"No Reconciliation?" Where's The Fun?

No More Excuses: John Tester Brings 51st Senate Vote for Public Option

Posted by Chris Bowers, Open Left at 4:40 AM on October 10, 2009.

The count's there if they get an up-or-down vote.

Post Tools
EMAIL
PRINT
6 COMMENTS

Share and save this post:

AlterNet Social Networks:

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Chris Bowers RSS Feed

Main AlterNet RSS Feed

I have just received word that Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) would vote in favor of Senator Schumer's "level playing field" public option.

This pushes the Senate whip count to 51, even without Joe Biden casting a tie-breaking vote.

Since there are now finally 60 active, voting Democrats, it is possible to break any Republican filibuster. Hell, it actually only requires 51 votes to break a filibuster, if Senators were more honest about process. Further, if they didn't even want to both with filibusters, they could always just go with reconciliation, since Tester now gives them enough votes even if Robert Byrd (who is opposed to using reconciliation for health care) defects.

Senate Democrats have the votes. No more process excuses. Pass the public option.

Chris Bowers was a full-time editor at MyDD from May 2004 until June 2007. Some of his projects have included the creation of the Liberal Blog Advertising Network, the first scientifically random poll of progressive netroots activists, the Use It Or Lose It campaign, the nation's most accurate forecast of Democratic house pickups in 2006, and the 2006 Googlebomb the Elections campaign.

Return to Chris Bowers » Post Tools: EMAIL PRINT 6 COMMENTS PERMALINK

Also by Chris Bowers
More Republicans Think Obama Stole an Election than Democrats Believe Bush Did There were of course no remotely serious allegations that anything was amiss in 2008. November 20, 2009.	Ned Lamont to Run for Governor of Connecticut There are not many progressive Democratic Governors. Lamont's entry into this campaign could change that. November 4, 2009.	Are There Enough Votes For a Public Option? Here's the Math There are at least 188 votes for the public option, only 29 away from passage. October 8, 2009.	3 Important Lessons Dems Should Learn From Grayson Even as Grayson intensified his rhetoric, Republicans withdrew their resolution to condemn him on the House floor. October 1, 2009.

Comments	Turn comments off sitewide	Give us feedback »
Comments closed. The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.		View:
I was wondering when he'd show up ! [Report this comment] Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Oct 10, 2009 7:29 AM Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Where the hell was he when Baucus had single payer advocates arrested earlier this year? [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Tester's support means nothing, really. [Report this comment] Posted by: weightman on Oct 10, 2009 8:57 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Bad legislation is worse than no legislation Getting Tester's support is like getting Bob Dole's support. If they support Obama's concept of "reform", something must be seriously screwed up somewhere. Tester's been spending his time in Montana talking with healthcare providers and industry spokespeople. I'm sure he found out exactly how they want him to vote. We can prevent another 45,000 Americans from dying next year. But we can't do that by capitulating to industry authored legislation which does nothing to alleviate our healthcare crisis. Capitulation means death to tens of thousands of Americans. One every 12 minutes. If it's not Single Payer, it's not Reform. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] » RE: my questions Posted by: David H State opt-out clause [Report this comment] Posted by: hedgewytch on Oct 10, 2009 10:41 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Last I heard the folks in Congress were all happy about this "compromise" in the bill which would allow individual states to decide whether they would accept a public option or not. Great, now the folks in Jindal-land, LA would still be screwed and in my state of Alaska it would be real fight to get our current stand-in Gov Parnell to accept it as he is of Palin's ilk. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Congressional Budget Office report: Public option will save taxpayer money [Report this comment] Posted by: Defenestrator on Oct 10, 2009 5:47 PM Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] "The public plan saves money because it pushes down premium prices. Lower premium prices across the country would mean the government would have to pay less in subsidies to low-income people who buy insurance through the exchange, according to CBO." They are running low on excuses. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] "No Reconciliation?" Where's The Fun? [Report this comment] Posted by: AlteredStates on Oct 12, 2009 11:38 AM Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] If the Senate really wanted to pass the "Public Option", they would do it, but, they wouldn't have anything to talk about; it would be over. But, the "Public Option" would piss off the health insurance lobby...and we can't have that. After all, the Senate has already been handsomely rewarded to prevent such a thing as the "Public Option" from becoming law. But, wait; even if the "Public Option" passes the senate, the states would still have the option to opt-out of the "Public Option" Hmmm... There seems to be too many "options" here. I'm a little confused. Will someone please explain? Well, yes, I can "explain". You see, with the "Public Option" ordinary citizens would have the option to choose the "Public Option", but, only after the states allow the "Public Option" to be available as an option for people who would choose from other options. If they had the "Public Option" to choose from, all other options would be pointless, but, only after all the other options have been exhausted and the only option would be the "Public Option", if they had that option. Let me put it another way. The Senate doesn't need the "Public Option". They simplified everything by avoiding the "Public Option" and leaving no option at all for the Senate but the "Public Option", which means, the is no other option. And, as for the people, well they don't need to be burdened with all those options. Options, no options, why all the fuss? Keep it simple. Just give them no options at all. "We the people" have other things to worry about, like, how are we going to pay for all those hospital bills that the "Public Option" was supposed to pay for. Life is complicated enough. We don't need anymore options, just die and forget about it. P.S. Make sure you have a good life insurance policy. That is your only option. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Newsletter

Search:

» RE: my questions Posted by: David H