The Nation: MIA on Healthcare

[Captain Hilts]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/lieberman?rel=rightsideaccordian

It should come as no surprise that Barack Obama does not support a national health insurance system like most other countries have. He made that clear during the campaign. What is surprising is that he has been so vague about exactly what kind of healthcare reform he has in mind.

Aside from saying he supports a public plan, the president hasn't gotten his hands dirty in the political muck. Is he pursuing a conscious strategy to be above the fray or waiting to see what Congress does before jumping in? Is the president being strategically vague or abdicating to Congress because he, too, is feeling the heat from the special interests that contributed millions to his campaign?

Campaign rhetoric led the electorate to believe that a new president was ready to overhaul the healthcare system and bring health coverage to everyone. Obama must level with Americans who still believe that everyone will be covered automatically once his healthcare reforms are enacted.

If Obama wants to give more than lip service to a public plan, he should offer guidance on how it will work.

[avaistheone1]

1. And making it mandatory that the American people buy expensive

do-nothing plans from private insurance companies is not what most of us had in mind in the way of health care reform.

[Captain Hilts]

2. It seems to me that Prez Obama is managing this debate, not leading it. nt

[avaistheone1]

3. It would be helpful to have his leadership on this issue.

Staying above the fray on the important issues is wearing thin.

You have to have some skin in the game if you want a legacy of greatness.

[blueclown]

4. It seems like Obama wants to let Congress dictate the terms.

It looks like the White House will have valuable input on what they would like in this health care overhaul attempt, but the White House wants to avoid what happened with Hillarycare when all the details were fleshed out behind closed doors and shoved down Congress's throat.

[snowdays]

7. Obama said his blueprint was in his budget and will give to Congress to work out details.

[JimWis]

5. I agree. He has been awfully quiet on this matter. What's up with

that. He needs to address this issue and give us a bit of hope and leadership. Maybe he has something up his sleeve, but I feel like we are sort of left hanging out there at the moment.

[MarjorieG]

6. Financial mess and Congress nixing helpful remedies limit options. Don't know what's possible.

I am sure at one time he wanted to increase Medicare, but seems impossibly expensive.

[Zodiak]

8. Obama was quite clear on what he envisioned

He wants Americans to have the SAME PLAN as congress as a public option. If you can afford it, he will make it affordable. If you cannot afford it, he will find a way to get it to you at no to low cost. If you don't want it...you can stick with the plan you have.

I heard him say this time and again on the stump.

So all of this watering down by Schumer and Baucus is NOT what Obama wanted at all, and therefore it should not be mistaken for Obama's position. Obama's position is not a "bargaining chip" in my opinion, but the MINIMUM needed for healthcare reform.

If Schumer and Baucus have their way (and by extension the republicans and the insurance industry), we will get no kind of health care reform at all. We will get crumbs, and the crumbs will be the reason the debate is never entered into again (because the crumbs will most likely fail to actually help people). Oh, and one more thing....the Dems will get all of the blame for the failure and deservedly so.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Great, so why isn't he fighting for it? nt

[Zodiak]

10. Political reality

Obama will not advocate for something he feels he cannot get. He is up against the entire Republican party, half of the Democrats, and the entire insurance industry and their ancillary allies. I actually think he was naive when he ran for President and does not have the political courage to take these interests head-on now that he sees the array lined against him.

If he pushes for what he wanted on the stump, these assholes will make sure he fails, and then they will crucify him politically for it. Obama cannot afford that because he has so much more he needs to do.

Someone needs to crucify a few conservadems politically....that will get things moving again. But alas, half of the left are sychophants to their party and make excuses for them endlessly no matter how Republican-like they are, and the other half spends all of their time trying to convince the former half that their blind allegiance does us no favors.

And so it goes...

Until torches and pitchforks come out in the form of a general strike, our political leaders will continue to play these games in service of the status quo. After all, they WIN AGAINST THE PEOPLE EVERY TIME, and we still elect them.

[Captain Hilts]

12. I understand that, but taking single payer off the table starts the debate too far to the right. nt

[eleny]

15. Political reality =- The Audacity of Bupkus

[FrenchieCat]

11. The fight is just now beginning......

Right now, he just got some conscessions.....

this thing ain't over by a long shot.

This is the part where we come in...and let our voices be heard.

We will have a public option by the time it is all done with,
mark my words.

[Captain Hilts]

13. Taking single payer off the table was a HUGE concession before the debate even began. nt

[FrenchieCat]

14. I see it differently.

I see Single Payer as the excuse for some to cry..."Government run Health Care", which, IMO, would muddle the water, and give the opposition for even a public option the perfect vehicle to distort the public debate using fear of government run anything.

I want to keep it clean, and I think Single Payer will make too many who are not informed susceptible to propaganda.

[TheCoxwain]

20. Why not use the bargaining analogy .... start from a position that goes way beyond you are willing

to accept...

I am not asking Obama to be an advocate Single payer .. but let single payer advocates have a seat in the table and let them define one end of the spectrum. This way public option guys have an easier time with their agenda.

[FrenchieCat]

24. Because I think that Single payer could be used as an albatross

around a Public Option choice. I think focusing debate on Single Payer would only take it to a place where it would be coupled to a public option by the opposition, and both would be talked of as one. All they'd have to do is demonize the more extreme option and tie it directly to the less extreme option. In essence, single payer can be too easily interpreted as big government in charge of your health care. We would be making it easy for opponents to confuse the two, and to point to the true fact that one would lead to the other. Remember the type of media that exists in this country. Under different circumstances, perhaps we could have an honest debate, but based on the realities, I don't think that we would....and there is just too much to lose by providing this kind of ammunition to the opposition of health care.

[TheCoxwain]

27. That would be successful only if Obama is associated with the Single Payer..

my fear is that ...there will be too many restrictions for individuals and firms from ditching their current insurers and jumping on the public option bandwagon and we will end up with something that conservatives can attack away to glory.

[eleny]

16. "let our voices be heard" - Those voices got arrested, FC

[riderinthestorm]

17. At the direction of a Democrat no less. nt

[snowdays]

22. Both Dems and Repug Grassley had a good laugh last week. I wonder

if they laughed on camera this week???

[FrenchieCat]

25. That was their choice. Keyes got arrested too.

I simply have a different take on the path to affordable health care at this time, if you don't mind.

[eleny]

30. If I don't mind?

Ad hominem much?

[uponit7771]

18. Link to OBAMA NOT fighting for it?

Thx

[eleny]

19. Obama’s Healthcare Announcement Legitimizes Insurance Industry

http://uprisingradio.org/home/?p=7799

Your welcome

[uponit7771]

21. Why does this means to you that he's going against what he outlined in his campaign?

Thx

[snowdays]

23. For one thing. Obama rallied against LOBBIESTS--NOW THEY ARE WRITING

THE LEGISLATION. THEY ARE AT THE TABLE. SINGLE PAYER IS NOT.

[Thrill]

28. They aren't writing shit.

[snowdays]

33. only the committee knows for sure.

[eleny]

26. The issue is that he's not listening to over 60% of Americans

At this point, the campaign rhetoric is not really the issue. He must pay now attention to those who put him where he is. Unless you believe that the corporations put him in the White House.

[Thrill]

29. Single Payer is not a reality.

Has nothing to do with Polls. Its about votes in the Senate. Obama isn't going to spend time fighting a losing battle. The support isn't there in the Senate. Shit would never get out of committee

[riderinthestorm]

31. Neither is a public option really. More and more docs are opting out of taking more Medicare

and Medicaid patients since their reimbursements are too "low". Adding millions upon millions more people onto that load means it will crash as the docs refuse to see them.

Meaning a public option won't really be any option at all if a person can't get treatment anywhere.

[wakeoftheflood]

32. .

Forcing the doctors to accept medicare patients is the easy part. Getting it too the people is the hard part.

[snowdays]

34. only in your mind.

[Thrill]

35. No. Its reality whether you want to see it or not.

You can't even get your voice heard in the committee roundtable, and you think its possible? Keep dreaming.

[snowdays]

36. Obama and the Dems are shameful in outright dismissing a group

of advocates who have a right to be heard.

[Better Believe It]

37. So the Republicans won the elections in 2008 and took control of Congress?