Reid: We don’t have the votes, but we are going with the public option anyway (UPDATED)
UPDATE: The New York Times thinks 60 votes on the public option may be a tall order.
Opponents of the public option have argued that it should be left out of the bill and that supporters should be forced to offer an amendment to add it to the legislation. In either case, winning 60 votes would seem to be a steep hurdle.
Mitch McConnell doesn’t take his eye off the ball. With or without the public option, the bill is a disaster.
Republicans immediately seized on Reid’s news, with GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) assailing a “thousand-page, trillion-dollar bill that raises premiums, raises taxes and slashes Medicare for our seniors to create new government spending programs.”
“That’s not reform. So, wholly aside from the debate over whether the government gets into the insurance business, the core of the proposal is a bill that the American public clearly does not like, and doesn’t support,” McConnell said in a statement.
And though the “trigger” option, favored by Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) has more votes than does the public option, Reid won’t even send that plan to the CBO for scoring. That will likely cost Snowe’s support, making the entire affair a partisan exercise.
But Reid said he will not send the “trigger” option to the CBO — which endangers the support of Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who has not signed on to the opt-out idea. Snowe wants a public insurance option to kick in only if private insurers don’t expand coverage fast enough.
Asked about Snowe’s lack of support, Reid said: “We are going to have to move forward on this.”
ORIGINAL POST:
The Senate Majority Leader is scheduled to announce that the merged Senate health care bill will contain a public option (with an opt-out provision for the states that the liberals will just love) and he will also announce that he doesn’t have enough votes to pass that plan. This guy is an embarrassment.
From Politico.
Senate Majority Leader will announce this afternoon that he plans to push ahead with a public option vote — one that includes an opt-out provision for states — even though he’s currently short several votes for passage, according to people close to the situation.
The Nevada Democrat has a 3:15 p.m. press conference to discuss details — and his staff has scheduled a closed-door huddle with Democratic legislative directors to map out the road ahead.
Leadership sources tell me that Reid, who spoke with virtually every member of his 60-member caucus this weekend, currently has between 56 and 57 votes for the opt-out, which is being pushed by Sen. Charles Schumer, according to Democratic aides.
A public option with a delayed “trigger” — supported by the White House and Maine Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe — has between 58 and 59 backers.
This fits right in with what Sen. Thune told us last week. They need to try to pass the public option to appease the liberal base even though they know it will fail. This gives them cover back home and then they can drop it and go with something akin to the Baucus plan.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
It’s not about 56 or 57; or 57 or 58. It’s about whether or not Democrats who are against either or both of these options are prepared to vote for cloture or not. Don’t be so sure that Dems. who do not favor any form of public option – or maybe the weaker ‘trigger’ option – will necessarily vote to permit a filibuster, even if they eventually vote against the bill. The procedural vote is the one that matter as all you need is 51 to pass the substantive measure.
I agree, but some of the Dems are hung up on the Public Option (Baucus, et al.) and others are hung up on the price tag (Lincoln, Landrieu, et al.), so we’ll have to see how they play it. As noted in the link to the Thune piece, I think this is a necessary step to appease the base, but I am doubtful it gets through.
In response to another comment. See in context »You make a big mistake when you under estimate Reid Bill. There will be a public option on the prez’s desk and it will be opt out!
And btw Bill you tenthers should be doing a tap dance over opt-out, isn’t that what you want, the states to decide?
A state’s rights issue presupposes that the federal end of the thing is within Congress’s Constitutional authority in the first place, which this is not. If it were, then yes, I would be all about the states’ deciding for themselves.
I am just curious why liberals (especially those in red states) who want universal coverage would be supporting the right for states to opt-out. Seems like those folks are being sold a bill of goods on this.
In response to another comment. See in context »You’re so missing the bigger picture here Bill. 26 govs are up for election in 2012 I believe. How many candidates do you think will be elected on a platform of wanting to take away people’s health care. Opt out is the goose that lays the golden egg for the Dems! Your side is being boxed into a corner
In response to another comment. See in context »Bill,
I believe that liberals are supporting the opt -out to make the bill digestible to moderates.
It seems a good compromise, moderates can claim that their states can do without it and still get insurance reform.
I believe the public option saves the government some money.
In response to another comment. See in context »