|
Are There Enough Votes For a Public Option? Here's the Math
By Chris Bowers, Open Left
Posted on October 8, 2009, Printed on November 27, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://www.openleft.com/143155/
At the request of Speaker Pelosi, the Congressional Progressive Caucus is currently undertaking a whip count to see if there are enough votes to pass a health care reform bill in that chamber with a "robust" public option (that is, a public option tied to Medicare rates, +5%).
As I reported on Friday, they began this whip count a couple weeks ago, interrupting their whip count of House Progressives who would vote against a health care reform without a robust public option to do so.
Yesterday, anonymous Blue Dog aides told Politico that Progressives had found only 145 votes for the robust public option during this whip count. This morning, Greg Sargent reports that Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Raul Grijalva's office is claiming a much higher number, around 180:
"I am confident that we have the support of over 70% of the Democratic Caucus," Grivalva said in a statement emailed my way. That means according to him, around 180 of the 256 Dems in the House are prepared to back the robust public option right now.
Sargent is correct, not the anonymous Blue Dog aides. I know this, because I have the actual numbers. As of Friday, here is where the whip count stood:
Progressive Caucus Whip Count on Robust Public Option
Democrats only, 217 needed for passage
Yes: 183
No: 22
Undecided: 20
Not Whipped: 31
All 22 of the no votes are Blue Dogs. Every single one.
Also, the House leadership is a significant portion of the Democrats who were not whipped. This means Speaker Pelosi and Representatives Hoyer, Clyburn Van Hollen, (John) Larson and Becerra. None of these members are Blue Dogs, and only Hoyer would conceivably be opposed to the robust public option.
That means there are at least 188 votes for the public option, only 29 away from passage. The chances of reaching 217 (there are currently only 433 members of the House, due to two vacancies) with the remaining members are pretty solid, too. Consider:
- Even if all 117 members of the Progressive Caucus and Tri-Caucus (Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus, Asian Pacific American Caucus) are in favor of the robust public option, that means non-Progressive and non-Tri-Caucus Dems are currently breaking 71-22 in favor of the robust public option (188 minus 117). If the remaining 45 undecided and unwhipped members (31 plus 20 minus the 6 leaders) break in favor of the robust public option at the same rate (76%) as the other non-Progressive and non-Tri-Caucus Dems, that means there are another 34 votes in favor, which would be enough for passage.
- The Progressive Caucus had moved to within 29 votes of passage (and really 28, given that Hoyer would likely fall in line on the floor), without any assistance or pressure from the leadership. As such, they are already close to the point where leadership assistance and pressure can bring health care reform with a robust public option over the finish line.
This whip count will largely determine what sort of public option is in the health care bill sent to the floor of the House. If the leadership is convinced it can reach 217 because of this whip count, they will send a bill with a public option tied to Medicare rates to the floor of the House. If they do not, then at the request of the Blue Dogs a public option with negotiated rates will be sent to floor. From that point, it is highly unlikely the public option would be strengthened.
Every step of the process is important in this campaign. If the House passes a weaker public option with negotiated rates, then it is less likely that any public option will end up in the final bill. If the Senate does not include a public option in the merged Finance and HELP committee bill that is sent to the floor of the Senate, then it is less likely that a public option of any sort will be included in the final bill. As such, not only is it heartening to see this whip count showing real strength, but it is heartening to see Wyden and Rockefeller demurring on voting for the Baucus bill in the Senate Finance committee. If Wyden and Rockefeller can use their leverage to send a public option to the floor, and if the Progressive Caucus can get a robust public option through the House, then we will be on the brink of victory. If neither happens, then we will be close to defeat.
There is still a long way to go in this campaign, and a lot of variables are still to be determined.
Update: I have just learned that the leadership who was not whipped is larger than just the top five plus DCCC chair Van Hollen. Exactly how many leaders were not whipped is unclear, but it might be as many as the 16 House Democrats listed here plus Van Hollen. If so, that would mean another 8-10 votes.
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.
© 2009 Open Left All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://www.openleft.com/143155/
|