Ben Nelson, a key conservative Senate Democrats, said on Wednesday that he was pleased with the changes party leadership had made to health care legislation, specifically on matters of deficit reduction. But the Nebraska senator, whose vote has been elusive to pin down so far, said he would be comfortable being the lone Democrat to prevent the bill from overcoming a Republican filibuster.
"I'm very comfortable having my vote, whatever it is, whichever way it goes," Nelson said, in response to a question from the Huffington Post. "I've said that from the beginning. There are other ways. I just have to make a decision based on what I think is best for the people of Nebraska and the people of our country. And then we will let the chips fall wherever they fall."
Speaking to reporters following a Democratic caucus meeting, Nelson said he is pleased with the direction that the bill was taking, though he wants to see specific language, and he remains concerned about the structure of the government-run insurance option.
"I've said, for me, all along, that [a public plan with an opt-out provision for states] is not the way in which I would proceed. And that has problems as far as I'm concerned," he said. As for an alternative proposal that would allow states to opt-in to a national government-run plan, Nelson added; "I certainly would look at that more positively than an opt-out."
On Wednesday night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid unveiled the preliminary outlines of his health care reform legislation. The bill includes the opt-out public option, a tax on expensive insurance plans, and language on abortion that does not go as far as the House's largely restrictive provision. Estimates of the proposal have it costing $847 billion over the next decade, covering 31 million uninsured, and reducing the deficit by $127 billion during the next ten years.
"Any time you add more to deficit reduction you have to say that it is a move in the right direction," Nelson said. "So, there is no doubt that there has been some areas of improvement. That clearly would be one. But again, you have to have a lot of faith and trust in the scoring system."
The Nebraska Democrat did essentially proclaim that he would vote with his party on the first parliamentary hurdle -- a procedural vote that would allow the bill to be brought to the floor for amending and debate. He would not commit to voting on the second parliamentary hurdle -- another cloture vote to end that debate.
"I said I won't make a decision until I've seen and reviewed the language of the legislation," he said. "That's fairly clear. And it has been that from the very beginning. As to the question about sometimes wavering -- I've never wavered on this. I've been clear from the beginning that you have to see the actual language before you can make a decision on whether you are going to vote for cloture on the motion to proceed... I'm still undecided. That's different than being on the fence."