Progressive Obama Backers Take Out Full Page NYT Ad Targeting President

In a full-page New York Times ad released Wednesday, Obama campaign workers demand that the president fight for a public health care option.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee raised over $100,000 online to fund the ad, which will be published in the paper this week. It features a petition signed by 400 former Obama campaign staffers, 25,000 Obama volunteers, and 40,000 Obama donors that states health care reform without a public option is not "change we can believe in." The full page can be seen at ActBlue, where the group is now raising money to turn it into a television spot featuring Obama organizers.

The 180,000-member organization raised $100,000 online in 72 hours to fund the ad. Over three thousand donated; the average contribution was $35.

The ad features a quote from Lance Orchid, Obama's Deputy Field Director in Georgia: "President Obama, I started making calls for you during the South Carolina primary from my recovery bed -- after a nearly fatal accident. I couldn't afford health insurance and racked up big bills. I worked for you because I believed you could bring real change on health care. The public option is that change -- please don't disappoint me and the millions of people who believed in you."

Obama is expected to voice his support for the public option in an address to Congress Wednesday night -- as he did at an AFL-CIO picnic in Cincinnati on Labor Day. For the PCCC, that's not enough.

"To avoid losing the grassroots army that got him elected, President Obama needs to do more than express a preference for the public option," PCCC co-founder Adam Green said. "He needs to draw a line in the sand and fight hard for it."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[MsLulu]

The Blue Dogs must concede NOW! They are halting progress for their own interests and possibilities of future elections for themselves. Little do they know, there are more of us than them, and we will not vote for them if they don't understand the basic needs of average Americans who are struggling with the status quo. I hope in the end the light bulb goes on for these guys!

[MsLulu]

PLEASE do not CAVE Pres. Obama. This is TOO dire for our Country right now! We need public option now! Too many people are being priced out or rejected by the insurance companies, andor not provided adequate care even though they're paying premiums. This is an atrocity that should not be enabled to continue to occur. We have the power to make this happen! We must do it now! With or without the Rethugs! They will see after it happens that the sky will not fall and the World will not end! I pray that are given the strength necessary to make this happen.

[lmt78]

support OBAMA...no man is an island unto himself...WE HAVE TO DO OUR PART..

HE CAN NOT DO THIS ALONE...

DO YOUR PART

[blinkthink]

We can take out ads, work like crazy, but the Blue Dogs, Bayh,Baucus, Dodd, Conrad and highest taker, Blanch Lincoln, have stuffed millions into their pockets to faithfully serve the health care lobby. People-get a grip and call out these Dogs working against the Public Option.

[mikeant50]

Bases in the lack of respect this President have received from both sides of the isle, I will not vote for any Dem that opposes President Obama. I guess it is okay for a white Dem to promise us health care, fail and get a second term, but President Obama get threaten if he doesn't get a perfect healthcare bill. This party is slowly becoming a joke.

[breakingpoint]

no public option no more democratic majority

[colourful]

Ok gang. Tell me.

Is Medicaid a public option for seniors and low-income families?
---Does this plan provide the same freedoms associated with a PPO plan?
---Do the participants also get dental and vision coverage under this plan?
---Will it harm capitalism if everyone had the option to purchase this plan (or one like it)?

My question to seniors that oppose the reform.
---Is your government the sponsor of your Medicare and Medicaid plan?
---If yes, why shouldn't the gov't seek to reduce cost to avoid reducing your access to life saving services?

[regulargal]

I don't think your second question to seniors is even being questioned by anyone.

[treat2day]

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html

Most federal money is spent on retirees, especially Social Security and Medicare. And of course the elderly have been moving south and west for years.

Every large blue state saw its elderly population depleted during the late 1990s.

As might be expected, red Florida and Arizona took in many of the elderly, but they weren’t alone. Almost every Mountain and Southern state expanded its elderly population

receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes --

76% are Red States that voted for George Bush in 2000

[zipowitz]

Question 2 leads right into rationing. You don't want to mention that.

As for #1, if we can't control our spending for a small amount of people that use Medicare, then what makes you think we could do any better with a PO?

It's funny to me that they talk about fraud in Medicare yet do nothing to stop it. Just keep throwing billions at it.

[aramos]

Nice add, but so many of the independants that pushed Obama over the top are ready to rescind their vote in 2010. Pass the public option please!

[welshTerrier2]

Dear Current and Former Obama supporters:

The Democrats are going to cave on the public option. They're trying to sell you a "trigger" that will never be implemented. Never. Progressives will never have a voice in the Democratic Party that refuses to confront the corporate stranglehold on our government. The problem is not Blue Dogs or Republicans or Obama; the problem is that you are powerless if you continue to give away your vote. With Democrats, we get watered-down, compromised centrism; not progress. With Republicans we get right-wing madness. You need to stop relying on "the next great progressive Democrat." The problem is not the candidates; the problem is the party itself. You can't get there from here.

And, to those who ask "If we can guarantee access to quality health care for almost all Americans, would you really prefer no bill at all because we can't pass a public option this year?", the answer is that absent a public option and a strong anti-trust push against the insurance industry's oligopoly, none of the hoped for "progress" in this bill will be sustained. You cannot allow corporate greed and a corrupt health insurance market to control the national agenda. If you do, regardless of what "reforms" you pass this year, NO PROGRESS will be made.

I hate to say it but no bill is better than one that will clearly fail.

[Tyler-Durden]

TRUTH!!!

and yes, we definitely need a new party. call it a working class party, whatever. i want it to represent me, not the rich.

[regulargal]

Just thinking....now that the Democratic and Republican parties have merged to become the Corporate Party representing only corporate interests, we need a Consumer Party to represent us.

[pdsimdars]

Yes, I mean, think for just a minute. If you force insurance companies to cover everyone and not drop anyone, without ALSO doing something to hold down costs, they can say - yes we'll cover everyone but we'll have to charge, say, $10,000 a month.
All they ever talk about is forcing them to accept pre-existing conditions and not cancel people, they never say they will disallow the insurance companies from raising rates, at least not that I've heard.
The public option is the only way to do that (except for single payer).

[welshTerrier2]

Exactly!

There are three approaches to addressing the runaway cost problem. Two are public; one is private. The public options include SINGLE PAYER and the so called "public option". Single payer clearly is the more effective way to reduce costs. It's tragic that the compromised Democratic Party took this option off the table. It will cost them and it will cost us. The public option, if indexed to Medicare rates instead of being left to the whims of negotiators, could have become an effective market presence to hold down costs. It will never happen.

The third option, and of course we hear absolutely ZERO discussion of it, would be to really enforce anti-trust laws. It's nonsense to allow huge insurance companies to gain such dominant shares of the market. Many geographical areas only have one or two companies "competing" with each other. If you oppose public solutions, you damned well better support anti-trust enforcement to repair the obvious defects in the private market. I don't hear Republicans, Democrats, or Obama pushing this idea. They're all worse than useless. We need to crush these insurance industry bastards who are responsible for the murders, that's right, murders, of tens of thousands of Americans every single year.

Here's a hint about the "trigger" mechanism: the Democrats have it "back asswards." Put the option in place NOW until there's proof the private market can do the job. Only then might a trigger be used to remove the public option.

[TomTheAlmostUgly]

I've already decided: If the bill that passes says that the insurance companies can continue to do as they please but I get fined if I don't buy one of their policies, I'll pay the three thousand dollar fine. Without single payer or the public option, it doesn't matter what "new laws" get passed, the medical-insurance companies will just laugh at them. FedEx is (relatively) cheap not because of "laws," but because it's in competition with the government-run US Postal Service.

[aofh]

Frankly, I think the ad is misplaced. The ad should be targeting Max Baucus and his gang of six, Blue Dog Democrats like Mike Ross, and Republicans. By targeting Obama, the ad is giving these people a pass, is telling them that they are under the radar and will not be held accountable. Our voices should be directed at Congress demanding that they do the public business in the manner that best suits the public. After all, their job is to create the legislation. The President's job is to execute what they create; he is only an advocate in the legislative process.

[Unforgivableblackness]

I agree partially. I think they should have targeted both. At the same time though,
The White House can put pressure on the Blue Dog Democrats to get their act together.

[pdsimdars]

It's called a lynch pin. You could target all the tea baggers and everyone else who is against. But that simply dilutes your energy and resources. You go for the head. Obama is the leader. If he comes out and says he will not sign a bill without a strong public option -- that forces all the others to come along.

[IAM4CLINTON]

Completely agree with this ad and applaud the donors who made this possible. President Obama and the Democratic party must understand that genuine health care reform that is useful is only one that has at least a public option. Else, it is just a phony political stunt !
When Obama should be roaring, he has refused to even purr.
I am waiting for tonight's speech- I can forgive if President Obama tries and fails but not if he does not try at all !

[wildedge]

One additional clarification of the point I made earlier: Right now, we have a supply-side insurance market, and the only real recourse for unfairly treated consumers is a law-suit. What Conservatives (Dem and Rep) want is to restructure a supply-side market where recourse to a a law-suit is unavailable (thus the Republican chant about 'tort-reform"). Without a strong, viable, efficient public option, a government sponsered insurance program you could resort to at low cost, we would have a market you would be mandated to purchase from without recourse to civil law if you were mistreated by it.

[Hopeington]

Yes we did, so yes he can. No more compromise, just do it!!!

[YewNeekId]

Why did we work so hard to elect a Democratic majority in the House and the Senate if Obama is going cave to few Republicans on the critical Public Option?

Why bother voting for Democrats at all?

[zipowitz]

Why would you even think for a second that he is caving to the R's? It's the D's that are giving him the problems.

[suzukimom]

It is both. If we could get a few reasonable Republicans to work on behalf of the American people, we would not have more options for getting legislation enacted even without 100% of Dems.

[suzukimom]

I meant the WOULD have a greater chance of getting good legislation passed.

[mcmchugh99]

I signed it, as a $4,600m Obama donor in the primaries and general election.

I will not support any health care reform that does not have a public option, at a minimum.

I will not support any "reform" that requires everyone to buy private health insurance, with no public alternative at all.

In this case, the Blue Dogs and DLC are going to either compromise with the progressives, or we will be taking a walk. That is all.