Colorado Senator Michael Bennet first circulated a letter to his colleagues in the Senate to “save the public option.” He and 23 other Senators wrote to Majority Leader Harry Reid and asked that the public option be inserted into the reconciliation package for health reform. Another two dozen Senators expressed public support for a public option if it came to a vote.
But now that Bernie Sanders has backed down on offering a public option amendment, another Senator needs to step up to the plate. After leading online activists and almost half his caucus to “save the public option,” it should be a no-brainer for Michael Bennet to show he’s a true leader and offer the public option amendment for a vote.
Unfortunately, it looks like Bennet is trying to weasel out of supporting the public option: Politico spoke with his campaign manager just now:
Bennet campaign manager Craig Hughes dismissed Romanoff’s message, telling POLITICO: “Issuing a press release is not leadership.”
“Andrew has repeatedly suggested he would have joined the Republican filibuster of health care reform in December and the House would never have had the opportunity to pass this critical legislation,” Hughes said. “What we’re not going to do is kill the bill to make a point.”
Andrew Romanoff, in a chat tonight on Firedoglake, responded to Bennet’s campaign:
That makes no sense. The bill they’re referring to is headed to the President’s desk. It will be signed into law tomorrow. Restoring the public option would strengthen health care reform. Leadership means more than making a speech or writing a letter — it means taking a stand, even if the leaders of your party aren’t ready to stand with you.
The only thing I’d add is that Bennet shouldn’t question Romanoff’s leadership, when Bennet’s abandoning his own. Let’s look at how much Bennet is walking back.
When Bennet first launched his campaign for the public option, here’s what he wrote:
Including a public option in our final health care reform legislation will make that bill far more effective.
Reforming health care will curb runaway costs and save vast sums of money — savings that will be increased by billions of dollars if we include a public option. According to the CBO, the public option would not only be budget-neutral, it could actually reduce our deficit by $130 billion in just the first 10 years.
Just as important to me is what I’ve learned while listening to the stories of people across Colorado: our working families want a public option — and need a public option — because there aren’t enough real choices available for them when picking their health insurance. [...]
We need to put consumers in charge by giving them more choices and ending these shameful practices that work for insurance companies, but not for people in Colorado and across the country. The current health care reform bill is a historic first step in extending coverage and controlling costs, but we need to take the final step to include a public option. [...]
With majorities in the House and the Senate, we can use the reconciliation process to include a public option in the final bill. The reconciliation process has been used for just this kind of urgent, publicly-mandated legislation before: it was used when we passed the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), Medicare Advantage, and the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA).
Those are powerful words in support of the public option, and clearly show that Bennet was in full support of using reconciliation for the public option. If Bennet doesn’t live up to these words, it’s clear they were for cheap political points. His opponent in the Colorado Senate primary, Andrew Romanoff, has the same concern. Romanoff said he was “deeply disappointed to learn that no member of the U.S. Senate is willing to offer an amendment to restore the public option to the health care bill,” and went on to call on Senate leadership to have an “up or down vote.” His campaign staff adds:
Bennet has spent the last month and a half touting his letter demanding a public option – and getting a lot of press for that move But now, thanks to Romanoff’s demand, he will have to put up or shut up. If he refuses to offer the amendment, he shows his past efforts to be kabuki theater – grandstanding for attention while refusing to actually take the steps necessary to do what he publicly claims he wants to do.
Let’s be clear one more time : health insurance reform has already passed. President Obama will sign the legislation into law at any time. Anything that’s done in Congress during this next stage will simply fix what will already be the law. Adding a public option to these fixes won’t endanger passage of reform in the House, because that’s already over. A majority of the Senate has said they’d vote for a public option. A whopping 60% of Coloradans support a public option. There’s no reason for Bennet not to force a vote on the issue.
More than 25,000 people have already signed our petition to Michael Bennet to force a vote on the public option. We’ll deliver it to his office in Denver on Wednesday, the last day that he can submit an amendment for debate in the Senate. Click here to add your name.




51 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Does the question even need asking?
For what it’s worth, I just got off the phone with the local offices of my senators (Boxer and Feinstein). The Boxer guy couldn’t get me off the phone fast enough, but noted my support for a public option. The Feinstein guy (Max) gave me a very long statement about how much Senator Feinstein supports a public option, but when I asked him whether or not she would actually put forth a reconciliation bill to attach to the current bill, I was put on hold for fifteen minutes. Maybe she’s another Senator with potential to put it out there? We can only know by making lots of calls, I suppose. The LA office lines for both senators were free.
probably not, but it’s for posterity :)
I don’t blame Coloradans for favoring Romanoff over Bennet and over Republican challengers one bit.
And, yes, Bennet’s letter was bullshit. He won’t support a public option when he has a chance to do it and make a difference. Weasel.
“A whopping 60% of Coloradans support a public option. ”
This is only slightly less than the percentage by which Colorado Democrats preferred Mr. Romanoff in the caucuses.
Bennet has been weasely from the moment when he was appointed by the state’s Blue Doggish Democratic establishment–weasel work is why he is there. Ultra-right Republican Philip Anschutz is now one of his main contributors–while Anschutz gave personal contoributions to former Interior Secretary and scandal figure Norton, they are offset by what his companies have given Bennet. Anschutz clearly doesn’t see Bennet as too much different from Norton. So neither do I.
If Bennet wanted I could put together the public option amendment in less than 10 minutes.
Slightly OT.
Where’s Kirsten Gillibrand?
Why isn’t she going to offer a public option amendment?
She was one of the more prominent signers of the Bennet Bullshit Letter. Is she just another mealy-mouth weasel trying to get credit for supporting real reform while doing nothing to actually make it happen?
Well, make that 25,001 signers. ;)
I don’t think this will come to anything, given how miserably congressional progressives have done up until now, but I’ll keep demanding they do the right thing.
Thanks, Jon. Well, Senator Bennet, what’s your excuse this time?
Very well put.
You could probably take that bill Rep. Grayson is proposing the Congress pass later, and add a sentence or two saying that the buy-in would be eligible for the same subsidies as for-profit insurance.
I know this might be a little off topic, but I’m hoping that there could be a refutation of these facts put out by MoveOn.org.
http://pol.moveon.org/healthcare/tenthings/?id=19504-6765294-8G59kgx&t=1
I think its important to realize that this reform is very shallow, hollow and not the great victory that its being hailed as. We need real universal health care, single payer, or at least a real robust public option. The “facts” that they are pushing, I think need to be seriously qualified or else they are just covering up the reality and perpetuating more illusions, to gloat over this passage and support Obama, no matter what he does.
I’m a little confused as to why this is even an issue.
So Bennett (or Gillibrand) or whoever proposes it.
It won’t pass.
The Democratic Party doesn’t want a public option. If they did, there would be a public option.
If your goal is to just try and force them on record to show that they’re really against it, well, good luck with that.
IMO, they’ve already proven to me beyond a reasonable doubt that they’re really against it.
Of course he will back out. He is a hand picked and funded Rahm Emanual corporate democrat. He only put the public option out there because of the support it has in Colorado and because of the challenge from Romanoff in the primaries.
Bingo! Getting primaried from the left by a totally proven electable candidate prodded Bennet into meaningless CYA action.
Gillibrand’s being challenged from the right. So far, the potential R candidates look unimpressive. Having said that, I’d guess yes, she’s just another mealy-mouthed weasel.
I even heard from her today. I’m beginning to feel like Miss Popularity with all these wonderful e-mails congratulating themselves. Not all of them ask for money but some do.
Feinstein’s pretty much a lost cause. She almost never stands up first for anything good (OTOH, giving away water to corporate buddies, or channeling defense funding to hubby, she’s at the head of the class).
Called Boxer’s SF office. Asked if Babs was serious when she signed the Bennet letter? “I’ll pass your concerns on to the Senator.” WTF?
“What are you passing on, it’s a yes-or-no question!” So I had to explain the Bennet letter to her, and she decided that yes, Babs meant it. So, I said that we need someone to introduce a PO amendment to reconciliation, and since Bennet changed his mind, and Bernie Sanders changed his mind, I’d really like for BB to do it. She said she’d pass that on.
If the PARTY wanted it they could pull it out of a folder in ten seconds.
If they’re not in riot gear, they’re probably not taking you seriously. There’s no reason to give them the satisfaction of playing along with their whack-a-mole game anymore. The Party don’t want it, so you ain’t gonna get it.
What’s with the pursed-lips-stern-father demeanor O has these days. Very unattractive.
Yes. Next question.
ahh, clarity!
Yes, but don’t you think it’s a lot of fun playing football with Lucie?
So Jon, what would you put in your public option amendment (assuming its not just the Grayson bill)?
The funny thing is that the Senate Democrats are getting so ridiculous in their hypocrisy– loudly demanding a PO vote while quietly blocking one– I wouldn’t be surprised if Jim DeMint or David Vitter puts it up for a vote (knowing Obama won’t let it get to his desk) just to screw with them.
So, put together a PO amendment you like and send it over to Vitter. :o)
BTW, even Chomsky would have voted for this POS.
So what’s Bernie Sanders story? Is he merely content with some free clinics?
Well, Chomsky’s right, the legislation doesn’t get at the heart of the problem but then the reeeeform was never meant to get at the heart of the problem. The U.S. is incapable of getting at the heart of any of it’s structural problems. Anyone that’s been paying attention can see that. For everyone else there is always wishful thinking.
I agree. Because the U.S. structural probs largely stem from its out-of-control corp greed, and corps now own the govt.
Agreed. It’s only a matter of time before the house of cards falls again. Almost hoping that the financial/banking reeeeeform is so watered down that it makes another collapse more likely sooner rather than later. This time it won’t just be the working and middle classes suffering but those that caused the problems in the first place because of the insatiable greed and lust for power. The CEO’s and their lackeys in D.C..
Villagers have callouses on their knees.
Where is Bernie Sanders? he keeps saying this is all he can get within this system and then writes an article in Huffington post blaming the republicans and saying the democrats should be getting stuff done using reconciliation. So why isn’t he doing it? I can’t wait to get the rest of that story.
Not around their necks.
Been wondering the same thing. Have tried to avoid HP because of the mindless backslapping and high fiveing after the passage of what the mainstream media likes to call “universal health care.”
I still want it for the record. they work for us. I for one am sick of our senators saying they are for public option but when it comes right done to it, there is no way Al Franken and Amy Klobacher would vote for it. It would be really great for the progressive community to finally see the truth about Al Franken since the progressives outside of MN haven’t figured it out yet.
Someone posted it in the chat room on Thom Hartmann show today, otherwise I wouldn’t know about it.
What was Hartman’s take?
Yes, EVERYONE is just another mealy-mouthed weasel. They’re all out to betray you. You have no friends.
You know, when I run into one or two assholes a day, I call them assholes and go on about my business. But when I start running into 50 assholes a day, I have to start looking at myself.
He’s just another mealy-mouthed weasel too. They’re ALL mealy-mouthed weasels.
Earlier today I commented on a thread that listed those dems that voted ‘no’ on hcr and weren’t punished for it. I have looked around the FDL site and cannot find it?? Is there an archive? And why does it go away so fast?
Anyway, I think it bares repeating that Obama knew before he went to Cleveland that Kucinich’s vote was not crucial in passing the bill for no matter what, they would have to appease the stupak bloc and were, even at that time, busy in the background figuring out what kind of CYA they needed to get him onboard. So why the big trip on Kucinich?
Because he was the last holdout on the left! It was more important to crush the left than uphold choice. It would be instructive to have Jane interview Kucinich and see he still holds himself to be a leader on the left after his sellout?cave?blackmail? on this bill.
Take the meds!
It’s OK, I’m only mocking you.
Speaks volumes about you, when in fact the topic is about politicians promising/saying one thing, then doing the other, all the while knowing they’re being disingenuous, which is the worst form of mockery possible.
And a lot of us are willing to help with their suffering, just to even things out a bit in the karma department. Not hurt them, but make them live on the kind of income that most of us have, and which they seem to see as pocket change.
Speaks volumes about me? That’s rich. The intellectual level of the commentary here is not what it used to be. You guys have become a bunch of mouth breathers. I used to spend a lot of time here. It used to be a much better place. It’s very sad.
The Reconciliation Bill that passed has a Public Option as posted on Thomas.loc.gov
[rests case]
Funny, we never noticed you were around.
also, if Bennet (or anyone) adds an amendment to reconciliation , it would have to go back to the house again.
Before your time. FDL hadn’t started to attract the racists and the haters yet.
.
It is waste of time as long as Democratic party takes corporate contributions. Our Reps and Senators simply takes turns to be the blame people based on the election cycle.
Whenever a policy which matters i.e. has financial impact to middle class it is the corporate contributions which always trumps. Middle class with limited budgets is always over-matched by corporations and is a race middle class is bound to lose.
Only solution is create some competition in the political space by promoting a third party which does not take corporate contributions like GREEN party in the party charter. Till that time we will be thinking senator M or Senator L is to be blamed when the actual fact in my opinion is we are to be blamed for not creating a competative political land-space by making more logical choices.