Make It Happen

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Oct 14, 2009 at 14:15


The Senate merger process ramps up today.  At 2:30 pm eastern, Senators Reid, Dodd, and Baucus will meet with five representatives from the White House to discuss combining the Senate HELP bill with the Senate Finance bill.  The combined bill will be sent to the floor for debate, amendments, and passage through to conference committee.

In these negotiations, Dodd and Baucus will largely cancel each other out.  That makes the White House and Senate Majority Leader Reid the key players.  As such, Open Left is entering the fray on the merger process, running advertisements in D.C. to tell President Obama and Senator Reid we are counting on them as the process goes forward.  The ad is on the right, and you can click on it to see the animated, flash version.

The message of the ad is simple: We have the votes. No excuses. Make it happen.

  1. There are at least 51 Senators who would vote for Senator Schumer's "level playing field" public option in an up-or-down vote. (Source)

  2. There are enough Senators in favor of health care reform with a public option for it to pass through the Senate reconciliation process: (Source)

  3. There are now 60 active, voting members of the Democratic Senate caucus, which means no Republicans are required for cloture motions to pass. ((Source)

  4. The House of Representatives is not debating whether or not to pass a public option, but whether to pass one tied to Medicare rates plus 5% or one with negotiated rates. As such, there will be a public option that reaches conference committee. ((Source)

  5. It will be more difficult to include a public option in health care reform if one is not in the merged of Senate Finance and Senate HELP committee bill that is sent to the floor of the Senate. If a public option is in the bill sent to the floor, it will require 60 votes only for the entire bill to pass cloture. However, if a public option is not in the bill, the public option itself needs 60 votes. (Source)

  6. It actually only requires 51 votes to break a filibuster, since we all remember the "nuclear option" fight that took place four years ago. (Source)
Senate process is often used as a weapon against the progressive grassroots.  Not wanting to say they disagree with us or for our contributions to stop flowing, Democrats leaders through up their hands and say they didn't have the votes, without saying which votes they don't have or telling the truth about Senate process.

That isn't going to fly this time.  The grassroots are learning about Senate process, and we know we have the votes.  What we need is leadership from President Obama and Senator Harry Reid to make sure that a public option is included in the final bill, and that no Democrats join with the Republican filibuster of that bill.

Please contribute $25 to send this message to Senator Reid and President Obama.  If we raise $5,000 total, we can run this in Roll Call and The Hill, two publications that most D.C. insiders read every day.  If we raise $10,000 total, we run it in The Washington Post.

As of 2:10 p.m. eastern, with the CREDO Action match, 87 donors have put us $4,680 toward our goal. Help get us over the top, and take action in the Senate merger process.

Update (3:15 p.m.): $5,880 from 113 donors! The ads will start running at midnight in The Hill and Roll Call. Can we make it to the Washington Post?

Update 2 (4:15 p.m.)  $7,040 from 133 donors!

Update 3 (Adam): $9,600 from 163 donors! Thank you!! Let's hit $10,000 by midnight EST.
Chris Bowers :: Make It Happen

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Make It Happen | 19 comments
re: senate process (4.00 / 4)
That isn't going to fly this time.

damn right it won't

kicked in $25 - where can we see the totals? (4.00 / 5)

thank you! (4.00 / 2)
Thanks! I didn't set up a thermonator for the page, but I probably should have.

I will keep updating regularly. We are currently at $6,230, from 119 donors.  

[ Parent ]
Make what happen? (0.00 / 0)
No matter what finally comes out of conference committee, it'll be something requiring numerous amendments to make it something that will cover every American and hold prices down while preserving quality of service.  If what comes out of conference committee either hasn't got a public option, or whatever public option is created from it is so watered down as to be ineffective, then we'll end up with something unacceptable and that cannot be supported by the left.

So what exactly are we supposed to be pushing for?  In all this baloney of a "public option," no one seems to have adequately defined what that is.  Is it Medicare for All, namely, single-payer?  Is it some package of regulations that brings down prices for insurance and drugs?  What?  If you can't explain this after everything that's gone on, and I suspect you won't be able to, then kindly explain why we should be pushing for something that won't get the job of badly needed reform done and will likely be used as an excuse for not trying to pass something better.  I'm not going to help make anything happen until I know exactly what it is I'm supposed to help make happen.


What the Public Option is (4.00 / 3)
Perhaps you should try writing less and reading more.  The Public Option is very well defined and easy to understand: The Public Option is a government run insurance plan one can purchase instead private insurance.

Yes, there is a lot of variability within that definition, but none of that includes what you wrote.

[ Parent ]
How? (0.00 / 0)
Which bill are you talking about?  There is more than one (two or three in the House, with the two now being mashed into one another in the Senate).  Is every American covered under any of the "public options" now being debated?  Will the government have bargaining power to drive down the price of drugs?  Will the "public option" be able to reign in insurance fraud by insurers?  What about those Americans too poor to afford private insurance but who probably won't fall into that income eligibility level that would allow them onto a public plan (assuming one survives the legislative process, something that is by no means guaranteed)?  How long will it take to implement?  If mandates are written into the final bill, with no provisions for forcing down private insurance prices, who pays the resulting tax penalties and how?  Once people deemed too poor or too sick to insure by the corporations are thrown out of their private insurance and into, well, nothing, where is the safety net?  Will one even exist in any meaningful form?

Lay out step by step what this so-called "public option" will do, what it won't do, and if it's even going to be in the final bill, how many people will be able to rely upon it.  If you can't or won't do that, and bear in mind these are things you need to be able and willing to explain to lay voters, then don't bother telling me to "read it."  I have read enough about the sham being foisted upon us to know it won't do anything to reform the health care system.


[ Parent ]
a "public option" available only to less than 5% of the country (4.00 / 1)
will be too small to be able to compete with private insurance.

The "public option", as currently presented, is a slight variant of the same free-market Reaganite ideas that have been shoveled down our throats for the last thirty years.

Those countries which have a "public option", do not allow competition between private and public sectors. Take Germany for example. Everyone under a certain income level is autoenrolled in the state-run insurance system. If you are over that income level (or meet several other exceptional criteria), you can choose to purchase private insurance. Otherwise you're obligated to stay in the government system. This prevents private insurers from cherrypicking and dumping the sickest customers onto the government system.

Or take Medicare is a single-payer system. Its constituency is restricted to the elderly and disabled, but once you qualify you are in it automatically, and the government does not allow competition.

What Congress is currently proposing is that the government get into the insurance business, and compete directly in the market with established private insurers.

That's a totally different approach, and one that has a serious chance of failure. Because it's very difficult to break into insurance, and without a large customer base, it probably won't get off the ground.

That's why this is all such a farce. The "public option" being proposed is tiny compared to what would be needed to work.

[ Parent ]
All very reasonable points! (0.00 / 0)
While I don't completely agree, these are all very reasonable points.  Obviously, you know what the Public Option is and know how to criticize its week points.   Michael, on the other hand, pretends he does not.  I almost responded to his reply, but decided it was not worth it.
[ Parent ]
There's no pretense. (0.00 / 0)
Explain to me, a lay voter, what these bills that contain a "public option" do.  Based on the analysis given so far in this farce, there really is no solid definition of what this thing - if it even passes - will accomplish.  Will it cover everyone?  Will it cover all of the uninsured (which includes me)?  If not, and I end up among those not qualifying for this so-called public option that may or may not be passed, how do I get health insurance?  And if I do manage to be covered, what sort of coverage will it be?  Will it pay all my medical, dental, eye care, or if I ever need it, mental health expenses?  If not, how much or how little?  And if I end up being penalized for not being able to afford health insurance, with what am I supposed to pay this penalty?  What will happen to me when I am unable to pay it?

You have to be able to explain this public option if you expect people to support and fight for it.  I've asked you repeatedly, and thus far you've refused to describe it.  And you wonder why I refuse to throw away my support on something no one seems able or willing to adequately define.  This is why I support nothing less than H.R. 676 - Medicare for All.  That, at least, can be defined.  It covers every American under Medicare.  It's that simple.  People know Medicare.  It's been around for decades.  It's proven.  It works.  Why you'd expect me to support something you can't and won't define is beyond me.  Instead of condescendingly dismissing questions, try answering them.


[ Parent ]
I'll chip in what I can... (4.00 / 3)
Especially if any plans emerge to run these ads here in Nevada, where they really need to be heard. People here want the public option, and that's the message we need to keep sending to Harry Reid. Believe it or not, he's been VERY GOOD in representing us in Nevada and "bringing home the bacon". If we frame it in a way that demonstrates how strongly Nevadans want real health care reform with a strong public option, I have no doubt he'll deliver. :-)

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.
I'm in this time, too (4.00 / 6)
You guys are doing great work at this site. OpenLeft really has become much more than a blog. I'm glad to help put some more wood behind your arrow.
Gotta say (4.00 / 5)
I don't think this strategy will do much.

You want to influence Reid? Hire organizers on the ground in Las Vegas and Reno and hit the doors of every voter that voted in the Democratic caucuses and was newly registered from '08 to '09, and have them get signatures from those voters that they will vote against Harry Reid in 2009 (in either a primary or the general election) if he doesn't work to represent them instead of Olympia Snowe. The petitions should demand a robust public option (with Senator Wyden's free choice provisions), repealing the anti-trust provisions granted to health insurance companies, and NO individual mandate of any kind until a functioning and affordable health insurance market has been demonstrated.

This is the only fulcrum we have against Reid -- listen to his own voters and do the right thing, or do the wrong thing and guarantee a loss.

The inside game might be worth something, but field trumps. Obama is the only politician in the Democratic party to have figured that out in recent years.

I appreciate all your hard work, reporting, advocacy, and passion, but I think this strategy is misguided. Revolution comes from boots on the ground, not ads in WaPo.  

sounds good (4.00 / 1)
You want to influence Reid? Hire organizers on the ground in Las Vegas and Reno and hit the doors of every voter that voted in the Democratic caucuses and was newly registered from '08 to '09, and have them get signatures from those voters that they will vote against Harry Reid in 2009 (in either a primary or the general election) if he doesn't work to represent them instead of Olympia Snowe. The petitions should demand a robust public option (with Senator Wyden's free choice provisions), repealing the anti-trust provisions granted to health insurance companies, and NO individual mandate of any kind until a functioning and affordable health insurance market has been demonstrated.

how about it chris?

can we set up something on the ground in nevada?

[ Parent ]
Friendly question (4.00 / 1)
What evidence is there that this approach (placing ads in DC publications) does anything useful, or even if it does, is the best use of scarce resources?  I could imagine that it might help, possibly less on health care than as a longer-run "these guys matter" sort of thing, but can also imagine it's totally useless.  I don't have enough money to give to this without a clear pragmatic argument on usefulness.
Get national media attention... (4.00 / 1)
The AFL-CIO just did exactly this today, and Ed's talking about it on MSNBC right now. Still, I agree with you that they shouldn't stop there. I'd like to see this ad also published in The Las Vegas Sun, The Las Vegas Review-Journal, The Reno Gazette-Journal, and perhaps a couple of the "Cow County" publications (perhaps The Pahrump Valley Times and/or whatever the Elko paper is). As I said above, we need to see this here in Nevada where we can have a real affect on Reid.

And by playing here, Chris will get even more media attention. I'd just LOVE to see him take on Jon Ralston "Face to Face"! ;-)

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

[ Parent ]
the ad is a show of force (4.00 / 2)
It demonstrates commitment on the part of the progressive base. It says, "we are well enough organized to make ourselves heard on short notice, even on detailed issues."

Now, granted, it not a LOT of force, since it is just an ad in a spot that will be read by staffers. But, it must be painfully obvious to the staffers reading such an ad that the same few hundred (or thousand) progressives that kicked in a few bucks each might just as well have saved the money and contributed to it their bosses reelection campaign. That is, we might have, if they would just stop pissing us off.

[ Parent ]
re: show of force (4.00 / 1)
the same few hundred (or thousand) progressives that kicked in a few bucks each might just as well have saved the money

time too (knock on doors)

I think that's the most important tool we can bargain with

didn't nate silver say the ground game is like 3 times as the air (ads) game?

[ Parent ]
I understand, BUT the ones that really need to be reached... (0.00 / 0)
Are my fellow Nevadans. I have some experience on lobby campaigns like this one, and I remember hearing legislators and their staffers dismiss progressive advocacy off hand as a bunch of "out of district hippies". But when it's people IN THE DISTRICT doing the advocacy, it's so much more powerful. That's why I think OL will get much more bang for its buck in publishing ads in the Nevada media and stirring up Nevadans to ask Reid to fulfill his promise to push the public option.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.
[ Parent ]
All the cited good reasons for this campaign are good reasons. (0.00 / 0)
The best reason however is that whats important about this campaign si it lets known, what needs to be known. The literati, the blogger watching, Versaille centric media aren't talking about this. Even HuffPo, even TPM haver been spurting that its all over for weeks, nmost papers have called the PO dead since last month, all we hear is blame in every media outlet.

AS far as they know, as a large number of people know this Bill has been given an obituary, its already dead.

Letting it be understood, that it is very much in hand, and that very specific people can make it happen, need to act to keep it on track exposes, the expectation of success.

A similar campaign in the blogs and papers of NV, an expectation of Reid's success, is also helpful. As would a campaign in Montana, among Democrats, from them, even better.

Maine and other states as time and money allow.

Washington first, so that the national media and intertubes understand this is very doable, that failure isn't an option except of choice, it isn't hard to, just hard to decide not to do it.

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.

Make It Happen | 19 comments
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.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox