Lieberman remains a shaky vote for healthcare overhaul
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
The decade began with Joe Lieberman nursing his wounds after he and then fellow Democrat Al Gore were narrowly defeated in their bid to win the White House.
Now the first decade of the 21st century could end with Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Senate Democrats, still in the limelight, but in a different, and less flattering way.
As the Senate prepares to resume the debate over healthcare reform this morning, Lieberman has emerged as one of the key senators Majority Leader Harry Reid has to woo if he will fulfill his pledge to get a healthcare bill through his chamber by Christmas.
Democrats are waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to tally the cost of the latest compromise, which includes a provision to extend Medicare to those 55 to 65 years old.
Lieberman, in an interview with CBS over the weekend and in a private meeting with Reid, made his opposition clear.
“Though I don’t know exactly what’s in it, from what I hear, I certainly would have a hard time voting for it because it has some of the same infirmities that the public option did,” Lieberman said on CBS. “It will add taxpayer costs. It will add to the deficit. It’s unnecessary.”
Lieberman has moved from the days when he was considered a liberal and was the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate in 2000. He lost Connecticut’s Democratic Senate primary when running for reelection in 2006 but ran successfully as independent in the general election. In 2008, he endorsed his longtime friend, GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, over Barack Obama.
Throughout the healthcare debate, he has been a shaky vote among the 60 needed to pass a bill. He has strongly opposed any public option as part of the package.
While his reluctance is not a huge surprise, it does mean Reid either needs to reach out to the Republicans, who have been united in opposing his bill, or he needs to further water down the bill to gain Lieberman’s vote – without losing liberals, some of whom are already unhappy with the compromise.
-- Michael Muskal
