Senate advances SCHIP legislation.
Defying a veto threat from President Bush, the Senate just defeated a cloture motion on the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), by a vote of 69-30. The Roll call vote is here. Passage of the bill will occur shortly. During the debate, Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), one of the 18 Republican senators to vote for the compromise legislation, excoriated the White House for holding the bill “hostage.” Roberts noted that Bush has nothing to offer himself:
I have yet to see a plan from the administration that can actually pass the Congress. In fact, I have yet to see an actual plan from the administration. I have yet to see bullet points from the administration. I have yet to see any plan that can be articulated in some fashion to sell to the American public, or to the members of this body. We don’t even have an acronym!
UPDATE: The National Review blog complains Roberts is “making matters much worse for conservatives right now” by “excoriating President Bush.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
58 Responses to “Senate advances SCHIP legislation.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Uh-oh….Chimpy’s not going to be happy about this one… ^_^
September 27th, 2007 at 2:15 pmWe don’t even have an acronym!
Usually, that’s the first thing they make up. The “cuter” or “patriot-er”, the better.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:15 pmBeing vacant never stopped him before.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:16 pmIsnt this that bill that targets smokers and taxes the shit out of them… the way the british over taxed the American colonies for tea? Or is that a different bill?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:20 pmBARTLEBEE
Isn’t it amazing how the senate gets all these “domestic†bills passed, but cannot seem to get just ONE bill on the war passed?
No?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:20 pmAt least it’s something.
Personally, I hope Dubbie’s so mad he pees himself. >:oP
September 27th, 2007 at 2:23 pmclutch the pearls Patty.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:23 pmApparently the Democrats made some sort of deal with the republicans to get all their domestic agenda’s passed in exchange for free reign to the President to wage war.
Comment by BARTLEBEE
Judging from the debates last night very few of the democrats are really going to stop the war… even after 2009…
September 27th, 2007 at 2:23 pmlet’s hang out here and see how many dittoheads show up to blast Pat Roberts for breaking ranks - I’m betting on 0.00 - any takers?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:24 pmFor the sake of reason people listen to Bartlebee DONT vote for the DNC … I am voting Ron Paul… if you cant must enough acceptance for Ron Paul then at least vote for Kucinich…
September 27th, 2007 at 2:27 pmI thought the vote was for cloture, not the vote on the bill. It is being debated now. Not sure if the vote count will be different, however.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:29 pmVoting for Ron Paul would be a mistake. The man is a Libertarian who hates government worse than the neocons. Sure, he makes sense on Iraq, but that’s because he is an isolationist.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:29 pm9 - That assumes the Cheerleader Prince actually cares about something besides strutting around, biking, clearing brush, and fantasizing about his government-subsidized retirement. I for one have never seen him do/say anything to indicate he does.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:29 pmThe media has already spoken, it will be Mitt Romney losing to Hillary Clinton in 2008. That way everyone will feel great, but nothing will actually change.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:30 pmWoah… Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich??? That is a pretty wide spectrum on the politic-meter
I say - GORE IN ‘08
September 27th, 2007 at 2:35 pmGod Bless this old bootlicking, rubberneck for doing the right thing for once. Hail to the Senators who got it right.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:38 pmYikes, Krazny - I thought it was Ghouliani v. Hillary.
Not that he’s any better or anything…. :o/
September 27th, 2007 at 2:39 pmIsnt this that bill that targets smokers and taxes the shit out of them… the way the british over taxed the American colonies for tea? Or is that a different bill?
Comment by ggibson1 — September 27, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
No. This is really nothing like the tea tax. Americans have representation to go with their taxation, and our representatives decided that the health care of poor children is more valuable than smokers saving money on cancer sticks. If the smokers they don’t like it, they can quit!
September 27th, 2007 at 2:42 pm22 - with #’s of smokers in steady decline, it’s just not a good horse to hook a revenue wagon to. tax gas, re-tax the billionaires, and we’ll have more than enough to go around.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:44 pmThe media has already spoken, it will be Mitt Romney losing to Hillary Clinton in 2008. That way everyone will feel great, but nothing will actually change.
Comment by Krazny
September 27th, 2007 at 2:45 pmThis is exactly what I am afraid of… the corporate MSM has the most corporate friendly candidate on the dems side picked out for us. She would be for more of the same. There are too many out there, whether they are too busy with their life or just plain stupid actually believe that if the media says it is so, it is so.
In Cleveland and Cuyahoga County, “sin tax” has paid for several public facilities (Browns Stadium) that smokers can’t even use.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:48 pmThe increased taxation is out of hand. Every few years cigarette tax gets raised another 40 cents or so a pack.
If it were ground beef, people would care. But it’s cigarettes, so people say, “just quit.” Just because the product has a more negative effect (although ground beef really isn’t too good for you), it shouldn’t be a factor in how much in taxes you should have to pay.
If the majority of people think SCHIP is a good idea, then a majority of people should help pay for it.
Isn’t it amazing how the senate gets all these “domestic†bills passed, but cannot seem to get just ONE bill on the war passed?
Comment by BARTLEBEE
September 27th, 2007 at 2:54 pmI am going to say that hideous vote yesterday,to use military instruments on Iran gave the public a message as to where they stand on the issue of war.
We desperately need a new congress.
Voting for Ron Paul would be a mistake. The man is a Libertarian who hates government worse than the neocons. Sure, he makes sense on Iraq, but that’s because he is an isolationist.
Comment by Great Frybread King
Look up the difference on Google between “isolationist” and “non-intervention” an isolationist is like a quaker or amish. Nonintervention means to mind your own business… and if someone else doesnt mind their business and attacks you THEN you attack THEM… under the order of Congress.
Wanting to solve problems without the government first is a good idea. Many of the government “solutions” seem to be a bunch of bandaid crap thought up by people who were not experts in their fields but rather D.C. types… in the private world engineer type experts are often (not always) allowed to design the solutions which often (not always) leads to success. So giving the private sector a shot at solving these issues could be the way to go … you can always fall back to the government as a default.
Take for example the Internet… it is something in the private sector that could be used to coordinate large amounts of people to conduct the same duties that are done by government agencies… except a computer network is not bribable… Coordinating large numbers of people was only possible under the great power of a central government or a large corporation… until the Internet. The Internet is us. Are WE going to be bribed? If the W3C can maintain the HTML standard… and ICANN maintain the Internets naming system… then why not a Dept of Education? or a Dept of Whatever?
There is more than one way to skin a cat.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:54 pmIf that’s the case, maybe the smokers, disquised as Indians, will gather and throw cartons of cigarettes into the harbor.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:55 pmI say - GORE IN ‘08
Comment by Rich Santoro
I used to also… but I have given up on thinking he might be in…
September 27th, 2007 at 2:55 pmFor God’s sake, for everyone thinking of voting for a Dem in next year’s election, please, please reconsider. We have to work with what we have, and you can’t convince me that any Dem would be worse than Romney, Giuliani or even Thompson. We have to work within the system, which is, for better or worse, a 2-party system - there’s absolutely no way a Ron Paul is going to win (and God help us if he did - GFK at #16 is absolutely correct; the man is a nightmare). Look what happened in 2000 - not that I blame Nader, and people certainly have a right to vote for whom they want, but the fact of the matter is that he did take votes away from Gore and cost us the election, which in turn has led to 7 years of absolute hell, death, destruction and misery. None of the Dem candidates is perfect, but any of them would be a HELL of a lot better than the alternatives. Do we want to make the same mistake again?
I know we’re disappointed (to the point of despair), but do we really want a President Giuliani? Because that’s what I’m afraid will happen if people start voting for a third-party candidate in protest…
JMHO…
September 27th, 2007 at 2:56 pmCarol
If that’s the case, maybe the smokers, disquised as Indians, will gather and throw cartons of cigarettes into the harbor.
Comment by TheToonGuy
Thats what I was thinking ) … but then again that is like forcing their choice for them then isnt it?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:56 pmIf that’s the case, maybe the smokers, disquised as Indians, will gather and throw cartons of cigarettes into the harbor.
Comment by TheToonGuy — September 27, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Afterwards, with the realization they are in serious need of a nicotine fix, they will jump into the harbor to fetch their cigarettes back.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:03 pmWilco-
I started making my own smokes 6 years ago. The supplies are all in a different tax classification: “J”, and so far the cost has not increased a bit. Very high quality supplies are available on the cheap, and I’ve no doubt saved thousands of dollars, besides enjoying the idea I’m skirting those ridiculous “sin taxes”.
D&R is a top-shelf supplier out of NC, and you can order up on their website. I’d been smoking American Spirit - very good, but what I make now is way better, beyond gourmet, and they cost me about $1.25 a pack to make (for king size, filter cigs)
Get on the make-your-own bandwagon, and stick it to the man.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:05 pmHillary, Obama, & Edwards basically said that they would not pull out all the troops before 2013. I will NOT vote for any of them. Kucinich or Green Party.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:05 pmThe only issue I have with this bill is funding being so tied to cigarette taxes, and here’s why:
It makes no sense to make funding for something this important directly tied to something you want people to stop doing. And not only do want people to stop doing it, you actually have campaigns encouraging them to stop it.
What happens when people stop smoking like they want? What happens when these people start to die off? What happens when people stop smoking because of the cost?
What happens is that there will be huge fluctuations in income for the program and, in all likelihood, a major shortfall at some point.
It just seems like a stupid way to pay for it. Like someone else posted — remove Bush’s tax cuts for the top 1% of 1% — or, better yet, defund action in Iraq — and there’d be PLENTY of consistent, reliable income for the program.
.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:09 pmtombaker,
September 27th, 2007 at 3:09 pmI’m no longer a smoker. There are ways of getting out of the high taxes, yes. Making your own is apparently one way. Ordering online from reservations or from overseas is another (Four years ago, I was paying $15 for a carton of Marlboros from Switzerland).
My point is that when you’re paying $4/pack now or however much, and 75% of that is taxes, then there is something seriously wrong.
Smokers get beaten on enough already. They’re societal outcasts at this point. They shouldn’t be ridiculously overtaxed on top of it.
Do they have the votes to override a veto?
September 27th, 2007 at 3:14 pmThe Republicans are going to hype this very hard. They will use their support for SCHIP to generate lots of smoke and noise to obscure how obstructive they are being about every other good thing the Democrats are trying to accomplish.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:16 pmlefty,
September 27th, 2007 at 3:20 pmthey need 67 votes to override a veto.
So the Senate is veto-proof, how about the House?
September 27th, 2007 at 3:20 pmlefty sez:
265-159 (just a hair short of veto-proof, unfortunately…)
September 27th, 2007 at 3:24 pmHad Enough @ 26,
I think the language you refer to was taken out of that awful thing.
Bartlebee,
I hate it too, but I don’t think it authorized military action. Now, I sure don’t trust Bush to give a whit what the actual language says since Nancy’s given him a green light instead of a table.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:25 pmSorry folks, but if you think that whoever is elected President will be able to pull out our troops from Iraq immediately after taking office, you’re smoking my counties most lucrative crop, not cigarettes.
One thing Bush has accomplished is that we will have combat troops in Iraq for a minimum of five years (and it’ll probably be 10-15 years) once Commander Codpiece goes back to clearing brush.
The pressure from big money corporations works on both sides of the aisles, and all the promises made by candidates that “we’ll begin troop withdrawls immediately” are nothing more than words.
Bush and Cheney know this, that’s why the invaded in the first place. They have secured oil for their donors and they have secured access to natural gas resources as well.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:40 pmshould read my county’s
September 27th, 2007 at 3:41 pmI’ll believe it when I see 67 votes overriding the chymperatic veto.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:45 pmThe National Review blog complains Roberts is “making matters much worse for conservatives right now†by “excoriating President Bush.â€
Oh poor babies. Things couldn’t possibly get much worse for conservatives, and it has nothing to do with Roberts or any other Republic who is now “seeing the light” because they see their chances of being re-elected going down the drain. What it does have to do with is the Bush Crime Family and the lemming Republicans who either aren’t running for re-election in 2008 or who don’t care if they are re-elected.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:48 pmJudging from the debates last night very few of the democrats are really going to stop the war… even after 2009…
Comment by ggibson1 — September 27, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
I’m pretty sure that most of the Dem candidates for president want to end the Iraq war. Given the present balance of forces in the House and Senate, I don’t think it is politically reasonable to expect them to say so, or, that Democrats will be able to pull it off under present conditions. Saying otherwise would raise expectations to unreasonable levels and only lead to frustration just like after the last Congressional elections.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:57 pmExecuting a safe military withdrawal from a theatre of war is, most military experts say, one of the most difficult if not the most difficult maneuver an army can undertake. If Bush could find a compliant general to stage a “surge”, I’m confident our next president (hopefully a Democrat) will be able to find a good American general to get us out of there, in say, three to six months. I’m hoping of course.
Kucinich said in the debate that he would have the troops out by April 2007! He then admitted that he got overexcited. I’m afraid HumboldtPrimo is right and it will propbably be President Hillary and some troops will be there fifteen years. But a hell of a lot fewer troops and in a less offensive role than if a Republican got in.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:58 pmIf we had universal single-payer healthcare———there would be no need to come up with extra money for children—–everyone is covered and it SAVES us $250 billion every year, administratively alone.
Our HHS Secretary Leavitt was asked Sunday by Wolf Blitzer why Bush was just now talking about healthcare after 6 2/3rd years. Leavitt said “Issues ripen and mature”.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:04 pmNo, they passed the cloture motion. Cloture means you end debate and move on to the vote. We are really living on the Bizarro Planet when filibusters are the norm and cloture — the end of debate, meaning we actually get to vote on the bill — is such an unaccustomed event that we can’t even remember which is which any more!
September 27th, 2007 at 4:11 pmI hate it too, but I don’t think it authorized military action.
Comment by Peter C — September 27, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
I aggree with you. This is just like the MoveOn.org vote: pure political theatre. Not that Cheney and his puppet wouldn’t like to bomb Iran but Reid and Pelosi need the votes of “so-called” moderate Republicans to pass important domestic legislation. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that if that means playing Joe (a*hole) Liebermann for a fool, so be it!
September 27th, 2007 at 4:21 pmJudging from the debates last night very few of the democrats are really going to stop the war… even after 2009…
Comment by ggibson1
You must have been watching a different debate than everyone else. John Edwards said that “if what Petraeus says is right and there are 100,000 troops in Iraq in 2009, I would immediately bring home 40-50,000 and then bring home the rest in 2-3 months.” He said he would only leave enough troops in Iraq to protect the embassy and to protect humanitarian workers.
Also, Dennis Kucinich would bring all the troops home the day he took office.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:48 pmKucinich said he’d go back in time and bring the troops home.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:56 pmKucinich said April 2007 when he meant April 2009. He got overexcited.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:08 pmggibson: “Isnt this that bill that targets smokers and taxes the shit out of them… the way the british over taxed the American colonies for tea? Or is that a different bill?”
There is a common misconception about the nature of the Boston Tea party. It wasn’t about an increase in taxes. It was about a special tax BREAK for the East India company. The king’s people cut taxes for just the one company and the domestic tea importers felt that this gave a favored corporation an unfair competitive advantage.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:33 pmJudging from the debates last night very few of the democrats are really going to stop the war… even after 2009…
Comment by ggibson1 — September 27, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
Which is why I am not voiting for the DNC candidate next year.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — September 27, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
This is exactly what the Repubs are hoping for. Block all legislative efforts by Dems and convince voters with a shallow understanding of politics to either not vote at all or not vote for the Democrat. Nice going guys. Perfect tools.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:35 pmUncle Ho: “Hillary, Obama, & Edwards basically said that they would not pull out all the troops before 2013. I will NOT vote for any of them. Kucinich or Green Party.”
They said nothing of the sort. Review the tape. This kind of thinking is exactly how we got Bush in the first place. You people are simply crazy.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:38 pmBart: “What we need to do now is stand up a solid 3rd party candidate early and throw all support behind him\her.
How about George Clooney?”
Again, this is exactly how we got Bush in the first place. And, I don’t want to burst your bubble, but George Clooney says he’ll be voting for the Democrat no matter who is nominated.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:40 pmRon Paul thinks we should get out of Iraq. Good for him. He also thinks it would be better if we didn’t have Social Security, Medicare, public libraries, public national parks, food stamps, the VA, the public school system, the environmental protection agency, any public works projects and any regulations on corporations. He thinks corporations are too regulated!!!!
Ron Paul doesn’t like the idea of public financing of elections or regulating the media.
Our libertarian friends here would like to gloss over all of these facts about Ron Paul’s libertarian philosophy and concentrate on his opposition to the war. But, let’s not forget the core libertarian philosophy which is the most corporate-friendly philosophy in politics today.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:48 pmI hate to be such a party pooper on this Libertarian thing, but I’ve got a major hardspot for this thinking.
The modern libertarian movement, as concocted by a bunch of wealthy corporate industrialists in the 70’s, is a classic “bait and switch” applied to political philosophy. Bait with individual freedom and switch to unfettered, unregulated corporate capitalism. Wealthy corporatists were concerned with the public’s progressive activism in the 60’s, so they had to figure out a way to convince working class Americans that their interests were the same as the interests of the wealthy. They did this by concentrating on emotional issues like drugs and guns. This convinced many working class people, mainly men, that libertarian philosophy would lead to more freedom, but all it led to was more power for large corporations. It’s an insidious trick played on working class Americans and I hope people will begin to see it for what it is.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:58 pmI guess I should keep my opinions about libertarianism to myself. Looks like they pretty much shut down this thread. But really, libertarians professing anger that children were not going to get government help for healthcare was too ironic for me to ignore. It just makes me think that some libertarians don’t understand what their own philosophy is all about, or worse, they do, and they’re being intellectually dishonest.
September 27th, 2007 at 8:16 pmI guess I should keep my opinions about libertarianism to myself. Looks like they pretty much shut down this thread. But really, libertarians professing anger that children were not going to get government help for healthcare was too ironic for me to ignore. It just makes me think that some libertarians don’t understand what their own philosophy is all about, or worse, they do, and they’re being intellectually dishonest.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
Maybe SOME people should stop thinking in terms of “teams”. This isnt football… this is our government. I dont care if a person is from the Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats, Satans Party… it is about what type of leadership THAT person will bring.
a PLAN should be put together to solve our biggest problems… Plans by engineer minded people… not by politicians and lobbyists… ALL plans should start off asking how can we solve this problem WITHOUT government because any time the Feds get their hands on a problem it becomes a chance to be bribed and they seem all too happy to use it that way… or even worse they do like the democrats are now and use it to force their self righteous beliefs on others about smoking…
IF we try to solve the problem without government and it fails OR we do not have time to let things play out like that THEN I would be fine with the government taking over temporarily to solve the issue… Take Universal Health Care for example.. we could stop the Insurance companies and drug companies from bribing Congress for special treatment and let a true market solution by WE THE PEOPLE to solve it BUT people are suffering right now… so if we can get the government to move against the bad actors and setup a temporary single payer plan until we can figure out how to get it out into the private sector without the Insurance companies taking over again then so be it.
This isnt a game and it isnt an either or proposition. All incompassing solutions often are complex and require the system to morph over time to get to the desired end goal… I know this works because I have done it for years in coming up with very complex solutions for companies/government computer systems that much morph over time instead of being an all or nothing solution…
September 28th, 2007 at 4:55 pm