health care bill

I think we are seeing a pattern emerge showing that the right is starting to get worried about the increased violent and slanderous rhetoric from some of their extremes. Let me give a couple of examples pointing to this.

First we have Tom Coburn this weekend. Coburn has never been considered what one would call a “nice guy” when it comes to discussing the opposition, however this weekend he did something that shocked a lot of political observers – he defended Nancy Pelosi and blasted FOX News.

But in a recent town hall meeting Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) offered some kind words for her, saying "she's a nice lady." Coburn added that although he and the Speaker differ on policy issues, she's a "good person."

Perhaps even more stunning than Coburn's conciliatory words for Pelosi was his criticism of Fox News.

"What we have to have is make sure we have a debate in this country so that you can see what's going on and make a determination yourself," he said, adding: "So don't catch yourself being biased by Fox News that somebody is no good. The people in Washington are good. They just don't know what they don't know."

Then yesterday we got news of the FBI arresting Charles Alan Wilson, a 64 year old Washington state man who phoned some very threatening calls into Senator Patty Murray’s office. Here are some of his rants against a sitting U.S. Senator:

"I hope you realize there's a target on your back now. There are many people out there that want you dead," one message said. "Now that you've passed your health care bill let the violence begin."

Another message included this threat: "I want to (expletive) kill you."

Every blog needs to do a post on it because it shows a serious fracture that is developing in the GOP this week:

In the wake of the passage of health care reform, nearly the entire slate of Republican senatorial candidates seems ready to run on a repeal of the bill. But now, the lawmaker overseeing their election strategy is softening the message. Rather than promising to scrap the bill in its entirety, the GOP will pledge to just get rid of the more controversial parts.

In a brief chat with the Huffington Post on Tuesday, National Republican Senatorial Committee chair John Cornyn (R-Tex.) implicitly acknowledged that Republicans are content with allowing some elements of Obama's reform into law. And they'd generally ignore those elements when taking the fight to their Democrat opponents as November approaches.

"There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things," the Texas Republican said. "Now we are not interested in repealing that. And that is frankly a distraction."

What the GOP will work to repeal, Cornyn explained, are provisions that result in "tax increases on middle class families," language that forced "an increase in the premium costs for people who have insurance now" and the "cuts to Medicare" included in the legislation.

God forbid that we allow any abortion coverage in the health care bill:

While Republicans and some Democrats want to hold up health care reform because of the false premise that abortions would be covered, the Washington State GOP provides its employees health care through a consortium that does just that. Congresswoman Cathy McMorris-Rodgers blasted Democrats for favoring a health reform plan that includes abortion coverage, even though her own state party is covered via AWB Health Choice, which covers abortions.

What’s good for the goose, well apparently it’s just good for that goose.

Michele Bachmann is telling people to break the law and calling for civil disobedience:

At a rally at the Minnesota State Capitol on Saturday, Bachmann declared illegitimate the potential route that House Democrats could take to pass the health care bill. She was specifically railing against a parliamentary tactic by which the House could skip voting on the Senate bill by declaring it passed as part of the reconciliation bill. Bachmann pronounced this to be taxation without representation. "They have just started a revolution -- and they did it," said Bachmann.

"But mark my words, the American people aren't gonna take this lying down," Bachmann later said. "We aren't gonna play their game, we're not gonna pay their taxes. They want us to pay for this? Because we don't have to. We don't have to. We don't have to follow a bill that isn't law. That's not the American way, and that's not what we're going to do."

Not the American way? Where were her complaints when the Republicans did the exact same thing?

– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03]
– Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297,5/11/06]
– The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [H. Con Res. 95, 12/21/05]

(By tlw3 via Alan.com)

Bachmann never once called those pieces of legislation illegal or un-American, despite the very same rule being used to pass them. As matter of fact those are the very issues that Republicans, like Bachmann, love campaigning on. They consider it huge victories for their party.

Rep. Steve King is trying to justify the attack on the IRS in a discussion with Think Progress:

TP: Do you think this attack, this terrorist attack, was motivated at all by a lot of the anti-tax rhetoric that’s popular in America right now?

KING: I think if we’d abolished the IRS back when I first advocated it, he wouldn’t have a target for his airplane. And I’m still for abolishing the IRS, I’ve been for it for thirty years and I’m for a national sales tax. [...] It’s sad the incident in Texas happened, but by the same token, it’s an agency that is unnecessary and when the day comes when that is over and we abolish the IRS, it’s going to be a happy day for America.

TP: So some of his grievances were legitimate?

KING: I don’t know if his grievances were legitimate, I’ve read part of the material. I can tell you I’ve been audited by the IRS and I’ve had the sense of ‘why is the IRS in my kitchen.’ Why do they have their thumb in the middle of my back. … It is intrusive and we can do a better job without them entirely.

Here is why the GOP is so against the health care bill. Health care has been a corner stone issue of the Democratic platform for years. When they control everything they try to get reform through.

Now take the Republicans. Abolshing the IRS has been one of their big issues for years, but when have they actually tried? They had control of the entire government for most of the last decade and not once did they try this. It’s like banning abortion – they never try and most likely never will.

The GOP is the party of rhetoric, and again we have someone in the GOP justifying a horrific attack against Americans to justify the very beliefs they never even act on. It’s the same as when abortion doctors get murdered.

Last night Barney Frank released the following statement:

I have two reactions to the election in Massachusetts. One, I am disappointed. Two, I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results. If Martha Coakley had won, I believe we could have worked out a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate health care bills. But since Scott Brown has won and the Republicans now have 41 votes in the senate, that approach is no longer appropriate. I am hopeful that some Republican senators will be willing to discuss a revised version of health care reform. Because I do not think that the country would be well served by the health care status quo. But our respect for democratic procedures must rule out any effort to pass a health care bill as if the Massachusetts election had not happened. Going forward, I hope there will be a serious effort to change the senate rule which means that 59 are not enough to pass major legislation, but those are the rules by which the health care bill was considered, and it would be wrong to change them in the middle of this process.

At first glance that could be a death blow, but maybe not. David Shuster reported this morning that Nancy Pelosi is looking at putting the Senate bill up for a vote in the House, but only with a commitment from Harry Reid. That commitment would be for what is called a “patch bill” and must be passed under reconciliation. The idea is to fix the Senate bill by another bill immediately following it and make it so the Republicans can’t filibuster it. Under that idea things like the public option come back into play.

Given the very narrow margins that the House passed their version of the health care bill, it appears that one of the key Senate changes could end up meaning doom for the legislation:

One thing is clear: Unless Sen. Harry Reid and President Barack Obama back down on the excise tax in the health reform bills being merged in a secret conference committee, Democratic Rep. Carol Shea-Porter will not vote for the final bill.

And that’s not the only feature of the final bill Shea-Porter is likely to oppose.

Usually in cases like this it takes one to open the flood gates. Now that Shea-Porter has publically said she won’t support the bill if the Cadillac tax is included, I am sure we can expect more to follow suit this week.

Also don’t forget that we are looking at other’s who may oppose the bill over the abortion language, namely people like Stupak, who want much harsher abortion language in the bill. The next few weeks are going to be very interesting to watch. Well not watch, since transparency is dead, but listen to the leaks on.