Anti-private option holdouts not swayed by Bell's amendment | Arkansas Blog

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Anti-private option holdouts not swayed by Bell's amendment

Posted By on Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 5:30 PM

The gist of Rep. Nate Bell’s pitch yesterday to opponents of the private option: Bell argues that there is no responsible political endgame to a defund strategy in the 2014 fiscal session, so he wants to get what he can and fight the private option in 2015. (Bell is explicit that he still wants to kill the policy down the road, and his amendment aims to squelch enrollment in the program in the mean time.)

This approach has opened up a divide within the divide in the Republican party in Arkansas. The caucus was already split over policy — supporting or opposing the private option. Now, among those opposed, there is a disagreement over tactics and strategy. There’s an obvious parallel to the recent series of fights in D.C. between those like Sen. Ted Cruz, who wanted to use a government shutdown or a possible breach of the debt ceiling to try to defund Obamacare — and those who felt that the Cruz approach wouldn't accomplish anything other than damaging the party politically.

Today, I've been hearing similar arguments among Republicans, including private-option opponents. Some believe that the party is likely to be on the cusp of an enduring majority in the state and that a protracted battle over the private option this year, without the votes to pass a budget in its place, is doomed to fail and would only damage the Republican brand. Others argue that their best chance to stop the private option is to hunker down now and take advantage of the supermajority requirement to use a small group to block it — at least in the Senate — hoping that the policy's proponents will eventually cave. 

In any case, so far, while the amendments from Bell and Rep. John Burris may have picked up enough votes in the House to get over the hump, Bell's strategy has thus far not been adopted by any of the nine senators who plan to vote against the appropriation. 

Senate President Pro Tem Michael Lamoureux, who supports the private option, said the amendments were "primarily geared toward the House side" and that they "didn't change any votes" on the Senate side. "No senator ever indicated that these amendments would get their support," he said. Lamoureux said that things in the Senate remain in the same standstill that has been in place for weeks, and that there was no sign of any of the nine budging. He said that if the House passes the appropriation, the Senate will likely take it up the following day. "I think we need a vote and to see where we’re at," he said. 

In the House, private-option foe Rep. Justin Harris expressed his disappointment with Bell's tactic of engaging with private option proponents. House Majority Leader Bruce Westerman agreed. "I’m not supportive of the premise of the private option, so I’m not here to try to fix the private option," Westerman said. "I’m here to try to end it. … I’m not in favor of it with those amendments on it." 

I asked Westerman about Bell's strategic argument — opponents have the votes to block something but not to pass something. 

"That’s why we have the process," Westerman said. "I don’t know. … I didn’t write the constitution but on an appropriation, nine votes in the Senate is a majority." 

Rep. Joe Farrer was also unmoved by the amendments. "All the Bell amendment does in my opinion is just kick the can down the road," he said. "It doesn’t stop the thing. You can’t stop QualChoice, Blue Cross Blue Shield and all the other insurance companies from advertising. … The [amendment] does nothing, it doesn’t stop anything. All it does is continue the program. I believe they had 9 in the Senate and we had 26 in the House to beat it. I think we could have stopped it." 

But even if they had the votes to stop the appropriation, I pointed out, they don't have anywhere near the votes to amend it or pass something new. 

“Right — but then you play a game of chicken [over the Medicaid budget]," Farrer said. "That’s something I’m willing to do.”

From the ArkTimes store

Favorite

Comments (22)

Showing 1-22 of 22

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-22 of 22

Add a comment

More by David Ramsey

Readers also liked…

  • The long and winding road: No exception yet for 30 Crossing

    The Arkansas highway department's representative on the Metroplan board of directors told the board today that the department is requesting an exception to the planning agency's cap on six lanes for its 30 Crossing project to widen Interstate 30 from six to 10 (and more) lanes.
    • Jun 29, 2016
  • Arkansas Times Recommends: A Literary Edition

    Arkansas Times Recommends is a series in which Times staff members (or whoever happens to be around at the time) highlight things we've been enjoying this week.
    • Jul 1, 2016
  • Medical marijuana backers: Health Department opposition 'disingenuous' and 'cruel'

    Arkansans for Compassionate Care, the group behind the first medical marijuana initiative to qualify for the ballot, has responded sharply to yesterday's statement by the Arkansas Health Department that it opposes legal medical use of marijuana.
    • Jul 13, 2016

Most Shared

  • A mayor stands up against freeway widening. No. Not in Little Rock.

    Another booming city, Indianapolis, fights ever wider urban freeways. Meanwhile, back in Little Rock .....
  • In the margins

    A rediscovered violin concerto brings an oft-forgotten composer into the limelight.
  • Donald Trump is historically unpopular — and not necessarily where you think

    My colleagues John Ray and Jesse Bacon and I estimate, in the first analysis of its kind for the 2018 election season, that the president's waning popularity isn't limited to coastal cities and states. The erosion of his electoral coalition has spread to The Natural State, extending far beyond the college towns and urban centers that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. From El Dorado to Sherwood, Fayetteville to Hot Springs, the president's approval rating is waning.
  • Arkansans join House vote to gut Americans with Disabilities Act

    Despite fierce protests from disabled people, the U.S. House voted today, mostly on party lines, to make it harder to sue businesses for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. Of course Arkansas congressmen were on the wrong side.

Most Viewed

Most Recent Comments

 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation