Blanche Lincoln and Health Care
Some Democratic Senators really enjoy making waves in the national press with highly public hand-wringing about the progressive agenda. Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas isn’t like that. Consequently, she tends to fly under the radar screen. But as Brian Beutler points out, in some ways her vote may be the hardest to get:
As a rule, Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) may not be as ideological as Nelson is. But she’s got a problem on her hands right now that Nelson doesn’t. She’s an unpopular senator in a conservative state and she’s up for re-election next year. Unlike Nelson (or Joe Lieberman, who we’ll get to momentarily) securing Lincoln’s procedural vote is a nuts-and-bolts political problem. How do you get her into a position where she (and the Democratic party) feels her seat isn’t particularly imperiled by votes for health care reform. Last week, she met with both Reid and President Obama. Those conversations will surely continue.
The most recent polling on Lincoln I found with a quick Google was from August and it looked really bleak for her. On the other hand, the public option polls well in Arkansas. But perhaps the most convincing thing you could say would be the argument from legacy. A lot of members of congress spent 1993 and ‘94 spiking the Clinton legislative agenda and then went down to defeat in November 1994 anyway. Wouldn’t it make more sense to turn the 111th Congress into a substantive success, hope you can persuade the voters that these are good ideas, and if you fail at least manage to have gone down fighting accomplishing something important?
45 Responses to “Blanche Lincoln and Health Care”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 9th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Fact is, if she votes to kill HCR, she’s done for. Her only chance is to water it down.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Two words: Creigh Deeds. She won’t win Republican and generically conservative-independent support regardless, so her only chance is to kick butt with African-American and progressive turnout. And she won’t get that as a neo-Blue Dog.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Blanche looks pretty good compared to some of the Blue State women (e.g. Mikulski) so let’s not be too keen on getting rid of her.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
I’m not sure “Take one for the team” is going to be a winning argument to any politician.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
This is how red-state Dems should act. Rather than get all Zell Millerish like Ben Nelson, she works with leadership and doesn’t publicly talk trash about her party despite her serious and understandable political concerns.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
At this point is she running for office or for a cushy seat on a corporate board or two?
November 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
And I don’t think “You’re probably screwed either way” goes over much better. Hope springs eternal and all that.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I have to give Yglesias credit that at least he has progressed to citing a state-specific poll when wondering about a Senator’s motivation on lack of support of legislation.
And here’s the latest National for health care reform
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php
Oppose – 51.6%
Favor – 44.2%
November 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Wouldn’t it make more sense to turn the 111th Congress into a substantive success, hope you can persuade the voters that these are good ideas, and if you fail at least manage to have gone down fighting accomplishing something important?
One would like to think so, but apparently it’s pretty cool to be employed as a United States senator, and people will do everything in their power to hold onto such jobs, even to the point of convincing themselves that fucking their natural political allies will actually help them do so.
Plus, in the event you lose your job despite your best efforts at back-stabbing your party, you’ve probably put yourself in a better position for a lucrative sinecure working for a powerful and wealthy corporation or lobbying firm. Conservatism simply pays better.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
At this point it’s really about Lincoln voting for cloture, yes? I can’t see her participating in a filibuster. Lieberman’s the real problem.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Agree with the last point. Hit the sacrifice fly.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Here’s President Kennedy on doing bogus moderation:
I left out the part about cost because both the House and Senate bill save money over time but hey whatever.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Senator Blanche Lincoln of Wal-Mart and Tyson Meatgrinders
FYT.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
While the polls in Arkansas favor the public option, the money will be disappointed if she votes for it.
When the election comes around, she will not be able to point to the benefits of health care reform that people are enjoying, because it won’t be in effect yet. She will, however, be subject to a ton of special issue attack ads.
She should still vote for the bill. Opposing it guarantees defeat. Supporting it gives a slim chance of victory.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Njorl above has it right. However if Lincoln is pretty sure she is going to lose, she will not want to upset WalMart and therefore her future seat on its board or its lobbying money should she decide to stay in DC
November 9th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
I agree with Njorl, vote yes and base your campaign on how you made everyone’s health care better and insurance cheaper. Brag about it all over the state and never express any doubt. Voters like winners and fighters, be one.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Lincoln is 49 years old and presumably will want to work for at least another twenty years. On the one hand, this suggests that she has a lot to lose if she loses her seat *and* her chance to sit on Wal-Mart’s board or to go Daschle. Legacy concerns seem to be stuff that people at the end of their careers think more about.
On the other hand, she has plenty of time to reinvent or rehabilitate herself in some capacity should she vote for health care reform and lose her reelection bid. Also, look at what committees she’s on:
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry (chair)
Committee on Finance: Subcommittee on Energy, Natural Resources, and Infrastructure.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
She’s set to be one of the most important Senators for a climate change / energy security bill. Maybe she’ll decide to do the right thing on health care and then sell out to Big Coal.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Re: How do you get her into a position where she (and the Democratic party) feels her seat isn’t particularly imperiled by votes for health care reform.
Well, she and the five or six others like her could split the difference: vote for cloture, but then vote against the final bill. Problem solved.
Re: And here’s the latest National for health care reform
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php
Oppose – 51.6%
Favor – 44.2%
These numbers have bounced around all over the place for months, and a single poll needs to be treated with skepticism. I expect to see another poll come on with the totals more or less reversed. The weird thing about these polls has been the fact that the specific ingredients of reform generally poll well, and the more liberal they are (e.g., public option) the stronger the public support is.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
JonF Says:
November 9th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Re: How do you get her into a position where she (and the Democratic party) feels her seat isn’t particularly imperiled by votes for health care reform.
Well, she and the five or six others like her could split the difference: vote for cloture, but then vote against the final bill. Problem solved.
Re: And here’s the latest National for health care reform
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php
Oppose – 51.6%
Favor – 44.2%
These numbers have bounced around all over the place for months, and a single poll needs to be treated with skepticism. I expect to see another poll come on with the totals more or less reversed. The weird thing about these polls has been the fact that the specific ingredients of reform generally poll well, and the more liberal they are (e.g., public option) the stronger the public support is.
============================================================
Go look, it’s not a single poll but a compilation of polls. The Oppose v Favor lines crossed in July and the Oppose trend line has been headed up since mid-September. That’s not bouncing around all over the place.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
if you fail at least manage to have gone down fighting accomplishing something important
Like in The Battle of Maldon: “Will shall be the sterner, heart the bolder, spirit the greater as our strength lessens.” Or Animal House: “Otter: ….I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part. Bluto: And we’re just the guys to do it.”
November 9th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I thought Wal-Mart came out in favor of HCR.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Here is a partial solution. If Lincoln loses in her Senate seat due to voting for health reform, Obama should promise her an important position in the administration.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
When the election comes around, she will not be able to point to the benefits of health care reform that people are enjoying, because it won’t be in effect yet.
There’s some kind of fund set up for people with preexisting conditions that comes into effect right away (IIRC) and also, and end to recision comes into effect immediately.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
I think David is right. She is going to lose no matter what she says or which way she votes. Period. And she knows it, or at least she should.
At this point Blanche’s vote is entirely up to the people who can promise her the best job after her defeat. And, unfortunately, her best opportunity is following the example of Daschle and Tauzin and getting those big corporate bucks shilling for Pharma, Big Agriculture, or Wal-Mart.
The more I think about the more I am coming to realize that there is no way she votes for a Public Option. Her future income depends on her stopping this bill. Same thing goes for Joe Lieberman, BTW. They literally have millions of dollars in personal income and perks awaiting them if they stop health care reform.
They’ve been counting on that big payday for years and years. They endured countless humiliations and rubber-chicken dinners while campaigning and raising money so they could get paid. No way they are screwing that up at the last minute.
The only question isn’t whether or not health care passes. Of course it won’t. The mystery is how it dies. Do amendments like the Stupak abomination finally force the progressives to walk, or does Reid make Lincoln and Lieberman stand up and vote against Obama and the millions of uninsured?
Lincoln, Landreau, et. al. would prefer it if a fight over, say, abortion derailed the whole thing. Which is why, I think, this amendment passed. They are trying – and succeeding – in making the bill too poisonous for anyone with a soul to vote for it.
The story of 2010 and 2012 is going to be the civil war within both parties. God knows where all of this ends up, but there will be blood.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
I’m with LED. If her political death is indeed imminent, let’s hope she decides to exit with some grace, doing the right thing.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
I think choska@24 nails it. The goal here is to make any bill that comes up so bad that no one will vote for it, not even the DFH’s. This will give certain people the cover they need to sneak out of town – should the chips fall that way – with their post-Congressional earnings potential intact.
And – of course – if ‘health care reform’ fails, it will be the DFH’s fault for not being ‘realistic’ enough, or ‘bipartisan’ enough, or whatever the current buzzword will happen to be at the time.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Campesino, I’ve looked at your site, and pardon the expression, that’s just so much hooey. The polls I’ve looked at have said in no uncertain terms that the majority of the public favors a public option, and that this has been so for many months now.
So why the discrepancy? What are the questions being asked that make the numbers flip? More generally, why would a majority of the public be for some sort of public option, yet also be against health care reform?
November 9th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
I agree with #24 and #26 — the way health care reform is going, either it will fail and the GOP will run against a “do-nothing Congress” full of moonbats who can’t even manage to pass their own agenda or it will pass and be so mangled with “compromises” that it will be a disaster that will, of course, be blamed on the DFHs for pushing health care reform in the first place.
What I can’t understand is how Reid, Pelosi and the 11-dimensional chess player in the WH walked into this simple trap. LBJ would have killed (or at least pissed on someone’s leg and sent their son straight to ‘Nam) to have such a favorable political environment for passing health care reform. Unfortunately, the Dem powers that be decided they would try to “compromise” rather than just saying “screw you” to the moderates and GOoPers and passing a bill that would make things a little better for everyone and start us on the path to socialized medicine. There would have been enough of a majority to pass a bill and political death to anyone who tried to filibuster it.
*
OTOH, “the public option polls well in Arkansas” doesn’t translate into “support for the public option will help, rather than hurt”. The GOP could always run an ad to the effect of “Lincoln even supported the public option so beloved by dirty hippies simply because it polled well. who would you rather have in office someone who supports dirty hippy legislation that the majority of your fellow Arkansans want because it’s politically expedient or someone who listens to powerful vested interests whom Jesus personally made wealthy?”
This sort of ad has been used before and works wonders for the GOP. No doubt it’ll be used again and work again.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:01 am
It is just stunning how poorly the Democrats have played their hand. In one year they have gone from one of the most stunning victories in history to pissing away most of their base. Women, gays, environmentalists, the unions . . . gone. Whose left? Seriously, why would any of these core constituencies get off the couch to ring a single door bell for a Dem?
2010 is going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats. Who is going to volunteer or vote for them? BTW, any one think that Hillary is looking good in 2012 if she decides to take a run. I’ll vote for anyone in the Democratic Party who knows how to fight.
Obama’s presidency is running off the rails. He needs to fire Rahm – tomorrow. That guy knows everything about accumulating power, but nothing about using it.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:02 am
ScentOfViolets Says:
November 9th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Campesino, I’ve looked at your site, and pardon the expression, that’s just so much hooey. The polls I’ve looked at have said in no uncertain terms that the majority of the public favors a public option, and that this has been so for many months now.
So why the discrepancy? What are the questions being asked that make the numbers flip? More generally, why would a majority of the public be for some sort of public option, yet also be against health care reform?
===================================================
So if you go elsewhere on Pollster and see the poll aggregation that shows Obama with high favorable ratings you think that’s hooey too?
Ignoring polls you disagree with is a fast road to failure.
November 10th, 2009 at 6:34 am
Re: 2010 is going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats.
They will lose some house seats. Maybe a Senate seat or two, but otherwise it won’t be a big year for the GOP. The Democrats may not be riding high any more, but have you checked out the GOP’s ratings lately?
November 10th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Re: The Oppose v Favor lines crossed in July and the Oppose trend line has been headed up since mid-September. That’s not bouncing around all over the place.
I have been following this fairly closely, and again, the numbers have fluctuated a fair amount, with “favorable” sometimes ahead and sometimes not. Your stating otherwise does not change that fact. Also, and I repeat: the actual components of healthcare reform have generally polled quite favorably. This implies that when people understand the details of the question (rather than being asked some vague question about “Obamacare”) they approve of them.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Would you please answer the question? Or is your not answering it all the answer that I need? I ask again: How can there be a solid majority for a public option, yet a minority for ‘health care reform’?
Ignoring salient questions is a fast road to having people thinking you’re nothing more than a partisan wingnut, btw. And since you won’t answer . . .
November 10th, 2009 at 9:54 am
I don’t know much about this campesino fellow, and what I do know makes me think he’s a garden variety wingnut. But in accordance with good debate practices, and in the dim hope he’s not a spambot, I’ll link to this:
I don’t think anyone can say this is partisan hackery. Unlike, perhaps, some of the others.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:56 am
ScentOfViolets Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 9:46 am
So if you go elsewhere on Pollster and see the poll aggregation that shows Obama with high favorable ratings you think that’s hooey too?
Ignoring polls you disagree with is a fast road to failure.
Would you please answer the question? Or is your not answering it all the answer that I need? I ask again: How can there be a solid majority for a public option, yet a minority for ‘health care reform’?
Ignoring salient questions is a fast road to having people thinking you’re nothing more than a partisan wingnut, btw. And since you won’t answer . . .
=========================================================
You haven’t linked to a single poll to support yourself. You just keep repeating “it polls well” and use that as an excuse to ignore inconvenient data.
You guys are starting to sound like Republicans did in 2005. The polls can’t possibly mean what they say if it’s bad news
November 10th, 2009 at 10:02 am
JonF Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Re: The Oppose v Favor lines crossed in July and the Oppose trend line has been headed up since mid-September. That’s not bouncing around all over the place.
I have been following this fairly closely, and again, the numbers have fluctuated a fair amount, with “favorable” sometimes ahead and sometimes not. Your stating otherwise does not change that fact. Also, and I repeat: the actual components of healthcare reform have generally polled quite favorably. This implies that when people understand the details of the question (rather than being asked some vague question about “Obamacare”) they approve of them.
=========================================================
You couldn’t have looked at the Pollster chart I linked to and written that with a straight face. Again, you haven’t linked to a single poll to support yourself
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/jobapproval-presobama-health.php
Obama’s approval on handling of health care has been in negative numbers since late July. Ignore that too if you like.
Again, you’re repeating GOP behavior from four years ago.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:05 am
JonF Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 6:34 am
Re: 2010 is going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats.
They will lose some house seats. Maybe a Senate seat or two, but otherwise it won’t be a big year for the GOP. The Democrats may not be riding high any more, but have you checked out the GOP’s ratings lately?
=====================================================
You need to e-mail Corzine and Deeds and tell them to check out the GOP’s ratings. I’m sure they’ll feel better
November 10th, 2009 at 10:26 am
ScentOfViolets Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 9:54 am
I don’t know much about this campesino fellow, and what I do know makes me think he’s a garden variety wingnut. But in accordance with good debate practices, and in the dim hope he’s not a spambot, I’ll link to this:
========================================================
Oh my. I link to a poll aggregator that averages a dozen or more polls that shows a solid trend line over a period of months and you cite one poll that gives an answer you like one time.
You guys are starting to sound like global warming deniers. “We had a record cold October, the earth can’t be getting warmer”. That’s a good debate practice!
November 10th, 2009 at 10:27 am
What, campesino really is a wingnut? And it took me all of three posts to figure it out? Whadda surprise. I note that in fact I have cited some polls in the column I linked, and that the twit still hasn’t answered my question.
Another big surprise. Campesino, you’re not only on the road to partisan hackery, you’ve traversed it in near record time. A word to the wise, since you’re so quick to advise others
November 10th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Game, set, and match. You lose, Campesino; when people ask reasonable questions like
and you refuse to answer them, guess what conclusions people are going to draw. Not that you’re honest, or that you have any point to make. More like you’re here to spout talking points.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Of course the nail in the coffin was the twits:
What happens when polls are cited?
What a putz.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:45 am
ScentOfViolets Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Of course the nail in the coffin was the twits:
You couldn’t have looked at the Pollster chart I linked to and written that with a straight face. Again, you haven’t linked to a single poll to support yourself
What happens when polls are cited?
Oh my. I link to a poll aggregator that averages a dozen or more polls that shows a solid trend line over a period of months and you cite one poll that gives an answer you like one time.
What a putz.
=======================================================
No, the nail in the coffin is the fact that you seem to sincerely believe that if you cite one poll that one time gives an answer that you like, 100 polls over a period of months that you don’t like logically *can’t* exist.
You have the global warming denier strategy down pat.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Sigh. Do you honestly think that people can’t see that you are refusing to answer a reasonable question? Do you honestly think people can’t see your about-face from “you haven’t cited a single poll” to “you’ve only cited on poll”? When you’re being this obvious, of course people are going to conclude that you’re a twit.
Thanks for not answering the question, btw
Saves loads of time for people trying to determine if you’re a good-faith kind of guy.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
[...] I referenced some fairly dated polling on Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln. Here’s a poll from just last week: The report suggests [...]
November 10th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
ScentOfViolets Says:
November 10th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Game, set, and match. You lose, Campesino; when people ask reasonable questions like
How can there be a solid majority for a public option, yet a minority for ‘health care reform’?
and you refuse to answer them, guess what conclusions people are going to draw. Not that you’re honest, or that you have any point to make. More like you’re here to spout talking points.
=============================================================
I’ll answer your question honestly – I don’t know. It really doesn’t make any difference, as the fact that you found one poll that says the public option is *popular* doesn’t invalidate dozens of polls that show the overall effort for HCR isn’t very popular. The public option is just one aspect of HCR.
You and MattY seem to think you can identify one aspect of HCR as popular and make that a proxy that makes the whole thing popular. Numerous polls from Arkansas show that the whole HCR effort is unpopular there and it appears Lincoln is acting accordingly.
Seen the polls on cap & trade? One asks if you are in favor and the results show it as popular. Then they ask the same question several times with increasing dollar amounts added to your utility bill due to cap & trade. Support drops like a rock.