Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

JohnSJ

(98,883 posts)
79. It was a very brief window, and that some continue to not realize that only displays their
Sat Jun 25, 2022, 06:39 PM
Jun 2022

ignorance.

The passage of what it took to get the ACA through is a perfect example:

The U.S. House of Representatives was safely Democratic as a result of the Nov. 4, 2008, elections by a margin of 257 – 199; the Democrats had gained 21 seats from the 2006-07 Congress. The real interesting ACA political dynamics began during the November 2008 U.S. Senate elections.

Going into the 2008 elections, the Senate consisted of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and two Independents (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) who caucused with the Democrats. When the smoke cleared from those elections, the Democrats picked up eight seats to increase their majority to 57-41 (although Democrat Al Franken’s recount victory was not official until July 7). With the two Independents, the Democrats were one vote shy of the supermajority magic number of 60 they needed to ward off any filibuster attempts and move forward with broad healthcare reform legislation.

But on April 28, 2009, the dynamics changed when Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Spector changed parties, giving Senate Democrats that coveted 60th vote.
Now the Democrats had a safe majority in the House and a filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 in the Senate. That scenario lasted only four months before fate intervened. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died on August 25, 2009, leaving the Democrats, once again, with 59 seats (counting the two Independents). Exactly one month later, on September 25, Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed interim senator from Massachusetts to serve until the special election set for January 19, 2010 – once again giving the Democrats that 60th vote. But the intrigue was just beginning.

There didn’t seem to be an urgent need for Democrats to reconcile both bills immediately, because the Massachusetts special election (scheduled for January 19, 2010) was almost certain to fall to the Democrat, Attorney General Martha Coakley. After all, no Republican had been elected to the U.S. Senate from the Bay State since Edward Brooke in 1972 – 38 years before! But in yet another twist of fate, Republican Scott Brown ran his campaign as the 41st senator against ObamaCare and shocked nearly everyone by winning the special election by 110,000 votes.
That left House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama in a dilemma. Everyone assumed that the Christmas Eve 2009 Senate bill would be tweaked considerably to conform more with the House bill passed two months previously. But now that strategy wouldn’t work, because the Democrats no longer had the 60th vote in the Senate to end debate. What to do? They decided to have the House take up the identical bill that the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. It passed on March 21, 2010, by a 219 – 212 vote. This time, no Republicans came on board, and 34 Democrats voted against. President Obama signed the ACA legislation two days later on March 23.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/physiciansfoundation/2014/03/26/a-look-back-at-how-the-president-was-able-to-sign-obamacare-into-law-four-years-ago/?sh=6caf0d19526b

In addition, the reason a public option could not be included was because there were Democrats who refused to vote for it if it was included in the bill. Nelson in Florida, Nelson in Nebraska, Blanch Lincoln, Lieberman, Bayh, Pyror.

It came down to getting something, or have nothing.

For those Monday morning quarter backs who find it so easy to "blame the Democrats" for NOT codifying Roe, they conveniently forget the facts, and as you pointed out, not all the Democratic Senators at the time were pro-choice, and that Roe had been established by the Supreme Court.

The fact that todays SC not only retracted what had been established by the court for over 50 years, all of trump's SC appointments, except barret, said under oath they would honor stare decisis, was a complete LIE, and slap in the face of precedent of the SC.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Briahna Joy Gray really thinks the president can single-handedly codify something? TwilightZone Jun 2022 #1
Sen. Warren and Smith believe he can MichMan Jun 2022 #2
Maybe the 2 senators should be lobbying their fellows mcar Jun 2022 #4
+1 betsuni Jun 2022 #9
+1 sheshe2 Jun 2022 #44
This. nt PunkinPi Jun 2022 #94
Biden can't unilaterally declare a public health emergency. TwilightZone Jun 2022 #6
Maybe Warren and Smith didn't have time to follow President Biden's remarks yesterday. lapucelle Jun 2022 #10
They should have gotten elected President and done it. treestar Jun 2022 #53
I bet she and sirota voted for trump twice nt maryellen99 Jun 2022 #7
Gray, Turner, and the usual cast went out of there way not only to loudly proclaim they would not JohnSJ Jun 2022 #78
Covering their behinds mcar Jun 2022 #3
Obama, Obama, Obama! We only had 60 senators for a small amount of time In It to Win It Jun 2022 #5
"YOU TRY PASSING A PRO-CHOICE BILL THROUGH 60 SENATORS WHO WERE NOT ALL PRO-CHOICE!!!!!!" BumRushDaShow Jun 2022 #29
YES! I mentioned him this morning talking about this. Also Ian Millhiser invites people In It to Win It Jun 2022 #30
One of my Senators at the time in 2009 - Arlen Specter (R) switched parties to (D) BumRushDaShow Jun 2022 #60
According to the legal "experts" Roe was settled law. Obama was busy trying to save us from crisis Samrob Jun 2022 #38
+1 sheshe2 Jun 2022 #45
+2 treestar Jun 2022 #55
and the amount of things they expected in that time treestar Jun 2022 #54
It was a very brief window, and that some continue to not realize that only displays their JohnSJ Jun 2022 #79
... mcar Jun 2022 #8
OMG THAT CHART in the tweet is a KEEPER!!!! BumRushDaShow Jun 2022 #21
Isn't it? mcar Jun 2022 #22
I love this chart LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2022 #50
Sad thing is, it's 100% true mcar Jun 2022 #51
You are correct LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2022 #93
That graphic In It to Win It Jun 2022 #27
Same here, crazy how it always comes down to Dem bashing n/t Shanti Shanti Shanti Jun 2022 #91
Rts TY, mcar! So True.. magats get Cha Jun 2022 #39
Perfect, thank you mcar! sheshe2 Jun 2022 #46
perfect summation! treestar Jun 2022 #57
That chart is brilliant TwilightZone Jun 2022 #59
Brilliant Me. Jun 2022 #70
Just read a long discussion, too many people convinced there are easy solutions laying around betsuni Jun 2022 #87
"Do something!!11" social media mcar Jun 2022 #88
Sad to say, but for a lot of people... Jedi Guy Jun 2022 #89
Three or four posts last night doing the same thing here AZSkiffyGeek Jun 2022 #11
How would anyone know that? N/T lapucelle Jun 2022 #31
Post removed Post removed Jun 2022 #33
Ratfucking scumbags dalton99a Jun 2022 #12
David Sirota is a Democrat AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #13
David Sirota is an independent. TwilightZone Jun 2022 #16
I'm interested in H2O Man Jun 2022 #32
The fact that Sirota is not a Democrat is right on his wiki page along with a professional headshot. lapucelle Jun 2022 #35
Wiki is not a reputable source lol AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #41
Yes it is. Sirota provided the headshot, and he is publicity conscious enough lapucelle Jun 2022 #47
lol no it is not. Anyone can edit it. AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #64
Where has he ever posted on twitter that he is a Democrat? lapucelle Jun 2022 #71
I have to agree H2O Man Jun 2022 #61
Yup exactly AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #65
Nope, he's a Dem AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #40
Prove it. TwilightZone Jun 2022 #49
Prove he's not AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #67
Really? lapucelle Jun 2022 #63
Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source & can be edited by anyone AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #68
Yet you have no evidence for the claim that an independent, third party advocate, anti-duopolist lapucelle Jun 2022 #76
He sure likes to attack Democrats dalton99a Jun 2022 #17
He hates Democrats and constantly bashes them mcar Jun 2022 #24
If he hates Democrats then why would he ever marry one who's serving in office? AntivaxHunters Jun 2022 #69
Don't know mcar Jun 2022 #72
Because he's a fucking grifter first and foremost. W_HAMILTON Jun 2022 #81
Really? Well, Sirota certainly was busy depressing the Democratic vote on November 7, 2016. lapucelle Jun 2022 #25
+1. He ran a years-long smear campaign against Hillary dalton99a Jun 2022 #34
Whatever his wife is, he himself is a Dem-hater. BlueCheeseAgain Jun 2022 #26
There's no way to sugarcoat it - Ginsburg made a VERY risky gamble - gambling that the Democratic Midwestern Democrat Jun 2022 #14
When obvious statements are anathema Sympthsical Jun 2022 #18
Indeed. Unfortunately there are influencers who don't understand the obvious, lapucelle Jun 2022 #20
It's not on my radar Sympthsical Jun 2022 #23
It is a shame that folks like Yang and Gray cannot countenance the discussion of their past mistakes lapucelle Jun 2022 #28
No kidding. I'm no Bernie/"Our Revolution" fan, but I'm not ever going to engage in such blind hero Midwestern Democrat Jun 2022 #37
Agreed. The blind hero worship of third party acolytes who work to depress the Democratic vote lapucelle Jun 2022 #56
It wasn't RBG who made the risky gamble, lapucelle Jun 2022 #19
Matthew Iglesias said it good! Hortensis Jun 2022 #15
Those morons are ignorant of reality. LiberalFighter Jun 2022 #36
Agree! Why cover up their names? Cha Jun 2022 #43
FO to All those 3rd Party POS Who Cha Jun 2022 #42
Recommend! sheshe2 Jun 2022 #48
I hate that sentiment of Andrew Yang treestar Jun 2022 #52
Anyone wondering if we have them here too, heres a thread full of em. Lancero Jun 2022 #58
We wouldn't be here if RBG had retired in a timely fashion. Crunchy Frog Jun 2022 #62
Yes we would. Both the NY gun law case and Dobbs were 6-3 decisions. N/T lapucelle Jun 2022 #75
Dobbs yes, but not the complete overturning of Roe. Crunchy Frog Jun 2022 #77
Roberts proposal would had only delayed matters LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2022 #82
Then why not blame Justice Kennedy who "unexpectedly retired" lapucelle Jun 2022 #85
If RBG retired before the 2014 midterms, the 60 vote filibuster was in effect LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2022 #80
Fuck grifting Yang, and all the idiots who believe this shit. we can do it Jun 2022 #66
And Don't Forget PJB Me. Jun 2022 #73
They can say that crap all they want to. We have the receipts Samrob Jun 2022 #74
Just an aside ... Pete Ross Junior Jun 2022 #83
Well... Jedi Guy Jun 2022 #90
I am not a fan of the Justice Democrats LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2022 #84
Rts💕TY & JDW, LMPV! Cha Jun 2022 #86
+1000, though after 2016 I no longer laugh at radical fringe Hortensis Jun 2022 #92
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Third party morons blame ...»Reply #79