Do Moderate Dem Senators Recognize Urgency Of Need For Reform?
It’s worth noting that this is one of the central questions that will decide the outcome of negotiations over the health care bill in the Senate — and, more broadly, whether it succeeds or fails in the end.
Senator Chuck Schumer, who has been uncannily accurate in predicting the direction of the health care debate, is already out front stressing that failure is simply not an option — in political terms for the Democrats, and in substantive terms for the American people.
“If we have to do it with just 60 Democratic votes, we will come together and do it,” Schumer said today. “We must get it done for the American people.”
But some on the wonky left are pessimistic about the urgency moderate Dem Senators feel about the necessity of getting it done. Both Johnathan Cohn and Steve Benen are sounding that alarm, with Benen perhaps most apprehensive:
We’re dealing with a series of upcoming negotiations in which conservative Dems’ indifference gives them leverage. In other words, Lieberman, Nelson, & Co. don’t much care if this once-in-a-generation opportunity implodes, while reform advocates care very much. These rather obvious bargaining positions create a playing field that is anything but level.
This seems right, but it’s also worth noting that the pressure on moderate Dems not to allow reform to collapse is going to be unspeakably intense once success is genuinely within reach. Right now it’s easier for moderate Dems to hold out the possibility of bailing in the end, because the prospect of success is only dimly visible and the consequences of failure have not yet become truly apparent.
Keep in mind that these moderate Dems have already gone on record articulating the dramatic need for reform — if only as a way to gain cover for agreeing to vote to move the bill forward. When final success is genuinely within reach, moderate Dems will quite literally be faced with a stark choice between embracing whatever compromise emerges, and letting the whole thing come crashing down, with potentially catastrophic consequences for their party and, by their own lights, the country as a whole.
On the other hand, the parochialism and narcissism that often reigns in the Senate never ceases to amaze. Yes, it’s gonna be a brutal couple of months.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I think we should just scrap everything and start over and plan on having the votes for reform at or around Nov. 4th next year during mid-terms. That’s when politicians show the most political courage.
Well, “failure is simply not an option — in political terms for the Democrats, and in substantive terms for the American people,” I agree. But if they are seeing it in terms of their own success or failure in their districts, they have the same argument from the other side.
Depends on whether or not their egos and their job security worries will get in the way of what’s actually best for the country. And what’s best for the Democratic Party – and if nothing else, I hope they think about that and about what losing the majority is going to be like.
Impeachment anyone? That’s what happened last time.
Greg, picking up the thread (literally) from the last post, sometimes you see all the posts and sometimes you don’t (including yours).
Must be a neat trick.
PS: I replied to your mail.
It still looks like Schumer is going to be the one to shepherd whatever compromise there will be through, while Reid is courting Snowe and Collins again. I keep thinking that Wyden and Cantwell have some of the best ideas though.
You’re right Greg, it’s gonna be brutal.
You’re kidding right Mike? The issue is now and it really can’t wait, not for all the folks out here without insurance. Have you watched any of the video from either of the Free Clinics? It’s very sad and only going to get worse.
Greg, we haven’t heard anything to my knowledge from the right on this war surtax yet, have you? We’ve got Obey, Levin and even Lieberman talking about it this weekend, but I haven’t heard anything from Repubs now that they’re so fiscally conservative and all.
First let’s truly assess the objections of these “centrists”. In reality even the strongest public option affects a very small percentage of our populace. There is nothing in any of the bills that truly affects the doctor/patient relationship. The REALITY is that nobody’s ox gets gored with the possible exception that public alternatives may show private insurance for the scam it is. And that’s what upsets Leiberman and his insurance cronies!
And so the one point open for debate is the cost. Certainly there is reason to doubt this or ANY bill will contain costs as long as we rely on procedure based medicine and let demagogues like Sarah “Death Panel” Palin scare people from even considering evidence based or scientific medicine. There is already rationing…there will ALWAYS be rationing…we simply cannot go on spending 50 BILLION a year ON THE LAST TWO MONTHS of life! Costs will soar even more without a bill!!!
Every other industrialized nation in the world realizes this! And I am with Rep Obey…pass a tax to pay for the WARS and we’ll have plenty of money for healthcare. It’s time to stop letting these unfunded wars screw up our entire economy as well as our moral perspective.
In the end I believe the moderates will milk all the leverage they can, as they have been doing, but will vote for cloture ending the upcoming rethug filibuster. Then they can also vote against the bill without much repercussion since the Dems can easily muster a simple majority without them. They’ll be able to have their cake and eat it too.
Looking past the current bill at hand, if Dems succeed what will the political playing field look like going forward? Will Republicans continue to obstruct if Obama gets through his signature piece of legislature? Or will they act like Graham and break on pet issues that could keep them from getting re-elected? Is there a point in time when the entire GOP voting block is just dead weight? I’m really curious as to how one gets put back into office when you literally voted for nothing of substance.
“the parochialism and narcissism that often reigns in the Senate never ceases to amaze.”
That sums up exactly what many of us are feeling…
Centrists will have to cross the line or be cast out as Dems are (rightfully) perceived as a failed party, what is on the other side once they do is another question.
“the parochialism and narcissism that often reigns in the Senate never ceases to amaze”
yup, yup, that what moosemama is now saying the same thing (though not so articulately) and she makes it look like it’s all only dems’ fault.
Greg, these holdouts are not “Moderate” Dems. Please stop calling them that. They are “Right-wing” Dems.
They are positioned to the right of the median population and they are positioned far to the right of the median Democratic population in their stated opinions and in their voting records.
Your use of the word “Moderate” to describe them reinforces the false “Center-right nation” meme that is unsupported by all polling on all national economic issues.
I know that you must work among the Villagers — but that doesn’t mean that you must thoughtlessly parrot their mischaracterizations of reality.
Tom — it’s a fair point. I’m often torn on how to describe these guys. “centrist” in quotes seems like a good way to go.
I got my usual update from the junior Senator from Texas and, along with the usual GOP talking points, my favorite bit was his notion that “hastily” passed HCR should not be used as a “feather in the cap” of Democrats in the mid-terms. So, I had to remind the good Senator that any failure by Democrats will be used *by him* as a proverbial feather in his.
Oy.
I shoulda ended with an end snark statement.
And agreed, the Moderate Dem label is being used now for corporate shrills. Since when does working for insurance companies and getting nothing in return to benefit a greater percentage of Americans count as being moderate.
That just means you’re a sell out.
Corporatist dems would do just fine, Greg.
Greg, thanks, but even “centrist” gives them too much credit, because they are consistently to the right of center. “Corporatist” would be more accurate, maybe even more so than “right-wing”.
@amk — Great minds and all that.
The more I consider it, the more I think that “Corporatist” is the most apt descriptor, because it goes more directly to their probable motivation for selling out their voting constituencies for the benefit of their funding constituencies
“the parochialism and narcissism that often reigns in the Senate never ceases to amaze.”
That’s only true for those of you that seem to have believe there is a bottom for these people can slink to, a line they won’t cross. There isn’t.
“Will Republicans continue to obstruct if Obama gets through his signature piece of legislature? ”
Yes they will. Don’t be silly.
Plus, I’m not kidding about impeachment if we lost the majority. The GOP base would be howling for it.
It’s a shame our Govn’t is incapable of admitting our politics is becoming corrupt beyond repair. Not one bit of legislation seems to pass without obvious cow-towing of corporate interests being weaved into the bills.
I would love to see a grassroots push to get money out of politics. Limit to individual contributions. No more private events held only for wealthy corporate doners.
I can’t figure out another way get the legislative process away from the wealthy.
Of course that will never happen. Another loophole will be found. The politicians can’t stand to not be loved and have attention focused on them. Attention whores is what many of them are.
“Plus, I’m not kidding about impeachment if we lost the majority. The GOP base would be howling for it.”
Yes Tena…in fact I saw one of the Palinites interviewed in line at one of the book signings and that was her most fervent wish…to figure a way to get Obama out of office before his term ends.
Sore losers doesn’t even begin to define these folks…well actually I guess LOSERS does pretty well do the trick! LMAO
rukidding – we’d have hearings on his Certificate of Live Birth right from the jump.
Why do you persist in calling these people moderates? They are conservatives, pure and simple.
“but I haven’t heard anything from Repubs now that they’re so fiscally conservative and all”
LOL
I know I don’t always agree with Jane Hamsher’s strategies but she gets it right an awful lot of the time.
“During debate in the Senate this weekend, a handful of corrupt Democratic senators like Blanche Lincoln and Mary Landrieu, who have taken big donations from insurance companies, promised to vote against health care if it included a public option.
We know who they are working for — the insurance companies who want to kill the public option once and for all. Goldman Sachs expects insurance stocks to rise by 59% in 10 years if there is no public option, but drop by 36% if there is one. That’s what happens when nobody likes your product. Their fat profits depend on being the only game in town.”
Another vote to drop the “moderate” label for “right-wing Dems”. It helps to legitimize the upside-down inside-out view of the mainstream media and the rightwing itself. If the right-wingers are considered moderate, then the rest of the Democrats (the ones from the Democratic branch of the Democratic party) must be extremists. In truth it’s the other way around. The mainstream of the Democratic party is pretty moderate, while the so-called “centrist” and “moderate” dems, are far right of most of the country.
“The mainstream of the Democratic party is pretty moderate”
This is true.
“I got my usual update from the junior Senator from Texas”
Interesting. I never have heard back from Cornyn once. Fluffy has answered my emails and my Rep, Hensarling, practically lives in my living room = dude wants his job.
Yep – comments are playing hide ‘n seek.
“The mainstream of the Democratic party is pretty moderate”
1 up
Right wing Democrats are the Republican Wing of the Democratic Party. The Republican Wing of the Democratic Party regularly indulges in right wing corporatism but there are degrees.
Blue Dogs are the Conservative Republican Wing of the Democratic Party, their corporatism is often mixed with theocracy.
While Blue Dogs are often regressive, they often reflect their constituency and occasionally vote for progressive legislation that a full Republican would never vote for.
DLC Dems are the “Centrist” Republican Wing of the Democratic Party, they’ve got a very wide variety of beliefs, some very regressive, some very progressive.
The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party are those handful in Congress consistently upholding traditional Democratic values: Protecting family, protecting workers, protecting women, protecting minorities.
For the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party:
Protecting family means opening up Medicare to EVERYONE, eliminating toxic products and toxic environmental substances completely, and providing a safe, challenging educational experience to children.
Protecting workers means protecting our borders from countries that don’t give their workers the same rights as we do and protecting our borders from countries that don’t have the same environmental standards as we do.
Protecting women means protecting women from theocrats and corporatists who would make them second class citizens.
Protecting minorities means giving minorities the same rights that the majority has.
The Republican Party is, with very rare exception, a Corporate-Theocratic Party. Republicans protect corporation’s pollution, deny funding for children’s education, deny children’s medical care, deny women the right to make their own medical decisions, deny minorities the same rights as the majority, and protect international corporation’s “right” to use mistreated labor and even foreign slave labor.