» 
» 
» 
» 
» 
» 
» 
(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)
FILE - In this Oct. 15, 2009 file photo, Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., is interviewed by the Associated Press in his Capitol Hill office in Washington. Obama and other top Democrats sharply criticized his appointment to the Senate in December by an ethically tainted governor, Illinois' Rod Blagojevich, and they forced Burris to abandon hopes of winning election in 2010 by making it clear they would not back him. Burris, 72, has virtually nothing to lose by defying his party's leaders and voting as he pleases on overhauling the nation's health care system this fall.
WASHINGTON— Democrats struggled mightily to obtain their filibuster-proof Senate majority, persuading a Pennsylvania Republican to switch parties and pushing Massachusetts to change its laws to quickly replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.
But with showdown votes approaching on wide-ranging health care proposals, the numbers mask a more complicated reality: President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders have only modest leverage over several pivotal Senate Democrats.
Some of these senators are more concerned about their next election. Others feel they have little to lose by opposing their party's hierarchy.
Democrats and their independent allies control 60 of the Senate's 100 seats. But Democratic leaders' limited leverage will complicate the push for contentious provisions, such as letting the government sell insurance in competition with private companies.
Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces a potentially tough re-election race next year in Arkansas, where Obama lost to Republican John McCain by 20 percentage points. She says she will base her health care votes on what is best for Arkansans.
Choice and competition among insurers are good, Lincoln said, but "I've ruled out a government-funded and a government-operated plan."
Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, where Obama lost by a similar margin, said she might be willing to let some states try "fallback or trigger" mechanisms that would create a public option if residents don't have enough insurance choices.
But she told reporters, "I'm not for a government-run, national, taxpayer-subsidized plan and never will be."
Another Democratic senator, who also may prove wary of Obama's overtures, takes the opposite stand.
"I would not support a bill that does not have a public option," said Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill. "That position will not change."
