Strength + Weakness Signaled From Obama On Health Care
Tweet
We’re getting mixed signals from the President, both in a positive and negative position.
For now, White House officials said, Mr. Obama remains committed to the goal of insuring all Americans and still prefers to foster competition for insurance companies by creating a new government insurance program, or public option.
White House officials are combing the versions of health care legislation approved by four of the five Congressional committees with jurisdiction on the issue, both to find common ground and to jettison provisions — some relatively minor — that have drawn fire from critics on the political right.
Bully to keeping the public option, but the President needs to move from saying he’d like to have it in the bill versus saying it’s got to be in the bill. That’s not a subtle distinction, but its one he hasn’t made. For whatever the White House thinks they may gain among conservative Dems and a random GOPer or two (probably none), the bottom is liable to fall out of the entire thing among the base. If the White House gives up on the public option they’re telling the base to stay home next year and possibly giving up the House.
The second sign is even troubling. And I don’t get it. I’m okay with bipartisan horsetrading on the edges of issues if it means getting some people on the other side on board. The GOP is not going to budge on health care reform. All the current legislation already concedes more than enough to the right, and they won’t vote for it anyway. It’s almost like the Herschel Walker or Ricky Williams trades – but without Herschel Walker or Ricky Williams!
35 Responses to “Strength + Weakness Signaled From Obama On Health Care”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Every time he does this mixed-signals thing, the left gets more vocal and puts greater pressure on everyone.
I mean, how many times now have we been through this same cycle? He wants us to call, fax, write, email and otherwise press for reform. It’s not rocket science.
So, just to clarify, you’d prefer to go down fighting and end up with nothing, rather than compromise? Don’t get me wrong, I hope that’s what happens with the current bill, I just want to make sure I understand you correctly.
O’Donnell’s take (on Maddow) wasn’t exactly inspiring. They were comparing Obama’s situation with Clinton’s and O’Donnell said when Clinton gave he speech, he was in a better position.
Bottom line is reform is not going to happen with the GOP’s help.
Buzz, a mandate (unaffordable for many because inadequately subsidized) with no public option is not “something”. It’s much, much less than nothing. It’s a lower and middle class tax hike going directly into the coffers of the insurance industry parasites- i.e. another bailout, and one whose pain people will feel in their wallets immediately. It will provoke a backlash that will sweep the Democratic majority out of Congress and James Earl Obama out of the White House. Do you REALLY want to go there? Talk about buzzkills, a bill like that would be the biggest buzzkill of all time.
Boy, that is one uncluttered desk!
Rather than fight, I’d rather see a compromise on a bill that has a chance of working, but the Republicans don’t seem to want that to happen.
Needless to say, Obama’s health care bill has, for many reasons, gone down in flames.
If he is expecting to move forward with his plan, he is going to have to compromise. Yeah, I know many here will say “Screw it. No compromise” Well that’s fine, but then you can be sure that nothing will happen and Obama will commit political suicide on live TV.
By the way, Obama has to compromise with the Democrats not the Republican minority. Republicans aren’t the roadblock to health care reform.
Here are a couple of points that he needs to address if he’s going to be taken seriously:
1. Tort reform. Say what you will, tort reform has to be a part of the bill.
2. Revise FDA approval process.
3. Easing of immigration laws for foreign medical doctors.
We’ll just have to sit back and see what Obama brings!
Concern troll joaquin is concerned.
It seems pretty simply to me. Tort reform + individual insurance (break from employers) + interstate competition + subsidies for the poor = win.
Me concerned? Now that’s f*cking hillarious!
Dude, I could care less about health-care or how Obama decides to handle it. I only posted some thoughts that obviously sailed way over your head.
Buzz, on the other hand, got it.
Here’s what’s “simple”: big bailout for the health insurance industry (“subsidies”) plus giving them immunity for their misdeeds (“tort reform”) plus nothing in any of this pile of crap for most voters except the shaft = 2010 goes like 1994 and Obama is a one-term President.
Obama’s more David Broder than David Sirota
Tort reform isn’t immunity, Steve.
It will be by the time the lobbyists get though with it.
Not that I like Broder, but I sure wouldn’t want Obama to be David Sirota.
Tort reform deals with doctors, not insurance companies, and they should no be punished for honest mistakes (like they currently are, severely). And why does the government deserve the money for running an insurance plan any more than a private company? That benefits no one but the employees; a private company would also make money for shareholders (ignoring the fact that a government-run plan would lose money).
Again, wait till the lobbyists get through with any such “deal”. Guaranteed it’ll serve just about anybody’s interests EXCEPT the consumers of health care.
Yes, paying for malpractice insurance premiums is awesome.
If they can get Snowe to write this bill with a “triggered” public option, get all the Dems to vote for cloture on it, and get Snowe to commit to the cloture vote as well, then we get that bill “reconciled” with the House’s “immediate” public option version, tossing the trigger and having a PO version sent to the Senate floor for a reconciliation version–which due to the rules will result in an even better and more robust public option. At that point, all we need is 50 Democratic votes, because VP Biden can break any ties in favor of passage.
Yes, paying for malpractice insurance premiums is awesome.
Buzz, do you happen to have any links to hard numbers on the effect of malpractice awards and insurance costs?
Not handy, but unless you think it has no cost at all, what’s your point?
Not handy, but unless you think it has no cost at all, what’s your point?
No point. Question.
However, if you’d like me to make a point, I’m happy to oblige.
Buzz Killington: So, just to clarify, you’d prefer to go down fighting and end up with nothing, rather than compromise?
Compromise with whom, Buzz? The right has flat out stated that they are not going to vote for health care reform. Period.
Long past the time that Obama and the Dem “leadership” (sigh Have to put that in quotes) said “screw ‘em” and focused on whipping their own party into line.
joaquin: If he is expecting to move forward with his plan, he is going to have to compromise.
No. If he is expecting to move forward with his plan, he is going to have to stop trying to compromise.
Buzz Killington: That benefits no one but the employees;
Oh, no! Anything but that!
Not handy, but unless you think it has no cost at all, what’s your point?
Oh, very well Mr. Killington. Since you asked so nicely…
You, along with other conservative commenters here, have offered up tort reform as a necessary element to effective health care reform. Since that seems to be so very important to you, I thought it possible that you might be aware of the extent of the problem you propose to solve. If so, I would have been very interested to read up on the matter.
I’m sorry to see that I thought wrongly.
Don’t worry, any day now McMegan will pull some numbers out of her ass for them to bandy about. If it’s good enough for drug company “innovation”, it’s good enough for “tort reform”.
Tort reform will accomplish nothing besides padding insurance company bottom lines. Premiums won’t go down. Costs won’t go down. And some people who need protection won’t get it from our judicial system.
Seriously why do all right wing “plans” sound like wish lists from the insurance lobby? Tort reform, mandated coverage, subsidies, deregulation, etc…
Classic example of the people moving left and too, too many of their political leaders, including the Big O, falling all over each while moving right.
including the Big O
Is that Obama? Or Oliver? Haw!
I’m all for torte reform as long as we go all out like other nations that have done torte reform and become a no fault society with a strong government run accident and malpractice system that compensates citizens for giving up their right to sue. New Zealand and Australia have a system like this I believe and it makes everyone’s life better. Torte reform doesn’t come for free.
Michael Over Here: I’m all for torte reform…
Except the linzer. That’s perfect just as it is, of course.
I lived abroad for a long tine and list my ability to recognize when a word does and doesn’t need an e at the end. Plus, aluminium.
Damn trying to write on an iPhone late at night made that come out stupid.