The same day the email from Jane and I went out to Vermonters, letting Bernie know that we (or many of us, at any rate) still recognize how dangerous this health care bill is (regardless of the juicy extras that were slipped into the bill to win him over), a glowing, downright gushing post went up on the Prog Blog praising Bernie for being such a champion, despite caving to the pressure from Reid and Obama. The post, entitled Bernie Sanders – Tonic for the Politically Depressed (do you feel healed yet, JD?) was penned by former Representative Chris Pearson, and in response to a bit of progressive pushback in the comments, Pearson responded:
Would doing the “right thing” have been standing with the Republicans to support the filibuster? That was really his only choice and as much as this bill is a disappointment I don’t think that would have advanced the cause or satisfied many of the left in this country.
Once that choice is made then Bernie could only make the bill as strong as possible… it doesn’t make much sense to me to include Bernie with the group of leaders that sold us out to the industry (again).
What’s Bernie supposed to do? Vote against it even though it’s a done deal? Especially if he can squeeze some good out of it?
That’s funny, because it’s apparently how Pearson himself felt back during the hearings on the Catamount Health Plan – Vermont’s own attempt at health care reform back in 2006. Pearson “stood with Republicans” and voted against the bill. In fact, he seemed fairly uninterested in the nuances he now incredulously demands folks consider in regards to Bernie:
…health care is simply a yes or no question. Are we going to cover everyone?
Now in fairness, there’s a big difference between the Catamount Health Bill and the US Senate health bill. The difference? Despite being a “band aid” for a broken system, Catamount was clearly going to help a lot of people (and it has). Not only did Catamount meet the more good that harm test, it didn’t really do any harm at all, on its own merits – which is precisely why, unlike Pearson, I supported it myself at the time. The Senate Bill, on the other hand, is a massive insurance company giveaway with no meaningful safeguards on corporate abuse, that could easily do more harm than good. Apparently the former merited a “no” vote, but Bernie’s “yes” vote on the latter is to be lauded.
Gawd.
Although this may be inconsistent on its face, it is consistent in another way. Despite the fact that he caucuses with the Dems, attends Dem fundraisers and the Dem party conventions, Progs still consider Bernie Sanders one of their own, and as one of their own, he is subject to the one absolute rule among the old-line Progressive intelligensia that transcends all others – including stances on policy; no fellow Progressive must ever be criticized. Even under the most extreme circumstances. Until and unless they learn to follow the example of newer Progs (like Jessica in the comments below…. bravo JF), get over that particular hang up and embrace honest, open, even rollicking self-examination and criticism, the Progs will always resemble something more akin to an exclusive political club than a healthy, functional political party in a democratic society.
Be a true progressive. Join your voice with those in the national Nurses Union. Click here to sign the petition – stop the Senate bill.
Political Preparation H, that post of Pearson’s.
Not really.
“in response to a bit of progressive (li’l ‘p’) pushback in the comments, Pearson responded…”
That’s capital ‘P’ pushback in the comments he is responding to. I post as “Jessica” on that blog and I am on the State Prog Party’s Coordinating Committee (the equivalent to the State Dems’ Executive Committee).
I posted Bernie’s speech (from a week) ago before he voted for the bill. My post was simply to share what I found to be a very impressive speech that made me feel a tiny bit better since the past several months have been utterly depressing on the health care front.
More important than my post or this one, we should be asking why Obama and others took Medicare for All off the table?
Happy Holidays Everyone.
I called Bernie and Leahy (both!) to ask them to vote no on cloture. Although in some regards I am thinking twice about that recommendation. And I will get into that in a moment.
But before I do, I want to ask readers to go to the Prog blog http://www.progressiveparty.org/blog/ and read Chris Pearsons post. It was praising Bernie, not for or against his vote on this bill, but reminding us that Bernie has been one of the most important voices and leaders on the push for single payer of anyone in Washington.
The reason I am torn about my recommendation to vote no on cloture is this, and it is a nuanced argument…so I am sure I will be challenged on it. I do not think that the minority should be able to uphold progress on legislation. We have a system of majority rule whether we like it or not. It is a strange quirk that we have this 60% rule.
Now…it is a different vote when it comes to the actual bill. On that, I truly hope that he and Sen. Leahy both vote no. The moderates can win without their votes.
Let me add that in Montpelier there is a motion to “call the question” which is a similar motion to cloture. It is a motion that if passed, ends the debate and calls for the vote to be taken on the question at hand. The request is made a few times each year when debates go on and on and on and some would argue start looking like a filibuster. In my 13 years, I have never seen that motion pass (that I can remember). However, what occurs next is the Institutional dignity that is lacking in DC. Folks realize that while the motion failed, it does seem as though most everything has been said that needs to and it is time to move on whether you are on the prevailing side or the losing side. Typically no one else rises to speak and the vote on the underlying motion is taken.
Sadly, that is not the case in DC. The cloture rule exists. Unfortunately it does not exist in its true form as the filibuster would occur far les frequently. But it exists none-the-less.
So in retrospect, my call to our senators should have been to vote for cloture and then vote against the bill. To stop majority rule (whether we like it or not) should not be a hallmark of our Democracy.
It is also important to remember (for those that will bring up minority rights), that we have a constitution that has clauses relating to rights. And for me, that is an entirely different matter and the majority should not be able to trample on minority rights (marriage equality, gender, race, etc.).
Anyway, I appreciate Chris Pearsons remarks in that we have one of the strongest and most articulate leaders in DC. That is what his post was about, it was not to say whether he liked the bill or not.
I was just trying to explain that there are two votes. One is proceedural and the other is actually the bill.
As I thought more about my recommendation to Bernie and Leahy, I have come to the conclusion that they should not use proceedure to kill the bill. But I do think they should vote against its passage.
I believe in majority rule. Not super majority rule.
I believe our consitution is written to protect minority rights (i.e. women, minorities, GLB etc.), and that we should stand up and fight for those rights. But that is different than how our process was set up to be run.
I do not know when or how the original cloture rules came about. I do believe everyone should get a chance to have their say with respect to why something is good or bad. But when those proceedures are exploited beyond the reason they were created then it is bad democracy.
I am actually pleased that the U.S. citizenry has seen how disgusting DC politics is. I hope that this spurs on a real discussion about the underlying causes of these problems; campaign finance and election reform in general. But I am not going to hold out hope.
I think this discussion has shown how some Democrats are totally beholden to the insurance industry (and there are many others from all parties who are beholden to some industry or another depending on the economics of their state).
I also think this discussion has shown how the Republicans are simply a party of obsructionists with absolutely no creative ideas of their own.
I think this discussion also should prepare all of us for the problems we will face with energy legislation, and just about anything else that we hoped for with respect to the new Presidents agenda.
Do I think that Bernie is perfect. No. Do I think he is one of the best legislators (House and now Senate) that is or has been in office, Yes.
I believe that Chris was simply trying to give us something to be a little proud of and something to help us all feel a little better in these depressing times. His focus appears to be to have been on the single payer speach and how at least someone is willing to stand up (albiet briefly) to speak to what this country really needs.
I felt that directly posting the link was more clear than in your posting. It was not meant as a slam on you for not doing that. I am sorry about that. I did think that your portayal of what Chris was saying was not quite fair and that folks should check it out for themselves.
I’m pretty sure I’m a true progressive, even though I don’t want to stop the Senate bill from moving forward to reconciliation. What special handshake do I need to implement in order to not get thrown out of the club?
and radical right wing and the corporate allies of the DC Dems (including Sanders) won big time.
There will not be reductions in premiums.
There will not be reductions in out of pocket expenses.
There will not be reductions in the costs associated with health care.
There will be a huge tax increase on the lower and middle economic classes as we are forced to fund the lavish life styles of the already glutted insurance industry.
There will be a quantum leap in corporate power as our money simply funds tomorrow’s further destruction of any honest health care/insurance reform.
There will be an absolute loss of privacy and expanded marketing making use of the information we are mandated to give to the already glutted insurance companies we are mandated to sign up with.
There will be less social control and protections as the glutted insurance industry swarms to the least regulated state … from which to sell their cross border policies (how many of you can afford to drive to Alabama for a court case when you have to sue one of these glutted insurance companies for non-payment?).
Sure a few bones were sent out there, but those meat-bare bones were only meant to get support for the corporate agenda. Watch as the next step is to finish destroying Medicaid and Medicare … the DC Dems (including Sanders) have given the radical right wing and the glutted insurance industry the vehicle to do just that.
It really is about winners and losers. Sanders and Leahy helped sell us down the river, and Sanders and Leahy helped give the glutted corporate industry a huge leap in political power.