Good for the Juice?
The prospects for health care reform have been looking up. I've now seen it described by two separate
as a "fait accompli." The only problem is
That part's not still going so well! ... P.S.:
I was going to write a post saying that Democrats in Congress are likely to ignore the polls (and the survivalist id those polls awaken) simply because they won't want to have to go through this whole tedious process again
. Then I thought, have they really hated the process? Legislation like this is a good "juice" bill--it motivates all sorts of lobbyists--for insurers, hospitals, drug companies, unions--give a Congressman lots of money to try to make sure the fine print goes their way. Suddenly even backbenchers are worth millions. Meanwhile only a few Senators and Representatives have, so far, been put on the spot and forced to make difficult votes, no? Unless you are one of those unlucky pols (e.g., Blanche Lincoln) what's not to like?
Someone who knows more about the culture of Congress might be able to better answer that question: Is Congress hating the health care reform slog or happily wallowing in it? ... 12:07 A.M.
Funding for 300 miles of actual (not "virtual") fence along the Mexican border appears to have been killed in a House-Senate conference , after the Senate voted for it 54-44. So Senators from California, Arizona and Texas get to say they voted for the fence, but it doesn't get built. That 's how Kabuki is done! ... [ Tks to alert reader M ] 12:06 A.M.
Bending the curve both ways: Obama is planning to require a "Project Labor Agreements" on big federal construction projects, which will force non-union workers "to pay union dues and pension contributions for which they likely will never receive benefits," complains the Washington Times . But if that's what "delivering" for labor comes to mean, we'll have gotten off easy. Really delivering for labor would be applying Davis-Bacon-style government-set "prevailing wage" requirements to, say, all health care workers who are paid with federal money, no? ... [ via Going Rogue ] 12:05 A.M.