dagblog - Comments for "Medicare funds no abortions. Did the "Public Option" die to avoid a Hyde Amendment donnybrook?"

the Church ain't paying those

jollyroger — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:21:45 +0000

In reply to My first inclination with the

the Church ain't paying those taxes

When you live in a Christian Theocracy, it's good to be a Christian Church.

"Reconciliation rules" which

jollyroger — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:16:37 +0000

"Reconciliation rules" which for practical purposes are most germane in their impact upon the order of debate: Bottom line, you only need a majority to end debate when a budget resolution has carried with it a "reconciliation instruction"

That said, the public option was a perfect candidate because the Byrd Rule (of reconciliation procedure) requires a clear budgetary impact of the items subsumed, and without the public option (as we have learned) there is no hope of containing medical costs or their budget busting impact.

In my Jesuit high school the

Flavius — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:53:38 +0000

In reply to My first inclination with the

In my Jesuit high school the Church's position was clear cut:freedom of religion meant that it should be allowed to promulgate its views. Naturally we asked

:does that mean that a Catholic controlled government should allow non Catholics to act in ways that the Church considered sinful e.g.abortion.?

We got a clear answer.

Certainly not. Error does not have equal standing with the Truth.

I heard Catholic theologians say that the Vatican conference under John the 22nd in some way undercut this view. Undercut, possibly. But I believe that the US bishops essentially still hold it.

If you

hadn't expected the 'spanish inquisition'

you're probably not a US bishop.

For cloture. I don't know

Flavius — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:35:17 +0000

In reply to Didn't have the 60 for

For cloture.

I don't know enough about reconciliation to rebut the argument that it could have been used to create a public option.

There was a lot of discussion at the time and I know that Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein jointly took a position that it could have been used to a greater degree than it ultimately was. ( I've no doubt there were intellectually respectable counter arguments to Mann/Ornstein )

So while I could be right , equally I could be wrong . At a minimum I should stop being so adamant that Obama just didn't have the votes for the public option.Pity. I liked being adamant and now I'll have to go back to being wishy washy.

Advantage jollyroger.

My first inclination with the

artappraiser — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 03:48:07 +0000

In reply to You're right--it crossed my

My first inclination with the Catholic bishops' lobbying re: "we don't want to be paying for birth control" came up was to think along similar lines, i.e.: "yeh well but how come you don't bitch about paying for war?" But then I thought again: doh dummie, they don't have to, the Church ain't paying those taxes.

Didn't have the 60 for

jollyroger — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:42:54 +0000

In reply to Of course. Since he didn't

Didn't have the 60 for cloture or the 50 for reconciliation? (You could be right on both points--there was no lock on reconciliation getting past 46 at first.)

You're right--it crossed my

jollyroger — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:41:22 +0000

In reply to One thing about Medicare, no

You're right--it crossed my mind after I had posted, and decided to adhere to the keep it simple stupid rule.

I am, on the broader issue, bemused by the alacrity with which we cater to the anti-choicers disinclination to pay for dead babies in utero, while giving no respect to my disinclination to pay for the incineration of babies ex utero

Where is the Kucinich Amendment, forbidding the expenditure of federal funds to blow up kids with drone strikes?

One thing about Medicare, no

artappraiser — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:56:25 +0000

In reply to Medicare funds no abortions. Did the "Public Option" die to avoid a Hyde Amendment donnybrook?

One thing about Medicare, no one comes seeking reimbursement for abortion services

You bringing this point up to make another point got me wondering whether it is 100% accurate, as I know disabled under 65 are on Medicare (if they qualify for SSDI, rather than SSI-those on the latter usually are only eligible for Medicaid.) Of course, as always, a lot depends upon a discrete doctor knowing how to code procedures, i.e. dilation and curettage for dysmenorrhea or fibroids or whatever.

Of course. Since he didn't

Flavius — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:51:22 +0000

In reply to TPM says yes, there was a

Of course. Since he didn't have the votes to pass the public option he agreed not to do something he couldn't do and in exchange got something else he wanted.

Wouldn't you?

TPM says yes, there was a

jollyroger — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:23:45 +0000

In reply to Prolly I got it from FDL, and

TPM says yes, there was a deal

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/t/r/truthseeker77/2010/0...