Chuck Schumer--Public Plan Point Man, And Political Barometer
The Senate Finance Committee's negotiations over the public option have been marked by predictable moments of egotism, chaos, and various other forms of legislative melodrama. But if at the end of the (much delayed) process, the panel chooses to include a public option of any kind in its bill, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will deserve most--if not all--of the thanks.
Back to Schumer in a moment, but it's worth considering just how important the difference between the two possible outcomes is. As it stands, the other two health care bills working their way through Congress both call for the creation of a public option, but neither is likely to win much, if any, Republican support. If the Finance Committee--more conservative, and more bipartisan--endorses a public option, then it will become a standard feature of the reform landscape, and will live or die with the final reform package. But if it eschews a public option, then the politics change dramatically. Suddenly the public option becomes the province of congressional liberals while the "sensible" centrist position is to delay a public option, or forego it altogether. That's a tough sell.
And that's at least part of the reason Schumer's been so insistent on including a public option--or something very close to it--in the bill the committee eventually unveils. Finance chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) tasked Schumer with being the point man on the public option from the outset of negotiations, but Schumer's gone above and beyond in that role, putting himself on the line very publicly at times when the momentum on the committee wasn't really on his side.
Last month, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)--lukewarm on the public option himself--took a stab at reaching a bipartisan compromise by floating the idea of substituting a system of private co-operatives in place of a government-run plan. Reformers weren't happy, and neither was Schumer. He pulled the plug on the idea, declaring that the sort of co-ops Republicans might accept wouldn't serve nearly the same function as a national public plan.
This past Sunday, on Face the Nation, Schumer boldly predicted, "there will be a public option in the final bill, some form of it." And this week, when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel suggested the White House might be on board with kicking the public option can down the road a bit, Schumer was perfectly clear. Delaying the creation of a public option is "not good enough."
Schumer has his share of critics on a number of issues, but inside the beltway, he is known as a pragmatic center-left Democrat, with no shortage of political savvy. His confidence is telling. And if it begins to falter, that would be telling, too.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Man, if he pulls this off, it's going to KILL me to have to give him credit.
If he'd just minded his own business last year instead of fucking up Senate races all over the map, we'd have more than 60 in the caucus and this wouldn't be such a nail-biter.
July 9, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
What!? We won almost ever Senate race we could have last year. You cannot deny, with his leadership and Repub fumbling we made up 15 seats in two elections and might bet a few more next year.
July 10, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
If we as a nation would just realize that a social Democracy is the best route to go, we could get universal healthcare lickity split, and stop messing with this public option nonsense.
Palin and Hannity are already on board. Don't believe me? See for yourself.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2025
July 9, 2009 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say he's center-center not center-left. Anyone to his right is a conservative. He says
"there will be a public option in the final bill, some form of it."
I'd watch that "some form of it" very closely. The public option is likely to turn out to be more form than substance.
July 9, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
As it stands, the other two health care bills working their way through Congress both call for the creation of a public option, but neither is likely to win much, if any, Republican support. If the Finance Committee--more conservative, and more bipartisan--endorses a public option, then it will become a standard feature of the reform landscape, and will live or die with the final reform package.
WTF? Did Brian eat his David Broder Wheaties this morning? Bipartisan? Hasn't the entire week made it clear that there will be no bipartisanship with the bill? The GOP doesn't support it at all, other than looking for ways to slow it down and kill it. That's what all of Bacus and Conrad's conservative friends are doing.
And it appears that the Progressive elements of the Senate and Leadership are finally having enough of it and calling for Bacus to move ahead.
Come on, Brian... you've been doing okay on this story all week. Put down the Bipartisan Bong.
John
July 9, 2009 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree re the bipartisan garbage. Max Baucus and the corporate media whores' idea of bi partisan is a bill with 40 republicans and 11 Democrats...oe comment really perplexed me, though. Exactly what senate seats did we not get that were on the table? Last time I checked we have gone from 45 to 60 seats in two election cycles, the biggest two election swing in the senate in a helluva long time...Schumer is a banking tool, and he and Feinstein pushed Roberts through, so he has plenty to answer for, but not sure what more he could have done in the 2006-2008 senate races!
July 10, 2009 4:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Schumer boldly predicted, 'there will be a public option in the final bill, some form of it.'"
Wow, that's bold.
July 10, 2009 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bipartisan compromise? The GOP wants NO public option...there can be NO compromise.
People want it and frankly our medical costs would be lower so what is the hold up. I have healthcare and I don't want other people to suffer for lack of care.
Oh wait, isn't the Congressional Medical Plan similar to what we're looking for? So essentially they are just selfish and beholden to their coorporate benefactors.
July 10, 2009 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hm, politicians are still too walled off from the public. They only listen to their staffers, and God only knows who they're listening to.
Whether they're Democrats, Republicans, Senators, or Congresspersons, their job is to exercise the will of the American people. The overwhelming majority of people in this country want a public option, not "some form of it", whatever that means.
You know what your job is, do it!
July 10, 2009 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chuck Schumer spoke to the WSJ and said that he could accept a co-op. I actually think that Republicans won't vote for a co-op either.
What will be important is what Chuck Schumer says on Sunday during Meet the Press on whether he sticks with his guaranteeing a public option.
July 10, 2009 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cutting through all the bullshit;
if there is no public option there is no reform.
July 10, 2009 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
You couldn't be more wrong. The only time we actually had an on the record statement of a Democratic Senator working with Olympia Snowe on the "trigger", she specifically said Chuck Schumer:
http://www.newser.com/article/d994mirg0/ap-interview-maine-sen-snowe-seeks-health-care-compromise-by-keeping-government-plan-on-hold.html
"Sen. Olympia Snowe, a key figure in shaping federal health care legislation, said Monday that a government-run plan that would take effect if the private insurance market fails to deliver affordable coverage could bridge the partisan divide that threatens to derail President Barack Obama's efforts to reform the system.
Snowe, R-Maine, said she's working with Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to establish that kind of a framework in the bill expected to emerge next month from the Senate Finance Committee."
Schumer denies it in the article, and during the same time period "blind" reports pinned the "trigger negotiation" on Kerry. I believe Olympia Snowe over anonymous sources. The truth is Schumer is trying to raise his profile while other Democrats much more committed to the public option and who are NOT interested in raising their profile are working the hardest to keep that public option in the plan.
I mean seriously: why are you being so influenced by Schumer staffers?
July 10, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh boy. Schumer.
How did a public plan ever become our top priority anyway? Because we were told to take single payer and stuff it?
I get the impression this is a bit of a setup, but it's not my strong suit.
July 10, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice love letter to Chucky there Brian.
What, is TPM now carrying water for the Democrats, in between the breathless reporting on various Republican sexcapades? (Ken Starr must be sooooo proud Josh).
For the record here's Schumer today in the WSJ:
Chucky Schumer, against co-ops before he was for them. Or something.
Chuck Shumer is just another bankers tool with fascist leanings. (See his almost singlehanded efforts to seat fellow fascist POS Mikey Mukasey as USAG)
TPM now returns you to their ongoing coverage of Sarah Palin and Rethug sexcapades...
July 10, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I may be way off base here, but is there any chance this represents a sort of audition for Schumer as Majority Leader since not many are too happy with Reid's run?
July 10, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink