Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Checkmate: How Joe Lieberman Turned The Public Option Fight On Its Head
After Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) threw down the gauntlet on the public option, political observers and liberal critics had no shortage of theories. Lieberman was rebelling against the liberal base. Lieberman harbors animosity about 2006. Lieberman is an egotist and wants the spotlight. Any or all of these theories might be true, but they obscured the more important, strategic rationale for his decision: With a 60 member caucus, and little to no Republican support, every Democrat has a pocket veto of the health care bill. Lieberman's explicit threat to use his veto was, in effect, checkmate on the public option in the Senate, and created breathing room for other public option skeptics to create the bloc that is now negotiating away the public option entirely.
From left to right Top: Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) Bottom: Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Center: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV. (TPM graphic) "I think we all came to a similar conclusion. He came to the timing
of his announcement, I think, pretty much on his own," conservative
Democrat Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) told me of Lieberman's threat.
So you all sort of knew where each other stood?
"Yes of course. We continued to talk about it. Each of us had a problem, to one degree or another, with the public option."
I asked, "Did you see it as helpful to your own negotiating on the public option?"
"I don't think it hurt," Nelson said.
Lieberman's move could be used as a case study on the importance of leverage in political negotiations.
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), another public option opponent, said Lieberman had always opposed the public option, and that his announcement prefigured the current behind-close-doors hand wringing over the provision.
"This has been going on for a long time, and so our caucus is in the process of negotiating with ourselves, because we need all 60 of us to get this done...we knew this day would come and it has come," she told me and another reporter last week.
For his part, Lieberman himself says he wasn't specifically trying to turn the public option momentum on its head, and help his centrist colleagues. But hey! All the better.
"I didn't actually think of it that way, if it had that effect, I'm not unhappy about it," Lieberman told me. "But I mean the progression here is that I felt from the beginning...the public option, government-created, run insurance company was not a good idea."
"As we came closer to the vote on cloture on the motion to proceed, and Senator Reid called me and he said, 'can you vote for it, I'm gonna put a public option in it,' and I said, 'you know I'm against the public option. But I want to start the debate and I want to be for health care reform.'"
And then there were some, my colleagues, who said, "well why don't you negotiate with Harry, see if you can get it out now," so I said, "I don't think he wants to negotiate." I talked to him again, it was pretty clear that he didn't, so I just thought it was very important to make that clear, to explain why I wanted to--I would vote to open debate on the bill--because I want to support health care reform, but that if there was a public option in it, the only recourse I have...is to vote against cloture.
Now, according to Nelson the opt-out public option isn't even part of the ongoing discussions between progressive and conservative Democrats, who either need Lieberman, or Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), or both on board for reform to pass. Still in the fold are the trigger compromise (which has Snowe's support, but not Lieberman's) and a new proposal to allow consumers to buy non-profit insurance with premiums negotiated by the federal government.
Conservative Democrats would like this latter plan--which isn't a public option--to replace the measure in the bill, though Snowe told reporters yesterday that the two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, and that it's likely not a replacement for a trigger. On Saturday, she met with Obama to discuss triggers and other elements of the reform proposal. She described Obama's position on the triggers as "supportive."
Senators say they hope to reach a more concrete compromise early this week, perhaps as early as today.
- Posted in



46 Comments so far
Show AllBeutler sez: "... (Snowe) met with Obama to discuss triggers and other elements of the reform proposal. She described Obama's position on the triggers as 'supportive.'"
***
Sure, he's supportive of triggers. Look how many he's sending to Afghanistan.
The best outcome we could hope for is that health care "reform" gets voted down and we continue to suffer with the current broken system that will at least deliver more health care at a lower cost than whatever corporate welfare disguised as health care "reform" the best congress money can buy sends to Obomber's desk.
Yes; we need to let Congress know that without a public option open to everyone we refuse to be held hostage by the insurance companies. No mandatory purchase without a public option! I sent this letter to my "representatives" two days ago; two of whom are Republicans and the third is Ben Nelson. Guess how far I'll get with that...But we still have to try.
Agreed. If, as the article states, any public option is actually DOA, the Democrats should put a strong option in the bill and let it die. Get moving on other legislation, see how the 2010 elections go, and try then.
Maybe just pass the pre-existing conditions part of the bill for now.... But no mandate without a public option!
Excuse making Democrats:
The Democratic Party should strip Lieberman of his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Department. In fact, they should have done so long ago; however, not doing so just shows how far to the right the party has gone. In the meantime, the party makes excuses.
Lieberman's wife has made over a million dollars by sitting on the board of the largest health insurance company in the his state. This is a simple case of corruption and attempting to find other reasons for his opposition to decent healthcare is ridiculous. Please do some research!
Joe Lieberman has long been a douche bag, with his "rise" to national prominence beginning with a splashy pro-censorship jab at "violent video games" in 1998 that borrowed liberally from the PMRC playbook. That he is now doing everything he can to protect a major business in his state, the "Health" insurance companies (who compensate his wife and him quite handsomely for it). If Harry Reid and the Democratic Senate "leadership" had any gonads, they would strip him of his committee chairmanship that strokes his considerable ego the second he pulled any legislative tricks to impose his warped vision of health care on the rest of us. Unfortunately, it appears as if the Democratic Senate "leadership" and the eunuchs of the Forbidden City appear to have many things in common.
In Canada public healthcare was fought against with the same vigor by the same interests using the same tactics. It was a long difficult battle. First we won in a single province than another and so on. Eventually a critical mass formed across the nation making it impossible for the feds to ignore.
Perhaps your battle is being fought in the wrong forum. It may be better to identfy the state that gives you the best chance of winning and start from there. Once people start to see it working there in may possibly spread to neibouring states.
Despite the possibility of losing a strong competitve advantage over the US most Canadians wish you luck.
The one state at a time option might not be a viable route.
Canada's system started in Saskatchewan and Alberta adopted it soon after that. Both those provinces are very large in territory and Air travel and even the road systems not as condusive to people travelling from say an Ontario to Saskatchewan to get the "Free health care".
US States are much smaller and if only one or two offer this option there will be problems with people coming from out of State for the free health care. Some States will just wink wink and nudge nudge THEIR uncovered Citizens into going over the border to get their care.
A BLOCK of States getting together to do the same might be more workable.
True enough the more the better. However whether it is one state or several eventually those out of staters will tire of this (besides there are ways to counter this)and demand public healthcare at home. And by all means keep up the fight for a national program at the same time.
Federal law prevents individual states from competing with private-profit companies.
I understand almost everyone is covered in Iowa.
If either the democrats or Obama had any courage at all they would go to these senators and say " either vote with us or we'll not give you any money for re-election.......
unfortunately they only say that to the progressives while saying to the blue dogs, "we're with you - just hold firm"....
the demos could say - vote against the public option - thereby destroying health care reform and Obama's chance at re-election and we'll simply vote for Medicare for all by reconciliation.
But as we know the demos and Obama don't have the courage - or I should say they don't have the courage when it comes to helping WE THE PEOPLE
they have plenty of courage when it comes to helping their corporate bosses or continuing a war......
the best that can be said about having a majority of democrats in congress is that the veil has been lifted on their corrupt to the core beliefs.....
as I've said many times
when you're drowning what's the difference between being thrown a 25 lb rock or a 15 pound rock?
lieberman is an enemy to WE THE PEOPLE and as such is an enemy of the USA.......
google FDR and economic royalists and see how not much has changed except that Obama is no FDR.... he's Hoover!
AS such Obama is proving to be an enemy of WE THE PEOPLE and we should respond accordingly and not give him one more dime or hour of our time, blood or effort...........
FDR:
"For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. Through new uses of corporations, banks and securities, new machinery of industry and agriculture, of labor and capital - all undreamed of by the Fathers - the whole structure of modern life was impressed into this royal service.
There was no place among this royalty for our many thousands of small-businessmen and merchants who sought to make a worthy use of the American system of initiative and profit. They were no more free than the worker or the farmer. Even honest and progressive-minded men of wealth, aware of their obligation to their generation, could never know just where they fitted into this dynastic scheme of things."
What a Crock! The last few months of farting around over the health care reform isn't even about reform. It is back room juggling for top dog and seeing just how deep everyone's pockets really are. Except for a very few no one is interested in making health care available to everyone, not at all, some persons simply are not worth helping or saving. Congress helps themselves to a socialized health care plan as the taxpayers foot the bill, but of course that is a different kettle of fish. It would be comforting to know that whatever they do decide on would be a baby step in the right direction, but looks more like a giant step backwards. Hopefully the next election will be pay up time for all of the dissenters, particurly Joe Liberman.
This bum needs to be thrown down the well--of course then we would pollute the well forever--in hindsight it is clear that the reason the Dems. kept him in power is their leader is the same shit for brains kind of guy as "W" was--there are no differences between the parties--to kill,rob, and destroy both here and abroad is their purpose and to build, help, and save, their loathing. We need to get rid of every last one of these career crooks and establish a gov of and by the people--no more chances for the two party system--Break away from this pathetic rut that we have been in for years.
The public-option has shrunken and collapsed to neutron star size.
This bill will only make health care worse.
Do us all a favor Joe, make yourself useful and kill this bill.
Better to start over from scratch than cement a guaranteed-to-fail plan.
We must not only think about those in need of care to today but the many more who will need medical access in the future.
So the health care charade continues. It would be highly-entertaining theater were it not for the fact that when this boondoggle passes it will destroy what's left of the middle class, if there's anything left by the time this mess is enacted after the next Presidential election. It's disappeared from the front page of HuffPo already, it seems, but O-Bummer didn't even mention the public option yesterday in his trip to Capitol Hill to -- ah-hem -- "twist arms" and Lieberman, of course, took that as a good sign that the PO is dead.
Why they're fighting over this joke of a PO is beyond me.
News also just in that O-Bomber is going to explain his Afghanistan policy at his Nobel Peace Prize speech. Oh, boy!
"News also just in that O-Bomber is going to explain his Afghanistan policy at his Nobel Peace Prize speech. "
Maybe Obama will be taking notes from Bush's "fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again" speech?
All these idiots talk like they know what things are going to cost in 10 - 20 years. Hell they don't have a clue what the dollar is going to be worth tomorrow let alone in 10 - 20 years or if we will even have a dollar. Complete idiots predictable as rocks and twice as stupid.
Lieberman: "...the public option, government-created, run insurance company was not a good idea."
The Senator from Insurance knows perfectly well that the purpose is to create competition to rein in costs. Senator Insurance's constituents spent $263 million lobbying to keep their monopoly, created out of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, that exempts them from anti-trust laws.
The only "government-created, run insurance company" is the current one in which monied interest have made a relatively small investment for a very large return. Pocketing a senator here and a senator there, they buy legislation that creates government subsidized monopolies, which is the uniquely American system that we currently "enjoy."
Not only did the Senator from Insurance get $1.6 million directly from insurance and pharma, his wife got a job as the health and pharmaceutical practice senior counsel at Hill & Knowlton. She was also a director at Wellpoint, which is one of those insurance companies who profits from anti-competitive (legal) practices in places like Olympia Snowe's home state, Maine, where they enjoy 71% of the business.
She stepped down, as did Chuck Ludlam, who was a senior staff member for Lieberman and pharma lobbyist. In 2005, Senator Lieberman introduced Bioshield II, S. 975 that would not only protect pharma from law suits, but extend patents by 2 years, something that, according to a pharma website, would send "billions right to the bottom line."
Actual healthcare reform would take on these sweetheart deals that have been purchased from our representatives over the years. These legal monopolies take more and more of our taxes every year, and no reform can succeed without addressing this. The public option was the very tiniest of steps in that direction. Without it, the bill is worse than useless and should be filibustered by a liberal senator. Maybe the shiney new "liberal" Senator Merkley, or some other fresh face of "change."
If Democrats are uncomfortable with language like "public option," maybe they should simply start enforcing laws against profiteering and remove exemptions from anti-competitive practices. Let Medicare negotiate drug prices. Tell the corporations who receive so much of their money from the government that they are going to have to earn that money. Stop coddling corporate crooks with Corporate Integrity Agreements and throw a few of these welfare queens off the public dole... that kind of thing instead of a weak public option.
You have written a masterpiece. You have hit every nail on the head and then some. Joe Lieberman is a disgrace to America and to the Jewish faith.
Very interesting, and disgusting, that this piece of crap's wife is working for Hill and Knowlton. This is the same outfit that brought us all the PR saying tobacco really isn't bad for you back in the 60's by creating "controversies" and doubt about the science indicating cigarettes were deadly. Not surprisingly, they also created PR around CFC aerosols not really causing holes in the ozone layer, and more PR still supporting asbestos manufacturers. It's painfully obvious to see who Joe Lieberman is looking out for. It sure isn't the common man and woman in this country.
Lieberman is a sanctimonious windbag who is no more than a shill for the insurance industry and Israel.
Doesn't say much for the people of Connecticut who keep this bozo in office.
Lieberman is a sanctimonious windbag who is no more than a shill for the insurance industry and Israel.
Lieberman is a sanctimonious windbag who is no more than a shill for the insurance industry and Israel.
Lieberman is a sanctimonious windbag who is no more than a shill for the insurance industry and Israel.
Worth repeating
You gave me an idea km0591, We need to find a way to shame the people of Connecticut into censuring their bozo senator and embarrassing him any way they can. A sleaze bag like him must have a lot to hide. Maybe we should take up a collection to hire a private detective to find enough dirt to drive him out of office. It may not effect the health care vote but it might scare some of the other rats into representing their constituents. There has to be more than one way to skin a rat.
I only have one question: Why is Joe Lieberman still drawing breath, let alone a pay-cheque?
That is a question best asked of the voters in Connecticut.
Wrong. You have too much respect for the short comings and vulgarity of Democracy.
In the case of Joe Lieberman, putting his mere existence up to a vote– much less confining that vote to only the idiot constituency in Connecticut – would be doing humanity itself a disservice. He is so loathsome that every breath he draws forces one to reconsider opposition to capital punishment as well as the due process of law itself. Lieberman is a walking 'crime' against humanity; with his ilk, nothing should be left to chance.That he continues as a member of the Democratic party, says more than one ever needs to know about that disgusting and criminal institution.–(Jill Bains)
Acually I have no faith in democracy or any other political system and I fully agree with you on Lieberman. However he would not be in the Senate unless he received more votes than his opponents which confirms my lack of faith in the system.
AMEN AND AMEN!!!!!! THANK GOD HE WAS NOT ELECTED VICE PRESIDENT WHEN HE RAN.
Also shows you what a putz Mr. Gore was.
This is from the same dyed in the wool Christ killer that taunted UBL and his Saudis into 9-11? Swell, more misury, suffering and death for the American people. Where, oh where, will this crulty and averice end?
There are rumors that several Congresspersons are working on a bill to expand Medicare by a "Buy Into Medicare" program.
Wow! Finally a refreshingly sane idea is re-surfacing in the ocean of Washington's health-cretinism!!! Unfortunately the White House, the Health Insurers, in league with the overwhelming majority of Democratic and Republican Congresspersons will easily squelch this idea because it would not only mercifully kill the progressive's sacred cow of an already castrated "Public Option" but would also inevitably lead to the dreaded but superior "single payer" system eventually used by the overwhelming majority of us Americans. President Obama has no fear that it will amount to anything more than a marginal distraction from his transparent "Health Reform Magic Trick" even while Harry Reid does not seem to have his 60 ducks in a row yet. If shove should stunningly come to push Obama can still veto "Buy Into Medicare".
I am in Medicare and I very strongly support "Buy Into Medicare" for all of my fellow Americans.
At 62, I lost my healthcare when my husband turned 65 and went onto medicare, I asked Judd Gregg and Jeanne Shaheen,gov NH at the time if I could buy into medicare.
he said absolutely not. She said it was up to Comgress, well now she is congress. Shouldn't everyone have medicare, Mrs Shaheen?Judd Gregg wanted to do without medicare and Social Security, now he's all for it now that he is leaving to be the CEO of Bank of America, which he initiated the bank bailout for. I guess he's getting what we "paid for."
NH
What the hell is a concrete compromise? More double talk - they'll still be talking about health care reform when Obama ends his first and only tour as pres.
The problem (one and only) is that these greedy Senators have accepted huge amounts of money from insurance companies and drug companies and they would lose everything, including office, if they voted for the public option. It matters NOT what the people want or what is best for America.......their greed takes first place and always will. As long as political contributions can be accepted from huge corporations, NOTHING WILL EVER BE ACCOMPLISHED. GOD HELP AMERICA!!!!!!!
William, it is going to have to get much worse before it gets better. See my blog article at "How our politicians sold out America, Campaign cash prevails over a stable society" at http://moneyedpoliticians.net/2009/11/28/how-our-politicians-sold-out-america/
Also has some articles on health care.
Jack Lohman
"America will always do the right thing, but only after everything else fails." Winston Churchill
Jack Lohman
http://moneyedpoliticians.net
If Lieberman or any of the other conservative/corporate-owned Senators don't like the public option -- which is already pathetically weak -- they can vote against the bill. But if they refuse to allow a vote by supporting a Republican fillibuster, I think they should all lose their chairmanships and/or plum committee memberships, all of which accrue to them because of their affiliation with the majority party. They can't expect to enjoy the perks of being in the majority without also accepting the responsibilities, which include supporting the party on procedural votes like cloture.
Craig Dunkerley
San Jose, CA
Can't stand to look at him; can't stand to hear his voice.
He betrayed his party and they licked his boots.
-30-
Joe Lieberman is a putz!
http://hubpages.com/hub/Joe-Lieberman-is-a-Putz
This bill should have been three bills, and each should have been done separately and correctly without amendments.
First bill: Heavily regulate the insurance and health care industries so that they do not deny coverage, offer equal coverage for reproductive services for all (that means Viagra gets covered only if abortion is covered, gentlemen), puts caps on rate increases, no lifetime limits, treating physicians have the final word on treatment not high school clerks with only insurance company training in medical issues, and medical care is not canceled due to age or illness. Also, restrictions on rates for medical malpractice back to the 1990 level, since there would be less malpractice suits if doctors were actually allowed to treat according to their training, not some insurance hack's call.
Second bill: Expansion of the Medicare program to cover all citizens who wish to participate through an opt-in program, with administration being done by government clerks, not non-profit arms of private insurance companies, and where the treating doctors call the shots and are paid fairly. Services for the elderly and disabled would not be cut, but rather returned to a level where the purchase of supplemental insurance is not necessary to cover medical costs, and the program would include dental, vision, and prescription coverage as well.
Third bill: Expansion of the current Health Saving Account program under IRS rules to allow for larger contributions, and matching contributions from employers. Also an expansion of the employer's self-insurance program currently available under IRS regulations as an alternative for small businesses versus having to provide insurance.
Under these three bills there would be no fines for not having coverage, and a subsidy program can be arranged under the Medicare bill for those who are low income.
Each bill would satisfy a specific issue - the GOP and Blue Dogs would get more small business involvement; the public would get the Medicare for all option; and the insurance and health care industry do not take precedence over the American public. Each bill would be debated separately, and groups like AMA, AARP, and the American people can more easily allocate funds to defeat lobbyists if the issues are isolated.
And the likes of Lieberman could not stop all these bills without looking like what he actually is - the prostituted husband of an insurance company lawyer! Come on, Connecticut, vote this clown out!
Lieberman is the senator from israel, plain and simple. He has as much clout as anyone in DC.
That one may smile and smile and be a villain......
To djnoll---
Really interesting ideas.
How come nobody in the Congress thought of this?!
-30-
Lieberman as others have stated, though the years, is concerned only about what is best for him to reach his agenda,-- is of no political party but his own and to please Israel. I still wonder what Israel is holding over our heads that we continue to cater to their demands and please the likes of Lieberman???????????