Healthcare Passed The House. Now What?

The Senate will most likely pass its own version instead of amending the House bill just passed. Then both versions passed will go to a bi-partisan conference committee where members of both chambers will take parts of both bills and form one joint bill.

Sounds incredibly stupid, tedious, and painfully clickish, but that's how something this historic is done when 535 people and one President all with different ideas on health care try to come together on some kind of consensus.

So, who voted how?

Congressman Jason Almire (D-4) pussied out (yes, I used it), yet Freshman from Erie County Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper (D-3) in a much more contentious district went for it. Altmire said his seat was not his motivation behind his vote, but rather that he thought the House could do better and he wanted to be a part of the process going forward. Oh, and he thought his district was against it. (post)

Was his district against the Employee Free Trade Act while he went out and spoke for it?

Sometimes a politician does things for the good of the common, despite what his conservative district wants; despite his seat (Arlen, are you reading this?).

I also don't understand why not vote for a less than perfect bill now, while it has the steam and the votes, and work on the imperfections later? Why wait for that Perfect Bill that he seems so sure will come?

Others who voted for the bill were Mike Doyle (D) and John Murtha (D). Tim Murphy (R), Bill Shuster (R) and Glenn Thompson (R) voted no.

One Republican voted for the bill--Joseph Cao from Louisiana. When asked what happened, he said he thought he was voting for the Ten Commandments to be etched in stone in every public school building. jk. Really, he voted "to keep taxpayer dollars from funding abortion and to deliver access to affordable health care to the people of Louisiana." (Cao)

Sue Kerr has a good blog about the impact on LGBT people.

The final vote was 220-215.

Opponents say it cuts Medicare--$500 billion. Fact: they are actually cutting the RATE of medicare spending INCREASES. They are not reducing current spending. The feeling is it will reduce supposedly excess funds previously paid to insurance companies and hospitals for artificial profits. So, they are using the savings to help make insurance affordable for working people who don't have it.

So, what will happen in the Senate?


Public Option killer #1--Joe Lieberman. He has already said he will not vote for any bill that has a Public Option. If you don't know, a Public Option would provide a government run plan that would compete with private insurance plans. Liberals very, very, very much want this in the health plan and believe this would in effect, give more people the opportunity for health care coverage.

SENATE MATH LESSON

58 Democrats + 2 Independents who Caucus with them = 60

60 Senators are needed to stop a filibuster, which provides indefinite debate to stop a vote.

If the Senate Democrats want to have a Public Option, then they must have one Republican to vote to stop a filibuster, since Lieberman will encourage a filibuster. (Paging Olympia Snowe... paging GOP Senator Snowe. Please come home to your allegedly progressive roots!)

After that, the Senate Dems will only need 51 Senators to vote for the bill, on final passage.

All of this and a health care bill still will not be signed into law.

HA!

LE

Dear Diary

Cripes.

I wasn't going to do it.

Even look at it.

But when a former sports writer for USA Today turns felon rat blogger, I have to peek.

Just a little.

Okay, maybe read the whole effin thing.

It's the most addicting thing I've read since Dan Brown's The DaVinci Code. I know, I should be embarrassed. But I don't care. When is the last time a politician outed all his friends in a soap-like blog drama?

I don't see Frank Gigliotti penning any kind "tell all" book while working in the Pittsburgh garages. Certainly don't anticipate Vince Fumo coming out with his own blog, "Working Over The Family Farm." Nor can we expect State Representative John Perzel from Philadelphia to write his memoirs while Attorney General Tom Corbett prepares for his Grand Jury trial, sans Bill DeWeese so far.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, then take a look at former Ellwood City State Representative Frank LaGrotta's blog, Politics as (Not) Usual. It's a detailed hemorrhaging of his life as he sees it during Bonusgate. No comments from users, although you can rate it. Just him and his computer.

One of the funniest things I've read so far was an e-mail sent to him by his friend of forty years--Terry Shaffer. What you have to understand about Terry is if you were talking to him, you were talking to Frank. That's how close they were. It's that simple.

Original Message -------

From: tlshaffertlshaffer@zoominternet.net

To: LaGrotta, Frank

Sent: Wednesday, Mar 07 09:30:02 2007

Subject: job

Hope all is going well with your new “job.” Glad Manzo found the money for Jaret to hire Dennis Pietrandrea – although he couldn’t find the money to hire me. So happy. So happy. Your inestimable bulls--t never ceases to amaze me. I have agonized over this for several months. Despite the way I have been treated by people to whom I was loyal for fifteen years, I have chosen to keep my mouth shut.But this last round of effluvium has pushed me over the edge. Tell Mr. Manzo that the Attorney General will be looking at the way leadership awards its contracts to DO employees. And don’t worry about where you’ll be staying for the next couple years. You’ll be in jail. I’ve had enough. Go f--k yourself.

I ignored both the email and the person who sent it.

It was a grave mistake.

Because Terry Shaffer did exactly what he said he was going to do.

That is the understatement of the decade.

All I can think of while reading this excerpt and really the whole blog is imagining Frank with a steel cage around his head in all these scenarios from his back surgeries.

In the back seat of the State Attorney General agents' car being interrogated; in front of the Grand Jury; at Josh Genova's house confused while the wife dashes out to the bank; reading the above e-mail; at K-mart with his sister calling Terry Shaffer; and sitting at Station Square with Bill DeWeese and Mike Manzo. I imagine him writing now like this in the "old Dick Cheney bunker" as he indicates on his blog, oiling up the bars.

I can see very legit points of Frank's explanations on messing around on e-mails, and Terry being mad he didn't get a job with the caucus, but let's be honest--

1. After 40 years of service to Frank, and 20 years in the State House, Frank couldn't find some job for Terry? Anywhere in Lawrence County? Anywhere in the Caucus? Couldn't have pulled some strings? We know how it works . . . come on.

2. After 40 years, or however long, the Democratic caucus couldn't find some job for Terry until retirement? We know how it works . . . COME ON! The Governor hired former State Representative Dan Surra from Elk County last year during the supposed pay freeze. And the caucus hired Frank as an advisor. Really, this IS the point. I'm reading in between the lines here, but I'm guessing Terry had like only a few years until retirement with the state. And if you retire with the state, it's the jackpot. Might even be worth threatening a 40-year friendship, losing your home, and wife over. Pension, doctors, and prescriptions!

The one problem, however, with the whole thing is this . . . in Frank's own testimony, he paid his Aunt and sister with state funds to archive 20 years of his work over 6 months, before his successor Jarret Gibbons took office. And in the end, he decided NOT to archive half of it and shred the rest; NOT to archive a third of it and shred the rest; BUT to SHRED ALL of it.
At the very least, this puts up red flags.

Just a thought.

Maybe Tom Corbett should blog about his bonusgate investigations and his run for Governor. It would make him wildly popular! Possibly skirt the line of unethical. Now that the Republicans have fed Perzel to him, a continuation of Bonusgate of sorts, it will enable Corbett to say he went through both chambers and did his due diligence.

Ahhh, a soap opera indeed.

LE

Some Thoughts, Post-Election

With about 50,000 votes, 98% precincts reporting, Luke wins--55.08%

In this election, we have supervoters, coming out in rain, tsunamis, tornadoes, snow, etc. And supervoters should have overwhelmingly voted for Luke.

And if a supervoter strayed a bit over to another candidate, it should have been far and few between. And still others might not have showed up. I would venture a guess as to why, but I will leave that up to you.

In the 2005 General, close to 60,000 voters showed up and elected Bob O'Connor 67%. Joe Weinroth (R--remember, his mom gave him $200 for his war chest); Titus North (Gre); David Tessitor (Abo?????); and Jay Ressler (Soc) were the other candidates in case your memory escapes you.

But with numbers like 25.49% for Dok and 19.42% for Acklin, Luke is not too popular among his biggest, most reliable supporters.

A shameful showing for the Mayor.

Maybe now he will update his website.



LE

Declaration of Independents

We have two "Independents" running in the mayoral election in the city of Pittsburgh right now, in case you haven't heard.

Kevin Acklin, the guy who is a shell of himself just a few months ago and who has lots of ultra-conservative Rick Santorum ties.

And

Franco Dok Harris, a former college Republican and son of outspoken Democratic activist and former Steeler Franco Harris.

Why they chose to run as Independents, well, I couldn't really tell you why. Inclusivity, putting party politics aside, "independent leadership?" Who knows? They never really said.

Then we have our favorite Pennsylvania Independent, Arlen Specter, who was so afraid to lose his independent seat that he was willing to change from an R to a D. But do not misunderstand, he IS an Independent, and always will be. He IS NOT a career politician, thirty-odd years into the job. Got it?

That's what VP Joe Biden said to a less-than-enthused and somewhat sparse crowd at the Democrats' Allegheny County Kennedy Lawrence Dinner. To eat asparagus and shrimp OR to vote Specter in, that is the question. If hard-core Dems aren't buying the Specter arguments you're selling now Joe, let alone staying home to eat leftovers, then I'm afraid Arlen may have lost them.

On a side note, it is not time for Klein . . . srsly.

Anywho, back to Independents.

A larger question gets back to this--every frickin' week, there is some article about those pesky independent voters who are ticked at the Obama administration over something or another they did, something they said they were going to do and actually did.

This is not any new thing. The Bush administration had the same problem back in the day. The swing vote of the Independents went to Bush, who won and over eight years, Bush and those guys did EXACTLY what they said they were going to do--cut taxes for the wealthy, cut social programs, and tried to privatize social security. And the Independents went bananas. - and not a little bit. A lot. It was like they thought, "where does Bush get off doing what he said he would do. That's not why we voted for him!"

So with Obama, he wins a large part of those last minute undecided Independents, those swing voters. And now they are pissed at him. What did he do? Exactly what he said he would do--ohhhh, dramatic healthcare reform, aggressive economic stimulus package and expanding the Afghanistan war.

There are two kinds of Independents: the first kind are those who are truly independents--they lean 70-80% to a party but totally disgree on one major issue that prohibits them from joining that party, so they become Independents. They are well-informed and vote. I respect and salute them.

I'm really talking about those idiot "independent" fence-sitters. You know the ones. Know nothing. Go on gut-feelings. Get all their information from the television, don't read the newspaper, then shut down a week before the election. You could argue straight party voters are just as poorly informed as these independent voters, relying on the party telling them how to vote. But party voters are not the decisive swing votes who actually determine the winner. Yet somehow they go on wreaking havoc, administration after administration, causing policies to fail, sometimes for the good, sometimes not so good.

So, these Independents base their last minute voting strategies on nonsense, a feeling, a sense, an expectation that no one person or administration can live up to. After the guy they vote for wins, these so-called "independents" wake up from their drunken stupor and ask themselves, who have I voted for? Would these Independents every truly be satisfied? In the end, do they even know what they want government to do? If not, why do they bother voting at all?

LE

When The Saints Go Marching In

In a church social hall in Lawrenceville, about 250 people from all parts of Pittsburgh showed up to support keeping open four branches of the Carnegie Library system--Lawrenceville, Hazelwood, West End and Beechview.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl emceed the whole event. State Representative Chelsa Wagner, City Council member Patrick Dowd, and State Senator Jim Ferlo were all present. Mayoral candidates Kevin Acklin and Dok Harris were also there, but asked no questions and offered no suggestions.

An awkward moment came when Luke handed over the mic to his appointee to the board, Terri Wolfe, to explain why she voted "yes" on closing the branches. Luke commented that he did not talk to Wolfe ahead of time on her decision to vote yes for the closures, implying it was her decision alone. *Need I point out Luke's history of appointees fired over voting counter to what Luke wanted.

Wolfe explained she is a big believer in not spending money you [Carnegie Library] don't have.

The restless crowd wasn't satisfied.

They questioned why there was money for sports teams, development for the Northshore, Casinos, and the G20, but not for libraries. They wondered out loud why we advertised Pittsburgh as such an economic success story, virtually untouched by the recession as the city administration offered in every piece of literature around the world, yet now, we're suddenly in tough times.

Many residents were furious that their library in Hazelwood was being closed--the last major public institution remaining--the pool and the school closed last year and their only grocery store closed this year. One resident spoke to the possibility of officials focusing on poor neighborhoods to shut down public facilities in hard times instead of wealthier neighborhoods that have better access to facilities in other neighborhoods.

The idea of this meeting was to ask residents to propose ideas on saving the branches.

Some ideas were a $2.00 yearly library membership fee; closing the central branch in Oakland; limiting hours more; limiting programs; create an endowment; and corporate sponsorship of libraries.

Interestingly, Wagner chimed up three-quarters of the way through and announced that there may be funding available to keep all four branches open for a year while they have that time to come up with a plan, even though they (the library) seemed to indicate they knew this was coming for a long while. Nothing like waiting until the last minute. Why Wagner announced this towards the end is anyone's guess.

One of the last speakers walked towards the mic carrying a trumpet under his arm. I don't know about you, but when a speaker brings props to an open mic, I suspect trouble. He spoke about all the students he mentored at the Hazelwood library, especially with music. A sentiment that resonated with many speakers, the Hazelwood library is a chance where many students work with computers and books, a luxury that they simply do not have at home. He then went on to play, "When The Saints Go Marching In."

Weiners Anyone?

I suppose I should write something before I'm taken off of some blog lists . . .

Something occurred to me the other day while I was neglecting my blog and watching the new fall line up--there is a US Representative Weiner [pronounced "weener" thanks to a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article with a pronunciation guide with his name] from New York. I thought of all of the possible combinations of bill sponsorships and future acts this guy could get out of his teenie weenie name.

The Blunt Weiner Bill
The Weiner Bean Bill
The Berry Weiner Bill
The Bishop Weiner Bill
The Bright Weiner Bill
The Austria Weiner Act
The Brown Weiner Bill
The Brown Brown Weiner Act
The Brown Brown Brown-Waite Weiner Bill
The Weiner Buyer Bill
The Weiner Camp Bill
The Weiner Chu Bill
The Clay Weiner Bill
The Christian-Christensen Weiner Bill
The Weiner Cummings Bill
The Weiner Dent Bill
The Dicks Weiner Act
The Dingell Weiner Bill
The Fudge Weiner Bill
The Green Weiner Bill
The Green Green Weiner Bill
The Weiner Hunter Bill
The Israel Weiner Act
The Johnson Weiner Bill
The Johnson Johnson Johnson Johnson Weiner Act
The Kind Weiner Bill
The King Weiner Bill
The King King Weiner Bill
The Kind King Weiner Bill
The Obey Weiner Bill
The Weiner Wamp Bill
The Wolf Weiner Bill
The Young Weiner Bill
The Young Young Weiner Bill
The Young Wolf Weiner Bill
The Dicks Dingell Weiner Bill


Some others that also occurred to me:

The Young Brown Wolf Bill
The Young King Bill
The Young Israel King Bill
The Hunter Green Bill
The Dingell Dent Bill


*****

LE

It's A Mad, Mad, Mad Supreme Court (and PA Legislature)

Back in March of this year, our Supreme Court Justices heard a case of a little non-profit, Citizens United, who produced an anti-Hillary video for her presidential bid in 2008 called "Hillary: The Movie." It never did what it was designed to do because the Federal Election Commission (FEC) went bananas because the non-profit group is incorporated and receives a small amount of corporate money.

The Justices argued somewhat as to whether or not the regulations would apply to non-profits producing campaign materials. Then they agreed to broaden the issue and focus on whether or not all corporations (unions would be included as well) had a right to spend freely like individuals to elect or defeat candidates.

This unprecedented move by the Justices to rehear an argument, to broaden the argument instead of narrowly ruling on it, was pressed by Theodore Olson, Solicitor General under President George W. Bush and who represents Citizens United. With the court stacked in favor of abolishing the 102-year old ban, corporate and union agendas will be the new way of controlling elections and the field of candidates.

Incidentally, this case greeted newly -appointed Justice Sonia Sotomayor this month when new arguments started. Listening to the arguments of both sides were Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.). I can't imagine what both men are feeling.

Imagine a candidate running as the Wal-mart Candidate or the FedEx Candidate.

With unions, we already have a fair amount of candidates who are endorsed by labor PACs but imagine only an SEIU Candidate, or a PSEA Candidate.

Like the Internet with its specialty sites and cookies, these candidates will be too specific for the population at large--not diverse enough to persuade a majority of voters to vote for them.

However, the Incumbency Rate will increase (or maybe decrease, depending upon how they vote), because corporations and unions will want winners with a proven track record.

And if a Corporate/Union-Sponsored candidate is elected, who are they beholden to? The voters, or the corporation/union who funded their campaign?

How far are we going to allow special interests to dominate our government?

If the elected official thinks dealing with their fellow colleagues is going to be difficult . . .

*****

Speaking of madness and difficult colleagues . . .

Governor Ed Rendell in a miracle never seen before in his seven budget cycles, might actually not get everything he wants in his budget. But we really don't know that for sure.

What I do know is he needs a personal miracle. Yes, he has three caucuses agreeing to this mystery Budget, but the fourth one is shaking their heads.

Who is this mysterious caucus? Those pesky Senate Republicans? Nope.

It's the forgotten House Republicans, not voting for any Budget with increased spending and taxes.

Rendell needs 102 votes to pass the Budget in the House. There are 104 Democrats. He must have all Democrats in line to vote for the Budget in order for it to pass because no Republicans will vote for it.

We shall see.

LE