TPMDC
Harkin: Handful Of Public Option Opponents Should Bend To 'Vast Majority' Of Dem Party
Brian Beutler | October 19, 2009, 9:54AM
Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Share
Send to a friend!
Here's another nugget exemplifying the intense pressure Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is facing from both elected Democrats and grassroots liberals to make sure health care legislation includes a public option.
"There are 52 solid Democrats for the public option," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA). "Only about five Democrats oppose it. Should the 52 give in to the five? Or should the five go along with the vast majority of the Democratic caucus?"
Last Thursday, at a heated Democratic caucus lunch, several Democrats rose to give impassioned arguments in favor of the public option. And, with the exception of Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), who gave a counterargument for private co-ops, the handful of public option opponents in the Senate were silent.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
PollTracker
Most Popular
- Gavin Newsom Throws Tantrum In First Interview Since Dropping Gov. Bid
- The Public Option Dead End
- Al Gore: I'll "Outcrazy the Crazy"
- Harry Reid, and What Happened to the Public Option
- What Did We Learn From Saturday's Health Care Vote
- Bachmann: 'I Don't Understand Why The Democratic Party Would Be Opposed To Me'
- Poll: Health Care Bill Could Hurt Dems -- And Not Passing It Would Be Worse
- San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom Loses Patience in CBS5 Interview
- Coburn: I Acted As Ensign-Hampton Go-Between
- Obama Announces Programs to Boost Math and Science Education
- Lieberman Repeats Claim That Public Option Not Part Of 2008 Presidential Campaign
- Senate Agrees To Debate Health Care Bill
- Is Everybody Disappointed In Obama?
- Bernie Sanders: 'My Vote For The Final Bill Is By No Means Guaranteed'
- November 22
- I Call Bullshit.
- HCAN: "It's a Shame Not a Single Republican" Voted To Allow Debate
- Steele: 'Moderate Democrats Sacrificed Their Principles'
- THE EXPERT AS THE DANGEROUS WHORE
- Intel Inside? Prove It.
- Where Does This Leave Us?
- Filibuster Thwarted ... For Now
- I Call Bullshit.
- Is Everybody Disappointed In Obama?
- Establishment Reality
- THE EXPERT AS THE DANGEROUS WHORE
- The Cast Has Assembled
- Bernie Sanders: I Want My Leverage!
- Clinton Not Attending Health Care Event Because it's Politicized?
- Time to contact the FCC
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
nova voter
October 19, 2009 10:02 AM
not to be a broken record, but i'll be a broken record (and put it in all caps because that's annoying):
IF THOSE FIVE "DEMOCRATS" OPPOSE THE PUBLIC OPTION, THEN THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO VOTE AGAINST THE BILL WHEN IT IS BROUGHT TO A VOTE. IT WILL BE BROUGHT TO A VOTE -- WHERE THEY CAN VOTE AGAINST IT -- AFTER THEY VOTE TO END DEBATE ON THE BILL. VOTING TO END DEBATE AND PUT IT UP FOR A VOTE DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE "FOR" OR "AGAINST" THE BILL, BUT RATHER ONLY THAT YOU WANT TO VOTE ON IT.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kenga
October 19, 2009 2:52 PM in reply to nova voter
This one goes to eleven.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
October 19, 2009 10:25 AM
If the five had good arguments against a strong public option, maybe.
As it is today, no. Those five should vote as they wish, but not make the Republican attempt at a filibuster bi-partisan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
October 19, 2009 11:04 AM in reply to Indie Pro
You know, lately, I've been wondering what an anti-public-option filibuster might do to the political fortunes of those who dare defy the majority and espouse, so publicly, the corporate mantra.
Since a very solid majority of voters are demanding that public option, maybe it would help us shake things up some more at the majority level, if they were allowed to make their desperate defense of corporate interests.
It would be fodder for future political ads, just take a video clip of a red dog or a Republican trying to justify opposition to the public will, and turn it into a campaign ad.
By their own words they shall be judged. And dethroned.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Flybynite
October 19, 2009 11:47 AM in reply to JEP07
You mean blue dogs. Red dogs we don't have enough of.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 19, 2009 11:57 AM in reply to Indie Pro
Just a guess, but I bet the most likely of those 5 "Dems" to back a GOP filibuster is Lieberman. And note, once again, all the Obama surrogates on the talk shows yesterday were downplaying the PO and saying it wasn't really needed even though they "supported" it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 19, 2009 12:11 PM in reply to rwc
One other point: I suspect that quite a few of those 52 votes for the PO really would prefer not to be forced to take a stand against their corporate masters. They also don't want to piss off their constituents by voting against the PO. They are really hoping to have the issue finessed -- we can't get the 60 votes, we have to compromise. I also put the White House in this group. The petition in favor of the PO by Sen. Brown has 30 senators on board. I suspect that is the truer number of real PO supporters in the Senate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
October 19, 2009 12:23 PM in reply to rwc
They are really hoping to have the issue finessed
my guess is this is the big hope of the WH and many Senate Dems. Yes.
I might be wrong. We'll know when Reid presents his combined bill.
If it has no PO, or a weak PO, then I will blame Reid and the Whitehouse. Absolutely. I'll blame the behind the scenes, backdoor deal with Pharma that Obama made. He'll be a sellout, in my opinion.
A mandate without meaningful cost controls in unjust. A good strong PO is barely enough.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truthspeaker
October 19, 2009 10:33 AM
Its amazing how people talk about health as though its a commodity, please try to understand that its people whose needs are being debated. I don't understand why you have the highest incarcerated of any country. I don't understand why you still have the death penalty, although the things some people do make one's head spin -
Columbine-, but this debate helps me understand, you just don't care about each other. Period
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nancydenis
October 19, 2009 10:38 AM
form the heartland of Iowa.... Finally Harkin speaks!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
October 19, 2009 10:45 AM
Strategy #1: If the pulic option is passed with 51 votes and 60 for cloture:
Positives - A good bill that might actually reduce health care cost. Over time the electorate will appreciate it and forget about how it was passed.
Negatives - Republicans scream and yell about the partisan "goment" takeover. Swing voters will be confused, but will respect the fact that Democrats got something done.
Strategy #2: If, on the other hand, the Democratic leadership insists on 60 votes for a lousy bill, Democratic voters will feel betrayed and many will cease lending support to the Democratic paty. Republicans will scream and yell just the same. Voters will see their premiums continue to go up. Many will blame the Democrats at the polls.
Which strategy is better?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Old Grouch
October 19, 2009 10:53 AM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
Here's a long, well-crafted discourse on the split in the Democratic Party and what the costs have been:
http://www.truthout.org/1018091
It's time for these five to fall in line. (I know, I know, Dems have to fall in love...)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 19, 2009 12:01 PM in reply to JoeTheMechanic
Your logic is impeccable which guarantees the Dems will do the opposite.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mateo123
October 19, 2009 11:07 AM
This is good to hear. Are we being optimistic? I mean, if 52 are solidly in favor of a public option -- and we know where the House is -- then it seems that the only question is the filibuster. Will Ben Nelson and Kent Conrad do the arrogant and elitist thing of killing a bill in which a clear majority support? Or, will they allow the bill to get an up-or-down vote?
If Conrad and Nelson kill the bill, they will damage and/or destroy the Democratic chance of retaining both Houses. The progressives will fund local and state candidates -- and not those at the federal level.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 19, 2009 12:17 PM in reply to Mateo123
I tend to give Conrad a little more credit than the other naysayers. Read his comments. He really is concerned about the disparity in Medicare payments made to rural hospitals. Cut him a deal on boosting payments to the rural health providers -- and I really don't think this is a bad thing -- and you can get his vote for a PO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
October 19, 2009 12:25 PM in reply to rwc
that's a pretty interesting take.
thanks for voicing it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ivy22
October 19, 2009 11:07 AM
The five were silent because they were busy counting the tens of thousands of campaign dollars they have been collecting from the big pharma and big insurance. Heaven forbid they would speak up for their constituents!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
October 19, 2009 11:12 AM
I'm guessing there are a few who are silenly threatening to allow a Republicn fillibuster. That's why Obama and the Dem leadership is not insisting on the public option.
History is calling. Joe "the schmuck" Lieberman, pick up the damn phone!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
October 19, 2009 11:36 AM
51-52 votes on the final bill, should the Dem caucus vote down the party line for cloture would be a political win for Republicans who could attack in 2010 saying "The Democrats are being pulled so far left that even eight Democratic Moderates couldn't vote for the bill but were forced to vote for cloture" with the overall message being that the GOP needs to be given Senate seats so that the Democrats can't automatically get cloture and force their liberal ideas on the rest of the country.
Non-PO dems would be better off politically voting for cloture and the final bill saying "It will work", and would have a better chance saving their jobs with that message than "I voted for cloture, but against the bill because I don't think it was a good bill but stopped the filibuster anyways".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
October 19, 2009 11:59 AM in reply to Walter Mitty
Walter: You make a good point, but I'm not sure the anti-public option Dems see it that way. If they vote for the P.O. after making statements against it, they will be called flip-floppers.
They need a reason to flip and a good answer to the flip-flop charge.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JoeTheMechanic
October 19, 2009 12:03 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Walter: You make a good point, but I'm not sure the anti-public option Dems see it that way. If they vote for the P.O. after making statements against it, they will be called flip-floppers.
They need a reason to flip and a good answer to the flip-flop charge.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr.E.
October 19, 2009 9:00 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
If you could equate voters with TPM readers, I would agree with you, but I don't think that is an accurate assumption. Most people, if asked, MIGHT be able to tell you that health care reform is being debated, but couldn't tell you anything about it, and they don't follow the details about votes and procedures.
I think you have to look at each of the 8-9 Dem. senators individually, their major economic supporters, and the demographics of their specific states.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frog Leg
October 19, 2009 11:50 AM
"There are 52 solid Democrats for the public option."
I'd like to see that list.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ProfessorB
October 19, 2009 2:08 PM
Give em Hell Harkin!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theone718
October 19, 2009 6:21 PM
Ben Nelson won't kill the bill. He said it himself, when the time comes he will be a "team player". I think we just have to keep pushing. We are almost there. We are either getting maybe an opt out or a Schumer PO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?