Democrats ‘in deep trouble’ due to health care, Howard Dean warns

By Raw Story
Monday, November 23rd, 2009 -- 1:54 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

obamahowarddean Democrats in deep trouble due to health care, Howard Dean warnsKey Democratic allies in the US health care battle warned Sunday that a Senate bill required major changes if it was to earn their support and give President Barack Obama a crucial victory on his top domestic priority.

Meanwhile, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean told Huffington Post's Sam Stein that Democrats could be in "big trouble" because of delays in crafting health care legislation.

A knife-edge ballot Saturday saw Democrats scrape the 60 votes needed for debate to begin November 30, but wavering senators Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson sent a strong message that they would not back the bill as it stands.

Lieberman, an independent senator from Connecticut who usually votes in line with the Democrats and did so on Saturday, opposes the creation of a government insurance program to compete with private firms, the so-called "public option."

"We have a healthcare system that has real troubles, but we have an economic system that is in real crisis," said Lieberman, who fears the government program would be too expensive for the cash-strapped US economy.

Story continues below...

"I don?t want to fix the problems in our healthcare system in a way that creates more of an economic crisis," he told NBC's "Meet the Press".

On Monday, Huffington Post's Sam Stein reported, "One of the leading progressive champions of health care reform is pessimistic about the state of the debate in the Senate, saying he sees virtually no path to passing strong legislation and predicting potential congressional losses for Democrats as a consequence."

Stein adds,

Former DNC Chair Howard Dean told the Huffington Post on Monday that Senate Democratic leadership was "in deep trouble" on health care, even after Majority Leader Harry Reid cobbled together over the weekend the 60 votes needed to get legislation to the floor. The problem was as much about politics as policy.

"I think if you passed the Senate bill tomorrow it would be OK. But then the problem is they don't have any defense for their members in 2010," Dean said, noting that the public option would not become operational until 2014. "On the other hand, if they drop the public option [to placate moderate members], I think they lose seats."

"So this is really tough. I didn't anticipate being in this position. I thought it would pass. Maybe Harry has some magic up his sleeve. But I don't see how he gets those four votes [Sens. Joseph Lieberman (Conn.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.)] without compromising the bill," Dean concluded.

The former Vermont governor warned that if the party allowed the four moderates to further water down the bill (or defeat it altogether) it could lead to primary challenges or a drop in fundraising from the party's base.

America's Thanksgiving holidays are set to be marked by bitter debate over the nitty-gritty of the bill, from its costs in terms of tax increases and fees to the merits or not of the "public option."

Divisive issues like abortion funding could also come to the fore while some Democrats may also seek funding for pet causes in their states in return for passing what amounts to the biggest shake-up of US health care in four decades.

The leading Democrat in the Senate, Harry Reid, faced three possible defectors in addition to Lieberman, any one of whom could have deprived him the 60 votes necessary to prevent Republican parliamentary delaying tactics.

Those senators -- Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Nelson of Nebraska -- have signaled a willingness to join Republicans if their proposed changes to core provisions of the bill are defeated.

Before eventually falling into party line on Saturday, Landrieu and Lincoln repeated their strong opposition to the "public option."

Nelson indicated on Sunday that he could be open to persuasion on the issue, although he prefers states to be able to opt in to program rather than having to opt out.

"We could negotiate a public option of some sort that I might look at, but I don't want a big government, Washington-run operation," he told ABC's "This Week" program.

Nelson has also demanded tougher restrictions on federal money subsidizing abortions, mirroring language the House of Representatives added to its version of the bill when it approved it in a 220-215 squeaker November 7.

The New York Times reported that the Obama administration was continuing to court two moderate Republican senators from Maine, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, in the hope of winning them over and breaking up the united Republican opposition on health care.

Debate in the Senate is expected to last at least three weeks, but Republicans hope to kill the bill or delay the battle into next year with the expectation that the 2010 midterm elections may make it harder for moderate Democrats to support it.

Senators voted 60-39 Saturday to formally start debate on legislation aimed at extending coverage to some 31 million Americans.

As well as the public insurance option, the Senate bill includes restrictions on dropping care for pre-existing ailments. It is estimated to cost 848 billion dollars through 2019 but cut the sky-high US budget deficit by 130 billion dollars over the same period.

A successful final vote -- expected a month away at the earliest -- would force the Senate and the House of Representatives to reconcile their rival versions of the bill and vote again on whether to send it to Obama.

The United States is the world's richest nation but the only industrialized democracy that does not provide health care coverage to all of its citizens, about 36 million of whom are uninsured.

Several US presidents since Theodore Roosevelt in the early 1900s have sought to overcome the traditional US suspicion of a wider government role in health care.

Washington spends more than double what Britain, France, and Germany do per person on health care, but lags behind other countries in life expectancy and infant mortality, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

(with afp report)

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • moonbeams62
    I have the highest respect for Howard Dean. I believe that if he'd been chosen to lead the charge on healthcare reform for the President, we would have a bill by now. I believe if he had been appointed the White House chief of staff instead of Rahm Emanuel, we would have more clarity right now, and less compromising on important principles. I'm afraid that President Obama is "paying too much, in terms of his political capital, for what he is getting because he is "negotiating" with the Landrieus, Bayhs, Nelsons and other so-called moderates. I seriously think that Joe Leiberman should have been stripped of his committee assignments. There should be some tough talk and some serious "LBJ" maneuvering. We won the election. I don't believe in being bi-partisan with people who are determined to oppose everything you do, just to see you fail! I didn't vote for Jimmy Carter to be President again. I could care less about the President bowing to the Japanese emperor,I'm more concerned that he is bowing too low to be "bi-partisan." If you want to make an omelet, you gotta crack a few eggs. Mostly, I regret that the man who is responsible for the 50 state strategy that got us a Democratic majority in 2006, has been pushed aside because Rahm and Jim Carville didn't like him. Mr. President, give us Howard Dean.
  • disappointedvoter
    If Howard Dean had not been stabbed in the back by Teddy Kennedy, John "Loser" Kerry, and Dick Gephardt in 2004, we would have gotten rid of Bush after one term.
  • WJM51
    The republicans are no more as a real party. The democrats are now the party of big business and therefore they are now the real republican party. So there is NO ONE to actually stand up for HUMANS in this country anymore.

    What we need is a party that actually gives a damn about something other than PROFIT and the dollar motive. What the hell good is going into debt if it's for the benefit of a very few already way too rich to begin with? Why should we sell ourselves and our children's futures down the toilet so that GE can use it's bombs, and make us buy more of them?

    Time to set both parties ablaze by starting a new one. One that has as it's platform that it's PEOPLE that matter, NOT profits. The American citizen is NOT just a bottomless pocket waiting to be picked. And one that has at it's heart a complete rewrite of our campaign finance laws. Ones that have real teeth and send those who break them TO JAIL. I don't care which party they are from, if they use ANY private money, it's off to jail. PERIOD. No more corporations that are too big to fail. No more corporations calling ANY political shots. ANY corporate head that tries gets to go to jail. And ANYONE found LYING to the American people goes into the same cell as those bastards. If that lie brings about death and destruction with it, then it's the GD CHAIR for them. If there is NO accountability, then we are just a sham of a country.
  • lousgirl84
    Good luck with that.
  • disappointedvoter
    That will never fly. Such a party will never get corporate bucks, and American voters get suckered by expensive advertising campaigns 90% of the time.
  • po
    Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. If the Democrats can't deliver on their #1 promise, what's the point of backing them? Seriously . . . this we need just a few more Senators - now more than 60+ -- is an impossible dream and needs to stop. We spend more than anyone on virtually everything and only have the bills to show for it. THE FIERCE URGENCY OF NOW is, well, NOW!
  • Savantster
    .
    I thought the #1 promise was getting out of the illegal, immoral, and expensive Iraq fiasco.

    I thought Gitmo was up there, too..
    .
  • Lets remember that just by ending the two wars we're in would pay for health care easily.
  • jimthebeam
    The number one domestic item is health care for all...which this is not. Yes the dems ability to get things done when everything is lined up for them is pathetic.
  • disappointedvoter
    If we had a president with a spine, it would make a big difference.
  • darker
    The citizens are EASILY HYPED by Republican strategies meant to
    turn people against what's good for them and trick people into
    VOTING AGAINST THEMSELVES!
  • tjfxh
    Maybe we should elect Palin/Beck in 2012, let them blow up the world, and just start over.
  • lousgirl84
    And that is what will happen. The dems may be shit but their shit is 100 thousand times better than the republican shit.
  • disappointedvoter
    "The dems may be shit but their shit is 100 thousand times better than the republican shit."

    Oh yeah? If the Democrats weren't shit, we would have gotten rid of the republican shit many years ago.

    I'd rather have an enemy than a false friend.
  • lousgirl84
    How do propose the Dems are supposed to get rid of the republicans? That's ridiculous. So even after 8 years of disaster, you';d rather have a Republican running the country. Good luck with that. I'm sticking by my statement
  • Freedom's Toast
    Why in the hell is ANYONE calling those four people "moderates"??!!??
  • disappointedvoter
    That's corporate Newspeak. I am astonished at how many people fall for it, even ones who absolutely should know better.
  • bobdevo
    The Dems should have made the indictment, trial and conviction of war criminals Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et alii as their #1 project. That was doable. Oh,s ure,t he rightwingers would have screamed bloody murder, but they do that anyway.

    Bush behind bars would've made an awesome billboard for the 2010 elections . . .
  • disappointedvoter
    That is dead-on accurate. People are disgusted with Obama's protection of the worst criminals in American history.

    And if they scream? Well, the best defense is a good offense.
  • kiboshki
    .
    Lieberman said: "We have a healthcare system that has real troubles, but we have an economic system that is in real crisis"

    Stumbling economy vs. 40,000 deaths per year.

    This perfectly exemplifies everything that's wrong with the rightwing mindset and, frankly, this country as a whole. Money is more important than human life.
    .
blog comments powered by Disqus