Coakley-Brown Senate Race in Mass on Jan. 19 - Dems could 60 seat Majority !

[DietDrThunder]

We know the enemy, and they are us.

-------------------------------
From Fox news:

A top Senate Democrat for the first time Tuesday acknowledged that the party is prepared to deal with health care reform by using a controversial legislative tactic known as the "nuclear option" if Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate election.

Calling the state's special election "an uphill battle to put it mildly," Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said "there are options to still pursue health care" should Democrat Martha Coakley lose to Brown.

Congressional Democrats have been discussing several options, since a Brown win would break the party's 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority at a critical time for health care reform. Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, described a combination of tactics to get what his party wants out of health care reform.

First, he said the House could simply approve the Senate bill, sending it straight to President Obama's desk.

Then, Durbin said, the Senate could make changes to the bill by using the nuclear option, known formally as "reconciliation," a tactic that would allow Democrats to adjust parts of health care reform with just a 51-vote majority.

"We could go to something called 'reconciliation', which is in the weeds procedurally, but would allow us to modify that health care bill by a different process that doesn't require 60 votes, only a majority," Durbin said. "So that is one possibility there."

Though House Democrats have major misgivings about the Senate version, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Tuesday suggested they'd be willing to consider approving the Senate bill intact, if the alternative is no bill at all. A majority of Democrats in that chamber are opposed to many provisions in the Senate-passed bill, including the controversial tax on high-cost insurance plans which the unions are vehemently against.

Though Democrats, including Durbin, have previously insisted reconciliation would not be used, key aides have quietly pointed to a change in circumstances with the unexpectedly competitive race in Massachusetts.

But reconciliation is not easy under any circumstances. Any measure that is passed under the process requires 51 votes for passage, but that measure's authors must pass strict legislative tests to show the bill deals only with taxes and spending to bring the legislation in line with the budget -- a move that its creators made back in 1974 to keep extraneous provisions from being passed under this expedited process.

Reconciliation might allow for Democrats to modify the excise tax, but it would not appear to allow for changes to abortion and immigration language, among some of the hot-button issues.
Republicans have decried the use of reconciliation for such a massive re-ordering of the nation's economy. To be sure, Republicans were the first to use the tactic outside its intended purpose, and they have used it most often for tax relief, but they say health care reform is different.

Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., the primary point person in the Senate for reconciliation matters as the top Republican on the Budget Committee, has called this "Chicago-style politics" and has vowed to raise scores of objections, called "points of order." There are about 13 different ways Republicans can challenge Democrats, and nearly all of these will require votes.

Durbin, in Chicago, said Democrats "haven't given up on finding other options. I hope some of the Republican senators who have at least been in conversations with us in the past will join us in passing health care reform."

But that's not too likely. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., could possibly have pushed away the only Republican in that chamber, moderate Olympia Snowe of Maine, open to working with the Democrats on health care. She told The New York Times that she had "no intention of ever working anything out," calling it "a waste of time dealing with her."

Under the current process, negotiators are trying to hammer out a compromise that both chambers would still have to vote on. But if Brown wins, this laborious process could drag on past his swearing-in ceremony.

-------------------------------

The US miltary are swarn to protect America from it's enemies, both domestic and foriegn. I'm now just wondering how many years of this will pass until our own military steps in and saves us from ourselves.

 

[Craig234]

since when? the press has broadcast exit polls in all elections even after the bush/gore crap.

humm just found this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/19/massachusetts-exit-polls_n_428655.html

Those seeking exit polls for the 2010 Massachusetts Senate Race will be disappointed to know there aren't any.

Mike Allen of Politico reports about the lack of exit polls:

The consortium scrambled to put something together -- for the "why," more than for the call -- but wasn't confident a reliable system could be built so fast."

Allen adds that just days ago the Boston Sunday Globe carried the headline, "Senate poll: Coakley up 15 points." Since the election wasn't expected to be close not long ago, some apparently thought the exit poll process wouldn't be needed.

Curious Americans aren't the only losers. John Fund of the Wall Street Journal writes in his blog that the missing exit polls are "disappointing journalists and political scientists alike."

Also on the matter, MSNBC anchor David Shuster tweeted: "No news organization is doing exit polls in Mass senate race today. Only numbers will be the election results themselves. Voting ends 8pm."

Ah, thanks for the info. Well, if there had been exit polls at all, that'd be the reason, the media has rightly stopped reporting them before the polls close, which affects the election.

 

[Patranus]

So why is a union from NY working to elect someone in MA?

 

[Zebo]

If they are prepared to go nuclear then dump this POS bill that 'caves' to blue dogs and write something good. If they don't rewrite they are FOS corporate whores. Wanna take bets?

 

[OutHouse]

Ah, thanks for the info. Well, if there had been exit polls at all, that'd be the reason, the media has rightly stopped reporting them before the polls close, which affects the election.

100% agree with you on a national election, local not so much.

 

[OutHouse]

So why is a union from NY working to elect someone in MA?

healthcare?

 

[hal2kilo]

So why is a union from NY working to elect someone in MA?

Your so fucking smart and classically liberal, and you need an answer?

 

[Wreckem]

Try again.
(Hint: Read the constitution)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Kirks_status.html?showall

Let the Democrats try some shenanigans.

Try again. The Senate has its own rules about swearing in new Senators, and heres a hint: they(these days) wait until legal battles and state certification is done.

Also another hint: an election is NOT LEGALLY BINDING until certified. All vote total are unofficial until certification.

 

[Craig234]

ugh. didnt pay any attention to this thread.

coakley should rot in hell for her part in the child abuse witch hunt of the 80's and that alone i would wish for her to lose.

Ugh sounds like a good word for that. She was one of those? Ever recanted?

 

[Craig234]

100% agree with you on a national election, local not so much.

Why not local? Seems like the same issue, early reports affect voters.

 

[Craig234]

If they are prepared to go nuclear then dump this POS bill that 'caves' to blue dogs and write something good. If they don't rewrite they are FOS corporate whores. Wanna take bets?

If by nuclear option you mean reconciliation, it's limited to money issues.

If the Dems could find a way to get a re-written much better bill passed with 50 votes, that sounds like a much better option - for the county and politically.

Then a more popular bill would be passed and people would remember the obstructionism.

 

[werepossum]

:thumbsup:

What's funny though is Republican/Brown policy does nothing to address rising poverty, increasing food stamps, decreasing wages , rising bankruptcies, evaporating tax receipts bankrupting states and municipalities, rising foreclosures, decreasing sales, falling rents, higher defaults etc etc etc - this concentric economic contraction can not stop until actual socialist policy i.e. getting money back in little guys hands and clearing debt is implemented . Something republicans will never do.

Ah, prosperity through redistribution. What's funny is that not even the ChiComms believe that anymore.

 

[OutHouse]

Why not local? Seems like the same issue, early reports affect voters.

eh i would say very little at the local level. national is a whole different ballgame. the news call the states won/lost on the east coast hours before the polls close on the west coast has a huge impact on voter turn out.

 

[Patranus]

If by nuclear option you mean reconciliation, it's limited to money issues.

If the Dems could find a way to get a re-written much better bill passed with 50 votes, that sounds like a much better option - for the county and politically.

Then a more popular bill would be passed and people would remember the obstructionism.

That is unless the Democrats change the rules of the Senate which (I might be incorrect) takes a simple majority.

 

[Zargon]

Why not local? Seems like the same issue, early reports affect voters.

its just not as bad, since there is less time differences locally as opposed to East Coast > West Coast

so I would think

I agree though, its still an issue locally

 

[Patranus]

Oh, looks like they are ready to change the rules...
http://www.breitbart.tv/barney-frank-god-didnt-create-the-filibuster/

Its a shame that the Democrats have been taken over by the progressives.

In the words of a true Democrat

Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed - and no republic can survive.

But again, the Democrats (progressives) say that the debate is over yet again.

 

[Andrew111]

Either way you look at it...this doesn't end well for Obama. Democrats can continue blowing smoke up your ass by saying this doesn't have national implications but it most certainly does. Independents (and even some Democrats) are so unhappy with the Democrats in Washington that they are making their voices heard in MA...a solid blue state. If the people were happy with how things were going....then the majority of Massachusetts would happily vote for practically any Democrat that runs for the Senate seat...there certainly have been much worse candidates for the Senate that have won before. When a solid blue state teeters towards a Republican win in a crucial special election you know the Democrats are in for a hurting come the midterms.

If Brown wins and the Democrats ram through health care anyway......there WILL be a huge backlash come midterm elections. The question becomes....are moderate Democrats willing to gamble away their seats by voting for an inadequate health care bill that doesn't contain costs as it should. People are already unhappy with the skyrocketing deficit...and this health care bill failed to address many issues to contain the spiraling costs...such as tort reform. And the Senate bill promises to "find" half a trillion in savings from Medicare...give me a break...either spell out how exactly costs will be controlled or quit blowing smoke up the public's ass by promising to "find" savings and write up a decent health care bill without such garbage in the first place.

And if Obama signs the bill before Brown gets seated...it gets even worse for him. Pelosi/Reid will have shoved their hands much farther up his ass to make him look like an even more servile puppet dancing to their every whim. He needs to have his own mind...he should have been more involved in forming the health care legislation if he wanted BI-PARTISANSHIP instead of letting Pelosi/Reid control it. So far he has proven to be a cheerleader of the Democratic party...without displaying much leadership of his own merit.

Whatever...rant done.

 

[woolfe9999]

Unreported until the polls close, as they should be.

Supposedly there will be no exit poll data available until tomorrow.

- wolf

 

[OutHouse]

Either way you look at it...this doesn't end well for Obama. Democrats can continue blowing smoke up your ass by saying this doesn't have national implications but it most certainly does. Independents (and even some Democrats) are so unhappy with the Democrats in Washington that they are making their voices heard in MA...a solid blue state. If the people were happy with how things were going....then the majority of Massachusetts would happily vote for practically any Democrat that runs for the Senate seat...there certainly have been much worse candidates for the Senate that have won before. When a solid blue state teeters towards a Republican win in a crucial special election you know the Democrats are in for a hurting come the midterms.

If Brown wins and the Democrats ram through health care anyway......there WILL be a huge backlash come midterm elections. The question becomes....are moderate Democrats willing to gamble away their seats by voting for an inadequate health care bill that doesn't contain costs as it should. People are already unhappy with the skyrocketing deficit...and this health care bill failed to address many issues to contain the spiraling costs...such as tort reform. And the Senate bill promises to "find" half a trillion in savings from Medicare...give me a break...either spell out how exactly costs will be controlled or quit blowing smoke up the public's ass by promising to "find" savings and write up a decent health care bill without such garbage in the first place.

And if Obama signs the bill before Brown gets seated...it gets even worse for him. Pelosi/Reid will have shoved their hands much farther up his ass to make him look like an even more servile puppet dancing to their every whim. He needs to have his own mind...he should have been more involved in forming the health care legislation if he wanted BI-PARTISANSHIP instead of letting Pelosi/Reid control it. So far he has proven to be a cheerleader of the Democratic party...without displaying much leadership of his own merit.

Whatever...rant done.

nice posting.

 

[OutHouse]

Supposedly there will be no exit poll data available until tomorrow.

- wolf

lol tomorrow we will have the election results.

 

[Robor]

Olbermann: http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser...bic_racist_teabagging_exnude_model_149284.asp

He is so awesome in his bias it's marvelous to watch. He is absolutely more of a douche than even Sean Hannity. He puts to shame the bias of even the worst republican sycophants on Fox. Look at him go. I wonder if he was in fact created in a moveon lab. They took everything they could find, all the people who hate republicans, minced them in a grinder and took out just the most pure hate and bias and used it as the basis to create Olbermann.

I don't watch Keith but from what I've seen of his clips it appears as though he's trying to keep up with Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. I'm not saying he's right in doing that, just that he's got to do a lot to 'level the playing field'.

 

[spidey07]

lol tomorrow we will have the election results.

One can only hope we have the election results and it's decided. I'm still hoping for no shenanigans and a decisive victory for Brown.

 

[Darwin333]

:thumbsup:

What's funny though is Republican/Brown policy does nothing to address rising poverty, increasing food stamps, decreasing wages , rising bankruptcies, evaporating tax receipts bankrupting states and municipalities, rising foreclosures, decreasing sales, falling rents, higher defaults etc etc etc - this concentric economic contraction can not stop until actual socialist policy i.e. getting money back in little guys hands and clearing debt is implemented . Something republicans will never do.

So the current Democrat plan for a few of those you listed are:

Rising bankruptcies: To solve that the Democrats offer incentives to people for purchasing a home that will in all likelihood (and needs to) lose even more value. To top it off the same administration will be launching a massive short sale program a few months after the housing credit ends which should force home prices down even further. Furthermore they write a bullshit "consumer credit bill" which resulted in everyone in the country getting fucked even more by the big banks. Even people with good credit are "enjoying" 30%+ rates. Yup, thats gonna reduce bankruptcies all right.

Evaporating tax receipts: Don't worry about this one. The stimulus plan will save or create enough jobs to offset that, right? You can try to tax the rich folk but I hate to tell ya they don't have enough money to cover anything close to the shortfalls. The only thing that helps this is getting more people paying taxes and less people receiving .gov benefits due to unemployment. A good way to do that is taxing businesses, right?

bankrupting states and municipalities: The Feds sure are making it easier for the states to borrow money aren't they? Its not like the Feds are selling record amounts of bonds, reducing the supply of money available for states is it? Or perhaps the supply of money to be loaned is infinite? To be fair, I don't think the Feds can solve this problem. Some states require constant a economic "boom" for their current budgets to be feasible.

rising foreclosures: See "bankruptcies" above. The admin literally traded more foreclosures on the backs of Americans in order to help out the big banks. Not only did they not help the problem they are intentionally making it worse. Good job?

decreasing sales: This had to happen. People can't use their homes as piggy banks or live well above their means via credit anymore. Don't worry though, tax increases should solve this problem, right?

falling rents: Very good thing and they need to continue to fall along with home prices. The fact is people simply can't afford the median home price with the median household income. They have to get much closer before home/rent prices stabilize but the current policy of the admin is to spend a crapton of money to prop the value up just a while longer so the banks don't lose as much money. Unfortunately it is being done at the expense of the American consumers.

Clearing debt: Are you friggen kidding me? The Dems have done nothing but "extend and pretend" and allow banks to use fraudulent accounting practices. I get it, since the balance sheet "looks" better it must BE better, right?

Don't get me wrong, the Republicans probably wouldn't do much better but if you think the Dems are actually solving any of those issues you listed you are fooling yourself. In fact, they are intentionally making some worse and playing kick the can.

 

[MrMatt]

Good thoughts. I note that your idea would seem to improve choice for those who already have insurance from their employers. What about people who work for small business or are self-employed and do not have insurance because they or their employer cannot afford it? Would you provide tax credits to small businesses to help those employers pay the stipend to their employees for health coverage, or would you leave them uninsured?

- wolf

the person above your post here actually suggested separating work from insurance, which I actually like better than the initial idea I posted even. I still favor a free market where the person is able to choose, and some sort of tax credits, yes I would support.

 

[Capt Caveman]

One can only hope we have the election results and it's decided. I'm still hoping for no shenanigans and a decisive victory for Brown.

Unfortunately, breakings news on the tv that voters in several towns have reported being handed ballots with Brown already shaded in.