TPMDC
Collins: No Public Option, No Triggers.
Brian Beutler | September 14, 2009, 11:54AM
Share
Send to a friend!
The word for the last week or two has been that the White House is hoping that, by moving toward a "triggered" public option, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) will be the 60th vote for health care reform. In the background, many have wondered whether Snowe's almost-as-moderate colleague, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), would join in as vote number 61.
The answer to that appears to be "no."
"The problem with the trigger is that it just delays the public option, because the people who are going to be making the determination about whether the market is competitive enough want the public option. So I think the trigger is just a delay."
That's not 100 percent iron clad, but there's certainly not much reason to think she'll help break a health care filibuster.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
PollTracker
Most Popular
- Top 10 Things You Didn't Know Before Reading Plouffe's 'Audacity To Win'
- The Biggest Dem Scandal You've Never Heard Of
- Party Crashers: Who Are Michaele And Tareq Salahi?
- From Dollars To Death Panels: How Republicans Distorted Debates On Capitol Hill
- Friends In High Places: The Salahis And The Famous People They Take Pictures With
- Secret Service Director: We Are 'Deeply Concerned And Embarrassed' Over Party Crashers
- New Statement Out from Secret Service
- The Salahi-Obama Meeting
- Tareq Salahi Donated To Virginia Pols And Sold $25K Worth Of Wine For Kaine Inaugural
- Police chief: Woods' wife helped after accident
- From Dollars To Death Panels: How Republicans Distorted Debates On Capitol Hill
- CT Report: Green Party 'Picketing' Ralph Nader In Hopes He'll Run For Senate
- TPM Reader Challenge: The Sex-Scandal Haiku!
- Why is Healthcare Reform Too Expensive, While the Sky is the Limit For War?
- FUN REPORTERS: Where the Hell IS Sam Kinison When We Need Him?
- The REAL Patriots were the Republicans who voted for Obama.
- Secret Service Investigates State Dinner Party Crashers
- Hey Prez! Do you feel lucky? (Army Study: Pashtun men's blood testosterone levels 3X U.S. Norm! Tom Ricks: "Afghans are Clint Eastwood with a turban..." )
- The Biggest Dem Scandal You've Never Heard Of
- Secret Service Director: We Are 'Deeply Concerned And Embarrassed' Over Party Crashers
- Big Deal or No?
- New Statement Out from Secret Service
- Watch Out
- Does It All Fit Together?
- Let The Scrubbing Begin!
- Why is Healthcare Reform Too Expensive, While the Sky is the Limit For War?
- Bumps
- FUN REPORTERS: Where the Hell IS Sam Kinison When We Need Him?
- Haiku Contest?
- Democratic Party: Get Your Dumb War On
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
September 14, 2009 12:05 PM
The Massachusetts legislature really needs to get off the stick and pass that damn interim appointment law.
If I hear the words "take the public option off the table" out of her mouth one more time, I'm gonna have a stroke. Or at least a TIA.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
September 14, 2009 12:46 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Support for that has been sinking daily and it doesn't look like anyone has the capital to push it through the legislature and make it happen. Lots of foot dragging.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rosebowl
September 14, 2009 12:16 PM
This is what happens when Rahm and Messina with Pres. Obama's blessing 'fetishizes' bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship. We get a repeat of the watered-down stimulus fiasco. Instead of focusing on what will work, the White House is focused on getting Republicans on board. The American people are not going to judge health care reform based on how many GOP votes it attracts. Rather, Obama will be judged on how effective this health care plan will be long term.
If this White House gets serious about producing not just a bill but a good bill that will improve the lives of the American people, history will be kind to them. They should be focusing on corralling 60 Dem votes, and like Bill Clinton said, forget about the Republicans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
musgrove
September 14, 2009 12:50 PM in reply to rosebowl
There are 59 dems atm, if you include the two independents.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
September 14, 2009 1:10 PM in reply to rosebowl
So you think getting the 3 Republicans to support the stimulus was just 'bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship'? Interesting!
Can you explain how this "stimulus fiasco" (that even Krugman and Roubini have admitted is working) would have passed without those three reublicans? Or do you think he should have said "fuck it! If I can't get everything, I don't want anything!"??
I'm also keen to learn how one corrals 60 Democrats when there are only 57 + 2 independents in the Senate.
I know the right wing constantly refers to Obama as the Messiah but it's clear that some of you have actually bought into that shit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rosebowl
September 14, 2009 1:29 PM in reply to FreeRider
Well, when you plan a stimulus package with 40 percent tax cuts with the explicit initial intention of attracting GOP votes due to the large tax cuts, and all you get is three GOP votes, that's what is called negotiating from a position of weakness. (btw, Krugman, Stiglitz, Roubini, Reich, etc were calling for a much bigger stimulus with fewer tax cuts). This White House has shown a tendency to give away most of the store too easily. As for the 60 Dem leaning votes, the White House could surely do more to pressure these senators not to filibuster the bill by focusing on them, instead of wasting precious time with getting a vote or two from the GOP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
September 14, 2009 2:34 PM in reply to rosebowl
And that completely dances around FreeRider's point...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
September 14, 2009 3:02 PM in reply to rosebowl
In other words, you got nothing? You're just spouting bullshit?
Again, please tell me how those three Republicans that upped the tax cuts from 35% to 40% were unnecessary. Tell me how that bill would have passed without their votes.
I know what Krugman, et al said about the stimulus at the time (useless, won't work, etc.) but 7 months later, even they have admitted that it's working.
Finally, tell me how you know that the WH is not putting pressure on the Dems not to filibuster the bill.
I know it's considered "progressive chic" to spout off about how Obama has caved to the Republicans. But whenever you're pressed for specifics, you start the Ralph Cramden hummana, hummana, hummana bullshit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cawleybo
September 14, 2009 8:22 PM in reply to FreeRider
Perhaps you need to go back and reread Krugman.
He never - n-e-v-e-r - said it wouldn't "work." (I.e., generate more gdp growth - or less, shrinkage - than would have happened without it.) He said it was too small and too diluted by tax cuts. It would slow the bleeding, which it has, but it was insufficient to keep unemployment from rising into double digits. Judging from the fact that unemployment is nearing 10% - already well outside Obama/Geithner's "worst case" scenario, it seems he was pretty much right.
And, you can call it a "cave" or whatever you want but the fact of the matter is Obama started with way too much in tax cuts in his stimulus proposal. At the time, nearly every article written said he did this in the hopes of attracting Republican support. He then had to negotiate and accept even bigger tax cuts while jettisoning some of the more effective stimulus proposals, such as aid for state/local governments. You can pretend now that they weren't hoping for far more than 3 republican senators but that's just revisionism. They were pushing the bipatisan angle hard. (Again, go back and read the contemporaneous accounts.) For all you know, he could have still gotten those three republican votes by starting with 10% tax cuts and doubling it to 20%. Maybe, maybe not. But the bottom line is that NOBODY (except democrats) enter a negotiation by giving the other side a big chunk of what they want without any reciprocity. You ask for everything you want and then make concessions in return for concessions from the other side.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
September 15, 2009 8:24 AM in reply to cawleybo
I've read Krugman. I know what he says and rarely is he right. Yet he remains the oracle for anti-Obama progressives.
Fact: The stimulus could not pass without Republicans so it wasn't just a giveaway to Republicans.
Fact: The stimulus has worked, despite Krugman's dire predictions to the contrary.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
September 14, 2009 12:18 PM
i've asked it a million times, but when did "i'm against the bill" turn into an automatic "i won't even vote to give it an up or down"?????
and how the fuck is that attitude "almost as moderate" as anything????
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
converse
September 14, 2009 12:40 PM
Your article seems to take for granted that there are 59 senatorial votes already supporting the public option, triggered or not. Why didn't you report this outstanding news earlier?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
markg8
September 14, 2009 1:26 PM
"The problem with the trigger is that it just delays the public option, because the people who are going to be making the determination about whether the market is competitive enough want the public option."
A trigger would keep the public option off the table for years. I guess Collins doesn't hold out much hope for her party ever taking back congress or the WH anytime soon.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Obey
September 14, 2009 1:32 PM
I'd like to know if Snowe, Collins and Voinovich would go for an OPTIONAL public option: States get to decide if they want to opt in on a strong Medicare-piggybacking PO participating in the state-wide insurance exchange.
That would be a pretty reasonable compromise for those reps who want to protect their incumbent insurers/providers more than their constituents...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Salmo
September 14, 2009 8:02 PM
Collins assumes a moderate mantle every six years when she runs for her seat, but the rest of the time she is no moderate. Those moderate votes are always chosen for moments when she can disagree with her party because they did not need her vote anyway. On this one, she will no more act in the interest of Mainers than she will grow wings.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?