Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Liberals Open Fire on Harry Reid
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is feeling the heat from his liberal colleagues to include a government-run health insurance plan, or "public option," in the Senate health care bill.
US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid speaks outside the White House in Washington, in September 2009. Reid of Nevada, trailing potential 2010 challengers in a public opinion poll, insisted Thursday that his reelection prospects were "fine." (AFP/File/Jim Watson) Now, as Reid and other negotiators move closer to unveiling their
health care plan, liberal advocacy groups are ratcheting up the
pressure, saying they will run Reid out of Washington if he does not
bring a public option to the Senate floor. With a tough re-election bid
ahead of Reid next year, the liberal "Netroots" could potentially make
good on their threat. Coming from a purple state, that puts Reid
between a rock and a hard place -- and has some local progressive
activists at least somewhat worried.
One television ad pressuring Reid to support the public option is already out: The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) is running a spot for at least five days in Las Vegas called "Is Harry Reid Strong Enough?"
"I'm your typical swing voter," Lee Slaughter, a Las Vegas nurse says in the ad. "I voted for Republicans for president, and I voted for President Obama. I also voted for Senator Harry Reid many times. But in 2010, I'll only be voting on one issue. I'm watching to see if Harry Reid is strong and effective enough as a leader to pass a public health insurance option into law."
FDL Action, the political action committee for the progressive group FireDogLake, is also planning to pressure the majority leader on the subject. The group has already targeted a handful of other moderate Democrats for not supporting a public option, like Arkansas Rep. Mike Ross, who has since come under a firestorm of scrutiny from all directions.
The message from the left is that a large Democratic majority in Congress is meaningless if the caucus is unwilling to support liberal causes.
"I'll take a Chuck Schumer-run Senate with 57 Democrats (bye bye Reid, Lieberman, and Lincoln) than a Harry Reid-run one with 75 Democrats," Markos Moulitsas Zúniga wrote last week on the liberal blog network Daily Kos.
Bob Fulkerson, the state director for the nonprofit Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, disagrees with that reasoning.
"Certainly we'd all like to see a barrage of progressive legislation get passed left and right, but even if we elected a more liberal senator than Reid -- likely impossible given Nevada's conservatism -- that would do nothing to change the dynamics of the Senate, where there's a number of conservative Democrats and Independents," Fulkerson told CBSNews.com. "And, would these lefty blogger types be happy with a right-wing senator to replace Reid who is openly hostile to all of our interests? Because that's where their strategy could lead."
Reid wouldn't necessarily hold up against a Republican opponent any stronger than a new Democratic candidate would, contends Ben Tribbett, executive director of the Accountability Now PAC. In fact, he said, having a relatively unknown Democrat in the race could be a good thing.
"There's an oft-quoted statistic that 98 percent of incumbents win re-election, but that's not the case with Senate incumbents in recent years," he told CBSNews.com. "People are able to mobilize earlier, and a lot of those incumbent advantages no longer exist."
Excluding senators who never draw strong challenges, he said, the chances for re-election are closer to 50-50. Furthermore, Tribbett said, a Republican candidate would be able to raise more money running against Reid than against another Democrat.
"Harry Reid's only chance to win this election is representing his own base and bringing a strong public option on the floor," he said.
Indeed, if liberals in Nevada do not get behind Reid next year, he could see his four-term Senate career come to an end. A recent Mason-Dixon poll showed the Nevada senator trailing two possible, relatively unknown, Republican challengers. Real estate developer Danny Tarkanian led Reid 48 percent to 43 percent in a hypothetical matchup, while those polled favored former GOP party official Sue Lowden over Reid by 49 percent to 39 percent.
Fulkerson contends that national liberal advocates are not considering the clout Reid can bring to local progressive issues and are underestimating the number of conservative and moderate voters in the state.
"Why would Nevada want to give up the power of being represented by the Senate Majority Leader? [Reid] has skillfully used that power to kill coal plants, plug state budget holes, and to kill Yucca Mountain, among other things," he said. "If the looney left wants to get rid of Democrats like Reid for not being more like [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi, they should move here and help us transform our state from conservative/libertarian to more liberal/progressive."
How Much will the Public Option Matter in Nov. 2010?
Jennifer Duffy, senior editor of the Cook Political Report, said that health care will certainly play a role in the 2010 election but that it will most likely be overshadowed by the state of the economy. As for whether ads targeting Reid on the public option could sway voters, she said it is too early to tell. Furthermore, she said, there have been ads running in Nevada on both sides of the issue for months.
"Voters are bound to be affected by it to some degree," Duffy said.
Polling on health care has had mixed results. A survey of Nevadans conducted by Mason-Dixon & Research earlier this month showed 43 percent supported President Obama's health care reform plans while 49 percent were opposed to them. Twenty-five percent listed a public option as "the best" way to reduce the number of uninsured Americans and reduce long-term health care costs.
Meanwhile, a new Research 2000 poll commissioned by PCCC shows 54 percent of Nevadans in favor of a public option and 39 percent opposed to the idea. Thirty-one percent said they were less likely to vote for Reid next year if a public option is not a part of health care reform while 17 percent said that would make them more likely to vote for him.
While they may be somewhat split on the issue, Nevada voters clearly care about health care reform. Nevada residents packed an auditorium on Monday night, leaving standing room only at a town hall meeting with Democrat Rep. Dina Titus to discuss health care.
While Fulkerson has reservations about the tactics of national progressives, he acknowledges health care will be a critical issue for Reid.
"I think if a good bill is passed, with a public option, Reid's standing with the base will skyrocket. I think it will also increase his standing with Independents," he said. "Nevada leads the nation in uninsured, and we rank among the worst states in per capita health care spending, so this is a really big issue here. The campaign [targeting Reid] does further raise expectations of liberal voters, who will feel demoralized if the public option is not part of the bill that Obama signs."
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said the issue is a game-changer for Reid.
"Reid would be politically devastated back home if he's weak and caves on the public option," he said.
- Posted in
28 Comments so far
Show AllI thought it was decided that the best strategy was to drop the "public option" and go for "Medicare for All". Why are they still harping on the former?
Really. When I see Public Option I think of the sealed goodie bags you can buy at the dollar store full of unknown treasures. In this case increased taxes and a whole lotta nothin else. The only part of public option I see worthwhile is HR 676. And theres a slim chance my state would adopt such a fair and democratic policy. The rest, who knows...
Wise choice, otherwise private insurance companies will be dumping their sickest patients into the Government program, thereby skewing their subscribers to the healthy side of the spectrum. Private health insurance has failed. Let's get on with medicare for all and tax the rich to pay for it. That's where the money is and that's were it has to come from. There is no avoiding it.
"If the LOONEY LEFT wants to get rid of Democrats like Reid for not being more like Nancy Pelosi, they should move here"
-Bob Fulkerson, the state director for the nonprofit PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP Alliance of Nevada
Umm..I think I see the problem here.....a supposed PROGRESSIVE calling others in his party the LOONEY LEFT would seem to me to be Teabagger in Democrat clothing.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Yeah, this Fulkerson weasel is definitely a proud "progressive".
Eugene V. Debs' shoes remain hard to fill-- unless, like Fulkerson, you're filling them with your own excrement.
· Yr Obd't Servant
My, we love alliteration, don't we Bob? This is the ole Jackrabbit here partly agreeing with you. I would add, Congress needs to get SOMETHING ON THE BOOKS ABOUT universal health care. It won't be perfect, but we can improve later models. People need to stop talking 'Perfection Theories'.
Like an old basketball coach once told me when his team kept losing, (Harry) can't make chicken sandwiches out of chicken you-know-what.
And lobbyist-driven U.S. Senate has a lot of chickens. We need to clean out that smelly coop with publicly funded elections.
As for the Looney Left, in past we discovered they often are rear guard action from the Tighty Rightys'. (as in lids screwed on moonshine jars, too tight) We imagine that Old Desert Dog Harry Reid, hiker and camper par excellent, will 'nose' his way into victory camp in this race. jackrabbit
I agree. This is an outrage. The corporate fascist media love to glom onto guys like this and tout them as the standard rather than the exception. He should be run out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. I doubt CBS would do a follow up. Unbelievable.
If one has a 50/50 chance for re-election, then obviously you'd better go for the base, which INCLUDES progressives. Reid had ought to pressure like his political life depended on it for a ROBUST public option, lacking the cajones to push for Single Payer Medicare for all, which is to only one that would work in the short and long run. It's hard to imagine why Congress would pass an inferior bill because it isn't politically expedient to pass the best one. We voted in Congress persons to represent us, and that includes times when a minority is correct and the majority is not. The Majority isn't ALWAYS right! Some times the "rules" have to be superceded by "good judgement".
we need third party
No, actually we need a second party that is different than the other one (with two wings)and is not for sale to lobbyists.
Poet
What self-respecting nurse would vote for a Republican for any office? I know of none. As for liberal, neither the Democrat or Republican parties can claim to be liberal, although they may contain self-described liberals, but most of those are more akin to Tories. None want to enforce the rule of law when it comes to capital crimes committed by the Executive, for example. Just look at Pelosi trying to look as if she champions the "public option." Like Pelosi, Reid is a fraud, and many reasons exist for running him out of the Senate.
The stakes are very high here. Reid had better give himself to working hard for a robust public option (Medicare for All); so what if he loses his seat in the next election? Let's make a little sense here: Harry Reid's future in politics is not an issue of major concern. Healthcare and healthcare reform are. Doesn't he KNOW that? He certainly ought to.
...harry round heels
"they will run Reid out of Washington if he does not bring a public option to the Senate floor"
What is it that caused liberals to finally grow a backbone? (See the WP article in the first link.) It seems arbitrary to me that liberals went along with the extreme right's carnival of horror then, out of the blue, they start hammering on Harry Reid to do the right thing when they should have been hammering on him all along.
Oh. Maybe it's because they are now "in power" and realize they may get pinned with the responsibility now that the people have finally had enough of the bankster bailouts and subsequent record bonus payouts, the likely Afghanistan escalation as part of a war without end on brown people, and the recent rapacious demands of the health insurance cartel against an already oppressed slave population.
So now, these liberals may have to take some heat. Oh my gawd. Rather than do the right thing "for the greater good", liberals take action to save their own friggin asses. We on the far-left hold both liberals and conservatives to the same standard. The only sensible reaction is to double up the heat on them (the ones who have now decided to put the heat on Reid).
"Is Harry Reid Strong Enough?"
Well, we already know that he sold his spine. The only hope left for Harry might be Viagra. On the other hand, it might also be too late for that.
I think it's probably time for Harry (Houdini) Reid to retire his magic sheeple tricks. The sheeple are finally getting tired of the same old
sh!t.
Harry, like many others on Capitol Hill, need to be forced into retirement.
Get out and vote him out!
Medicare E ( everyone) --- If Reid became like Pelosi he would still be right of center.
The Democrats with a majority are almost as useless as they are without one.
Boy! Obama is trashing the enviornment big time.
Rabbit season's started.
No public option should equal NO democrats in the House and fewer in the Senate in 2010. At least the repubs are easy to hate, and we know they're all filth.
"I'll take a Chuck Schumer-run Senate..." You have to be kidding. The only difference between Schumer and Reid is style. Schumer is the bankster's man all the way, and a pretty decent war-monger too.
The real problem with Liberals is they are willing to give in on corporate rapacity for a few welfare crumbs. What they usually wind up getting is kicked in the metaphorical teeth.(See: bankers response to bailout; consequences of NAFTA, GATT)
"And, would these lefty blogger types be happy with a right-wing senator to replace Reid who is openly hostile to all of our interests? Because that's where their strategy could lead."
If Reid acts basically as a republican - then who really cares......
I don't think progressives are going to vote for the republican....no - they'll either not vote or vote 3rd party - the greens for example.....
and if we can get a huge green turnout we can get matching funds and access to ballots....
if you're drowing and someone throws you a 10 lb rock (reid) and the republicans throw us a 20 lb rock - what's the difference in the end?
Either way, he still needs to be run out of town on a rail!
The message from the left is that a large Democratic majority in Congress is meaningless if the caucus is unwilling to support liberal causes.
And they'd better understand that it's not going to change any time soon. These expressions like "looney left" and "we would live to see a barrage of progressive legislation" are insulting. We have a rogue government with a bunch of bribed crooks, for crying out loud! We cannot accept the idea that civilized behavior in government is a move to the left. That is bullshit. We want the law breaking to stop. Reid is breaking the fucking law, period.
If dem loyalists are fighting this hard when they have majorities in the House and Senate, plus the Presidency - all for a weak "public option" in healthcare funding - then it's time to rethink the party that you support.
Consider the next step. Stop reflexively voting for Dems and build an alternative. For instance, most Dem voters would probably agree with Green Party principles. That's an easy choice to make. You'll always lose if you vote out of abject fear, and especially if you continue to support corporatist Dem candidates that agree with Republicans.
-TIA
Well Auntie, Here is where the rubber meets the road ---- If you vote for a third party, You guarantee a win by your worst nightmare ---- just what we have had for the past two psychopathic administrations of "George The Lesser". The Dimocrats, as a party, too, are a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of USA Inc. What the hell to do????? Seems to me that third party (no matter how much I may agree with their positions) is a suicidal strategy. I think better to do what is being done---- ratchet up the pressure on the bastards we have in power and vote them out if they do not respond to our at least partial satisfaction.
How's that "make them do it" strategy working out?
If the deck is stacked against you - and it is - why participate in the fraud by continuing to vote for the corporate duopoly?
My worst nightmare is not corporate control, which we have with Dem/Repug "representation" anyway. No, I fear that most Democratic voters are kind of conservative - kind of like the Republicans they denigrate. Either that or Dem voters aren't thinking about the issues, or they just like following leaders that spout liberal-sounding rhetoric and don't care what the end result may be (which is usually regressive when they pass something).
Perhaps it's my fantasy that loyal Dem voters have some bit of progressiveness in their bones, but maybe they don't. All I know is that Dem voters stay loyal. In the end, that will prevent a third party from coming to power under the U.S. winner-take-all system, and that's a bad thing. To me, that's true hopelessness.
-TIA
This article is a perfect example of the carefully crafted corporate fascist propaganda we are deluged with on a daily basis. CBS News. Who could have seen that coming?
First they quote some dip wad who calls himself a progressive. He calls people of the left looney Then he rails about lefty blogger types. But the big message in his quote is the assertion that we must vote the Reids of the Senate because Republicans will win if we don't. Someone needs to point out to Fulkerson that if we can't pass any significant legislation with Democratic majorities, that it makes no sense voting them in again. If we can't make progressive changes, we might as well let Republicans win and force the issue down the road. That is where I am at right now. If they can't deliver Medicare E, no more votes for them.
The second big point is that healthcare reform won't matter. Voters have other bigger issues. This unsubstantiated opinion is tossed out there in a blatant attempt to minimize the perceived importance of this issue. Americans need to be brainwashed, er informed, that IT DOESN'T MATTER.
If you are represented by Reid, send him an email saying he'll be shown the door if he doesn't pass a strong public option. If you are part of this progressive organization this Fulkerson leads, give him a tongue lashing and start a grassroots movement to toss this clown out on his ear. He's a disgrace to progressive politics.
PS: You can contact Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada at lrake at planevada.org and let them know what you think of Mr. Wilkerson. I did.
the truth about harry is he couldn't pick the winner in a one
horse race!
Let's all work together to get term limits for ALL elected officials. Two terms and your out......