Liberals Assail Senate Health Care Compromise

By: Stephanie Condon
Topics: Health Care

5192102A bipartisan group of six senators indicated Monday they are closer than ever to reaching a compromise they hope to turn into a moderate health care bill. Liberal activists, commentators and legislators, however, are blasting the negotiations, with some suggesting a "bipartisan" deal will not get very far.

When news broke that a group of legislators in the Senate Finance Committee are nearing a compromise on health care reform that nixes some key Democratic proposals like a government-sponsored insurance plan, prominent liberal voices assailed the negotiations.

"Saying you're going to do health care reform without a public option is kind of like saying you're going to fight Al Qaeda in Afghanistan by invading Iraq," Cenk Uygur, host of liberal talk show the Young Turks, wrote Tuesday on the Huffington Post. "It misses the point - on purpose. It promises to do more harm than good. And it's what was planned all along."

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the Nation magazine, said, "conservative Democratic Senators are doing just about everything they can to cripple real health care reform."

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said on MSNBC Monday evening that the compromise proposed -- which would replace a government-sponsored insurance option with non-profit cooperatives and leave out an employer mandate -- is not health care reform at all.

"This compromise does nothing except reform insurance," he said. "It is not worthless because it makes it fair, but it is not health care reform."

Dean's liberal group Democrats for America posted an open letter to President Obama on its Web site Tuesday that says "First and foremost, it is time to cut the Republicans loose."

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, suggested the same on a radio show on Monday, the Hill reports.

"At some point they're going to have to pull the plug on that process" of bipartisanship, he said of the Senate Democrats. "What concerns me about what's happened in the Senate Finance Committee is that they've had a whole lot of time to work these things out, and just don't seem to be able to break the impasse."

The bipartisan group of six, led by Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), may even face opposition from other Demcrats in the committee. Liberals like Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) have essentially been left out of the negotiations but will not allow a deal to go through the committee without their consent, according to Bloomberg.

Some Democrats in the commitee would even prefer Baucus leave any kind of coverage scheme out of his bill completely -- rather than include a co-op plan -- so that the party can push for the public option once the full Senate takes up the issue, the Washington Post reported.

The White House maintains the president has still not taken sides on many of these issues, including the debate over the public plan.

"I don't believe that the president has come down one versus the other in terms of denoting co-ops equal to or above public option," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday.

Mr. Obama's political arm in the DNC, Organizing for America, is more aggressively supporting the legislation in the House of Representatives, which includes a public option. The group is planning a rally in front of the office of a moderate House Democrat on the fence on health care, Politico reports.

Stephanie Condon
Stephanie Condon is a political reporter for CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

93 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 93 Comments


by proudmilvet July 30, 2009 4:36 AM EDT: Obama has been in office for a little over 6 months! It's going to take Longer than that to clean up the Shi**y mess that was left to him by Bush/Cheney!!; Reply to this comment


by dbaecht July 29, 2009 12:49 AM EDT: The Va works better now that rethuglican control over the budget has quit gutting the VA budget. When you can't afford or are not allowed to hire but one doctor for every five hundred Vet's you are bound to have problems.
My last appointment was right on time and I had all of the time I needed for questions.; Reply to this comment


by dbaecht July 29, 2009 12:43 AM EDT: Someone asked what insurance congress has. Congress has the same insurance all federal employees have. Once a year during open season a book comes out with all of the private insurance companies plans and cost, you pick one. If it turns out to be a bad choice your stuck with it. The cost are lower because it's a large pool.
That's it in a nut shell; Reply to this comment


by Scales_of_Justice July 28, 2009 11:05 PM EDT: Having read so many vile comments on health care reform from so many people from the right wing I only wish I could audio-stream them to the American people during elections so they can grasp what Republicans stand for.

Which is fear-mongering, sucession if they don't get their way, and above all make sure all American workers are held as subserveant labor with no rights. Bet you all on the right wish we were in Dixie, eh?

If we don't have a strong public option come out of this fray then the American people aren't just going to fade away and let this die. They'll want single-payer with a vengence. This is much more a moral issue than a political issue. Wait and see if I'm right.

Bet that shivers your timbers. If not it should.; Reply to this comment

by jdub99999 July 28, 2009 10:48 PM EDT

Saying the republicans are to blame for this not getting passed is absurd. Dems control everything so GOP is not a factor. But thankfully there are the blue dogs that have some common sense to see that the proposed plan will only increase costs and limit choices.
Also, if everyone on here that is posting in favor of this "government control" bill would stop and think for just a second that all the politicians trying to ram rod this through "for the good of America" will in fact be keeping their existing insurance plans while providing the rest of us with crap -- there is a reason that no one in congress or the senate wants to hop on over to the public option -- its because it will SUCK -- stay strong blue dogs or you will be looking for work after the next round of elections like everyone who is voting for this fiasco

Reply to this comment


by hungry1968-16 July 28, 2009 11:05 PM EDT: The republicans aren't to blame.

The CONSERVATIVES are to blame.

Conservatives are WORSE for America, than Al Qaeda is.


by nearl451 July 28, 2009 9:17 PM EDT: It's going tobe impossible to maintain cost control without a public option.

Like in Germany and Japan, the Government needs to periodically negotiate (i.e. set) prices for drugs and procedures. They are the only body large enough to do it.; Reply to this comment


by jab232 July 28, 2009 7:57 PM EDT: I'd put up a bill with the public option plan, let the Blue Dogs vote it down and then stand for their next election on the basis of having trashed health care reform. To me it is undemocratic that a majority of the Senate (elected by a majority of the people) can't pass something. They have to have 60% so that the minority Republicans and a few recalcitrant Democrats can trash the whole thing.

As I see it, if you don't have a public option, all you'll get is another Medicare Drug Plan. Remember that fiasco? Huge donut hole, skyrocketing insurance and drug prices after first year. That bill was pushed by the GOP after it was written by the health, drug and insurance industries to put billions in their pockets, and that's what it did.

I think the majority of Americans, even the insured ones, know they will lose their health care or job (to keep from having to insure them) as soon as someone in their family gets an expensive illness. It happens to tens of thousands each month. They call it rescission.

Better no so-called reform at all if we can't get a public health care option. Let those who are owned by the lobbies and the big companies vote it down, and then face the voters.; Reply to this comment

by lloydbest1 July 28, 2009 7:55 PM EDT

We need to go for the "home run" on this. That's to say single payer health care with the funding to come from a progressive tax surcharge. The poor and middle classes would pay a pittance while the wealthy would pay more based on income AND personal assets. In some cases this could amount to as much as 5 to 10 percent of income and/or half to one percent of assets. For someone who makes $250000 per year and has a net worth of $2 million dollars (most at this income level have far more) that's between $1250 to $2500 per year from income and between $10000 and $20000 per year from assets.
In addition we WILL need to get smart about our personal health maintenance. Lay off the junk food, get regular medical checkups (under a single payer system they would be free), lose weight if you need to, avoid risky s*x, cut down or cut out tobacco use - and so on. It's going to be hard enough to get the wealthy to give up their "entitlements" as it is, no need to make it more difficult by failure to take a proactive approach to our health.

Reply to this comment


by lloydbest1 July 28, 2009 8:39 PM EDT: to TejasEd,

If that's what it takes......


by bajajohn1 July 28, 2009 7:49 PM EDT: We who support the President's iniative on health care, will continue to support his efforts. His poll numbers while damaged by this debate are not indicative of his leadership abilities. What we have here, are the same 'good ole boy' politics from conservative democrats who are doing thier best to scuttle true reform. Perhpas, other Democrats will challenge them when their turn for re-election arises. In the meantime, the greedy congress people of both houses have their hands out for the insurance companies to fill them with cash. Cash that should be used to pay for medical care.; Reply to this comment

by aes76 July 28, 2009 7:10 PM EDT

"If you think it's hard to get into your doctor now, imagine how hard it will be when 45 million uninsured enter the system." WOW CBS, of all the arguments against healthcare reform, your use of this scare tactic is the most inhumane I've heard yet. No matter how you feel about the issue this statement is just sick! How about instead of that you imagine BEING one of the uninsured! Furthermore, I AM using the Canadian healthcare system and I HAVE received specialist care. I find this system 1,000% more accessible than the U.S. system! I find it funny no one asks people who have actually experienced both U.S. and Canadian systems. Why don't people try asking others who actually KNOW what they're talking about instead of relying on people who want to use "Friend of a friend" stories to scare the general public. We have health clinics on every corner and almost as many medical laboratories. The care is EXCELLENT and I can't even express the relief of knowing if I am ever diagnosed with a life threatening illness I don't have to even THINK about financial devastation! If you think you want to rail against national healthcare, ask someone who KNOWS the difference!

Reply to this comment


by jsd330 July 28, 2009 7:34 PM EDT: So stay in Canada, and CBS was just reporting the facts as they are. There is a shortage of primary care physicians in the U.S. now as there is a nurse shortage. And then you add 45 million more people to an already overloaded system and you are going to have long waits. If you are in Canada then you have no idea how the healthcare system in some parts of the U.S. works. And I'll bet there is no malpractice in Canada or any other country with socialized medicine, so therefor there is no defensive medicine.