An intellectual consistency question: What if Obama had become a "bill killer"?

[Armstead]

I am interested in how the people who are pushing for the current version of "the bill" would have reacted in a hypothetical situation. It didn't happen, but it would not have been beyond the realm of possibility.

Suppose President Obama had followed through with his earlier statements in support of a public option when he said "Any bill I sign must have a strong public option to give people a choice."

Let's say during the last few weeks, when the Senate killed the public option and a Medicare buy-in, Obama had come out and said: "I restate my earlier belief that a public option must be an aspect of any health care bill that I sign. I will not sign it any bill without a public option....If you need to take more time to negotiate a compromise that includes one, take it. But I will not sign a bill until you deliver me one because I believe it is important."

How would you react? Would you still be pushing to pass the bill now, and criticizing Obama for being a "purist"? Or would you be saying "That is my president. A strong man of principle. I support him, and we must push those stinkers in the Senate to retract this awful bill and put back a public option."

Just askin'

And, just so you know, I would have retracted my criticisms of him for not pushing harder. I would say "I was wrong to criticize him for not standing up for that. he has turned out to be the president I originally hoped he would be."

[jenmito]

1. I'd say...

"Oh, well. Here goes a repeat of Bill Clinton's mistake-threaten to veto a bill and get nothing. I guess we won't have ANY change in HCR-again."

[Armstead]

3. Thank you for your honesty

[johnaries]

13. Same here. He already said he was trying to learn from Clinton's

failed efforts, which is why he let Congress write the bills instead of presenting one of his own. It would have been horrible to avoid that mistake only to repeat another.

[WeDidIt]

2. That's what Clinton did in 1993, basically.

It killed health care reform for a generation.

[dave29]

4. You should stop trying so hard

it's got to be hurting your brain. Most of us who are supporting the President on this are deeply disappointed that there is no public option. But the odds of the President coming out and saying any such thing were infinitesimally small, because it was clear in that time frame that he was going to support the bill in whatever form it took in the Senate. However, if it makes you feel better, a few short weeks earlier, the President strongly endorsed the House Bill which had a (smallish) public option.

[Armstead]

6. It does hurt my brain, and at some point I'll say "Screw it and forget it"

but not yet.

[MercutioATC]

5. I would view that as an example of leadership...which is why I thought we hired him.

However, it would have been more productive to exercise that leadership throughout the process...not just by saying "I'll veto it" near the end.

[JVS]

10. +1 sign me up for that

[sandnsea]

7. I'd be disappointed

but figure he must know something about the votes that I don't. But if he did that and then didn't get the votes, I'd be furious. Lives are at stake.

[Armstead]

14. Thank you for the candid answer

[hulka38]

8. I'm sure he could have rallied nearly all of the people who are supporting this golden turd.

A lot of Dems play follow the leader. '93 wouldn't have happened if Obama told Reid to threaten to push HCR with a PO through reconciliation, imo. Can anyone tell me why using reconciliation is such a no-no if Dems use it (they never do) but the Repubs use it all the time?

[quakerboy]

9. Not your target audience, but I will answer anyway

I would also retract and appologise for some of my harsher thoughts. To be honest, I would probably still lament that he had not taken control of the mess earlier, but I would be behind him 100%, in any way that he asked.

Afghanistan would still suck, but I would accept it as coming from a man who kept his word even when inconvenient with the base. I would defend him from anyone attacking him as just another corporate politician, and I would be calling my rep and senators daily, and the holdouts nearly as often.

[Overseas]

11. False choice. Should have pushed Single Payer from the start.

Could have started with the truth. Bankers and financiers got a bailout. The people need a bailout. The private sector is always welcome to compete, and Medicare for All will be the public option. They are welcome to compete with that. Low overhead & high patient satisfaction. That's the bailout our people need.

After groveling for a 1% bipartisan vote, begging for Olympia Snowe and legislators beholden to insurance company funding, why would that president who has already played political games with our vitally important national health security then be insisting on a public option? Those are two different people.

44,000 still die early every year. That hasn't changed. That was the fact before we began the current debate. That was the fact when single payer wasn't even allowed into the discussion even though any triggers of decency had been blown off their hinges by the private insurers over the past decade as they bankrupted millions more of our fellow citizens and dropped many more from coverage through their ingenious new recision policies.

Political gamesmanship with our very lives.

People who had been foreclosed and were facing eviction had to watch our noble president play political games with their health security. They could be homeless and uninsured. Just as long as we got those few votes from legislators who dared to ignore all the bribes/campaign donations.

[depakid]

12. I'd say GOOD- let's use reconciliation to get rational and effective legislation- or

make this a campaign issue in order to get more progressives in office.

Instead- what all of the acolytes cheering "victory" over will produce the opposite result- all the while empowering the worst elements of the party who will now hold every piece of legislation coming down the pipeline hostage to their corrupt influence.

Obama came into this with unprecedented political capital- and comes out of it increasingly looking like the goat (or worse- the powerless victim).