TPMDC
Clearing The Way: Sen. Bayh Says He'll Bring Health Care Bill To Floor
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN)
Share
Send to a friend!
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) has pledged to vote to bring the health care bill to the floor, a procedural hurdle that would allow the Senate to start debating the $849 billion plan.
Without promising he'd back the final plan, Bayh told the Hill newspaper he would support the first cloture motion that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid files. Several conservative Democrats had suggested they might vote against that, and Republicans have threatened to use those procedural votes as political fodder.
Bayh said:
"At the end of the process, I'll avoid the Washington two-step of voting to go forward but then voting against the final bill. But this is just a starting point, so at this point I do think there's a difference."
He joins Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), who suggested yesterday he would do the same.
Comments (11) | 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.
mans_best_friend
November 19, 2009 10:42 AM
Odd that we haven't heard from Lieberman (I-Aetna). I could be persuaded to change my opinion on waterboarding.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lifeofreilly
November 19, 2009 11:24 AM in reply to mans_best_friend
Lieberman has already said that he will vote in favor of proceeding to the debate. He is threatening to obstruct when it comes time to END debate and proceed to an up or down vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
November 19, 2009 11:29 AM in reply to lifeofreilly
I don't trust him. Not one bit. I still think Reid has some kind of leverage. I don't believe he would go down this road knowing full well that Lieberman was going to wreck it in the end.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 19, 2009 11:29 AM in reply to mans_best_friend
Silence from Lieberman after one of his escalating provacation tantrum episodes is usually a good sign. It usually means he's either been cowed by threats they were made in private or that he's extracted whatever the price was for his cooperation or both.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
November 19, 2009 11:36 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I hope to hell you're right. I don't trust that preening, self-important SOB.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
November 19, 2009 10:42 AM
It's not a "Washington two-step," it's a decision to uphold majority rule. Bayh is a douchebag.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wj
November 19, 2009 10:55 AM
The sudden willingness of Conrad, Bayh, etc. to allow the bill to move to the floor suggests to me that we should all buy insurance company stock right now. It is clear (to me, at least) that these Senators have been persuaded that this "reform" will actually increase insurance industry profit margins over the long term. Perhaps I am just overly cynical. But, if Obama's footsie with the pharmaceutical industry is any tell, there will be no corporate hurt issuing from this bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 19, 2009 11:09 AM in reply to wj
Nice example of the moral bankruptcy of people more interested in "corporate hurt" than "helping your fellow human beings." By your reasoning, any bill that could pass is, by definition, a horrible bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
November 19, 2009 11:16 AM in reply to wj
"corporate hurt"? Isn't part of the argument FOR the Public Option is that it wouldn't take down private insurance companies?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 19, 2009 11:34 AM
Landrieu's the one we need to watch. Last I heard, she was still talking filibuster and, so far, I haven't heard anything to the contary. Some days, I loathe her worse than the rest, Lieberman included. Just because she's a rare example of a person who thinks she's putting on a dumb act for the rubes back home but is, in fact, as dumb as she thinks she's pretending to be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
November 19, 2009 11:45 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I don't think Landrieu has the nerve to stand alone. Neither does Lincoln. That's why both will eventually give in. Lieberman is the only one who's a big enough horse's ass to be the 41st Nay vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?