Obama's Speech: Trapped In the Gap Between Action and Rhetoric
The President did a great job last night making the case to the nation of the need for health care reform. He made the moral case, and every metric indicates that people were overwhelmingly moved to support his plan. That's the good news for the White House.
The not so good news: the White House has been trying to get out from under the burden of supporting the public option for weeks. The trouble is, every time they try to do it, the President's poll numbers take a huge hit. And so last night he came out and indicated that a public plan would be a part of his reform package. Today on the White House website, under "The Obama Plan," it says:
If You Don't Have Insurance
Offers a public health insurance option to provide the uninsured and those who can't find affordable coverage with a real choice.
The website is not so quick to commemorate the qualifiers regarding this public plan from last night's speech:
- "The public option is only a means to that end - and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal." (expendable)
- "For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies." (triggers)
- "Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring." (co-ops)
The administration's inability to close the gap between expectations and reality is a boon for progressives members of Congress trying to maintain the 40 vote firewall necessary to keep any health care bill from passing that does not have a public public option. So far they are holding steady at 66 votes with no support from the party, the White House, Congressional leadership or the liberal "veal pen" institutions.
Earlier this week, the co-chairs of the Progressive Caucus -- Raul Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey -- wrote a letter urging the President to mention the public option in his speech. I spoke with Rep. Grijalva yesterday, and he reiterated how important it was to their efforts that the President do so. As long as the President keeps expressing his support for a public option, they -- and we -- can quite rightly say that we're only insisting on something Obama himself endorses, something he campaigned on.
Interview with Rep. Grijalva -- Pt. II
Of course, the actions of the White House betray quite a different intent. The deals they have negotiated with health care industry stakeholders do not include a public plan, and they don't believe they can back out of them without triggering a rush of lobbyist money to GOP coffers.
At some point there will be a day of reckoning when the public understands that the public option is gone. But getting there will be tricky, and in the mean time White House wants to stop their opponents -- and let's face it, progressives who are insisting on the inclusion of a public plan are at this point their opponents -- from being able to exploit that gap. Because with every day that goes by, the base gets more and more wedded to the promise of a public plan, encouraged by the positive rhetoric of the President himself. It becomes that much harder for the White House to extract itself from the enthusiasm they assist in fostering without paying a huge political price.
One day the 11 dimensional chess set is going to have to come to terms with the fact that Rahm Emanuel worked with Max Baucus to cut deals that they force into the House through the Blue Dogs, and that the goals of the White House are not at odds with those of the Blue Dogs. Which is why Emanuel protects them so fiercely. And why we keep hearing things like this:
Remember back on Friday, President Obama discussed the public option on a conference call with House liberals?... Well that meeting never happened. [I]t doesn't seem to suggest that House liberals are being roped in to the health care negotiations between the House and the Senate.
Meanwhile, the President meets with the Blue Dogs this morning.
NBC's First Read indicates that the President's speech "will be a failure if progressives...are still obsessing over the public option a week from now." But recent Rasmussen polling found that 44% of Democrats "strongly support" health care reform if it includes a public option. "Without the public option, just 12% of Democrats Strongly support it," they note.
It's going to take more than just one speech to move those numbers significantly.
It's hard to believe the administration thought they could ditch the public plan without completely demoralizing the base and potentially suppressing 2010 turnout to 1994 levels, just as the passage of NAFTA did in 1993. Let's not forget, that was also Rahm Emanuel's handiwork and it resulted in a 54 seat swing that gave the GOP control of the House. Those Democrats who feel the need to "pass anything" and sacrifice the heart of health care reform just to build Republican support should also consider the potential nationwide downticket disaster that dropping a public plan could portend.
In the mean time, as long as the White House is consumed with the task of gaming out how they're going to break the bad news to the public and hoping they can somehow pass off the blame to the GOP, House progressives will exploit the double the administration has created to consolidate their block.
Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake
Follow Jane Hamsher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janehamsher
John F. Wasik: Future of Health Care Is Nasty, Brutish and Short
Right now, weak state regulators not only turn a blind eye to the worst practices of the health care industry, they greenlight most rate increases. I know because I've been a victim of these abuses.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Obama was hired by rich corporations to increase profit, and for banking and Wall Street he has done just that.
Comes now a medical industry that can only increase profit by more patients or poorer health, and to reform such a system is a quest for the impossible.
Whereas public charity healthcare, like Medicare, shows a profit by decreasing patients and improving health.
As long as the "health care reform bill" remains a massive corporate welfare bill for the insurance industry Obama is good with it. It's his only steadfast point for "health care reform".
Any attempt to take the moral high ground that does not exhort the public to repudiate the belief that corporations should profit from the sickness or fear of sickness of the American people rings hollow.
Yes and even thought 60% of the public has excessive wealth, and even enjoy plundering the world to get that wealth, you would think out of self preservation they would run for daylight.
It sounds like we have traded the Cheney/Bush puppet show for the Emanuel/Obama puppet show. If I had only known that Rahm Emanuel was going to be anywhere near the White House after Nov. 4th, I never would have supported Obama over Hillary.
well said. There was a lack of vetting before the elections. And we didn't know who would be his main advisors. So far, many of his choices have not be sterling or in favor of any changes we can believe. To wit, Geithner at Treasury and the lack of robust changes in the regulatory process of the banking and financial behemoths.
While I thought that the president gave a rousing and brilliantly crafted address the other night, I was highly skeptical by the end. Too much wiggle room was left in the details.
While health care reform in itself won't be Obama's Waterloo, reform without a public option certainly will be, at least as far as the mid-terms are concerned.
I can't believe that they don't see that. It makes one wonder just how much of their soul they sold in their secret dealings with the Health Care Industrial Complex.
Agreed. I am also amazed that the Democrats fail to see that passing REFORM will amount to a Waterloo for the Rethuglicans. Short of actual violence, the Thugs have thrown everything they can onto the issue. They risk long term irrelevance. Democrats need to capitalize on this weakness.
Its almost as if most politicians are paid actors, paid to pretend we have a real government.
This WH shows the evil of politics in their dealings with healthcare reform. They are ready and willing to double-talk their way and obfuscate their strategy while not looking at the long term consequences. Progressives, independents are taken for granted and are not seriously given any consideration and respect in this WH. This is why the conservative (not really moderate. an oxymoron) democrats/
The original public option was intended to create competition and put immediate saving back into peoples pockets by reducing their premiums. It had a two fold purpose in health reform and providing extra income for the middle class that could be spent back into the economy as a form of stimulus for our consumer based economy.
The public option, if given to the general public, had the potential to become a defacto Single Payer if a large majority enrolled. By killing this plan, they simply gave preferential treatment to industry and perpetuate the macroeconomics of a nation that allows farming of the populations incomes.
The economy is split in two, one half based in financials which the affluent run, and the other half is floundering. They have completely disenfranchised the middle class and continue to exploit their own people as a consumer base as they suffer.
My goodness, but you do have us on the verge of a real Revolution.
As well we should be!
We don't need to take up arms to have a new American Revolution. It's time for progressive Americans to take to the streets and demand that firedoglake Progressive Democrats give up on the Democratic Party and break away, form their own third party. Organize progressives at all levels of gov't for a strong, viable third party able to get their message out.
MSM has marginalized every attempt made by Progressive candidates on the national stage. Kucinich, Dean, Edwards - the establishment has worked hard to discredit and trivialize these great men. Why? Because the establishment cannot afford to let Americans hear the views of politicians that actually care about providing ALL Americans with an equal opportunity for success.
Sadly, the Constitution and American democracy have taken a back seat to corporate profits. The Bush Administration locked corporate-held puppet strings securely into government at all levels, from SCOTUS down to the lowliest agency office. Congress no longer bothers to hide their corporate masters because they know the people can do nothing about it.
It's the American People vs Corporations and the wealthy few. We need political leadership if we are to win. Without it, corporations will win by default. We thought Obama would bring change and he's proving to be just another puppet. Let him stay aligned with the Blue Dogs. I look to Jane Hamsher and Progressive Democrats - Step forward! Be the leaders we so desperately want and need!
Apparently BO thinks he can pass a crap bill and call it caviar, and that will earn him a place in history along side of Lincoln & FDR. No public option at the least is a betrayal of everything Sentor Teddy stood for; so he can put that read after I am gone letter he got right where the sun don't shine. Not even a nice try Mr. Prez.
He should be more concerned being seen in the company of Carter, Bush & Shrub.
A vote against a Public Option is a vote against you, me and the people's choice.
Target the Senate Democrats listed as ""Don't know" on the Public Option :
Source : http://sta
Sen. Max..Baucu
Sen. Evan..Bayh
Sen. Mark.. Begich....
Sen. Robert...B
Sen. Thomas..Ca
Sen. Kent ..Conrad..
Sen. Mary..Land
Sen. Blanche..L
Sen. Bill..Nels
Sen. Benjamin.N
Sen. Mark..Pryo
Sen. Jon..Teste
Sen. Mark..Warn
Sen. Ron..Wyden
Please call, everyone, and keep calling. I read somewhere that being flooded with phone calls is much more effective than email. Email is easy to ignore, but a ringing phone is not.
A personal appeal by snail mail is good too.
SNIPPING FROM THE SIDELINES DOES NOT HELP !!!!!
Want to help then SNIP at the Corporate LACKEYS holding up the progress and letting bankers rob the country !!!!!
Jane. I totally agree. The speech was good no doubt. But i am not like those liberals who were falling over themselves with Obama's speech. This liberal is waiting for the nuts and bolts of the final HCR bill.
Conservatives always controll politics, liberals always hope for some good out of politics, and us progressives alway rebel against such an ungodly thing as capitalist politics.
"It's hard to believe the administration thought they could ditch the public plan without completely demoralizing the base and potentially suppressing 2010 turnout to 1994 levels..."
I wondered (for a short while) if this could be naivety. Now, I believe the President has experienced more than enough resistance from the true 'center' of his party to take seriously the promises he made in the election. At this point, I have to think it is hubris that allows him to discount his supporters so completely. I believe he is acting out of the conviction that his judgment is far superior to that of his supporters. This president is, I believe, 'unknowable'. Conviction seems to be a fluid thing that needs only to find a 'center'. The 'center' of anything. It remains to be revealed whether this 'center' is the conviction or whether his re-election is the goal. It's truly frightening to think he may still believe that anyone right of center is going to develop a great love for him and his 'bi-partisanship' efforts.
Honestly, I don't envy anyone trying to sell this public option. The savings are so small for both the government and the consumer compared to single payer, it's like selling an old car you managed to get 3 wheels for but it's always going to be missing the 4th.
I urge all HP readers to read Auerback's op-ed piece.
He spells out what POTUS is trying to do, and the consequences of doing so as in what they have created in MA where I live.
We must defeat the bills in Congress and demand SINGLE PAYER as the way forward.
Forget the rhetoric, it is time for action.
And I would say to the President with all due respect, the time for propping up the insurance industry courtesy of the US taxpayer is over.
It is time for this nation to take care of its own, and if taxpayer dollars are going to be used for anything, it must be for health care of its citizens, not forever wars win foreign countries that we cannot win, nor can we afford.
Obama and the Democrats just authorized $128 billion more to be wasted killing innocent poor people in Iraq and Afghanistan. How many more "terrorists" will be created as a result of the deaths caused by this new $128 billion for the US' war forever?
And that $128 billion could have paid for healthcare reform for one year. It's disgusting.
Health care already costs us 16% to 18% of GDP. Per capita spending is approximately twice what it is in all other industrial countries with worse outcomes.
WE ALREADY SPEND THE MONEY!!! The CBO can say reform or a single payer plan will cost this much or that much but it is NOT new spending. It is redirecting the money we currently spend, much of it going to private for-profit insurance companies.
If the only legislation Congress passed was a requirement that all medical billing coding be based on Medicare coding, regardless of who is being billed, millions of dollars would be saved every year. The problem with our current system is that private insurance would keep the savings as increased profit rather than reduce premiums, so it wouldn't provide any of the relief we are looking to reform to provide. That's why we need nothing less than single payer.
HR676!!!!
Wall Street breathes sigh of relief following speech, sending insurance stocks higher:
http://www
I thought so. I posted at a NYT blog after hearing the speech that "Insurance companies surely are the winner. They must be absolutely thrilled after hearing tonight’s speech." It baffled me why so many democrats were praising his speech or busy with criticizing Wilson.
Think of "heathcare reform" as the politically acceptable name for a plan to give needed life support to the insurance companies directly from the public till. That's what the "cost" of reform actually is - almost $1 trillion of subsidies to be paid directly to healthcos. Plus the mandates. Plus the reforms to stop abusive cost control efforts by insurers - which will increase their costs, therefore their prices and revenues. All will increase profits, hence the Wall Street jubilation.
Democrats? They now get more money from healthcos than do Republicans, so they praise the speech. Joe Wilson provided just the kind of distraction they need to avoid discussing real reform, single-payer Medicare For All, which the House will actually vote on soon .
The public option is already eviscerated, but it serves the healthcos by diverting attention away from Medicare For All. So they are happy to participate in the sham "debate" about it by offering opposition to it, even though they have already stifled it in its crib.
O. and his administration are dreaming if they think they can dupe the American people. He dropped 20 points on Kos, a liberal site, and it all had to do w/ healthcare. I, for one, have my PB (pocket book) jammed shut to all Dems and it will not open until I see action for the sick and dying in this country. I am outraged that the thieves at BC BS raised my rates $200.00 per month, but I got a measly 3% raise at work. I demand that Congress advocate for all Americans who are bent over financially by the robbers in the health care industry. The thievery must stop now.
Publicly finance elections now. That way the politicians have no excuses.
If only.... :(
Slave owners created a Republic to destroy democracy, we need to create a democracy to destroy this ungodly Republic.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
