Thinking Out Loud - Ben Nelson: Deal or No Deal?

In a recent blog on the whole health care issues, I likened the current state of affairs in Washington to the Chicago mob way of doing things back in the day. And then the issue of deals and bribes and threats came crashing to the forefront.

Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard has reported that the Obama Administration, back on December 15th, 2009, threatened Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) with closure of the state's most important military base. If true, it would be a dangerous move as far as national security is concerned. Goldfarb reported that an anonymous aide to Sen. Nelson was quoted as saying in regards to the proposed closing of Offutt Air Force base was a "naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson's vote."

Many detractors are calling the reporting "slimy" and untrue. The President and the Senator have denied the rumors. It is claimed that the story, a complete fabrication on Goldfarb's part, is being drummed out there by conservative talk radio with nothing more of a source than the originating author. No name has been associated with the staffer.

Concerns over the report, however, are resulting in Senators calling for an investigation of the alleged deal. Again, Goldfarb is the source of this claim, with no other reports on the subject.

Though this claim may seem quite dubious, it is not out of the realm of the unthinkable. The White House has been very stern with those in the Democratic party over this health care issue. There have been no less than three closed door sessions with members of the Democratic Congress (Republicans are often left out of these meetings).

Aside from this particular claim by Goldfarb, there does seem to be something fishy going on with Senator Nelson and this bill. After being very vocal against the bill, stating "as it is now, without further modifications, it isn't sufficient" and that he will not vote for it." He also told a radio host on KLIN 1400 AM in Lincoln, Nebraska, that he had cost and tax concerns about the bill. And when asked if he thought it would be passed through the Senate before Christmas, he asked if the host meant this Christmas or next. He is on the record as saying that abortion funding should not be in the bill, but it would not be a reason to give his vote if it was removed. "I accept the idea of deadlines . . . but a deadline and a timeline out there that is not achievable is not helpful . . . I can't tell you they couldn't come up with something . . .but I don't see how." "I won't vote on cloture to end debate."

Then he spun a 180 degree turn and voted for the bill after securing the questionable "deal."

The part of the bill, a section called the Manager's Amendment, singles out Nebraska for payment of all its new Medicare funding. The section states "'(3) Notwithstanding subsection (b) and paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, the Federal medical assistance percentage otherwise determined under subsection (b) with respect to all or any portion of a fiscal year that begins on or after January 1, 2017, for the State of Nebraska, with respect to amounts expended for newly eligible individuals described in subclause (VIII) of section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i), shall be determined as provided for under subsection (y)(1)(A) (notwithstanding the period provided for in such paragraph)."

What this means is that Nebraska will not have to fund ANY of the new Medicaid provisions of this bill. Nelson came out on December 22, 2009 and said, "It is not a special deal for Nebraska."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, in defense of Nelson's sweet Nebraska deal, said "You'll find a number of states that are treated differently than other states. That's what legislating is all about. It's about compromise." I suppose Senator Reid never heard of the equal protection clause, nor had it laid up against the benefitting of one state or another. In other words, not only is there equal protection under the law so that states would not deny any persons within its jurisdiction the equal protection of its laws. However, the federal government, which is implied in the Amendments to the Constitution, and specifically in this case section one of the 14th Amendment, is failing to apply equal protection under a law they are imposing on ALL states by exempting or making special provisions solely based on the state itself. And specifically in this case with Ben Nelson (D-NE), Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Bill Nelson (D-FL) getting specific allocations in the national health care reform bill that other states are not getting.

PolitiFact.com calls this a "falsehood." Which is a nice way of saying it is a lie. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called it "sleazy." Attorney General Henry McMaster of South Carolina and several other states call it something else. Illegal. And they are looking into the Constitutionality of these provisions. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) came to Nelson's defense and even seems to laud him as a hero. He says that even though it only mentions Nebraska, it opens the door for other states to come back in and get the same deal.

The question, however, seems to go unanswered and unasked. "If that is the case, why do it in the first place? Why not just include all states now?"

The answer, in my opinion, is that it would drive up the already unimaginable (or to use the President's own favorite word, "unprecedented") costs. The CBO would come out with a bombshell of an expense that would kill this bill now and for decades to come. And it would have been ineffective in getting Nelson's vote.

A late breaking report from Nebraska has the Republican Governor of the state lashing out at Nelson. He told Nelson that Washington can keep the money, that he doesn't want the government funding any expansion of the state's Medicaid program. "The reason he's in hot water right now is that he's not listening to Nebraskans - it's very unusual for him," Gov. David Heineman said to POLITICO. "I am shocked."

Whether you believe the rumors of the threat to close a military base if he didn't play ball and vote for the bill, or if you think that Goldfarb made it all up, you have to admit that the vote by Nelson on the bill in the Senate was nothing less than, effectively, a bribe. Call it the "what legislation is all about" if you want in place of a bribe. But it is not "change you can believe in," That's for sure. It is Washington political maneuvering at its Chicago-style best. The same old back room deals and political and personal arm twisting that everyone said was at an end with the election of Barack Obama.

In an ironic side note, the motto of Nebraska is "Equality Before The Law." Guess Nelson forgot.

It seems to me that the threat aside, Senator Nelson is willing to sell out his vote for a special deal for Nebraska. A deal that the Governor and some it its citizens do not want. In the end, what did Nelson achieve? Culling favor with a Democratic leadership that is ensuring its defeat in 2010? Giving Nebraskans a break on funding in order to garner enough votes to keep his seat, despite those same voters railing against him?

I don't know what the answers are to some of the questions the Nelson and Landrieu and Bill Nelson deals raise. I just know that no matter how it got to this stage, this is not the way a government of the people, for the people and by the people is supposed to operate.

Agree with me or disagree with me, you have to admit that questions have been raised and need to be answered. And serious concerns over how this government is operating, and the cost in both money and freedoms may be more than we can bear. Either way, it makes no difference to me, so long as you start thinking for yourself. This is just me, Thinking Out Loud.

Have a great Christmas.

Charles

Sources

POLITICO.com
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30947.html

Podcast Hosting
http://www.cyberears.com/index.php/Browse/playaudio/8132?loc=interstitialskip

POLITICO.com - HR 3590
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM145_chris.html

Political Punch - abcnews blog
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/12/white-house-sen-nelson-dispute-rumor-in-conservative-media-about-air-force-base-closure-threat.html

Washington Examiner
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Source-White-House-threatening-Sen-Nelson-with-military-base-closures-in-Neb-79326897.html