Hill: D.C. Dems Back Off Health Care Promises

In a stunning - if predictable - story, the Hill newspaper reports that congressional Democrats are now saying that they will effectively thwart any effort to create a national health care program. Here is the key excerpt:

"Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult...Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a member of Senate Democratic leadership and a key Hillary Clinton ally who also sits on the Finance Committee, said he is 'not sure we have the big plan on healthcare.'...'Healthcare I feel strongly about, but I am not sure that we're ready for a major national healthcare plan,' Schumer said...Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.), a Clinton supporter who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, said "the money is not necessarily there right now" to enact the plans."

There's a lot to unpack here.

First and foremost, to those in Washington who say the nation should just wait for Washington to act on health care and wait for Democrats to win control of Congress and the presidency, this story exposes the glaring failure of that strategy - especially as states move forward into the breach. Health care reform has to be a dual effort - at the federal level and at the state level. And most likely, real reform is going to start in the states - in part, because Democrats in Washington are so afraid of their own shadow and bought off by Big Money interests that they are now acknowledging that they are no serious about fulfilling their health care promises.

Second, you'll notice the right-wing arguments being made by Democrats in this piece. Schumer, like a reliable Fox News anchor, tells us that America isn't "ready" for national health care plan, despite polls over the last decade showing strong support for such a concept. Likewise, Meek - playing right into the Grover Norquist "drown it in the bathtub" mantra, claims the federal government doesn't have the cash to pay for a health care overhaul - even as Congress continues writing blank checks to fund the Iraq War.

Finally, this reminds us of the need for progressives to focus on building a social movement, rather than exclusively on winning elections. Democrats are effectively saying that no matter how many elections are won, they will not move forward on the most pressing domestic issue. That's because there isn't yet a powerful social movement putting constant pressure on both parties - and instilling fear in both parties. The infrastructure that has been built in recent years is largely partisan rather than movement-oriented - that is, aimed at buttressing the Democratic Party, regardless of what it does. If we are to get health care reform, it will require a movement - not a party.

Join the book club for David Sirota's upcoming book, The Uprising, due out on 5/27.

Comments

[InjunTrouble]

The democratic congressmen are trying to protect the health care and insurance industry just in case Obama gets elected.

They were OK with a national health care plan when they thought it was going to be Hillary - she would have taken care that corporations don't suffer from any such plan.

Obama is an unknown quantity, so supporters of corporations in Congress as well outside are really worried.

[naugiedoggie]

You have to be joking. Why don't you actually go look at Obama's "health plan"? It holds more air than a sponge cake.

In particular, Obama has specifically ruled out both mandated care and any Federal health plan ("extending Medicare") -- both of which are key to the Clinton plan. Obama will deny health care "reform" to somewhere around 20 million citizens.

You can bet your patootie that the medical and insurance industries would far prefer the Obama plan to the Clinton plan, since he has pledged to NOT use the Federal gov't power to "force" coverage of all Americans.

Thanks.

mp

[elkabong]

A mandate won't sell no matter how good it is. Screw mandates, anyway. How about "single payer"? That's what Obama has hinted at. He's going to make the plan he is on available to everyone. Back door single payer. The special interests know who they're trying to scuttle.

[chery]

After decades of propoganda against entitlement systems, you honestly think Hillary believes she can deliver on a mandated health care system? Why is it that Hillary people are so quick to jump on any promise that government will come to their house and do their laundry for them? It's gonna take a movement of the people to force changes in skyrocketing costs of medical care, of establishing caps for health care profits! Unless we can rein in those costs, no one is going to consider a universal program unless they're lobbiests! We already saw the damage the repubs did with the military! Instead of caping profits that were out of control, we cut back on our level of forces, and broke off half the jobs to be served by private contracts at twice the cost! And that private sector has no oversight! That's exactly what government would do with health care if we didn't start with costs first! Once burned, twice learned!!!!

[KELLI2L]

Are U kidding? Obama's health care plan is horribly inadequate. . . . . That's why the congress may prefer it.

[dbredes]

So let's see 2 major supporters of Clinton - are already setting the stage for another Hillary Led - Failed Healthcare attempt.

Listen up folks...We need a movement to get healthcare­...and guess what....Ob­ama is more than a candidate.­..He IS leading a MOVEMENT.

So Listen Up - You Congressional Sellouts - Be You Republicans or Democrats.­..

You're on Notice...I­f it takes riots in the streets..M­arching on the Capital...­Healthcare Panthers..­.WHATEVER.­....

[zizyphus]

I say we start a new party and call it the Blue Jeans Party. It would actively seek to abolish the FED and the IRS, regulate the banking industry, reduce military spending by closing some of the 400 bases around the world, shift the money to education and health care, institute single payer universal health care, start a new WPA with a conservation/green slant, eliminate tax subsidies for giant corporations and give them to small businesses, nationalize the oil companies, raise the cap on social security contributions from people, eliminate the Department of Homeland Security, restore Habeas Corpus, end the War on Drugs which as led to the largest underground economy since Prohibition, end the use of private mercenaries, and tax churches. For starters.

[siegfried]

Or we could take a look at the Green party which advocates most of what you are suggesting.

[Imabachi]

Most of what you recommend is what the Green Party of the U.S. has recommended for over 20 years. But we have to fight the "Party With Two Wings, Both Broken" tooth and nail. Check it out at www.gp.org.

[KELLI2L]

To zizyphus: I applaud that you have a plan. And it sounds better than the one our government uses. Maybe we should vote for you. . . . . .

[DebbieKat]

Voting in a combination of both Green Party and Libertarian Party candidates can help achieve this goal. The Libertarian Party, while not fond of government-funded programs in general is very much in favor of civil rights and limited military/g­overnment. They are also the 3rd largest party in the nation and have some traction on ballot access. The Greens are also quite strong. We need a combination of these types of candidates to take our country back. Vote for Mike Gravel in the Libertarian Party. He's for ALL of the things you are talking about.

[JumpinJ]

What the $#@! do they mean that "America's not ready"? Have they asked? Were we ready for civil rights? Were we ready to fly to the moon? Were we ready to go into Iraq? (okay, two out of three ain't bad). Seriously, this is one of the dumbest excuses ever. Note to ALL politicians: American's are more than ready. We're ready for health care reform, energy reform, election reform, and almost any other kind of reform. Stop the excuses and just effin do it already.

[Absintheforall]

Well, the difference between McCain, Hillary and Obama has just been blurred beyond recognition.

The Democrats/­Republican­s are not going to end the war, and they are not even pretending to have a health care solution anymore.

Sadly, we've been snookered again!

[UnbiasView]

Sadly, you should have saw it coming. It started with we will end this war next year and morphed into even Obama saying we'll be withdrawing COMBAT troops. Nothing about all the troops.

[DebbieKat]

We need to start voting in third parties NOW. Let's get rid of the Dems and Republicans once and for all. The only ones we should keep are people like Kucinich who have proven their worth.

[GDliberal]

Well Duh.
This is one of the reasons that dems need to nominate someone that has some coattails that can help bring other dems to DC. Verses the one that will have the gop digging up the dead to vote against her and any other dems. There has to be a movement for change not business as usual if anything is ever going to get done for the people.

[UnbiasView]

So what your saying is Dems failed so we need more Dems? Interesting logic.

[S1m0n]

Hillary's healthcare plan won't happen? If only we could get Hillary's 'key ally' to say so to the Canadian ambassador­...

[MidwestBlue]

I emailed Elizabeth Edwards about this. I don't know if I had the correct email (I got an "out of office" reply), but I thought she should have this information if she's thinking about endorsing Hillary Clinton because of Clinton's health care plan.

[Citizenofreality]

It isn't Americans who aren't ready for a national health care system, it's the insurance companies. Here are two ideas to get the ball rolling 1). Propose that all who serve in Congress be denied access to their excellent health care coverage until they fix this problem. 2). Every citizen in this country who pays for junk health insurance drops their policy. ( If you are the proud owner of one of these policies you are already in dire straits anyway, believe me I know).

[UkieOlie]

Good ideas.

[KELLI2L]

Back to you 'Citizenofrealtiy': I'LL VOTE FOR THAT.

[BeeOplentee]

Damn! You Dems could have at least waited until you gained the Whitehouse before crushing the promise for healthcare reform.

Hypocrites!

[UnbiasView]

If you used common sense you would have known that it was a pipe dream right from the begining . . . just like $5000 baby bonds . . . just like free college.

[RoloTomassi]

Indeed, and all because corruption in congress and great conservative minds like yours continue to do all that you can to keep us equal to a 3rd world country, in regards to social equality.

[KELLI2L]

to 'BeeOplentee' - If your not a Dem (and I assume your not from your comment) that may make you a Republican and if so you do realize don't you that Mccain is not offering a health care plan at all. If you are an independant - I think the Green Party will be offering a health care plan.

[racom]

This post will receive plenty of rants, we have been sold out again. As David said, no surprise. The dems have a history of selling out their constituents and this is just more of the same. Tired of getting disappointed, then drop your expectations. Some think they have the answer to cure our ills. My big issue, corporate lobbyist. 99% of all politicians have proven from time indefinite they can be bought and the lobbyist are there to do the buying. 35000 lobbyist in DC now and still multipling like rabbits. Here is a little test for you to try, go to DC and try to get an appointment with your congressman. After you have been denied try again representing yourself as a lobbist with connections to one of the big lobbying firms in DC. Odds are you will be successful. So who is getting representation, the constitutent or the money?

[jcwtts1]

uhhh I'm looking for the Obama supporter who said we weren't going to do it? Obama has the chance to grow the party, to bring in new voters to build a consensus. Hillary just wants to govern from a defensive crouch. That's the difference between the two. And frankly, lets put the negotiations of tv and see who blinks first. Obama can get this done specifically because he doesn't owe the HMO Drug Company lobby his friggin soul. Hillary does.

J

[UnbiasView]

"Obama has the chance to grow the party, to bring in new voters to build a consensus"

Best way to unite in my opinion: BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY

[msjentay]

You're exactly right. This is why Hillary's plan has not been successful in the past. Not being owned by the drug or insurance companies is the only way to get this passed. Also, I don't know why people are ignoring this promise to televise the negotiations. That could be a huge step in our political process. I know the idea of transparecy in government scares a lot of people but this just goes to show you that Obama isn't afraid of Americans being involved in this process.

[KELLI2L]

response to jcwtts1 - < you sound deluded if you think Obama cares for the working class people. His voting record in the Senate shows that he does not >

[Vige]

Rome was not built in a day but, Hillary is again peddling that it can be built in a day. Hillary is proposing the same plan she proposed in the 90's which was defeated because of refusal to compromise.

If you have read both Clinton's and Obama's plans and then read everything that the experts say and really compare them you understand why Obama does not make it mandatory.

The Obama plan works on four levels which involves the states, the insurance providers, the pharmaceutical companies and the federal government. His plan also allows for the provisions of allowing individuals to secure plans that would reduce the premiums to rates that you have with employer participation by creating large buyer pools. His plan working from the bottom up and involving participation of all involved and some give from all involved stands a better chance of getting it done has a better chance.

Something as massive as health care reform simply has to come in steps if it is ever to have a chance.

[naugiedoggie]

Actually, I have compared the Clinton plan to the Obama plan, and therefore, I can reply that you're talking nonsense. Obama will leave many millions of Americans without any option to obtain coverage and he will specifically rule out any options that would make coverage universal, such as "extending Medicare" or implementing mandates. Anybody who wants to know the truth about these plans can search on http://www.healthbeat.org to find out the facts.

"Private insurers compete by avoiding high-risk individuals, limiting services for those they do cover, and, whenever possible, shifting costs to other payers or to patients in the form of high deductibles and co-payments. We have the only health system in the world based on avoiding sick people." -- Dr. Marcia Angell, senior lecturer on social medicine at the Harvard Medical School and a former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine (quoted on Healthbeat)

Obama plans to leave that system in place, specifically allowing the above-described cost shifting to continue. You're selling a one-legged stool. I'm not buying.

Thanks.

mp

[ExPatriot70]

I am glad I retired to a country with UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE the system has flaws but it works and I am not going bankrupt to have decent health care. Prescription drugs and dental work are also covered and for this I pay $80 month depending on the exchange rate of the $

[UnbiasView]

You are exactly the reason why we can't have a universal health care program. We already have a huge illegal immigration problem and it will only get worse as the government adds on to their free handouts package.

I'm sure the working people in whatever country you are in enjoy footing the bill for you.

[TheBlackCat]

Though I do not know what country they moved too so I can't say this with certainty, as someone who's lived in Europe, they do not have the same problems with immigration as we do. While England and France do have a large problem with immigrants putting strains on their social services, many Western European countries have very stringent immigration laws. You can't just move there like you can in America and get a potential free ride. They go over your financial records with a fine tooth combed and put you through a rigorous process to make sure that you will be contributing enough to their economy and society to make it worth their while to then support you in their programs like Health care. It is very hard to become a full citizen who gets the same rights and provisions (like health care) that a native does. You have to prove you are contributing more than you are getting. You can't show up to Denmark and go on welfare, it doesn't work that way. Don't compare problems with US immigration to immigration in all countries.

How about, next time, you know what you're talking about first before you deride someone?

[kdogg]

hey Mr. unbiasview, your bias is showing. did he say that he was an illegal in the country he is retired in? ever think that he might have dual citizenship? you are such an asshat.

[RoloTomassi]

We would all have a better use of our time and words if we ignore UnbiasView, as he is a GOP-Troll who has nothing relevant or intelligent to add to any discussion. He makes wild claims that he never bothers to back up with verifiable links or information, and is amused by dropping what he supposes are inflamatory comments just to see how we wil react to them.

He's not worth the time of any reasonable commentor.

[Phoenixfire089]

Schumer's quotes illustrate the gap between politicians and regular people. This morning I woke up to a guest on a tv program speaking about how American's average lifespan has stagnated and that 20% of women will not make it to that average. Further, the United States is 24th in a ranking of infant mortality.­..lower than Cuba. According to recent studies, there is a statistically significant relationship between wealth and life expectancy.

For a nation that is supposed to be the world's superpower, these figures are rather poor. Especially when the lack of access to healthcare is the root cause, a cause that can be fixed. Schumer and others who believe along the same line are obviously the ones with good health insurance.

[UnbiasView]

"Schumer's quotes illustrate the gap between politicians and regular people."

False, most Americans can just look over the past 50 years and easily see that every government run program starts with good intentions and then morphs into a money sucking, ineffcient drain on the rest of society.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

That statement is stupid right wing hyperbole. Every country that has a national health care program is glad they have it.

One of the best ways for ANY politician in ANY country that has one to go back to working an honest living is to propose going on the American (non)system.

[Phoenixfire089]

I believe that can be true. However, most European nations have a system of nationalized healthcare and look at the strength of the euro. I would argue that it's not making them too inefficient.

Besides if workers have a way to recieve preventative treatment, then there can be a reduction of costs in the long-term and increased productivity in the present.