In the stately Mansfield room, where Democrats meet for their weekly caucus lunch just off the Senate floor, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), appeared this morning alongside Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) and a number of entrepreneurs from around the country, at an event dedicated to the idea that health care reform is crucial to the survival of small businesses in America.
It was at once fitting and unusual for Landrieu to appear at this pro-reform event. On the one hand, as chair of the Small Business Committee, how could she miss it. But on the other, she's one of a handful of conservative Democrats openly suggesting she might support a Republican health care filibuster, particularly if the public option in the Senate bill isn't affixed to some sort of trigger mechanism.
About nine minutes in Landrieu channeled her inner Democrat. "While we may not yet completely agree on all of the specific details," Landrieu said, "one thing we can all agree on is doing nothing is not an option."
A breakthrough? A signal that she'd been won over by a majority of senators and the vast majority in her caucus who support the reform effort? Sadly, she didn't want to stick around to clarify. Moments before the Q&A session was set to begin, Landrieu slunk out the side door, leaving Harkin at the podium with the dozens of assembled guests.
Before he fielded his first inquiry, though, most of the reporters in the room had already bolted, and were running down the hallway to catch up with the Louisiana senator before she'd reached the elevators down to the Capitol subway and the safety of her office.
As it turns out, she's not actually ready to commit to giving the bill an up or down vote. "That's the goal of this, is to give people more affordable choices, not just one, you know, government subsidized program, but more affordable choices in the private sector," Landrieu said
The public option proposals in both the House and the Senate would actually be prevented from receiving a government subsidy. But no matter. Landrieu supports Sen. Olympia Snowe's proposal to trigger a public option as a fall back if private insurance doesn't succeed at lowering premiums without public competition. Liberals in both chambers deplore that compromise, and count it a great victory that Harry Reid eschewed it when he put the Senate bill together. But Landrieu says, "I wouldn't count it out."
This exchange highlights the uncomfortable position conservative Democrats find themselves in as health care bills makes in both chambers approach the floor. The different public options in each proposal have already been substantially watered down, and, though conservative Dems remain skeptical of the idea, they may find themselves faced with the question of whether the inclusion of a small measure, extremely popular with the Democratic base, is worth tanking the entire, months long effort.
I asked Landrieu whether she can imagine going from "doing nothing is not an option" to voting to filibuster the final bill. "I can imagine fighting hard for what those people in there want," she said, "which is many affordable choices."

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

CJ
November 3, 2009 11:40 AM
One word: reconciliation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
November 3, 2009 12:33 PM
Hilarious!
As is the lead-in on the front page about the species known as "centrist".
Well done, TPM.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Posture
November 3, 2009 4:37 PM in reply to CT Voter
Yes, but as pointed out on another thread about Ben Nelson's recent shenanigans, these people aren't centrists, if one defines centrist as being in the center of things. The article gets it right, I noticed, calling Landrieu a conservative dem. In general, though, I wish TPM would do a better job at challenging these misnomers. There's nothing centrist about obstructing reform that the majority of people claim to want.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Grand Panjandrum
November 3, 2009 1:09 PM
Interesting that she doesn't have a problem with LA getting assistance from government run Federal flood insurance, and government aid from FEMA. Maybe we need triggers on that coverage as well?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
twirling fartknocker
November 3, 2009 1:10 PM
"centrist" is a misnomer. these people are pro-corporate in their actions and then they pay lip service to doing the people's bidding, occasionally perhaps on a generous day when no corporate lobby is telling them not to, throwing out a bone to the little folk. I wouldn't call that centrist
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cube3u
November 3, 2009 1:32 PM
Welcome to horse-trading, Louisiana-style. Don't know exactly what Senator Mary is angling for, particularly in light of our support for NO and LA recovery after Katrina.....but at the end of the horse-trading sessions, Senator Mary will vote to bring the bill to the floor and then will vote in favor of said bill. And this applies even with the public option that she wants to play cute about.
Centrist? Nah...just horse-trading like Byrd displayed for decades. But she's got a bit of a tin ear on this one--along with our other "centrists". Playing this one for state or district gain may buy one a trip to the woodshed when the next primary comes along. Money can whisper, but voters can roar.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Schwartz
November 3, 2009 1:58 PM
Meh, they won't filibuster; give them candy and pat them on the head.
Actually, Lieberman is capricious and weird, so I do worry, but only about him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
November 3, 2009 2:18 PM
...proving once again that she is either one of the most stupid or most ignorant members of the Senate. As with some of her other statements, she clearly doesn't -- or refuses to -- understand that the public option would pay for itself through premiums. It would not be subsidized (other than the subsidies that go toward helping people afford their premiums whether paid to a private or public insurance plan).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
November 3, 2009 3:04 PM in reply to Moose49
I WISH she were stupid or ignorant and simply did not understand what she was talking about. The Public Option is not at all hard to understand. The truth is that she is lying and dissembling to create an appearance of caring about people and practical solutions that help people. The truth is she is completely a WHORE for the corporations she gets paid to WHORE for PERIOD. Louisiana is much the same as Mississippi and Alabama, an ignorant backwater plantation society. The sad thing for the rest of us is that these backwater states are hugely over represented in the Senate and will keep the large majority of Americans who want a public option from getting one. Pathetic.
I think America reached the peak of it's glory during the Clinton years of shared prosperity and now we are on a fast decline. Bush gave massive tax cuts to the already filthy rich, started two wars he had no idea how to end, and drove the entire world economy over a cliff that we will be trying to recover from for many many years. The Senator from Louisiana represents the rich corporate bloodsuckers and not the vast majority of poor, working, and middle class people. I am afraid our great experiment in Democracy is officially over.
If there is no public option .... THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lestatdelc
November 3, 2009 3:45 PM
Oh for FSM's sake!!
First, the PO is not subsidized, but funded through premiums paid by those who sign up for the program, and...
Two, it would not be the only choice. In fact, most people are barred from being able to choose the PO even if it is in the final bill in its current form.
If she wanted more options for everyone to choose from, she would not only SUPPORT having a robust PO (i.e. an affordable choice vs. private insurance plans) but she would also be leading the charge on a Wyden style free-choice amendment so everyone, not just the 5% or so that would be eligible for it in the current bill, can choose either private insurance or the public plan.
Why is that me, an average schmuck, knows this better than a siting Senator nominally from my own party?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?