David Sirota: Don’t get the Democrats

[OhioChick]

10/15/2009 11:04:37 PM EDT

I don’t get it. I know that’s the simplistic refrain of every 10-year-old, but I’m 33 and I mean it: I just don’t get it.

Specifically, I don’t get why Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) -- or any Republican senator, for that matter -- is attracting so much attention.

In the last few months, Democratic senators eliminated the public option and substantially weakened their health care proposals in order to buy insurance industry acquiescence and, thus, Snowe’s vote. Now, based on the deafening media noise, all of American politics is focused on this unaccomplished backbencher and whether or not she will endorse the final bill. It is as if Republicans control Congress -- as if Snowe, not Barack Obama, won the biggest presidential landslide since Ronald Reagan.

This is bizarre for what should be obvious reasons. First of all, Snowe’s much-celebrated initial vote this week for an embarrassingly flaccid health care initiative wasn’t necessary to pass the bill -- Democrats had enough votes to move the legislation out of the Senate Finance Committee without her approval.

That’s a mathematical fact, as is the fact that Democrats control the 60 votes to overcome a filibuster with or without Snowe; as is the fact that Democrats have the 51 votes to enact health care reform through a parliamentary procedure called reconciliation -- again, with or without Snowe.

So the notion that Snowe’s vote -- or any GOP vote -- is inherently pivotal to health care reform is a fantasy created by the Beltway media and the Democratic congressional leadership. The former is desperately trying to manufacture headline-grabbing drama; the latter is looking for a Republican excuse to water down the bill and protect corporate interests -- all while absolving Democrats of legislative responsibility.

Second, the idea that Snowe’s support will result in the final legislation being called "bipartisan" -- and that such billing will politically protect Democrats -- is absurd. How do we know this? Because Democrats themselves taught us that via the Iraq War. Recall that with solid Democratic and Republican backing, the 2002 Iraq resolution was far more "bipartisan" than any health care bill will ever be. Yet, Democrats turned right around and used the Iraq War to criticize Republicans -- and because the conflict was so wildly unpopular, Americans in 2006 and 2008 were willing to overlook the contradiction and vote for the only major party echoing any semblance of an anti-war message.

On health care, it will be the same in reverse: The GOP will invariably attempt to turn any bill into an electoral cudgel against Democrats -- regardless of how many Republicans end up voting for it.

The lesson, then, is simple: If Democrats hypocritical Iraq criticism only worked because the war was such a disaster, then the GOP’s inevitable health care attacks -- however hypocritical -- can only be thwarted by making health care reform the opposite of Iraq (i.e., a major success). For Democrats, in other words, good health care policy is great politics, and bad policy is the worst politics.

Whether passed by one congressional vote or 50, real reform that improves the system (i.e., a bill with a public option, tough insurance regulation and universal coverage) will transform the Democratic Party into an election-winning force forever known as "the generous protector of middle-class interests," as GOP strategist William Kristol admits.

Conversely, even if passed unanimously, bad legislation that makes the system worse (i.e., a bill empowering insurance companies, preventing a public option and leaving millions uncovered) will make GOP criticism of Democrats extremely effective. That’s a truism, no matter if Snowe or any other Republicans add their support to a health care bill that doesn’t actually need it in the first place.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/ci_13572736

[Skittles]

1. I don't get it either

the entire sorry affair is one big fucking circus

[bertman]

2. That about sums it up. Thank you OhioChick for posting that. Rec

[loudsue]

3. Dems are "torn between two lovers": voters, corporate masters/lobbyists

They are either going to put together a program that is a joke, or they're going to do something great. They've already taken money to do the wrong thing. It's going to be hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[Zenlitened]

4. K&R. Good piece, by and large.

Good, progressive policy = strong Democratic Party.

Pointless, phony "bipartisanship" for the sake of bipartisanship = Well... I don't know what the heck to call it any more. :(

Maybe it really is all just a cop-out.

[sabrina 1]

5. Baucus and the Republicans

are pretty obviously working for an industry that deprives Americans of healthcare when they most need it, people who pay their premiums. An industry that spends one third of the money they get on overhead. And even after Baucus et al gave them everything they wanted, including no public option basically giving them a monopoly on what they claim is a commodity (which is isn't, it's a right but that's their claim) they threw a fit because they wanted more severe punishment for people who do not buy their 'product'.

Iow, what they want is that people go to jail if they cannot afford to buy from them.

Everyone knows this now. So, any Democrat who continues to cater to this industry which is not needed at all to provide health-care to all Americans, has to have an ulterior motive.

Marcy Kaptur said it best when MM asked her a similar question about Congress. She said 'they are not in charge anymore'. It's up to the people now. They have to be more scared of the people than they are of the special interests.

[Uncle Joe]

6. I believe the missing link or element in Sirota's consideration is of the Corporatist Party;

this political party is a Doppelganger; whose primary clients are corporations. This Ghost Party could never stand on it's own core beliefs; should they be overt as to what they are, that being corporate supremacy over the American People. Thus it must take on the living ideology of both major political party's to exist passing through the permeable membrane and playing both ends against the middle in an eternal game of "good cop, bad cop."

By playing the role of centrist or moderate, they subtlety yet ultimately serve corporate interests either on the offensive or defensive depending on corporate needs and political reality; that being which Party is in power.

In the case of health care, there is no logical, functional, moral, ethical or political reason for a for profit "health" insurance industry to exist.

For profit health insurance can only damage the noble profession of health care by leeching precious dollars away from that industry while driving up costs. In short their profit is blood money on the American People and yet Medicare for everyone from the cradle to the grave has almost been dismissed out of hand without consideration.

The hyper concern; regarding bi-partisanship on such a critical issue when doing the right thing on every level is so blatant and obvious is the fig leaf hiding the Ghost Party's true allegiance; and it isn't to "We the People."

Thanks for the thread, OhioChick.

[sabrina 1]

7. It doesn't make sense, it never has from the beginning

that with the majorities they had, and 77% of the American people wanting Health-care (not Health Insurance reform, why a Single Payer system was never even considered. In every way it makes the most sense. It saves money and it saves lives.

But not only did Democrats never even try, they avoided using the best weapons they had, such as the criminal death toll of Americans that should have made this issue an issue of National Security and even more, an emergency.

In the case of health care, there is no logical, functional, moral, ethical or political reason for a for profit "health" insurance industry to exist.

No, there isn't and all the excuses being made are a disgrace, especially when they are being made by Democrats and those who are putting their Party ahead of the lives of the American people.

This whole excercise has been conducted to save the Insurance Industry by handing them a windfall of millions of new customers, whether those poor people can afford it or not. It has not been, from the start, about saving lives.

The Insurance Industry like Wall St. needed a bailout, and that's what has been going on.

[JohnWxy]

8. Sirota is good. But let's be 'real' here. The Blue Dogs are not real Democrats. They are

Republicans. So dems do not have 60 votes, this necessitates this cow-towing to the Corporate Lobbyist Party.

But, I do think if Dems would go ahead and take the fight to the Republicans they would win on HCR. They just seem so fearful of fighting the masters of disinformation (let's not forget they pretty much have M$M in their pocket which helps enormously with their disinformation barrage).


This is why I think if people do not continue to send emails to Congress telling them we expect them to fight for REAL Health Care Reform ...(i.e. Public Option) we will not get it. There are about 6,000 lobbyists (not counting all the Republicans in Congress) for the health care industry on the Hill to stop or subvert HCR. They will win if pressure from the people is not maintained on Congress.

[The Magistrate]

9. Right On All Counts, Ma'am

Good reform is good politics; failure to provide real reform will be political disaster.

[swaroop]

10. health industry and media do not want you to know ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

American life expectancy ranking is 35 by country, while Canada ranking is 6.

[TankLV]

11. Yep - I don't get it either...& NO BILL is better than the fucking baucus bill...

We have to NO NAME fucking Senators from armpit, NO POPULATION states, representing, what - TEN people - dictating what the rest of us should do...!!!

This is INSANE!!!

[BR_Parkway]

12. Her vote to get it out of committee didn't matter either - they need her

to claim "bi-partisanship" - which they can then turn around and say "we had to make these concessions" and blame the Republicans so we aren't supposed to notice that they actually gave it away to their health insurance masters instead.