The biggest (political) problem with ObamaCare is that the public doesn't want it, as poll after poll after poll has demonstrated.  The latest comes from Rasmussen, which shows (ominously for Obama) that the more Congress and the public focuses on the issue, the more opposed they become to it. 

Currently, 53% of Americans are opposed to the pending Senate version of the bill, and only 42% support it.  Keep in mind that these numbers come AFTER Congress spent over a year working on the issue, Obama made dozens of speeches and town hall appearances, and after the highly covered health care "summit" meeting with Congress that Obama sponsored.  55% think Congress should scrap the whole thing and start from scratch.

Now that the Obama administration has decided to double-down on health care and demand passage of the Senate version of ObamaCare...and the White House has set a timeline of two weeks to get it done...it's safe to say that we're about to see some of the most severe arm twisting in political history. 

In fact, if you thought it looked bad the first time around, (when the House version passed by only 3 votes, and the Senate version passed that chamber by the bare minimum), you haven't seen anything yet.

Why is that?  Because the Democrats decided to forget about a conference committee, (the usual process of ironing out differences between House and Senate bills), and push the existing Senate bill through the House.  The problem is that it must be passed WITHOUT any amendments or changes whatsoever.  This is because, if it is changed, the Senate would have to approve it all over again...and this time there are 41 Republicans, (thanks to Scott Brown's win in Massachusetts), that can sustain a filibuster.

As we move into what should be the final (and most important) phase of the debate over ObamaCare, it's of course critical that members of Congress hear from as many of their constituents as possible.

And given Obama's speech outlining how he wants Congress to move forward, and Nancy Pelosi's recent statements, it looks like they intent to move forward with using the trick of the Senate budget reconciliation rule to pass this monstrosity.  This puts the near term focus on the House.

Below you'll find a list of the names and contact numbers for what appear to be the "swing votes" in the House on this issue.  If one of them is YOUR Representative it is VITAL that you contact them now and let them know how you feel.  If you would rather send them (or even all members of Congress) a fax, click here.

Contact them today...  Then pass it on!

People who are pushing for Pelosicare, Reidcare or Obamacare will say reconciliation is a good and moral practice. They will site "Great" presidents who have used it. Or will they? Nobody printed on the US dollar has used it. Nobody who face is on a mountain has used it. No these people who are so honored warned against the tyranny of the majority and set in place protections against it - The 2/3rds rule. Reconciliation has been used to remove spending. It has been used to introduce changes to legislation. It has never been used to make massive changes in Government. Our greatest leaders never used it - Why would they? They were leaders not dictators.

2/3rds can be a difficult number. It is required to change the constitution or remove a president. Reconciliation was created to allow the congress to act quicker on small maters of state to prevent a filibuster. A filibuster requires 2/3rds to end it - It can be used at anytime but it is rarely used.

Our leaders have decided that 2/3rds may not be required to change 1/6th of our economy and impose a federal requirement that people must purchase insurance.

It looks like the American public is going to have to endure (and oppose) at least one more version of ObamaCare before we can finally be done with it.

The White House announced that Obama would pitch the newest version of his "plan" tomorrow.  Essentially, it looks like that plan will be "part" of the existing plans, with the addition of a few ideas that they call "Republican" ideas.

Of course this goes on against the backdrop of talk by the Democrat leadership (and the White House) that they will now look to use the budget reconciliation process to pass the bill.  Which means they're going to attempt to get around a Republican filibuster by using a rule that was designed for the budget process...not legislation that can remake 1/6th of the US economy.

But you're not likely to hear Obama (and even few Democrats) use the word "reconciliation"...or any talk about using the special rule to pass his big program.  Instead, they're rephrasing the talking points to use the term "simple majority".  Of course, they're quick to overlook the fact that their proposal doesn't even come close to having a "simple majority" of support among the American people.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has taken the retooling of euphemisms to the next level, saying that "The bill can be bipartisan, even though the votes might not be bipartisan".

Now that last week's big health care "summit" has come and gone, it's a good time to take a look at what kind of impact it had on American public opinion about the Democrat's proposed reforms.

Short answer?  Still opposed.  The latest survey by Rasmussen shows 52% of voters opposed and 44% in favor.  And remember, that's AFTER all the fluff coverage it received from the summit.

The more interesting numbers however, (and the ones that the politicians up for reelection this year should pay attention to), are those that demonstrate the passion and intensity people have about the issue.  The survey shows 43% of voters being "strongly opposed", with only 22% "strongly in favor".

Not good for Democrats who have voted for it already, much less thinking about using the budget reconciliation process to get around a filibuster and pass it with a simple majority in Congress.

Some other interesting items:

Does anybody really believe that a system ran by the Government would be free of suffering. That a nurse provided by the Government is going to be kinder and provide better comfort than a nurse selected by the one in need of a nurse.

I pray for those in need; My heart also goes out to those who have care provided by the Government and remain tragically more in need. I know that God is aware of every tear. My chest grows tight as I put this post together because I know these people matter to God and to somebody else.

I've been to both DMV and when possible alternative private businesses for services of registering a car. Although not broken by the my experiences with the DMV I can image those people running a hospital but in some cases I don't need to imagine.

An independent inquiry found that managers at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust stopped providing safe care because they were preoccupied with government targets and cutting costs. Patients were routinely neglected or left “sobbing and humiliated” by staff.

Should I go on?

The report, which follows reviews by the Care Quality Commission and the Department of Health, said that “unimaginable” suffering had been caused. Regulators said last year that between 400 and 1,200 more patients than expected may have died at the hospital from 2005 to 2008.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article7039285.ece

Some of today's ObamaCare headlines...

Washington Post -- Obama stays on offense with health-care proposal

There had been rampant speculation that the White House would narrow
its ambitions for health-care legislation after the loss of the
Democrats' filibuster-proof
Senate majority last month. Instead, the president's proposal is
striking for the extent to which it hews to the basic scale and
framework of the bills on which Congress has toiled for months.

That decision -- to go big one last time, rather than small -- emerged quickly inside the White House after senior advisers to President Obama concluded privately that his goals for comprehensive changes to the health-care system could not be done piecemeal....

Congressional Democrats have not given up on the idea of passing government run health care - despite the overwhelming opposition of the American public.

Senate and House liberals are co-signing a letter urging Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to use the budget reconciliation process to push the so-called "public option" through the Senate.  Now that Republicans have the 41 votes necessary to sustain a filibuster, the Democrats want to get around the filibuster all together by using the budget process to pass legislation that would alter 1/6th of the American economy.  Which the majority of the American public do NOT want.

Via CNN:

The fight over health care reform burst back into public view Tuesday as four Democratic senators asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to hold a vote on a government-run public insurance option.

Over the course of the past year as the Obama administration and Congress have been busy proposing and debating the creation of new, bigger government programs, the public resistance to bigger and more expensive government has increased, which also translated into more state legislators introducing legislation to have their states opt out of such programs (like ObamaCare).

A recent Rasmussen poll would seem to confirm the resurgence of public support for federalism.  The survey found that 59% of voters agree that states should be able to opt out of federal programs that they oppose.  (Only 25% disagreed, and 15% didn't know)

Sixty-three percent (63%) of voters also think
states should have the right to opt out of federally mandated programs
if the federal government doesn’t help pay for them. Seventeen percent
(17%) say states should not have the right to opt out of federally
mandated programs. ...

Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republicans and 67% of
voters not affiliated with either major party say states should have
the right to opt out of federal programs with which they don’t agree.
Just 37% of Democrats agree.