TPMDC
Report: 17 Senate Dem. Caucus Members Called to White House to Discuss Health Care
Brian Beutler | September 10, 2009, 12:29PM
President Barack Obama
Share
Send to a friend!
ABC News is reporting that President Obama has summoned 17 members of the Senate Democratic caucus--most of whom have expressed some degree of skepticism over President Obama's health care plan--to the White House for a meeting late this afternoon.
The members are: Sens. Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Mark Warner (D-VA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Tom Carper (D-DE), Arlen Specter (D-PA), Mark Begich (D-AK), Mark Udall (D-CO), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Joe Lieberman (I-CT).
We'll be on the lookout for developments.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
PollTracker
Most Popular
- How Clemmons Went From Prisoner To Alleged Cop Killer -- And Why It Matters For Mike Huckabee
- Another Huckabee Pardon
- Why Are Dem Voters Now Less Motivated Than Republicans?
- CBO: Health Care Reform Will Lower Out-Of-Pocket Burden For Most Consumers
- Bachmann: Just Over A Year Ago, The Private Economy Was 100% Private
- Rep. Hinchey: Bush Purposely Let Bin Laden Escape To Justify Iraq War
- Radio Host Bill Press: Glenn Beck Is A 'Ticking Time Bomb' Who Will 'Explode In The Face Of Roger Ailes'
- Family Guy Mocks Chris Matthews' Inflated Ego
- Latest High-Flying Accused Ponzi Schemer Has Ties To Indiana Guv
- Limbaugh: Obama Is 'Wimpy Little Man-Child'
- Obama Issues New Orders On Afghanistan
- Why Are Dem Voters Now Less Motivated Than Republicans?
- Dems Add Entitlement Reform To Packed Agenda Ahead of 2010 Elections
- Huckabee Cites System's 'Failures' In Response To Washington Police Killings
- Gibbs: Social Office Not Problem With Dinner Crashers
- How Clemmons Went From Prisoner To Alleged Cop Killer -- And Why It Matters For Mike Huckabee
- Rep. Hinchey: Bush Purposely Let Bin Laden Escape To Justify Iraq War
- Radio Host Bill Press: Glenn Beck Is A 'Ticking Time Bomb' Who Will 'Explode In The Face Of Roger Ailes'
- Bachmann: Just Over A Year Ago, The Private Economy Was 100% Private
- Progressives (and Obama) are Doing Better Than We Think -- and We Won't Know What We've Got 'Til It's Gone
- Not Getting Distracted
- Why Have We Subjugated Ourselves?
- Obstructionism Trumps Transparency
- Progressives (and Obama) are Doing Better Than We Think -- and We Won't Know What We've Got 'Til It's Gone
- Jeff Goldberg Faults Obama For Suggesting Settlement Expansion Leads To Violence
- A Dime In My Pocket
- Return to Sender: Feigning Indifference & Losing My Religion
- Great Moments in CNN Journalism
- The Pivot
- Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
KY Yellow Dog
September 10, 2009 12:32 PM
Roll up a nice, thick newspaper and smack those Blue Dogs hard right on the nose.
Then rub those noses deep into the shit that bunch have been spouting all summer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
September 10, 2009 12:58 PM in reply to KY Yellow Dog
Yes, it's pedantic, but: "Blue Dogs" applies to a group of Representatives, not Senators. If you want a suitably equivalent canine sobriquet I suggest "bitches".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tosh
September 10, 2009 1:21 PM in reply to KY Yellow Dog
There will be no rubbing of the nose here. This is the equiv of Obama's call with the progressive caucus where he tries to figure out that the bottom line position of the ConservaDems is. And I think at this point we all know that whatever the bottom line position of the ConservaDems is, that's what Obama is going to Bend The Curve towards to craft up the new Snowe Plan that will be our beloved, society changing Healthcare Reform to end all Healthcare Reforms.
So... no rubbing of noses. This is likely where the White House caves on what the ConservaDems really want out of the bill.
John
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The BBQ Chicken Madness
September 10, 2009 12:40 PM
Uh, where is Baucus?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LarsThorwald
September 10, 2009 12:41 PM in reply to The BBQ Chicken Madness
Nice catch. My guess: marginalized.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BluGrass
September 10, 2009 12:48 PM in reply to LarsThorwald
Good call. You know you're useless when you don't even get called in for the Detention Club.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
September 10, 2009 1:35 PM in reply to BluGrass
Baucus may have gotten individual attention.
I'd always rather be advised of my flaws as a member of a group.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MomlyD
September 10, 2009 3:36 PM in reply to BluGrass
Is this like The Breakfast Club? Which one of them is the Molly Ringwald character? Who is the Ally Sheedy character? Maybe they'll get stoned and dance to '80s music!
Seriously, this sounds like a summons to the woodshed. Of course, their respective chiefs of staff will cut the switches.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FMArouet21
September 10, 2009 1:44 PM in reply to The BBQ Chicken Madness
Maybe the WH has concluded that both Max Baucus and Kent Conrad have been completely, reliably bought off by Big Insurance.
And Maybe Rahm is promising these 17 almost bought-off senators that they can look forward to raking in even more Big Insurance cash by making it clear to the uninvited progressives that the public option must not, cannot, and should not, be passed, for it would threaten the profits of Big Insurance by putting downward pressure on their potential windfalls from mandated universal coverage.
Perhaps Rahm and the Chicago pragmatists are betting that they can replace the ground game energy and small donations of progressives with large dollops of corporate cash from Big Insurance, Big Pharma, Big Banking (already secured by the bailouts of the Wall Street Big Boyz), and perhaps even Big Guns (including Big Private Security and Intelligence Contractors). That would leave the GOP with little other than Big Oil and a few eccentric millionaires for funding and the frightened, medieval, screaming, reality-denying Right for grassroots energy. But the heavy lean toward corporate funding would reliably leave in place politicians and policies friendly to the corporatists. It's just that for the next few election cycles most of them will be Democrats.
It does appear that the Supreme Court will soon open the corporate floodgates to make it easier for the corporations to buy influence directly, rather than going through the inconvenience of buying it indirectly by funneling funds through PAC's and right wing "think tanks" and by bundling limited individual donations from executive corridors to pass on to specific favored candidates.
The Corporations will (have?) become the State. And the State will (has?) become the Corporations.
Hmmm. Where have I heard that before?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
September 10, 2009 1:52 PM in reply to FMArouet21
Louis XIV, Le Roi Soleil
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bushie
September 10, 2009 2:41 PM in reply to FMArouet21
Well put. Dems or GOPs are just heads or tails of the Corporate coin. That Roberts and his Court Jesters have the power to turn over our Government to Corporations that effectively hold the Government in thrall anyway makes me nauseous. And the fucking GOP doesn't see a problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FMArouet21
September 10, 2009 3:58 PM in reply to Bushie
'Course not. It's been the GOP's consistent goal since the days of the Robber Barons. The Goopers may be surprised, though, when the Chicago Pragmatists get to that lode of all mother lodes the "fustest with the mostest" and end up garnering the bulk of corporate cash in 2010 and 2012.
I sensed this coming when Obama flipped a 180 on telecom immunity during the campaign. I imagine that he and the Chicago Pragmatists will now expect generous funding from the telecoms for Democratic candidates in the next few election cycles. Next was the bailout of the investment bankers and hedge fund speculators. Surely, more campaign funding for Democrats will be on the way now from them. Heck, the Big Money Boyz not only stayed out of prison (except for poor Bernie Madoff, the fall guy), but they got to avoid bankruptcy and even gave themselves record bonuses! Now it is the turn of Big Pharma and Big Insurance to dance the "Chicago Waltz." It must be tough for the Goopers to watch their age-old strategy being turned against them.
As for the people--you know, the working stiffs who actually produce goods and services--they will simply stand buy and let it happen. They have been fooled, separated, atomized, marginalized, and tamed. I mean, what is a real progressive going to do? Threaten to vote for the GOP? Refuse to chant "change we can believe in?"
And we can bet in the end that the progressives will cave in to the Chicago Pragmatists' demand to drop the public option in order to unleash the corporate spigots to help "centrist" Democratic candidates. American progressives, unlike European, Latin American, or Asian progressives, always cave. Watch now as they get cajoled and bought off, one by one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
September 10, 2009 12:40 PM
What should be asked was if they'd vote for cloture even if they voted against the bill.
There is enough public support to the public option, and with the GOP already painted as the party of no the plan should be to force them to filibuster. Let the GOP grind the senate to a halt and see how long they can keep it up before 2 votes are peeled off for cloture.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BluGrass
September 10, 2009 12:42 PM
I'm guessing there's a "time-out room" in the WH basement somewhere..
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frog Leg
September 10, 2009 12:43 PM in reply to BluGrass
Rahm is borrowing some of the EIT equipment from the CIA....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Libertine
September 10, 2009 12:43 PM
Time to kick some asses and get all the ducks in a row...we are going to start moving forward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AdamND
September 10, 2009 12:46 PM
No Kent Conrad?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
"Ruthless Pragmatism" Sucks
September 10, 2009 12:46 PM
What is Liebs doing there?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ripper McCord
September 10, 2009 12:48 PM
McCaskill's remarks today on "Morning Joe" were very disappointing. She talks about "handcuffing the public option" to prevent its spread. Stupid remark. As if the public option was somehow criminal. And then she absolves Wilson. Missouri can do better.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeepsdad
September 10, 2009 12:55 PM in reply to Ripper McCord
"Missouri can do better."
Really? Missouri?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
September 10, 2009 12:58 PM in reply to jeepsdad
Anybody further left of Sen. McCaskill would be unelectable in Missouri. Besides if Robin Carnahan has any hopes of getting elected there in 2010, McCaskill cannot veer left or the voter will look to counter-balance her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ripper McCord
September 10, 2009 1:05 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
I'm not talking about political leanings. I'm talking about political balls. Claire often lets her tongue wag badly and seems willing to sacrifice her best friends on the altar of her career while absolving Republicans of the worst offenses. She needs to consult a chiropractor who can locate her spine.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
September 10, 2009 12:59 PM
Hopefully, being cajoled into line.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
September 10, 2009 1:21 PM
I think there is a possibility that this group has been voting as a block, and for that reason Obama never had 50 votes let alone 60 votes for cloture.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
andrew
September 10, 2009 1:36 PM
Speaking of Senators who oppose public option....welcome Pat Roberts, everybody!
"I have taken a hard look at the proposals before the Congress and I will not support ill-considered legislation that hurts those it intends to help. Many of the proposals will have dire consequences for patients - denying access to quality, affordable health care, raising taxes and rationing care. The unprecedented cost of a public plan will have a staggering effect on our economy."
Almost makes you wonder if he slept through Obama's whole talk...
"We should adopt a thoughtful, step-by-step approach to health care reform that includes...Providing incentives for individual responsibility that allow insurers to reward healthy behaviors."
Isn't "providing incentives for individual responsibility that allow insurers to reward healthy behaviors" the same thing as letting HMOs tell you what to eat, how many hours per day you're allowed to sit, how many laps around the park you have to run, etc? It'd be one thing if "reward healthy behaviors" meant "pay you to exercise" -- I can picture making a good case for that -- but it sounds to me like in the Pat Roberts theme park, insurance vendors will be allowed to charge by the pound and add a fee for every cigarette you smoke and every chicken nugget you eat, and slap on a surcharge for having a desk job.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Pat Roberts plan!
(OK, so I'm exaggerating a little bit. Obviously those kind of nickle-and-dime games would NEVER happen if you allowed HMOs the latitude to issue coverage across state lines. *cough* credit cards *cough cough*)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnsnottoodistracted
September 10, 2009 1:40 PM
Ya know there are cons and semi cons who believe they get extra points for "blocking" popular bills. There is no way any clear thinking usa person is not on board with some type of uni-health care. Is there any doubt here?
Only way for cons and semi-cons to get media hype is stare at a concrete wall and say it's a picaso!
If people don't get this by now why are there elections.
Have to go back to my 10 year old rant: if you wear a suit that does not mean you tell the truth.....or even have connected brain cells.
Some of the people have to be usured out. They are clogging the arteries.....no matter how big their pac is
Still can't understand what happened with behavior in congress. 40 years ago this type behavior ......well,,,, you get the point. This would not be ..... the last 8 years really allowed the mic/pharma media to rule.These idiots (eleceted somehow??) get as much attention as the people who actually know what they are doing!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
September 10, 2009 1:56 PM
The President needs to ask them why they are against a Public Option. He should ask them to give reasons.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
September 10, 2009 3:35 PM in reply to Indie Pro
More importantly, he (personally) needs to ask them in public.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rb6
September 10, 2009 2:44 PM
I am so peeved that Mark Warner is in this group. Well, let me rephrase: it pisses me off that Mark Warner requires this kind of special handling from the president. He should be out there selling the president's program. He was just elected, by wide margins and every time I write to him I get back a whimpering simpering letter about how important it is to control costs. How does Mark Warner plan to control costs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aikbay
September 10, 2009 3:25 PM
I want him to ask the GOP WTF they were doing for a decade. Really more than a decade that they had the Senate and house. They dicked around and now they want incrementalism? Maybe if they had started it 8 yrs ago then you could see incrementalism. As far Lieberdick, that scumball has been getting government health insurance for almost his whole adult life. If its ain't grand, then you give it up Not So Holy Joe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Carlos
September 10, 2009 3:37 PM
Did we (meaning Brian Beutler) ever figure out why Obama's meeting with the progressives never took place? Was it a snub?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?