
House progressives will press the joint deficit Super Committee to ditch entitlement cuts and pass measures to bolster the economy.
The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are rounding up Democratic signatures on a letter, obtained by TPM, pressing the 12 member panel to pair emergency jobs legislation with deficit reducing measures based on tax increases on wealthy Americans.
"We ask that you lead the Select Committee by these simple core principles," write Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Keith Ellison (D-MN). "The American people have spoken loud and clear on their priorities for our nation. They want Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare protected, they want billionaires and corporations to finally pay their fair share and they want to be able to get back to work to earn a fair living."
Their effort is partially bolstered by a new CBO analysis, which found that the unemployment crisis is a massive driver of the deficit. In other words, effective job creation measures will go a good way toward closing the near and medium term hole in the budget.
You can read the entire letter, which has not yet been delivered to the Super Committee co-chairs, below the fold.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and of the three caucuses of black, Hispanic and Asian members of the House would like a word with President Obama before his Thursday jobs address.
In a Tuesday letter provided by a source, the leaders, who speak for a majority of House Dems, sought to make sure that Obama keeps his eye on the jobs crisis, which has disproportionately hit minority groups.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) doesn't want Democrats to think they can leave him hanging on the the floor Monday night when the House votes on legislation to raise the debt limit, and slash deficits by at least $2 trillion.
But with Democratic leaders declining to whip for the bill, and wide swaths of their party vowing to oppose it, he's got to be wondering whether they'll come through.
Here's what he told reporters at a Capitol press conference Monday.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans have pulled off a neat trick since taking over the House back in January -- they've repeatedly attacked President Obama on the languishing job market while shifting government focus away from job creation and toward the deficit and debt.
Now, the House Progressive Caucus is planning to turn the government's attention back toward eliminating unemployment. Starting Wednesday, caucus members will fan out across the country on a summer tour that will attempt to push the focus away from spending reduction and toward using government resources to create jobs.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Despite the White House and Democratic leadership's seeming reluctance to discuss it, House progressives say their budget proposal didn't just come out of left field and deserves to be part of the discussion.
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) told TPM that though he's been "somewhat disappointed" with the response from Democratic leadership, and the White House, he thinks it's because
"we have a platform that probably scares people more than anything else."
Representatives from the 77-member House Progressive Caucus gathered at the Capitol on Wednesday to roll out their plan to cut the deficit and put the budget back into balance. Their simple solution: pull the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, install a public option for health care, raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations and voila, America is fixed.
The caucus plan, known as The People's Budget, was explained in some detail by Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs last week. Today, progressive members extolled the virtues of the plan as members sat waiting for President Obama to introduce a deficit reduction plan many Democrats worried would sacrifice necessary spending on the altar of a mistaken understanding of fiscal responsibility.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Leading progressives in the Democratic party are pressing President Obama to get more involved in the fight over public worker rights playing out in Wisconsin and other states across the country.
Obama has publicly sided with state and local government employees against laws meant to crush their right to collectively bargain. But his political shop has run hot and cold on the question of involving him more publicly in the protests.
The co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus yesterday both called on him to speak out more loudly -- or even join the protesters in Wisconsin.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Ahead of the State of the Union address, House progressives want a word with President Obama about Social Security.
In a letter delivered Friday to request a meeting with President Obama, 33 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus seek assurances that he will not work with Republicans to cut or privatize Social Security.
"[T]here is no Social Security crisis," the members write.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Leading House progressives are joining outside advocates to pressure Democratic leaders to let the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to expire at the end of the year.
In a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Progressive Caucus co-chairs Lynn Woolsey and Raul Grijalva gently make the case for extending tax cuts to middle-income brackets alone.
As Co-Chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, we would like to reiterate our support for President Obama's Fiscal Year 2011 budget proposal that would extend the Bush tax rates for the middle class, but permit the tax levels to return to previous levels for single taxpayers making more than $200,000 or married couples making more than $250,000," the co-chairs write. "We respectfully request that we have a Caucus discussion regarding our position before any proposal is brought to the Floor.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
After watching Majority Leader Steny Hoyer conduct an overt campaign to become House minority whip next year, current Whip Jim Clyburn is starting to make a more public play for the leadership office.
Last night, the Democratic Conference's Vice Chair Xavier Becerra became the first member of leadership to endorse in the contest -- and picked Clyburn.
"James Clyburn deserves to be reelected Democratic Whip in the 112th Congress," Becerra said in a statement. "Through some of the toughest legislative efforts in recent history--from health care to Wall Street reform--Mr. Clyburn found us the votes when they counted most. He fought to pass legislation that is putting America back to work and laying the foundation for a future where America leads the world in the new energy economy. He is a stalwart supporter of fixing our broken immigration system and providing every American a decent education and an equal shot at the American Dream. James Clyburn has my vote to continue as our Whip in the 112th Congress."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
We have a race!
When Jim Clyburn threw his name into contention to be the Democrats' Minority Whip next Congress yesterday, it touched off a tough race between himself and the Dems' current Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. The results of the midterm elections didn't help Hoyer. Many of the members who lost were moderate and conservative Democrats who saw Hoyer as a sympathetic ally in an otherwise liberal leadership. Clyburn, has significant support among members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and is more ideologically aligned with the progressive-leaning minority.
Not so fast, though.
A number of House progressives -- members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, even -- are circling their wagons around Hoyer, hoping to balance the leadership ticket next year.
In a "Dear Colleague" letter to Democratic members, progressive Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) made the pitch for Hoyer.
"I believe that it is in the best interests of our Caucus to keep Majority Leader Hoyer as a member of our Democratic leadership team--a team that helped Democrats pass a range of landmark legislation," Polis wrote. "Keeping Steny Hoyer in leadership will help to unify our Caucus and ensure that House Democrats hit the ground running in the new Congress."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Thirty-two House progressives have sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging her not to allow a vote on extending President Bush's high-income tax cuts.
"[W]e respectfully urge you to bring to the floor, before Congress adjourns in October, a vote on President Obama's recently proposed tax plan: permanent tax cuts for the middle-class while allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest two percent of Americans to expire, using any additional revenue to close our budget deficit," the letter reads.
The effort was organized by Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, along with Reps. Mary Jo Kilroy and Alan Grayson.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Over 50 House Democrats have now signed on to a letter, first obtained by TPM earlier this month, warning President Obama they'll oppose any effort on his part, or on the part of his fiscal commission, to cut Social Security benefits or privatize the program.
The letter was spearheaded by Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. It was originally cosigned by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Dan Maffei (D-NY), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), and CPC co-chair Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). The advocacy groups Social Security Works, P Street Project (the lobbying arm of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee) and MoveOn helped organize the effort to add signatures.
They will continue to round up signatures through tomorrow, before the letter goes to the White House.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)President Obama's message to progressives who are dissatisfied with the Senate health care bill is two fold: First: Don't forget about the uninsured. Second: Don't forget what failure to pass this bill would do to the party and my presidency.
In a meeting with House progressives today, Obama made the pitch.
Speaking to reporters in the Speaker's lobby off the House floor, Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) said the President reminded them that "If this opportunity passes, much of our agenda, on the progressive side...it would be difficult, if not impossible for a generation to get back to this issue."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The White House added something new to President Obama's schedule today - meetings with key members of House Democratic caucus groups who want to have their say on health care.
The conservative Democrats Obama is attempting to woo - several who attended his party last night - to win the needed votes on the final health care plan this month will get to speak with the president in the Oval Office at 2:30.
They are all leaders of the New Democrat Coalition. As we mentioned earlier the group's Health Task Force Co-Chair Rep. Jason Altmire told reporters today he won't change his mind.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The public option already died once. Today it died again.
House progressives have been trying to use the health care stalemate to revive the public option. Almost 100 have signed a letter urging Congressional leaders to include a public option in a separate bill, which could in theory pass the Senate with a simple majority of votes. If that happened--a big if--it could then be included as part of comprehensive legislation, securing progressives a major victory. But on a conference call today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi put a second set of nails in the public option's coffin, saying it would not be part of any grand bargain to push ahead with health reform. But in so doing, she took a veiled swipe at the White House for not standing enthusiastically behind the proposal.
"The Senate never supported the public option," Pelosi said.
There was talk that there would be 51 votes for it, but it never passed on the floor of the Senate. It did pass in the House and, of course, I think it would be the way to go. But it isn't the way that the Senate went. And so I think that what you might see coming out of some reconciliation would be those areas of agreement that all three--the White House, the Senate and the House--had already agreed to...more than two weeks ago.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
Democrats in both the House and Senate and beyond hailed President Obama's State of the Union address tonight as a major step forward on health care reform. But when the speech ended, and members filed out of the House chamber, one thing was abundantly clear: no matter how good tonight's speech was, it did not break the congressional health care logjam.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) said the President sent "exactly the right message."
"He made it very clear that he isn't walking away from health care with his tail between his legs," Wiener added.
That view was echoed by members in both chambers, and at least one powerful Democratic ally.
"This was an important message to get it done," Anna Burger, president of the labor federation Change to Win, told me in a brief interview. "They can do reconciliation...I think it's perfectly doable."
But for all the plaudits Obama's words won tonight, it appears that neither the House nor the Senate--stuck in a health care face-off since Democrats lost a Senate seat in Massachusetts last week--is prepared to blink.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)It is now evident to House leadership that their plan to amend the Senate health care bill and toss it back over to the upper chamber for final passage has been scuttled. Members of the House Democratic caucus are wandering far off the reservation, and the longer that persists, the more difficult it will be for leadership to pull them back into the corral.
In an attempt to regain control over an increasingly chaotic situation, leadership will hold a caucus meeting this afternoon*, and at stake could be the fate of the reform drive that has eaten most of the first year of Barack Obama's presidency.
To right the course, they'll have to convince rank and file members--but particularly progressives, who are now in full revolt--that success is still possible, half measures won't do, and failure is not an option. Given what members are saying, though, that won't be easy.
Congressional progressives have had to swallow a number of hard health care concessions over the last several months. Just today, an agreement was reached between the Obama administration and Labor to largely preserve an excise tax on expensive health insurance policies, opposed by the overwhelming majority of House members, that could impact middle class Americans. But nonetheless one of the leading progressives in the House says both chambers are ready to pass reform.
"I heard that we're very close to a final decision, that we will be having a bill soon, and it's not going to have everything anybody wants in it, but it will be a bill that can pass the House and the Senate and it will be a start for health care reform in the United States of America," Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)--co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told me in an interview this evening. "It is moving ahead. [Obama is] very committed to having a health care bill that will be good for America."
"I think we're beyond any one caucus," Woolsey said, before correcting herself to point out that pro-choice Democrats could still withhold their support over the issue of abortion.
Nevertheless, that could be an indication that, despite all the heartache and all the compromises, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi might not lose many progressive votes when health care comes to a final vote.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)President Barack Obama made a hard sell to House Democrats to support a compromise health care bill, the details of which are finally taking shape. He applauded the work members of Congress have put into creating health care legislation, acknowledged the concessions progressives have been forced to accept, and thanked vulnerable members for casting tough votes during a difficult political year.
According to a Democratic aide, Obama told progressives--bruised over the loss of the public option, and the persistence of the excise--that they could have another crack at the bill in the future.
"This is not the last health care bill ever passed," he said.
"Once we have a final bill, we can really talk about how it's going to help all Americans," Obama told the caucus. "This is something that will last. You'll look back and say this is one of the most significant accomplishments you've ever made."
At one point, Obama turned to members in vulnerable districts, including Reps. Tom Periello (D-VA) and Steve Driehaus (D-OH), to offer his appreciation and support.
"You've had to take tough votes. I understand it. I really appreciate it. The country is better off because of these tough votes you've taken. I want you to know I'm behind you 100 percent."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Progressives aren't happy with a number of developments on the health care front, but faced with a choice between the House health care bill (with which they have some reservations) and the Senate health care bill (with which they have major reservations), they're telling their leadership, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and the White House, that the House bill must prevail.
The Congressional Progressive Caucus has sent a memo to the White House and Senate leadership showing in no uncertain terms that they think the House bill should prevail over the Senate's. On the issue of abortion, CPC says both the House and Senate language should be scrapped, and replaced with less restrictive provisions.
You can read the entire list of priorities here.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) lays it on the line. If Senate health care legislation doesn't move significantly to the left when House and Senate negotiators meet to resolve the differences between their bills, he's a "no."
"The Senate has somehow managed to turn the House's silk purse into a sow's ear," Grijalva says in a statement. "If what the Senate is doing isn't corrected in conference with the House, I will not support the bill. Since the Senate won't use reconciliation, which only requires 51 votes, it doesn't look promising for any real change."
As of last week, there was no word on what, if anything, House progressives are planning to do to force the final package to the left. But I'm looking into it and I'll let you know what I find out.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)In the wake of some troubling signs that the progressive wishlist might get cut out of health care legislation, Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, have sent a curt letter to President Obama, requesting a meeting to discuss the push for reform.
"On behalf of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, we write to request a meeting with you to discuss health care reform legislation," they write. 'We have attached the Congressional Progressive Caucus' Principles that we expect to be included in the health care reform bill conference report."
Those principles include: "The creation of a nation-wide public option, such as the one in the House bill that increases competition, affordability and access for all Americans."
But, of course, all indications in the Senate are that the public option will not be part of the package, and now it appears as if even the consolation prize--a Medicare buy-in--might have to be stripped from the legislation as well. You can read the entire letter here. This could get ugly.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, isn't pleased with the public option rumblings she's heard out of the Senate, and suggests that, unless the final product has the same impact as a public option, her Caucus could reject it.
"I am looking at, Where's the competition in this compromise?" Woolsey told me today. "Are we offering competition to the private insurance providers? I don't see where that is. That's what the public option was all about was having competition so that premiums don't spike."
"We have 30 million new customers for the insurance industry, and what, we don't let them choose an option that would be less expensive?" she said incredulously.
Woolsey said the Medicare buy-in plan is a good one, though too limited.
President Obama last night spent about an hour with leaders of several key Democratic caucuses talking about health care.
TPMDC waited to talk to members as they left the evening meeting, but it got started late so leaders of the Progressive, Black, Hispanic and Asian Pacific American caucuses hurried out instead of speaking to reporters.
A senior administration official tells us this morning:
It was a productive meeting that lasted for about an hour. The President congratulated the members on working so hard to get a meaningful reform bill put together in the House. They talked about strategies for ensuring choice and competition, expanding coverage, controlling costs, ensuring that minority health is addressed, and discussed the road forward.PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
After House Democrats reveal their version of the health care bill this morning on the Capitol steps, President Obama later this afternoon will hold a private meeting with some of the most key groups he must keep united to pass a plan.
The White House says Obama will gather in the Roosevelt Room with members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.
As TPMDC has written, Obama's relations with these groups have not always been warm. Progressives were irritated the conservative Blue Dog Democrats were hosted at the White House to discuss health care last month.
On an unrelated note, we're wondering if Obama will discuss with the members of the minority caucuses the accusations from Republican lawmakers that the Council on American Islamic Relations planted spies on Capitol Hill as interns.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)The public option-stakes will continue this week, with most eyes on the developments in the Finance Committee. But on the other side of the Hill, progressives continue to insist that, whatever happens in the Senate, one chamber still insists that health care legislation include a public option.
In a new op-ed, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus blasts the proposal written by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) saying it's "all about the insurance industry's bottom line: no teeth in enforcements and regulations, endless patent hoarding for the pharmaceutical industry and laws that rein in citizens to pay these industries the largest transfer of wealth in history," and adding that a bill without a public option would be "unacceptable".
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)If there's a sign that one faction is winning the tug-of-war between House progressives and conservative Senate Democrats over the public option, it may be coming from the Speaker's office.
Last Tuesday, when Nancy Pelosi emerged from the White House after a meeting with President Obama, she said that the fate of the public option would be determined in the legislative process, and she suggested that if Congress goes for a "trigger," it would be affixed to a Medicare-like public option.
On Thursday, she said "This is about a goal. It's not about provisions. As long as our goal of affordability and accessibility and quality, meeting the four...goals that we have in the legislation, then we will go forward with that bill."
But not two weeks ago, Pelosi insisted that a health care bill without a strong public option would not pass the House. That statement was of a piece with similar statements she'd made for weeks, which were based on the progressives' insistence that health care reform's passage depended on the public option.
In other words, since meeting with Obama--who's been notably solicitous of Senate moderates, and notably dismissive of House progressives--her public language has softened notably.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)We already know that House progressive leaders are giving President Obama's health care speech positive, if not overwhelming reviews. But they're engaged in a bit of legislative tug-of-war with Senate centrists, particularly over the public option. So how did conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans react?
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), who's come out in support of the idea of triggering the public option, said "I think it was a bit of a game changer."
That's about as positive a review as you can get. But right now all eyes are on Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and her response was a bit less enthusiastic.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)I just got off the phone with Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)--co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. His takeaway from the speech was pretty simple: Though the President didn't go all the way on the public option, the fact that he addressed and endorsed it means the fight for the public option will live another day.
"It was very encouraging," Grijalva said. "Obviously our policy point is the public plan and I thought the President dealt with it. He didn't get into a lot of specificity of what he does support and doesn't support."
In an official statement, which I've pasted below, Grijalva said "the President needs to be more direct on what the public option means and what it will do for the American people."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)Remember back on Friday, President Obama discussed the public option on a conference call with House liberals? And remember how the upshot of that call was that Obama planned to meet yesterday with the chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, And Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus?
Well that meeting never happened. Yesterday, sources told me that the meeting hadn't been scheduled, but could happen as late as this morning. Today, a House aide tells me that it's not going to happen at all.
"They never called," the aide said.
Before reading too deeply into this, I have a call in to the White House seeking an explanation. But at a glance it doesn't seem to suggest that House liberals are being roped in to the health care negotiations between the House and the Senate.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY)--a single payer-supporter and one of the most visible surrogates for a public option in Congress--has some stark words of warning for Congressional liberals: If they don't vote against a health care bill without a public option, as he intends to do, nobody will ever buy their threats.
"There is clearly a sense that progressives in Congress are easily rolled," Weiner told Greg Sargent.
"If the Congressional left can't pass even something as modest as a watered down public option, then frankly I don't think anyone is going to take the left very seriously later on in this Congress," he added. "When Blue Dogs talk, there are fewer of them but they have more influence than when progressives talk."
Weiner reiterated his intent to vote no on health care legislation without a public option. In mid-August, Weiner cautioned that "unless [President Obama] says a public option is the way to go, I'm gonna be a no, and so will a lot of people."
A key House liberal, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, says that a vast majority of House liberals aren't about to agree to another compromise on the public option.
"The vast majority of CPC is not prepared to wave a white flag on public option," Grijalva told Greg Sargent. "A trigger would be a surrender."
As Greg notes, a vast majority of the 60-or-so members who vowed to oppose a bill without a public option would still be enough to ensure that the bill did not pass.
By way of contrast, House Majority leader Steny Hoyer says the public option might have to go. And a knowledgeable House aide tells me that many progressives are looking at other ways to achieve "real reform."
As before, House leaders can only lose 38 votes within the Democratic caucus if a bill is going to pass.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)At least four signatories to a July letter drawing a line in the sand over a public option have suggested that they may be willing to support a compromise proposal to "trigger" a public option only as a fallback if other reforms don't produce results on their own.
"Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, for a public option with reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates...is unacceptable," the letter read. "We simply cannot vote for such a proposal."
Among the signatories were Reps. Mike Capuano (D-MA) Jim McGovern (D-MA), Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), and Sam Farr (D-CA), who now say that definitions of "public option" may vary.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A variety of reports suggest that, during a conference call this afternoon, President Obama probed House progressives to see just how flexible their demands are.
A source familiar with the call tells TPM that Obama asked the group to define their red line when they talk about a "robust public option."
NBC reports that Obama reminded the group that they enjoy the security of representing safely Democratic districts.
And progressive caucus co-chair Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) told Greg Sargent that Obama outright asked the participants how far they're willing to compromise on the public option.
All in all it appears very much as if the President is feeling out how willing House Democrats will be to support a bill that falls short of meeting their earlier demands for a Medicare-like public option available to consumers nation-wide, without any triggers. As I reported earlier today, Obama's set to meet with progressive House leaders Tuesday ahead of his big health care speech before Congress. That's shaping up to be an extremely crucial meeting.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)We know that the White House has been in deep health care negotiations with Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), who they hope will be the 60th vote needed to overcome a filibuster. Now, it seems, the administration is drafting its own legislation--presumably influenced by those negotiations--to be introduced sometime after the President's health care speech, to be delivered Wednesday before a joint session of Congress.
Multiple sources close to the process [say] that while the plan is uncertain, they are preparing for the possibility they could deliver their own legislation to Capitol Hill sometime after the President Barack Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress Wednesday.
As always, it's worth cautioning that the situation is fluid. But as I noted earlier, the White House's preference seems to be to work with Snowe to craft a bill that can squeak by in the Senate. That package--which will presumably lack a robust public option, or will attach it to a trigger--will have to be sold to House progressives, who have loudly objected to the idea of compromising on that point.
For more on the menu of options before the White House, see here.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Looks like we'll have to wait a few more days before we know whether House liberals will make peace with the Obama administration. Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Lynn Woolsey appeared on MSNBC moments ago and reported that, in an afternoon conference call with the President, members reiterated their insistence on including a public option as part of health care reform.
However, she said, Obama didn't signal one way or another if he will ultimately get behind that position, and instead invited the co-chairs of the progressive caucus to a meeting at the Tuesday ahead of his big Wednesday health care speech before a joint session of Congress. By then, or perhaps sooner, we should have a clearer sense for where the White House stands.
We'll have video for you shortly.
Late update: Video below.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)After nearly 48 hours of trial balloons and kabuki theater, it seems pretty clear that the White House is focusing its attentions on a couple different potential paths forward for health care reform.
The first, and seemingly preferred, idea is to court Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), give her tremendous say in the shape of legislation, and then, if that's good enough to get 60 votes in the Senate, pressure House progressives to hold their noses and go along with it. It wouldn't be pretty though. Snowe's preferred approach appears to be a 'trigger' for a public option -- implementing a public option only if insurance companies are unable to rein in costs and expand coverage by a certain fixed date. And House progressives have really put themselves on the line for a public option free from any trigger mechanism.
If that strategy fails at any point along the road, the White House could still turn to the Democrat-only strategy of passing reform (or at least, many elements of reform) through the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process. Just yesterday, former Senate Majority Leader and current White House ally Tom Daschle wrote in the Wall Street Journal "should Republican intransigence continue, [Democrats] must focus on the budgetary implications of health reform and use the Senate rules of budget reconciliation to allow a health-care bill [to] move with majority support. The choice between complete legislative failure and majority rule should not pose a dilemma for any Democratic senator."
That's an important tell.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are laying down a new mark. Though President Obama appears to be laying the groundwork to scrap the public option, and progressives are pessimistic about his upcoming health care speech before Congress, the CPC is digging in on its earlier vow to block health care legislation that does not include a public option, setting the stage for a potential rift in the Democratic party.
"We look forward to meeting with you regarding retaining a robust public option in any final health reform bill and request that that meeting take place as soon as possible," they wrote in a letter to Obama today. "Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, a public option built on the Medicare provider system and with reimbursement based on Medicare rates--not negotiated rates--is unacceptable."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)House Progressives are increasingly indicating that they're worried the White House will sacrifice the public option.
"Many Members of Congress -- including myself -- will not support a health insurance reform bill that does not break the strangle hold of private insurance companies on our health care system," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). "That requires that consumers have a choice of a robust public health insurance plan. I will support nothing short of a robust public health insurance plan upon implementation, no triggers. I believe Congress will pass and the President will sign such a bill this Fall."
Schakowsky is chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus' health care task force. She's also a close Obama ally and many progressives believe that if the White House wants House progressives to compromise further on the public option, it will turn to her first. For now she's saying she's not budging.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
