Shoebox and Birdman have been having a spirited debate on the future of PlaceboCare. While I hope that Birdman is right that this can still be scuttled, I’m of even a more sour opinion than Shoebox. Allow me to put in my 2-cents’ worth:
- There are actually three versions of PlaceboCare out there: the version that passed the Senate on a party-line vote (the hijacked H.R. 3950), lacking any sort of public option but financing abortion-on-demand; the version that barely passed the House (H.R. 3962), lacking financing for abortion-on-demand but having a public option; and H.R. 3200, still lurking in the shadows and having both the public option and financing for abortion-on-demand. Of the three, only H.R. 3200 and a completely-unamended version of H.R. 3950 would not have to go through a 60-vote test in the Senate.
- The limited debate on H.R. 3950 strongly suggests that there would be 50 votes (plus Biden) in the Senate for H.R. 3200.
- If Nancy Pelosi can get a majority to support an nearly-unchanged (from the Senate-hijacked) version of H.R. 3950 (or even a completely-unchanged version), it is likely that she would also be able to get a majority for H.R. 3200. After all, the bigger stumbling block in the House has been abortion-on-demand funding.
- If Scott Brown pulls off the upset in Massachusetts and wins next month’s special election to permanently fill Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat (and if the ‘Rats seat him), the Democrats would not be able to get to 60 votes for either an amended H.R. 3950 or a Senate-considered H.R. 3962 (at least without the defection of one of the Maine Wonder Twins).
- As Shoebox said, Pelosi doesn’t much care about losing 40 ‘Rats, especially if they’re
BlueLap Dogs. I’ll add to that by saying Harry Reid and company aren’t at all worried about losing a majority in the Senate. Indeed, given the lack of NRSC/NRC support for Brown, I have my doubts about the Republicans’ desire to pick up even one net seat in 2010. - However, I disagree with Shoebox that just “anything” will mollify the moonbats’ anger that full-out Communism hasn’t broken out yet. If the Dems lose control of the House in 2010, it will be in large part because the ‘bats stayed home to protest “nothing” being done, much like how the Republicans lost control in 2006. That is the threat that Pelosi will respond to.
Damn, I hope I’m wrong. I REALLY hope I’m wrong.
One disagreement. If the Rats take it on the chin in ’10 it will have nothing to do with the far left. It will have everything to do with the stupor having worn away from the Americans that ignorantly bought the “hopey change” thing and now understand that “change” does not always translate to “improvement!”
Lot of “ifs” there, but hopeful ifs, to be sure. And if the ifs don’t pan out and it gets to Obama’s desk, there ought to be some lawsuits or citizen action coming on the unconstitutionality of the bill, one would hope.