I am writing today to announce the closure of the New Mexico Independent. After three and a half years of operation in New Mexico, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news…
While environmental activists played their part yesterday during demonstrations at the capitol building, going so far as to dress up as solar panels and to sing the tune of “You Are My Sunshine,” their counterparts, the anti-cap-and-trade contingency who has…
Roughly one quarter of University of New Mexico students are unimpressed with the state’s flagship public school, according to a survey that questioned college students about their higher education experiences.
I told you this would be a “semi-regular” feature (as long as the health care reform debate goes on), and here’s the second installment of the Senate health care reform debate with an emphasis on Jeff Bingaman’s role.
Bingaman continues to support a public option, a Bingaman spokeswoman confirmed that to Santa Fe New Mexican political writer Steve Terrell, despite an ABC News report that seemed to say something different.
“Yes, Sen. Bingaman continues to support — and work for — a strong public option. It was clear from the start that the Finance Committee would have a different approach than the HELP Committee,” Bingaman spokeswoman Jude McCartin wrote to Terrell in an e-mail. “The goal is to work toward getting a strong public option in the bill that reaches the president’s desk.”
The blog Democracy for New Mexico asks readers to “muster some compassion and appreciation for Sen. Bingaman,” asking, “Would YOU want to be the only champion for the public option in that group?”
In the last roundup of Bingaman health care news, many observers wondered by a group of small-state Senators were so instrumental in the crafting of the Senate Finance Committee’s health care bill. New West highlighted a blog post by Bridget Cavanaugh disputing that notion.
I’d like to point out that Ms. Collins and I commonly live by the same constitution whose Founding Fathers purposefully skewed political power to favor rural America by giving all states equal representation in the Senate. So why is she angling on Montana’s lack of population? It’s a non-issue and completely irrelevant in these matters. It’s funny, but is politcally ignorant. Which should be surprising coming from a newspaper serving 6% of the entire US population.
That is in response to a New York Times op-ed piece by Gail Collins.
The Christian Science Monitor notes the Senate Finance Committee’s “Gang of Six” is headed towards a “healthcare bill that pleases no one.”
Republicans, they write, want to “start over” while Democrats are “trying to get it done.”
The Des Moines Register wonders why these six Senators are the ones deciding the fate of the Senate Finance Committee bill.
Partly, it comes from their own reputations for seriousness of purpose and bipartisan legislative success, built from a combined 132 years in the Senate. It also stems from the structure of the Senate itself, which the founding fathers set up to accommodate deliberation and independence.
The Register notes Bingaman worked closely with Republican Pete Domenici for decades before Domenici retired due to health reasons.
Statistician and online political rock star Nate Silver writes of the differences between the debate in the Senate and House.
One is being held between Democrats and their fellow Democrats, and the other is being held between Democrats and Republicans. Almost every Democrat, Blue Dogs included, is going to be in a better position if health care passes than if it fails.
Silver also says that the wrong Republicans are in the room debating if the Democrats want an effective bill passed. Instead, Silver suggests, “[Max] Baucus should be sitting in a room with Ben Nelson and Mary Landireu [sic] — and maybe Olympia Snowe.”
