Today the Seattle Times editorial page, not always a hotbed of liberal sentiment, comes out in favor of the public option for health care reform. Seattle Congressman Jim McDermott, no surprise, is already on record supporting a reform plan with a strong public option. So is Washington Senator Patty Murray.
But Washington Senator Maria Cantwell? Not so much. Yesterday she said of the public option on KUOW’s Weekday: “I don’t think that’s something we can get through the United States Senate.” She prefers the idea of promoting regional health care cooperatives. Which puts her on the wrong side of public opinion, not to mention the wrong side of the president, who said today:
The public plan, I think, is an important tool to discipline insurance companies.
More on this in the next issue of The Stranger, but for now here’s what Cantwell’s office tells me:
Everything is on the table including public option and co-ops.
Which, again, is not what Cantwell said yesterday on KUOW. Here’s another quote about the public option from her appearance: “I don’t think we can get the votes for that… While you can describe something that gives leverage in the marketplace, you have to get the votes.”
A Senator arguing that she can’t vote for something because it might not get enough votes is pure double-speak. The public option would have plenty of votes if Democrats voted for it.
Time for some civil disobedience.
SHE has a public option plan. SHE has a gold plated plan. WE’RE paying for it, even those of us with no health insurance.
Hey Maria, why are WE paying for YOUR public option plan when YOU don’t support OUR public option plan?
Single payer national health care.
Demand it.
And @2 is right.
I’ve been thinking recently how you see all these U.S. senators out there in the national press arguing their positions. You see slimy, do-nothing “centrists” like Joe Lieberman and Kent Conrad and Arlen Specter all the time. And yet you never ever see or read or hear Maria Cantwell and her opinions. It’s like she’s not even there. We have a silent senator, and I’m trying to figure out why. Is it that (A) she has little confidence in her views and her ability to express them or (B) she doesn’t really have any views of her own because she doesn’t really st
and for anything or (C) she is trying to fly under the radar while she’s doing her big-time contributors’ bidding?
Now, when she finally does express her views–in as local and inconspicuous a forum as possible–she comes up with the kind of circular logic you’d expect from a Red State senator who takes huge contributions from the medical-industrial complex.
In her one-plus terms in the U.S. Senate, all I’ve ever heard or read from Maria Cantwell is brain-dead, consultant-tested drivel and pandering. I have yet to hear a real or original thought, never mind see a courageous stand. Why, oh why, do we in Washington settle for such a political non-entity as Maria Cantwell?
What’s so frustrating is that here you have Maria Cantwell, a Democrat from a solidly blue state, echoing the talking points of none other than the quintessential, red-state, status quo Democrat Kent Conrad. And mark my words, it is the Kent Conrads of the world, namely the blue-dog, weak-kneed Democrats of the United States Senate–and not the Republicans–who are going to be the death of health-care reform.
From the latest Paul Krugman NY Times column:
Kent Conrad is the same guy who has the nerve to preach about fiscal responsibility and reducing the federal deficit while griping about the Obama administration’s desire to cut federal subsidies to rich farmers–something which would actual reduce the deficit.
Someone in corporate America has Cantwell’s ear. Would be nice if reporters could do some digging and find out who.
Cantwell will pay big time if she does not support public option. Go get the goddamn fucking votes, Senator, or there will be absolute hell to pay when you come back home.
“Which puts her on the wrong side of public opinion, not to mention the wrong side of the president…”
So, Eli, you’re saying having a position different from the President and public opinion, like Cantwell, is Bad.
And therefore having the same position as the President and public opinion, like Carrie Prejean’s position on Gay marriage, is Good.
You should explain that to Dan.
Because I don’t think he understands that point…
senators are proof that this is not a democracy, it is a plutocracy.
In the clip they just played on KUOW she said Group Health is a pretty good model for these regional plans, maybe they’re the ones who’ve her ear.
@9,
That’s sort of the point. This country was never meant to be a democracy. We didn’t even have direct election of Senators for over a century.
Now, now stop with the class warfare.
I am sure Ms. Maria Cantwell and her family pay a hefty premium every month, and have 20% copays that can bankrupt themselves just like we do, and have to fight over the forms and the out of network coverage.
What is her monthly contribution anyway, some google hound oughta get that pretty quick
@8 You’re stellar logic is hard to refute, but let me try:
If Public Health Plan = Ban on Gay Marriage (because the president supports both)
then it stands to reason that:
Maria Cantwell’s position = no public health option = Fascism = having sex with goats (since the president does not support any of these things.)
So by association, Maria Cantwell’s position = having sex with goats.
Not to say Maria is a nazi goat rapist (that we know of…) but merely to show that your logic is all sorts of retarded.
@12 – she gets the gold-plated single-payer option that all US Senators can get.
@11: exactly. the senate is our plutocracy’s emergency brake.
a senator who doesn’t ultimately serve the interests of commerce and wealth above those of the proles should stay out of small planes.
She didn’t think the votes were there to stop the invasion of Iraq, either, so she went with it.
13
You’re making it too complicated, pal.
Eli says good little boys and girls stand with the President (btw Eli, “President” should be capitalized) and respond to public opinion.
On Gay marriage Carrie does.
Dan doesn’t.
Odd response, to say the least.
Is this an honest effort to be realistic and pragmatic and not sacrifice the good in hopeless pursuit of the ideal?
Or is she being unduly influenced by lobbyists?
Definitely worth digging into.
@4: Cantwell has made some notable stands, including defeating the efforts of Ted Steven and the oil industry to drill in Alaska.
Ted who?
Sorry, is he some kind of Governor who got lost?
seandr @18: @4: Cantwell has made some notable stands, including defeating the efforts of Ted Steven and the oil industry to drill in Alaska.
No, this is a classic, pain-free, easy Cantwellian position. Taking a stand against Ted Stevens by coming down on the status quo, safe, no-cost, conventional wisdom side of an issue in the state of Washington isn’t exactly taking a stand.
We settled for Cantwell the first time around because she was running against Slade Gorton, long a member of the Northwest Axis of Evil.
Last time, she was running against an empty-suit Republican, though I can’t remember which one it was. McGavick?
The left/liberal vote is a given for any statewide Democrat, and the center of statewide political debate is controlled by the corporate status quo vs. the populist anti-tax warriors like Tim Eyman. The Republicans put up candidates on the far right and lose over and over again, while Democrats end up catering to the slime in the middle. That’s how we end up with mediocre statewide Democrats like Cantwell, Gregoire, and Locke.
I think the only way to change it is to regularly run more progressive alternatives in the primary. Assuming that we can do that without top two screwing us over.
Cantwell is lying about her position on the public option. She opposes it but she and her office are saying they support it. Washington State deserves more from their Senator than lies.