DISQUS

timncguy · 5 months ago

so many "pundits" are out there now saying that the progressives will have to cave. That they shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water. That they won't dare vote against insurance reform if we get things like the end of pre-existing conditions etc. Not to make the perfect the enemy of the good. Not to throw away this chance at reform just because it doesn't go as far as we would like. Don't hand the white house a loss over the public option.

The question is, why can't this same argument be put to the blue dogs and conserva-dems? Why not tell them to get on board with the public option and not hand the white house a loss just because the bill goes farther than they would like?

Why does the "conventional" wisdom think this argument only goes one way? Why is it the progressives that are expected to take one for the team? How about making the blue dogs take one for the team this time instead?

Steve_in_CNJ · 5 months ago

this is one of several ways in which the conservatives beat the liberals in the messaging and framing. the public option was framed as liberal and no public option as "centrist". i give obama a lot of the blame for letting this happen. he should have urged negotiations with the single-payer liberals instead of the no-reform republicans.

Butch1 · 5 months ago

Very good points.

Jophus · 5 months ago

Liked for your logic, but I think we all know the blue dogs aren't a part of any team without Inc. in the title.

rayso · 5 months ago

The dems from liberal districts will get reelected if they vote for a bill without a public option.

The blue dogs will not get reelected if they vote for a bill with a public option.

Kenneth Brown · 5 months ago

Umm... It's a little more complex than that - http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/why-blu...

Steve_in_CNJ · 5 months ago

polls in montana show a majority supporting the public option and disapproving of their senator baucus for his handling of the issue. it's frankly naive to say that entrenched politicians are working for their constitutents. their lobbyist clients give them ample resources to mold publc opinion with distortions and to smear any opposition.

rayso · 5 months ago

I agree. Politicians care only about one thing: getting reelected.

caphillprof · 5 months ago

Moyers made a good argument about rejecting a bad health care bill so you can get a better one later. That's essentially what happened with Medicare. Lyndon went to Independence to sign that Medicare Act because it had been Truman's baby and Truman had vetoed a bad version.

cowboyneok · 5 months ago

It would have been nice to have gotten all the raging arguments out of the way before the heavy lifting started. In fact, I can just imagine all the arguments in defense of not following through on any of Obama's promises because they had to save their precious political capital for Health Care! I hope the Obama Admin proves me wrong eventually but I'm one of the people he has lost. He lost me at backtracking on DADT. I figured if someone who came from a minority community would not push to overturn something the American people wanted overturned because he was afraid of expending capital then we were in DEEP trouble.

JohnnyG · 5 months ago

It's just time for Obama to learn the power of the progressive caucus. If they hold strong and stop any bill without a robust public option, Obama will learn they're a force to be reckoned with and then they will have much more influence on the legislative process. And another attempt at passing health care reform can happen again, next time with everyone knowing it has to be real reform. It's all dependent on the progressive caucus holding firm, but if they do, there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

fromer · 5 months ago

Ha!

A "force to be reckoned with" would be cramming HR 676, Single Payer, through.

We are negotiating away what was already a compromise. At this point, even if a public option is passed, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the devil in the details makes it another Wall St/Ins Co. handhout.

Would love to be wrong, am very afraid that I'm right.

JohnnyG · 5 months ago

At this point, even if a public option is passed, I'd bet dollars to donuts that the devil in the details makes it another Wall St/Ins Co. handhout."

Then it wouldn't a *robust* public option. The wording of the progressive caucus' promise to stop any bill without a public option includes saying it has to be a ROBUST one, not watered-down. I realize the public option is a compromise from single payer, but it's still better than nothing. Which is what we're going to get if the progressive caucus doesn't hold firm.

Bubbles · 5 months ago

Anyone with a brain knows that single payer is the most rational and best approach to health insurance.

We all compromised ourselves for the sake of the Obama candidacy, for the public option.

If he bails out on public option, quite simply, he is toast with liberals. I'm sure he'll get lots of votes from Republicans in 2012.

I, for one, am sick and tired of Obama's leadership style, which is, to create a leadership vacuum at the top, until the 11th hour, and then fill it at the last minute.

I'm sorry, that's not leadership.

It might be good political strategy, but it's poor tactics. At this point, I don't care about the end game.

Leadership is a full time job. Obama's on vacation for 11 hours on every issue, only to show up at the last moment. He has the benefit of vigor when the other parties are tired out. I understand the strategy. It's the end justifying the means. But in the end, we are all dead. He has to have both means and ends. And he has to be on the battlefield directing traffic for the entire battle, not just the last hour of battle. That's the nature of leadership.

Nobody knows where he stands on any issue anymore. So why vote for him? Why support him? This guy is a terrible leader.

At no point during World War II did the English not know where Churchill stood. That's leadership. Obama? The biggest issue is health care insurance, and no one knows where he stands anymore.

To quote him, "Enough!"

Kenneth Brown · 5 months ago

I agree. When I voted for Obama, I expected movement on civil rights, the war(s) and health care. So far we're 0 for 2.

If we don't get real reform this time around, nothing short of Obama jumping on a rocket with Bruce Willis to save the planet is going to win my vote back.

jonwalker · 5 months ago

You got to be kidding me. Even if this is the case, why the hell do you let people know you have no idea what you are doing and will give Snowe anything she wants.

BlueJelloElf · 5 months ago

This has been so disappointing. It's like the guy we elected has nothing to do with the guy who actually showed up at the White House. How can a person run on a platform of change and then be apparently terrified to change anything? WTF, Obama?

Jophus · 5 months ago

Will Obama have any credibility at all after this is said and done with? I remember them saying that he is willing to be a one term president over the health care issue. I think he can count on it. He had more political capital than any president in history and he is getting walked over. Unless, like someone else said on here, he swats down this bill and backs single-payer, he has no political future.

Bubbles · 5 months ago

Agree. Liberals gave up the single payer option for "public option" to support Obama's candidacy.

If he drops "Public Option" then we drop him. Then he's toast. He'll never get re-elected, in fact, he might not even get re-nominated. I'm sure lots of Republicans will vote for him.

He creates leadership vacuums, then he likes to fill the vacuum and five minutes before midnight. Perhaps this is good political strategy, but it is not, in any way, shape or form, leadership.

He's leading a nation, not a merry band of warriors. He has to stand on the middle of the battlefield, holding the standard, for the entire battle, not just the last 10 minutes of battle. That's almost cowardly.

Jophus · 5 months ago

There is only one scenario that could play out and he can count on my vote. If all this soft-democratic bullshit was a planned strategy to get everyone's cards on the table while he is holding something incredible close to his chest. Now is that likely? About as likely as my gay ass getting a blessing from the Pope. I just don't want to believe that this administration that we've all worked so hard for is going to continue bending over.

rf7777 · 5 months ago

One term president?

Oh, we can only dream...

tlsintx · 5 months ago

the cost has to come down?
bullshit.

think of it as a war boys. the sky's the limit!
let's just shift our perspective, stop fighting stupid trillion dollar wars, and we'll have plenty for what we need.

so simple!

Jessica · 5 months ago

If the primary focus of the Health Reform is to reduce Healthcare costs, why is the Tort Reform not being included in it?

rayso · 5 months ago

Howard Dean explained it very simply. “This is the answer from a doctor and a politician. Here’s why tort reform is not in the bill. When you go to pass a really enormous bill like that, the more stuff you put in it, the more enemies you make, right? And the reason that tort reform is not in the bill is because the people who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers in addition to everyone else they were taking on. And that is the plain and simple truth.”

caphillprof · 5 months ago

tort reform becomes a no brainer, but only after you move to a single payer system.

given the high number of uninsured under the present system, a successful tort action is all many ill have in an attempt to cover the bills

Butch1 · 5 months ago

Perhaps, if we stopped dumping money into those two continuing misbegotten Bush wars we have and tax those making over $250k, LIKE OBAMA SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO, would be a step in the right direction in containing the cost for this type of health care plan. Just a thought ... I'm sure the White House has already thought of this. <snark> It's the obvious answer. ( probably just too simple for them to use, what do I know, I'm just an average citizen. )

Charlotte Waldo · 5 months ago

This makes me profoundly sad. Such a squandered opportunity. We progressives have been working towards affordable healthcare for all for generations. And here we have the greatest chance we have ever had and it's being wasted by cynical Blue Dog Dems and a Democratic leadership that can't lead. They are actually fighting about how little health care reforms to actually give? What a joke.

So the universal-lite folks want to give the private insurance industry all of those 47 million uninsured they can exploit charge up the wazoo and the supposedly politically savy in the White House thinks we don't need to cover everyone anyway. After all, a "win" is a "win." This is not reform. It's a giveaway. The only people that will benefit is the insurance companies who will get richer.

evan_la · 5 months ago

Crying shame, no?

bluebear · 5 months ago

Talk about a rudderless administration. So many opportunities wasted with having a majority in power, it's disgraceful.

mwfolsom · 5 months ago

KILL THIS BILL!!!!!!!!!

Just do it and get us all out of our misery. Its already over but nobody wants to say so -

stevewami · 5 months ago

my brother still believes in Obama and believes he will come through on health care. I hope he's right, but, I'm losing faith in the hopey changey thing.

jonwalker · 5 months ago

I smell a rat, why is Obama so afraid of going pure Dem. Does he really think 2 Republican votes will change the optics? I think he sold us all out big time.

JohnnyG · 5 months ago

I've been smelling that rat since McClurkin two years ago.

lessthanacitizen · 5 months ago

Given what has happened in the last several months, we need a really savvy investigative reporter to research a book on how exactly Obama came to be the Democratic candidate in 2008. If we know the how, we'll soon uinderstand why.

SCLiberal · 5 months ago

Greg Palast would be a good choice. He's already writing about Obama/health care:

I checked out the government's health stats (at HHS.gov), put fresh batteries in my calculator and totted up US spending on prescription drugs projected by the government for the next ten years. It added up to $3.6 trillion.

In other words, Obama's big deal with Big Pharma saves $80 billion out of a total $3.6 trillion. That's 2%.

Hey thanks, Barack! You really stuck it to the big boys. You saved America from these drug lords robbing us blind. Two percent. Cool!

The whole article is good.

rf7777 · 5 months ago

Salon states it well:

"high minded fecklessness"

vkobaya · 5 months ago

another trillion dollars of the taxpayers' money that we're actually going to spend it on something well thought out, and worthwhile.

Oh, it is very well thought out, and very worthwhile. Well thought out to give a trillion dollars to the health insurance, pharmacuetical and medical corporations. Very, very worthwhile ... for them. You just have to look at it from their perspective as Obama does.

caphillprof · 5 months ago

Two armed camps, in the White House, is what you get when you have a president without principles. Bipartisanship doesn't work on Capitol Hill, but in the White House, where you get to do your own hiring? It's like having the Southern Leadership Council and the KKK, not only in the same office building, but in the same company.

robertarhodes · 5 months ago

It is so incredibly sad.

We have gone from a democratic party who held all of the cards and support from the vast majority of the country and a republican party bleeding, infighting and fragmented to this. We have a president who is suffering from a self inflicted wound from which, I believe, he will not recover. If for no other reason, the repubs have him figured out and cornered, have driven down his numbers and know how to kill any future reform with their thug tactics and 24/7 broadcasting network, Fox.

An that's not counting the progressives, of which I am one, who will sit out the 2010 vote and vote for another candidate for prez in 2012.

What a wasted moment in American history.

SCLiberal · 5 months ago

Why is Obama still sitting at the back of the bus?