Sen. Joseph Lieberman, speaking in that trademark sonorous baritone, utters a simple statement that translates into real trouble for Democratic leaders: “I’m going to be stubborn on this.”
Stubborn, he means, in opposing any health-care overhaul that includes a “public option,” or government-run health-insurance plan, as the current bill does. His opposition is strong enough that Mr. Lieberman says he won’t vote to let a bill come to a final vote if a public option is included.
Probe for a catch or caveat in that opposition, and none is visible. Can he support a public option if states could opt out of the plan, as the current bill provides? “The answer is no,” he says in an interview from his Senate office. “I feel very strongly about this.” How about a trigger, a mechanism for including a public option along with a provision saying it won’t be used unless private insurance plans aren’t spreading coverage far and fast enough? No again.
Joe Lieberman is a tower of strength and perhaps one of the last tangents toward sanity in the US Senate.
God Bless Him.
Intercessor
Lieberman has been a source of frustration for both sides of the aisle, but you can’t deny that this guy votes his conscience. In this case, he may be the most important man in Congress, considering how the attempted nationalization of our health care system would decimate our medicine and our economy. He may save us yet.
So, do you think the Dems right about now are a bit introspective about their decision to turn their backs on Joe’s run for the Senate? Yeah! I would say that, aside from his feelings regarding a public option, there just might be some payback involved here.
I would add that I doubt that they’ll be able to pull a buy-off they used with respect to the good Senator from Louisiana. Yes, Sen. Lieberman appears to be in a great place to tighten down the thumbscrews on a party which heartlessly attempted to sink his political career. That decision might well have come back to bite them.
It will be interesting to see how Reid comes up with 60 votes (assuming he doesn’t do the budget process end run and need only 51). Will he find a RINO or two to come along? Will he have to find a way to accommodate Lieberman? Can he get Lieberman while retaining the public option by cutting a special deal for Connecticut keeps Liebermans vote but relieves his state of the need to do the public option?
We will be watching a technicolor exercise in XXX rated political prostitution played out before our eyes over the next few weeks. Our Congress is the biggest, most outrageous whorehouse in the world. If any public citizen attempted what our elected representatives of both parties do on a daily basis that citizen would be headed for a long period of incarceration for a bribery related offense.
The only answer rests with “We The People.” “We The People” must flush enough incumbents of both parties from both houses of Congress so consistently over a sufficient number of elections so it becomes clear the current level of degradation of our nation will not stand. We must do it because if we don’t we will throw our Republic into the dumpster of history.
I’m told that the entire Congress is up for reelection next year, and if that’s the case, then it’s time for a thorough housecleaning in both houses. The incumbents……save for a few very good men and women……Sen. Joe Lieberman among them……should be sent packing.
Only one third of the Senate will change. Their terms are staggered so that one third is elected every two years.
The American people should rise up and vote against anyone of either party who voted for the bailouts, the stimulus or any of the health care proposals offered thus far. That would clean out the House and 1/3rd of the Senate. That’s a pretty good start!
I find stubborness and unwillingness to compromise unfortunate from *either* side of the debate. [i]Some[/i] kind of government-sponsored plan should not be off the table, if only to function as a safety net for those who fall through the cracks of employer-sponsored plans.
Unwillingness to compromise is a good thing when the alternative is to cave in to a stupid action. Lieberman is only saying he will not be listed as one of the drivers if the Senate wishes to drive the bus off the cliff. The man deserves credit for using his brain. Sure, he is probably enjoying this chance to “smack the Dems up-side-the-head”, but he is not doing the wrong thing in his vote in order to do it. That makes it even more delicious.
Will he persuade others to see the light? Probably not. Machine politics is tough to buck, but without Joe and a couple of others the Dems may not be able to get the bus over the cliff, anyway.
#6, to clarify, only 1/3 of the Senate can change. How I wish your statement that 1/3 will change was correct. Incumbents are reelected at a 95% rate. 🙁
#8 We have a safety net. It’s called Medicaid! I wish ALL employer sponsored health plans were abolished, so you owned your own plan wherever you worked. THAT, I think, is what you are calling for, but it’s not on the table either.
If I’m not mistaken, all members of the House of Representatives (Congressmen & Congresswomen) serve two year terms which are up for election on “The first Tuesday after the first Monday of November in the even numbered years of the calendar.”
This coming year, 2010, is obviously one of those years. All of Congress (not to be confused with the Senate) is up for grabs.
A Senate term is for six years and the cycle for that is 1/3 of the membership every two years. Hence, 1/3 of the Senate is also up for election this next year.