to sweep more than 20.

I think we'll be OK.

Numbers matter.