
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) just announced that he will vote yes tomorrow on a motion to proceed to debate on Senate health care legislation, though he says he will filibuster the bill if parts of it are not tailored to his liking during the amendment process.
"This weekend, I will vote for the motion to proceed to bring that debate onto the Senate floor," Nelson says. "The Senate should start trying to fix a health care system that costs too much and delivers too little for Nebraskans."
"In my first reading," Nelson said, "I support parts of the bill and oppose others I will work to fix. If that's not possible, I will oppose the second cloture motion--needing 60 votes--to end debate, and oppose the final bill.
Though Reid insisted yesterday that he would not use the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process to pass a reform package, Nelson and other conservative Democrats continue to suggest that the threat of reconciliation is part of their calculation as they consider coming votes.
"As we have seen before, obstructionists are inviting a move toward reconciliation by opposing this first procedural vote," Nelson said. "Let's be clear. That route shrinks debate and amendments, eliminates bipartisanship and needs only 50 votes to pass a bill."
You can read his entire statement below.
For more than a year, Nebraskans and all Americans have debated health care reform in their homes, at work, and with friends at hundreds of town hall meetings.
This weekend, I will vote for the motion to proceed to bring that debate onto the Senate floor. The Senate should start trying to fix a health care system that costs too much and delivers too little for Nebraskans.
Throughout my Senate career I have consistently rejected efforts to obstruct. That's what the vote on the motion to proceed is all about.
It is not for or against the new Senate health care bill released Wednesday.
It is only to begin debate and an opportunity to make improvements. If you don't like a bill why block your own opportunity to amend it?
As we have seen before, obstructionists are inviting a move toward reconciliation by opposing this first procedural vote. Let's be clear. That route shrinks debate and amendments, eliminates bipartisanship and needs only 50 votes to pass a bill.
In the end, far more Washington-run health care policies win, but Nebraskans lose.
In my first reading, I support parts of the bill and oppose others I will work to fix. If that's not possible, I will oppose the second cloture motion--needing 60 votes--to end debate, and oppose the final bill.
But I won't slam the doors of the Senate in the face of Nebraskans now. They want the health care system fixed. The Senate owes them a full and open debate to try to do so.
Bleacher Creature
November 20, 2009 12:18 PM
What a self-important buffoon. Harry Reid has given this grandstanding idiot WAY too much power.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
November 20, 2009 12:21 PM in reply to Bleacher Creature
It makes me wonder what Reid has to offer for his vote on Cap & Trade, etc.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
November 20, 2009 12:23 PM
This is great news!!! Get this done!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jfields
November 20, 2009 12:41 PM
Sounds to me like Ben got a LOT of calls from his fellow Nebraskans recently.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
November 20, 2009 12:55 PM
Nelson has to show due diligence to the insurance companies. As long as it looks like he is being dragged, kicking and screaming, they'll keep supporting him.
Oh, what a web these guys weave.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 20, 2009 3:25 PM in reply to Homefries
Substitute "crackers back home" for "insurance companies" and you're about right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
make
November 20, 2009 1:16 PM
Harry Reid gave up on stripping the Anti-Trust provision from the bill to get Senator Nelson's agreement to hear the bill on the floor?
Who does Nelson represent? The state of Nebraska or the health care insurance industry? I think that's a very fair question.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
November 20, 2009 2:00 PM in reply to make
In case you hadn't noticed, the state of Nebraska is VERY pro-Republican, which means anti-health care reform, or at least any version of it proposed by Democrats. Hell, McCain won the state by 15 points last year despite overwhelming anti-Republican sentiment.
He has to tread very carefully here. Ultimately, I think he will vote for it, or at least for cloture to end debate and put it to a vote. But he has to posture a bunch and otherwise make sure his rear is as covered as possible, or he is going to get Tom Daschled in 2012.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Aslanleon
November 20, 2009 1:37 PM
I guess this wily politician has read the polls in his home state-- by this I mean the real polls. When people are asked if they want a public option, they say yes. When they are asked if they want a public option if it will raise the cost of their insurance, they say no. Pre-existing conditions? Yes. Pre-existing conditions if it adds to the cost of their health care, no. And so on. Nelson knows what the real polls are, and he wants to keep his job. Too bad! If he only followed your advice, we'd have a better chance of defeating him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mgmonklewis
November 20, 2009 3:25 PM in reply to Aslanleon
I'm really not following any of what you're saying. For example: People want to be afflicted with pre-existing conditions, but not if it increases the cost of their health care? Whaaa?
I also don't know who you're referring to by "we," or "your advice," or what you mean by the "real polls."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Aslanleon
November 20, 2009 4:34 PM in reply to mgmonklewis
What is being said is that people will answer yes to a question as to whether pre-existing conditions should be covered or no if they are asked if pre-existing conditions should be covered if it will cost more for insurance as a result. The point is it depends on what question is being asked. If you add the consequences of that coverage, the polls are not in favor of the public option or covering pre-existent conditions. Clear now?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oumagicman
November 20, 2009 1:47 PM
Told you so. Reid has the 60. look for Blanche and Mary to come forward with yeas latter today. There is no way Reid takes reconciliation off the table without some assurances.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
November 20, 2009 1:56 PM in reply to oumagicman
I hope he's got a body double for that preening SOB Lieberman.
Hmmm...now that I think of it, maybe that's not such a crazy idea.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 20, 2009 3:27 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
That's it! We could get that guy who played the dad in ALF to do the role.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jorge
November 20, 2009 1:56 PM
And LIEberman?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
November 20, 2009 2:07 PM in reply to Jorge
He gets to keep his precious chairmanship and continue his penetrating investigations of the Ft. Hood "terrorist plot" ahead of the legal military investigations of the Ft. Hood massacre.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
November 20, 2009 2:49 PM in reply to Schmed
I look for some slacking off from the Administration on the West Bank settlements, too. Or something else Israel wants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tommyo
November 20, 2009 3:32 PM
Nelson is an ass, but this is another example of how the only Senate Democrats with any balls are the conservative ones. Where are the liberals?
Why is Reid catering to a group of conservative senators whose votes are unccessary if he uses reconciliation, which the GOP did unapologetically numerous times?
Enough already with this senseless sacrifice of another strongly supported national policy on the alter of the fillibuster. It's nothing more than an undemocratic, extra-constitutional parlimentary rule.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DickTater
November 20, 2009 3:33 PM
Thank you Mr Nelson, for your gracious go-ahead so we can debate the bill. Without you, what would we do WHAT WOULD WE DO?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FlownOver
November 20, 2009 3:42 PM
I can't help but think of that line from Silverado: "I think there's only a couple of guys up there and this asshole's one of 'em."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
subzer0epsil0n
November 20, 2009 6:18 PM
The problem with reconciliation, and I would love to see this since most things deserve an up or down vote, is that it would fragment the healthcare bill too much. Under reconciliation, the Budget Committee would get to write the bill and it would only concern the fiscal aspects of the healthcare bill, anything extraneous would be ruled out of line by the Senate Parliamentarian pursuant to the Byrd Rule. Interestingly, this *might* strengthen the PO since only 50+VP would be necessary to pass (Dems could afford to lose 10 members on this) but any of the consumer protections (ban on preexisting conditions, recission, etc.) would have to come up in a second bill which would likely be derailed by a GOP filibuster.
I don't envy this position one bit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Scott in PacNW
November 20, 2009 8:47 PM
Anyone else notice that Sen Nelson doesn't say what he likes or doesn't like, what he wants or doesn't want?
This kind of tap dancing wouldn't fly in my state. We demand at least a buzzword or two from our bland politicians when they inadvertantly bloviate about their own nothingness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
November 20, 2009 9:51 PM
So. On the right we have a chunk of people who feel Obama is moving too fast and is a radical liberal. On the left we have a chunk of people who feel he is moving too slow and is a closet right winger. They're all babbling about how incompetent he is, each from their own perspective.
The middle has now shrunk to less than 50 per cent.
Considering what he inherited, and how much leverage he really has to make things happen, those look like pretty good numbers to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Homefries
November 20, 2009 9:53 PM in reply to Homefries
Dang it. Posted this in the wrong place. Moderators please delete.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?