Politico again falsely reported that Dems won't compromise on SCHIP
SUMMARY: A Politico article cited health care as an issue on which Democratic "party leaders have shunned compromise" and cited the congressional debate over expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) as part of this purported "storyline." However, the Politico did not note that an earlier bill expanding SCHIP by $35 billion over five years -- which President Bush vetoed -- represented a bipartisan compromise.
In an October 30 article headlined "New Congress at war over everything," the Politico cited health care as an issue on which Democratic "party leaders have shunned compromise" and cited the congressional debate over expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) as part of this purported "storyline." The article reported: "Almost every Democrat, and a large bloc of Republicans, wants to increase spending for the popular program. But Democratic leaders have consistently framed the issue along party lines, arguing Republicans won't spend as much on children." The Politico further reported that when the House of Representatives recently approved a revised SCHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 265-142 -- less than "the two-thirds needed to override another veto vowed by President Bush" -- "another chance at bipartisan consensus slipped away."
But in asserting that Democrats have "shunned compromise" on this issue, the Politico did not note that an earlier bill expanding SCHIP by $35 billion over five years -- which President Bush vetoed October 3 -- represented a bipartisan compromise. Indeed, House Democrats had initially proposed a bill expanding the program by $50 billion, but it received the support of only five Republicans. As Media Matters for America noted, an October 18 Politico article similarly suggested that Democrats had refused to "come to the negotiating table to forge a bipartisan compromise on" SCHIP.
From the October 30 edition of the Politico:
In a closed-door meeting before the last vote on the children's health care bill, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer appealed for the support of about 30 wavering Republican lawmakers. What he got instead was a tongue-lashing, participants said.
The GOP lawmakers, all of whom had expressed interest in a bipartisan deal on the SCHIP legislation, were furious that the Democratic leader from Maryland had not reached out to them in a more serious way early on. They also criticized him and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois for failing to stop his allies outside Congress from running attack ads in their districts, while they were discussing a bipartisan deal.
The result was a predictable one for this bitterly divided Congress. The House vote for a second SCHIP bill was a healthy majority, but not the two-thirds needed to override another veto vowed by President Bush. Only one Republican switched his vote -- to oppose the measure.
Democrats accused Republicans of hurting kids. Republicans howled about a heavy-handed, uncompromising Democratic majority. And another chance at bipartisan consensus slipped away.
"They spent $1.5 million through their various shill outreach groups attacking me and a handful of my colleagues," Rep. Ric Keller (R-Fla.) said before the Hoyer meeting, "but they did not spend five minutes to approach me to ask for my vote."
This us-against-them mentality has been an ongoing storyline of the new Democratic-controlled Congress. On the big items -- Iraq, health care and spending -- party leaders have shunned compromise.
Democrats are under tremendous pressure from liberal activists to take a hard-line approach against everything Bush. Republicans face similar pressure from their own base to stick with the president and prove they are serious about curtailing spending, even if it means less cash for a popular state-run health care program for children not covered by Medicaid.
[...]
The SCHIP debate is similar. Almost every Democrat, and a large bloc of Republicans, wants to increase spending for the popular program. But Democratic leaders have consistently framed the issue along party lines, arguing Republicans won't spend as much on children. And some mostly moderate Republicans complained to Hoyer and Emanuel last week that they had not seriously reached out to would-be allies on the other side of the aisle. Now, discussions for a serious compromise are finally underway.
"Now, discussions for a serious compromise are finally underway."
So then...all's well that ends well, right?
Sounds to me like Republicans in Congress are feeling the heat back home and are now dying for a chance to jump on board a "compromise"...while still trying to save face by acting tough.
It would be interesting to administer sodium pentothal to Congressional Republicans and ask them what they really thought about George W. Bush.
In a lengthy interview on NPR Radio last night, host Robert Siegel* asked Pelosi about compromising with Dubya. She responded that she was quite willing to meet with him, but that he hadn't made any effort toward meeting with the Democratic leadership re. the SCHIP issue. (He issues statements to the press, but he refuses to meet with the Dems.) Thus, the block to compromise apparently rests within the Executive branch, not the Legislative. I trust the mainstream media will pick up on this.
* -- no apparent relation to Jonathan L.Isn't the bigger question, and another Politico fails to bring up:
IF THIS IS TRUE, HOW IS IT ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS OR THE ADMINISTRATION'S "COMPROMISE" EFFORTS?
That is true, that Bush has maintained a combative, uncompromising posture throughout, which is unflattering to the entire Republican Party. The whining of Congressional Republicans for an opportunity to compromise demonstrates to me that they are attempting to distance themselves from Bush. They must be feeling the heat back home.
What it all means is that the Dems will finally have to really compromise and work with the republicans, instead of attacking them and making wild claims and accusations. The notion that republicans want to hurt children is crazy, and the smear tatics did not work this time. Going from a 50 billion dollar bill that had almost no support to a 35 billion dollar bill with limited support is NOT in any way a compromise. Now they may finally be able to work out a bill. Speaker Pelosi simply does not have the power she thought she had.
"Speaker Pelosi simply does not have the power she thought she had."
To the contrary, it strikes me that, assuming she can count, Speaker Pelosi knows exactly the limits of the Democratic power in the House. In my observation she is methodically playing her hand to maximum benefit. Congressional Republicans are pleading for an opportunity to compromise, aren't they?
I see cancerman has name morphed.
Now they may finally be able to work out a bill.
Like the one they passed through the house and senate with overwhelming bipartisan support? The one that Bush unilaterally vetoed because, you know, "poor kids first?"
Speaker Pelosi will have that power next year and President Clinton will sign the bill, rethugs should enjoy this last year of having any say at all, extinction is near.
If by power you mean the ability to achieve any of the objectives to which the dems picked up house seats, ie the war in Iraq, Guantanamo, wire taps, or most recently SCHIP, then I am more than happy to let her believe that she has all the power you think she does.
I'm looking forward to watching you whine like a baby when the democrats control all three branches of government next november.
"...then I am more than happy to let her believe that she has all the power you think she does."
That is very knid of you. I am sure Speaker Pelosi appreciates your generosity.
Smile.....I am glad she appreciates the gesture. As long as her agenda is kept in check, I am happy
If S-CHIP still passes with a significant increase in benefits as a result of Congressional Republican compromise how is Speaker Pelosi not accomplishing her agenda.
You're so gonna hate next year. This country is gonna swing that pendulum so far left you're gonna need a jackhammer and an F350 to break that puppy loose! Yeah baby!
As long as her agenda is kept in check, I am happy
First of all, you understand how to reply to a post, right? You're not doing it just to be annoying?
And if the only thing you care about is blocking her agenda, then that speaks volumes about "compassionate conservatism." As in, no such thing exists. Doesn't matter if kids have health insurance. As long as the evil Pelosi is blocked.
If it passes....that is a big if....and it also depends how much of an increase we are talking about.
Snoopy....I am really looking forward to next year. I am sure, unless something major ocurs, that HC will be the dem rep, and I do not think she can win. I am no big Rudy fan either, but at this point I am confident that when the time comes, he will win. I wont be overjoyed with Rudy, but he is a far cry better than Hillary
If it passes....that is a big if....and it also depends how much of an increase we are talking about.
Uh, it already passed with strong bipartisan support. Bush veto'ed it. The house is short a few votes on overriding Bush's veto -- the one he used because "poor kids first." The senate has the votes to override.
Sorry Bitter, but it does not have the votes....hello.....if they had the votes for an override, than it would have happened. Once again, making the claim that stopping poor kids from getting insurance is om as long as we stop the evil pelosi is again speaking right from the dems talking points. While I dont like her in general, my point was simply that she does not have the political clout and or power to force this bill through. There has to be a real compromise....and so far the dems have not wanted that. If they simply back off the 35 billion dollar figure, this could be solved and passed very quickly. It is the dems who feel that any compromise is a defeat...not the conseratives
"Passing" does not equate "override a veto." It's still possible that Republicans will see that the public supports the bill as passed.
And as for compromises, Bush is the one who refuses to compromise. The house and the senate came together to pass the bill. One man blocked it. And you blame the Democrats for not compromising? Sorry. You're just plain wrong.
POV, ok make a case.
Don't know if thew evangelical block is anywhere near a sure thing. A large part of that population is getting sick of only have two political concerns placed before them by their leadership. Like many of us there is more to life than the supposed evils of the gay lifestyle and making abortion a crime.
On the last item the British medical journal Lancet did a study of world wide abortion rates. You'll never guess what the effect of legallity had on those rates. Nada,zip, as in the legallity has no effect on the rate of abortion.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I have not see the abortion study you are talking about. Do you have a link?
Here's a news article on the study. Here are the first two paragraphs, with my own emphasis added:
A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.
Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely. Globally, abortion accounts for 13 percent of women’s deaths during pregnancy and childbirth, and there are 31 abortions for every 100 live births, the study said.
The irrelevant pregnancy link was in the article and I didn't realize it would carry over into the post.
Live and learn,
Sorry not while I'm at work. Lancet should be easy to find on the web. I'll work at it when I get home.
Some searching finds me unable to substanciate the abortion study. Perhaps it'll show up with time as the lastest from lancet online is from the middle of the month.
Here we go again. Republicans want bipartisanship, as long as the Democrats do things their way.
For the first time in the history of America. The life expectancy of today's children is less than that of their parents. This is catastrophic. And our infant mortality is equal to that of a third world country. Current U.S. adult life expectancy is down from #1 to #42. And dropping fast. These facts are what is known as EXTINCTION! indicators. These are the early signs of the final phase of the EXTINCTION of the American people.You have to take the profit motive out of health care delivery. The profit motive does not work with health care. Or any other essential public service like police, and fire. The sooner everyone faces this truth. The sooner you will be able to adopt a real solution to the problem. The days of paying for health care out of pocket are at an end. Just like the mob days of paying for protection out of pocket came to an end.HR 676 is the way to go. Single payer Universal National Health Care For All. Medicare for all. Accept no substitutes. The sooner you face this. The sooner you begin to heal the Cancer of private for profit medicine that is destroying this entire society. Other developed countries realized this years ago. It's a no-brainer now. See sickocure.orgMoney, greed, and the profit motive has just decimated health care in America. And killed, and injured millions needlessly. Just for profit. But that is what large amounts of money, greed, and a lust for power always does. No one is immune from this corrupting power. The smart ones know this. And avoid letting them-self be put in compromising positions. But that is easier said. Than done. And very few succeed.Most in the US go into medicine primarily to become wealthy. That is who the medical schools mostly choose. Most of the medical schools faculty are in bed with the drug companies, and others. And like the story of Dr. Faustus. They end up selling their soles. One compromise at a time. Until Lucifer owns them.In medicine. Compromised care means. Injury, disability, and death. It's sad really. But HR 676 can fix this disgrace. Like it has in other developed countries. The only question is. How many more millions will be hurt, injured, and killed. And how many more of your children will die before their time. Before we fix this disgrace of private for profit health care in America.I realize there will be a few people that have what they believe is good health care coverage. Who will want to opt out of a single payer system like HR 676. But let me remind you we rank # 37 in quality of health care for all. Down from #1. Never the less. A few opting out is not a problem. As long as all other Americans are automatically covered at birth through life. Unless they choose to opt out of HR 676. The government takes out 1.4% from your paycheck now for Medicare. All they have to do is substitute for HR 676 what they now take out of your paychecks for private health insurance. Remember, we already spend more on health care than any other country in the world. Right Now. We are being ripped off. And raped.The SCHIP program is a desperately needed program for Americas children. But with the impending EXTINCTION of Americas children. And their current catastrophic health care condition. SCHIP needs to be extended to cover all of Americas children, immediately. Parents should have no hesitations, or financial worries about seeking medical care for their children. Whenever they have any concerns about their children's health. Especially in the richest country in the world. I would submit that any President, or politician that fails to do this for the children. Betrays their most solemn oath to protect the American people. Especially when you consider that all other developed countries have done this. And that we are the richest country in the world.So get on it America. Get it done. You have been doing great over the past several months. Keep it up. And step it up. You have to force it, and take it. It's the right fight, and the right thing to do. Now is the time... Take no prisoners.