TPMDC
Key Democratic Senators Correct Lieberman On The Public Option
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Share
Send to a friend!
Key public option supporters in the Senate Democratic Caucus pushed back today on different objections raised by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to the idea of including a public option in health care reform.
"I think one of the problems the leader is working through...is that there have been a number of theories about what a public option is that have been kicked around," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) in response to a question from TPMDC. "On the Senate side, in the [HELP] Committee, we chose to...make sure that these public options were self sustaining."
Lieberman has suggested both that the public option would be a drain on taxpayers, and that it would drive up private insurance premiums, in contrast to the findings of most experts.
"I think there's a bit of a function of trying to make sure that everybody's clear exactly what it is that we're proposing," Whitehouse said. "I think once the actual text of the bill is out and it's clear that the HELP language is what was adopted. I think we'll be successfully able to make the case to Senator Lieberman that there is not a subsidy here and it is not an entitlement."
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) added his own two cents as well.
"Any low income, or moderate income person coming into the exchange brings a subsidy...you can take the subsidy and buy Aetna, you can take that subsidy to buy the public option. So the public option gets nothing better or worse...than any private company that's involved in the exchange," Brown said.
Lieberman made big news yesterday when he said that he'd be inclined to filibuster a health care bill if, at the end of a long amendment process, it still includes a public option. Asked by a different reporter if his potential defection lends credence to the idea that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ought to have chosen a more moderate course, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) leapt to Reid's defense.
"We are working with leader Reid on getting 60 votes... I am optimistic that we will get those 60 votes," Schumer said. Harry Reid is the best vote counter and vote getter that I have ever seen in my 35 years as a legislator."
Comments (32) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Weeferdog
October 28, 2009 3:35 PM
Good luck, Senators. Like Lieberman doesn't already know the facts, and is just pumping nonsense because he's a prick. I'd love to know what these three really think of that jackass.
Weeferdog
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thomas1
October 28, 2009 3:46 PM in reply to Weeferdog
What do the West Pointers call it, the silent treatment?
Whatever it is the Senate D's need to apply it to the Senator from Likud.
Oops, I believe the Israelis have universal health care. Perhaps someone needs to tell joe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
meri
October 28, 2009 4:02 PM
Leiberman should have been thrown under the bus long ago, he was chief proponent of "homeland" security monstosity of a bureaucracy.
To those of us,that survived the WW2 era,use of the word "homeland" has many negative connotations. Shame on Joe.He should be banned from the D caucus. Why admit a worm?
merisea
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 28, 2009 4:32 PM in reply to meri
I'd love to throw him under the bus, too, but I would wait until after the Dems have a few more seats in their caucus. Throw him aside now and he will side with the Repugnicans on everything and you would get absolutely nothing done. I'm with Reid on this one, much as Liebersmuck makes my blood boil.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
October 28, 2009 4:06 PM
He's not going to respond to reason or logic of facts. He'll only backstab again if you try to bribe him. He's not going to respond even to reasonable arguments based on raw self-interest. He does not really believe even in the possibility of consequences for his misconduct because a) he's always right and, b) he's never had any before. As long as he can get attention and punish those who he deems insufficiently loyal to his personal awesomeness--i.e. those who thwarted his presidential ambitions and who switched to supporting Lamont--whether tepidly or enthusiastically, it's all the same to Joe--after he lost the primary, he'll keep it up.
I've been saying for months this would happen. Predictable as day following night, and mostly I got pooh-poohed by wishful thinkers who assumed he'd just fall in line, the same way people just assumed he wouldn't run as an independent if he lost the primary.
The only think that will work on him now is actual fear. Inducing it, given his sense of invulnerability and self-rightousness, is the hard part.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fbacon2
October 28, 2009 6:54 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Are there any ambassadorships that might appeal to him. Maybe Freedonia?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Peter Principle
October 28, 2009 4:20 PM
It should be pretty clear by now that Lieberman has absolutely no intention of voting for cloture on health care reform -- much less voting for the bill itself. And his excuses are as irrelavent as they are false.
I think Holy Joe understands one simple fact: He can't vote for health care reform and hope to keep his seat in the US Senate after 2012.
The logic is pretty straighforward: Lieberman must know (or at least strongly suspect) that he can't win a Democratic primary in Connecticut, no matter how tightly he toes the party line. Not after his Iraq war love affair with the neocons AND his over-the-top campaigning for McCain.
So that leaves Holy Joe with two choices: defect to the GOP, or try the Lieberman-for-Connecticut dodge again.
Either way, Lieberman is going to need a lot of GOP votes to survive (especially if he goes the independent route and the Republican nominee is someone who actually has a shot at winning, like Jodi Rell.) No way Joe gets those votes if he votes for health care reform.
Ergo, fuggetaboutit. Joe's effectively in the Senate GOP Caucus, at least on this issue. (And I'm guessing that right now he really wishes he could have a do-over on that vote for the stimulus package.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bmull
October 28, 2009 5:39 PM
My vote: Dump Lieberman now. Forget this sham of a health care reform. Lincoln, Reid, Dodd, and the Blue Dogs will all be gone come next November. Anyone but Obama or Palin in 2012.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
October 28, 2009 7:45 PM in reply to bmull
No one but Obama is what I am sure you meant to say!!!!
Who you gonna vote for. The rethugs. Let's see how great that's going to work for you. This President has accomplished a lot in 10 months. Let's see what voting for the thugs will get you unless you want to waste a vote on a green party candidate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
October 28, 2009 5:40 PM
Have you considered that just possibly Senator Lieberman was concerned for the welfare of his country?!
Nah?
Me neither.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
October 29, 2009 1:30 AM in reply to Overreach THIS!
Yes, the country of Lieberman
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
October 28, 2009 7:14 PM
Well, then. If we don't get the 60 votes at first, force them to actually filibuster. That means Joe will have to get up there too. That means the American people will get to see who is obstructing legislation, especially legislation that makes sense. That means those doing the obstructing are going to look pretty bad to their constituents that really want to see this enacted. Plus, you'll have Obama flying around the country generating massive rallies for healthcare in the fence-sitter's districts.
If this happens, it would be the most closely watched filibuster ever in our history. Every speech made during the filibuster would be dissected for accuracy. Not a pretty sight for a GOP that wants to return to relevancy in this lifetime.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rwc
October 28, 2009 9:12 PM in reply to Homefries
will never happen that way. rules force the side seeking to end a filibuster to produce 60 votes, the other side does not have to produce 41 votes, they only need one senator to force a vote. It's a nice fantasy I share, but until the rules are changed, it ain't gonna happen
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
October 28, 2009 10:52 PM in reply to rwc
What fantasy? I'm saying if there aren't 60 votes to close debate, let those who are opposed do an old fashioned filibuster. To wit:
"In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits filibusters in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster where no floor speech and no quorum is required may, therefore, be more powerful than an actual filibuster, which would require attendance by a quorum of Senators as well as the physical presence of the Senators speaking.
Previously, the filibustering senator(s) could delay voting only by making an endless speech. Currently, they only need to indicate that they are filibustering, thereby preventing the Senate from moving on to other business until the motion is withdrawn or enough votes are gathered for cloture."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster
Last I saw, Harry is the Majority leader and can thus chose an old fashioned filibuster. Given the interest in this bill, people will be nitpicking the speeches for accuracy, which means BS will be called out instantly--which won't look good for those senators that are spewing it.
The Republicans are not going to hand this bill to the Democrats. So why hand a victory to them, where they don't even have to get their hands dirty? Force them to make fools of themselves, which they will, when they have to actually make speeches explaining their opposition. Or they could simply talk about any ridiculous thing they want, which will go over real good with those who care about this issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mark sensing
October 28, 2009 7:30 PM
If you live in Connecticut - make your voice heard. Sign th epetition to tell Senator Joe Leiberman to give the public option an up or down vote in the senate.
Click to sign the petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/tell-leiberman-to-support-the-public-option
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truthspeaker
October 29, 2009 8:59 AM in reply to mark sensing
Most sensible suggestion thus far. Put up or shut up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
atticus1104
October 28, 2009 7:30 PM
I thought this was pretty funny. Watch John Boehner act like a high school meathead and take a shot at Harry Reid while discussing healthcare with Neil cavuto.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=3287
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
October 28, 2009 7:39 PM
Same story different picture. I would prefer not to look at his ugly mug thank you very much!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
October 28, 2009 7:50 PM
LIEberman knows what it is. He chooses not to believe it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
October 28, 2009 11:06 PM
As others have said, Lieberman wants something.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
maya89
October 28, 2009 11:25 PM
this is SHEER CORRUPTION and nothing else on the part of Senator Loserman.. I just watched a segment about this on Rachel Maddow.. it turns out an overwhelming no. of people in CT favor the public option, but Sen Loserman is of course going with the corrupt private insurers who have been filling his coffers.. this is nothing but LEGALIZED BRIBERY.. once again proof that we URGENTLY need to get rid of the corrupt system of financing political campaigns we have in this country.. if health care reform fails it will be mainly because of CORRUPTION and BRIBERY that passes for campaign financing in this country... Sen. Evan Bayh was also mentioned, he has also announced he might filibuster.. it turns out his wife, who apparently sits on boards of health care cos., will directly benefit financially from a failure of health care reform.. as soon as these corrupt senators announced they might filibuster the health care bill the stock of private health care cos. went up, so Sen Bayh's wife is benefiting financially AS WE SPEAK from her husband's actions..
no other modern democracy in the world has the corrupt system we have here of financing political campaigns, and it's high time we got rid of it.. if what is happening right now with health care reform is not proof enough that this system of BRIBERY and CORRUPTION is not working for the American people I don't know what is...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Slideguy
October 28, 2009 11:49 PM
Lieberman isn't putting out ideas to be argued with. He's putting out rationalizations for the action he has to take. He's been bought. The insurance companies own him. He doesn't even care if he gets re-elected because he's been promised a high-paying sinecure when he leaves the Senate.
Billy Tauzin sold out to the drug companies. Lieberman sold out to the insurance companies.
This isn't about ideas. It's about money.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
3star2nr
October 29, 2009 12:36 AM
Suck it Joe Fucking suck it
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
marycat
October 29, 2009 1:06 AM
I wish Ted was here to help push the public option through. We miss you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
October 29, 2009 1:29 AM in reply to marycat
Yep. I really really wish Senator Kennedy was here to push back against all this evil.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
synchronicity
October 29, 2009 3:36 AM
Okay so build the most robust public option you can get 50 votes for in the senate, the most robust reform bill you can get and use reconciliation. Better to get a bill through without a ridiculous and ugly fight. I know reconciliation has risks but if they are going to 'have' to end up using it the end anyway... they should just do it quickly and and cleanly and not give a lot of press and floor time to the morons that are threatening to block a straight up or down vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
willia451
October 29, 2009 5:52 AM
Yes. Joe DOES want something.
He wants to link HCR to US support for Israeli policies in the Middle East and a strong, vocal hard line policy towards Iran. Its all he really cares about.
That's why his arguments make no sense.
IMO, he's holding HCR hostage for concessions from the Obama Administration on US foreign policy vis a vis Israel and Middle Eastern foreign policy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nellieh
October 29, 2009 7:32 AM
The only way the Democrats will get Lieberman's approval is if they offer him something he covets more than insurers money. No opposition in his next election primary! He will get somethong for his vote one way or the other. Did someone mention "Lobby Whore" recently?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
October 29, 2009 8:09 AM
Rachel Maddow and Glenn Greenwald nailed both Lieberman and Bayh last night on the TRMS. Both Senators and their wives are paid shills for the insurance industry and pharma. It is blatant corruption to the core. Of course it should be illegal. It is certainly immoral. Pressure from the citizens of their own states with demonstrations and exposure is probably the best way to get these guys. WH arm twisting (threats) is needed, but Obama does not seem to be on the side of the people when it comes to healthcare reform. Very disappointing! The way Obama has handled healthcare is as enraging as the some of the worst tactics of the Bush Administration. It is such a deep betrayal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
October 29, 2009 8:40 AM
Kick his immoral ass out of the party and go to reconciliation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
truthspeaker
October 29, 2009 9:04 AM in reply to Rich in NJ
He should have been gone ages ago.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
October 29, 2009 9:07 AM in reply to truthspeaker
Actually, they just played clips of Lieberman supporting robust measures to achieve universal health care on "Morning Joe." So the guy has really sold his soul. The time is now to get him out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?