September 29, 2009
WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE.... Prominent Republican lawmakers spent much of the summer trying to move the goalposts on the kind of majority health care reform should get.
A simple majority (51 votes) isn't enough, because it would suggest plenty of Dems oppose the idea. A supermajority (60 votes) also isn't enough, because it would mean a "partisan" bill. A 61- or 62-vote majority doesn't count, either, because it would mean Dems only peeled off a couple of Republican votes. To be legitimate, GOP lawmakers said, reform needs all of the Dems and several Republican votes.
And now the Senate's most conservative Democrat is endorsing the Republican line.
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) continues to be a scold to the liberals in his party. Before a crowd of over 200 gathered at a senior center in Nebraska, Nelson said health care reform ought to pass with 65 votes -- a feat which would require at least five Republicans to break with their party.
"I think anything less than that would challenge its legitimacy," he said.
Nelson didn't go so far as to say that he'd oppose a bill that had less than 64 other votes. But he did say he disagreed with the party's legislative approach to the issue.
Historically, legislation that enjoyed say, 57 votes in the Senate, reflected a pretty popular bill. But the political world has not yet come to grips with the unusually small Republican minority, so the expectations are skewed.
And that's what makes Nelson's public comments so foolish. By his logic, health care reform legislation isn't "legitimate" unless some opponents of health care reform vote for it. Nelson is deliberately creating an environment in which the biggest progressive policy achievement in a generation won't be impressive enough, because conservative Republicans didn't like it.
This is the same Ben Nelson who said yesterday that he wants to see the reform debate go even slower and see the public option get scrapped. Last week, Nelson also refused to commit to letting health care reform come for a vote on the Senate floor, holding out the possibility that he'll side with Republicans on a filibuster.
—Steve Benen 10:35 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (32)
So who bought him? For how much?
Posted by: me on September 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK
They can vote anyway they like on the bill, but if he doesn't vote to invoke cloture on all the filibusters, I will pay money into any primary challenger they have.
Posted by: Travis on September 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM | PERMALINK
Maybe it's time to cut him off and cut him lose.
Posted by: SaintZak on September 29, 2009 at 10:42 AM | PERMALINK
Q: What do we want?
A: An illegitimate health care reform bill.
Q: When do we want it?
A: NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Chopin on September 29, 2009 at 10:43 AM | PERMALINK
Ben Nelson hates America. Then again, I think America hates Ben Nelson.
Posted by: Paranoid Floyd on September 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK
Why doesn't he just cross the floor already. He's a DINO.
Posted by: Liam J on September 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK
As a registered non-partisan, I must say partisans don't seem to understand how their own system works.
Posted by: Grumpy on September 29, 2009 at 10:47 AM | PERMALINK
What an asshole.
Posted by: kc on September 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM | PERMALINK
Get him to vote for cloture and let him spout any nonsense he wants.
Posted by: Anthony Damiani on September 29, 2009 at 10:51 AM | PERMALINK
what ben nelson needs is a primary challenge.
what the dems need is 51 votes.
Posted by: howard on September 29, 2009 at 10:51 AM | PERMALINK
I can't wait till there are 80 democratic Senators and 20 Republican ones, and a bill will have to have 81 votes to be considered legitimate.
Posted by: buckethead on September 29, 2009 at 11:00 AM | PERMALINK
Reductio ad absurdum: Let's simply take Bennie's logic to the absurd extreme.
Suppose the the Dems had a 99-1 majority in the Senate. Would every bill need that one Republican vote in order to be legitimate?
(Hint for Nebraska Democrats: the correct answer is NO.)
In reality, elections matter. The election by the people of a 60-vote majority for the Democrats, defines the threshold for "legitimacy". In what possible way is the party that has be rejected soundly, necessary to a "legitimate" result?
Posted by: RuSs on September 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK
So, the next Farm Bill, if it does not get 65 Senate votes, is illegitimate?
Posted by: Tigershark on September 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK
I think anything less than that would challenge its legitimacy
I think that President Obama's signature on a bill duly passed by both Houses is plenty legitimate enough, thank you very much.
Posted by: Gregory on September 29, 2009 at 11:06 AM | PERMALINK
he's the Pinocchio of dildoes: he just gets bigger and bigger
Posted by: sjw on September 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK
Ben Nelson.
Isn't he the one who first got elected in NE with 51% of the vote, yet, he thinks Healthcare Reform needs 65% to be legitimate?
Even his second attempt, virtually uncontested, he got 64%, still less than HIS mandate.
Posted by: IntelVet on September 29, 2009 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK
The first poster here asks "who bought him?"
Ben Nelson was bought and paid for the day he first arrived in the Senate. Look at the number of health insurance companies who have donated to him, the number of health insurance companies that have offices in Nebrqaska, then throw in for good measure the banks that have been ripping off students through the Federal subsidy for a "private" student loan system - which is now being wiped out - and you can see the real reasons this "Democrat" In Name Only is so upset. His gravy train is getting derailed.
Posted by: TCinLA on September 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK
Nelson is a DINO alright, but he's as good as we're gonna get out here. Nebraska can be a pretty strange place. Here in Omaha, we once had a wingnut run for Public Defender on a hard-line law and order platform. His catchphrase was "a Public Defender who actually defends the public."
Posted by: Doctor Whom on September 29, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK
Here's an observation: Democrats are slaves. That's the only reason it seems their votes only count for THREE-FIFTHS OF A REPUBLICAN VOTE.
Posted by: MNPundit on September 29, 2009 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK
How about "enough Senate votes to represent 60% of the population of the United States is needed for passage"?
Posted by: g on September 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM | PERMALINK
Would someone take Ben Nelson into a side room and put the fear of god (or even worse, political irrelevancy) into him?
Unfortunately, "Jello Man" Reid isn't up to the task.
Posted by: bdop4 on September 29, 2009 at 11:52 AM | PERMALINK
Think long-term. If Senator Nelson supports a filibuster for a week and then agrees to vote for cloture after getting a bone thrown his way (new corn subsidy? continued student loan graft?), the health insurance reform bill will pass.
"Who bought him?" isn't the right question.
What is his price?
Posted by: danimal on September 29, 2009 at 11:54 AM | PERMALINK
If this clown is what passes for a Democrat in Nebraska, I'd hate to see what a Nebraska Republican would be like.
Posted by: Ron E. on September 29, 2009 at 12:01 PM | PERMALINK
As much as people may want to excoriate Nelson, remember that he represents Nebraska, which is a fairly conservative state (All three House members are Republicans, the governor is a Republican, the other Senator is a Republican, and Nebraska has voted Republican in every presidential election since 1964, with no Democrat getting more than 42% of the popular vote).
He may be out of line with the rest of the Democratic party, but I'm guessing that he is pretty in line with his consituents.
You may not like Nelson that much, but he's better than the alternative, which would be another conservative Republican.
Posted by: mfw13 on September 29, 2009 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK
If this clown is what passes for a Democrat in Nebraska, I'd hate to see what a Nebraska Republican would be like.
Oddly enough, about the same. Bob Kerrey used to be a Republican. Current Senator Johanns used to be a Democrat. And when Johanns was governor, his Democratic opponent, Stormy Dean (his real name) was a former Republican.
Posted by: Doctor Whom on September 29, 2009 at 12:05 PM | PERMALINK
Is he really better than another conservative Republican? I don't think so at this point, because he is just becoming a distraction. Will he, won't he, how can we make him vote for cloture. F_ck him - forget about finding out what he wants for his vote, find out what he DOESN'T want taken away from him (committee chairmanships, whatever) then tell him that it will be taken away if he doesn't vote for cloture (he can vote however he wants on the final bill.) Then concentrate on giving Olympia Snow what she wants - a promise to be queen of the lobster subsidies forever, whatever. Remember, we only need to get pass cloture. If we can't muster 50 Democratic votes for the bill, it's not likely to be worth passing anyhow.
Posted by: dcsusie on September 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM | PERMALINK
It bears remembering that the SCHIP children's healthcare bill which had majority approval in both the Senate and House could not gather the two-thirds vote needed to overturn Bush's two vetos. Nelson is advocating killing healthcare reform without wanting to speak the words.
Posted by: Jack on September 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK
"If this clown is what passes for a Democrat in Nebraska, I'd hate to see what a Nebraska Republican would be like."
Lee Terry and Jeff Fortenberry.
One dumb as a post and the other an employee of Club For Growth.
Go Big Red
Posted by: 2Manchu on September 29, 2009 at 12:29 PM | PERMALINK
Hey, Ben, does that mean you'd call it legitimate if a set of Senators representing 65% of the American population voted for the bill?
I think we can get to that, even with 51 votes on reconciliation.
Posted by: nicteis on September 29, 2009 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK
the gop's medicare part d boondoggle didn't get 60 senate votes when it passed....
Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 29, 2009 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK
I think any bill that has less than 110 votes in the Senate would not be legimate.
Posted by: bucky on September 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK