Progressive Senate Bloc Forcing Public Option

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 20:45


Many progressives have been longing for the day when the Democratic leadership would drop futile, even counter productive, attempts to win Republican votes on major legislation and instead focus on developing long overdue, popular, sensible solutions to major problems.

Well, it appears that day has come. A progressive bloc in the Senate has given the Democratic leadership a blunt choice: pursue a strong public option, or lose 10-15 left-wing votes on health care. From Roll Call:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday ordered Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to drop a proposal to tax health benefits and stop chasing Republican votes on a massive health care reform bill.

Reid, whose leadership is considered crucial if President Barack Obama is to deliver on his promise of enacting health care reform this year, offered the directive to Baucus through an intermediary after consulting with Senate Democratic leaders during Tuesday morning's regularly scheduled leadership meeting. Baucus was meeting with Finance ranking member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) Tuesday afternoon to relay the information.

According to Democratic sources, Reid told Baucus that taxing health benefits and failing to include a strong government-run insurance option of some sort in his bill would cost 10 to 15 Democratic votes; Reid told Baucus it wasn't worth securing the support of Grassley and at best a few additional Republicans.

This is like some beautiful dream come true. At the behest of a determined bloc of progressive Democrats, the Senate leadership is dropping futile attempts to appease Republicans by weakening major legislation. It is difficult to even count all of the times Open Left and other blogs have urged the Democratic leadership to do just that.

This has happened because the Progressive Block strategy is starting to manifest itself. Rather than Democratic leaders voluntarily turning legislation into a warm pile of corporate mush in order to appeal to a center-right business, media and political status quo, and then having those leaders browbeating the left into supporting said warm pile of  corporate mush because that is just "political reality," now progressives are determining the limits of political reality themselves.  Progressives are offering the leadership a simple choice: pass a strong public option, or you don't get a health care bill.

The Progressive Block strategy is working. Have you ever remembered another major legislative debate where the momentum of fight is to actually make a bill more progressive? Neither have I.

Remember: it is not about what Democratic leaders say, but instead about what they are forced to do. Stop worrying about this or that latest statement from the leadership, and keep working to keep the Progressive Block strong.

Update: The House Progressive Caucus has also released a statement saying they will block passage of any health care reform bill that includes a "trigger" on the public option. This is getting good.

Update 2: Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Lynn Woolsey says a trigger means "no deal at all" to Rahm Emanuel himself, and gets huge applause from across the Democratic caucus:

Progressive Caucus Co-Chairwoman Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) warned Emanuel that he would lose the caucus' votes if the White House compromised on the issue and included a "trigger" that could delay a public insurance plan indefinitely. The trigger idea is backed by conservative Democrats but is anathema to liberals.

"We have compromised enough, and we are not going to compromise on any kind of trigger game," Woolsey said she told Emanuel. "People clapped all over the place. We mean it, and not just progressives."

This is like some dreamy, alternate reality.

Chris Bowers :: Progressive Senate Bloc Forcing Public Option

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Who are they? (4.00 / 4)
These good senators need to be identified and supported strongly!!!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


One of them is Reid now. (4.00 / 5)
and that has to be recognized. A little dignity while moving forward is a good idea.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


[ Parent ]
Good on them for taking a position that the President... (4.00 / 1)
agrees with!... ??? ...

LOL.  I don't understand.  The President has been in favor of a strong public option from day one.  What's everyone getting so up in arms about?

Geez.


it's not that simple. (4.00 / 9)
and this from someone who generally defends obama's actions here.  

the white house definitely has spoken in favor of the public plan, but hasn't drawn a line in the sand, going so far as to express a willingness to compromise on this point in order to win republican support.  so, there was (and still is) a real risk that obama would go along with a 'trigger,' or with the co-ops proposal.  

a lot depends on the balance of forces in congress.  and what is so exciting is that progressive democrats + sanders have started drawing a line in the sand, making it all but impossible for a bill to be passed without the public plan.

i imagine that we will see a few more acts in this drama before it is all done, with conservadems threatening to vote against cloture if the bill isn't watered down, but it is starting to look like they may finally be in a weak negotiating position vis-a-vis the progressives.  a lot still hinges on what the democratic leadership does, especially rahm and obama.  so, pressure is still needed.  


[ Parent ]
This is some momentum in the right direction, but ... (4.00 / 2)
... there's a long way to go.  I remember the twists and turns of the despicable FISA retroactive bill that eventually got passed.  I remember the pope of hope coming out against that as well, but as usual he acquiesced to corporate interests and voted for it anyway.  

Notice how this got started, Bernie Sanders got the Senate moving in this direction.  He's the best Senator in this country.

Z    


[ Parent ]
Things Obama agrees with (4.00 / 14)
Like the Employee Free Choice Act? Defeated.

Like cramdown? Defeated?

Like 100% auction cap and trade? Defeated.

Like D.C. voting rights? In eternal limbo.

Obama supporting something doesn't magically turn it into law. In the case of health care reform, the Progressive Block strategy is designed to force the White House and the Democratic congressional leadership to whip conservative Democrats into line, or else there is no deal.


[ Parent ]
What matters is making sure everyone knows that the truth will be told, and the American people have made demands. (4.00 / 1)
We can join a lot of people who have been pushing this way, each in their own way, but its the engaged public thats the sole source of the push.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


[ Parent ]
Not to mention... (4.00 / 9)

  ...that Obama "supporting" a particular issue doesn't necessarily mean he's going to the mat to fight for it, as evidenced by his unfierce unadvocacy for gay rights...

  (Was EFCA defeated, or just kicked down the road? I seem to recall it was the latter but my memory might not serve me well.)

   

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn


[ Parent ]
Kicked down the road... (0.00 / 0)
...in the hope of more Senate democrats down the road...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
The Admin did nothing while Dems who voted for it previously slowly announced their opposition.  I understand the argument that you couldn't bring it to a vote until Franken was seated, but long before that happened we lost a lot of votes we had previously.  Unless Franken gets 15 votes or so, I fail to see how this was a strategy of hoping for more Senate Dems.  

I make no claim to know why they did it, but EFCA died while the Franken saga unfolded, and the Admin did nothing to stop it.  Even if its not dead, it will be far harder to switch all those Dems back then it would have been to hold them in the first place.

Who are the best keepers of the people's liberties? The people themselves. The sacred trust can be no where so safe as in the hands most interested in preserving it.
James Madison


[ Parent ]
You're right on 1/4 (4.00 / 1)
1) EFCA hasn't come up yet.
2) Cramdown, yes, you're right. But I don't find it as big an issue.
3) Defeated is the wrong word.  Most of what he wanted is there.  Why doesn't anyone else fight for it?  Plus nothing's definite yet.
4) Yeah it's in limbo.  Doesn't mean it won't happen.

My point is that they're tapping themselves on the back because the White House informed them of the position they've held since day one because they had to clear up an issue that had to do with the WSJ twisting the facts. <--rambling intended.

Nothing changed.


[ Parent ]
I see (4.00 / 4)
Carmdown, which would have allowed hundreds of thousands of people to say in their homes, isn't inportant.

And yes, card check is dead.

Your basic point, as far as I gather, is that if Obama supports something, then it will become law and we can all relax and smile as we watch it magically happen.

That is a position that even President Obama wouldn't agree with.


[ Parent ]
Well, yeah, if it makes you feel better you can lie (4.00 / 1)
1) "I don't find it as big an issue" does not equal "isn't important"

2) Card check isn't dead.

3) Didn't say that.

4) I would agree, which is why I didn't make that point.

What I am saying is that just because you think bitching, moaning and distorting the truth of President Obama's position will help your cause, doesn't make it so.


[ Parent ]
Chris, I thought of you (4.00 / 10)
when I read the 'Roll Call' article earlier this evening.  I thought - shit there is the '13' Progressive Dems we needed to stand in the way of the corporate whores.  It also looks like Lynn laid the 'smack down' on Rahm tonight at the meeting.

So now we need to 'hold' the current Progressive Block and expand the numbers - as we know Politicians are like sheep and they will flock to an area of 'strength'.  If it looks like the American People are going to give credit to the Progressives for the health care bill - we will see more members aligning with the Progressives in the days and weeks ahead.

Again, Chris super idea of building 'The Progressive Bloc(k)' - lets hold it firm and build it.  


Fingers crossed :) n/t (4.00 / 2)


[ Parent ]
Speaking of expanding our numbers (4.00 / 3)
anyone know what the hell's going on with the "Populist Caucus"? If they're not out front on this one, I wonder just what it is they think makes them "populist"? Anyone know if they've done anything since forming?


[ Parent ]
This is indeed good news (4.00 / 4)

 With the health care industry spending a million and a half a day on lobbying to prevent meaningful reform, it is remarkable indeed that a bloc of progressive senators has resisted. Maybe they're public servants after all.

 I don't get Rahm. He's wired to default to the right-wing side of most issues. He needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into standing for a public option. How do people like these assume leadership roles in the Democratic Party?  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn


Considering he worked for Bill Clinton it is entirely possible there would have been a role (4.00 / 1)
for him in Hillary's admin as well.....or am I wrong about that possibility?

But you are correct ~ how do people like Rahm, Larry Summers, et al manage to stay at that level when it is so obvious they can make things more difficult than easier for whomever they work for, both in the immediate tense and the long run?  


[ Parent ]
There seems to be a tendency for people to blame it all on larry, tim and rahm (0.00 / 0)
Well for God's sake, who fucking hired them?  Everybody knows about their past and whose interests they've served, but people that were obama-tized convinced themselves that obama was going to use their industry and political ties to get things done for the people.  And what happened?  They got things done for their big business pals at the expense of the people. There has been very little change.  Even the "stance" that obama has taken against israel and the settlements has been toothless and ignored even though we give israel a ton of money in foreign aid and hence have leverage with them.

Behind all the eloquent words and pretty photo-ops lies a disgrace.  Despite his oratoricals, he's far from a leader.  His political cover must be destroyed to get him to do what he promised.

Z


[ Parent ]
$ (0.00 / 0)
and access to $


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Becoz he acts as a conduit for corporate cash into the democratic party (4.00 / 1)
Mind you also that this dude is personally backstopped.  He left "public" service in the clinton administration, in which he aggressively pushed for nafta for his corporate pals and allowed health care reform for us to die on the vine, and walked into a wall street "job" and made $16M in a little over 2 years.

Another thing too, obama knew exactly who/what he was hiring as his chief of staff as emanuel is known as one of the most deceitful, pro-business dems on the hill ... a guy that serves big business while creating cover for the dems.  That's why obama hired him IMO: to get things done for big campaign donors.

Z
 


[ Parent ]
The same could be said of Steny .. (0.00 / 0)
I don't get Rahm. He's wired to default to the right-wing side of most issues. He needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into standing for a public option. How do people like these assume leadership roles in the Democratic Party?

They get where they are because they are corporate whores .. which means they get campaign cash to dole out .. and what don't you get about Rahm? ... You do realize that Rahm isn't like Krugman .. or Steve Cohen(TN-09) .. or Bernie Sanders .. you do realize that Rahm practices a very conservative brand of Judaism  .. it's all out there in the open .. so it doesn't surprise me at all


[ Parent ]
out of curiousity, what (4.00 / 3)
does where he is Jewishly have to do with his positions on domestic policy?  Or any policy?  There are plenty of Conservative Jews who are great on Health Care and Employee Free Choice.

[ Parent ]
I Agree. (4.00 / 1)
Rahm's Jewishness has nothing to do with his politics, it's his neoliberalism that should be highlighted. Same as Obama's. Many African-Americans are quite conservative because many of Christianity, but many of these same folks are also strong supporters of progressive policies, foreign or domestic.

We have to be careful not placing people in little categories like that because it's not so black-and-white.  


[ Parent ]
It's his conservatism!!! .. (4.00 / 2)
that is the whole point .. he's not a liberal

[ Parent ]
I have been taking unscientific 'soundings' among friends, family,even acquaintances (4.00 / 1)
and most people want a single payer government run option or don't even bother....

maybe it's because I'm from MA and the big health care reform did nothing to control costs which everyone is concerned about now


I'll wait (4.00 / 1)
until after the votes before I get excited.

But I hope (4.00 / 1)
you'll make (or continue to make) some phone calls in the meantime. Our elected officials need to know Hell's a' poppin' amongst the people on this issue!

[ Parent ]
Thanks for the good news! (4.00 / 2)
The Heat is ON!

WHOA! No Strong Public Option = Same Old SHIT (4.00 / 1)
don't even call it '_ealth are eform'

cuz it ain't reform of anything, it is the same old lying and the same old stealing and the same old fucking us over.

we should NOT be using their fucking fascist framing.

rmm.  

It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way


just who are they? (4.00 / 1)
This is very exciting - having enough even somewhat progressive Dems in the House to turn into a Block, whichever way you spell it.

But who are they?


Here's the chart from FDL (4.00 / 2)
Daily recaps here, and click on the "Use Our Citizen Whip Tool" button on top-right or bottom-left to access the page with phone numbers. Then make calls and report, even if the person can't agree that the Rep will take the pledge.  

[ Parent ]
is it possible? (4.00 / 1)
At the behest of a determined bloc of progressive Democrats, the Senate leadership is dropping futile attempts to appease Republicans by weakening major legislation.

is that a spine forming?


It Occassionally Makes an Appearance (4.00 / 3)
They showed a surprising amount of spine during the Social Security fight during the Bush years. It appears this issue, unlike energy, EFCA, or some of the others, might be another one they're willing to go to the wall for. It'd be easy to cave on this. After all, Democrats have been failing to get national health insurance done since the Truman Administration. However, I think there's a sense that this is a defining moment for this Congress and there will be serious consequences for Democrats if they don't deliver real health care reform with a real public option. The people demand it and, frankly, it's a second shot of much needed stimulus. The economy is going nowhere without it either.

Honestly, it's all about confidence and learning how to win. These guys got their hats fed to them for a quarter of a century. They're timid because they've gotten beaten way too often by the conservatives. So it's going to take one or two wins for them to really start acting like the supermajority they are.

I'd love to see them get this done the way Bernie Sanders has proposed: get it to an up or down vote. That'll let the weasels like Lieberman and Ben Nelson to vote against it but not cost the party and the President a critical victory. Of course, that would require them to wheel Kennedy and Byrd in, which might be difficult to achieve.


[ Parent ]
I am sure most of us here .. (4.00 / 1)
Of course, that would require them to wheel Kennedy and Byrd in, which might be difficult to achieve.

would volunteer to wheel them in ... if that is what it takes to pass real health care reform


[ Parent ]
Let's Keep It Up! (4.00 / 4)
The past couple of weeks have produced lots of good news on the health care front, and if we continue to pressure the Dems to do the right thing, we'll get the public option we need.  "Don't stop, keep going!"

saw this in one of today's 'morning no' links (4.00 / 1)
Most importantly, who makes the ruling on whether the Byrd Rule applies? In an interview with Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, Senate Budget Committee chair Kent Conrad suggested that it was the Senate parliamentarian. This is a deliberate and grotesque evasion of responsibility. Just as disingenuously, Jim Cooper suggested the same thing.

It is, in fact, the President of the Senate, otherwise known as the Vice President of the United States, who makes the ruling. His ruling can be overriden by a majority of Senators, but that motion is itself subject ot filibuster.

http://www.samefacts.com/archi...

any comments on this?


that's just the nuclear option (4.00 / 1)
Saying the VP can just make up any ruling he likes. It's BS.



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.


[ Parent ]
What happens is (0.00 / 0)
The presiding officer in the Senate (who will usually be the Vice President, but could be someone else acting in his stead...through unlikely on something this important) will make a ruling on whether or not a provision is acceptable when a Senator makes a motion under the Byrd Rule.  The presiding officer will consult the parliamentarian before making a ruling and will almost certainly do what the parliamentarian says.  

It is, however, theoretically possible for the presiding officer to ignore the parliamentarian's advice.  I would personally be opposed to doing that.


Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both


[ Parent ]
The public option is an ideal place for this to start (0.00 / 0)
Though I don't think that this is really that innovative. I think it is a matter of the public option being the one thing progressives actually care enough about to get done.

So it will be interesting to see if progressives are willing to stand for anything else.



http://transgendermom.blogspot....


"ordered" (0.00 / 0)
harry ""ordered" max around. max actually appears to have balls, unlike evan bayh for instance.

I assume this means (0.00 / 0)
that we are going to use reconciliation to get this through - not a bad thing.


Futile is the word (0.00 / 0)
Please list the names of the progressive bloc. It will be much more effective to write to our Congressional delegation asking: "Do you agree with Sen. So-and-So and Rep. So-and-So on health care? I sure do hope so."

Attempts to win over Republican votes are indeed futile for getting effective public policies in general, not just in health care. But try telling that to Obama, the great compromiser.

Republican votes come at the cost of poor solutions and subsides to certain industries. Any solution that leads citizens to despair of government effectiveness is OK with Republicans.

The Senate/Congress may finally be taking back some of the power it has ceded to the President over the last 50 years. About time.



Senate has one member in the Progressive Caucus (0.00 / 0)
Congressional Progressive Caucus member list is here. Senator Bernie Sanders is the sole senator in the caucus.

Use the Citizen Whip Tool at FireDogLake to assist in contacting members to secure their pledge to accept only a final bill that includes the public plan choice.

Stand with Dr Dean provides a tool to check out Where Congress Stands. The 37 Yes votes in the Senate are 36 Dems plus Sanders. Make calls and send faxes to the 22 uncommitted. Support Change Congess and their ad targeting Sen Landieu, who is still listed as the only Dem NO.


[ Parent ]
Could the Senate be the force for change? (0.00 / 0)
Could this be actually happening? The Senate is the force for change--wow!  Great news, I'd love to see them use this tactic on climate as well.  

Senator Whitehouse is strong voice (0.00 / 0)
Yesterday Sen Patty Murray announced Morning speeches of five minutes could be given in mid-afternoon. When I saw Sen Whitehouse at his desk, I sat down to watch. As we've been reading, Majority Leader Reid assigned him to take Hillary's place on the HELP Committee, to hold the seat for Al Franken. Whitehouse has served Rhode Island as their Attorney General and US Attorney, so he's had plenty of experience, including setting up a state-wide program to improve care and outcome at the same time as lowering costs in Intensive Care Units in RI hospitals.

Asking for 15 minutes, he spoke about the savings that CBO cannot "score" because there is no track record for the type of changes that are in the HELP bill, no "rear view mirror" to calculate the savings over time. I've signed up for his video notification so that when the July 7 speech on "Real Savings in Health Reform" is available, I'll post a QuickHit.


[ Parent ]
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search