October 27, 2009
SNOWE'S DISAPPOINTMENT.... When Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he was moving forward on health care reform with a bill featuring a public option, Sen. Olympia Snowe's (R-Maine) role as the most important person in the known universe was quickly diminished. One approach insisted Reid push a "triggered" public option in order to keep Snowe on board. That's not the approach the Majority Leader chose.
Not surprisingly, Maine's senior senator was not pleased. Snowe's statement yesterday afternoon read:
"I am deeply disappointed with the Majority Leader's decision to include a public option as the focus of the legislation. I still believe that a fallback, safety net plan, to be triggered and available immediately in states where insurance companies fail to offer plans that meet the standards of affordability, could have been the road toward achieving a broader bipartisan consensus in the Senate."
Brian Beutler sees glimmers of hope in this: "How explicit a statement is that, though? I could be over-parsing here, but it sounds to me as if she's leaving a door pretty wide open to supporting this bill down the line. Note, she doesn't say she's withdrawing her support."
Perhaps, but I suspect Snowe's "deep disappointment" is her way of distancing herself from the bill. Indeed, just four days before Reid's announcement, Snowe said, "I'm against a public option." Asked if she'd join a GOP filibuster on this, Snowe said, "Yes, it would be difficult" to support letting the bill come to the floor for a vote.
In other words, I suspect the key question is no longer, "How do we keep Olympia Snowe happy?" Rather, it's, "How do we convince Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu to let the Senate vote on health care reform?"
As for Snowe's argument that the trigger "could have been the road toward achieving a broader bipartisan consensus," I think there's ample evidence to the contrary. For one thing, several leading Democrats -- Pelosi, Rockefeller, et al -- really hate the idea. For another, leading Republicans hate the idea, too. Snowe may have missed it, but just a few weeks ago, Susan Collins, Snowe's moderate Maine colleague, was asked whether she could support a trigger as a compromise. "No," Collins said. "The problem with triggers is that is just delays the public option," and she rejects public-private competition.
Around the same time, the official Republican weekly address told the public, "These so-called healthcare reform bills have different names: a public option, a co-op, a trigger. Make no mistake, these are all gateways to government-run healthcare."
The trigger measure was never the course to "broader bipartisan consensus" -- it was a way to possibly get one GOP vote.
—Steve Benen 8:35 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (28)
I hate to admit it, but I agree with Steve Benen. The probability for "broader bipartisan consensus" is zero. Bipartisanship is dead. BHO and the dems have driven a stake through its heart.
Posted by: Al on October 27, 2009 at 8:42 AM | PERMALINK
Yeah, the Dems are always reponsible. 160+ Repubilcan ammendments, a seat at the table, catering to Snowe.
Those damn dems they don't compromise on anything. Of course even with all that the Republican'ts still won't give us their health plan.
/snark off
Posted by: madstork123 on October 27, 2009 at 8:49 AM | PERMALINK
"the trigger "could have been the road toward achieving a broader bipartisan consensus,""
So what? Who really cares about "bipartisan consensus"? I think most people care alot more about geting meaningful health care reform that will make a difference in the quality of teir lives than maintaining some phoney Senate "clubbiness." I think these Senators should wake up to the fact that this isn't about them.
Posted by: SaintZak on October 27, 2009 at 8:59 AM | PERMALINK
Regardless of what they say in the Times, I suspect Harry has 60 votes in his pocket. With 60 votes Snowe's vote is unnecessary. I also suspect the leadership is quietly using both the carrot and the stick to make sure Nelson, Lincoln and Landrieu are on board.
Posted by: Ron Byers on October 27, 2009 at 9:01 AM | PERMALINK
I still believe that a fallback, safety net plan, to be triggered and available immediately in states where insurance companies fail to offer plans that meet the standards of affordability......
Dear Olympia Snowe,
Consider that trigger pulled.
Posted by: about time on October 27, 2009 at 9:02 AM | PERMALINK
Who really cares about "bipartisan consensus"?
I for one. It is much better to lie on your death bed, or to see a loved one lie on theirs, without insurance, than to have insurance that gets zero bipartisan support. But that's just me.
Posted by: MynameisAL on October 27, 2009 at 9:08 AM | PERMALINK
"to be triggered and available immediately"
Triggered and available immediately?
Posted by: Jinchi on October 27, 2009 at 9:08 AM | PERMALINK
Of course she's disappointed. She wanted to be able to tell the good people of Maine that she saved the public option, and tell the insurance companies that she killed it.
Posted by: rabbit on October 27, 2009 at 9:09 AM | PERMALINK
So she's disappointed. What about all those people who would be disappointed about health insurance before the "trigger" (ever) kicked in?
Posted by: sjw on October 27, 2009 at 9:09 AM | PERMALINK
"How do we convince Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu to let the Senate vote on health care reform?"
Stealing a line from a well known film, "You make them an offer they can't refuse."
-in other words, let them see what it is like to run for re-election with no seniority, chairmanships, comity even, from fellow travelers. Let them-gasp!- run as Republicans. . .
Posted by: DAY on October 27, 2009 at 9:10 AM | PERMALINK
In other words, I suspect the key question is no longer, "How do we keep Olympia Snowe happy?"
The only reason Snowe didn't say she would vote against it, or that she voted for the committee bill in the first place, is that it allows her to continue to demand Republican concessions. I wish Dems would just ignor her, but I'm afraid the choice is allowing the Nelsons, Bayhs, Liebermans, etc. to demand concessions on other issues as well.
Posted by: Danp on October 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINK
Poor, poor Olympia. She was all set to be a star when suddenly the show closed on the eve of opening night. No more limelight for her.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne on October 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM | PERMALINK
In the entire discussion of what Sen. Snowe would do, rarely is it mentioned that the chances of her voting for cloture were zero -- even if she ended up voting for the bill.
Why?
Cloture is a political test. If she voted for cloture, and allowed someone like Nelson to vote "no" the Republicans would kill her.
How anyone votes after cloture is pretty much up to them; but the vote for cloture is a test of political loyalty.
I suspect that Reid was smart enough to know that he could strong arm all the Democrats to vote for cloture, then free them on the final vote. But with Snowe, he would be forever open to blackmail from Snowe -- she would demand the moon in exchange for that cloture vote.
I actually think Snowe is going to love how this will turn out. All 58 Democrats will vote for cloture ( I don't know why everyone calls Lieberman and Sanders Democrats), the two independents will go along, and all the Republicans will vote no. Snowe will say that she voted "no" because she wanted more time to negotiate the details of the bill. But once the bill is presented for a final vote she will vote "yes" -- and there will be no repercussions from the Republicans because all the bill will need at that time is 50 votes, and there will be no drama about that.
Posted by: Joesbrain on October 27, 2009 at 9:22 AM | PERMALINK
"How do we convince Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu to let the Senate vote on health care reform?"
I suggest that the bigger question is "How do we convince Evan Bayh to let the Senate vote on health care reform?" With the public option, we are talking something that has the potential to decrease the value of his wife's stock in Wellpoint, where she has been on the board of directors for several years. As she has amassed several million $$$ of stock and stock options, we are talking about a major hit on the Bayh family wealth.
And everyone knows that the first priority of any senator (see Feinstein, Dianne) is to protect and increase family wealth! Don't hold your breath waiting for Evan 'I wish he would go' Bayh to vote for cloture!
Posted by: SadOldVet on October 27, 2009 at 9:25 AM | PERMALINK
the last time olympia snowe felt this bad was when dorothy's house fell on her sister.
Posted by: mellowjohn on October 27, 2009 at 9:27 AM | PERMALINK
Seems to me that she's disappointed about no longer being Queen of America. After all, for about a week, she became the most important person in DC, her decision deciding the fate of some 42,000 or so people who die every year due to lack of insurance.
Of course, she's still like every other piece of crap in the GOP, and several on the Dem side -- people who care more about maintaining their campaign contributions and/or their love affair with the free market, than they do about the lives of their own constituents.
And no, that's no harsh -- it's the truth, and I dare anyone to prove to me otherwise.
Posted by: Mark D on October 27, 2009 at 9:28 AM | PERMALINK
Still gonna need 60 votes from somewhere to get this thing done and I fear there are too many fake Dems in the pocket of big insurance to allow it.
Posted by: Bobo Teh Clown on October 27, 2009 at 9:29 AM | PERMALINK
BHO and the dems have driven a stake through its heart
It was a vampire, sucking the life out of useful legislation. What the heck took so long, that's what I want to know.
Posted by: dr2chase on October 27, 2009 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK
Harry Reid should tell Olympia Snowe to do what Dick Cheney told Pat Leahy to do.
Posted by: gradysu on October 27, 2009 at 9:37 AM | PERMALINK
Sounds like Snowe is pulling the trigger on her retirement. Do the right thing Maine, elect a progressive.
Posted by: doubtful on October 27, 2009 at 9:54 AM | PERMALINK
I still think Lieberman will be the fly in the ointment. He wants to punish the Connecticut Dems for not voting for him in the primary and "forcing" him to become an independent.
Posted by: wbn on October 27, 2009 at 9:58 AM | PERMALINK
Oh yes, let's work for a "broader bipartisan consensus" - or we could look for a herd of unicorns. I'm betting that we'd find the unicorns first.
Posted by: Dennis-SGMM on October 27, 2009 at 10:01 AM | PERMALINK
Hey, as long as we've got Bernie Sanders, we've got 'bipartisan consensus.'
I'm glad Reid failed to play Charlie Brown to Snowe's Lucy.
The vote we really need to worry about is Lieberman. He's been moving rightward at lightspeed. I think we'll need BHO to lean on his 'good friend' pretty hard.
Posted by: biggerbox on October 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM | PERMALINK
I hate to admit it, but I agree with Steve Benen. The probability for "broader bipartisan consensus" is zero. Bipartisanship is dead. BHO and the dems have driven a stake through its heart.
Posted by: Al at 8:42 AM | PERMALINK
Ram baby, Ram. A stake in every Rethug.
"I am deeply disappointed with the Majority Leader's decision to include a public option as the focus of the legislation." - O. Snowe
Her disappointment is equaled only by my deep and abiding contentment.
Al and Oly should sit down and have a beer together and lament the lost opportunity for the R's and D's to sit down and break bread and share bipartisan success stories from the past. There would be so many and it would be such a rewarding conversation.
Posted by: burro on October 27, 2009 at 10:40 AM | PERMALINK
"Al and Oly should sit down and have a beer together..."
Madam Snowe has not returned any of my phone calls or emails. I'm sure she is just too busy.
Posted by: Al on October 27, 2009 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK
The health care reform objective should be to give the best reasonable outcome at the lowest reasonable cost. If the pulling the trigger at some future date would work to fix unresolved runaway insurance issues, then we might as well just pull it now.
Posted by: qwerty on October 27, 2009 at 11:14 AM | PERMALINK
Of course she's disappointed. She wanted to be able to tell the good people of Maine that she saved the public option, and tell the insurance companies that she killed it.
Rabbit nailed it. As I've said before, Snowe's whole game is to appear to every person, across the entire political spectrum, what they want her to be. She wants to appear to conservatives as taking a hard line against health care reform in general (and the public option in particular), while at the same time appearing to liberals as supporting both. Now she's gonna be forced to take a side, something she continually resists.
Based on this analysis, I think she will vote for cloture, but against the final bill. If she were to prevent a vote on the bill, she'd have moved too far away from the non-Republicans she needs to remain in office. Problematic, because that group is the majority in Maine. She can then salvage some cred with the right by voting against the final bill. She doesn't need to worry about the rabid Alabama-type GOP; those types are pretty small in number here in Maine.
Posted by: bucky on October 27, 2009 at 12:55 PM | PERMALINK
I hate to pick on Senator Snowe since she seems a decent sort, but Senators have to go with their beliefs or represent their constiutents. She doesn't have the guts to just flat out vote her belief against HCR, and she doesn't have the morality or empathy to vote with her constituents for HCR.
If she wants to be a REAL moderate Senator she would vote for HCR like her state wants, and bust the balls of the medical insurance industrial complex for REAL cost reduction (like a conservative would want.) But she's sold her soul to the medical insurance industrial complex so she ends up being against anything which would benefit the people of Maine even cost reduction for people ALREADY with health care insurance.
All Republicans blather on about is tort reform which would be used to increase the medical insurance industrial complex profits by gutting the ability of American citizens to be represented by the third branch of government (our courts).
Posted by: Glen on October 27, 2009 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK