As he notes there, the rubber hits the road in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid's under pressure to produce a healthcare monstrosity that a majority of Americans opposes. The Politico's got the story, "All Eyes on Sen. Harry Reid." But the bottom line is who's going to vote for the bill in the upper chamber? A bit of that calculation's at NPR, "House Hands Health Care Challenge Off to Senate."
Note first that Harry Reid is vulnerable. See Rasmussen, "Election 2010: Nevada Senate Race: Harry Reid Trails Republican Challengers in 2010 Election." And as Liz Sidoti reports, "Democratic leader Harry Reid is woefully unpopular in Nevada. Six Republicans are competing for the chance to topple him the way GOP Sen. John Thune of South Dakota did to then-Democratic leader Tom Daschle in 2004."
The prospects of facing defeat next year must weigh on Senate Democrats as they contemplate their healthcare votes. (See, "2010 elections: Democratic Fears, Republican Hopes.") Reid will need the support of all 58 senators from the Democratic caucus. He'll also need the support of Connecticut's Joseph Lieberman, the Independent Democrat who has pledged to oppose any health bill that includes the public option. And on this morning's "Face the Nation," Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina announced that the Nancy Pelosi ObamaCare cram-down would be "dead on arrival" in the Senate:
Also, from Bill Dupray, "Democrats Celebrating Too Soon on Health Care?":
In the Senate, the Democrats need 60 to break a filibuster, and several Democrat Senators have expressed deep reservations about the breadth and expense of the bill . . . and the Senate bill is nowhere near as broad and expensive as Pelosi's. Also, in the House, the minority party cannot control or obstruct the majority. In the Senate, not only can a minority party obstruct legislation, a single Senator can do it.More action at Memeorandum.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) has flat-out said he will filibuster the bill. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) will not support the Public Option.
And they are not the only ones.Independent Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman said Tuesday that he would support a Republican filibuster against the bill unless it's changed. Key Democratic moderates including Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; Ben Nelson, D-Neb.; and Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., also said they were uncertain how they'd vote, expressing deep reservations about the public plan.
And Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, the only Republican to have voted for any version of health care reform, reiterated Tuesday that she's "disappointed" in Reid's proposal and will not support the government option.
The wavering, and in some cases crumbling, support for the package demonstrates how much of a gamble the Nevada Democrat took by unveiling a bill Monday that includes the controversial government plan but has no Republican backing. And it's a reminder of the warnings made months ago by Senate Democrats like Kent Conrad, D-N.D., that a public plan simply does not have the votes to pass and should not be included in the final bill.
1 comments:
Forget public option. There should be a solid no against this bill in whatever shape, form or length it is, unless it were 100% re-written, truly transparent, market/patient/doctor friendly, contained elements of tort reform, cost control, portability of insurance, lack of forced purchase and mandates etc.
If it does not have these, then it should be DEFEATED AT ALL COSTS. It is a tyrannical bill, in either Senate or House form, worse than anything we stood against at Bunker Hill.
ENOUGH.
Enough control over our lives, enough spending us into bankruptcy and ruining the lives of our children and grandchildren.
It's time to throw out ANYONE who votes for this bill, and the public option is only a small part of what makes it so awful. It does NOTHING to help control costs, it does nothing to give us our own choices.
These totalitarians in Congress can GO TO HELL.
Post a Comment