Will Harry Reid Lose His Senate Seat To Take the Hit on Health Care?
Harry Reid is losing in the polls in his own state of Nevada to almost any GOP opponent for the 2010 Senate race, and Danny Tarkanian leads him 49-38 in the polls. Charlie Cook just downgraded his 2010 race to a tossup.
But that brings up an interesting question. There are two health care bills in the Senate, one written by Max Baucus's Finance Committee (which includes provisions from a back-room price gouging deal with PhRMA and a $3800 fine on Americans for being uninsured) and one written by Ted Kennedy's HELP Committee (which includes the cost control measure of a public plan). Kennedy worked on the HELP Committee bill up to his death and was committed to its passage, and many have said that a public option program should be named in his honor.
It will be up to Harry Reid as Majority Leader to combine thse bills in some fashion for the Senate to vote on as a whole. And at that time, Reid is either going to choose to include the HELP Committee's public option that the insurance industry vigorously opposes, or go with the Baucus bill that was authored by a former WellPoint VP.
Today, Reid endorsed the oo-op plan put forward in the House by Blue Dog Mike Ross.
Members of the Senate have said repeatedly that "we don't have the votes" for a public option as their justification for passing an insurance industry bailout bill. But as Congress Matters notes, this must mean that there are Democratic Senators who are willing to join with the Republicans and filibuster the Kennedy public option:
To say that no plan with a public option can pass the Senate means -- when there are 60 Democratic votes-- that Democrats like Bayh and Baucus will have to stand with Republicans in filibustering a public option in order to prevent it from getting to a vote. Unless Bayh and Baucus are saying there aren't 50 votes for it, either, which is certainly something I haven't heard said yet.
Chris Bowers has been keeping track of where each Senator stands, and he reports that no Democratic Senators "oppose" the public option. They just say the votes aren't there. So who are these Senators? Will we ever get a chance to find out?
The Majority Leader keeps his job by making his fellow Democratic Senators happy, and keeping them from being put in an awkward position is job one. Democratic Senators who won't even publicly say they oppose the public option are not going to want to be put on the spot. They will want him to protect them from taking the political hit for casting a vote against the Kennedy HELP bill.
So when Harry Reid settles on how he will combine the bills, is he willing to incur the wrath of those who will claim that he's shielding his fellow Senators by excluding it? Can he take the hit in his own state from a brutal assault of attack ads that will certainly ensue, claiming he's facilitating an insurance industry bailout by excluding a provision that would have contained costs? When the Nevada public learns that he's personally responsible for fining them $3800 if they refuse to pay for expensive premiums from Blue Cross, how will his poll numbers fare?
In short, will doing what it takes to save his Majority Leader status make Harry Reid lose his Senate Seat?
Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake.com
Follow Jane Hamsher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janehamsher
Sen. Mark Udall, Sen. Michael Bennet and Gov. Bill Ritter: Public Option in Danger
There is no doubt that we have an historic opportunity to reform our health care system, once and for all. We believe the public option is a crucial part of any real reform of the health care system.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
VENTING...SORRY....
The ineptitude of the Dems is pissing me off!
Too many won't legislate their principles or listen to the will of their constituents..regardless of the party controlling the WH or possesses the majority in Congress...
Why the hell should anyone vote for them? Anyone explain the rational to me, why???
We could all stay home, save precious pennies, & let the GOP continue to ruin the country, ruin our lives w/ their ignorant obstructionist strategy and die sooner than later....
I feel like a political hostage, maybe its time for a new party, but definitely a change in the campaign finance system
If most people performed their professional obligations as ineffectively as the Dem gain consensus w/in the party, they'd be FIRED!!! Become bums and never work AGAIN!
2010 is barely a year away, the internet affects excellent memories of ineffectiveness...DEMS Pty keep that in mind...Forget the GOP, muzzle the damn blue dogs or put them down like you'd do any rabid animal wants to do you harm!
He should immediately step down as Majority Leader -- he has been ineffective, and now has a conflict of interest
Does it really matter if Senator Harry Reid loses his seat? Is he not willing to stand for his conviction and vote with conscious for what the 'American public' wants? Both the Democratic and Republican Party are parsites of society because they forgot about the centralist segment.
I am supportive of the public option but with the constraints and procedural policies that exists in other countries that makes it successful. However, the problem is that the Democratic Party wants to sell champaigne for the price of beer. Let's be totally honest as to why the public option works everywhere else and it would be acceptable. Inform the American public rather than lecture to us. Not one of the Democratic or Republican member of Congress has stated of how much societal choices (or lack of lifestyle choices) has impacts on the cost of healthcare in the U.S. versus everywhere else. Most countries with Public Option have 'private insurance' because individuals of means can opt out of the rationing that exists with government service.
If anything, all of the 'hysteria' of the town hall is really a 'vote of no confidence' in both parties. Start from the beginning and do a full comparative analysis to explain why and how it will work rather than trying to 'sneak it through'. If anything, both parties are guilty of not telling the truth. In that regard, by default, no action is better than action because this 'kind of change is busy work change'.
What we all can't seem to get through our heads is that the first goal of all Senators is reelection. To achieve the possibility of reelection, the sell out to special interests to get campaign money and structure the rules in the Senate to be able to avoid taking an actual position. It seems wrong. That's why term limits are needed, to flush the cesspool every so often.
Yes, along with many other dems.
If we include a mandate without a public option it will be the greatest political mistake since Napoleon made his brother king of Spain.
Right on! End of Harry's tenure.
Harry, if you're on the way out, why not actually do something for your country--for once--and pass the HELP bill.
No, Harry Reid will lose because no one likes him and they are sick of him and no amount of pork he brings back to NV will get him re-elected.
yep, Harry is looking JUST LIKE Tom Daschle in 2004 - an INCREDIBLY WEAK "Democrat" who, kowtowing to the DLC "centrist" line "YOU MUST ACT LIKE A REPUBLICAN to WIN elections as a Democrat" GOT TOSSED ON HIS CAN by his "loyal" South Dakota voters!
Timid Tom COULDN'T EVEN WAGE an EFFECTIVE PR Battle in support of Georgia Dem. Senator MAX CLELAND's 2004 re-election camapign; (Cleland lost THREE LIMBS in the Vietnam war), to a mealy-mouthed GOP senate nominee who had AVOIDED the Vietnam War, but was running campaign 2004 based on his alleged dedication to "national security."
In short, Timid Tom was EASY FODDER for KARL ROVE's slash-and-hack campaigns...
... and now we get A REPEAT in Hapless Harry, a "Democrat" who INSISTS that "HE MUST SOUND LIKE A REPUBLICAN to get reelected,"
the "CHANGE!" campaign of 2008 (and MILLIONS of _DEMOCRATIC VOTERS__ wanting REAL "Change") notwithstanding!
The REAL tragedy here is, that after Hapless Harry goes DOWN under the weight of his OWN INABILITY to DEFEND 100 YEARS of "liberal," progressive, DEMOCRATIC progress, the Emanuel/DLC toadies will RAM ANOTHER DLC "DINO" down Arizona Dem. primary voters' throats....
because, like JOE LIEBERMAN, SABOTAGING Democratic Voters is what the Emanuel/DLC Neo-Cons DO BEST.
When people say about the Democrats that they have no b@lls, this has been, historically, who they're talking about. There was recently a post on HuffP. about how 'Obama has no power of conviction or something of the sort'. I'm sorry, but no, this here is your guy..
"The Majority Leader keeps his job by making his fellow Democratic Senators happy, and keeping them from being put in an awkward position is job one."
Well if that's the common wisdom then no wonder us Dems are in trouble. Job one is to get the Dem agenda implemented. Period. If he's not doing that (and clearly he's not) then losing the next election is entirely appropriate. We need Dem leadership with b*lls and passion and a willingness to fight to get the job done.
Good point. Senate Majority LEADER Lyndon Baines Johnson (future president) was not a "leader" in this TIMID model - Johnson, for all his legendary "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" political skills (bordering, according to many critics, on outright corruption) at least had a GENUINE CONVICTION to support genuinely populist, DEMOCRATIC programs, AGAINST ALL opposition!!
There can be NO doubt, Johnson dedicated his ENTIRE CAREER to TAKING ON the Wealthy Texas elites, Johnson pushed for ELECTRICATION of RURAL AREAS against electric companies' fervent opposition, Johnson PUSHED FOR CIVIL RIGHTS against the MONOLITHIC Southern RIGHT-WING SEGREGATIONIST FILIBUSTER, and of course Johnson spent his ENTIRE CAREER trying to alleviate POVERTY among all races in America.
Considering that Senate MAJORITY LEADER Johnson was able to win SO MUCH LEGISLATION, at the VERY HEIGHT of Southern Segregationist influence, illustrates how WEENY today's "Democrats" are !!
President Johnson & Accomplishments of the 89th Congress (1965-1966).
http://www1.american.edu/bgriff/H207WebS2009/GreatSocietyChart.htm
MUST READ for ANYONE wanting to understand the history of modern American "liberalism" and progressive, democratic progress of the past 50 years:
(the very "Democratic" programs that TODAY's "Democrats" are TRYING TO SELL DOWN THE RIVER, whether by the death of 1,000 cuts, or in large pieces.)
http://www.amazon.com/Lyndon-Johnson-American-Liberalism-Second/dp/1403971536
Reid has shown no evidence he has any balls(politically speaking) and there is no chance he or the Dems will grow any. They control the Senate and instead of calling out the traitors to the public in their own ranks they will give the Reps the resounding victory they could never have hoped to achieve on their own.
Put a spotlight on any Dem who votes with the Repos to support a filibuster, hell force the Reps to filibuster then call them out as the insurance company bootlickers they are and then tell the public who EXACTLY wants them to suffer and d.ie in the name of corporate profits.
The biggest pair in congress at the moment may be on Nancy Pelosi.
If you have to lay down your political life for a cause, this would be the one.
That's exactly what I logged on to write, so I'll just let you say it for me. Bravo.
However it comes about, it seems rather assured that Reid is toast. Good riddance.
The thing is though who will get the credit? With things just as they are right now, the Rethugs will claim the victory, pointing to the Presidents failures, both real and perceived.
If Reid could grow a pair and adopt the major provisions of Kennedy's bill, the Rethuglicans be damned, he could help push a Progressive win that will take the credit away from the Rethugs, and surprisingly he may even win because of it. Considering his options, this could be his single best option.
But will he do it? Going by past performance, I'd have to say it's doubtful.
For him to do this, and possibly retain his seat, he'll have to show that he'd be willing to sacrifice it.
If he was real man and a true Deomocat, he should risk his seat for doing the right thing!
I sincerely hope when Reid deservedly loses his seat in 2010 there are enough Democrats surviving to allow for us to remain in the majority. Should that happen it is my most sincere hope that Russ Feingold is named Majority Leader. With Russ leading things then Harry can watch from retirement to learn about how he should have led.
Reid is politically weak and will be voted out either way. His only chance to save any future dignity, is to do the right thing by his constituents - meaning to include the public option over the insurance giveaway.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
