General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenators Reject Pair of Public Option Proposals (2009)
By ROBERT PEAR and JACKIE CALMES
WASHINGTON After an intense debate that captured the essence of the national struggle over health care, a pivotal Senate committee on Tuesday rejected two Democratic proposals to create a government insurance plan to compete with private insurers.
The votes, in the Senate Finance Committee, underscored divisions among Democrats and were a setback for President Obama, who has endorsed the public plan as a way to keep insurance companies honest.
The first proposal, by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, was rejected 15 to 8, as five Democrats joined all Republicans on the panel in voting no. The second proposal, by Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, was defeated 13 to 10, with three Democrats voting no.
The votes vindicated the middle-of-the-road approach taken by the committee chairman, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana. Mr. Baucus voted against both proposals, which were offered as amendments to his bill to expand coverage and rein in health costs.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/health/policy/30health.html
Blanche Lincoln voted against both, which was why the unions opposed her re-election.
By The Public Record
The Public Record
Oct 8th, 2009
Thirty U.S. Senators signed a letter today urging the inclusion of a public option in any health reform legislation that will be considered on the Senate floor. An additional 14 Senators at least have expressed support for the public option through a resolution, letter, or by voting for a strong public option during committee markups.
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, circulated a letter Thursday to show depth of support for public option among Senate Democrats.
Thirty U.S. Senators signed a letter today urging the inclusion of a public option in any health reform legislation that will be considered on the Senate floor. An additional 14 Senators at least have expressed support for the public option through a resolution, letter, or by voting for a strong public option during committee markups.
The letter, which was circulated by U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), was signed by Brown; John D. Rockefeller (D-WV); Russell D. Feingold (D-WI); Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT); Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI); Tom Udall (D-NM); Kristen E. Gillibrand (D-NY); Roland W. Burris (D-IL); Ron Wyden (D-OR); Debbie Stabenow (D-MI); Barbara Boxer (D-CA); Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI); Michael F. Bennet (D-CO); Dianne Feinstein (D-CA); Jack Reed (D-RI); Jeff Merkley (D-OR); Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ); Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD); Al Franken (D-MN); Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA); Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD); Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI); Edward E. Kaufman (D-DE); Arlen Specter (D-PA); Maria Cantwell (D-WA); Robert Menendez (D-NJ); Bernard Sanders (I-VT); John F. Kerry (D-MA); Herb Kohl (D-WI); and Paul Kirk (D-MA).
Support for the public option runs deep in the Senate, Brown said. Health insurance reform is all about lowering costs, improving care, and increasing choice for consumers. In too many parts of the country, one or two insurance companies control the majority of the market. This isnt good for consumers, businesses, or taxpayers. As we finalize health reform legislation, we shouldnt forget that a majority of Americans, doctors, and Members of Congress support a public option.
The Senators letter expresses concern that absent a competitive and continuous public insurance option health reform legislation will not produce nationwide access and ongoing cost containment.
- more -
http://pubrecord.org/politics/5710/senators-letter-urging-reid/
annabanana
(52,791 posts)revisionist history season.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)President Barack Obama hasn't reached out to lobby Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) on healthcare, the senator said Wednesday.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/87285-sen-lincoln-says-obama-never-lobbied-her-on-healthcare
"... Lincoln, a key Senate centrist who's facing a tough reelection challenge, said that Obama had barely reached out to her on healthcare, his top domestic priority.
"I made it pretty clear that I didn't support reconciliation," Lincoln said during an appearance on MSNBC, by way of offering a reason as to why the president would let her be. "I think he hates asking people to do things contrary to what their gut tells them to do."
... Lincoln said she hadn't spoken to Obama on the phone about healthcare, though at some point during the healthcare process, she reached out to the president and sought a meeting with him.
The reconciliation process Democrats are considering would allow them to pass healthcare legislation with only a simple majority of votes instead of the 60 votes usually needed to end a filibuster. Lincoln and a handful of other centrist Democrats have said they would vote against the reconciliation bill, but it still appears as thought Senate leaders still have enough votes to proceed..."
White House as helpless victim on healthcare
http://www.salon.com/2009/12/16/white_house_5/
"... As was painfully predictable all along, the final bill will not have any form of public option, nor will it include the wildly popular expansion of Medicare coverage. Obama supporters are eager to depict the White House as nothing more than a helpless victim in all of this the President so deeply wanted a more progressive bill but was sadly thwarted in his noble efforts by those inhumane, corrupt Congressional centrists. Right. The evidence was overwhelming from the start that the White House was not only indifferent, but opposed, to the provisions most important to progressives. The administration is getting the bill which they, more or less, wanted from the start the one that is a huge boon to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry. And kudos to Russ Feingold for saying so:
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation.
This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I dont think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth, said Feingold. I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.
Lets repeat that: This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place. Indeed it does..."
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Sen. Lincoln says Obama never lobbied her on healthcare"
...the 30 Democrats who signed the letter didn't need lobbying from the President to support a public option. Is this an attempt to excuse Lincoln?
This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I dont think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth, said Feingold. I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.
Lets repeat that: This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place. Indeed it does..."
So the people who voted against the bill aren't to blame?
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)If you really want something then you fight for it, unless you really did not want it in the first place.
Thought the point of those articles would be obvious.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Lieberman Pledges To Filibuster House Bill: The Public Option Is Unnecessary
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/11/08/68348/lieberman-filibuster-public/
Don't pretend this is the first time a Senator, either a Reublican or one who enables them, snubs logic and public pressure.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)Lieberman: Obama Never Pressed Me On Public Option
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/21/lieberman-obama-never-pre_n_399355.html
Remember when Billy Tauzin said he cut a deal with the WH and many on DU called him a liar, then we come to find out there was a deal cut!
Maybe Lieberman and Lincoln are not telling the truth.
So what did Obama do to persuade Lieberman, post your links.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Lieberman: Obama Never Pressed Me On Public Option"
...I really care about Lieberman's version of events. Why the hell did he oppose the bill?
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)use to convince him to change his mind?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You probably did not care about Tauzin's version either, what public pressure did the WH use to convince him to change his mind? "
...care about this either. Lieberman sucks. He's an asshole. He did not support the public option. Deal with it.
Try to find someone else to help you salvage Lieberman's credibility.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)yet Lieberman gets the blame.
http://www.salon.com/2009/12/16/white_house_5/
"... UPDATE: Its also worth noting how completely antithetical claims are advanced to defend and excuse Obama. Weve long heard from the most blindly loyal cheerleaders and from Emanuel himself that progressives should place their trust in the Obama White House to get this done the right way, that hes playing 11-dimensional chess when everyone else is playing checkers, that Obama is the Long Game Master who will always win. Then, when a bad bill is produced, the exact opposite claim is hauled out: its not his fault because hes totally powerless, has nothing to do with this, and couldnt possibly have altered the outcome. From his defenders, hes instantaneously transformed from 11-dimensional chess Master to impotent, victimized bystander.
The supreme goal is to shield him from all blame. What gets said to accomplish that goal can and does radically change from day to day...
"... UPDATE III: Over at Politico, Jane Hamsher documents how Joe Liebermans conduct on the health care bill provides the perfect vehicle to advance the agenda of the White House and Harry Reid. Consistent with that, she independently notes media reports that White House officials are privately expressing extreme irritation with Howard Dean for opposing the Senate bill as insufficient, but have nothing bad to say about Lieberman, who supposedly single-handedly sabotaged what the White House was hoping for in this bill."
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You cannot post anything the WH did to influence Lieberman ...yet Lieberman gets the blame. "
...poor misunderstood Lieberman, being accused of not supporting a bill he didn't support!
He's an asshole and deserves the blame: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2009/December/16/lieberman-and-reform-position.aspx?print=1
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)put pressure on Lieberman, yet we are told the WH Really wanted it.
So no links on that subject ... guess we're back to crickets again.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"So you have no links to support how the WH ...put pressure on Lieberman, yet we are told the WH Really wanted it. "
...have links? I don't care how much pressure the WH put on Lieberman. He should have had enough common sense to do the right thing.
"So no links on that subject ... guess we're back to crickets again. "
No, we're back to you pretending that you're arguing a valid point.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)"I don't care how much pressure the WH put on Lieberman. He should have had enough common sense to do the right thing."
LOL, now you're living in a fantasy world!
So the WH should just sit back and apply no public pressure because they can expect Lieberman to have common sense and do the right thing.
Post when you have some relevant links.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)I don't care how much pressure the WH put on Lieberman. He should have had enough common sense to do the right thing."
LOL, now you're living in a fantasy world!
So the WH should just sit back and apply no public pressure because they can expect Lieberman to have common sense and do the right thing.
Post when you have some relevant links.
...how the hell can anyone expect a member of the Democratic caucus to "enough common sense to do the right thing"?
Does he know not to pee on the floor without being coerced to go to bathroom by the President?
You're delving into absurd speculation about the level of pressure that would have been required to make Lieberman less like Lieberman, and you're accusing me of being in a "fantasy world"?
Lieberman opposed the public option, that's not a fantasy.
As for the repetitive request for links, do you realize that these make no sense because your point is a big FAIL?
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/11/08/68348/lieberman-filibuster-public/
Cleita
(75,480 posts)sold to the highest bidder. Sigh!