More Positive Reconciliation Noises

by: Daniel De Groot

Mon Aug 24, 2009 at 00:18


About an hour ago, the NY Times published this piece indicating mostly unnamed Senate Democrats are now strongly considering using reconciliation to pass a bill containing a public option:


WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats said Sunday that they were fleshing out plans to pass health legislation, particularly the option of a new government-run insurance program, with a simple majority, instead of the 60 votes that would ordinarily be needed to overcome a filibuster.

After consulting experts in Senate rules and procedure, the Democrats said they were increasingly confident that they could legislate creation of a public plan in a way that would withstand challenges expected from Republicans.

The article goes on to recap Charles Schumer's surprisingly strong pro-public option comments this morning on MTP.  

Adding onto that, TomP at DailyKos reports (h/t fladem in quick hits) that Max Baucus has come out in support of a public option.  

Meanwhile, CNN reports (among others) on Sen Lieberman's remarks against using reconciliation.  No need to quote him, he's very serious and very concerned.

It's hard not to see these things as being connected.  Schumer's support was nice to see, then Baucus' sudden break in favour of the PO, and now (most significant, I think), Lieberman's sudden vocal opposition to reconciliation indicates there is something more to this than a trial balloon through the NY Times.  In addition to hailing from an insurance heavy state, Lieberman was well positioned to make demands for his support on cloture for the bill if the 60 vote rules are kept.  At 51, his ability to do so is much weaker.  

Was last Tuesday's story for reals?  

Daniel De Groot :: More Positive Reconciliation Noises

Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
More Positive Reconciliation Noises | 45 comments
Lieberman's a paper tiger (0.00 / 0)
That is, assuming he wants to run for reelection in 2012.  
I'm not worried about him (4.00 / 2)
So much, just that I think that he speaks up now about this is significant, as he had been quiet on the health care debate so far (as I can recall).
[ Parent ]
From reading your post (4.00 / 3)
I didn't think you were, and I agree with your take on the meaning of his statement.    

Somehow, it just felt satisfying to diminish the pious SOB.

[ Parent ]
Lieberman's Official Tag (4.00 / 2)
"Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Aetna)"
[ Parent ]
Ahh.... (4.00 / 3)
Now, we see why Lieberman is suddenly so "concerned" all of a sudden...  He won't get to be the diva that he wants to be...

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!
Also.... (4.00 / 1)
...very interesting that Grassley suddenly became much less of an asshole today...

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 ]
AND (4.00 / 2)
Reuters is reporting that health care saboteur Kent Conrad is even ready to "cut bait" if negotiations continue to stall with Grassley et al.

That's a significant change of tone coming from him!

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 ]
thats refreshing - I haven't seen the Reuters article (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
Here you go... (4.00 / 1)
http://digg.com/d311kUn

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 ]
thanks (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
One thing I've been thinking (4.00 / 2)
Splitting the bill in two with all money related things in reconciliation seems a little unrealistic and will look messy.

But just the public option? That seems potentially good. We are not going to get a single Republican and will lose a few Democrats just based on their opposition to the public option. But could we get a deal on the rest? It seems possible. Pass a House bill with a public option. A Senate bill without it. Take the public option out of conference but have it pass through reconciliation.  

Let's hope Schumer is telling the truth when he says this is being seriously considered.  

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

Well, Reid still hasn't walked back his comments... (0.00 / 0)
And it's been 4 days!  A new record for him!

Bernie Sanders said on Friday's Stephanie Miller show that they have been consulting with the parliamentarian about this, so it does seem real...

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 ]
The problem with putting just the most controverial things in the reconcialiation. (4.00 / 1)
Is that it will be up for review in five years. They might have the balls to throw out PO, but if there's more in it, they might be less willing to strip it, if its a lot of stuff that has to be re-passed. What protects the PO more?

I am posing the question to legislative wonks. Progressive leg wonks, what are the pitfalls and dangers of moving forward. What could be stripped to make it a weak PO, what is the best way to protect it in five years.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
They do not need to be re-passed... (4.00 / 3)
As long as they don't run a deficit, the programs can continue to run forever without a re-authorization...

That's an important point not to be overlooked...

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 ]
Thanks. How to make sure this huge thing doesnt run a deficit is important. (4.00 / 2)
AMking sure we have the proggies in enough numbers to keep it protected will become a full time job. Course thats all to the good.

"Elect progressive democrats or lose your healthcare" is a big big slogan.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
More confidence, pls! The p.o. will be an outstanding success... (4.00 / 1)
..that nobody will dare to throw out in five years.

This reminds me a bit of Emanuel's stance, who doesn't believe in the p.o. being successful, and who even questiones if universal healthcare is possible at all. Consequently, he tries to hedge his centrist Dems with negotiations with health industry. If he would believe in the p.o. becoming a huge success, he would see that his actions aren't only nonsense , but totally counterproductive. A popular reform is its own best safeguardn that doesn't require artificial locks and chains!

Really, imho that's behind many Dem lawmakers' hesitancy: The failure to see that a reform including the public option will be a victory like social security, and that people will drive everybody out of the country who would dare to take it away from them.

[ Parent ]
In five years, depending on hows it is implemented, it nmay not even have sunk in what it does, (0.00 / 0)
let alone been rolled out to lots and lots of people.

As lambert says, one of the problems of this very real victory, is that some of it doesn't even start till 2013, which is four years away. One year of kinks and misstatements and lies in the press and constant bs from the right, it wont yet be the very popular 'social security' like bill it is destined to become.

Oh yes, it will need constant work to protect it, and defend it, and sell it, well after the bill is passed.

Single payer in Canada, incredibly popular, constantly attacked. Not openly, the right de-lists covered services, sells hospitals and leases them back, makes public private partnerships, brings deceptive court cases against it, etc etc. Just because it will be popular doesnt mean it wont need every defence possible, and thats after its fully rolled out.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Yup, depends on how it is implemented. 2013 is too late, of course. (0.00 / 0)
But if it is created in a way to immediately (within one year) give people the public choice, it will be strong bastion. It will still have to be defended, but this won't be too hard. And the canadian example is a good one because it shows the conservatives attacked several times, but they were driven back by liberals AND the public in every single instance.
[ Parent ]
Or, just look at even conservative Brits defending the NHS... (0.00 / 0)
..as evident in the outrage in the UK after the rethuglicans made it look as if british healthcare is a sure path to premature death. When even conservatives defend this socialized medicine, the Tories have only a snowball's chance in hell to get away with the system, if they tried it.
[ Parent ]
No. I am sorry to say that is being attacked even as we speak, Canadians are fighting everyday to keep their health system. (0.00 / 0)
They put shivs in it. They put wedges into it, they write article declaring "Its going to collapse!!!"

I am quite serious, although it will be strong, and defending it will be a crowd pleaser, an election winner, the attacks don't stop, ever.

I have said many times, all good things are temporary, all bad things permanent. It is a wake up call about always being a citizen, and its reminder that organizing is everything.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Hmm, that's not the impression I have, but... (0.00 / 0)
..I have to admit I don't read Canadian news regularly. And you are closer to their issues, regarding culture and neighborhood, of course.
[ Parent ]
I am a dual citizen living in Canada. (0.00 / 0)
as in neighbourhood.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Well, that's quite close! (0.00 / 0)
:D
[ Parent ]
You seem to have connected the dots (4.00 / 3)
I won't believe it until the President signs it...but I will admit that the tone of the print media has changed slightly, and Republican Senators seem strangely jittery over the last few days...
We are winning. This is organizing on the ground. (4.00 / 1)
The progressive caucus et al. was organized here at openleft, moveon, dkos, TPM etc etc to whip the pledge for the PO, public demos and fun draising is moving the whole denate left. We are doing it. Here on the ground.

The most powerful force in America is an engaged public making demands. We need this to grow, to double to triple in strength. We need this to become more self confident, less cynical, more vocal.

We are winning. The Actblue site's page for donations to the Heroes who took the Pledge for the Public Optioon grew by more than $10,000 in the last seventeen hours, and by $ 446.00 in the last 44 minutes.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
The description of Baucus' teleconference is interesting (4.00 / 4)

While discussing the obstacles to getting a public option through the Senate, he assured his forty listeners, "I want a public option too!"

The conference call was groundbreaking in that none of the recipients could ever remember this kind of call ever happening before. The teleconference was set up seemingly in reaction to rising discontent among the local Democratic leaders with the Senator's failure to take a clear position on the issue.

The discussion, which became contentious and rancorous at times, also touched upon the wisdom of creating insurance cooperatives as an alternative to a public option. When several of the county chairs objected, commenting that they did not trust the health insurance companies to police themselves and limit their outrageous corporate profits, Baucus commented, "Neither do I."

In the aftermath of the teleconference, a coalition of eighteen Montana counties in the Senator's home state decided to move forward with their plan to issue a Unified Statement accompanied by a joint press release. The statement sends a loud and clear message to their Senator: Any health care reform package coming out of his Senate Finance Committee must contain, at a minimum, a provision for a strong public option.

The action is a show of unity not previously seen in Montana political history.


More here.
This powerful stuff! (4.00 / 1)
This is great! The most important part is the OBVIOUS pressure being put on our elected represntatives. Obvious in this

a coalition of eighteen Montana counties in the Senator's home state decided to move forward with their plan to issue a Unified Statement accompanied by a joint press release. The statement sends a loud and clear message to their Senator: Any health care reform package coming out of his Senate Finance Committee must contain, at a minimum, a provision for a strong public option.

And in this:

, "I want a public option too!"
Me too! Me too!

This is us being strong. This is us winning, with the teams we are putting together.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Public Option or Nothing (4.00 / 1)
I think the Progressive Block has succeeded at its secondary goal.  There will either be a health care bill with the Public Option or there will not be a health care bill at all.  (The primary goal, of course, is to actually pass the Public Option.)

I don't know the odds, though.

Exactly. (0.00 / 0)


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
[ Parent ]
Hmm, dontcha think "kill bill" may easily be misunderstood... (0.00 / 0)
..by those who want to misunderstand everything Dem? And isn't Pelosi even standing in front of a wide, black death panel???
:D
[ Parent ]
I do not think that people visiting this site are under any apprehension, (4.00 / 1)
that this a threat, promise and realization that the heroes of congress are saying DO NOT TRY AND NEGOTIATE A RECONCILIATION WITHOUT PUBLIC OPTION. Because it will be .  .  .  well, killed.

Like death. It will end. The bill will die. Just like Monty Pythons Parrot. It will not be resting, it wonted be pining for the fjords.

I hope with great urgency that it is understood that this is non-negotiable, just like the grim reaper.


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
re (0.00 / 0)
Hmm, dontcha think "kill bill" may easily be misunderstood

it's not 'kill bill' but 'kill the bill'

I knew something was wrong with your school, now it seems your eyes are going too!

:p

[ Parent ]
There was nothing wrong with my German school! (0.00 / 0)
It's only my fault that I had a "D" in English most of the time (should have spent more time learning vocabulary and training grammar. Especially grammar.)
:-(
And I really am a bit short sighted. But even without glasses I can see that the "The" isn't on the same line as "kill bill", so the slogan obviously goes "the kill bill" and not "kill the bill". If this isn't what HoP wanted to say, that's his fault, not mine.
:P
[ Parent ]
re (0.00 / 0)
And I really am a bit short sighted. But even without glasses I can see that the "The" isn't on the same line as "kill bill", so the slogan obviously goes "the kill bill" and not "kill the bill". If this isn't what HoP wanted to say, that's his fault, not mine.

excuses, excuses!

:p

[ Parent ]
The mood still… (4.00 / 1)
...smacked of reluctance among the Sunday-morning TV pundits yesterday, but elsewhere it seems like progessives are finally standing their ground. And the line on middle-class resistance to reform seems to have gone from "they're pleased as punch with their current coverage" to "they're pleased but apprehensive about ever-rising premiums". Every little bit helps...

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams
Just saw something similar… (4.00 / 1)
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/...

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams
[ Parent ]
Can't find any MSM reporting about Baucus change of mind yet!? (0.00 / 0)
Wouldn't even the lazy US corporate media see that this is news? Strange...
"Change of mind"? (4.00 / 1)
So far it just looks like more Kabuki.  "I'd like the public option too (but we can't get it past the Senate)." It's a transparent exercise in telling the troops what they want to hear.

What is interesting is that Baucus apparently felt the need to mollify the locals.

September is going to be interesting.

[ Parent ]
Let's hope it won't become "Black September"! (0.00 / 0)
:-/
[ Parent ]
And what sort of public option will be passed, if any? (0.00 / 0)
It'll be something toothless that is doomed to failure.  It's got to be single-payer or nothing, people.  Every honest analysis of this so-called public option has made the case that it won't work.


Every analysis has said that short of a Single payer system, which apparently we can't (0.00 / 0)
get enough votes for, but, like Canada did, we can begin with partial implementations, that cover millions and millions of people, and stop Insurance companies from ending coverage mid treatment, prevent insurance companies from not covering pre-existing conditions etc etc., until we explain in ever greater detail, and create ever more demand for an American style of Single Payer.

Your solution will be good too. Can you post a link where people can sign up, do you allow plastic surgery?

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Excuses (4.00 / 1)
Some people use incrementalism as an excuse to slow down progress and protect the current power structure.  We need to fight those people.

But some people use the rejection of incrementalism as an excuse to prefer moral victories over real progress.  

It seems you belong to this latter group.  I almost said this second group needed to be fought as well, but that isn't true.  I appreciate you staking out true left flank and think it is extremely important you keep fighting.  But I don't believe in moral victories.

[ Parent ]
Wrong. (0.00 / 0)
This isn't about scoring a victory.  It's about actually pressing for something we know will benefit every American.  Yes, it would be good morals, but the point is that we aren't going to achieve the real solution to the greater problem of health care failure by taking baby steps or by refusing to fight for that solution at all.


[ Parent ]
I take issue with this (0.00 / 0)
Your qualifier "every honest analysis" implies that anyone saying the PO could work is being dishonest and I think you need to back that up.  I live in a single payer country and like the system, but it isn't the only way to get UHC.  France, Holland, Switzerland, Japan and Germany have UHC without single payer.  It obviously can be done.

I'm open to arguments that the PO won't work as written in any of the bills as written, or even that it can't work even in theory, but not that the people advocating for it are being deceitful or otherwise malfeasant.  A lot of people with no motive to lie are in favour of the PO, so it just doesn't wash.

[ Parent ]
Anyone saying the public option in its current form will work is either lying or not paying attention. (0.00 / 0)
The truth isn't pleasant, and often times is downright offensive - especially to those who don't care to hear it.  That's neither my fault or my problem.  What you're not pointing out when you mention health care reform efforts in other countries is that although not all of them went the single-payer route, they nevertheless enacted laws and regulations that strictly control what private companies are and aren't allowed to do when providing health insurance.  And frankly, after so many years of hearing the same excuses for not pushing for single-payer and other substantive reforms without any valid explanation for why, it's difficult to think that the people making them are being at all honest in their arguments.


[ Parent ]
More Positive Reconciliation Noises | 45 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox