Two Key Senate Dems Cool to Public Option

By: Stephanie Condon
Topics: Health Care

(AP)

As the weeks wind down to the next set of Congress' self-imposed deadlines on health care reform, all eyes are on a select few potential "swing votes" in Congress, particularly when it comes to their position on a government-sponsored health insurance plan, or "public option."

One of those swing voters, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) indicated Sunday on CNN's State of the Union that she may not support a public option.

"I would tend not to," she said. "But, we've got to keep working to find solution."

Meanwhile, moderate Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) also indicated he may not be willing to support proposals supported by the party's liberal wing.

Even as liberal groups hammer him for not taking a stance on the public option, the senator has apparently received a great deal of feedback from constituents against health care reform, the Wall Street Journal reports.

"I was going to be cautious before," Nelson reportedly said about his vote on health legislation, after a town-hall meeting. "Now I guess I would say I'll be super cautious."

For most liberals, a public option is considered a necessary part of health care reform because, they argue, it would keep down costs by acting as a competitor to the private industry. For that reason, they are closely watching moderate senators like Nelson and Landrieu, who could determine whether Democrats can push through a health care bill without Republican support.

Senate leadership is holding out until Sept. 15 to see if bipartisan negotiators from the Senate Finance Committee can come up with a compromise on health care that would win some Republican votes. Failing that, Democrats on Oct. 15 will be able to use a simple majority to pass some components of health care reform using a procedure called reconciliation.

It is unclear, however, whether some elements of reform -- like the public option -- could pass via reconciliation, since Senate rules dictate that only budgetary items may be considered through the process. Moreover, it is still unclear whether even a simple majority in the Senate supports a public option.

Given the uncertainties at hand, liberals are still pressing some Republicans to work harder for a compromise. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Howard Dean's Democracy for America are running a television ad in Iowa and Washington pressuring Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to support a public option. Grassley is one of the three Republicans working on bipartisan negotiations in the Senate.

The ad, shown at left, features Iowa Republican Kevin Shilling, who says there is bipartisan support in their state for a public option.

"When Grassley takes over $2 million from the big health and insurance industries that oppose reform and then says he won't give Iowans the choice of a public option," Shilling says in the ad. "I have to ask, Senator, whose side are you on?"

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who had led health care discussions this summer in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said Sunday that President Obama needs to "step up" and give Democrats more direction on what to support in health care reform.

"I think the president's got to decide to step up and really frame this again for us," Dodd said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

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

9 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


by toddlarado August 31, 2009 11:18 PM EDT: I thought the Democrats won the election? The Majority wants the public option!! BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS ARE UNDERCOVER REPUBLICANS !! Next time you vote Democratic make sure their not a member of this UNDERCOVER REPUBLICAN COALITION.; Reply to this comment


by hamiltoningrate August 31, 2009 6:44 PM EDT: At the end of the day, LEGAL TORT reforms must come first. Then, the cost of medicine will plument.

/////// WHY IS IT off the table ??

could it be the stangle hold on the country ?

/////////////The Edwards EFFECT ?

Some people look at Tort Reform and ASK WHY ?

I LOOK AT TORT REFORM AND ASK WHY NOT.; Reply to this comment


by parrots7 August 31, 2009 2:16 PM EDT: "When Grassley takes over $2 million from the big health and insurance industries that oppose reform and then says he won't give Iowans the choice of a public option," Shilling says in the ad. "I have to ask, Senator, whose side are you on?"

Even this Repug had to ask ?? ..... Dumb Repugs !; Reply to this comment

by valleywiz August 31, 2009 1:20 PM EDT

We need the Public Option. It will motivate private health insurance to be more competitive.

Reply to this comment


by TheMasses2002 August 31, 2009 1:53 PM EDT: You talk in double-speak.


by hamiltoningrate August 31, 2009 6:42 PM EDT: PURE double talk.

by valleywiz August 31, 2009 1:19 PM EDT

We need the Public Option. It will motivate the private insurance groups to be more competitive.

Reply to this comment


by jon2012-2009 August 31, 2009 2:25 PM EDT: There is nothing else that compares to the record of cost-effective medical care that a public option has achieved in all of the developed world outside of the U.S. Nothing. To continue finding solutions without it is just spinning your wheels.

The real problem is not so much the GOP and so-called centrist Democrats who balk at having government play a primary role in health care. The real problem is the corporate influence that is able to subvert collective decision-making in our political system.

There are three groups that benefit from the waste and greed in health care: doctors with sky-high incomes defying the norms in developed countries, private insurance that devotes a good chunk of premiums to profits and activities unrelated to actual care (such as lobbying Congress, screening claims with the intent to deny as many as possible, etc.) and drug companies enjoying a special status in the U.S. where they charge consumers much more than they do in other countries.

These entrenched interests are why market solutions without an aggressive government intervention hasn't worked in the U.S. in 50 years and will never work.


by User_00000000002945496845 August 31, 2009 2:33 PM EDT: Yeah. Enjoy your insurance and drug company money Senators.

Thanks for screwing-over America.

Hopefully, your constituents will remember not to vote for you in your next election cycle.