Democrats & Liberals Should Support Debt Ceiling Deal! 5 Reasons Why

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Five Things for Liberals to Like in the Debt Ceiling Deal

As the broad strokes of the debt ceiling deal began to leak out over the weekend, progressive groups filled reporters’ in boxes with outraged e-mails. “Seeing a Democratic President take taxing the rich off the table and instead push a deal that will lead to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefit cuts is like entering a bizarre parallel universe — one with horrific consequences for middle-class families,” Progressive Change Campaign Committee Co-Founder Stephanie Taylor wrote. “This deal is the exact opposite of what the majority of Americans support, and all Democrats in Congress should oppose it.”

“MoveOn’s 5 million members, along with the vast majority of Americans, will not stand for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefit cuts–not now, and not six months from now,” wrote Justin Ruben, Executive Director of MoveOn.org, “Congress should reject both ‘triggers’, and a ‘Super Congress’, and pass a clean debt ceiling bill that doesn’t force the middle class and the poor to bear the brunt of this crisis.”

But as the details of the compromise emerged, it seemed there was actually a lot for liberals to like about this bill. If and when the House passes the bill on Monday, it will likely be with the help of a lot of Democrats. Here’s why some liberals are actually happy with this deal:


1) The 2012 budget: At one point in the negotiations, the 2012 budget was to be slashed by $36 billion. The final number of cuts: just $7 billion. And just to ensure we don’t have another bruising government shutdown fight over cuts in September, the deal deems and passes the 2012 budget. Yes, that’s right, the old Gephardt Rule or Slaughter Solution, is back. What’s deem and pass? It’s a legislative trick that essentially means that Congress will consider the budget passed without ever actually having to vote on it.

2) The trigger: This is counter intuitive, but the trigger is actually pretty good for Democrats. For all that MoveOn thinks that it would force benefit cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, it actually wouldn’t trigger benefit cuts to any entitlements. The only cuts it would force would be a 2% or more haircut for Medicare providers. And House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, along with most Democrats, has never opposed provider cuts. Not only that, most progressives actually want the Pentagon cuts. So if the committee deadlocks and the trigger is pulled, Democrats won’t be miserable.

3) The commission: Again, for all the liberal carping about a “Super Congress,” the commission of 12 members — three from each party in each chamber — set up to find the second phase of $1.5 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving is actually rigged to force some revenue increases. Yes, the Bush tax cuts are off the table. But there are plenty of loops holes, subsidies and other corporate welfare programs that are on the table. And with such a strong trigger, it’s hard to imagine at least one Republican not voting to kill corporate jet subsidies over slashing $500 billion from the defense budget – even if the revenues aren’t offset. The question is: who are Republicans more afraid of, Grover Norquist or the joint chiefs? Democrats’ money is on the joint chiefs.

4) The immediate cuts: It may seem like a lot, but the $917 billion in the first phase of cuts were carefully negotiated by Vice President Joe Biden and his group. They include $350 billion in Pentagon cuts – a win for liberals. They don’t touch entitlement benefits, another win. And they set top line numbers for the next decade of budgets that aren’t draconian. It still cuts where liberals might prefer to spend, but most of the savings are backloaded to avoid extreme austerity in next few years of fragile economic recovery. Just $7 billion would be cut in 2012, and only $3 billion in 2013. And of that combined $10 billion, half would come from the Pentagon.

5) The debt ceiling: Raising the debt ceiling through 2013 will not be contingent on the second round of cuts. There will merely be a vote of disapproval. This avoids another messy fight in January and another round of painful forced cuts.

In a world where the Tea Party didn’t exist, would this be a good bill for Democrats? Absolutely not. But considering that the trigger, commission, two-step process and discretionary budget cuts could’ve been a LOT worse – and actually were in Boehner’s version of the bill – this deal will be easier to swallow. The commission will likely mean a long-term win for Democrats: they’ll get either their revenue increases or achieve significant Pentagon cuts. It could mark a political victory as well: If Pelosi passes this bill on primarily Democratic support, they’ll look like the adults in the room who can compromise and govern, a stark contrast to the Tea Party freshmen.


Sources: CBS News, CNN, MSNBC, TIME

Debt Ceiling Deal Includes Deep Cuts & GOP Triggers (Creates More Poverty)

McConnell Sees Deal “Very Close”; Focus Is on Triggers for Cuts


Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said Sunday morning that he was “very close” to recommending to his members that they sign on to a debt deal with President Obama and the Democrats.

Speaking on the CNN program “State of the Union,” Mr. McConnell said the emerging deal included as much as $3 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years, with much of that decided later this year by a joint congressional committee.

“What conservatives want to do is cut spending,” he said. “We’ve come a long way. This agreement is likely to encompass up to $3 trillion is spending cuts.”

In addition, Mr. McConnell said the agreement would allow votes in Congress on a balanced budget amendment.

Mr. McConnell indicated that proposals to force action by the joint committee had been among the most contentious of the last week. He declined to be specific about so-called “triggers” of across-the-board cuts that would go into effect if the committee could not agree on a plan — a measure meant to put pressure on the committee to finish its work.

But he said the committee — made up of six Democrats and six Republicans — would be under tremendous pressure by the American people and the markets to implement the further spending cuts.

“That’s been an item of outstanding discussion for over a week,” Mr. McConnell said. “We’ll let you know what we’ve done on the trigger issues when we make the announcement.”

Congress and the White House are racing to strike a deal to raise the federal government’s borrowing cap before Tuesday, the day that the Treasury Department has said it would no longer be able to pay for all of its commitments. Congressional Republicans have demanded spending cuts in exchange for approval to raise the federal borrowing limit.

Late on Saturday night, the Senate delayed until 1 p.m. Sunday a crucial vote on a debt ceiling bill put forward by the Democrats, amid growing indications that a compromise was in the works.

Appearing after Mr. McConnell on the same program, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, a Democrat, Mr. Schumer agreed that the question of a trigger was “one of the key issues that’s still being debated.”

Mr. Schumer echoed Mr. McConnell’s optimism but had a different assessment of the tone. The debate, he said, has “an enmity that in my 37 years as a legislator I have never seen.’’

But, he said, “I feel a lot better today about the ability to avoid default than I did even yesterday morning.’’

“And default would have such disastrous consequences for our nation for decades to come,’’ he said, adding, “The fact that our leaders are talking, though hardly any one agrees with everything that’s come up, is a good thing,’’ he said.

But Mr. Schumer sketched out a key area of disagreement, the components of a trigger for what would happen if Congress does not follow up with a second round late this year, based on recommendations by the commission. That is still under negotiation, he said.

“The key to the trigger is one word, equality,’’ he said. “It should be equally tough on Democrats and Republicans.’’ He proposed a series of policy defaults that would take effect if Congress could not agree, to encourage such agreement.

For example, he said, it might include steps anathema to Democrats, like cutting college scholarships for middle-class children or prescription drug benefits. And for Republicans, he said, “They would have to do things they hate, like close loopholes for oil companies, and corporate jets.’’

But at the moment, he said, “We don’t even know what all the details are, so we’re not yet ready to urge anybody to be for it.

On the ABC program “This Week,” David Plouffe, senior adviser to Mr. Obama, was asked if there was a deal. “No, there’s not,” he replied. But he laid out the outlines of an emerging agreement: a package that includes $1 trillion in cuts, and a Congressional commission that would report to Congress in the fall with a plan for additional changes amounting to $1 trillion or more.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats are still pushing for revenue increases, he said, though the Republicans remain opposed. “I think the American people have spoken out that they want a balanced approach,’’ he said.

He said twice that it was “inconceivable” that there would not be a deal, and said the American people were “furious” that no agreement had been reached.

Mr. Plouffe was followed by Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican who has sometimes shown tendencies toward bipartisanship. He said that the emerging deal represented progress.

“It’s a $3 trillion package that will allow $7 trillion to be added to the deficit over the next decade,” he said. Without the agreement, $10 trillion would have been added, he said.

“We’re no longer running toward oblivion, we’re walking toward it,” he said.

But he has not decided whether to vote for it, he said.


View Larger Map

Sources: CNN, NY Times, Google Maps

Public Option Is Slipping Away...Compromise Only Hope

Reid: Obama pledges to help pass health reform. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that President Obama pledged to work with Senate Democrats to help pass a health care overhaul, in their closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill. Watch his news conference.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Republicans: Heath care bill "Partisan". Senate Republican leaders say President Obama's health care overhaul has become a closed-door, partisan effort that is aiding drug companies and other medical providers. Watch their news conference.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Chances shrink for pure Public Option


Senate Democrats in search of a health reform compromise Sunday zeroed in on a new alternative to a government-run insurance plan – signaling that the chances a final bill will include a pure public option are diminishing.

The new idea — for the government to create a national health insurance plan similar to the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan – seemed to gather momentum as the weekend went on, and the differences between liberals and moderates on the public option became even clearer.

The proposal would take the place of a new government insurance plan currently included in the Senate version of the bill, according to officials involved with the negotiations.

The plan would be administered by the Office of Personnel Management, which oversees the federal plan for members of Congress, and all of the insurance options would be not-for-profit offered by private companies.

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a public option opponent who is participating in the talks, said the new proposal would do away with the government insurance program in Majority Leader Harry Reid’s current bill, which allows states to “opt-out” of a public option.

“Seems to me it would be in lieu of the public option,” Nelson said. He also said Reid’s “opt-out” idea “is no longer being talked about.”

If the Senate goes in this direction, the challenge for Reid (D-Nev.) is framing this alternative as an acceptable compromise for progressives. Politically, the idea holds appeal for moderates, who have opposed establishing a new government insurance plan, but might also satisfy liberal demands for more choice and competition to private insurers.

“The proposal under consideration can be said to provide access to the same type of insurance plans that members of Congress and federal employees get. People think of that as government health insurance; progressives could portray this in the same vein,” said a Democratic Senate aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the negotiations. “But moderates can simultaneously point to the fact that the government isn’t the payer and say competition was enhanced without growing the government.”

That feature – that the plan would offer policies similar to those members of Congress get – could prove a potent selling point for members of Congress to their constituents back home.

Progressive senators emerged from a three-hour negotiating session Sunday night declining to comment. Asked if the public option has been taken off the table, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said: “I’m not going to respond to that one.” Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) would say only that he was hopeful a deal could be reached Monday.

Aides familiar with the negotiations said the meetings are not focused solely on the public option, and that senators who want the public option are seeking other concessions, including stronger regulation of the insurance industry.

There is also discussion of including a public option "fallback" provision, which would trigger a government health plan if private insurers did not choose to take part in the program — an unlikely outcome.

Jacob Hacker, a Yale University professor who originated the public option concept, posted a blog item on The New Republic website titled “You Call This a Compromise?” He said the latest crop of alternatives, including the plan modeled after the federal employees’ health program, represent “abandonment of the public option altogether.” It appears to be nothing more than a new kind of insurance exchange, which is already in the bill, he said.

And Timothy Jost, a health-law expert at Washington and Lee University School of Law, wrote on POLITICO’s Arena that replicating the federal employees’ health plan “was the dumbest idea yet.” Nonprofit insurance plans currently dominate the market, and they haven’t reduced the cost of insurance, he wrote.

The group directed their staff to work through the night on the proposals in preparation for what could be a key meeting Monday afternoon.

“You have people of very diverse and strong views who are making a real effort to come together,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a public-option supporter who has become an intermediary between liberals and moderates. “But people have strong views and we’ll have to see where people end up.”

Progressives are represented by Feingold, Harkin, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.). The moderate side is represented by Nelson, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.), and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.).

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), a public option opponent, did not attend the meeting but his staff was present.

The group came together only in the last few days, representing the first time in the months-long process that key liberals and moderates sat at the same table.

Earlier Sunday, President Barack Obama paid a rare weekend visit to the Senate as the talks heated up. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden called on Senate Democrats to set aside differences and pass legislation by the end of the year. “They’re doing great; they’re going to get it done,” Obama said as he departed the 45-minute closed-door meeting in the Mansfield Room.

On Sunday night, with progress being reported, the senators ordered Chinese food from Schumer’s favorite restaurant, Hunan Dynasty on Capitol Hill, and at one point, they turned on the Giants-Cowboys game. Senators later attributed raucous applause heard from the hallway to the football game, not a sudden breakthrough in the talks.

Reid said he had personally asked five moderates and five progressives to work things out on the issues that they care about, including the public option and small business coverage. “Progress is being made, and that’s not just talk. We’ve made a lot of progress,” Reid said.

“There are still a few things we have to work out [in] the bill, and the issues are being narrowed as we speak. We’re working toward a consensus. We’re not there, but we understand how important it is that we arrive at a consensus, and we’re going to do that just as quickly as we can.”

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said there are several options on the table that liberal and conservative Democrats are considering in order to strike a deal on the public insurance option in the health care debate — and that negotiations are still ongoing.

And Durbin, who is a big supporter of the public option, is very much open to striking a deal.

“I’m looking for an alternative that creates competition for the health insurance companies,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Reflecting on the moment, Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) said that Democrats should be able to get a bill done when they have a Democratic president and a pair of congressional majorities. “We've got to get this done in order to demonstrate we can get something this substantial done, even in a difficult economy and a difficult political environment,” he said.

Reid doesn’t have much wiggle room if he expects to finish the bill by Christmas.

Under the best-case scenario, Reid could reach a tentative deal on the public option during the first half of the week and send the revised plan to the Congressional Budget Office for a cost estimate, which is likely to take several days.

Once he receives the estimate, Reid would seek firm commitments on votes, which he will want to lock in before taking the procedural steps necessary to cut off debate on the bill. Aides say the goal is to start taking those procedural steps by the end of this week.

Democrats would then need to hold together 60 senators on three procedural votes and three votes on the bill. The votes could unfold over a roughly nine-day period, ending just before the Christmas break.

Democrats remain seriously concerned about Nelson, who is considered less likely by Senate aides to vote for the bill than are Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Lieberman, whose interests align more closely with the caucus. As long as the public option is sufficiently tailored to their liking, Snowe and Lieberman can likely be persuaded, aides said.

Snowe met with Obama on Saturday, and the two discussed her “trigger” proposal, under which a public option would kick in if private insurers didn’t adequately expand coverage. Snowe also met with moderate Democrats on the floor, and they plan to continue talks Monday. Snowe, however, is not part of the talks among Democratic liberals and moderates

Nelson is a tougher case. He has not only taken an uncompromising position on abortion, demanding stronger language to prohibit federal funding of abortion. He has also voted against all but one Democratic amendment so far, aside from those that received unanimous support from the body. Nelson’s voting record on the bill suggests a general dislike for key aspects of it.

Nelson’s position could become clearer after an expected vote this week on his anti-abortion amendment. Nelson has said he will not compromise, but he also signaled Friday that he wouldn’t do so until after the vote.

With Nelson as a wild card, the need to win over Snowe and Lieberman become all the more important — and that means progressives will be asked to make serious concessions on the public plan.

Obama’s visit came ahead of a busy time in his schedule that could make another Capitol Hill visit difficult, with a pair of trips to Europe for the Nobel Peace Prize and the Copenhagen climate summit. Then he’s scheduled to depart for Hawaii shortly before Christmas.

Despite repeated calls from lawmakers for more direction, Obama has picked his spots over the last 11 months. He has taken significant steps – a visit to the Hill, a major speech, a private meeting at the White House – only when he and his aides considered them necessary.

But given the decisions Reid needs to make in the coming days, Sunday may prove to be a pivotal moment.

Along with Obama and Biden were Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton, senior adviser David Axelrod, health care “czar” Nancy-Ann DeParle, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, and chief legislative liaison Phil Schiliro.

The only speakers, senators said after, were the president and Reid.

“We're really pretty much staying out,” said Sebelius when asked if the administration would take a side on the negotiations over the public option. “The discussions are really among the members of the Senate.”

Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) said Obama “said it would be the greatest legislation since FDR passed Social Security."

Lieberman, who is open to supporting the bill so long as it does not include a public option, noted that Obama didn’t bring up the idea: “He didn't. I don't think he once talked about the public option. He didn't. That's what I'm saying. I thought it was interesting.”

Reid, asked about the comment, responded, “the President didn't say a lot of things. Senator Lieberman said that to me after the meeting also, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue because the President didn't talk about it.”

But Lieberman said even the benefits of health reform legislation wouldn’t outweigh his concerns about a public option enough to vote for the bill if that provision stays in.

“No!” Lieberman told reporters. “That’s exactly what I’ve been saying to my colleagues who are pushing for the public option. This bill has so much good in it, and it does so much good — it’s deficit neutral and all the rest. Why are you insisting on getting a foot in the door for single-payer?”


Sources: Politico, MSNBC

Olympia Snowe Returns To Public Option Bargaining Table

Snowe Rejoins Dems At Public Option Negotiating Table


In a breakthough in Senate negotiations around a public health insurance option, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) sat down with centrist conservative Democrats for the first time Saturday since the bipartisan Gang of Six broke up shortly after returning from the August recess.

Since then, Snowe, the most likely Republican to cross the aisle on health care reform, has been meeting individually with Democrats, but had yet to rejoin negotiations in a formal way.

Snowe, emerging from a meeting on the first floor of the Capitol, Saturday afternoon, told a few reporters hovering outside the room that she had been approached earlier that morning about attending.

She said that no agreement had yet been reached, but that the group was considering "another option," aside from those already under discussion. An agreement had been reached that it would not be publicly discussed, she said, until more details were worked out. Earlier Saturday, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) also mentioned the new option being kicked around but said he couldn't discuss it.

Kerry said that Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) was one of the leading intellectual fathers of this new approach, an assertion Snowe confirmed, adding that Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) were also closely involved.

Sens. Mark Udall (D-Colorado), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) also attended the meeting.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) was not at the meeting and has vowed to filibuster any bill that has any version of a public option. If Lieberman holds to his threat, Democrats would need Snowe to break a GOP-Lieberman filibuster.

Snowe said she was still pushing her "trigger" proposal and met yesterday with Kerry to discuss it. Kerry, she said, has long been open to such a plan. Under her trigger, the public option would only be available in states where private insurance is deemed unaffordable to a certain percentage of residents. Advocates of the public option say a trigger is as good as no public option at all, because it will be gamed by insurance companies so that it never "triggers."

Snowe said Kerry's been in discussions with her about her proposal for months. "[She and Kerry] have, even prior to this, [had discussions] on the Finance Committee about the possibility of a trigger and how it would work and so on," she said.

As the conservative meeting was breaking up, a separate meeting on the Hill began, where liberal Democrats met to discuss their own strategy around the public option.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was also in the Capitol Saturday, but didn't attend either meeting.

"I've talked to a lot of senators and encouraged the good work that's gone on," she said as she left the building and was met by a driving snow. "I know that lots of very positive conversations are underway with lots of members of the Senate and that's just what needs to happen."

President Obama plans to address the Senate caucus on Sunday afternoon, a meeting she said she planned to attend, as well.

HuffPost asked what she thought Obama would tell his party.

"Pass health care," she said.

UPDATE: Conservative Arkansas Democrats Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor joined the liberals on the second floor of the Capitol following the centrist meeting earlier. Snowe didn't join, but said she'd continue talking.

Following the meeting, Pryor declined to get too specific, but did say that a leading proposal involves increasing the ability of the Office of Personnel Management -- which oversees the federal employee health plans -- to negotiate on behalf of individuals and small businesses. Pryor told a HuffPost and an AP reporter that it was unclear how exactly it would be set up, but that it would take the place of the public option managed by the Health and Human Services Secretary.

Lincoln, also interviewed after the meeting, said that the OPM plan would not need additional seed money and would be similar to a proposal she introduced earlier this year called the SHOP Act. She said that she continues to oppose a "government-run plan," but that this proposal would meet the twin goals of keeping down costs and increasing competition. Snowe and Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) are cosponsors of the SHOP Act.

The Lincoln proposal appears to be the alternative option that the conservatives and centrists discussed at the earlier meeting. Snowe had said the proposal was both old and new and Lincoln's measure answers that riddle.

It does little, however, to answer liberals' demands for a nationwide public option. Pryor said, however, that the progressive senators they met with were willing to continue discussions and cautioned that it would be several days before a deal was reached.

They plan to meet again Sunday evening after Obama departs.



View Larger Map


Sources: Huffington Post, Google Maps

Pelosi's Robust Public Option Lacks Enough Votes...Trigger Or "Opt Out" Compromise Only Alternatives

(Political Pundits discuss Pelosi's Public Option)





Pelosi lacks votes for most sweeping Public Option

Speaker Nancy Pelosi counted votes Thursday night and determined she could not pass a “robust public option” — the most aggressive of the three forms of a public option House Democrats have been considering as part of a national overhaul of health care.

The California Democrat's count — coupled with a significant turn of events Thursday during a private White House meeting — points to an increasingly likely compromise for a “trigger” option for a government plan.

Administration officials have been telling POLITICO for weeks now that this is the most likely compromise because it can probably satisfy liberals — albeit only reluctantly and after many vent frustration and some even threaten to walk away from the bill.

This would clear the way for backers to sneak a limited public option through the Senate by attracting moderate Democrats and then to win President Barack Obama's signature.

Speaking to reporters Friday after a meeting of House Democrats, Pelosi said “no decision of that kind has been made" on which public option to pursue. "By no means is the count complete or has the decision been made," she said.

"We had a very congenial - is that the word for a caucus? - a very lively, friendly caucus this morning where we are continuing to count the votes on this,” Pelosi said. “A robust public option is the preferred way to go because it saves the most money - $110 billion. It's not the only way to go, and at the end of the day we will have a public option in this legislation to keep the insurance companies honest and to provide real competition. Again, it's good, better, best. We're having that debate."

Obama told Senate Democratic leadership at the White House Thursday evening that his preference is for the trigger championed by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) — a plan that would allow a public plan to kick in if private insurers don’t expand coverage fast enough, a top administration official told POLITICO. It’s also sign Obama is interested in maintaining a sense of bipartisanship around the health reform plan.

At that meeting, Obama did not sign on to a plan being floated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to include a different variation of the public option in the Senate bill — a plan that would create a national public plan but allow states to “opt out.” Reid now believes he can get 60 votes to bring a bill with that plan to the floor by breaking an expected GOP filibuster — and then secure the 51 votes needed to pass it.

But Pelosi’s vote-counting didn’t go as well in the House. There has been a flurry of rumors that a robust government option remains viable. But top House Democrats privately concede that is wishful thinking that ignores the power of moderate Democrats in this debate.

The House is now likely to include one of the two weaker versions in the bill that will be considered on the floor as Obama’s historic health reform plan chugs toward passage — possibly a version that would set rates for the public plan by allowing doctors and hospitals to negotiate them with Medicare.


Nadeam Elshami, deputy communications director and senior adviser to the speaker, said: "Speculation that a final decision has been made about the public option are not accurate. We continue to work with all the members of the caucus to build consensus."

A House Democratic official said: "The leadership did not tell progressives last night that the robust public option is off the table. The votes are still being counted."

The vote count is a disappointment to liberal members in the House, after two days in which Pelosi seemed increasingly confident she could secure the votes needed for the most liberal option. She had her top lieutenants polling members and even enlisted progressive leaders in trying to corral more support.

“Votes aren’t there,” a top official said. “The progressives are always more optimistic than reality.”

But the final outcome could be helpful to the crucial members of her caucus from conservative-leaning districts, who opposed the most liberal version of the public option, one tied to Medicare rates.

The speaker has proved herself a reliable vote counter, and she wants to release a bill that she knows can get at least 218 votes. Aides say the count was somewhat of a surprise but not completely.

The speaker plans to roll out the House bill with a big ceremony on the West Front of the Capitol.

That was planned for Tuesday or Wednesday and may still happen then. But aides say that disappointing first tally could delay the timeline a bit as they scramble to finalize the bill that will be considered on the House floor.

Sources: Politico