The campaign arm of the DNC, Organizing For America, has delivered over 150,000 phone calls, at last count, in favor of health care reform. The President himself will deliver remarks at a “Time To Deliver” call party tonight.
Less clear is what these callers are actually asking for in the health care reform currently working its way through Congress. The President has resisted at almost any opportunity delivering specific instructions on what he wants out of health care, particularly with respect to the high-profile provision of a public option. And now, Sam Stein is reporting that Democratic aides are worried that this lack of insistence will end up squandering the opportunity to include a public option in the bill.
Democratic aides said that a “handful” of senators who are skeptical of a public plan likely could be persuaded if not to support it then at least to oppose a Republican filibuster, if the administration were to apply a bit more pressure — or even guidance.
“There is a clear sense that it would be helpful,” said one senior Democratic aide. “Throughout this entire debate the White House line has been ‘We will weigh in when it is necessary’…. Well now we need 60 votes. So if it’s not necessary now, then when will it be?”
“I think folks in general in Congress were looking to the president to clearly define his feeling on the issue,” another aide said. “And I don’t think he has done that on the public option from the get-go… With a lot of senators nervous because of elections or other political dynamics, it would be helpful for the president to send a strong signal that this is what he wants in the final bill.”
The White House has generally scoffed at this, but clearly there is power in the bully pulpit, as John Aravosis confirms. That intangible of executive leadership could be enough to push a public option over the line.
In its absence, you have these endless discussions behind closed doors in the Senate, and such winning statements as “We’re leaning toward talking about a public option,” as uttered by Harry Reid, today. Now that’s what I call being bold!
With public support for a public option increasing, this would seem to be a perfect moment to align the White House’s policy preferences with the Senate’s. Clearly, ConservaDem opposition is waning, as can be seen in that WSJ story. Two Colorado Senators not known as fire-breathing liberals, Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, just created a website demanding that the Senate give the public option an up or down vote. They have over 6,500 signatures to their petition within a few hours. Clearly, there would be no better time for the President to demand this provision. He’d almost certainly get it.
Perhaps he’ll say something on tonight’s OFA webcast. I’ll be monitoring it. Meanwhile, Senate talks continue tonight.
…via TalkLeft, Jay Rockefeller has now publicly expressed his frustration with the President:
Sen. Jay Rockefeller told CNN on Tuesday that he’s “disappointed” that President Obama wasn’t more forceful in pushing the Senate to include a public option in its health care bill. “A little bit, a little bit I’m disappointed,” the West Virginia Democrat told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “I know he’s strongly for it, and I know his tactic has been to let the Congress do his work and then he’ll come in when the crunch really counts. What I’m saying is that the crunch is really beginning to count now, and I think he’s – I know he’s for it, and said so publicly, and campaigned on it, so I think it’s important that he come in at this point strongly.”
This could get interesting.
35 Comments
Spotlight



Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Advanced search
Well I’m a little disappointed that Congresspeople can’t legislate w/o training wheels provided by the WH. The President could walk around with Public Option tattooed on his fucking forehead and it wouldn’t be enough for those cowards. Pass bills that represent what your constituents want Congress! Be the co-equal branch! President Obama would be delighted to sign your fucking bill with a gigantic public option in it if you all would get off your ass. He asked for this bill in July. God, I’m sick of this.
Also off-topic, Microsoft has never heard of Obama and offers to spell check it. Asinine. Grr.
Here’s my wish list to both senators and my congressman, plus the white house
public option and/or insurance exchange available to all (I should not be stuck with whatever my employer provides)
remove anti-trust exemption
remove state line restrictions on insurance sales
federally regulate premiums (cap at 10-12% of income for everyone for basic coverage) and establish minimum care provision for basic insurance
remove rescission and annual/lifetime caps on coverage
if there is an individual mandate, then insurers must become non-profit.
(an insurance mandate should also require that insurers be answerable to customers, not shareholders)
It’s definitely a game of hot potato. The Senate Dems don’t want to be responsible, and neither does the White House. But with 60 votes in the Senate, they can’t escape responsibility. Definitely annoying.
I vote for KDawn’s list. See, that was easy!
I love that the idea of taking away the anti-trust exemption, which has allowed insurance companies to collude and rip-off every man, woman, child and business in the US for 60+ years, came at the last minute so they had little time to react.
Good strategy. Now let’s get a vote done. Hurry up Senators, the people are on hold.
Maybe, but I don’t believe the WH doesn’t want responsibility, perhaps they just want Congress to function. Something new and different for them. This was a central tenant of the President’s campaign, remember, so it’s sort of ludicrous to think he’s dodging.
Ya need to be careful of this one. The end result of this would be the insurance companies working out of the most lax state they can find. Think of how all the credit card companies work from South Dakota nowadays as the example you don’t want to follow.
O thinks all it takes is a “bully speech.”
They say words have meaning but I have seen no evidence of that in O’s behavior. In fact, it seems that if you thought O would do the opposite of what he sez, your forecast would be a lot more accurate.
Thanks for pointing that out. Many are not aware of the phenomenon of jurisdiction shopping.
Wanting Congress to function implies backing off of the imperial prez. Yet his actions, esp in the courts, idicate just the opposite. Keeping all the powers W accumulated, except if O decides to give one or two up by noblesse oblige. What makes you think O’s motive for punting is anything other than not wanting to piss off corp donors?
Harry Reid: We’re leaning toward talking about the possibility of maybe adding a really weak, watered-down public option that won’t work.
Harry Re
ied bends with the wind.Harry Reid breaks with the gentlest breeze.
Perhaps the White House is using these blue dogs or so called senators to cover their asses for when they deliver massive wellfare to their corporate masters.
He’s like the dandylion seeds blowing away.
Dya think.
they’ve been pulling that act since at least fisa summer of 2007 (first time i really paid careful attention). imo blue dogs are the excuse. dem party leadership is the problem.
Or like dandelion greens waiting to be devoured by passing critters.
emptywheel is upstairs!
House Judiciary Committee to Propose PATRIOT and FISA Reforms
Senate Dems don’t want the responsibilty?!? Hell, then take the credit! This is the Social Security of our time. Now that one was really, really unpopular, and sure had a major downside for Democrats for a long, long time, didn’t it? /s
I understand that, good point, we do want to avoid insurers going to the state with laxest regulations. That’s why the next item in my wish list is federal regulations capping premiums and mandating minimum covered benefits.
The notion of mandating not-for-profit to coincide with coverage mandates came from a libertarian friend; I thought it made a great deal of sense though. A major part of the problem is that insurers are motivated to maximize profits and ROI at the cost of customer health and well-being.
I get an email from OFA almost daily, always with a donation request. They are also asking for phone-bankers to make healthcare reform calls. There is nothing in their script that speaks to the advacacy for a public option. I have written them more than once and said, no money, no support, no phone calls unless and until Obama comes out strong for the PO. If he falls down on this, perhaps no vote in the future either. I am really fed up with the complete betrayal coming out of the WH on healthcare.
Do ya hafta say that? Heading for EPU land here . . .
Clearly Social Security has been disasterously unpopular, just like any Single Payer type program would inevitably be./s
The curious thing about leadership, like air miles and cell phone minutes, is that you either use it or lose it.
Declaring yourself committed to pragmatism rather than ideology substitutes visibly empty rhetoric for political choice. It pisses off loyal followers and tells a disloyal opposition that the store’s open, the lights are off and nobody’s home. In an inherently conflict-ridden process, the proponent of that rhetoric indicates he’s conflict averse and easily tumbled, not that he’s too smart or poker-faced to tip his hand.
There’s a huge difference – as Obama’s party will learn at the polls in 2010 and 2012 – between zealously wanting a policy for good and sufficient reasons and being unable to obtain it, versus claiming to want no thing in particular and then bragging about whatever it is you and the cat left on the legislative doorstep.
Will someone inside the Beltway please remind Mr. Obama – after his whisperer-in-chief Rahm has left the building – that JFK’s book was titled, Profiles in Courage, not Profiles in Pragmatism.
completely OT: Orionid meteor shower tonight
thanks! outta the park.
I’m into my 7th week of the new school year, I’m 49, and Obama, I HOPE, is a 1 termer. I’m fucking sick of ivy league sell out-ism — dud-krap-kis, gore, kerry, clinton, obama …
excuses, fat paychecks for them making excuses, losing to fascists, us working stiffs getting STIFFED again by their bullshit … excuses, losing…
spare me the 40 syllable words, the 40 sentence paragraphs, the 40 page tomes.
OBVIOUSLY, the choices for Dim-O-Cratic politicians are:
1. win at the rules which exist (ha ha… HA HA HA)
2. change the rules so you can win (hha ha haha ha ha HA HA HA)
3. snivel and fucking whine and lose AND stay in charge!
rmm.
“We’re leaning toward talking about a public option,”
wow, don’t get too far out on that limb, Harry; a lean mean waffle machine.
Whyknot, you get the award for the funniest pissed-off, indignant comment of the day!
Boy, is this ever refreshing! On other threads here at FDL, credence is being given to the idea that progress achieved on the PO so far is part of some brilliant grand strategy on Obama’s part. According to this, O foresaw and pre-ordained every single move, every twist and turn of this farcical Chinese fire drill. Ye gods! People will stretch to any lengths trying to preserve the giddiness of election night.
Obama’s comments tonight . . . same old.
I want it to be 15 years from now. Someone has written a book about how all this came out and what the hell was really going on at the WH.
Did anyone know he would be this frustrating?
As this has ground forward, it seems that most of the proposals which have been offensive to progressives have been jettisoned and the proposals most favorable to progressives have survived. Its been painful, but in politics when you don’t show your fear and allow your opponents to flail, you end up looking stronger. In politics, appearance of strength is power.
All indicators are pointing our direction now, and have been moving in our direction steadily. Let’s take steps to ensure that the trend lines continue unbroken.
Two ideas, one of which I found referenced at TPM, the other just browsing:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0795/is_n2_v16/ai_16863015/
In short: “the govt negotiates prices for all private and public insurance, thereby lowering adminsitrative costs and creating an equal playing field. It’s a single payer system, but a different name, and allowing for more private ownership”
The other talks about a risk assessment mechanism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoHF_7lZx_8
Neither is predicated on a public option. Nor do they preclude the possibility of a public option. They could be grafted on to existing bills under consideration, and would, I think, lower costs
Two ideas, one I found referenced at TPM:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0795/is_n2_v16/ai_16863015/
In plain English: “govt negotiates prices for all private and public insurance, thereby lowering adminsitrative costs and creating an equal playing field. It’s a single payer system, but a different name, and allowing for more private ownership”
The other just browsing the web:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoHF_7lZx_8
Risk is assessed, so plans that end up with younger, healthier populations make compensation payments to a fund which is drawn upon by plans that end up with sicker patients. Risk adjustors – formulae – are used to assess risk.
Neither idea is predicated on a public option, and neither precludes it. I think they would bring down costs and could be grafted onto the legislation under consideration.
Single payer is probably in our future, but many lives will be lost and fortunes ruined by the time we get there.
The system you mention is called an all-payer system. They have it in Maryland. It causes Medicare to have to pay higher rates than it would under the normal administrative rate system, so what’s the point.
Obama has permitted–in fact participated in–the portayal of single payer and the robust public option as fringe ideas. These are mainstream ideas, variations of which are employed in dozens of countries. Obama has failed the American people on health care reform and it simply makes me sick when people try to excuse him with an 11-dimensional chess theory.
Obama has been awful throughout this whole Health Care debate…just awful. there is no defense of his unwillingness to speak his mind. He campaigned on the public option…got elected in part because his stump speeches included talk of public option. And now what? Wish washy statements meant to not come down anywhere…afraid to even mention the words public option. Pathetic.
Yes Im glad republicans are not running the show but this is just sickening. who would have thought “Off the table” Pelosi would be the one taking a firm stand and showing real leadership on this.
Thanks Obama…when we really needed to see leadership and conviction you let us all down. All of us.