The News of Its Death is Greatly Exaggerated

by: Mike Lux

Mon Aug 17, 2009 at 16:52


Kent Conrad has repeatedly said there are not enough votes in the Senate for a public option, and now says he won't vote for one. HHS Secretary Sebelius says the public insurance option is not essential. These statements add to a steadily growing conventional wisdom that the public option is now dead.

Not so fast. This fight hasn't even come close to being played out yet.

I explain why in the extended entry.

Mike Lux :: The News of Its Death is Greatly Exaggerated
Conrad is accurate that there are not currently 60 votes in the Senate for a public option. But what conventional wisdom ignores is that there are 64 House members who are unequivocally on record as saying they will not vote for a health reform bill that has no public option, way more than enough to take that possibility off the table. So there are two possibilities right now:

  • If both sides of this equation hold tight, no bill passes at all
  • Something happens to change the dynamics

The conventional wisdom says that while it is entirely possible that the first scenario happens, that if the second scenario happens it will be because House progressives fold. There seem to be no other possibilities to all the expert prognosticators.

Now, I will admit that progressives have been known to fold before, as Chris Bowers wrote today. But let me suggest that there are other possibilities here, scenarios that are actually within the realm of the possible. If progressives in the House hold their ground, if they hang tough on the public option, what happens next will go something like this:

1. The House will find the votes to pass a comprehensive bill with a public option soon after they get back from August recess. That will be reasonably easy, because Pelosi will be able to peel off a reasonable number of Blue Dogs, many of whom have said they would support a public option, to vote for the bill.

2. The Senate will find the votes to pass a convoluted, tortured, unworkable bill, not only with no public option but so messed up and compromised to be unworkable anyway. This is less certain than number one, but Democrats will probably find a way to pass something.

3. The conference committee will sit for several weeks as Senators like Conrad say we will never pass a public option, House progressives says we will never pass something without a public option, and the White House, Pelosi, Reid, and conference committee members work out details to try to get something passed.

At that point, there are a few possibilities. One is that Democratic leaders just give up and declare health care reform dead. That seems unlikely to me, given the high stakes. Another possibility is that House progressives just fold up. That is more likely given recent history, but given their clear promises and the strong pressure on them not to, they might just hold this time. So let's assume for the moment that they do hold strong. Here are a couple of possibilities for getting a bill passed:

A. The first is that conservative Senators are given a fig leaf compromise on the public option, so that they can say to people they forced a compromise, and then are brought over with all kinds of other incentives that make them more comfortable with the bigger bill.

B. The second is that the conference committee simply breaks the bill in half, one half being the less controversial part that everyone agrees upon, the other being the public option and the financing, both of which can go through the reconciliation process. Then Obama and Reid muscle the 50 votes they need for support.

None of this is easy, and none of it is pretty, but having been through a ton of these kinds of issue fights, both from inside the Clinton White House and from the outside, I can tell you that all of this is doable. These kinds of rhetorical logjams happen all the time, where it looks like the House and the Senate are both unalterably dug in, and then magically deals get done. On important bills, effective Presidents and Congressional leaders find some tough-to-thread-the-needle sweet spot, or they use some uncomfortable or inelegant legislative tool, and things that matter can get done. The media and establishment conventional wisdom, which always tends toward the dire and toward the conservative scenarios, is sometimes proven wrong. So ye of little faith, do not give up hope. The worst thing sometimes happens, but not always. Politicians sometimes sell people out, but not always. Keep fighting for the public option.

If you're looking for inspiration, take a page out of Gov. Dean's book. I co-moderated this part wonky, part political, part fiery panel (along with the wonderful Texas AFT union organizer Tanya Tarr) with Gov. Dean, and I'm sharing it with you because like me, he still believes hope for a public option is still alive and worth fighting for.


Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Good diary. (4.00 / 7)
It would help if Obama and his admin stopped undercutting progressives, though.   Perhaps you could pass that on to folks you know in the admin.  :-)

Yes, please! (4.00 / 6)
The Obama Administration is in dire need of message control. Their confusion is hurting our chances of passing any bill, especially since the progressive base is becoming disillusioned so quickly.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

[ Parent ]
Obama's character (4.00 / 1)
What else would you expect from Obama? He doesn't like fighting.

It's possible he's just undercutting progressives and really doesn't think the public option is necessary to get healthcare costs under control - that's what he's done with the banking issues.

It's also possible that he thinks he has to send these mixed signals in order for the Senate to finally vote on a bill. It would be completely in character for him to think that digging in will just make the gang of 6 dig in further, and that then healthcare reform would die in the Senate without ever getting a chance at reconciliation.

If and when the Senate finally gets something passed, we'll find out how conservative Obama really is - and also how wishy washy. Considering the firm statements he's made over and over again supporting a public option, I think it would really weaken him if he doesn't fight like hell to retain a public option in the final bill. But to get there he doesn't have to start fighting until after something comes out of the Senate finance committee, and he may be right that it would be counterproductive to fight before then.


[ Parent ]
Thanks, Mike. (4.00 / 4)
I hope you're right. With no public option, it's just another corporate bailout that deserves to die. And considering how unpopular corporate bailouts have become, it could seriously drag down Democrats in 2010 and 2012.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

Thank House Progressives Who Support the Public Option (4.00 / 6)
This link to a petition thanking House members who support the public option was posted in comments on another OL diary. But I'm re-posting here to emphasize that it's up to us to make sure these Democrats stand strong and never back down in the face of pressure from the insurance industry and insider Democrats.

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...

So far (4.00 / 3)
under this administration/congress bills in conference have tended to favor the Senate and the House progs have tended to fail.

C.  They go with the Senate bill with a fig leaf for the house.

You may be right, and I hope you are, but I haven't found optimism to have a great track record with this Congress/administration.


Mike actually may be this time... (4.00 / 2)
And here's why:

"As the President stated in March, 'The thinking on the public option has been that it gives consumers more choices and it helps keep the private sector honest, because there's some competition out there.'

"We agree with the President that a public option will keep insurance companies honest and increase competition.

"There is strong support in the House for a public option. In the House, all three of our bills contain a public option as does the bill from the Senate HELP Committee.

"A public option is the best option to lower costs, improve the quality of health care, ensure choice and expand coverage.

"The public option brings real reform to lower costs over the 10 year period of the bill."

This time, we have Speaker Pelosi firmly on our side. Judging by this statement and past statements, she won't even try to whip support for a public option deprived HMO/pharma bailout. It WILL fail if it goes to a House vote. With Pelosi holding firm, the challenge may end up being in Reid's court to find a way to get a public option included bill either past 50 votes in reconciliation or to get cloture if a filibuster threat mounts.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.


[ Parent ]
Some evidence Mike is right (4.00 / 2)
[ Parent ]
No splitting this baby (4.00 / 2)
With the stimulus, there were dollar values and smallish individual items that could be pieced out, so the compromise that came out of conference was pretty much a true compromise.

The compromise on the public option (co-ops) actually appears to be worse than useless. They'll probably make things even worse.

The one thing that gives me some optimism is that it is actually possible that the wanker caucus will actually accept a fig leaf. The Waxman compromise in the house actually gave relatively little to the Blue Dogs to earn support in committee. E.g. adjusting the small business exemption from $250k to $500k is exactly the kind of compromise I can live with (hell, I think that particular change is probably even good policy).

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that a few concessions around the edges like that are sufficient to satisfy the egos of the Senate narcissists and give them cover to declare victory, brag about killing sacred cows, etc.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!


Howard Dean feels the Blue Cross Dems made the Waxman bill better (4.00 / 2)
He said that at his book signing at Barbara's Bookstore in Chicago, and repeated it during the NN09 panel with Mike Lux.

You did an outstanding job there, Mike - I enjoyed seeing it on C-Span very much! Even my tending-McCain younger sister watched it. She's calling the Governor "my" Gov Dean, since I mentioned I had bought his book. I think she's intrigued by a bloggers' conference, so where will next year's event be held?


[ Parent ]
las Vegas (0.00 / 0)
next year. :)

[ Parent ]
Thanks, Ian! (0.00 / 0)
I've e-mailed her about going next year. Two more seniors in the audience, if we make it. :>)

[ Parent ]
This year (0.00 / 0)
was a lot of fun.  NN had some growing pains (Chicago two years ago was not run well), but they seem to have learned from them and ran one of the best run conventions I've been to in years.  And Las Vegas is fun in itself (or at least I think so, some folks can't stand it.)

Hope to see you and your sister there.  


[ Parent ]
News Flash! RNC doesn't like Co-ops either! (4.00 / 2)
This is actually great news in that it cuts the ground from under Conrad and Baucus.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

It's this kind of shit... (4.00 / 2)
...that will make the progressive caucus stronger, 'cos it will make them literally angry!  You feel that you already compromised... here's another compromise, and they still attack it... That would certainly stiffen my resolve and say, screw it!  They won't like anything, so forget it!!!  We're going for the original option...

Now, an interesting scenario I thought our today was that the single payer bill hits the floor in the fall (a promised deal to Anthony Wiener)... one of the reasons they made that deal was 'cos they were worried that Republicans would vote for it in committee and screw everything up...

There is a small, but decent chance that republicans may vote for it on the floor to do the same thing...  If that happens, Pelosi has the house bill... single payer... conference with that, Senate!

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 ]
How about C: (4.00 / 1)
We completely abandon the Public Option with great sorrow, and instead settle for the 'Cost Control Option,' which is completely unlike the Public Option in that it makes a cost-control plan available alongside the private plans that can be enrolled in through a national or regional purchasing pool. This Cost Control Plan will compete with private plans, ensuring an insurance product with broad choice of providers and encouraging private plans to match the administrative efficiencies, cost-control abilities, and quality-improvement capacities of Cost-Control insurance.  


Yes and yes (4.00 / 1)
Yes, this thing can get passed.

It will take some work with a sharp knife in some of those little, hidden House and Senate offices that the leaders like. But, I even think we are hearing about the "fig leaf":

Howard Dean at Netroots Nation spoke eloquently about "choice" and "competition". They are, he said, what the "public option" is about.

Look "public option" is Inside-the-Beltway short-hand for, who knows, some amount of verbiage in some version of some bills, at least, two. Paul Krugman in his blog called the public option "a signal" to the "progressive community" that they are not being sold down the river beyond, everyone admits, not even starting with "single-payer".

I doubt anyone takes health-care reform, not just insurance reform, more seriously than Howard Dean. But, if there is some such person, it just might turn out to be President Obama. But, as Dean said, Obama is the President, and he is not. They will not be saying or doing the same thing in the same place.

So, Obama is in Montana, saying one thing, and Dean is in Pittsburgh, saying something else. But, if this President is as "strategic" as he seems to be and sure was during the campaign, this is going to all add up in the end.

If the "public option" short-hand is "re-framed", re-labled, or just replaced by well designed "choice" and "competition" provisions in the bill that the President signs, that is fine. It could be the same thing as whatever the "public option" actually is in whatever version of which bill is best. They can call the key verbiage "banana" for all I care.

And, yes, the "progressive community" is a weak link in all of this.

For one thing, it is not a community, it is an "identity" with an excess of self-styled "advocates", used to whining and unused to governing.

Health care reform -- after, not before, it is passed and well implemented -- is going to be popular and will lay the foundation for a thirty-year Democratic majority that is likely to be called "populist", not "progressive". This is why the GOP -- which called its program "progressive" back in 1994 -- is fighting tooth and nail.

The Democratic Party will revere Barack Obama, if and only if we get this done. But, we will have other leaders only now emerging. They are going to build new institutions that deal with very big questions only government can address, not every last middle-class anxiety or petty ambition the GOP has balooned and intrusive government exploiting. Those institutions will have to balance more than just budgets, they will have to deal with planetary instabilities.

So, I would like to thank Netroots Nation for showing-off some fine, new leaders, including outstanding members of not so much a "progressive caucus" but a post-Clinton generation of everything it takes to build and maintain a majority governing party -- not the left-wing of a bi-partisan coalition.

This will be hard and some of it is new: The Democratic Party in Congress was in coalition from 1874 to 1994. It did opposition very poorly from 1994 to 2006, and it has not done governance well since then.

But, we are getting better: The Open Left session at Netroots Nation was inspiring, and today's posts right here are ... outstanding. That is what it takes.

If the self-styled "progressives" can build and maintain practical and productive discipline and solidarity with other Democrats instead of celebratinng their precious opinions, well, we will not just get on "the right track" with "health-care" but deal with other matters decisively.

"Decisive" is a word we need to start understanding along with "strategy", -- yes, the same way the military understands this -- "focus", "cohesion", "discipline, "moral" versus "material", and on and on.

We will have to learn "whip" and unlearn "whine".

Progressive will work ex post only as a fact. It will not work ex ante as sanctimonous elitism, hand-wringing, and so on -- the habits and signature emissions of ... losers.  

::JRBehrman


Dems need their own Tom Delay! (4.00 / 2)
Once again this shows that Dems lack a ruthless Hammer which will hit those who endanger party unity and enforce subordination under the president's lead. The rethugs would never allow such nonsense as Senators and Representatives openly arguing against reform plans. Such rebels would have been singled out and put under pressure until they beg for mercy. And rightly so! Allowing such open sabotage ensures that nothing meaningful can ever been done, despite haqving a solid majority. And the public has no sympathy whatever for this fooling around.

Um, DeLay was a criminal (0.00 / 0)
We don't need ruthless criminals, thank you very much.

We had a Tom DeLay, he name was Dan Rostentowski.  


[ Parent ]
He was a criminal AND an effective whip (4.00 / 2)
Of course, I wasn't arguing for engaging in Delay's criminal activities. Do I really have to point this out?

Having said that, now what's your point on the content of my comment? Do you think Clyburn and Durbin are doing a good job?


[ Parent ]
A major reason why he was effective (0.00 / 0)
was because he was a criminal.  

[ Parent ]
You want to give a rest? (0.00 / 0)
Nothing matters. Nothing is worth doing. You're soooo much smarter than us poor saps who actually believe in, god forbid, trying to change things.

You've made that point like, 600 times already, so why don't you go paint your fingernails black and listen to your 70's death glam rock or whatever, and let the grown ups talk in peace?

I promise we won't say anything that would be of interest to you.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Pelosi has been pretty good so far.... (4.00 / 2)
...but the blue dogs overrid her in July, and that set a bad precedent... Prior to that, she was pretty damn good at keeping blue dogs in line...

On the Senate side, though... ugh!  I know it's tough to push Senators, but Reid doesn't even friggin' try, and that's why we are where we are!  If Schumer were majority leader, we'd have two bills passed out of the house and Senate by now... (the house balked 'cos they wanted the Senate to go first)

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 ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox