30! Five More Democrats--Including Durbin--Say They Support a Public Option Through Reconciliation

[babylonsister]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/30-five-more-democrats--including-durbin--say-they-support-a-public-option-through-reconciliation.php?ref=fpb

30! Five More Democrats--Including Durbin--Say They Support a Public Option Through Reconciliation
Brian Beutler | March 1, 2010, 10:08AM


Five leading Democrats--including Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin--have publicly announced that they will vote for a public option if it's offered up during the budget reconciliation process, where legislation can pass with a majority vote.

"Sen. Durbin has long been a supporter of the public option," reads a statement from Durbin spokesman Joe Shoemaker to the progressive groups Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America, and Credo. "I don't know whether the votes exist in the Senate right now, but if the House version of the public option came up for a vote in reconciliation Sen. Durbin would vote yes."

Similar statements were also issued from four other senators: Patty Murray (D-WA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

To be clear, these are not signatories to a letter--circulated by the three groups--advocating the public-option-through-reconciliation strategy. PCCC co-founder Adam Green put it this way: "We're accepting clear statements that if the public option comes up for a vote, they would vote yes. We're debunking what Gibbs said last week, that the votes don't exist -- they do...we'll prove it."

So far, 24 members have signed the letter, and five have issued statements indicating their support for passing a public option through reconciliation. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also stands behind the idea in principle. That means Green et al. have 20 members to go.

[still_one]

1. Democrats are going to have a hell of a time if they have the votes for a public option through

reconciliation, and they don't offer it

[midnight]

2. Public option with no mandates????

[Froward69]

3. awesome

[liskddksil]

4. Bill Halter might be scaring them today!

[subterranean]

5. As I recall, 59 were ready to vote for a Medicare buy-in

before Joe Lieberman put the kibosh on that. So we should easily have enough votes for at least a Medicare buy-in after age 55, right?

[brand404]

6. On Huff Post - GOP: "We Should Want Health Care To Pass"

As the bill stands, i have said this before, that it is more a blessing for GOP than it is for Democrats....primarily because it doesnt include a Public Option (nor a Medicare buy-in). The GOP can easily turn this thing and say "look at this, the democrats passed a bill that shows it still is doubling your premiums AND now you are mandated to buy into it." without telling people that it doesnt take affect for many years down the road. The biggest killer is definitely the mandates and if this bill passes without a PO the democrats gooses are cooked this November. I understand that the WH will be doing an advertising blitz to support the bill (which is likely to remain mostly unchanged) but the words "mandated" with no backing for PO is political suicide...or better yet...lipstick on a pig:

Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/01/matthew-dowd-to-hurt-dems_n_480468.html

[FrenchieCat]

7. Matthew Dowd!

Ooh Boy!