Patterico's Pontifications

3/16/2010

More on the Slaughter Solution

Filed under: Health Care,Politics — DRJ @ 2:01 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Michelle Malkin rounds up the latest news on the Slaughter Solution:

  • “House Republican leaders will announce this morning a plan to force a vote this week on a resolution that would require the Senate health care bill to be brought to an actual up-or-down vote. *** [The text is at this link.] *** If passed by the House, the resolution would prohibit Speaker Pelosi from implementing the “Slaughter Solution,” the scheme by which House Democratic leaders are seeking to “deem” the Senate bill as passed without an actual vote in the House.”
  • Mark Tapscott reports how the Republican-controlled Congress used a “self-executing” rule very similar to the “Slaughter rule” to raise the debt ceiling in 2005. The bad news for Democrats is that Pelosi, Slaughter, and Waxman went to court to stop it. The bad news for Republicans is they failed.
  • Syracuse Democrat Rep. Dan Maffei announced his support for reconciliation, while Democrat Rep. Jason Altimire condemned “deem and pass.”
  • Finally, Drudge has the headline of the day:

    Top FOUR Dem Leaders All Disagree…

    BLOOMBERG: Pelosi Says Dems to Have Votes for Health Bill…

    THE HILL: Hoyer Shoots Down Larson’s Vote Count, Clyburn’s Timeline…

    THE HILL: Clyburn Says Health Vote Could Push Past Easter Holiday…

    POLITICO: Larson Says Dems Have the Votes…

    Obama refuses to campaign for Dems voting NO on healthcare…

    Are these examples of orchestrated disinformation by Democratic leaders or unorchestrated chaos? Either way, the last report may justify a “No” vote for some red-state Democrats.

    — DRJ

    31 Responses to “More on the Slaughter Solution”

    1. Regarding Obama’s threat to not campaign for his members seeking re – election, they must all be wondering to themselves, “where do we sign up?”

      Dmac (ca1d8c)

    2. Dmac – you beat me to it ! (grin)

      Alasdair (e7cb73)

    3. Damn, DMAC beat me to the obvious retort…

      Tully (4dce1a)

    4. “The bad news for Democrats is that Pelosi, Slaughter, and Waxman went to court to stop it. The bad news for Republicans is they failed.”

      I put the link to the opinion and some of the text that it cited from teh 1890s in the other thread.

      imdw (8f8ead)

    5. I think it’s also available at the Mark Tapscott link, imdw.

      DRJ (daa62a)

    6. “Obama refuses to campaign for Dems voting NO on healthcare…”

      He even blew this one! Looking at the wonders he did for Corzine and Coakley, by threatening to campaign for the “no” votes, Obama could have ensured the bill’s passage. What a maroon!

      daleyrocks (718861)

    7. I think the moment they have the votes, they will vote. so every day they don’t vote they don’t have it. its that simple.

      The depressing thing is that if they took their constitutional oaths seriously, this “deemed” vote concept would be a complete non-starter.

      A.W. (f97997)

    8. Democrats….
      Oaths….
      Seriously….

      Laugh, I thought I’d never start!

      AD - RtR/OS! (02b3ae)

    9. “Obama refuses to campaign for Dems voting NO on healthcare…”

      Dems say NO to Obama’s help in 2010 campigns…

      There, fixed it…

      Of course, the one could never even imagine the possibility

      MD in Philly (70a1ba)

    10. Threatening to not campaign for the “no” votes just comes across as extremely weak.

      If he can’t get democrats in the House to vote for it on the merits of the bill itself, then why not come up with an idea that people will vote for? Threatening someone into agreeing with you sounds like something you would do in Chicago.

      What a weak president. George W Bush was simply better at leading. He didn’t win every legislative battle, but he never had to resort to acting like this, and he was much more effective at getting democrats and republicans to work together.

      And Pelosi and Slaughter going from an initially blatantly unconstitutional move to a slightly less blatantly unconstitutional move. You don’t have to do that if it’s a popular domestic proposal. And if it isn’t, we shouldn’t spend money on it when we’re broke (even if it is, really, but doubly if it isn’t).

      What a bunch of weaklings.

      Dustin (b54cdc)

    11. Obama ran ads for Scott Brown in Massachussets, now he promises to reward his opponents by not campaigning for them. Methinks he is not half as smart as he thinks he is.

      Have Blue (854a6e)

    12. But what makes this use of “demon pass” controversial is because it’s being used to ram something through that has no bipartisan support and little partisan support. It is primarily a creation of Pelosi and Obama. The other occasions it was used for bipartisan bills.

      This is an executive branch gone insane…or as Mark Levin put it, as close to martial law as we have ever gotten.

      Patricia (e1047e)

    13. Obama refuses to campaign for Dems voting NO on healthcare…

      Win-win for those dems, I guess.

      I mean, a better threat would have been “Vote yes of I’ll do for you what I did for Coakley and Corzine”.

      Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

    14. Do any of you put much stock in intrade? I think it can be very insightful. Check out obamacare on there.

      Hopefully the steep drop this evening is the result of some breakdown in negotiations and not some amazing change of heart. Usually if something goes from 70% to 35% in a matter of minutes that’s a great indicator.

      Dustin (b54cdc)

    15. Hey! Haven’t been lurking here much of late, but thought I’d add another link to your list DRJ.
      (I was very glad you came back btw 🙂

      It’s from the American Enterprise Institute blog, and I would consider it of a piece with the Tapscott editorial: Hypocrisy: A Parliamentary Procedure.

      35 times – wow! I personally think there is more than enough hypocrisy to go around for both parties on these procedural dust-ups (i.e. b.s.)

      Dustin, I don’t disagree with your conclusion @8:03 pm, though I’d quibble with your assessment of the factors (GOP’s traditionally strong party discipline; their increasing ideological coherence vs. Dem’s structual fractures; blah, blah, blah…). I think we would both agree that the Democrats got some weak ass game. Mostly I wanted to thank you for the Intrade link; it does make me feel that there is a very important piece of information that I’m missing but a whole bunch of other people (or a few very rich people) know about?!

      Bob Loblaw (7a8b3f)

    16. “Usually if something goes from 70% to 35% in a matter of minutes that’s a great indicator.”

      It’s in the mid 60’s now. What is that a “Great indicator” of? Besides the fact some people have made / lost money.

      imdw (89430f)

    17. I think the slaughter solution is just a smoke screen sent up by Pelosi to focus attention away from the backroom deals that are taking place now. I think she will say anything at this point. And the other leaders will do the same.

      In the end, I have a sick feeling this will get passed. By hook or by crook.

      Corwin (ea9428)

    18. Obamacare doesn’t work or lower costs and Massachusetts proves it.

      http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1240176

      PCD (1d8b6d)

    19. “In the end, I have a sick feeling this will get passed. By hook or by crook.”

      I have a feeling that if it does pass, it will pass as a result of several votes in the senate, including a supermajority of the whole senate, plus several votes in the House, including a majority of the whole house.

      imdw (cd4b7a)

    20. Comment by Dustin — 3/17/2010 @ 12:37 am

      Perhaps the fact they’re talking up the Slaughter option.

      Gerald A (a66d02)

    21. I have a feeling imdw is being intentionally obtuse.

      JD (06eeff)

    22. “Obamacare doesn’t work or lower costs and Massachusetts proves it.”

      But senator scott brown loves it, so it’s ok.

      imdw (d8a0c2)

    23. Only in your world does that make it okay, imdw.

      JD (a0372a)

    24. “including a majority of the whole house”

      Even if they don’t actually vote on it.

      “But senator scott brown loves it, so it’s ok.”

      Says who?

      Corwin (ea9428)

    25. But senator scott brown loves it, so it’s ok.

      After watching Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) win a special election by opposing the health care bill, now independent Massachusetts governor candidate Tim Cahill is coming out against it too — in a very forceful way.

      Cahill, the state treasurer who switched from Democrat to independent in advance of his run against Gov. Deval Patrick (D), said Tuesday that the national bill would lead to the same problems his state is experiencing.

      “If President Obama and the Democrats repeat the mistakes of the health insurance mandate in Massachusetts on a national level, they will bankrupt this country within four years,” Cahill said. “It is time for the President and the Democratic Leadership to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan that does not threaten to wipe out the American economy.”

      Gerald A (a66d02)

    26. “Even if they don’t actually vote on it.”

      Boy will you be surprised one day when they have the vote, it’s on CSPAN, and everyone talks about who voted for or against health care reform.

      “Says who?”

      Say’s brown. He supports the MA insurance regulation.

      imdw (9c0eb2)

    27. “Boy will you be surprised one day when they have the vote, it’s on CSPAN, and everyone talks about who voted for or against health care reform.”

      Yes.

      “But senator scott brown loves it, so it’s ok.”

      Him liking it does not mean it is ok.

      Corwin (ea9428)

    28. “Yes.”

      Like, what do you think these whip counts are about? What was it that Dennis Kucinich announced today, for instance?

      imdw (603c39)

    29. Dennis the Menace…One of the intellectual towers in the House!
      Someone imadickwad can look up to.

      AD - RtR/OS! (bdaa22)

    30. intrade does seem to have kicked right back up.

      That’s interesting too. Someone made a huge sell-off, though.

      I recall when George Soros started a sell-off so that he could buy low. If you have enough wealth, it’s easy to do. You can never be sure of what you see on intrade, but it can be insightful when something huge happens. I don’t think anyone can make a precise conclusion about what led to the huge selloff and then correction back to 66. I imagine someone bailed out on a dumb investment.

      I don’t really buy into the whole ‘intrade is games as astroturf’, but it’s certainly a few points more liberal than mainstream predictions on most issues (which could just reflect liberals being better off than commonly thought or a confirmation bias on my part).

      Dustin (b54cdc)

    31. […] reading: Patterico’s Pontifications: More on the Slaughter Solution and ObamaCare: Lazy WaPo bloggers relay bogus Dem talking point and The Constitutionality of the […]

      “Lack of Political Guts”… Jack Cafferty at CNN Says Pelosi’s Slaughter Solution Is Beyond Sleazy (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone (a66042)


    Powered by WordPress.

    Page loaded in: 0.0797 secs.