I don’t see how this is going to help, as psychologists can’t prescribe drugs and the Dems are clearly off their meds. But for what it’s worth:
…retiring Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan (N.D.) recently brought psychologist Drew Westen in to see the Democratic caucus, because Dorgan is convinced that the Democrats’ problem is one of messaging.
This always comes up, again and again, whenever the Dems run themselves onto the PR rocks. It’s never the ideas that are wrong; no, the ideas and the actions they take based on those ideas are good and right. The problem is always that the stupid voters out there have just missed the point. They just don’t understand that the Democrat party is made up of people who just want to help them and do good things for them. If only we understood the good intentions behind their actions, we’d all be rushing to the polls to pull the lever for Carl “Shitty” Levin and his ilk.
You guys keep on believing that it’s just messaging. Just keep telling yourselves that.
Dr. Westen told the Democrats that they need to strike a more populist chord, explaining that the best way to win over voters is to use simple language that engages the brain’s “frontal emotion circuits.” In other words, since reason can’t provide much help in defending the Democrat’s policies, perhaps emotion can. CQ reports that the Democrats gave Dr. Westen a round of applause and have started taking his advice.
Great. Now we can look forward to even more condescension from our Senatorial betters. I can’t wait to have Debbie Stabenow explain to me yet again that she understands my anger about government spending and that’s why she voted to spend all the money they can print on the ridiculous scheme that we’re not supposed to call Obamacare anymore. I’m sure if she just tweaks her message I’ll be sprinting to the front of her campaign volunteer line.
Taking the psychologist’s advice, perhaps the Democrats should say, “We know you’re angry that we passed Obamacare in direct defiance of your will. We know you’re angry that this Congress and this president have racked up more deficit spending in two years than President Bush and the previous four Congresses — hardly models of frugality in their own right — did in eight. We feel your pain. We understand your anger. So please vote for us.”
On occasion, the “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body” will do something that makes sense. It appears that last week, we arrived at one of those auspicious moments:
Bipartisanship has broken out in the Senate, not that the media bothered to notice. Last week John McCain introduced a resolution stating that “It is the sense of the Senate that the Value Added Tax is a massive tax increase that will cripple families on fixed income and only further push back America’s economic recovery.” The resolution passed 85 to 13.
For those who are not aware, a VAT is a “Value Added Tax” in which a tax is applied at every stage of production of a product (or whenever “value is added” to a product). The Wall Street Journal notes:
The typical VAT rate in Europe is close to 20%. That’s about how high a VAT would have to be in the U.S. to balance the federal budget, according to the Tax Foundation. Mr. McCain said about his VAT resolution that “With the economy in such bad shape, we should be cutting tax rates now, shouldn’t we?”
Hey, that makes sense, right? I mean, right now we don’t want to do anything to discourage people from producing things or to keep consumers from purchasing them. And a VAT would surely do that, seeing as how it would raise the cost of everything by around 20%. Hence the large margin of passage of the McCain’s sense of the Senate resolution. I mean, who would be dumb enough to support a VAT right now, especially considering that the people are far more concerned about out-of-control government spending, deficits, and debt?
Carl Levin would be, it turns out. Heck, even Debbie Stabenow wasn’t stupid enough to vote no on this resolution.
Who can discern why Michigan is in the national economic dumpster right now? It’s a mystery, I tell you.
As with all things relating to the Zombie Bill From Hell (I refer of course to Obamacare; I’d link to the bill under discussion at the moment, but, you know, there isn’t one), this must be taken with a grain of salt, but if true, this certainly seems promising. According to Roll Call:
The Senate Parliamentarian has ruled that President Barack Obama must sign Congress’ original health care reform bill before the Senate can act on a companion reconciliation package, senior GOP sources said Thursday.
Let’s review the state of play: in November, the Democrat-controlled House shat out its version of the wretched Obamacare effluvium, which, to be fair, at least included Bart Stupak’s amendment to bar federal funds from being used for abortions, but does include the awful “public option” which is simply a way to describe the destruction the private insurance market in pretty legislative-ese.
After “passage” in the House – pun intended – this prime example of maggot-ridden legislative excreta slimed its way into the chambers of the “world’s greatest deliberative body” which promptly undertook to digest and expel the bill by the only means possible – via an orgy of bribery and corruption that shocked the consciences of normal citizens but was described to me by the arrogant twerp who answers the phones in Senator Carl Levin’s office as “the democratic process at work.” If you’re disappointed to discover that the “Democratic Process” now seems to include such dirty legislative whoring as the now-immortalized “Cornhusker Kickback” and the “Louisiana Purchase,” not to mention “Gator-aid,” well, join the club. Even my own state of Michigan got a bit of a kickback thrown in, thanks to the aforementioned Levin and the horrifying Debbie Stabenow. Perhaps we could refer to their little deal as the “Blue Cross Buyout.” It should also be noted that the Democrat leadership of the Senate was forced to engage in this raw political prostitution in order to hold together their much-vaunted 60-seat “filibuster-proof” majority. The pièce de résistance of this particular legislative stool sample was the fact that it was forced out of the impacted colon of the Senate on Christmas Eve, as a smelly, disease infested “Christmas present for the American people.”
The end result of this disgusting display was a pile from the senate Senate significantly different from the loaf pinched off by the House. Of course, for a bill to become a law, both houses of Congress must pass legislation in the exact same form before it can be sent off to the President for his signature. (The process is laid out in the US Constitution if anyone cares about that old thing anymore.) This posed a problem for the statists who make up the leadership of the Democrat party, as the two houses had passed fundamentally incompatible bills. The House had included the public option in order to assuage the insane liberal caucus of their party, but the provision was removed from the Senate version, along with the Stupak abortion language. These were pretty big hurdles for the contemptible Democrat leaders in the respective houses to overcome, but considering that the political left in the United States has been drooling over the possibility of subjugating the entire population under a government health care regime for the better part of a half-century, and also taking into account that our current president is a rigid leftist ideologue, there was little doubt that they could get the job done in the end.
While all this was going on in Washington, there was the minor issue of the election of a replacement for the dear departed Edward M. Kennedy, longtime Massachusetts senator and official Drunken Jackass of Congress. Up until, say, November, it appeared that the race would go to Standard Massachusetts Leftist Martha Coakley. But then a funny thing happened – the idiots in the House passed Obamacare, which caused Coakley’s opponent to pick up a little momentum, and then the mouth breathers in the Senate passed Obamacare, which created even more momentum for Coakley’s opponent. And then on January 11, Coakley’s opponent absolutely smoked her in a debate in which he declared that the Senate seat in question was “… not the Kennedy seat and it’s not the Democrat’s seat. It’s the people’s seat.” Is was no looking back from that point, and thus did Senator Scott Brown become the Obamacare saga’s deus ex machina.
With the election of Brown (who had campaigned on a promise to be the 41st vote against the atrocious Obamacare plans), the Democrats seemed to be screwed. They needed a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate in order to pass whatever pile of crap came out of a conference committee with the House, which would be necessary considering that the insane liberal caucus in the House would never vote for the no-public-option Senate bill and the awful Senate Dems weren’t in a conciliatory mood regarding Bart Stupak’s pro-life language in the House Bill. With Brown taking over for Kennedy, the filibuster-proof majority was gone, leading many to say that health care reform was dead, seeing as how the “nuclear option” of using the Senate’s budget reconciliation process to pass this major landmark legislation was simply unacceptable. Such leading lights of the Senate as the author of the rule creating reconciliation had said that to do such a thing would be an abuse of Senate procedure. Aside from which there was the little matter of poll after poll showing that the American people hated the legislation. So the smart thing for the Dems to do would be just to drop the whole thing, pretend it never happened, and try as hard as possible to minimize the anger of the electorate before the midterm elections, which were starting to show signs of being a 1994-style wave election for the Republicans.
Unfortunately, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama aren’t smart people. They decided to… I think this would be to triple-down on enacting this legislative colostomy bag. Obama organized a “summit” at Blair House that ended up proving that Republicans have both legitimate major critiques of Obamacare, legitimate gripes about the process, and legitimate plans of their own to fix the health care system. It also contributed to the meteoric rise of Paul Ryan as a conservative superstar.
The natural thing to do at this point would be for the Dems to stop shooting themselves in the foot. But remember, we’re talking about zombie legislation being pushed by mini-tyrants on an ideological power trip. Ain’t nothing natural about it. So why not quadruple-down on the whole mess and try to cram Obamacare down America’s gullet via reconciliation?
Of course, this would involve a whole bunch of legislative shenanigans that make the whole process about as transparent as the crust of the Earth. But no matter! The bill must be passed so we can find out what’s in it! And so the whole corrupt bunch of “leaders” in the House and Senate have been huddling together to try to come up with some sort of parliamentary trickery that would allow the House to pass the Senate version of the bill with an assurance that the Senate would come back to “fix” the bill via the reconciliation process in some bizarre way. Hell, they’re even trying to come up with a way to allow the bill to “pass” the House without actually being voted on by the House. Yuval Levin at NRO notes:
Democratic leaders should be asking themselves just how they have gotten to the point that their strategy is to amend a law that doesn’t exist yet by passing a bill without voting on it.
Indeed. And this is where Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin comes into play with his ruling. If Frumin has ruled as reported, that would mean that the House would have to vote on the Senate bill before the Senate acts on a reconciliation bill to “fix” the original bill. Considering that the House trusts the Senate about as far as they can throw it, that makes passage of Obamacare in the House that much more difficult. It was already nearly impossible, which is why the Dems have been looking to the abominable but appropriately named Congresswoman Louise Slaughter to craft the “House votes by not voting” option mentioned above. A sampling of pundit reaction, starting with Daniel Foster at NRO:
“Game Changer” is quickly replacing the various iterations of “under the bus” as the most overused political cliche of our age, but this certainly qualifies as one. And it leaves House Democrats with little but the fig leaf of the “Slaughter Rule” as political coverage.
So there you have it, House Democrats. Once you vote for the Senate bill, Obama will sign it, the Left will declare victory, and who knows if reconcilliation will ever happen. This confirms that the Democratic leadership has once again been hiding the ball and not leveling with either their own members or with the public about the procedural aspects of the bill. It will certainly not help to calm the nerves of House Democrats, who already suspect the “fix” is in and that they are being trapped into voting for the noxious Senate bill — Cornhusker Kickback and all.
Summing Up the Past 24 Hours: The Congressional Hispanic Caucus makes a demand that already derailed healthcare reform once. The Congressional Black Caucus complains that Obama isn’t listening to them. The co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus announces that the President’s stumping across the country isn’t doing a lick of good. The Stupak Twelve announce that there will be no deal. And now the Parliamentarian makes it that much harder to get wavering Congressmen on board.
House Democrats do not trust the Senate; they do not want to pass the Senate bill–with all the special deals in it–and hope the Senate will fix these problems and others later. Even Democrat Michael Capuano of Massachusetts is expressing very grave concerns about passing the Senate bill unamended.
If this report is true, the parliamentarian’s ruling seems to nix the “Slaughter Solution,” whereby the House would deem the Senate bill passed only after the reconciliation bill is passed by both the House and the Senate.
So where do Democrats go from here? One possibility is that Harry Reid will fire the Senate parliamentarian.
If Democrats really think they can get away with such a heavy-handed move in the first place, they might as well replace the parliamentarian with Rahm Emanuel and kill two birds with one stone.
I’ll level with you. I thinkthis is huge, but the procedural chicanery has gotten so convoluted that I can’t be sure anymore. Could mean nothing.
Allah also notes the possibility that all of this could be rendered moot by a raw exercise of political power on the part of that smirking jackass who lives at the Naval Observatory, but that would call down the thunder from the sky, methinks. But hey, aren’t they already doing that by considering the Slaughter option?
All this to say, America may have just dodged a bullet, and we may owe the Senate parliamentarian a huge debt of gratitude when this is all over. It’s not over yet, but we may be a bit closer tonight.
With the “temporary leave of absence” that Charlie “Exonerated” Rangel has embarked upon due to the fact that he’s, well, corrupt as hell, we just about got saddled with this arrogant ass as chair of Ways and Means. Instead we get… oh lord it’s Carl Levin’s older brother Sandy. Faaaan-tastic.
Perhaps most important, Ryan confronted the Democrats with the issue of the “Doc Fix” — a separate bill that would have added $371 billion to the Democrats’ legislation if it hadn’t been stripped out. The Doc Fix would have prevented Medicare reimbursements to doctors from plummeting by 21 percent, a drop that Congress put into the bill to improve its CBO score but never planned to allow, most political observers agree.
Niether Obama nor any of his party people were able to effectively respond to this point, or to the other points raised by Ryan, because Ryan is correct and the only honest response to his critique is to admit that he’s correct. The Democrats are playing games with the financial side of their “reform” bill in an effort to make it seem palatable to the American people (although failing miserably); they honestly do not seem to care whatsoever about the absolutely crushing deficits they are racking up at present. This mindset is absolutely foreign to me.
Back in December, I made a call to the office of Senator Carl Levin to express my extreme displeasure with the “health care reform” effort. Now, calling Levin’s office is always a frustrating affair, as Carl has virtually ossified in his liberalism and probably doesn’t have the capability to think outside of his union- and left wing-dominated box, but this particular instance was a supreme example of the arrogance permeating his office after all of his years as a senator. I was explaining to his staffer the various reasons that I opposed a government takeover of the health care sector, chief among them my (completely plausible) nightmare scenario of skyrocketing health care costs (which are inevitable in a socialized system) and the necessary rationing that will follow paired with the future possibility of legalized “assisted suicide,” which could easily be pushed into a de facto policy of euthanasia for the old or disabled as a cost-saving measure. The staffer completely ignored the point, instead insisting that when I am elderly I will be able to rely on Medicare. I responded with the perfectly obvious observation that Medicare is already going bankrupt, to which the staffer responded that I was incorrect; there is merely a “revenue shortfall,” but “Congress can fix that.”
To the best of my knowledge, Congress has two means available to “fix” a “revenue shortfall” (or, in plain language – to stave off bankruptcy): they can either raise taxes (a hell of a lot when those boomers retire) or cut services (AKA ration services). Needless to say, that phone call didn’t end well.
Here’s the difference between a guy like Paul Ryan and a guy like Carl Levin: Ryan at least recognizes the problem for what it is and has presented a plausible, workable plan to correct America’s fiscal mess. Levin may or may not recognize the problem in the first place, and if he does, he simply doesn’t care. To Levin, America exists to support the federal government, and no problem is too small for federal intervention. No federal program is superfluous; no federal agency ever outlives its usefulness. If there was ever a time when Carl Levin was not a creature of the State, it has long past. He is a statist through and through.
We need to stop electing people who either don’t know or have forgotten the meaning of limited government and federalism. We have to send home those in Congress who don’t understand that their first priority is to defend the individual liberty of citizens, not to buy off as many voters as possible. We need adults who can be honest and make some hard choices in Congress. So kudos to Paul Ryan for actually trying to get that ball rolling. I wish him all the luck in the world.