Does nobody remember that when it comes to the ACA...

[BumRushDaShow]

22. It wasn't "through the Democrats". It was "couldn't get it through Lieberman"

In essence, Baucus blocked Single Payer -

Baucus Watch, Part IX
The senator ejects single-payer advocates—again
By Trudy Lieberman, CJR
May 13, 2009


Single-payer advocates tried again yesterday to be heard at another Senate Finance Committee hearing on health reform options. Again, chairman Max Baucus indicated he didn’t want them there. The topic of this hearing was how to pay for reform, and the witness list included various organizations with strong views (or expertise) on the subject, such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Urban Institute’s Tax Policy Center, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the AFL-CIO, and the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Michael Jacobson, the long-time executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, whose specialty is food and nutrition, was also there. Maybe Jacobson was invited for diversity.

Single-payer proponents had asked that Dr. Marica Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine and author of a popular book, The Truth About the Drug Companies, or Dr. Steffie Woolhandler of the Physicians for a National Health Program be allowed to speak. Advocates had also tried to get New York Sen. Charles Schumer to help them, but it appears things didn’t work out politically.

The Washington Times reported that several protestors stood up and shouted such slogans as “no more blue crosses and double crosses.” Like last week, protesting the exclusion of single-payer supporters from the table was apparently too indecorous a thing for the Senate, so Baucus had five demonstrators removed from the hearing room. They were arrested in the hallway. As the meeting came to order, twenty-five nurses dressed in red hospital scrubs stood in silence, with their backs turned to the chairman, and left the room. The Times noted that the audience applauded.

Baucus had this to say:

Believe me, we hear you. I will meet with anyone who wants to meet. We’ve got to work with what we’ve got. We cannot go to a single payer system, but that’s not going to work in this country.

More: https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/baucus_watch_part_ix.php

and Lieberman blocked the Public Option -

Politics
Why Lieberman Hates the Public Option

Theories explaining the senator's threat to filibuster the health care bill if it includes a public option
Mara Gay
October 28, 2009

This article is from the archive of our partner .

The public option was on a roll. Then, on Tuesday, Sen. Joe Lieberman threatened to filibuster the health care bill if it includes a public option, which he says would create "trouble for taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt." Liberals are once again at war with Lieberman, who has been on the outs with Democrats since ditching the party and campaigning for John McCain. Left-wing pundits are laying on the derision, while everyone else asks: what is Lieberman after?

Power Grab The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder says Lieberman's maneuvering is a clear play for more influence over the final bill. "The final bill, post-conference, is going to look a bit different from the reconciled Senate bill," he explains. "Lieberman is giving himself the power to influence the final bill. I doubt that the Senate leadership is going to press him too hard right now, preferring to see if he can be accommodated in the final debate." At Gawker, Amrita Rajan agrees. "Joe Lieberman Would Like Some Attention Please," her headline says.

(snip)

Resents Democrats At The New Republic, Jonathan Chait says Lieberman is "furious with the party, resentful of President Obama (who beat his friend in 2008) and would relish a Democratic catastrophe...Lieberman won't join a futile filibuster, but if he has the chance to stick in the knife and kill health care reform, I think he'd probably jump at the chance." And he suggests Lieberman's true constituents may be quite wary of the public option. "Another reason for his position, of course, is that Connecticut is home to some huge insurance companies, who don't want any new competition."

In the Pocket of Insurance Companies At The Daily Beast, Paul Begala goes for blood. "Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman is identified as (I-CT). But the 'I' does not stand for 'Independent.' It stands for 'Insurance Industry.'" Begala says Lieberman opposed reform in 1993 and 1994 for the same reasons he opposes it now: he receives significant support from the insurance companies. "Lieberman sided with insurance companies against sick people, and with insurance companies against citizens who want to sue to protect their rights in court. As The New York Times reported, 'Many of Mr. Lieberman's friends said he had no alternative but to take this position because it was the one favored by the insurance industry. The industry is important to Connecticut's economy and has generously donated to Mr. Lieberman's campaigns over the years.'"

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/10/why-lieberman-hates-the-public-option/347740/

And to get the 60 votes to pass "something", the compromises had to happen.