THE HILL
 

Dems let Rockefeller ponder health vote

By Alexander Bolton - 10/07/09 05:05 AM ET

Democrats are tiptoeing around Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) these days.

Ever since President Barack Obama twice pressed him to support Sen. Max Baucus’s (D-Mont.)  healthcare bill, Rockefeller’s fellow Senate Democrats have avoided the subject.

They talk to him, but not about the subject that must be foremost in their minds and his — namely, whether he will vote for or against a bill he has publicly excoriated.

Baucus himself keeps saying Rockefeller will vote for the bill, but hasn’t talked with him. Obama has urged him to, both in person and on the phone, and now the West Virginian’s colleagues seem to be giving him space to let the president’s words sink in.

Rockefeller said Tuesday that “nobody” has approached him. “Has Baucus talked directly to me? No.”

The approach Democrats are taking with their most unpredictable member of the Senate Finance Committee is vastly different from the one Republicans have pursued with their renegade member on the panel.

Republican senators are reaching out to Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) to get a sense of how she intends to vote. But rather than confront her in large groups and risk rattling the centrist lawmaker, they are seeking private, one-on-one meetings to make their case against the bill.

“We had discussions about the issues, frankly,” Snowe said in an interview. “They recognize it’s been an ongoing effort in the [Finance] Committee. No one has argued against me. I think I know their preferences.

“It hasn’t been an intensive lobbying effort,” she added. “I understand where they’re coming from and they understand where I’m coming from.”

Both senators have a chance to greatly influence the healthcare debate with their votes. If Snowe votes for Baucus’s bill, Democrats can make an argument that it has bipartisan support.

But if Rockefeller opposes legislation that the White House worked to advance, it could be a sign that Obama cannot unite his party behind his top domestic priority.

Neither senator has indicated how he or she will vote, keeping colleagues in suspense. The panel could vote on the bill by the end of the week, or early next.

“Sen. Snowe is a close friend who keeps in constant contact with me about — about her activities,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) said last week. “And she’s been an important player in the healthcare debate and knows a lot about it.”

Snowe said she would give McConnell advance warning before striking a deal with Democrats.

But she hasn’t gone so far as to offer the entire GOP conference periodic updates on her talks, something that Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) did during their negotiations with Democrats.

A GOP senator who spoke to Snowe last week said: “Most of the meetings have been one-to-one. We don’t want to have a nine-to-one meeting with her because she might stop showing up.”

Democrats have taken an entirely different tack with Rockefeller, who threatened to vote against the Senate Finance Committee bill unless it received substantial revision.

Baucus, however, has assured colleagues that he expects Rockefeller to support the bill in committee, an assumption that may be a source of friction between the two lawmakers who sit side-by-side on the Finance dais.

Democrats have left the arm-twisting to Obama.

Obama invited Rockefeller to the White House in September after the legislation was introduced, and then called Rockefeller on the phone last week to discuss his potential support for the measure.

But Democrats have practiced small random acts of kindness toward Rockefeller, though it’s not entirely clear if they have any ulterior motives. For example, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), a member of Finance, gave Rockefeller his chocolate dessert at a lunch meeting last week.

“Rockefeller is so high on the food chain that there aren’t many people here that can talk to him about his vote. The president’s about the only one who can,” said a Democratic senator who requested anonymity because he felt uncomfortable discussing a fellow senator’s vote.

Healthcare legislation would be approved by the Finance Committee even if Snowe and Rockefeller vote no. All the other Democrats on the panel are expected to support the bill while all the Republicans, with the exception of Snowe, are certain to oppose it.

Democratic aides say Snowe’s and Rockefeller’s votes could nevertheless have a significant impact on the debate going forward.

One aide said that a no vote from Snowe would make it more difficult for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to include provisions she favors in the bill he puts on the floor. One such provision would set up a government insurance program that would only go into effect if private insurance companies failed to meet certain benchmarks for providing affordable, quality care.

“The public option with a trigger would be a compelling thing to put in the merged bill if the

Finance bill has the endorsement of Snowe,” said the aide. “When progressives howl, you can point to Snowe’s support.”

Another aide said that Rockefeller’s support is important to create a sense of Democratic unity heading into the floor debate. This aide said that Rockefeller has sway among certain “constituencies,” such as fellow liberals in the Senate.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said a no vote from Rockefeller would send a strong signal that Democratic leaders cannot take liberal support for granted.

Baucus has gained leverage with Reid by arguing that certain policy proposals favored by liberals, such as the public option, would not have enough votes to pass the Senate. Rockefeller’s opposition could balance that argument by allowing liberal advocates to claim that a healthcare package closely resembling the Baucus bill could face significant opposition from Democratic liberals.

“It would send a signal to pay attention to the left,” said Whitehouse.

Jeffrey Young contributed to the article.

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/61951-dems-letting-rockefeller-ponder-vote

Comments (8)

Why doesn't President Obama press Senater Baucus to support Senator Rockefellers bill? Senator Baucus' bill only helps the insurance companies and all the senators who receive "contributions" from various insurance companies. Why would an industry spend millions of dollars to lobby an issue that they would not directly benefit from? I support the President, I just don't understand why the Senate seems to be terrified of the insurance companies.BY a nobody on 10/07/2009 at 11:16
'A nobody' - they're not terrified, they're paid off. Look at the amount of contributions by health insurance companies to the Democratic members of the finance committee who voted against the public option. All six of them have been paid well to go against what the clear, consistent majority of Americans want.BY Mtnman on 10/07/2009 at 12:31
We need universal health care … Senator Rockefeller stand your ground the Baucas bill is so wrong stop helping insurance companies help the United States Of America AmericansBY Barbara Hawkes on 10/07/2009 at 12:38
I am so sick of the amount of influence that big "no conscience" business has on shaping my health care. If something isn't done to stop it, we have no chance of living, at least, a semblance of a healthy life. Politicians are a bunch of scavenging garbage animals…BY lifecoaches on 10/07/2009 at 15:14
Why do we need this bill? To offer health care to un-insured people, and to do this we need to destroy a program that has served over 125 million people well. Why not just take care of thjose who need the program and stop there, Eliminate totally the illegal immigrants, make dam sure that they must comply with our laws, take out the legalesse that lets lawyers avoid the intent of the people. Try writing the bill in simple English, remember you were elected to protect this country against enemies foreign and domesticBY Phil Petter on 10/07/2009 at 15:19
Sen Rockefeller - no public option, no vote. OK, just in case, here's plan B for the public option: Presumably, once the jobs stimulus kicks in (??) there will be lots of new federal employees. These new federal employees will be given an opportunity to buy Federal employee health insurance. Just pass a law that if people even apply for a federal job, they can immediately buy Federal health insurance while waiting for a Federal Job. But, you have to be out of work to buy in.BY No One on 10/07/2009 at 15:43
"All six of them have been paid well to go against what the clear, consistent majority of Americans want."Wow, what poll are you looking at? The majority do NOT want gov't run healthcare of any kind. (57% against to 41% for, I believe). Look at Gallup or Rasmussen, they don't have a reason to skew the results like the Huff Post, NY Times, Wash Post, etc… do.BY JPGR on 10/07/2009 at 16:44
I am trying really hard to remember who won the election last year? Which party gained seats in the House and the Senate? I just seems so long ago. Perhaps Rahm Emmanuel has forgotten it was the Democrats who won it. Has Reid forgotten it too? And these people who kissing the feet of Olympia Snowe and not of Rockefeller's? Also,I bet Snowe's consittuents are thrilled about the 18percent premium that Anthem just announced for the vast majority of them.BY jayne daou on 10/07/2009 at 16:59

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.