Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada speaks about health insurance reform on Capitol Hill in Washington on Monday.
(Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)Photos (1 of 1)
Senate healthcare bill revives public option. But can it pass?
Majority leader Harry Reid said Monday that the Senate healthcare bill will include a public option that states can decline. But it is not clear how he can get the needed votes.
By Peter Grier | Staff writer/ October 26, 2009 edition
Washington
A public option in healthcare may be OK with Senate majority leader Harry Reid. But it has yet to pass muster with a more important audience: the full Senate itself.
Senator Reid announced Monday that he will send to the Senate floor a healthcare-reform bill that includes the option government-run insurance plan – though states could opt out if they wished. Yet all indications are that the Nevada Democrat remains just short of the crucial threshold of 60 votes needed to defeat a likely Republican filibuster.
Asked flatly on Monday whether he had those votes in hand, which would enable him to shut off debate and move to a final vote, he punted.
“We’ve been working on healthcare, as a Democratic Party – and much of the time we had Republicans helping us – since 1948,” said Reid at a press conference. “We’ve made significant progress these past months.”
The reality is that a number of different versions of a public option may come up for a vote during full Senate debate on a healthcare reform bill.
Under the version backed Monday by Reid, states would have a year following the 2013 phase-in of the new healthcare plan to decide whether to opt out of the public option.
That opt-out clause might soften the opposition to the public option among some conservative Democrats, such as Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. But as it stands now, Reid’s version of the public option likely has lost the vote of Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) of Maine.
Senator Snowe voted to approve the Senate Finance Committee health reform bill, which did not contain a public option. Instead, it contained a provision, suggested by Snowe, that would trigger a public option if private insurance firms did not hit certain cost-containment goals.
“I would not be surprised one bit if Reid has to reverse course over the next few days and reintroduce the plan with a ‘Snowe-trigger’ rather than the ‘Reid opt-out,’ ” says Jordan Sekulow, a political analyst and director of international operations at the American Center for Law and Justice. “Neither liberals nor conservatives seem pleased with Reid’s proposal.”
Sen. Tom Harkin (D) of Iowa, chairman of the Senate Health committee, has said that there are 52 firm votes in favor of the public option in the Democratic caucus and five or so opposed.
On Monday, Senator Harkin issued a statement praising Reid’s inclusion of the public option.
“There is strong support among Senate Democrats and around the country to improve access and affordability and an effective public option can achieve,” said Harkin.
Still, 52 Democratic votes will not get a healthcare bill through the full Senate. Reid has to convince all Democrats (and the Senate’s two independents) to vote as one if he is to push through a bill with no GOP votes.
That would only be to shut off debate, however. It is possible that some Democrats would vote to end talking and move to a final showdown – and then vote against the legislation itself.
“While all the rumblings indicate that Reid is still short two to three votes, the majority leader is betting that moderate Senate Democrats who oppose this version of the public option will still vote to invoke cloture and then later vote against the Senate bill,” says Mr. Sekulow of the ACLJ in an e-mail .
—–
Follow us on Twitter.
Comments
2. Steve M | 10.26.09
Uncle,
True, this plan is partisan, but not in the sense that you’re thinking of. It’s not a plan designed for the benefit of liberals and moderate democrats. The plan is not about insuring only democrats. Its about insuring all Americans.
Its only partisan in the sense that no republicans will vote for it. But that has more to do with 1) republicans’ failure to grasp the significance of this moment in health care history; and 2) their desire to see Obama fail in whatever he tries.
3. Ray | 10.26.09
I don’t see the problem. You vote to end debate saying, “We should vote on this.” and then vote against it if you want. You have the data you need for your ad both ways.
Frankly, the Republicans should also vote to end debate and then vote against the bill. Then they can avoid the label of being obstructionists to this, an most, historically significant votes.
Frankly, Republicans haven’t done anything historically significant in the name of social justice since Teddy Roosevelt.
4. nedclark | 10.26.09
Steve M. is right, Uncle - and you’re…not…
Progress on health care reform is only `partisan’ because the Republicans have refused from the start to cooperate in good faith - doing everything in their power to stymie progress on Capital Hill, and whip up `Tea-Bagger’ Know-Nothings out in their districts. With `cooperation’ like that, who needs foreign enemies?
Our small business insurance premiums sky-rocketing another 19.4% (after rising 11% last year) - to $1073/mo. And we’ve already got the next-highest deductible plan - combined $9,600 for my wife & I. The status quo has conclusively failed…give Americans the chance of affordable, quality health care - a robust Public Option.
5. Outwest | 10.27.09
Steve
Why do you argue “partisan?” I don’t trust the Congress (either party). Where is the transparency? What is the rush to pass this legislation without due deliberation? Troops can be sent to Afghanistan, and then when the leaders on the field report what is needed, the administration can take time to study the situation. Don’t you think this piece or legislation requires similar scrutiny? There are all kinds of statistics showing percentages of the population that either support or oppose this legislation, but we are never told who is polled and what questions are asked? We have been arguing among ourselves about something that we don’t have all of the information about. Why can’t the most pressing aspects of healthcare be reformed first, and then proceed to the next? Do you actually know how much it will cost, and how it will be paid for? Cost savings? I have been around long enough to know that is nothing but hot air. What government program can you, or anyone name that is efficient? Why would anyone think this will be any different? Frankly, why don’t those who truly believe this is such a wonderful idea just move to Canada? Most of the propaganda is based on hatred and envy. Not great motivators to create something good for all. Not that Insurance companies are above any criticism, but do you know what profit they actually generate? Where do you think there is more abuse and corruption: with private insurance companies or in medicare and medicaid? If you think healthcare costs are out of control now, just wait until there are no life insurance companies to add some sanity to the system. Steve, you, uncle and I — we’re just pawns. We can go under the bus. It is a power grab.
Since I am over 30, I don’t know anything. It is just the young who haven’t been lied to long enough by politicians who really understand. If it passes, I hope you like what you’re gong to get. It won’t be what you imagine, and it will cost a heck of a lot more than you dream. I don’t want any President to fail or fall, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with everything he or she does. Every speech he has given contain untruths and distortion. When anyone has to do that in order to get something done, you can be sure the outcome won’t be good. So, when I see the tactics used to mislead and ram something down my throat I feel distrust, and I don’t like it. Like I said, the tactics used and the secrecy surrounding the proceedings, as well as the special interests drafting this further erosion of individual choice tell me enough to know it will not be good for our country. I think it would be great if the President could focus on one or two important priorities and really accomplish something on the unified basis he promised, rather than attempting to “FUNDAMENTALLY change our country.”
6. Edward | 10.27.09
Hey, you’ve got a Democrat next to your title as a Senator, you’ve got to go along on a procedural vote. Cloture will be attained by 60-40. It is not necessary to amass 60 votes after that, except for amendments to the bill.
The conservative Democratic Senators will vote against the final bill if they feel it will help their re-election prospects. And it might, though actually the public option polls very well in nearly every state. Especially among Democratic primary voters, but even does OK among Independents and some Republicans. It is remarkable that even after a long, expensive, false campaign of lies against it, health care reform has over 60% support nationwide. Even 77% of physicians approve of the public option.
7. Eric Klieber | 10.27.09
We keep hearing about a “public option,” but nobody seems to want to tell us what it is. This is an opportunity for the Monitor to scoop the competition by telling readers exactly what a public option is all about. How does it raise capital? What are its sources of income? How will it calculate premiums? Does it use GAAP accounting or Federal Accounting Standards? Can it go bankrupt? If not, what happens if it runs out of money? Is it subject to state health insurance mandates? Does it pay state premium taxes? Put a reporter on this.
8. AngryMobVoter | 10.27.09
This administration is trying to ram a “public option” down the throats of the American people. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!
10. John M Jones | 10.27.09
Until we make constitutional malfeasance a capital crime these thugs in the government will run rough shot over our liberty and freedom.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Uncle Bean | 10.26.09
Make no mistake. There will be no place to hide. Everyone with an IQ above zero knows that closure is the vote that matters. Democrats from moderate areas will not be able to hide behind the I voted to end closure knowing it will pass with only liberal support and pretend that they opposed the measure. Absolutely no independent or conservative voter is going to buy that line. Pure and simple, the liberals are pushing a partisan, national health care plan and everyone knows it.