and if anything could be a sadder commentary on our politics, the good faith deliberative, democratic and honest debate you pow wow call on our congress to engage in is something we citizens have been unable or unwilling to do for ourselves this past year.

as ralphbon writes above,

Corruption remains our nation’s preeminent preexisting condition.

finally, to both pow wow and ralphbon, if the only way someone like jim mcgovern has to sell this bill to his constituents is to lie about it (i actually don’t think he knows what he was doing, i expect he in good faith believes what he is being told), then this bill may in fact be worth trying to block. i don’t know, still on the fence here, but as we learn more about the hidden details (is fairleft correct about the schip issue?!) the defects we know about in this legislation mount as well as my growing belief that this bill was not written with the healthcare of americans in mind, i am more and more convinced that the solutions to our current troubles are not to be found in deecee. instead, for our all our flaws and ignorance, we must rely on the american people for a populist uprising and do everything we are capable of to assure it is a liberal, progressive one and not a reactionary, rightwing movement.

after listening in on the town hall though, my impression is that there is not much (any?) interest in making this a better bill. it’s already so wonderful and historic and blah blah.

It’s stunning really, how willing these…people…are to behave like a bunch of barking trained seals upon command – simple-minded apologists for power, robotic seat-warmers, who checked their independent will and thought at the door.

But thank you so much for trying, selise. All we really have is the ability, on rare occasions, to throw their deeds in their sheltered faces to show them we know what they’re playing at, and what utter contempt we have for their sick games. And you succeeded in doing that much with McGovern – you knew he’d signed the letter, he knew you know, and he had to try to BS his way out of it – and everyone listening heard him dissembling, right from the top.

I can’t fathom the abdication of responsibility that an incumbent is willing to countenance by silently watching a bill of this magnitude and import being “debated” – WITHOUT POSSIBILITY OF AMENDMENT – on the floor of the House for less than ONE full day. “Debated” that is, in 2-3 minute soundbites, by a fraction of House members talking past each other, in an attempt to score Party PR points, rather than engaging in any sort of actual debate on the LEGISLATIVE merits – which are already a pre-ordained backroom done deal. The PARTIES and their shoulder-shrugging members for whom THE PARTY WIN trumps all, have cheapened our legislature to such an extent that The Lobbyist Branch, as emptywheel called it today, is a far more fitting name.

ralphbon said:

These bills are all but out of our elected representatives’ hands now. They’re in the hands of leadership.

But it’s worse than that. These bills never were “in the hands” of (most of) our representatives, aside from a tiny minority of members of the House sitting on the committees of jurisdiction and those who could coax favors from the powerful committee chairs and Party leaders. And yet, watching the House Judiciary Committee markup of important legislation today – the ONLY chance these representatives are going to get to have ANY impact on the legislation, as they know – John Conyers couldn’t wait to gavel down the debate to get to his rubberstamped Party-line votes, after never holding a full-committee hearing on the legislation, and cobbling together a product behind closed doors without full committee participation. The freshmen legislators were at sea, without any reference points or experts to lean on, and the veterans (Nadler and a couple of others excepted) were too busy posing for the camera and playing Party tic-tac-toe to care.

“Does not work” is an understatement.

There are some Senators (Whitehouse and Casey tonight, Cardin, Klobuchar, and Kaufman last night, Feinstein Monday) showing real passion and humanity about this issue on a sustained basis. We can only hope, plead, beg that THEY will insist on the right to genuinely debate and amend the bill on the Senate floor, without agreeing to intentionally misleading UC Agreements that make amendments futile, by mandating 60 votes for anything that seems in danger of passing by simple majority.

So here’s my “hope, plead, beg,” Senators: It’s only good faith deliberative, democratic debate and amendment in public that I’m begging for – isn’t that precisely what the chamber we pay you to periodically visit was custom-designed for??

I was surprised to see a DKos diary by Eve today that pounded on the inadequacy of delaying the PO and other key reforms to 2013. She cited the speed with which Taiwan initiated its single-payer system. This sounded weirdly like the good old nyceve, I thought, yet how can she be bringing this up now, when it’s all but too late?

With supposed reformers like Grayson crowing about how great the House bill is, in its current hobbled form, and with other reps tossing off the sound bites you just got on your conference call, does Eve seriously think that the deficiencies in the House bill, which people like you and I have been screaming about for months, are going to succumb to a phone-banking effort?

These bills are all but out of our elected representatives’ hands now. They’re in the hands of leadership. If health care activists of whatever stripe don’t organize to scare the shit out of leadership to inject actual substantive reform into these bills, Americans will remains fucked for years — with greater numbers insured, to be sure, but in a manner still rigged to bleed them dry.

Corruption remains our nation’s preeminent preexisting condition.

your ideas all sound good to me, i’d just add that i would like to see the po pre-populated, maybe with medicaid and schip? maybe kip has some ideas to share.

i would also like to see his staff publish on his website the estimated costs (premiums and out of pocket) for the various income levels. i think that will show how very NOT affordable the reform may be (it will also let MA residents compare it to our current system of subsidies).

after listening in on the town hall though, my impression is that there is not much (any?) interest in making this a better bill. it’s already so wonderful and historic and blah blah.

sorry for the ramble. and even more sorry not to have much of anything useful to say at this moment. maybe a couple of hours of wallowing in despair are needed to purge the defeatism. actually what i need is something to do that might possibly be constructive. i think i will call his office tomorrow to pitch the cost by income level idea for posting on his website.

do you think there is any possibility of a consistent set of demands by both po and sp advocates? if so, what might i do to help that along?

Yesterday, 12 protesters were arrested at Pelosi’s San Francisco office, demanding restoration of the Kucinich amendment and the HR 676 floor vote.

According to an email from the Kucinich campaign, the only hope for restoration of the state single-payer amendment is now in House/Senate conference.

As I insisted recently, and reiterate now, protests and civil disobedience need to be redirected immediately from private insurers (whom everyone already knows are villains) toward Senate and House leadership.

In my view, this is the moment for public option boosters and single-payer activists to join forces to demand, at minimum:

* Opening of the exchanges (and through them the PO) to all Americans not otherwise covered by public programs from in year 1
* Redesignation of year 1 from 2013 to first quarter of 2011
* Restriction of income-based subsidies on the exchange to the public option only (one of the original Hacker criteria)
* Public option operated as an extension of the CMS infrastructure (another Hacker criterion for a truly “Medicare-like” PO)
* Medicare + 5% reimbursement rates on the PO
* Making physicians’ continued participation in Medicare, Medicaid, or SCHIP contingent on their acceptance of PO patients (so docs pay a price for attempting to duck out of seeing PO patients)
* Restoration of the state single-payer waiver amendment

don’t know if there will be a chance.

i’ve never been so convinced our gov. does not work. this phone “town hall” is so very very sad. and jim is one of the better congressmembers.

he said that this bill was better than nothing, that he is not the only one writing the bill, that it’s necessary to control costs and this bill would do so. i tried to challenge that statement with the cms report, but apparently that is considered a second question and he moved on. hopefully there will be an audio (they said that the call would be recorded).

i can not believe the level of bs my congressman is selling. and he is one of the better ones.

third question was on abortion and he reassured the caller that abortion services will not be covered.

….

says the public option is important because costs are too high. gives the whole neoliberal competition argument (which is nonsense).

doesn’t mention that the public option as it now exists is not expected to offer insurance at lower rates (because of weak risk adjustment).

… i’ve never been so convinced that our gov does not work. this is insane. i don’t think jim knows what he is talking about (some details yes, but fundamentally about the policy this bill is based on). so very very sad.

….

if i get another question, i’m going to ask about the kucinich amendment. third choice is rules committee question from pow wow. fourth, i’d like to ask about costs.

Do members of the House Rules Committee (such as Jim) ever buck Party leadership, to, for example, in the case of this bill, insist on passing a rule that will allow key floor amendments (including those promised in earlier negotiating)? So as to allow, say, a public debate and floor vote on the (Weiner?) single payer amendment, the Kucinich state-single-payer-experiment amendment passed by committee but since stripped, and an amendment that would shorten the Eshoo/Barton 12-year sweetheart ‘drug deal’? Not to mention amendments that would speed up, and broaden eligibility for, the public option.

Or, “Rep. McGovern,” are you Rules Committee members just rubberstamps, who serve only to mindlessly obey and enforce, without question or quibble, Party orders – never mind the will of the Congress?

The Rules Committee will be voting on the rule for this bill this Friday, at 2 p.m.:

http://rules.house.gov/bills_details.aspx?NewsID=4465