Is Health Care Compromise a Lost Cause?

(CBS)  Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus said today that his "gang of six" - three Democrats and three Republicans - is "on track" to reach a compromise in the debate over health care reform.

But other Democrats are beginning to think bipartisanship on this issue is a lost cause, reports CBS News correspondent Nancy Cordes.

Worried that the White House is caving under pressure from the right, some liberal democrats are now pushing for a "go it alone" strategy on health care reform that does not include Republicans at all.

"Over and over again the Republicans have said no," said Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md. "I don't think that they want reform."

The final straw may have been a comment by a top Republican senator, Jon Kyl.

"There is no way Republicans are going to support a trillion dollar bill," Kyl told reporters - even if Democrats drop the public insurance option that the GOP so strongly opposes.

"I actually don't think there's any peril in opposing the president's plan at the moment," said Republican Strategist Ed Gillespie. "I think that stopping something bad from happening is the right place to be right now."

Read more of CBSNews.com's coverage of the debate over health care reform.

Liberals were already angry that the president seemed to be backing off his demand for a strong public option to compete with private insurance.

They're defending the contentious proposal at their own town halls. In one exchange that's gone viral online, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., excoriates a questioner at a Dartmouth, Mass. town hall who compares President Obama to Hitler.

"Why do you continue to support a Nazi policy - as Obama has expressly supported this policy. Why are you supporting it?" the questioner asks.

Frank's reply: "When you ask me that question I am going to revert to my ethnic heritage and answer a question with a question. On what planet do you spend most of your time? You want me to answer the question? Yes, as you stand there with a picture of the president defaced to look like Hitler and compare the effort to increase health care to the Nazis, my answer to you is, as I said before, it is a tribute to the first amendment that this kind of vile contemptible nonsense is so freely propagated. Maam, trying to have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a dining room table. I have no interest in doing it."

But "going it alone" would be a risky strategy. Even some democrats oppose a public option. And reformers may need a few Republican votes if they want to carry the day.

"It's quite possible that the critical votes in health care are going to be decided by one vote," said Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute.

But the only true bipartisan effort - a group of six senators trying to reach a compromise - took a hit when the leading Republican in the group embraced one of the most damaging myths about reform.

"We should not have a government program that determines if you are going to pull the plug on grandma," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

Grassley insisted today that he is still committed to finding compromise. But in this environment that's getting harder and harder to do.

[daisyjingles]

I have no confidence in Senator Charles Grassley or what he says. From a recent interview of him, it appears that Senator Chuck Grassley negotiated changes Republicans wanted in the health care bill in bad faith. While he appeared to be working toward a bipartisan bill, he was simply trying to run out the clock.

I am outraged that Senator Charles Grassley (Republican Iowa) negotiated changes to the health care bill that he himself will not vote for if he cannot SELL it to his fellow Republicans.

Does his loyalty lie with the people in Iowa or with his fellow Republicans in the Senate? Now we know, because of the Washington Post research, that he has accepted millions of dollars from the health care industry during this decade.

I saw that The Washington Post had an article about Grassley recently: "Grassley, the Finance Committee's ranking Republican, received more than $2 million from the health and insurance sectors since 2003."



We all know the economy was a huge mess when President Obama was sworn in.

Guess who was head of the Senate Finance Committee the entire time while the economy went down the tubes? It was Senator Charles Grassley.

Senator Grassley himself is a multimillionaire and he also spearheaded the estate tax repeal law which only benefited very rich people in the top few percents. He should have done more for the people who elected him.

Oh, and that drawl he has that sounds like a Jimmy Stewart character? He is no Jimmy Stewart. He negotiated in bad faith and anybody that does that is a snake in the grass.

Fortunately, Senator Grassley's current term is up in 2010.

[govmess]

Obama's health care plan will be...
-written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it,
-passed by a Congress that hasn't read it,
-signed by a President who smokes,
-funded by a Treasury Chief who did not pay his taxes,
-overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese, and
-financed by a country that is nearly broke.


What could possibly go wrong with such a plan?


"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing"
It appears America is on permanent snooze alarm these days.

[jab232]

The Republicans (and maybe some Democrats) are in the pockets of the big lobbyists. They have no interest in doing what is best for the people. They want to do what is best for the large corporations and their rich CEOs. The idea of bipartisanship is a pipe dream.

Look back at the last eight years. Who got rich and who got unemployed, lost health care, homes and retirement. That tells you were the GOP stands.

[robham777]

"There shall be no administrative or judicial review under section 1869, 1878"

This statement appears six time in hr3200 but I can't find sec 1869 or 1878 in the text of the bill. Does anyone know if this refers to another bill?

[noloyalisti]

Like the Republi CONS said, you can't negotiate with terrorists. You can't negotiate with greedy, rich, uncaring corporations and their CON tools. They want to continue to ration health care and decide on whether people live and die.


The solution is to take the management of health care away from those that profit from it. Universal single payer, like Medicare, is the only sure solution.

[daisyjingles]

From a recent interview of him, it appears that Senator Chuck Grassley negotiated changes Republicans wanted in the health care bill in bad faith. While he appeared to be working toward a bipartisan bill, he was simply trying to run out the clock.

It is an outrage that Senator Charles Grassley (Republican Iowa) negotiated changes to the health care bill that he himself will not vote for if he cannot SELL it to his fellow Republicans.

Does his loyalty lie with the people in Iowa or with his fellow Republicans in the Senate? Now we know, because of the Washington Post research, that he has accepted millions of dollars from the health care industry during this decade.

I saw that The Washington Post had an article about Grassley recently: "Grassley, the Finance Committee's ranking Republican, received more than $2 million from the health and insurance sectors since 2003."



We all know the economy was a huge mess when President Obama was sworn in.

Guess who was head of the Senate Finance Committee the entire time while the economy went down the tubes? It was Senator Charles Grassley.

Senator Grassley himself is a multimillionaire and he also spearheaded the estate tax repeal law which only benefited very rich people in the top few percents. He should have done more for the people who elected him.

Oh, and that drawl he has that sounds like a Jimmy Stewart character? He is no Jimmy Stewart. He negotiated in bad faith and anybody that does that is a snake in the grass.

Fortunately, Senator Grassley's current term is up in 2010.

[daisyjingles]

From a recent interview of him, it appears that Senator Chuck Grassley negotiated changes Republicans wanted in the health care bill in bad faith. While he appeared to be working toward a bipartisan bill, he was simply trying to run out the clock.

It is an outrage that Senator Charles Grassley (Republican Iowa) negotiated changes to the health care bill that he himself will not vote for if he cannot SELL it to his fellow Republicans.

Does his loyalty lie with the people in Iowa or with his fellow Republicans in the Senate? Now we know, because of the Washington Post research, that he has accepted millions of dollars from the health care industry during this decade.

I saw that The Washington Post had an article about Grassley recently: "Grassley, the Finance Committee's ranking Republican, received more than $2 million from the health and insurance sectors since 2003."



We all know the economy was a huge mess when President Obama was sworn in.

Guess who was head of the Senate Finance Committee the entire time while the economy went down the tubes? It was Senator Charles Grassley.

Senator Grassley himself is a multimillionaire and he also spearheaded the estate tax repeal law which only benefited very rich people in the top few percents. He should have done more for the people who elected him.

Oh, and that drawl he has that sounds like a Jimmy Stewart character? He is no Jimmy Stewart. He negotiated in bad faith and anybody that does that is a snake in the grass.

Fortunately, Senator Grassley's current term is up in 2010.

[robham777]

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text


19% Users Support Bill
684 in favor / 2991 opposed

[Stevenapoli7]

What would Allah do?

[robham777]

In 2007 George Bush had an adjusted gross income of $923,807 and donated $165,660(17.9%) to charities, during that same year Barrack Obama had an adjusted gross income of $983,826 and donated $60,307(6.1%) to charities.

Government is great, government is good, let us thank them for our very existence.

Amen