Senate Finance Committee votes 14-9 for universal health care

This healthy margin was more than was required and reflects the support of Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe.  While I’m still a bit dubious of some of Sen. Baucus’ choices, I think he’s earned a pat on the back today.  We haven’t guaranteed Sen. Snowe’s vote for the main bill, but this is a very good symbol and it changes the incentives for voting decisions substantially.  With 60 Democrats plus one Republican that means we can afford to lose a single vote.  If we only had 60 votes than any single Democrat could be a spoiler.  As is, the leadership only has to meet the demands of the second biggest pain in the but, which means there can be a real penalty if you get too greedy.

Comments

[Mikey]

I'm hard pressed to see how it's possible to maintain a final 60 votes on the bill when there are too many conflicting "must have's" for various senators. If Senator Rockefeller gets the public option, does Reid lose Senator Ben Nelson's vote?

All of the senators must have a price that Reid is willing to pay to get their votes, since a tight vote like this increases the power of hard to get senators.

I guess it could happen, it just won't be easy.

[Greg Sanders]

Mikey: It will take hard negotiation, but the difference between want-to-have and must-have doesn't come out prior to the end game. Notably unless my memory is failing me, the bill got out of Finance with Rockfeller's vote.

It's a tricky game, if the bill looks too strong, people hold out for more. If the bill looks too weak, than people won't stick their neck out. What will help is that there's painful memories of failure from overreach.

Ultimately, Sen. Reid plays his vote counts conservative. I don't doubt that he's willing to sacrifice the public option if it comes down to it, but his inclusion of it in the Senate bill suggest that he sees a way to 60.