Do you believe President Obama will veto the HCR bill if the HCR bill does not have a public option?

[ZombieHorde]

Poll question: Do you believe President Obama will veto the HCR bill if the HCR bill does not have a public option?

This poll is about your beliefs.

[Unvanguard]

1. Certainly he won't. Has he said otherwise? n/t

[ZombieHorde]

11. I don't remember him threatening veto, but he has stated he strongly supports

a public option on more than one occasion.

[floridablue]

2. He will sign whatever they send him

Even if the House adopts straight up what the Senate finishes with.

[timeforpeace]

40. If it says "HCR" on the title page, he signs. Even if it's blank pages. Campaign promise kept.

[Vincardog]

3. He does not care as long as ANYTHING passes, That is the lesion he learned from Clinton

[Ken Burch]

29. "The LESION he learned from Clinton"?

You're probably put it more aptly than you intended.

[timeforpeace]

41. Inadvertently clever double entendres are the best double entendres.

[KansasVoter]

4. He will not veto it. It is crap but he is OK with the crap!

[FrenchieCat]

6. Crap is what we currently have! Doh!

It won't be crap, and he will sign it, and I will be glad, and the American people will be in a better place for it.

[Lyric]

30. Some of them. And some of them will be far, far worse.

Like my family.

[timeforpeace]

42. This will be worse than what we have. But at least it will be more expensive.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

47. And mandated. Yippee! (n/t)

[Th1onein]

5. I don't know, but I hope he does.

This health care thing is really pissing me off.

[DailyGrind51]

7. He absolutely needs to pass "a" healthcare bill, ANY bill to win in 2012!

[Sebastian Doyle]

8. He certainly SHOULD, but I doubt he will

Of course then, he takes complete ownership of the failure, once he does.

[Drunken Irishman]

9. If he wants to end any hope of re-election, he'll veto.

And then we'll get nothing and have to deal with this problem when another Democrat gets to the White House.

[Honeycombe8]

10. There is no reason to think he would veto it, if it doesn't have PO. He's never said it HAS to.

He would, however, veto it if he thought it wouldn't help a few million otherwise uninsured people while helping to contain costs and esp. if it added to the deficit.

He's made that clear.

He's said that this is not a public option or abortion bill. Those provisions are not required.

[Pirate Smile]

12. Of course not. That's why he never made such a declaration.

[patrice]

13. I think that depends upon what IS in the bill. He may take the opportunity to be the champion of a

Public Option and veto Congressional bullshit if there isn't anything else in there that's strong enough for what we DO want.

[DrDan]

16. face it - he will sign any bill reaching his desk . . .

[patrice]

18. And you will say that no matter what's in the bill if he does sign it.

[DrDan]

27. so what are you implying . . .

Do you honestly think we will see any reform of substance?

Single Payer was never on the table. We have said good-bye to the PO. What's left - oh yeah - mandated insurance . . .

[pampango]

31. If he vetoes something supported by the Progressive Caucus and opposed by repubs,

he'll have some major explaining to do.

IF the 95% of progressives in congress end up voting for the eventual conference HCR bill and the repubs unanimously oppose it (as with the current House bill), Obama had better sign it. If he hangs the Progressives out to dry by doing that, he'll definitely show whose side he's on as far as I'm concerned.

IF, on the other hand, Obama, Reid and Pelosi cave for the sake of attracting "bipartisan" republicans and congressional progressives vote against it and significant numbers of repubs vote for it, Obama should (but probably wouldn't anyway) veto that bill.

I'll support the Progressive Caucus. I'm sure many of them would like any bill to be better than it is. If the eventual bill stinks too badly, they'll vote against it and I'll support them. If the bill is acceptable to them, I'll support them.

[DrDan]

32. there will be a bill - the stakes are too high

will there be real reform - doubtful

[pampango]

36. You have a rather low opinion of the Progressive Caucus. If they vote overwhelmingly for a reform

bill that is not sign that the reform is "real"?

That is where we disagree. IF they vote overwhelmingly for a final bill that is unanimously opposed by repubs that will mean something to me. Doesn't mean I wouldn't pass something better if I had the power, but it will still mean something.

[GreenArrow]

39. It'll mean they know what side their bread is buttered on.

The goal is to pass something, anything, and even the Progressive caucus is going to go along to get along.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

49. He said he's staking his entire presidency on HCR.

Do you think this is some sort of trial run? I'm pretty sure we don't get a do-over.

[DrDan]

14. of course he won't - he did not fight particularly hard for it - why would he veto a bill without it

[Nite Owl]

15. I wish

he just wants to say he signed a bill of any kind.

[jobycom]

17. Nah, they could pass a boondoggle for the insurance companies. As long as he can sell it

with a pretty speech he'll say it's a success, thank everyone involved for their hard work, and declare "mission accomplished."

[IndianaGreen]

21. Like the SNL skit in which Biden is saying Obama will sign anything with Health Care Reform

on the title.

[ipaint]

19. No

The bill was never about health care reform. Never about providing access to health care for all americans. It was always about a tiered system based on class and it always left out millions of people. It was also never about reigning in or regulating ins. companies in any way to protect americans from skyrocketing prices and abusive practices.

He'll sign anything that ends up on his desk and we will be told it is the most profound piece of legislation in history. Those who don't believe it will be ostracized as haters and left wing radicals. In a few years the people who know the bill stinks will be proven right.

Been there, done that. Several times. We seem to be stuck in a 20+ year nightmare loop of useless legislation that punishes the working class and poor. No matter how many times the legislation miserably fails there are some that are just dying to repeat the mistake over again.

[IndianaGreen]

44. K&R to your most excellent post

which sadly happens to be too true.

[Cleita]

20. I don't think he has to veto it.

I believe he can send it back to Congress for more work on the public option until they come up with something that he will sign.

[Jakes Progress]

22. I have to doubt that he has the insight

to veto the bill. His handlers have him convinced that any bill with any conditions are necessary for him to win in 2012. Unless the conversations and legislation in the Senate take a dramatic turn for the better, this bill, when signed, will be the cause of his concession speech in 2012.

[Blue_In_AK]

23. I think he'll sign just about anything

that has the word "health" in it.

[Vidar]

24. Unfortunately, no.

[Hatchling]

25. If it has "health" & "reform" in the title of the bill

It doesn't matter what is in the body, he will sign it.

[quiller4]

26. Nor do I think he should. In fact, I'd be disappointed if he did.

[Raine]

28. No, he wouldn't do that

the insurance companies wouldn't like it if he did. x(

[Proud Liberal Dem]

33. No- and he probably shouldn't

First, he didn't make the pledge that he'd veto it if it didn't. Second, the way that it has ultimately written, I'm not sure it's worth torpedoing the whole otherwise worthwhile effort over. Third, with "Traitor Joe" and other conservadems, the votes are probably not going to be there to break the impasse at this point. I've become somewhat disappointed regarding the whole health care reform effort but remain convinced that many of the reforms included in this bill need to be passed and that passing something now will pave the way for more reform later. Politically, I don't think that a defeat would be palatable for President Obama and/or the Democrats in Congress either and, however well-intentioned, killing off HCR (or allowing it be killed off) will, like for Bill Clinton, be viewed (and rightly so) as a disaster for President Obama and the Democrats. If there continues to be momentum for more change (and continues to build as I believe there will be), reform will continue to be an ongoing process but we need to get something out of the gate first IMHO- which, in many ways, is a major accomplishment in and of itself considering the usually intransigent nature of progress in this country.

[saltpoint]

34. If you were his political strategist, what would you recommend he do?

[backscatter712]

38. I'd tell him to sign it.

It sucks, but that seems to be the only way we're going to get anything resembling a health care bill this cycle.

And that's because ending up with no health care bill at all would be an utter fucking disaster.

Gotta make the choice: Gain one yard and take the first down so you can build upon this bill later, or punt and let the teabaggers have the ball?

[Warren Stupidity]

35. Yes.

[varelse]

37. Hasn't he already backed away from supporting the Public Option?

Of couse he will not veto the Health Care Reform bill. He'll sign it into law, and then the Republicans will campaign in 2010 and 2012 on promises to repeal it.

[RoadRage]

43. No, and he shouldn't.

Something is better then nothing. He veto's it.. we're back to nothing.. and nothing would be worse then not getting anything at all IMO.

[ZombieHorde]

45. The mandate is extremely bad, so what we get needs to be really really good,

as opposed to just "something."

[IndianaGreen]

46. No if about this. HCR bill will not have a public option or Medicare expansion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4183015&mesg_id=4183015

[jefferson_dem]

48. Hex no.

And he shouldn't.