Yesterday, after reading the news of Lieberman's comments, I, as a Connecticut resident, immediately went to his website and sent out an email to our junior Senator. I was firm, but still polite. I told him I was hoping this report was mistaken somehow. I told him that I couldn't believe he would be standing up AGAINST health care reform legislation when we are finally so close (after nearly 70 years of trying).
Well.... he got back to me. The next day! Usually, Senator Lieberman does answer my correspondences, but often it is so much later that I almost forgot I wrote him. This was the next day. It starts out with the typical fluff that even Mitch McConnell would probably put in his emails.... uninsured Americans is a problem.... the need for health care reform is clear....I will continue to work on this... blah blah blah.
But then his letter got to the heart of the matter.
I will continue to work with my colleagues and the Obama Administration on a bipartisan basis to resolve the remaining aspects that are key to reaching an agreement. A broad coalition is needed when addressing an issue as large, and as important for our nation's citizens, as health care reform. I do feel strongly that any health care reform legislation that I support must not only be budget neutral, but also reduce health care costs over the long term for individuals, groups, and businesses and for the federal government. That is the primary reason why I oppose a public option. It would be better to first sustain the long-term solvency of Medicare and Medicaid before creating a new government-run health insurance program.
That is the primary reason?!!
To be budget neutral and reduce costs??!!
That is exactly what the public option ensures. That is the argument FOR the public option, not against. The CBO has scored the public option. It is the part of the plan that does help ensure reduced costs. It is a federal program that will be paid for by patient premiums. It is VERY different from Medicare and Medicaid because these other programs function to insure the highest risk groups. The public option, if applied broadly, will spread the risk out. Heck... it might even make money! You don't need me to explain this to you. Joe Lieberman doesn't need me to explain this to him. He is purposefully playing obtuse on this matter and hoping I won't know the difference.
Oh, but then there's one other thing that is oh so important to the junior Senator.
I am hopeful that Senators on both sides of the aisle will come together to achieve meaningful health care reform that expands coverage, reduces costs, and improves the quality of care for everyone.
Seriously?
Let's say we all agree to remove the public option and go forward. How many Senators from across the aisle are going to support the legislation? One? Maybe one. This kind of phony bi-partisanship for show is not nearly as important when the American people have voted to put Democrats in control of Congress by a 60-40 margin. The last election was the American people's way of saying, we'll take care of the fake bipartisanship problem for you.... you now have 60 votes to do what is right.
Come on Senator Lieberman. Don't lie to me anymore. You just aren't a Democrat. You are a Republican. You have now stood against Democrats on the two biggest issues of the past decade. Switch to their caucus and get it over with.