Enough already with the judges! Nobody cares accept a gaggle of lawyers. Nobody in their right mind thinks Wyden discriminates against women.

Nice of you to remind everyone that you like the guy, but it isn't the first time you defended Wyden on BlueOregon. Your conscience is clear - go pop a LeftHook and enjoy your Friday.

Who doesn't owe someone, something?

I didn't vote for you last spring, Steve, but your track record seems clearly one of integrity. Rock on!!!

One thing we learned about you when you ran for the US Senate is that if you didn't believe it, you wouldn't say it.

I think the obvious solution is to toss out the results of the selection committee and make you a federal judge, Steve. Sorry, it's Friday and the sun is shining and it's hard to take anything seriously!!! Why am I on my computer???

Here's what I think happened with Senator Wyden this week: He appeared to hurt the momentum of the healthcare bill. So now other Democrats in Oregon are churning out stories to lessen that perception by diluting or deflecting the Wyden debate.

  This is what happens when people with political instincts sense a mistake has been made.

But all the talk about judges and who doesn't want to take a vacation in August, and who remained neutral back in 2008, doesn't change the initial problem:

   Senator Wyden hurt the momentum for healthcare reform this past week. It's part of the record now. I wish he hadn't taken that path. Anytime a Democratic senator does exactly what the right wing wants them all to do - i.e. stretch this out so it has more of a chance to die - it's not helpful.

  Fixing our healthcare system would border on a miracle. It doesn't take much to derail something with long odds like this.

  Senator Wyden screwed up.

  Now back to if and where the judges and Wyden want to take their vacations in August, or whatever you're talking about.

Great column, Steve!

Here's what I don't understand, Bill McD:

Rewind the clock to before the time you got angry at Wyden for whatever he did, and specify exactly what he should have done to earn your respect--step 1, step 2, step 3 specifics.

Apparently as the senior senator AND senior member of our Congressional delegation (DeFazio is Dean of the House but Ron had been in Congress for 6 years when Peter was elected) should not use his experience and best judgement because apparently you know better.

Where exactly is DeFazio on this issue? What about the other members of our delegation?

You said, ""Here's what I think happened with Senator Wyden this week: He appeared to hurt the momentum of the healthcare bill. .................Senator Wyden hurt the momentum for healthcare reform this past week. It's part of the record now. I wish he hadn't taken that path. Anytime a Democratic senator does exactly what the right wing wants them all to do - i.e. stretch this out so it has more of a chance to die - it's not helpful. "

OK, you think if Wyden had said no one should leave DC until the bill was voted on, the Blue Dogs would have gone along? Rahm would have demanded it? Max Baucus would have joined in the effort to get something before the August recess? I heard a news report that there are Sen. Dems really angry at Baucus because he is not doing a good enough job of informing his caucus about what is going on in his committee. Is that also Wyden's fault?

Or is it that you are unhappy this story appeared on NPR http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106979677

about the Healthy Americans Act and Wyden should shun his program because bloggers tell him to?

If only Ron Wyden had followed your advice, Bill, this would not have appeared in the Washington Post because Wyden's actions would have prevented it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/24/AR2009072403651.html?hpid=topnews

Senate Democrats announced a day after the news conference that they could not meet Obama's deadline for passing a health-care bill, while the House has been hung up by differences between liberals and more conservative members of the party.

Tensions in the House over the issue reached a boiling point Friday, when, during a back-and-forth day of private huddles, Democrats emerged at times to accuse one another of lying or "empowering the Republicans." <<

You were there in DC and can dispute this account in one of Kari's posts?

http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/07/yesterdays-wyden-wtf-moment.html

Majority Leader Reid and Chairmen Baucus have asked Ron to bridge the gap between progressives and the moderates to find enough votes for them to pass health reform this year. That is what he is attempting to do. <<<

All the talk about the public option doesn't guarantee an end to pre-existing condition problems, a concentration on prevention, or magically make all health care in this country exactly like the Cleveland Clinic or the Mayo Clinic. If we have a public option, will simple fixes (Cong. Earl B. gave a dynamite speech today that I saw on CSPAN saying Medicare will reimburse for tests, but not for a doctor sitting down with family members and explaining what is going on with a loved'd ones serious medical condition and the various treatment options) be funded or just more tests because there will be no change in the fee-for-service system?

Are you angry he signed a letter along with people you don't much like? Do you not believe in protocol and politeness in order to negotiate or solve problems? What problems does anger solve?

This vituperation really bothers me, and I don't know what problem it solves. If you don't know that very descriptive word, here is what dictionary.com says:

vituperation –noun verbal abuse or castigation; violent denunciation or condemnation.

Synonyms: censure, vilification, spite, scolding, defamation, aspersion.

<<

I should probably also make a disclaimer. Ron and I go back a quarter century to the SF Democratic National Convention where we were both delegates. He has always been friendly to me. This was especially appreciated in 1996--he was still friendly after discovering I had re-registered NAV after the 1996 primary. I'd been told I wasn't even supposed to be friends with the losers of that primary (who I had known a total of 20 years) because DSCC had endorsed the winner and all good Democrats should give unquestioning support.

Registering NAV meant I could just laugh at the "all good Democrats" line and say that the I in Independent meant "I think for myself, thank you very much!".

Even bills in the Oregon Legislature which were only half this complex took a lot of effort (and sometimes unusual alliances) in order to pass.

If someone thinks that Ron Wyden taking orders from bloggers will magically make health care pass in a version they approve of, they are entitled to that opinion. I'm not required to agree. And if anyone is so angry about this they recruit a primary challenger to Ron, I will campaign for Ron.

Oh my god, that is the most inspiringly sane and insightful comment I have ever read on this site.

Just saw Judiciary Comm. Chair Cong. Conyers (D-MI) on National Press Club on CSPAN.

Very thoughtful and very witty. For instance, "I want a REAL public option, not something written by lobbyists which is not worth the napkin it is written on ", and disparaging comments on Max Baucus. He says there are Blue Dog Democrats in Congress and freshmen from previously Republican districts who don't want tough votes. Also that the 60 vote Sen. Majority is only on paper.

Talked about the effect of Rahm Emanuel on the health care debate.

Conyers talked about his concern for people being denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. "If you want to make money as an insurance company, don't cover the people who might actually get sick!". Also said Judiciary Comm. will be having hearings on medical bankruptcy (due to medical bills) .

LT, You're wound up way too tight. My comment doesn't have the anger in it you see. It's a very calm assessment of what I think happened. I just noticed we're suddenly taking a Blue Oregon tour of Wyden topics other than healthcare. I sense it's to deflect from the "WTF moment" Wyden gave us - and that's Kari's description.

  My God, you're emotionally invested in this guy to the point where you are practically hallucinating. While you're looking up words, look up "bemused." If you read my comment again, it fits much more than this intense anger you see.

  Why bemused? I enjoy watching political operatives try and navigate through events especially when some voice inside them is wondering, "What's going on here? What's my guy doing?"

   It's like when Mary Matalin was explaining why Sarah Palin's resignation press conference was so coherent and brilliant. I find this part of politics to be quite entertaining.

  Not that this isn't a very serious time. I see healthcare reform as the longest long-shot in politics. Individual senators with their own agendas have to balance them with the fact that this is a very small window of opportunity.

   There probably won't be another chance for 8 years. I think Wyden failed to show a clear appreciation for how little time this effort has before it collapses of its own weight.

   His actions were a mistake - in my opinion - and his buddies at Blue Oregonian appear to think that too and are trying to help him through it.

In closing, I want to acknowledge your long association with Ron Wyden. That's clearly very important to you. But the level of your reaction to my comment was way over the top. Let's hope the new healthcare plan covers anti-anxiety medicine.

Right. Wyden's operatives are geniuses and convinced a bunch of women and minorities on a judicial committee to vote for white guys so they could buy themselves a critical Willamette Week article and change the subject from health care if the need arose. Makes perfect sense to me.

I am calling Wyden's office to push him on public option twice a week, Bill. But your theory on the flap over judge candidates is pretty paranoid. You may be right about Wyden calling for canceling August recess for congress members, tho. He was probably releasing a little pressure from the letter incident (the letter itself was fine - I just hate the names on the letter). That's what skillful politicians do. I saw that last night the President invited the cop he called "stupid" to the White House for a beer. Releasing a little pressure, cleaning up a little mess. That's what the good ones do.

I hate to let all the die-hard progressives throughout Oregon and the blogosphere in on a little emerging fact. Unfortunately for the loud huzzahs of super majorities, there are some free thinkers elected with the letter d behind their name. They are listening to constituents who believe that change should be real, but that some of the very left ideas are over reaching.

I want healthcare reform, I thought that Wyden's plan was a great start towards a bipartisan reform bill. Unfortunately, lots of progressives declared themselves the only voices that shold be heard and THEY derailed reform by demanding single payer or government option as the only true path to salvation. They shut out moderate republicans as well as the Blue Dogs.

Wyden didn't take HEalth Care Reform off the news cycle this week, he was to busey still trying to get menaingful bipartisan support together for such reform. No, our President took Reform out of the mix by his comments on the cambridge, MA situation. He admitted he didn't know the specifics (who does?) and then went on to step right in the middle of it. Instead of allowing the two main protagonists time and cooler heads to back away from the situation he threw napalm onto the flames.

Ron Wyden is definitely a player, folks. And I believe, mostly for the good.

We get to be amateur pundits on this forum. As such I am going to prognosticate on the progress of the health care debate the next few months. (Dusting off my crystal ball and wizard's hat) To begin with we should all try to ignore the play by play "sports announcing" that goes on in the corporate media, whose only focus is the drama of the current 24 hr. news cycle.

Despite all the cries of "my way or the highway," I predict we will have a health care bill signed into law by the end of Oct. It will satisfy few, as compromises do, but will pass with just enough votes. It will happen because Democrats know the country expects it, because there are no excuses, and because if they don't, the Dem. party will become virtually extinct and out of power for decades. Ron Wyden knows this. The public option will be called "Co-op" because the symbolism is necessary to get enough blue dog senators and reps. on board, and maybe 2-3 Rs. ( http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/24/757497/-Just-dont-call-it-a-duck - "Just Don't Call it a Duck" )

Because of Chuck Schumer the "co-op" will be national and have a base of start-up funding. The key player in the Senate in this is Chuck Schumer, not Harry Reid, and will in due time replace him as majority leader. I also think Ron Wyden will have an important role in the final product both in policy content and in bringing the blue dogs on board. I predict this bill will not be the end, but the beginning, of a lengthy reformation of health care delivery in the U.S.

Here's Ezra Klein's similar take on it: "Why Democrats Will, at the End of the Day, Pass Health-Care Reform" http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/why_democrats_will_at_the_end.html

The last question. The very last question of the press conference and it had to be about the Harvard professor. I knew all the attention would be drawn away from the healthcare debate, and I cringed when President Obama used the word "stupidly." Watching it, I had the same "uh-oh" feeling that I had with his ill-fated Special Olympics "joke" on the Tonight Show.

   But when I worry about a window of opportunity closing on healthcare reform, it is not these little distractions that may shut it. We are guaranteed to get some new jolts from our economic problems. We could get something major on other fronts. Can't you just hear the special interests and their people in Congress saying, "We'd love to address this, but this just isn't the time given the magnitude of our new problem X." We've all seen that movie.

 JJ, I'm not saying Wyden's operatives are orchestrating some grand plan. I'm saying he made a political mistake and his allies at Blue Oregon are stepping up to help him through it. The vacation post was an ineffective way to try and undo the damage Ron has done to healthcare reform by slowing the momentum.

 If the political operatives at Blue Oregon feel Ron Wyden's approach has been exactly what they'd have recommended, I'd like to hear that. But I believe Kari, Steve, and the gang have better political instincts than that.

 And speaking of political instincts:

  Howard Dean was just in town and he's calling for more pressure on Wyden.

It's clear Howard knows that the damage to the unified front has been a serious problem. It has hurt the momentum here which is all I'm saying. It sure didn't help it.

 You may disagree with Howard Dean's political instincts but remember, it was his 50-state strategy that people scoffed at in the last campaign. Without Howard Dean we could be listening to John McCain and Sarah Palin right now and I doubt they'd be talking about healthcare reform.

Bill McD, see Kurt Chapman and Bill R's remarks.

Talking about Mary Matalin and Sara Palin does not answer the question which is: State the affirmative and tell us 3 specific actions Wyden should have taken. And you didn't answer my question about where the other Oregon Democrats stand on current health care proposals. Are they all united given the differences between House and Senate?

Or else, explain why Kurt, "I want healthcare reform, I thought that Wyden's plan was a great start towards a bipartisan reform bill. Unfortunately, lots of progressives declared themselves the only voices that should be heard..." and

Bill R. "Ron Wyden is definitely a player, folks. And I believe, mostly for the good.

We get to be amateur pundits on this forum..."

have no right to express their opinions. Are they also "heavily invested in Wyden" and "wound up way too tight" ?

I would rather have a bill with few unintended consequences which has some votes from both parties than a straight D bill which is ideologically pure.

But then, I have been involved in crusading for legislation both state and federal which was all about the issue, not which party the advocates belonged to.

I want to see "pre-existing condition" exclusions made illegal, prevention made part of the equation, everyone having some level of coverage for basic and catastrophic care, an end to the "fee for service" model where doctors are encouraged to order more tests but don't have the time to talk directly to patients about serious conditions. I'd like to see rating the effectiveness of procedures and drugs for various ailments much like the original concepts in the Oregon Health Plan and the Kitzhaber Formulary for drug use in Oregon (is an expensive pill really more effective than aspirin for a particular condition?). I want an update of Medicare reimbursement so that states like Oregon are not penalized just because they are different than NY and Florida.

When Kitzhaber spoke locally some months ago, he spoke about 2 potential problems which need to be considered.

If on really hot days like the next several days, a medically fragile person needs medical care because there is no air conditioning in that person's apt., which is a better solution---a system which pays for a room air conditioner for that person? Or a trip to the ER caused by an overheated apt.? Under the current system, the ER visit is covered and the air conditioner is not. What elected official would like to explain to the locals that they want to maintain that system (regardless of party)?

Also, electronic medical records all must be compatible, or the benefits aren't there. I'm no techie, but I do know that not all systems work on both Mac and PC. I It seems to me that requiring all electronic medical records to be compatible by setting some sort of federal standard is a no brainer. Are doctors supposed to invest in a system which might or might not be compatible with the ER 2 counties over?

Bill R makes a lot of sense, "I also think Ron Wyden will have an important role in the final product both in policy content and in bringing the blue dogs on board. I predict this bill will not be the end, but the beginning, of a lengthy reformation of health care delivery in the U.S."

I happen to think that Wyden, DeFazio, Rarl B. have been around Congress long enough to know what works and what doesn't work.

What I don't want is a repeat of that idiotic Catastrophic Care plan from the days of Danny Rostenkowski. A current Congresswoman (D--Chicago) said she was working with senior citizens back when a group of them chased ol' Danny down the block. She said they had a right to be angry----Congress had passed a plan which required seniors to pay for something like a year before the plan even went into effect.

If there is a plan which does all of the above passed in Sept. with an intelligent model to pay for it, well and good.

I don't see how "Democrats should pass public option now!" solves all those problems.

Steve, why don't you pass on the recommended appointment and recommend that a woman or minority get it? Oh, that's right affirmative action only applies to working people, not political hacks.

Re the despicable Mary Matalin:

She has literally been in bed with DP strategists (Remember Carville?)for many years. Now ask yourself: How could a true progressive ally himself with a true regressive?

The answer is easy: He could not.

And that's the story of the relationship between the DP and the RP, including the overwhelming tendency to sell out on health care.

<h2>Wyden is no better and no worse than any of the other DP operatives who are desperate to save the dying empire rather than to create meaningful change (NOT any kind of "public option").</h2>