The New Bar on Health Care: “Every Democrat and Perhaps Olympia Snowe”
EmailABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports: Things have changed at Max Baucus' office. Last week he had bipartisan talks looking for middle ground. Today, it was only Finance Committee Democrats huddled in his office late into the evening. And Sen. Chuck Schumer put it bluntly when he said what they are optimistic that they can work real hard together and come up with a consensus bill that gets the vote of "every Democrat and perhaps Olympia Snowe." And there was good news for a Democratic consensus. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who has been a chief liberal critic of Sen. Max Baucus' health reform plan. And while he said on-cam tonight after a meeting of Democrats on the Finance Committee that his criticism of the bill remain, Rockefeller sounded buoyed and like a team player. "There was a feeling in there that we're in this together," he said. There are still real differences. (Rockefeller again attacked the co-ops envisioned by Baucus and other centrists as a substitute for the public plan — "Can they work?" Rockefeller said of co-ops. "The answer is no they can't.") But Rockefeller sounded committed to working in the amendment process when the bill reaches the Finance committee next week.
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will 
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
yeah when hell freezes over
Posted by: natalie from mass | September 17, 2009, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm
Oh, pant pant, ABC prays for the clouds
to open, pant pant, and the bad guys
to get on board with Obama’s policies.
“WE might get Snowe”. Yes, ABC, and
you may get diddley-squat. Many of us
root for the latter.
Posted by: Trajan | September 17, 2009, 9:12 pm 9:12 pm
Is Health Care Reform Constitutional?
The administration seems to be operating under a distorted version of the Commerce Clause that has been grossly misinterpreted over the years as allowing the feds to regulate and control just about everything. In United States vs. Lopez in 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress can only regulate human activity that is truly commercial at its core. One does not go to a doctor to engage in commercial activity. The Supreme Court has specifically rejected the idea that Congress can regulate noneconomic activities simply because through a chain of collective events they might have some impact down the road.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | September 17, 2009, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Sandcrab1612,
Is Medicare unconstitutional? Do Republicans really want to argue this point?
Posted by: anthony | September 18, 2009, 3:25 am 3:25 am
Count on this: There will be a nice-paying, cushy job for Max Baucus at some insurance lobbying firm – or the Republican National Committee – next time ’round when he is defeated for reelection as surely he will be – as surely he must be..
It’s people like poor old Max that are the walking, talking personifications of why I left the Democratic party over a decade ago. They have forgotten that they are (or were) the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Pity.
Tom Degan, Goshen
Posted by: Tom Degan | September 18, 2009, 5:07 am 5:07 am
anthony – The case law would support that there is a large question to the constitutioality of the healthcare being considered.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | September 18, 2009, 8:55 am 8:55 am
Sandcrab1612: anthony is pointing out that while it may be possible to use case law to legally support the argument that the Commerce Clause does not “allow” the federal government to regulate health care, the political ramifications of voicing such an argument would be devastating. I would also point out that SELLING health insurance is definitely commerce. Also – programs like Medicare – “promote the general welfare”.
Posted by: PJ | September 18, 2009, 11:32 am 11:32 am
PJ – Agree that selling insurance may be classified as commerce it does not fall under the comerce clause as due to current rules and regulations insurance companies can not sell policies across state lines and thus fall under state not federal rules. That is part of the problem in that insurance from Idaho can not be bough if you live in Iowa.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | September 18, 2009, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm
Sounds like a “lofty discussion”, the nexus of which is equivalent to “Oppositional Vapor!”
Posted by: bobj72 | September 18, 2009, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
Who could possibly DEFEND health insurance companies, and say that the system is good as it is? That would certainly be crazy, and political suicide. Yet Republicans openly defend the current system–and somehow their constituents don’t seem to notice? There is a dark, evil hand at work here–spreading lies and creating resistance where there is none, and it has Republican politicians showing their true colors. They fight for big business–not for you. Wake up!
Posted by: repubsloveHMO's | September 20, 2009, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm