Blogs and Stories
Next Stop, the Senate
Brendan Hoffman / Getty Images
As the House narrowly passed the health-care bill Saturday night, Sen. Harry Reid, the man now charged with pushing the bill through the Senate, is closing in on 60 votes. How? Sen. Lieberman’s post-election loyalty to the Senate Majority Leader—and the political implosion of Reid's Nevada rival.
Ever since Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid announced last week that his health-care bill would include a government-run insurance plan, he has been scrambling to secure a 60-vote consensus to bring the bill to the Senate floor for debate.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) has long been seen as a major stumbling block to Reid’s success, and has vehemently opposed any bill that included the so-called public option. But Reid’s comment last week that Lieberman was “the least of Harry Reid’s problems”—combined with The Hill’s report this week that the two had reached “a private understanding” that Lieberman wouldn’t block a final vote—has given momentum to Reid’s agenda.
While Reid doesn’t seem to have locked up his 60 votes, he has put his leadership on the line, and his behind-the-scenes machinations cannot be underestimated.
Lieberman’s support, as the 60th vote, is seen as crucial to avoiding a Republican filibuster. Both camps have denied that any agreement has been reached. But congressional insiders say the notoriously unpredictable Lieberman is uncharacteristically loyal to Reid. What has gone “unsaid,” as the Las Vegas Sun reported, “was that Lieberman owes his committee chairmanship (Homeland Security) to Reid after the majority leader declined to punish him—as some Democrats wanted—for his support of Republican Sen. John McCain in last year’s presidential election.”
Reid’s motives have been attacked from the right as a political ploy to shore up his liberal base in Nevada, where polls have shown him trailing in his 2010 reelection bid, and where nearly two-thirds of Nevadans favor the public option. Political observers in Nevada discount such blatant pandering. “I seriously doubt that anyone on the left is dumb enough to vote for anyone in this race against Harry Reid,” said Michael Green, professor of history at the College of Southern Nevada. Las Vegas blogger Steve Sebelius pointed out that “Reid has been saying for months that a public option would be part of the final package. It would have been easy to go back on that promise—certainly, President Barack Obama did, saying on the campaign trail it would be part of the plan, but later saying it was entirely optional.”
A Reid spokesman said the senator has “supported the public option for months,” and that “it was only recently that national pollsters came back with research indicating just how strongly people support the public option.”
While Reid doesn’t seem to have locked up his 60 votes, he has put his leadership on the line, and his behind-the-scenes machinations cannot be underestimated. “There is no better vote-counter than Reid,” Green said. “I don’t know if he has the votes. But I think he thinks he can get them, or put those who oppose him in a very unpleasant position.” Reid’s plan includes a provision that would allow states to decline participation—a brilliant maneuver crafted by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) that shifts the onus to Republicans and centrist Democrats who traditionally clamor for states’ rights and will be hard pressed to vote against a bill that gives states the option to opt out.
“If polls show that the public wants a public option and most of your colleagues want it, you are courting political trouble if you vote against having a vote on the bill,” said Green. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), the only Republican to vote for any version of a health-care reform bill, has indicated she will join in filibustering the bill because of the public option. “Did she learn from the New York 23rd District election that being a moderate Republican is a lot like being a woolly mammoth?” asked Green.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
'Tricky Dick' vs. the Pink Lady
Sally Denton is a writer based in Santa Fe and author of six books, including The Money and the Power: The Making of Las Vegas and Its Hold on America and the forthcoming The Pink Lady: The Many Lives of Helen Gahagan Douglas (Bloomsbury Press).
Tarnished Ensign's Next Move
Sally Denton is a writer based in Santa Fe and author of six books, including The Money and the Power: The Making of Las Vegas and Its Hold on America and the forthcoming The Pink Lady: The Many Lives of Helen Gahagan Douglas (Bloomsbury Press).
Giving Harry Hell
Sally Denton is a writer based in Santa Fe and author of six books, including The Money and the Power: The Making of Las Vegas and Its Hold on America and the forthcoming The Pink Lady: The Many Lives of Helen Gahagan Douglas (Bloomsbury Press).
It's a toss up right now but I sure hope this arrogant ###$#$%%!! gets thrown out next election time.
I still think with the opt out plan, there will be a scramble of doctors pulling up the stakes and moving there. Ironically enough, this will probably lower costs in those states.
Hmmmm? Doctors moving to states that opt out? How will this lower costs in those states? It's the insurance companies that dictate prices, not the doctors. Doctors are under insurance company control as much as their patients.
Exactly. I am very moved by what the House accomplished yesterday. There is no perfect solution to the health ins crisis in this country, but a public option is going in the right direction. I don't fully understand about the opt out provision that may pass in the Senate. It sounds silly to me and unfair. I guess the right-wing states (like the one I live in) would opt out and leave their very large number of uninsured--uninsured. How fair would that be? The uninsured in the red states would have no say. Am I understanding this right? Also, would not that encourage people to move from the uninsured states to the public option states? Someone clarify this for me if I am misunderstanding this! Anyway, the best imperfect solution would have been to have a single payer system and say goodbye to the health insurance companies. That would have pleased me to no end. They are simply all about profits and/or cherry picking. And anyhow, when you want to insure all citizens regardless of income, private cos. cannot do that. It is a social contract and a moral contract that this country should have implemented many years ago.
revcat you are one of the few that gets it!
manticore,
I guess you are unfamiliar with all the research that shows that, contrary to the way the market usually works, with doctors, the more there are in an area, the more costs go up, because many more "procedures" are done, with no improvement in resulting health for anyone.
I suppose i am unfamiliar with the private practice. My family members that is in the medical field works in a hospital.
I think you are unfamiliar with the research that shows that there is a substantial percentage of unwarrented testing linked directly with our penchant for bringing suit any time there is a less than stellar outcome--no matter what the reason. Doctors have to defend themselves with a battery of tests to protect themselves. One law suit can financially ruin a career. Yes, there are unscrupulous doctors, just as there are people in every profession that are crooks, but don't put them all in the catagory of greedy. I know many decent, hard-working doctors who lament at our court system and government regulations and what they require them to do. Remember, doctors are often on call 24/7 without recompense--they cover ERs at no cost to the hospital-and seldom get paid for their work in the middle of the night. As I heard more than one doctor say--ususally the work done in the middle of the night is gratus and is often due to violence. Your statement is inaccurate.
This is true. My argument is private practices might be forced to lower costs by competition. I know firsthand how the insurance screws both doctor and patient.
Did not the American Medical Association, like the AARP, decide a health care reform bill was really a good idea, after all the blustering smoke had faded?
Did not the AMA lose so many members over this that they now only represent a small proportion of American doctors? Hint-- yes is the correct answer.
Actually, the AMA, by its own count, only represented 30% of physicians in 2004. External groups estimate it only represented 15-25%, BEFORE this whole health care thing. So the AMA never represented a majority of physicians, and just represents only slightly less today. That's not to say they aren't a valuable organization, of course.
AARP is in the pocket of united health car, as an ex member of AARP, I can tell you their adjenda is not your adjenda.
As someone who worked in the corporate medical field (non clinician) I can tell you that the docs got into bed with the insurance companies to screw the patients. Payments for managemetn/services agreements, case management, capitation, trip to exotic places, fancy gifts, etc., all drove docs to follow the dictates of the health insurers instead of what was best for the patient.
Too many docs were willing conspirators. I think it was a Rand Corporation Study that published finding that people heading for careers as doctors (particularly in the late 70s & 80s) were in it for the money. These individuals were easy pickings for the insurance companies.
But in the last decade or so, the insurance companies have been putting the screws to the docs. Continually cutting their reimbursements AND denying treatments that are extra billings. Every time an insurance company denies a procedure that's some doc/hospital/provider who isn't getting paid.
Now that the providers are feeling the pinch they've gotten on the reform bandwagon.
Before I get hammered over my greedy doc comments, I know it doesn't apply to all. But I saw docs walk away from dying patients as their insurance ran out or refuse to participate in case management unless a check was attached to the file.
There is an old adage about "my enemy's enemy is my friend." It's proved true in the healthcare reform debate.
Great reporting!
Who knew Harry was so tough......Now congrats to Pelosi and Co.
Let's pass this thing before x-mas!!
SvK
It will be interesting to see, when it gets down to the nitty-gritty of the roll-call vote in the Senate, just how many Republicans, seated among their glowering party fellows, will meekly continue to vote in favor or the private insurance industry.
yes that is interesting and we aready knew that the republicans are so dumb and insensitive
No states will opt out. Can you imagine a legislature that will say to it's citizens that no, we don't want you to have a benefit the rest of the country is getting? That's why the option is so brilliant.
Medicare has an opt-out clause.....not one state has ever used it.
Wow, really? Having grown up in an era in which Medicare is a given, it's crazy to think now that any state would opt not to offer the benefit. Let's hope we see the same result with the present health reform legislation...but I live in a Democratic state, so I guess I'm covered, even if some do choose to opt out.
We all live in democratic states - oh you mean not Republican. I thought that Republican's were democratic as well - but come to think of it maybe not. Seeing as how their leadership gives the vote to big business over their constituents - maybe they aren't democratic after all.
Ok, I live in a "blue" state... better?
The crooked republicans,the unethical medical doctors,dentists and the rest of the crooked health care industry are pissing in their pants.These cowards know that
their cash cow is going to end.If the unethical medical doctors
want to keep making ( stealing ) inflated salaries;they need to
become basket-ball players or they should become crooked
republican senators ( whores of the health care industry ).
After the single payer Public Health Care Bill passes
the senate.Make it effective immediatey.This is the only way to lower the health care costs in the USA.Is time to stop the
crooks ( the stinky USA Health Care Industry ) to keep screwing the USA taxpayer
.
Who knew utopia would be a police state where "health care" is simultaneously a "right" and a civil obligation in the form of a tax punishable by imprisonment for non-payment? What's next? A tax on breathing in order to save mankind?
Instead of a police state where life and death decisions are made by profit motive?
I promise you our leaders have never met a tax they didn't like--and any power they can take from individuals and put in their control--it is truly frightening--they are destroying our country.
what you should do is get your insurance companies overseers to pay a little more to their republican cronies in congress to pass a law that would allow you to opt out of ANY government programme or tax based requirement however this means you cannot drive because you wont pay taxes to use the roads, you will have no police protection or first responders responding because that is also a government programme,no medicare for you or you grandmother, no medical benefits for you if you are a veteran, no education for you or your children and oh yes no marriage recognized by the state! Enjoy you republican america and since you have sold your soul to the great god of profit remember it has no retirement!
You must be a non producer or unemployed?
Does your name-calling contribute anything here, notax1?
Great job Sally. Keep up your good work!
OK, Senate, your turn to take a proud and gigantic step towards stopping the the terrible crime of the massacre of 122 Americans a day; 7000 dead by Christmas; 19,000 fallen by Easter for only the lack of health coverage. ( http://tinyurl.com/l7cy8u )
A 9-11 of cherished Americans will perish by this Thanksgiving for no other determining factor than lack of health coverage.
If we learn at last to look through the lens of the beloved community, the human lens, rather than the myopic partisan lens, we can make smart and tender history.
We should be proud of the House -- it indeed did the people's work in deed. Harry, Harry, please channel LBJ's nads. Bamboozle, connive, turn the screws. Flam and flim. Whatever hopping and scotching are required. Harry, oh Harry . . .
This sounds dire. Could you please cite sources?
If Lieberman blocks healthcare in the Senate he ought to become a national pariah. Of course, the suicidally stupid right-wingers, will offer him refuge but his public career will, thankfully, be over.
And the Dems will get the job done without the corrupt, sanctimonious hypocrite.
The far right will not give Lieberman refuge .... In their minds his people killed Jesus .....
What mind?
Harry,
Speaker Pelosi & the House of Representatives have done their part in making Universal Health Care with a Public Oprion into law before Thanksgiving, 2009. If you & the Senate get your @$$es in gear you can fothermucking pass Universal Health Care with a Public Option before Thanksgiving, 2009.
JFDI. Stop the $hit of saying that the Senate & you will get us Universal Health Care with a Public Option by 12/31/09. Do it now, before Thanksgiving, 2009.
Keep the Senate in session for Veterans Day, 11/11/09 & keep the Senate in session on Thanksgiving Day & Xmas, 2009 till the Senate passes Universal Health Care with a strong, iron clad Public Option. You owe it to us & the USA. Do it now or 2 weeks ago.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Let's look at the opt out option, shall we? A state can opt out of all the benefits of the program, but its citizens still have to pay all the taxes that provide those benefits. What a choice!
Our sad march to Socialism continues. The day is fast approaching when we will all be government employees--and there will be noone left to pay our salaries. We are watching the destruction of America. Atlas Shrugged. A Brave New World. Animal Farm.
What rot! Many western European countries have adopted public healthcare and other measures that the right-wing propagandists would vilify as "socialism," and meanwhile these Europeans live longer lives, have more vacation time each year and have better educations and retirements than Americans do.
If our fate is to be more like the western Europeans, in the words of Bushboy, "Bring it on!"
It is coming, don't worry. And so are people dying because of rationed healh care, searching for cures curtailed, cure percentages in cancer and other diseases declining...that is the reality of European health care and it is our future. Unfortunately, the only way you are going to understand is in about 10 years when it is full-blown--when the brightest and best of our country no longer enter the medical field, when our elderly are treated as if they didn't matter because they are old--and try to remember--one day you will be old too. It is sad, but once you have actually lived in that system as I have and have many family members that still do, you understand. Americans are being fed baloney by our leaders. If you think for one minute they care, you are mistaken--it is all about more power over our individual rights--the more they control the happier they are--that is the real truth.
sandyua: 45,000 uninsured Americans die each year because they can't afford life-saving medical treatment.
The great American rationing system - money!
If this is Atlas Shrugged, shouldn't you be hiding in a mountain somewhere? Please do.
Childish response
I would much rather live in a socialist society where some of our resources go to making sure that we are all healthy and educated than the Republican Theocracy that makes MONEY AND PROFIT their God. All Republicans are Greedy haters who hide behind false religious beliefs.
Dumb statement! ...like saying all you under thirty don't know how much you will pay.
Sorry Johnny, but I'm over 60 and believe that all Americans should be taken care of, even if it costs more in taxes.
But with a good single-payer system, we could save over $1 trillion a year in health care costs. Maybe in 2013, after Obama gets reelected, we can take another stab at reform.
"As the House narrowly passed the health-care bill Saturday night," who voted against the people? Let's see names: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_house_rollcall_health_care - find your representatives - did they vote for you or did they vote for the Insurance Companies? Except for those who voted for Rep. Joseph Cao, a first-term Republican who holds an overwhelmingly Democratic seat in New Orleans, If you voted for a Republican your representative voted against the people and for the Insurance Industry profits - 99.5% of the Republican representatives voted against the people. How many of you believe that the Republicans who voted against us were trying to say that the bill didn't go far enough to cover 100% of the Americans that live in the US?
Think about it, the Republicans had months to affect the bill and when the time came to vote for what they could have made "better" they said NO, and nothing more. Oh, you say they did affect the bill and made contributions during those ?wasted? months - then voted NO against their contributions. In either case they voted NO and either wasted months of opportunity or voted against their own contributions - not very smart or constructive.
"Think about it, the Republicans had months to affect the bill and when the time came to vote for what they could have made "better" they said NO, and nothing more." Totally untrue. The Republicans had a counter bill which was turned down. They also suggested tort reform and increased competition, which Democrats accepted. They fought hard for a ban on funding abortion, which they got. What the Republicans did not do is simply accept the highly partisan bill that the Democrats wouldn't otherwise change or debate.
So now we have a bill with no exemptions for religious objection, which even Social Security has, a bill which can jail anyone who opposes it and refuses to sign on by up to a quarter of a million dollar fine and up to five years in prison. This is be the tolerant, socially concerned liberal rule we've been hearing about-- obey or go to jail. Nice one.
The Republican Party remains the single greatest enemy of the American people. It has been so for a long time, but some people are just beginning to realize it.
It isn't the Republicans or Democrats that are the enemy of the American people, it is intolerance and ignorance and apathy.
Those evils are always with us. But we could make the Republican Party history, if we voted them out of office. And if you don't think their the enemy, you must be a rich, tax evader, who exploits their workers.
Another dumb statement1
Just like yours, which contributes nothing. Pots and kettles...
Johnny...you are wasting your time trying to discuss issues with these dolts.
Obviously they are a product of our public education. No more Civics, History from the new perspective, no Economics 101, and a mind that is intolerant of facts. If they had any, they would cite sources.
Correction - ". . . which Democrats opposed."
I believe the delay until 2013 will turn out to be the bane of the Democratic Party. Once a bill passes and is signed by the President, people expect it to take effect quickly. They do not understand or appreciate that it takes time to set up the necessary bureaucracy, both governmental and corporate, to implement the law. Nor, do they care about it. They have been promised benefits and they expect to see them quickly. This will translate to anger on election day 2010 and 2012, with many seats in the House and the Senate falling to the Republican Party. This may well extend into the state legislatures, as well. You can bet that the media will take full advantage of the public feeling, running stories of people who cannot afford the medical care they need - there will still be many of them.
If the economy does not improve quickly, I fear that we will see many hospitals file for bankruptcy. With the current state of the States' budgets, they cannot increase funding to cover the bills of those who cannot pay, just as the ranks of those without insurance swell due to unemployment. Urban hospital emergency rooms are seeing an increasing load of indigent patients, without an increase in funding. Those that can are seriously considering closing their emergency rooms to alleviate the financial hemorrhage, while keeping their planned admission services, where a private practice doctor with privileges at the hospital refers the patient. We already have a real shortage of primary care physicians. The current health reform bill will be almost moot if there are not enough primary care doctors and hospitals to care for them.
Like the hospitals in southern California that no longer have ER rooms, they are broke.
You have stated the problem succintly. And in the meantime, those 40 million, or whatever the actual count is, could have been put on Medicaid until Congress could hammer out a good plan for dealing with health care.
I was at the emergency room on Oct 2 with a serious spinal injury and laid on a gurney for 3 hours before they started tending to me or even giving me anything to kill the pain. And I don't even live in a big urban area, a medium sized suburb. However, once they started working on me and admitted me to the hospital my care was first rate. Medicare authorized a first rate surgeon to repair my badly mangled spine. And I was also able to go to a rehab facility for more physical therapy in order to get me ready to go home. All together I was hospitalized for 20 days with most everything paid for by Medicare. This PUBLIC OPTION is wonderful and I'm afraid those like me who are reaping the benefit may lose something in the future if government is spread too thin. However it would be selfish for me to think that I deserve health care and others do not.
once again a humongous bill...
has anyone on TDB read the bill?
Was done behind closed doors, the bill was suppose to be put on the web for 72 hours prior to the vote, so actually no one has seen the final product, not even the congress that voted for it.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
I can't stand "talk through clenched teeth" Lieberman. Whether or not the health bill passes, I hope the voters in his area turn him out next time around. I think his Independent tag is a ruse, he stands for nothing but himself. He needs to go.
Someone forgot to tell Sue Lowden that she doesn't have a chance. I live in Maryland and just got a plea in the mail today to contribute to her campaign and help defeat Harry Reid. Regardless if she doesn't have a shot, Harry probably is going to need all the campaign $$$ he can get. Regardless of her gaffe there is going to be a ton of money pouring into her coffers from people that know/care nothing about Nevada but just want to see "Dingy Harry Reid" gone.
Snowe will hear from her constituents and find some way of voting the way the want her to: FOR a public option.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.