All Hail Tom Harkin! He says he has the votes to pass a public option
By John Amato Wednesday Sep 30, 2009 7:00amSenator Tom Harkin, who leads the HELP committee, made a stunning statement to The Hill:
The Senate has the votes to pass a healthcare reform bill including a public option, a key Senate chairman said Tuesday.
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, said that the Senate "comfortably" has a majority of votes to pass the public plan, and that he believes Democrats can muster 60 votes to break a filibuster.
"I have polled senators, and the vast majority of Democrats — maybe approaching 50 — support a public option," Harkin said told the liberal "Bill Press Radio Show." "So why shouldn't we have a public option? We have the votes.
"I believe we'll have the 60 votes, now that we have the new senator from Massachusetts, to at least get it on the Senate floor," Harkin later added. "But once we cross that hurdle, we only need 51 votes for the public option. And I believe there are, comfortably, 51 votes for a public option."
That's great news. Let's hope it plays out this way.
I have said before (most recently here) that the Senate Finance Committee was conservative, in fact the most conservative committee makeup in the Senate, and that we would be likely to lose these votes:
With numbers like this, and with the entire Democratic base mobilized intensely around the issue, you would have to be politically tone deaf as a Democrat to oppose this, but this is the Senate Finance Committee, so public option advocates are likely to lose these votes. The question, though, will be the margin. On a committee this conservative, far more conservative than the Senate as a whole, if we only get seven votes for the public option amendments, that would have to be considered a major political victory, and a sign that the public option can definitely get a majority vote on the floor.
So getting 10 votes on this is promising for those of us who believe a public option is essential. Baucus, Conrad, Lincoln, Carper, and Bill Nelson are five of the ten most conservative Dems in the Senate, and on the Schumer amendment, even two of them went with us. President Obama is for it, a majority in the House is for it, and the whip count we're running right here at OpenLeft.com shows that 51 Democrats are in favor of it. And today Tom Harkin confirmed that our whip count is right...
Will all this evidence, the public option will only be hard to beat if Democratic leaders decide they don't want to do it.
And Digby has more:
Carper and Nelson flipped on the Shumer public option amendment, leaving only Conrad, Lincoln and Baucus voting against it. This is good news believe it or not. It indicates that there are 51 votes for a public option in the senate.
The question most certainly is whether or not the president can change their minds. And frankly, if he doesn't have enough juice to at least hold them together for one cloture vote then I have to wonder if he has any real juice at all. Every one of these corporate lackeys can vote against the final bill if they dare. Assuming they can bring Byrd in to do it, all they need to do is break a Republican filibuster and "allow an up or down vote."
Now matter what FOX News says, the public option is not dead. I saw Schumer on with Tweety and he was ecstatic that he flipped a couple of votes. It sucks that he has to kowtow to Max Baucus, though. He was talking to him like he was the Duke of Westminster. All that royalty cannot be overlooked.
Tweety asked Schumer about those pesky liberal ads that are being run against Baucus, as if Matthews thought he was NOT going to defend his Senate brother. And during our President Obama blogger conference call, Obama told US to keep the pressure on everybody. He's got to push for the public option hard no matter what Rahm thinks.
Login or Register to post comments.
Question - Which Public Option would that be?
#1 - the make believe Robust Public Option
#2 - the bait and switch, FLIM FLAM Public Option
Answer - it has to be #2 because there is no #1.
Is this a great country or what?
---
Black Agenda Report Editor Bruce A. Dixon's articulate piece here
And then even when you get this FLIM FLAM Public Option, what do you have?
Michael Moore and Rose Ann DeMoro here
Oh yeah uh huh.
Thanks John for staying on the positive side. I agree with your assessment. Members may vote against the final bill, but it is very unlikely that Democrats will vote against their own party on a procedural vote like cloture. It would be political suicide for a Democrat to do so.
Well as Mr. Wolf in "Pulp Fiction" would say:
"Let's not start suckin' each other's dicks just yet."
senators and congressmen need to wear thier corporate sponsors on thier clothes like race car drivers or athletes in Europe.
a big ConocoPhillips logo on the back, and a United Technologies Corporation logo on the back.front. .
!
Show them all to be the farce that they are.
seemed to me he was lying....his eyes were shifty, and he usually stares right at the camera when talkin...
I'm taking all bets on the fact that there will be a Public Option on the Health Care Reform Bill.
The only real question, right now, is whether it will involve a trigger.
"The public option is on the march," Rockefeller said, moments before his amendment was roundly defeated.
Schumer pledged, "We are going to keep at this and at this and at this until we succeed, because we believe in it so strongly."
Okay Chuck hell, call up W he'll teach you how to ram an agenda through.
Tell me exactly who would be eligible to opt in to a government run "Public Option" insurance program?
Tell me how much it would cost?
How would that be figured?
What would be covered, compared to say "Medicare"?
But here's the biggest question of all: Why is it not one single person can explain in plain English the answers to my questions?
Except for Bruce Dixon's article mentioned by Alice up top, I have not heard ONE SINGLE PERSON explain the answers to my questions.
Which means...none of us know what The Public Option even is!!!
Yet everyone keeps cheerleading for it?!
Why?????
Another memo to John Amato: Please get Anthony Weiner (or someone who knows the answers to my questions) here on a thread to tell us the answers to my questions. Thank you very much.
I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.
Now I'm providing answers according to HR3200, which is the main bill (of the 5). I haven't read the other ones, but this one I've studied.
Who is eligible?
Section 202 explains who is eligible. Also anyone already enrolled in Medicare/Medicaid is automatically folded into the public option.
Cost?
According to the CBO, it'll cost $800 billion over 10 years. If you take into account the fact that we've already allocated 2/3 of that cost in the budget & that the other 1/3 will be covered by taxes on the top 5% of incomes along w/eliminating fraud & waste in the system, it's very affordable. On top of that, if we DON'T have the public option, we'll be $3-5 trillion in the hole in 10 years (status quo according to CBO again)
How would that be figured?
CBO calculates that.
What gets covered?
Section 122 in that bill gives the minimum standards for ALL insurance policies (not just the public option). Section 203 details the different plans you can get (basic, premium, premium plus, etc). As for coverage, there are spots littered all over the bill, refer to pages 3 & 4 to get specific things (end-of-life dealings, nurse visitations during pregnancy, preventative care/vaccines, & much more)
Answer your questions? I want a public option because it'll force private insurance companies into not having a monopoly on our health! Think about it, when your employer offers you a plan, you only get 1 choice most of the time anyways.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Corporations are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are profit, profits and the pursuit of more profit.
That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the Corporation to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect our safety and happiness.
said the same thing on Hardball last night.
He was confident that they had the votes to pass it on the floor and that no one really expected a lot from the conservative finance committee.
If we have any hope to pass this thing everyone out there pick up the phone, email, get the word to the senators and congresspeople !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Let em know how you feel folks.
PS I was in a pro-public option rally last week in Philadelphia. We had excellant speakers and a good turn out. Guess how much press we got ? Pretty much zilch. Oh did I forget to mention what we didn't have ? No one carrying guns, or Hilter-race-baiting-inflammatory signs or anyone shouting down the speakers.....gee....wonder why we didn't get any coverage ?????
well i feel they're a bunch of bought and paid for blood suckers and i wouldn't trust them to write a health care bill. a fair 30% of those senators need to be ousted in the next election to have a senate the MIGHT just have what it takes to pass meaningful reform that doesn't fatten up the wallets of their campaign contributors.
Say it ain't so!
Anything that comes out of this congress will be blatantly weighted to benefit the insurance companies - i.e., mandates, fines for failing to purchase insurance, diminution of care, increased deductibles, liability protection for insurers, etc., etc.
The only way to get real health insurance reform will be to vote out the obstructionists. That means delaying health
insurancecare reform until after the midterm elections when obstructionist corporate shills can be voted out of office.The question is does Obama have the balls to veto a bad bill or will he let it pass as a symbol of "victory". I'm afraid the latter is what he is shooting for.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel reportedly called the advertisements run against Baucus and other conservative Democrats "f---ing stupid" during a closed-door meeting.
that should be obvious.
Rahm = DLC = Corporate Whore
that anything less then 75 votes is COMMUNISM! And UNAMERICAN! And WRONG! And UNFAIR!
This will be part of the coordinated, well-funded message bomb for the next few weeks leading up to a vote.
and a distraction. In the end, they will pass a bill with a 'public option' that will not go into effect for several years, and that will be so watered down as to be perfectly useless.
Then, because it will be so bad, no one (except those forced) will want to sign up for it - and the Reich-wingers, the Congress, and the insurance companies will gloat as it fails - then they can say: "see, we told you so, Only Private Insurance Companies know what's best for the health care needs of Americans."
In the meantime, in the back rooms, the banksters and the Fed and all the insurance and other CEOs are conniving to enact the next big fraud and steal the rest of our wealth....just watch!
expect to be disappointed. The votes yesterday weren't likely to pass given the makeup of the Senate Finance Committee. These are senators from small states where special interests can more easily wield their power since they are mainly the ones funding these senators reelection campaigns.
Describing our current campaign financing situation:
A small businessman bitched about unions to a store clerk at a local hardware store.
So the businessman was asked which "union" he belonged to. The businessman replied, "None". Then, the clerk asked the businessman whether he was a Democrat or Republican? Businessman replied "Republican". The clerk told him he belonged to the Republican Union then. Hey, union, association, guild, party, lobby, special interest group, all the same thing - a group formed to benefit its members and advocate their views. Then, the clerk asked him if he knew how much his Congressman's union dues were. How much does your Congressman pay in union (Party) dues each year to keep their support and consequently, his/her job? The businessman had no idea.
Imagine his shock when the businessman was told his Congressman's dues were between $90,000 to $600,000 per year, depending on his position, committee memberships, etc.
The clerk then asked if he knew how much his Congressman made per year? $180,000/year. So, the clerk asked "Why would a man pay $600,000/year for a $180,000/year job?
Would you? And how is it that we hear the persistent urban legend that a Congressman leave Washington richer than when they went there, if their Party dues are 1/2 to 3 times their salaries? I know I haven't sent any money to my Congressman, have you? Well, where do you suppose he gets the $50,000/month to pay his Party dues? See the conflict of interest?
Either the public pay for the election campaigns or the special interest groups will, duh! Hey, fellow citizens, this is the hiring process for legislators. We need to fund the horse race to see that it is run fairly, or let corporation or the Supreme Court outsource it out of our control. Either our Congressmen work for us, or they work for their Parties. We already see what happens when our Congressmen work for their Parties - Parties first and Public second.
This is where citizens throw party affiliations out the window and come together for the common good.
Baucus, in explaining his vote, suggested that he only voted against the Public Option because he believed they couldn't get 60 votes.
Okay, so if just a few more people thinking like you are willing to vote for a Public Option "if only" we got 60 votes, then that means we only need to flip 3-5 votes.
I think that's not unachievable. Let's call these Blue Dogs on their claim to see if that's REALLY why they voted No.
I saw Tom Harkin on Ed Schultz after the debale of the democratic turncoats voted with their rethug brethern.
He insisted that they would have a bill on the Prez's desk by Christmas and it will include a public option. He even talked about using reconciliation if they have to.
Christmas? That gives Pharma, insurance lobby, teabaggers, glen Pecker, and fox news almost three months to bribe, scare, and intimidate the bejesus out of the weak members of the democratic flock known as the Congress.
Why can't they step this thing up? Just frickin' do it and let's move on to other campaign promises.
I realize others are asking this question...but why am I now looking at an ad on Crooksandliars.com just below this thread that says:
STOP GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE!
HANDS OFF MY HEALTH CARE!
SIGN THE PETITION!
(Paid for by Patients First a project of Americans for Prosperity)
You don't really want us to sign the petition, do you John?
Isn't there some way C&L can get advertisers who aren't "Teabaggers"?
They have said they have no direct control over their ads, the content is automatically generated from post text.
You are on a Mac, so am I with Safari (which crashes too much for my liking). But for me Firefox has other problems except that there is an ad blocker giblet you can download (so I hear).
Maybe that would work for you. I mentally tune the ads out, for me that works well enough.
Last night I was in bed checking out your post on the Open Thread and my cat walked over the keyboard and hit exactly the right key to put you on my "Ignore user" list!!!
Ha!!!!
So funny!!
That is one smart kitty!
Give her a hug for me…
---
Those men, can't live with, but you can live without them…
here
What I want to see is those pay scale comparisons, because if they aren't equal this is just another way for the Rats to keep floating their ponzi ship. Hire the women, they'll work for cheap(er).
a 'conservative' Democrat? Does that equal 'progressive' Republican?
In my mind, conservative Democrat = REPUBLICAN. You can call them whatever you want; conservatives, Blue Dogs, asswipes, whatever.....they are Republicans disguised as Democrats.
Tom Harkin was Wellstone's mentor when he first got elected.
He is a pre-'80's Northern Dem, the way I used to remember them.
Tom was the one that got the Lim-Pukes all wound up during Wellstone's memorial
Harkin is quoted in two paragraphs. I don't know if he said the second quote immediately after the first, but I don't quite see how the two quotes mesh with each other.
First he said, "...the vast majority of Democrats — maybe approaching 50 — support a public option."
In the next paragraph, he's quoted as saying, "I believe there are, comfortably, 51 votes for a public option."
How does "maybe approaching 50" become "comfortably 51"?
"OFF WITH THEIR HEADS"
is it NOT good news for THIS congress to pass a sweeping healthcare bill. in particular this senate which is bought and paid for. what we get from them will not be better than what we have just because there's a public option. they're going to fork over billions of dollars to private medical and insurance companies in the process.
Login or Register to post comments.