The Public Wants Partisan Health Care; But Will They Get It?
Public opinion is in support of harsh measures to secure a public option:
“Which of these would you prefer – (a plan that includes some form of government-sponsored health insurance for people who can’t get affordable private insurance, but is approved without support from Republicans in Congress); or (a plan that is approved with support from Republicans in Congress, but does not include any form of government-sponsored health insurance for people who can’t get affordable private insurance)?”
Fifty one percent said they preferred the public option; 37 percent said they preferred a bill with some support from Republicans in Congress. Six percent said neither and seven percent expressed no opinion.
“Who will tell President Snowe and the rest of the Villagers” jokes Atrios.
I think it’s important, however, to remember that legislative outcomes are ultimately determined by raw vote counts and political power, not by semiotics and control of the media narrative. There are three ways to pass a health care bill:
One: Olympia Snowe votes for cloture.
Two: Ben Nelson votes for cloture.
Three: Fifty Democrats agree to try reconciliation.
Clearly Olympia Snowe doesn’t favor the “ignore Olympia Snowe” approach.
It’s pretty clear that there are fifty Democrats who favor a public option, and if they’re really willing to play procedural hardball there’s not much the parliamentarian or David Broder can do to stop them from enacting a bill with 50 votes. But we’ve seen very little enthusiasm for that approach, probably for reasons that have less to do with public opinion than with the fact that the 60 vote senate serves the interests of individual senators qua senators.
So you’re left with Ben Nelson—and everyone else. What does he want? Will joining with the Republicans to filibuster a health bill imperil his re-election?
27 Responses to “The Public Wants Partisan Health Care; But Will They Get It?”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 30th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
The public voted for a partisan majority, too.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
So you’re left with Ben Nelson—and everyone else. What does he want? Will joining with the Republicans to filibuster a health bill imperil his re-election?
Not necessarily, but Obama cutting his DNC-approved or even actively campaigning against him would. But then again, Obama doesn’t fundamentally disagree with Nelson, or Snowe.
We can dance around this forever, but the truth is that the White House cut deals with health care lobbyists before debate on reform even started. And that is why the bills already kind of suck, before they get further watered down.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
DNC-approved funding*
October 30th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
But we’ve seen very little enthusiasm for that approach, probably for reasons that have less to do with public opinion than with the fact that the 60 vote senate serves the interests of individual senators qua senators.
The ability for one stray asshole to derail a whole bill is what makes Senators important.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Fuck.
When Matthew wrote “Public opinion is in support of harsh measures to secure a public option” —
I thought he was about to report that a mob was hanging half the Republican Caucus from tree limbs on the National Mall.
Don’t TEASE me.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Or you could, you know, let the Republicans filibuster against health care for a few days, watch the media talk about it, and see how it helps their popularity.
But we’d never do that…
October 30th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
I would say Lincoln is a much bigger problem than is Nelson.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
That’s not how it works anymore, Cotter. Part of making cloture easier (60 vs 67 votes) was ending the Mr. Smith Goes To Washington absurdity. If there’s no cloture, there’s no cloture–they don’t have to keep debating, there just isn’t a vote.
Reconciliation is being saved for maximum effect. Lieberman and Nelson won’t end their party affiliation with a filibuster of a bill that’ll be passed–with better provisions–through reconciliation.
Their support actually weakens the bill, cuz we’d get Rockefeller with Opt Outs in reconciliation.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“I would say Lincoln is a much bigger problem than is Nelson.”
And Lieberman is a bigger problem than either one of them.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
During the Revolution, Washington would station a unit of trained regulars at the rear of his own lines with orders to shoot the militiamen if they ran away too early. If they were no longer needed, or if the fight was hopeless, they were allowed to run off without being shot. I don’t know if they ever actually had to shoot any.
Obama should find a way to make the conservative Democratic senators aware that he has resources at his disposal to hurt them if necessary. Losing Ben Nelson’s seat to a Republican would be a net loss. Losing that seat to a Republican and having a half dozen other Senators develop a strong sense of political mortality would be a net gain.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
A tourism boycott of Maine might do some good, but Nebraska is immune to that threat.
If Snowe screws this up, we should start circulating jokes about how dumb Mainers are, especially if they vote wrong on marriage too.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
I suspect he wants to have it three ways, by allowing cloture, taking credit for stripping out the death panels, and telling his lobbyist buddies, “sorry, this is the best deal I could get you.”
October 30th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
If Snowe screws this up, we should start circulating jokes about how dumb Mainers are, especially if they vote wrong on marriage too.
Hey Emerson’s not blaming Obama.
I agree with Miles when he says:
Reconciliation is being saved for maximum effect. Lieberman and Nelson won’t end their party affiliation with a filibuster of a bill that’ll be passed–with better provisions–through reconciliation.
Their support actually weakens the bill, cuz we’d get Rockefeller with Opt Outs in reconciliation.
Early in the summer when Obama said he’d take it through reconcilliation you knew it meant he meant business. Maybe it’s why we’ve gotten as far as we have.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
So we must take what we can get because the Senate is corrupt?
October 30th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
One word: reconciliation (no opt-out compromise needed).
October 30th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Don Williams
If anyone proposed hanging BHO on the National Mall, you would call it a “lynching”; why is fair the other way around?
BTW, it is hysterical that anyone hear actually believes Joe Lieberman cares what the denizens of this and all the other Loony Left blogs think of him. You flatter yourselves silly.
He defeated Ned Lamont decisively, after the likes of Chris “Friend of CountryWide Bank” Dodd supported Lamont; is a good friend of McCain; is a deficit hawk facing a budget-busting bill.; isn’t running for reelection until 2012 and most CT voters would not support a “governnment-run” health care system. “Public Option” polls well only because most people don’t understand it; see how “government-run” polls? Poorly, except here.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
they don’t have to keep debating, there just isn’t a vote.
Which is why we’re in the absurd situation we’re in!
Rules intended to preserve the right to debate measures are being abused to kill them, because there’s essentially no cost to doing so.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Mike K. Lieberman is now one of the most unpopular politicians in Connecticut history. He ‘won’ reelection by lying to the people of CT and telling them he’d be critical of the war. The idea of him running for reelection with his approval rating is a joke.
He appears to intend to run again anyway, but that says a lot more about his mental state than it does about any actual chance he has of winning.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
I would seriously suggest that, come 2010, the Democrats seriously alter the Senate rules. Eliminate filibusters, reduce the number needed for cloture, or make filibustering a far more arduous process.
If they don’t, Obama will be a failed a President. Hopefully the all-but inevitable losses in 2010 will make that clear to them.
October 30th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
soullite: [Lieberman] appears to intend to run again anyway, but that says a lot more about his mental state than it does about any actual chance he has of winning.
Well, it’s possible that Lieberman just wants Harry Reid and the rest of the Senate to have to stick their noses up his ass and then he’ll gladly vote for cloture. Which isn’t delusional or anything. But when even the goes-out-of-his-way-to-be-even-handed Nate Silver says that Lieberman is “a little crazy”, you know, maybe Holy Joe does have a few screws loose.
October 30th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Re Mike K at 16: “If anyone proposed hanging BHO on the National Mall, you would call it a “lynching”; why is fair the other way around? ”
———
Oh, I don’t know. Maybe because Obama doesn’t murder 1000s of Americans every year by whoring for Rich interests — the way the Republicans do?
By the way, has Dick Cheney found Saddam’s nukes yet?
After being in power for 12 years, what solution did the Republican Caucus come up with for the 45 million Americans going without health care?
Or did that $24 TRILLION bailout of Superrich investors foreclose any Republican options on addressing that?
October 30th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
It is difficult in the majority, isn’t it?
October 31st, 2009 at 7:06 am
HaHaHaHaHa!
Those ignoramuses don’t know what the “public option” is.
Every poll questioning them shows that fact.
And no wonder.
The DemoFrauds have yet to say.
They love it that citizens think the public option means the government will give them health insurance at no or reduced cost.
HaHaHaHaHa!
Ask them how they feel about a plan that cuts Medicare by cutting services and raising costs to their elderly parents and raises taxes for an expansion of Medicaid and forces them or through their wages at work to buy some over priced insurance with absolutely NO controls on insurance costs and that the government will demand among other things that insurance polices cover abortion on demand and naturopathy and every New Age hoax available and the icing on the cake they will be taxed on their insurance benefits so that they pay twice for their crummy Obama designed insurance and let’s see how many want the “public option”.
Oh and ask them how much they trust Obama Lies to keep his pledge to cut all that “waste, fraud, and abuse” which is about the sole source of the “savings” he promises.
And lastly ask them if they really trust the TARPonistas to make decisions about their health care.
HaHaHaHaHa!
October 31st, 2009 at 7:50 am
Glenn Beck told me a public option is bad. So it must be. He is so dreamy.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:20 am
The “public” does not understand what the “public option” will mean: huge federal deficits, higher taxes and rising private insurnance rates. Once the public understands this, they will NOT want the public option. Remember, 75% of Americans have health insurance already and the vast majority of them are happy with it. Any democrat who supports this train wreck (health reform with public option) will be voted out in 2010.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:43 am
Remember, 75% of Americans have health insurance already and the vast majority of them are happy with it. Any democrat who supports this train wreck (health reform with public option) will be voted out in 2010.
It is amazing how being discredited and suffering a resounding electoral defeat has only led the Bushies to dig in further. What an embarassment.
October 31st, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Indeed, so great is the need to reduce government spending that we must forthwith abolish the military.