Axelrod, Grassley Spar Over Bipartisan Health Care

One of Barack Obama's chief advisers and one of the key Republicans in the Senate jousted on Sunday over what constitutes bipartisanship when it comes to health care legislation.

Appearing on ABC's "This Week," David Axelrod, the president's chief strategist, sought to allay criticism that the health care reform being pushed by the White House and Democrats on the Hill was being constructed without GOP support.

"The bill will be bipartisan by definition," said Axelrod. "The Senate health committee accepted 82 Republican amendments. Republican ideas will be included with this process, we hope it will come with Republican votes as well."

Host George Stephanopoulos followed the remark by noting: "That seems to be the new White House definition of bipartisanship." He appeared to be referencing the administration's approach to the stimulus package, which passed with no Republican support in the House but contained various GOP policy proposals.

"I don't think we should get consumed by process at a time when health care costs are -- you know they've doubled in this decade?" Axelrod responded. "Ultimately we'll bring the federal budget down. We have to act. We can't afford to get consumed in these types of Washington discussions."

That position was attacked in a latter segment on the same show when Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, scoffed at Axelrod's definition of bipartisanship.

"He said they put in 83 amendments," responded the Iowa Republican, missing the number Axelrod used by one. "Let me assure you, those were not changes in policy. Those were strictly technical. And Republicans are not going to hoodwinked into calling that a bipartisan bill."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[hankelvis]

With a government-run healthcare program in place, healthcare facilities and providers even remotely involved become prey to law suits. Imagine being forced to treat patients in your private healthcare facility. Now that you have treated them, you get sued by organizations such as Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). The religious art on the wall, the cross around your neck, and of course the thoughts in your own mind like “spiritual health is a necessary component of human well-being”. Sotomayor will insist we give away freedom along with free health care for 10 million illegal immigrants. National health care beckons FFRF to bring lawsuits against private hospitals receiving government payments for patient care while maintaining a religious component within their healthcare services.

[careforall]

Money talk..BS walks
Yes! No Cap on lawyers' fee!
The real way to improve healthcare is to keep malpractice cases going. By not putting a cap on lawyers fee will ensure patients to get the best health care they deserved.
The President got it right!
This is REAL CHANGE!
http://abajournal.com/news/trial_lawyers_shift_from_edwards_to_obama/

[rad21]

If Senate Republicans do not deliver on healthcare and are perceived as obstructionists, will other Republicans elected to the House; and at the state and local levels also suffer at the polls?

[frappe]

I heard a statistic that 50% of Republicans polled would like a "public option" in the healthcare legislation. So, yes, those Republican reps and senators who oppose it would stand to suffer at the polls.

[snesich]

Remember, the Public Health Care Option is NOT being held up by the "Democratic Party" or President Obama. It is a group of individual senators within the Democratic Party that have put this plan in jeopardy.

Don't blame "The Democrats". Understand WHO these specific individual senators are---and speak directly to them. They are the following:

Max Baucus
Dianne Feinstein
Mark Warner
Ben Nelson
Blanche Lincoln
Evan Bayh
Harry Reid
Mark Pryor
Kent Conrad
Michael Bennet
Tom Carper
Joe Lieberman
Kay Hagan
and a few others.

If the above senators get on board, we'll have a public option. If they don't, the public option is in trouble. And if it fails to pass, we'll be right where we are today, 100% at the mercy of the insurance and drug companies.

The passage of a Public Health Care option---a REAL one, with some teeth in it---is entirely in the hands of the senators listed above. We need to contact all of them and let them know that the future health and financial stability of our families is in their hands.

What are we waiting for? Call the Capitol Hill switchboard, TOLL FREE, at 1 -877 851-6437 and remind these senators that 70% of the public supports the choice of a public health care option!

[ncmom54]

I was born a Democrat so this isn't intended to be an insult to the party... but,
Does the Democratic Party not have any influence at all with these representatives who have aligned themselves with the party, under the umbrella and receive a great deal of support from them?

[Ajegunle]

Run over 'em O, run over 'em with a bulldozer!


RethugliKKans!

[Ajegunle]

If the "Just say NO" Rethuglikkans don't want to help average and poor Americans...


F_U_C_K 'em!

[avoicealone]

Obama and the Democrats want bipartisan support for one reason: so they do not to acept full responsibility when this bill ends up costing more than it saves.

Just like the spending spree, Democrats want Republican support so they can say it was partly the Republicans fault the reforms failed.

Sorry, this reform bill and the spending spree are going to be the downfall of Obama and the congressional Democrats.

[lady49]

That is so not true....

[Davwbaird]

it seems the gross money we spend on the military will be our downfall. Then try the greed of the insurance companies and the banks that have stolen our lives.

[RadicalRationalist]

I simply cannot fathom why the Democrats, ever since 2006, seem to consider the threat of a filibuster to be an impossible obstacle to overcome. Write a good bill and if the Republicans don't like it let them filibuster. I trust the Obama Administration's ability to frame the issue in the right way. The GOP will be seen as needlessly blocking legislation that nearly 70% of the American public is in favor of. They are bluffing and the Dems never call them on it. It's time for the Democratic majority to find its spine. If they don't, I think they're going to face some serious primary challenges in 2010.

http://www.radicalrationalist.com/2009/06/29/conventional-wisdom-60-votes/

[knowhelpnow]

There are Democrats that are bought and paid for by big Corporations, that is the big problem these people are bought and paid for by special interest, look how much the financial system and the health care system is paying for lobbyist to stop regulation of the financial system and to put down the Public Option plan (the best plan they don't even want to consider is the single payer one). The people want it so what is their problem; they owe to much to the big Corporations.
If we had a public finance system for elections a lot of this would stop, our Representative would be ours not Corporate America.

[brandon102]

These people are so clueless it gives me a headache (luckily I've got health insurance).

While they bicker back and forth and Axelrod says we've got to get this done because, mercy me, health insurance costs have doubled in the last decade, wouldn't you think someone would say we have to get this done because we have 50 million (or so) people with no health insurance in this "Great Country" of ours, and most people who go bankrupt do it because of health costs.

I mean, if that's not a reason to get something done, I don't know what is. The problem is they all have great health insurance. I say repeal health insurance for every political decision maker. Make it illegal for them to be insured, until they get a bill passed. Let them see how the other half lives. This is so sad. The truth is, they don't give the uninsured a moment's thought.

[GirlOutWest]

This article is from the Denver Post (6/7/09) regarding the "myths" of the Canadian Health Care System.

http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_12523427

It's interesting.

[JuliaRain]

This one too:

Lies About Canada's Superior Health Care

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-francis/republican-lies-about-can_b_201521.html

[Budokan]

Saying it is one thing. Getting the Democravens in congress to stand up with a spine is something else altogether.

I'll believe it when I see it.

http://kennethmarkhoover.com

[OhComeOnNow]

Democravens - love it!!!! Faved!

[MountainPenelope]

Some here have questioned why President Obama wants bipartisanship. One of the prinicple planks of his platform was to try and bring the country together.

The GOPers fear unitiy of purpose in the United States. They know 70+ per cent of us want health care reform with a strong public option.

They do not want a strong United States. They want a "controlled" United States population in order to push forward their corporate agenda.

Sorry guys. Better get with the program.

[frappe]

The bottom line, MP, is that we want a STRONG PUBLIC OPTION, at a minimum. Why is this such a problem when three out of every four Americans want it, too? What is so hard to understand about this? Why won't the Democrats run with this and ignore the Republicans who will do everything that they possibly can to not only derail a workable health care reform bill, but the Obama presidency as well.

We need real health care reform and we need it NOW. We won't be enjoying these kinds of majorities in Congress unless Congress grows a set...and grows them quickly.

[magic3400]

That's only matters if you don't believe that your policies will work, If you know you are right it doesn't matter because success is the best defense against Repubs. If he fails, then all bipartisanship does is give you cover, if you win then bipartisanship meaningless.

My question is why dilute your plan, if he can't turn the economy around there will be no second term anyway, so why waste time playing footsie with the losers in the Repub party?

If people fell like Obama has their best interest at heart then they'll give him time.

[MacQ]

Mr. Obama only wants "bipartisanship" from his opponents.
His message to republicans has been clear: I won and we don't need your ideas. We don't even need your votes. Echoed here by Axelrod.

Just a thought here: you might want to read some history of our founding. "Unity" is not a particularly great goal in fact. There was unity at Jonestown. A healthy opposition is a good thing and helps keep power in check.

As for "control", I'm not sure how you arrive at your statement. The GOP argues for LESS of it, the Dems argue for MORE of it.
Same with a "strong" America: who is that wants to cut defense spending?

You just make up your facts to support your opinions, don't you?

[frappe]

There's more to being a "strong" America than spending five times the amount for defense that every other nation on planet Earth spends combined. Jobs, community, civility, EMPATHY...all of these combine to create and maintain a strong America. And, in my view, affordable universal health care for all from cradle to the grave is near the top of the list.

We've seen an exodus of manufacturing jobs go overseas under the banner of "globalization". Republicans seem to embrace globalization efforts despite the negative impact on the domestic population. To Republicans, it would seem that profits come before people. This seems to have always been the case. It is why, I believe, you will always be the minority party.

[Adjuster]

You are a perfect example of why bipartisanship is not worth pursuing. Thanks for making the case so clear.

[Dystopic]

Rethugs argue for less control. yet everytime they are in power, they take more and more control.

$600B in defence spending is welfare, plain and simple

[knowhelpnow]

Well I'm one progressive that is tired of these water down bills to include this bipartisanship nonsense, the Republicans used the nuclear rule and we should too.
We are to far apart to ever come together to produce any sort of Public Option much less the single payer plan that 70% of the people want, now that is bipartisanship the people have spoken. Some things ought to be controlled by the government Health Care is one of them, we have waited to long to not get what the people want.

[CherokeeGirl]

GOP have proven by their choices and actions that they don't give two hoots about the American people. Why waste our time with them? What they offer is not bi-partisanship. I don't care what Johm McCain says.

[bannorhill]

Axelrod does not even know the meaning of bipartisan. It means "marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties".

Without agreement (votes) from the two parties it can not be bipartisan.

[frantaylor]

You are missing out on the hidden jab at the Republican Party here. Polls show that this plan DOES have bipartisan support AMONG THE PEOPLE. What he is saying is that all of the people support this, it is only the Republican "Leadership" that is not on board, and they are irrelevant.

[jusasoldier]

Well said....this has been my take on their meaning of bipartisanship all along....how's that wilderness working out for you trolls....just sayin

[Dystopic]

yes, but both parties must be honest brokers of their ideas.

The rethugs are obstructionists plain and simple, because they know once healthcare reform is passed, they will be put out to pasture, just the the conservatives in europe. They will have to run on taking away your heathcare...

[CherokeeGirl]

so? who cares, if they can't work together with sincere concern for us, I say to heck with them.

[NPA]

After the last eight years why do we expect the republicans to do anything?!