PROGRESSIVES TO REID: Support PUBLIC OPTION Or You're OUT

[Segami]

Source: TPMMUCKRAKER

" Major progressive organizations see a golden opportunity to resurrect the public option, and are preparing a campaign, which will include television ads in Nevada, to pressure Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to get on board.


As I've noted a number of times, the public option will not be in the Senate Finance Committee's health care bill, but it can re-emerge at three key points in the legislative process. Among those, one of the most important is the next step, when Reid merges the Finance bill with a more liberal proposal from the Senate HELP Committee. If he adopts the latter panel's public option, it would dramatically alter the nature of the legislative battle, shifting the onus from liberals, who have been doggedly fighting to include the public option in the Senate bill, on to conservative Democrats, who would have to decide whether their opposition to the popular measure is so strong that they'd be willing to join the GOP in a health care filibuster and tank the entire reform effort.


Such a move would likely alienate Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), the only Republican working with Democrats on health care reform, and require Democratic leaders, including Reid and President Obama to make sure all 60 Democrats stand united when Republicans try to block the bill--a tall order, and one Reid doesn't seem prepared to meet.


"If Harry Reid does not have the leadership skills to get 60 votes for cloture and give a Democratic president an up-or-down vote on health care, progressives will help defeat him in 2010, even if that means Republicans take that seat," said the head of one progressive organization, who's still working out the detail of the campaign. "There is no use for Reid's vote if 60 Democratic votes means nothing on cloture, and no use for Reid's leadership if his leadership is so blatantly ineffective."


That might not be such a troubling threat if Reid, who's up for re-election in 2010, wasn't suffering at the polls.


Leadership, which will work with the chairmen of both the Finance and HELP committees, along with White House officials, when it cobbles together the final bill, says its main concern is ensuring that any bill that reaches the floor has 60 votes for cloture. And though that would likely be easier in absence of a public option, conservative Democrats and Republicans would still be able to have their say by introducing an amendment to strip it from the bill. That amendment would also likely require 60 votes, and would almost certainly fail. But it would give skeptics a chance to go on the record.


A call to Reid's office for comment on the coming ads was not immediately returned.

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/progressives-prepare-to-pressure-reid-to-include-public-option-in-senate-health-care-bill.php?ref=fpa

---

Reid and others who continue to explore all avenues to expunge a public option from the bill vs. finding all possible avenues to KEEP the public option within the bill need to be made clearly aware that their positions will be challenged or campaigned against should they NOT heed the will of the majority electorate, especially within their own district constituents.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. That's the spirit!

[loudsue]

42. Not really. Reid will just get a job as a lobbyist. It's a closed system.

He takes care of them on the government dime, then he comes back to ask his old buddies in the legislature for the government dime to pad the pockets of his new employer.

Corruption abounds in the system we now have. It's time to change the system.

[FiveGoodMen]

43. What shall we change it to?

[defendandprotect]

2. This has long been true . . . more help to Repugs than to Dems . . .

[No Elephants]

23. Yet the Democratuc Senators elected him and keep him in that position.

He must serve their purposes.

[defendandprotect]

33. True . . . very odd . . . how does anything that stupid happen?

Probably they're told that someone like Ted Kennedy wouldn't have gotten enough

votes --

Whatever does it, it stinks!

[Recursion]

3. If 60 democrats can't pass a public option...

...then there is no purpose in having a 60-40 majority.

[Segami]

7. Logical and yet, Reid and others continue to find reasons to resist at every turn. What makes them

any different from republicans? Why did the electorate give Democrats a majority in 2 branches while ushering in the election of the first African American president in history? Are we scared to make history once again with Health Care reform?

[depakid]

20. Republicans still own the Supreme Court- so the Dems only have two branches of government

and the fourth estate- well, that doesn't even bear mentioning.

[closeupready]

12. We either have a 60-40 majority or we don't, regardless of what the numbers say.

Reid wants us to act as though we don't, even though the numbers suggest otherwise. That means he's a wimp and a follower, not fit to be a leader.

[No Elephants]

21. Bingo! That is what I tried to explain to the woman who called me on behalf of the DNC.

She told me I had to contribute bc they needed to elect more Democrats in 2010. I said, "We already gave you an overwhelming majority in the House and 60 Senators. How many Senators do Democrats need before they can get something done-110?"

She didn't seem to see my point.

[Segami]

24. Seems that Republicans are doing more with a faint minority than Dems

are with a majority. Maybe the Dems need to elect at least 75 Democratic Senators to make any kind of difference.

:sarcasm:

[ProSense]

4. "even if that means Republicans take that seat" That's just friggin stupid.

Find a progressive to challenge him instead of talking nonsense about conceding the seat to a Republican. Lot of help that does having a Republican in the Senate for six years or more.

[XOKCowboy]

9. Easier said than done in Nevada

Reid is cutting his own political throat by being such a milquetoast Republican enabler. Most NV conservatives will never vote for him anyway (sound familiar?) and he's losing support from Democrats due to his pandering to big money and the Senate GOB club. He's got a big war chest though and it'd be hard for another NV Dem who's electable statewide to knock him out of the primary.

I agree with your sentiment but I also agree with the premise of the story. If Harry can't get HCR passed we're going to lose the majority anyway. Harry might just be one of those.

[closeupready]

14. If resources need to be allocated sparingly, will losing Reid's seat to the GOP

be more or less painful than losing a seat elsewhere? That's what we need to examine.

[derby378]

10. +1 (n/t)

[No Elephants]

22. IMO, it may be more harmful to Democrats to have 60 Senators and still not be able

to push a Democratic agenda. Makes them appear not only ineffectual, but weaker than a Republican minority. As Perot might have said, "Now, that's just sad."

No one likes elected leaders who can't lead, even if they have crazy majorities.

[BlooInBloo]

31. A threat only has to be *credible* to be effective. It doesn't have to be true.

[The Magistrate]

34. In My View, Ma'am, It Has Reached The Point Where It is Necessary

My preference would be to beat him in a primary, but in any case, if Reid does not shape up and fly right, he must go, even if the result is another Republican from Nevada. He is a disgrace as a leader.

It is time for our Senators to stop selecting these trimmers precariously perched atop 'red' states. Our next Majority Leader must be a fighter who answer to a liberal constituency in a large, solidly Democratic state.

[imdjh]

38. No it isn't. We have to be willing and able to punish these guys.

"Where you gonna go?" has been their answer for too long. As my esteemed DU colleague , whose name I can't recall says: "I'm not going to be a Log Cabin Democrat."

To which I would add that if the Democratic Party can't get the job done, then maybe we should ALL switch to the GOP and take it over.

[XOKCowboy]

5. Interesting - "even if it means Republicans take that seat"

Interesting because that's a good point. Why have a majority when the Senate leader panders more to his colleagues than his constituents and the people who voted in that majority.

If Reid fails to get meaningful HCR passed we can kiss that majority goodbye anyway IMHO.

[rucky]

13. The ideal situation would be to unseat a few blue dogs and keep our majority.

Getting Baucus & Reid out of their positions would lead to some hopefully sane replacements.

[No Elephants]

25. How long before the "sane replacements" get corrupted, though?

The system is so messed up. Another thing for which we can thank Reagan and the Republicans. K Street did not start really getting out of hand until 1982. Almost 3 decades later, the insanity is part of the system.

[rucky]

28. It would take an act of Congress to clean up Congress.

and there's the rub, eh?

[Segami]

19. What Democratic reps need to be made to understand is that THEY THEMSELVES will be judged and held

responsible for being defeated or loosing their current Senate & House majority ( to which they don't know how to use to do the people's business) or even possibly lose the White House. Every two years the people's voice will be heard and with that will come rewarding the party with an increase of support that includes independents or a loss of support for FAILING to advance THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS. They will shoulder whatever darts or laurels is lobbed their way.

[No Elephants]

26. The House is doing fine. It's the Senate that's been the problem on health care.

[Segami]

27. I agreed but the House could become a victim of voter fallout. I don't see them loosing their

majority but some unexpected upsets could arise that are a direct result of the Senate's health care shenanigans.

[tekisui]

6. BIG K&R!!!

[gkhouston]

8. Interesting that they didn't attribute the quote or identify the "progressive organization".

I'm thinking it's Jane over at FDL. She's taking no prisoners on this one, and rightly so.

[Segami]

15. Time to turn the back room whispering about Reid into a full blown shout! Everyone needs to be made

aware that progressive Dems and all others mean serious business should they pull a fast one on the electorate. I believe the charge trumpet will be blown should they fail to present the public option in the final bill.

[Segami]

16. Time to turn the back room whispering about Reid into a full blown shout! Everyone needs to be made

aware that progressive Dems and all others mean serious business should they pull a fast one on the electorate. I believe the charge trumpet will be blown should they fail to present the public option in the final bill.

[Segami]

18. Others feel the time is RIPE to pushback. Its a NOW or NEVER deal.

Harry situation: What if Reid loses?


It’s a question few in the Senate will ask aloud but one that’s creeping into the chamber’s collective consciousness: What happens to Democrats if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid really does get knocked off in the 2010 midterm elections?


“You’ve got people who ask, ‘What does Harry actually do around here?’


<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27723.html>

[closeupready]

11. Tough talk is necessary sometimes.

K&R

[felinetta]

17. How about sending money to Grayson and show where our money will be spent for Democrats.

It's our turn to turn up the heat.  Nothing talks like money.
All the insurance lobby money in 
the world won't get them re-elected if we don't vote for them
and sending money to those we will
support will show them who will get our votes.

[Dr Fate]

32. Grayson and any REAL DEM- but NO money to any "Blue Dogs" or DLCers.

For now, this means no money to the DNC, DCC , or anyone else who funnles money to "Blue Dogs"

Pass it on.

[autorank]

29. Great k*r

"even if that means a Republican." What difference would it make. I'm tired of seeing this guy take
a dive and act like he's really upset. In this case, he's just being himself, holding the line
against real reform, well, the chance of real reform.

The public option needs to be available to EVERYONE, not just "those without insurance" as outlined in
Pres. Obama's speech.

[BlooInBloo]

30. Playing hardball.

[defendandprotect]

35. k i c k

[omega minimo]

36. What has Harry done for us lately?

[imdjh]

37. Reid's website says "Reid fights for Nevadans" over and over. No sense of national responsibility.

[Vidar]

39. K&R

[Triana]

40. about DAMN time - they had better FOLLOW THROUGH with this too.

Reid NEEDS this WAKE-UP call.

[newtothegame]

41. Don't you actually have to defeat him in an election first? n/t