The question now is whether we will nonetheless fail to get that change, because a handful of Democratic senators are still determined to party like it’s 1993.
And yes, I mean Democratic senators. The Republicans, with a few possible exceptions, have decided to do all they can to make the Obama administration a failure. Their role in the health care debate is purely that of spoilers who keep shouting the old slogans — Government-run health care! Socialism! Europe! — hoping that someone still cares.
The conditions favor change, voters want and are comfortable with a government run "public plan," but, oh, those recalcitrant centrist Dems!
The real risk is that health care reform will be undermined by “centrist” Democratic senators who either prevent the passage of a bill or insist on watering down key elements of reform. I use scare quotes around “centrist,” by the way, because if the center means the position held by most Americans, the self-proclaimed centrists are in fact way out in right field.
What the balking Democrats seem most determined to do is to kill the public option, either by eliminating it or by carrying out a bait-and-switch, replacing a true public option with something meaningless. For the record, neither regional health cooperatives nor state-level public plans, both of which have been proposed as alternatives, would have the financial stability and bargaining power needed to bring down health care costs.
Update: BTD also discusses this column, calls for pressure on Obama to make sure the president realizes he will be the one remembered as losing the healthcare reform opportunity.
- jawbone's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
I've been wracking my brain for hours,
hoping to come up with the answer to your question...
Anyway - have you read any of the posts by Frank Pasquale over at Balkinization?
If not, here are a couple of links you might find interesting:
Senate Follies in Health Reform
Health Reform on Endless Trial
Making the Case for the Public Plan, Part I
Making the Case for the Public Plan, Part II
Making the Case for the Public Plan, Part III: Co-ops Are Not the Answer
Glad to see this being discussed in a lot of different places.
Obama who?
Obama should have followed the majority in the nation and led the crusade for health care reform with a public program option. He doesn't do it because: first, all he wants is "reform," the kind of reform doesn't make much difference to him. Second, Obama seems to avoid any fight he he is not guaranteed success like the plague.
Of course, this means that health care reform will lack a public option and a president who avoids fights is, in the end of the day, the last thing we need.
KoshemBos
Joe Biden?
Could that be it? Look, I'm reaching, here.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Krugman gives Obama a pass, seems to me. No responsibility
for the Congressional Dems taking the paths they have rests with Obama or the WH staff. Which may be the case, but why isn't Obama doing anything to correct such waywardness?
In one paragraph about Kent Conrad, Krugman even seems to indicate Obama doesn't agree with Conrad by mentioning the 60-vote criteria as opposed to Obama's willingness to go with 51 votes:
If this thing goes cowpie, it's going to be on the Congressional Dems, not Obama. That seems to be what Krugman is saying. Now, maybe Obama told Krugman and Stiglitz about some plan he has for getting healthcare reform that will be implemented when needed, if needed, and Obama is going to do something not apparent to us little people...?