The Washington Independent » Joe Lieberman

Lieberman Leaves the Public Option in Doubt

Aaron Wiener — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:57:19 +0000

Public option supporters who have looked at TWI’s Senate Public Option Scoreboard in the past few hours are probably dismayed to see that the math simply doesn’t add up for passage of health reform legislation with a government-run health insurance plan. That’s the result of comments today by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who basically nixed the already-slim chance that he’d support cloture for a bill with a public plan.

Can he support a public option if states could opt out of the plan, as the current bill provides? “The answer is no,” he says in an interview from his Senate office. “I feel very strongly about this.” How about a trigger, a mechanism for including a public option along with a provision saying it won’t be used unless private insurance plans aren’t spreading coverage far and fast enough? No again.

So any version of a public option will compel Mr. Lieberman to vote against bringing a bill to a final vote? “Correct,” he says.

Consequently, we’re left with 41 senators likely to oppose cloture for a bill with a public option, meaning that unless one of these senators changes his or her stance, there’s no way such a bill can win the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster and receive a final up-or-down vote.

Either someone’s going to have to budge, or we’ll see a revised bill that lacks a public option (but might contain a trigger or another mechanism to pressure insurance companies to contain costs) — or Democrats could attempt to pass a public option through the budget reconciliation process, which requires a simple majority.

Keep checking the Senate Public Option Scoreboard for the latest updates.

Brown Predicts Success of Public Option

Mike Lillis — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:51:04 +0000

In the wake of Saturday’s Senate vote to take up the chamber’s health reform legislation, the focus of the debate has shifted back to the public option, over which no fewer than four Democratic caucus members — Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) — have threatened to kill the bill.

With Congress out of town for the Thanksgiving break, there’s been little to distract Washington’s prognosticators from offering their predictions over the public plan’s fate. Truth is, no one is quite sure how this saga is going to play out. Based on comments from several of the four moderates since Saturday’s vote, it’s tempting to argue that Democratic leaders will at the very least have to scale back the public plan to pass the larger bill. Then again, the way Landrieu melted Saturday at the chance to secure millions of federal dollars for Louisiana indicates that there’s much more at play here than mere principle.

With all of that in mind, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) offered his own optimistic take on how the drama over the public option will end, telling CNN yesterday that the historical significance of the reform vote will ultimately be enough to sway the four moderates in favor of the bill.

In the end, I don’t want four Democratic senators dictating to the other 56 of us and to the country, when the public option has this much support, that it’s not going to be in it. [...]

I don’t think they want to be on the wrong side of history. I don’t think they want to go back and say, you know, on a procedural vote, I killed the most important bill in my political career. I don’t think they want to be there on that. So I think in the end, we get them.

Lieberman’s Investigation Into the Fort Hood ‘Terrorist’ Attack

Daphne Eviatar — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:30:23 +0000

Jesselyn Radack at Daily Kos has a nice roundup of yesterday’s Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing, called and led by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who opened the morning session with an announcement that the shootings of 13 soldiers on the U.S. Army base was a “terrorist” attack as opposed to a mass-murder. Never mind that the military and the FBI are just starting their own investigations of the shooting, and are far from having unearthed enough facts to draw any conclusions just yet.

Here’s Radack’s take on how Lieberman is using the incident to scare the American populace into suspecting more Muslims are home-grown terrorists.

What struck me about the hearing yesterday was how often Lieberman and others kept calling Nidal Hassan a “lone wolf” terrorist, suggesting not so subtly that the controversial “lone wolf” provision of the USA Patriot Act ought to be re-authorized. A recent House markup of the bill removed that provision, which allows the FBI to eavesdrop and otherwise target so-called “lone wolves” who allegedly plan all on their own, without any help from known foreign terrorist organizations, to launch a terrorist attack on the United States. One reason the provision was removed is because it’s never actually been used, and the Justice Department has had a hard time making the case that it’s actually necessary and not prone to abuse.

Judging from the comments at the Lieberman-led hearing yesterday, you would have thought that the Hasan case now offers the perfect argument for why that piece of the law is needed. What none of the senators mentioned, however, was that the “lone wolf” provision of the Patriot Act wouldn’t actually apply to Hasan.

For one thing, the government’s already said that Hasan did have communications with a foreign al-Qaeda operative, and so it could have already been monitoring him under other legal authorities. The second point overlooked at the hearing is that Hasan is a U.S. citizen, and the “lone wolf” provision only applies to a “non-U.S. person.”

It will be interesting to see how the “lone wolf” idea fares at the next Senate markup session of the bill.

The Pentagon’s Own Fort Hood Probe

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:18:05 +0000

The major investigation of the Fort Hood shooting is a joint law-enforcement effort led by the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division and supported by the FBI. That investigation will contribute to Nidal Malik Hasan’s ultimate prosecution in military court. There’s also an intelligence investigation that’s being kicked up to John Brennan at the White House. Now, reports The Wall Street Journal’s Yochi Dreazen, there’s going to be an internal Pentagon inquiry as well:

[A] military official said [Defense Secretary Robert] Gates wanted the review to extend beyond the Fort Hood case and also look at broader questions about how the military identifies, tracks and potentially moves against troops who may have violent tendencies or radical beliefs.

The official said Mr. Gates wanted a shorter, initial report within the next few weeks, followed by a longer-term systemic report sometime early next year.

And of course, right now the Senate government-affairs committee is holding its own hearing into what happened at Fort Hood.

Kaplan: Fort Hood Shows We Need More Muslim Soldiers

Spencer Ackerman — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:44:05 +0000

Robert Kaplan on the real lessons of Fort Hood:

The massacre at Fort Hood, Texas, in which 13 soldiers were shot and killed by Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, paradoxically took my memory back to April 2004, when I was embedded with a Marine battalion during the first battle of Fallujah. The battalion just happened to have in the ranks a corporal of Syrian descent who did double duty as the commander’s translator for his meetings with the Iraqis. The young Muslim corporal was arguably the most valuable member of the battalion: simply by his presence he was able to cast the battalion in a different, more positive light among the locals.

The United States military needs more troops of Muslim origin within its ranks. We need a military that looks like the larger world for the global challenges ahead, such as helping to protect the “commons,” the air space and sea lanes. Think of the Navy’s slogan in its new television recruitment commercials: “A Global Force for Good.”

There are a whole bunch of right wingers who ought to read this piece. Quite possibly Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), too.

Update: Have I taken Kaplan’s argument a step too far? I don’t think so. But James Joyner does, and he’s a smart guy, so you make the call.

Levin Postpones Senate Committee Briefing on Fort Hood

Spencer Ackerman — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:45:26 +0000

Just released from the Senate Armed Services Committee staff:

Today’s Senate Armed Services Committee briefing on the shooting incident at Fort Hood, Texas, has been postponed. The committee will send out a notice when the new date for the briefing has been scheduled.

In the aftermath of the Fort Hood shooting, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the committee’s chairman, requested a “detailed account” on the circumstances behind Nidal Hasan’s alleged rampage. The statement from the committee doesn’t explain why the hearing was postponed, and a spokeswoman hasn’t immediately returned an email requesting elaboration. But over the weekend, President Obama asked Congress to fall back on hearings about Fort Hood until military and law-enforcement inquiries conclude. Two senators who’ve resisted the call: Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), who will begin hearings on Thursday in the Senate Government Affairs Committee.

Update: Committee spokeswoman Tara Andringa clarifies that, indeed, the postponement came “at the request of the administration.”

Senate Public Option Scoreboard — Likely Opponents

TWI — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:24:22 +0000

On the Fence	Likely Supporters	Likely Opponents
8	51	41

Likely Opponents
Senator	Stance	Home State Data*


Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)	“Senator Reid’s bill is appropriate for the season. It’s the same turkey you didn’t like in August, and it’s not going to taste any better on Thanksgiving. It’s still more premiums. It’s still higher taxes. It’s still Medicare cuts. It’s still a 2,000-page bill.” (11/19/2009) “Thumbing their nose at the American people by ramming through a partisan bill would be the same thing as going to war without asking Congress’ permission. You might technically be able to do it, but you’d pay a terrible price in the next election.” (09/06/2009)	13.6% uninsured 61% support the public option, 28% oppose



John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)	“The more Washington runs the system, the worse it’s gonna be for the American people.” (10/06/2009) “What I’m hearing all across the country is ‘kill the bill.’” (08/28/2009)	13.9% uninsured



Robert Bennett (R-Utah) Co-wrote the Wyden-Bennett health reform bill, which restructures the private insurance market without a public option	“If it has a public option in it, even one that is described as a co-op, the answer is: ‘No.’” (08/26/2009)	15.5% uninsured



Kit Bond (R-Mo.)	“I don’t want to see government-controlled co-ops or triggers, anything like that. It’s a gateway drug to a public option.” (09/09/2009) “The only bipartisan thing about this whole bill is the opposition to the plan.” (09/09/2009)	13% uninsured



Sam Brownback (R-Kans.)	“I call on the President and the Congressional leadership to stop the current attempts to push massive and expensive health care reform through Congress.” (08/27/2009)	12.2% uninsured



Jim Bunning (R-Ky.)	“I do not support a government-run health care program. I believe it will kill private insurance.” (09/09/2009) “We will see if Congress and the Obama administration … continue to ignore the will of the people in an effort to force their liberal agenda down our throats.” (09/09/2009)	14.1% uninsured 46% support the public option, 45% oppose



Richard Burr (R-N.C.)	“We’re leaving to an elected official the ability at any point now, five years from now ten years from now, to write the rules on mandates in a way the private sector couldn’t compete with the government option, that’s just not a smart thing for the congress to do.” (08/14/2009) “I am willing to entertain [the co-op proposal.] However, if these co-ops are financed or run by the federal government, then they are no better than the public option and are just federally run health care under a different name.” (08/18/2009)	15.9% uninsured 54% support the public option, 38% oppose



Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)	“Every individual has the right to choose their own doctor and that’s why I’m opposed to universal health care.” (09/01/2009)	18.8% uninsured



Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)	“As a practicing physician, I have seen first-hand how giving government more control over health care has failed to make health care more affordable and accessible.”(05/20/2009) “Is it efficient to care for the people in Northwest Arkansas by sending money to Washington … or could you as a community figure out a way to do it better, which by the way is constitutional? … There is no compassion in any government program.” (09/06/2009) “We have a government-centered approach that is already failing instead of a patient-centered approach. And we ought to be concerned about patients, not the government.” (11/22/2009)	19.5% uninsured



Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)	“I don’t think the Senate is going to endorse the House work product.” (08/2009)	17.9% uninsured



Susan Collins (R-Maine)	“I’m opposed to a Washington-run public option. I believe it would cause many people to lose health insurance that they’re currently happy with now, and that’s contrary to the assurances that advocates of the public option have been giving. I’m also concerned about the cost and control issue.” (09/08/2009) “The problem with the trigger is it just delays the public option.” (09/08/2009)	10.9% uninsured 57.4% support the public option, 37.2% oppose



Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)	“I don’t think a public option will be part of a final package. While I think certainly the president will mention that in a speech Wednesday night, I do not think it’s going to be a part of a plan that passes unless it’s done through reconciliation, which to me is not the route to go.” (09/08/2009)	13.6% uninsured 61% support the public option, 28% oppose



John Cornyn (R-Texas)	“There is nothing ‘optional’ about a public option. The so-called ‘public option’ is nothing more than a Trojan horse that will ultimately result in government-run health care. This partisan proposal will also raise premiums on those with private insurance, raise taxes on the middle class, and cut Medicare benefits for seniors.” (10/26/2009)	24.1% uninsured



Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)	“The battle in our country over whether to shift to a government option in health care is an overarching one that we have to get past.” (09/09/2009)	17.8% uninsured



Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)	“If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.” (07/17/2009) “Any Republican now that helps them pass a bill is helping them pass a government takeover of health care.” (08/17/2009)	17.4% uninsured



John Ensign (R-Nev.)	“[A public option] will destroy, I believe, and most believe, that it will destroy the private insurance system.” (09/25/2009) “I hope people don’t politicize Sen. Kennedy’s death and use it to pass a bill.” (09/25/2009)	21.3% uninsured 52% support the public option, 40% oppose



Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) Ranking member of the HELP Committee	“For millions of Americans, the government-run plan would turn into a bureaucratic nightmare.” (08/19/2009) “I can count votes, and I know that a government-run plan will not pass in the Senate.” (08/19/2009)	13.9% uninsured



Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)	“My belief is that no private-sector entity can survive over a long period of time competing against the government.” (08/08/2009) “The public option has been roundly rejected by the public. The public is smart.” (10/26/2009)	17.4% uninsured



Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) Ranking member of the Finance Committee	“The simple truth is that I am and always have been opposed to the Obama Administration’s plans to nationalize health care. Period.” (08/2009) “I see [co-ops] as an opportunity to enhance health-care competition — just as cooperatives do in other areas of the economy.” (08/18/2009)	9.1% uninsured



Judd Gregg (R-N.H.)	“A public plan is essentially a stalking horse for a single-payer plan. It is more than the camel’s nose under the tent. It is the camel’s neck, and probably front legs, under the tent. There is no way the private sector will be able to compete.” (09/12/2009) “We shouldn’t push [those 170 million Americans who already have health insurance] into a public plan by creating a system which basically disincentivizes their employers to give them health care.” (10/28/2009)	10.8% uninsured



Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)	“They’re trying to put through a government plan, one way or the other, that will have everything run right out of Washington. I mean, look, it just doesn’t work that way.” (09/15/2009) “Sooner or later they’re going to do away with the private insurance market, which would be a catastrophe.” (08/26/2009)	15.5% uninsured



Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas)	“I think this bill is a disaster for our country.” (11/22/2009) “If the president truly wants to bring America together and have Republicans sign onto this, he really does need to start all over with a new blueprint.” (09/09/2009)	24.1% uninsured



James Inhofe (R-Okla.)	“Many in Washington believe the answer rests in a bureaucratically managed, one-size-fits-all, government health care program that includes what advocates call a ‘public option’. I strongly disagree and reject this approach.” (08/11/2009) “We can stall it. And that’s going to be a huge gain for those of us who want to turn this thing over in the 2010 election.” (07/22/2009)	19.5% uninsured



Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)	“I am not going to be a part of mortgaging my kids’ futures by driving Americans to a government-run health care system we can’t afford.” (09/10/2009)	18.8% uninsured



Mike Johanns (R-Neb.)	“President Obama continues to press for a government-run option and I cannot support that.” (09/11/2009)	11.1% uninsured 39% support the public option, 47% oppose



Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) Senate Minority Whip	“There is no way that Republicans are going to support a trillion-dollar-plus bill. … No matter how bad things are, Congress can always make things worse.” (08/18/2009) “I agree that states should have the option to opt in. But I don’t even know if they have this provision written yet. I certainly haven’t seen it.” (10/27/2009) Kyl’s office (in response to preceding quote): “Today’s report in The Hill regarding Senator Kyl’s position on an ‘opt-in’ for a government insurance plan is inaccurate. His statement was taken completely out of context, and he, along with every member of our caucus, does not support a government-run insurance plan in any form. Everyone who has been following this debate should know Senator Kyl has been leading the charge against a government takeover of our health-care system.” (10/28/2009)	18.7% uninsured



George LeMieux (R-Fla.)	“Cutting half a trillion dollars from Medicare (over 10 years) is not budget neutral. Shifting costs to the states for increases in Medicaid is not responsible. And taxing medical and life-savings devices – which will increase, not decrease the cost of health care — is not reform!” (10/21/2009) LeMieux stressed that he had ‘serious concerns’ about the latest health care reform proposal being pushed by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, ”specifically highlighting $400 billion in cuts to Medicare funding.” (09/17/2009)	20.8% uninsured 40% support the public option, 47% oppose



Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)	Feels “very strongly” about his opposition towards any kind of “public option” or “trigger”: “I’m going to be stubborn on this. … The answer is no.” (11/24/2009) “If the public option is still in there, the only resort we have is to say no at the end to reporting the bill off the floor.” (11/22/2009) “I don’t think anybody thinks that this bill will pass as it is.” (11/22/2009) “If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote, because I believe the debt can break America and send us into a recession that’s worse than the one we’re fighting our way out of today.” (11/08/2009)	9% uninsured 64% support the public option, 30% oppose



Richard Lugar (R-Ind.)	“I would advise the president that the bringing up of the health care situation in the midst of recession … was a mistake. Let’s clear the deck and try it again next year or in subsequent times.” (08/23/2009)	13.9% uninsured 53% support the public option, 40% oppose



John McCain (R-Ariz.)	“A public option, which is really a government option, is not something that will do anything but lead to a government takeover of health care in America.” (08/25/2009)	18.7% uninsured



Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) Senate Minority Leader	“I think if you have any kind of government insurance program, you’re going to be stuck with it and it will lead us in the direction of the European style, you know, sort of British-style, single payer, government run system. And those systems are known for delays, denial of care and, you know, if your particular malady doesn’t fit the government regulation, you don’t get the medication.” (10/29/2009) “A government takeover on the installment plan — or a ‘trigger’ as some are calling it — is still a government takeover.” (09/09/2009)	14.1% uninsured 46% support the public option, 45% oppose



Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)	“I am not one of those who believes that the best course of action is just to kill this thing. … I think it’s gonna have to be scaled down.“ (08/20/2009) “I think that conventional wisdom is that a public option doesn’t have the support, and will not pass through [the Finance] committee.” (09/11/2009)	20.1% uninsured



Jim Risch (R-Idaho)	“Private entities cannot compete with a government entity.” (09/09/2009) “The President continues to promote the false choice of a complete government takeover or doing nothing.” (09/09/2009)	17.8% uninsured



Pat Roberts (R-Kans.)	“[The public option] won’t work. It hasn’t worked in other countries.” (06/08/2009)	12.2% uninsured



Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)	“I do think it continues to decline in public support. I can’t imagine that the public option could be a part of that, part of a final bill, but it’s possible. … I think if the will of the American people continues to be expressed, I think that every week that goes by, the threat of a major government takeover is less and less.” (09/03/2009)	14% uninsured



Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)	“As long as the president continues to pursue a government-run plan, I remain in strong opposition.” (09/10/2009)	14% uninsured



Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) Leading advocate of a “trigger” system	“I also support a public plan which must be available from day one — in any state where private plans fail to ensure guaranteed affordable coverage.” (07/22/2009) “I don’t support [an opt-out public option]. … I’ve said, I’m against a public option. … It would be difficult [to vote for cloture on a public option].” (10/22/2009) “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.” (10/26/2009)	10.9% uninsured 57.4% support the public option, 37.2% oppose



John Thune (R-S.D.)	“We should be providing incentives to states to reform their insurance markets and expand coverage in ways that work best for them, not a one-size-fits-all program imposed by the federal government.” (08/23/2009)	11.7% uninsured



David Vitter (R-La.)	“Any public option would eventually become the dominant option, and I’m afraid eventually the only option.” (08/25/2009)	17.8% uninsured



George Voinovich (R-Ohio)	“A bureaucratic Washington-run government plan is not the answer. … The last thing we need to do is pass legislation that would expand the government’s role in health care or create new entitlement program without first controlling costs.” (07/23/2009)	11.8% uninsured 57% support the public option, 35% oppose



Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)	“We’re being offered the promise of genuine competition between the public plan and private insurance plans. When, in fact, the purpose is to switch Americans to a European-style single payer plan down the road.” (08/03/2009)	17.9% uninsured

For senators who are on the fence, click here.
For likely supporters, click here.

*Uninsured numbers come from 2008 U.S. Census Bureau data.

Senate Public Option Scoreboard — On the Fence

TWI — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:24:09 +0000

On the Fence	Likely Supporters	Likely Opponents
8	51	41

On the Fence
Senator	Stance	Home State Data*


Evan Bayh (D-Ind.)	Rachel Maddow Show: “Sen. Bayh told us it is extraordinarily unlikely that he would filibuster health reform. He said there is nothing in the bill he is aware of now that would cause him to vote to filibuster and he said that he currently ‘can’t think of a set of circumstances’ under which he would vote against cloture.” (10/29/2009) “How you do it isn’t quite as important as the fact that you do it.” (09/10/2009) “Some people argue that we should vote to go forward on a bill even if we don’t like it. [...] I’d like to move forward, but some of that’s going to depend on is it fiscally responsible.” (10/28/2009)	13.9% uninsured 53% support the public option, 40% oppose



Mark Begich (D-Alaska)	“Some people call it a public option, some people call it an exchange, some people call it a co-op. Right now, to be honest, there are not 60 votes for any of those three.” (10/06/2009) “I guess I don‘t want to put the word ‘public option.’ What I‘d rather say is that there‘s going to be some mechanism, I guess, at the end of the day to ensure that insurance companies are held accountable. … What I don‘t want to have happen is that the bill lives or dies by [the public option].” (09/10/2009) “I’m not going to let the bill live or die on that single item.” (11/23/2009)	20.1% uninsured



Tom Carper (D-Del.)	“I think at the end of the day there will be a national plan probably put together not by the federal government but by a non-profit board with some seed money from the federal government that states would initially participate in because of lack of affordability. The question is should there be an opportunity for states to opt out later on and if so, within a year, within two years, within three years?” (10/22/2009) “There may not be enough votes to get the bill [that includes Reid's version of the public option] off the floor and get us to conference.” (10/27/2009)	10.3% uninsured



Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)	“I think all of us have recognized throughout that there are three things” — abortion, illegal immigration and the public option — “that could really bring this down.” (11/10/2009) “I’ve got to see [Reid's 'opt out' proposal] in writing and have scores before I reach any judgment.” (10/27/2009) “A public option tied to Medicare levels of reimbursement is a non-starter for me because I represent North Dakota.” (10/13/2009)	10.5% uninsured



Mary Landrieu (D-La.)	“I have leverage now, I’m using it to the best of my ability, I’m going to use it on the Senate floor.” (11/20/2009) “The public option has been shaped 100 percent better than when it started out. So, it’s already shaped to be a public option that is supported by premiums.” (11/04/2009) “We’re not trying to be Republicans…but we do believe in the free market.” (10/23/2009) “I am pressing to get a government-run, taxpayer-supported public option out of the bill. I want to rely on a reformed private marketplace — not the current wasteful, abusive, unaffordable private market.’’ (10/22/2009) “I’m not right now inclined to support any filibuster.” (10/20/2009)	17.8% uninsured



Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)	“Creating another government-funded option is not where we’re going. We don’t need to go there. A government-funded option is something that I think is not the way to go.”(10/27/2009) “Individuals should be able to choose from a range of quality health insurance plans. Options should include private plans as well as a quality, affordable public plan or non-profit plan that can accomplish the same goals of a public plan.” (11/23/2009) “I will not vote in favor of the proposal that has been introduced by Leader Reid as it is written … I do not support the creation of a so-called robust government administered public plan.” (11/21/2009)	18% uninsured 55% support the public option, 38% oppose



Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)	“We could negotiate a public option of some sort that I might look at, but I don’t want a big government, Washington-run operation that would undermine the [...] private insurance that 200 million Americans now have.” (11/22/2009) “If there’s no public option, perhaps some of the problem [with abortion coverage] goes away.” (11/19/2009) “What was interesting in the poll numbers that I saw, that while there’s support for public option generally, generically, when you start talking about it specifically as it relates to states being able to opt out or opt in, have their own, the support overwhelmingly goes up to 76 percent.” (10/20/2009)	11.1% uninsured 39% support the public option, 47% oppose



Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)	“I’m open to a public option. … It depends on how it’s structured on whether I can support it. … I just haven’t decided.” (10/22/2009) “I like the opt-out provision, at least what I know about it so far.” (10/28/2009) “I don’t think you’ll see me or any other Democrats [filibuster a health care bill].” (10/15/2009) “The truth is, I think, for folks who really know what the public option is, they get more comfortable with it. I think originally some folks branded it as just a government takeover of health care and that’s not what it is.” (10/27/2009)	18% uninsured 55% support the public option, 38% oppose

For likely supporters, click here.
For likely opponents, click here.

*Uninsured numbers come from 2008 U.S. Census Bureau data.

The Lindsay Graham Censure

David Weigel — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:01:30 +0000

The Charleston County (S.C.) Republican Party’s move to censure Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) didn’t strike me as too surprising–last year, Graham fended off a primary challenge from a member of the Republican National Committee. But the full resolution, via Beth Marlowe, is worth reading. Forming compromises with the likes of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is, according to the local GOP, “holding the Republican Party hostage.”

Whereas, U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (SC) and John Kerry (MA) have called for a bipartisan bill dealing with “climate change” via a “Cap & Trade” energy bill;

Whereas, the basis of Cap & Trade – global warming caused by carbon emissions – is still in doubt as evidenced by the past decade of cooling temperatures;

Whereas, the people of South Carolina can ill afford the job-killing Cap & Trade bill’s ripple effects on our state’s economy and on personal energy bills;

Whereas, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham supported TARP and has shown a willingness to discuss nationalizing U.S. banking institutions;

Whereas, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has shown a condescending attitude toward his constituents by calling them “bigots” when they oppose his stance on amnesty for illegal aliens;

Whereas, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has stated on many occasions that his primary concern is to “be relevant”;

Whereas, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham continues to hold the Republican Party hostage and undermines Republican leadership and party solidarity for his own benefit by joining the “Gang of 10” and the “Gang of 14”;

Whereas, U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham – in the name of bipartisanship – continues to weaken the Republican brand and tarnish the ideals of freedom, rule of law, and fiscal conservatism.

Therefore, let it be resolved: The Charleston County Republican Party Executive Committee respectfully requests, with sincere sadness that the South Carolina Republican Party withdraw their resolution commending U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham and that the Charleston Country Republican Party censure U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham for many of the positions he has taken that do not represent the wishes of the people of South Carolina, such as: passing a “Cap & Trade” energy bill, bailing out banks, and granting amnesty for illegal aliens.

Ben Nelson: I’ll Block a Health Care Bill That Includes a Public Option

Mike Lillis — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:55:47 +0000

Sen. Ben Nelson, the conservative-leaning Nebraska Democrat, vowed to filibuster health reform legislation if it includes a public health insurance plan, ABC News reported yesterday.

“Well, first of all, it has more than a robust public option, it’s got a totally government-run plan, the costs are extraordinary associated with it, it increases taxes in a way that will not pass in the Senate and I could go on and on and on,” Nelson said in an interview that is part of ABC News’ Subway Series with Jonathan Karl.

“Faced with a decision about whether or not to move a bill that is bad, I won’t vote to move it,” he added. “For sure.”

Nelson here is following in the footsteps of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who announced last month that he also would join Republicans in filibustering the Democrats’ health reform bill if it contains a public option, as party leaders have said there will be. As a result, Lieberman has become the target of liberal protesters, some of whom are idling in jail awaiting a talk with the senator. Nelson might want to consider locking his office door.