Tag: democrats

How quickly we forget

ryking points out weakness in the Democrat by noting that:

— The GOP had at most 55 Senators during Bush’s presidency

Yeah, but where are the accomplishments? What was W’s healthcare? What historic game-changer did the man manage to pass? Certainly not what he tried hardest to do with his “political capital”: Social Security Privatization. The link notes these “accomplishments”:

– John Ashcroft nomination
– Iraq war resolution
– Repeated Iraq funding resolutions
– 2001 & 2003 tax cuts
– Patriot Act
– Alito
– John Roberts
– Medicare Part D

Pretty weak tea there. Let’s knock off the low hanging fruit first: Americablog and ryking seem to be forgetting that, back in them days, a President was deemed capable of choosing who would serve in his cabinet; anyone not utterly and plainly incapable or actively serving time in prison was generally passed along through without much of a fight. Thus Ashcroft (Brownie, Gonzales, Bolton, and a host of others. Seriously, it’s not hard to understand: GOP Presidents are given wide latitude in their appointments by Democratic Senators. Democratic Presidents are not afforded this luxury by the GOP Senate). Obama, specifically, is not allowed even the most controversy free, obviously overqualified appointments; all of them have been subject to secret holds and as many time-wasters and cloture votes as are possible to throw up. And that’s leaving aside the furor over (previously and entirely) non-controversial advisory roles (aka the Czars).Do the Democrats or our Liberal Media hold the GOP to any of this? Why, of course not. Any time there is a microphone around, a Democrat should be screaming into it that the GOP is killing babies because it won’t approve [insert name]. All the time, every time. Only then will things begin to change. But we hold ourselves above all that, apparently.

The tax cuts broadly fit under the same aegis: give the “winner” what he wants. Elections have consequences: The GOP was in charge of all three branches, it is they who should set policy (speaking here in the extremely broad strokes of Our Media Elite; you know, like Cokie Roberts). Democrats, mind you, are never afforded such a luxury, and furthermore forget said poor treatment “the next time around,” immediately sucking up to the furthest right-wing opponents they can find in the hopes of “rekindling bipartisanship.” Idiocy, but undeniable.

9/11/01 and the spectre of mushroom clouds being our wakeup call led to Iraq and the Iraq votes. Honestly, given the volume and velocity of the lies in and around that debate, it’s amazing any kind of push-back was managed, much less a successful one. Not that we’re going to investigate any of that, of course. Gotta keep ourselves focused on the future! That way it’s easier to repeat the past in four years. But, once we’re in Iraq, you’re not going to vote against the troops, are you? Why do you want to kill our troops? The votes follow. And continue to this day. However, the GOP is now merrily allowed to vote to kill our troops. The media: zzzzzzzzzzzz. Boooooooooring. Old news.

Roberts played his role perfectly. Exactly what in his confirmation hearings seemed so far right as to warrant a filibuster? Again, anyone from the right-wing of American politics is allowed wide latitude on appointments. Plus, by the time you got to Alito you had the Gang of 14, whose ranks included many of the right-wing Democrats now giving insurance reform fits. So a filibuster there, though widely discussed (and, IIRC, attempted), was functionally never possible. You couldn’t hold 41 votes against a cloture with those 14 avowed non-participators. That was the point. All of whom, by the way, completely lost interest in judicial filibusters right after Obama won the election. Amazing. The media has certainly put this whole thing into the memory-hole and so have ryking and Americablog, apparently.

Which leaves us with Medicare Part D. Broadly framed, Medicare Part D gets at a core Democratic issue: making health services affordable to as many as possible. Is it so hard to imagine why Bush peeled off lots of Democrats with such a move? This is the fundamental Achilles heel for the Democrat, something we touched on earlier today. Namely:

if a given piece of policy is flawed but ultimately in service to the greater good, then the Democrat will vote for it over their several reservations.

Republicans, however, show no such compunction. Obama and the Democratic Congress could offer them the complete elimination of the IRS and all non-tariff tax revenues and the GOP would lock-step against it. Period. Not invented here, so fuck off. This is ultimately and not coincidentally what Lieberman and his ilk are counting on:

I won’t be killing the bill, because these left-wing do-gooders will be too focused on getting something passed, no matter how fractional and/or dysfunctional the final product might be because of my actions

There is no point in the process where a Rockefeller or Brown will simply say “fuck it, I’m going to Wisconsin” and walk away. Thus, without a credible, bill-killing threat to sit on, it is the left that constantly is forced to give away while the right is constantly operating on the expectation of taking away that which the left most prizes. To the Liebermans of the world, it boils down thusly:

The more Kos and MoveOn squeal, the more likely it is we’re onto something that needs to be excised.

He said as much. What is needed, as Matthew Yglesias notes, is legislation that swings for the progressive fences but can be allowed to fail. Then you can bludgeon Senators X, Y, and Z over their murder of said (popular) bill; use that energy to launch a primary challenge from the left or unseat a Republican. Bank reform (which is what Yglesias suggests) might be a good one. But again, you need something that the left can walk away from. So, basically, it can’t be good policy but has to play in the media as though it is the best possible policy.

Good luck with that.

Congressman Weiner made a comment that Medicare-buy in is better than a public option, it’s the beginning of a road to single-payer,“ Mr. Lieberman said. "Jacob Hacker, who’s a Yale professor who is actually the man who created the public option, said, ‘This is a dream. This is better than a public option. This is a giant step.’

Joe Lieberman on why he flip-flopped on the Medicare buy-in.
And you thought I was joking. El Dorado, here we come.

Shit sandwich

Some on the Hill remain worried that Lieberman will discover new points of contention in the coming days, as they believe he had signaled that he wouldn’t filibuster the Medicare buy-in. They worry whether his word is good.

No reason to worry, Ezra. It is not good and never has been. The goalposts will move again. This time, my guess is “We’re moving too fast. The vote must wait until after Christmas.” Which would effectively kill the bill, so far as I can tell. So that’s what comes next from Joementum. Deep down I always knew I could count on Joe to submarine both the health insurance options of ~40 million people and the presidency of his least preferred option because he faced and lost a primary challenge. What a true patriot. Truly a model for us all.

Digby sums it up rather succinctly:

I think we have a way to go before this bill is bad enough for [Lieberman] and his cronies to allow the Democrats to commit political suicide with it.

Indeed we do. And indeed they are committing suicide. The only saving grace for 2010 is that the “you are now required to buy crummy insurance you cannot afford act of 2009” goes into effect after the 2010s, and but just in time to destroy Obama’s reelection bid. President Palin, here we come. (Naturally, she’ll abruptly quit after 90 days leaving us with President Beck. You heard it here first.)

I was very focused on a group that’s post-50, or maybe post-55,” Lieberman explained to the Connecticut Post. “People who have retired early, or unfortunately, been laid off early, who lose their health insurance or are too young to qualify for Medicare. And what I was proposing is that they have an option to buy into Medicare on the premise that that would be less expensive.

Joe Lieberman, three months ago

Let it Snowe

I tend to agree with Josh Marshall here:

the key issue senate Democrats now have in dealing with Joe Lieberman isn’t his position on the the Medicare Buy-In [it’s that Lieberman] isn’t negotiating in good faith. […] it’s as clear to [Republicans] as it is to anyone else that he’s now basically mocking his Democratic colleagues by moving the goal posts every time a new agreement is struck.

[…]

it’s definitely time for the Democratic caucus to strip Lieberman of all the benefits he receives as a member of the Democratic caucus. But that doesn’t accomplish anything at the moment. The only path I can see for the Dems is that they need to try to put 60 votes together with Sen. Snowe.

Two birds, one stone: give Snowe the chairmanship of Homeland Security (and whatever the hell else she wants) in exchange for her cloture vote. She can do whatever she wants to on final passage. She keeps the chair so long as she votes for cloture. Every time, every issue. Period. Irregular as hell? Sure. But it would drive home the point that playtime is over. If you value your committee appointments and/or office accommodations and caucus with Democrats then YOU WILL VOTE FOR CLOTURE. Or you will find yourself in the Senatorial equivalent of Siberia. Likewise, if you’re a Republican willing to deal on the issues of the day: we’ll make your life much more comfortable in exchange for some painless votes on ending debate.

Either way, Lieberman should find himself so far down the power ladder that he has a hard time buying bean salad at the Senate cafeteria. Only then will this idiocy even begin to stop.

And, by the by, if you believe for one second this isn’t entirely about tweaking the smelly hippies that caused Joe all his problems: you are without a clue. That’s all it’s about. Joementum could care less about policy or what’s best for the most people. He’s got some petty axes to grind and the issue to do it on today happens to be insurance reform. Tomorrow: cap and trade. The Senate is, was, and will be 59-41. Plan accordingly. Find the trapping that Lieberman most prizes and strip it away. You might get it back when… It’s childish, but also the only way to proceed when dealing with a child.

Nate Silver on the Public Option

squashed notes “They’re good thoughts” in reference to this article. I’d call them indispensible. Particularly this:

1) The energy by progressive activists on behalf of the public option has done more good than harm, and by a wide margin.

2a) Nevertheless, the public option is/was a relatively minor part of the health care bill, at least once it became clear that it (i) wouldn’t be pegged to Medicare rates, and (ii) would only be available to a small fraction of the population.

2b) To claim that a health care bill without a public option is anything other than a huge achievement for progressives is, frankly, bullshit.

Absolutely right. It hurts to hear it, I know, but this is 100% the case. Sorry.

I think he’s both right and wrong on this, though:

Liberals have tended to underestimate what a significant political achievement it would be for Democrats to pass such a major bill that has become rather unpopular with the public.

Agreed on underestimation. What he leaves aside, though, is that Democrats in Congress don’t seem to appreciate that they are going to own this legislation. They’d better make it to their liking and damned effective too…because they are going to be the only ones defending it on the hustings in 2010 and 2012. That said, improvement over the current mire shouldn’t be too hard to achieve. The problem is, you need a group of policy-minded individuals who are genuinely looking to improve the situation rather than scratch the back of their favorite interest groups. So we’re in trouble.

Nate Silver on the Public Option

How it passes

ryking:

“This is so freakin’ obnoxious I can hardly stand it. We are about to get a turd of a “reform” package, potentially worse than the status quo. We have the insurance industry declaring victory, Republicans cackling with glee, and the administration is using that piece of shit to raise money? Obama spent all year enabling Max Baucus and Olympia Snowe, and he thinks we’re supposed to get excited about whatever end result we’re about to get, so much so that we’re going to fork over money? Well, it might work with some of you guys, but I’m certainly not biting. In fact, this is insulting, betraying a lack of understanding of just how pissed the base is at this so-called reform. The administration may be happy to declare victory with a mandate that enriches insurance companies, yet creates little incentive to control costs or change the very business practices that have screwed so many people. But I’ll pass.”

— Daily Kos founder Markos: Idiocy

This kind of idiocy is precisely how the bill is going to pass (this post has more context). Rest assured that without suitably believable whinging on the part of Kos and MoveOn (and etc…), the Liebermans of the world won’t for a second believe they have accomplished their goal of pissing off those same groups (and thus feeling confident that they have found the center-right path that is, of course, preferable to them regardless of (often in spite of) the resultant policy). So, 40 million new insurees can thank Markos. People over 55 able to buy into Medicare, and the ultimate expansion of that option (and all that that will mean) can also thank Markos. That we’ll be spared the ridiculous, non-functional nubbin of a public option that remained in the previous iteration of the bill: thank Markos.

Thanks, Markos.

PO Boxed

azspot:

“If, as reported, the Democrats have dropped the public option, they have abandoned any attempt to improve the health care in the United States in favor of increasing health-care insurance profits. This is good for the economy, as ever more jobs will be created in medical claims processing. Also, delivering 40 million new (taxpayer subsidized) premium-payers to the insurance companies to pretend to cover the currently uninsured will certainly drive up health insurance stocks. But nothing in the bill will actually improve heath care nor lower the cost of what passes for healthcare in the US. The war is over, the people lost.”

I must say that I strongly disagree with this sentiment. First and foremost, it presupposes that adding 40 MILLION PEOPLE to the world of the insured is somehow barely worth doing. All these folks can go see a doctor, and not just whoever is on duty at the emergency room. And, presumably, won’t be financially ruined for doing so. And, presumably, will go sooner, when the treatment course will be both cheaper and more effective. Look no further than breast cancer diagnostic stage and outcome in african american women stratified by socioeconomic standing for a hint at what this could really mean. Answer: a lot. A shit-ton. Just this is (potentially) a giant cost container if you can convince people to use it and find sufficient primary care doctors to handle them.

Then, you’ve got the public/private government plans: extending tightly regulated but still for-profit plans like those offered to government employees. This is your mid-level cost container. These are big pools of folks…public option light with a prettier name. Garden-variety people will see the cost benefits that a large pool can bring. Also for the good.

Forgetting all that, though, you still have the (supposed) Medicare buy-in for individuals over 55; this is the biggest deal by far, and, if actually enacted, marks genuine progressive progress in this country. For the first time, you’ll have actual consumers comparing prices of the dread government care and that provided through private insurers. Worth noting that these same 55-and-ups vote. A lot. This is potentially a game changer. It’s a lot simpler to revisit the law and roll the eligible age for buy-in to 45, then 35, then everybody that might want it than it is to announce that on Jan 1, 2010, we’ll be having a single-payer plan in these United States, as much as many on the left would like to believe otherwise. This plan, much more that what remained of the late but not terribly lamented public option, has the potential to completely rewrite how we deal with healthcare in this country. Seriously. Because people will finally know what the costs are and what it means to be part of a negotiated, nationwide cost structure. And this information will begin to trickle down. Think of it as healthcare Reaganomics…

Best of all, though: This version appears to have the votes for passage. You could (potentially) convince Pelosi to ping-pong this thing straight to Obama’s desk before Jan. 1. Not saying that’s going to happen, but it could. But, by all means, go on like this outcome is a giant failure, not worth doing in the first place, and a deep disappointment to boot. Nothing gets us to President Palin more quickly.

Smell the Joementum!

TPM is reporting that Lieberman is at least open to the notion of the Medicare buy-in as a replacement for the public option:

Lieberman said he’s open to both the Medicare buy-in idea, and a separate proposal to extend the private system that insures federal employees to individuals and small businesses.

On the Medicare buy-in–which has significant appeal among liberals–Lieberman was open, but non-committal. “I’ll take a look at it,” Lieberman said. “I think the good news is, however, that the current bill will, for the first time, provide people 55 and over who are not yet eligible for Medicare with subsidies to go on to the exchanges and buy, so they can buy for a lot less than it costs them in the marketplace now.”

“I’m open to looking at it,” Lieberman told reporters. “But I want to make sure that we’re not…adding a big additional burden to the Medicare program.”

Seeing as Snow has already dumped on this idea as pure crazy-talk, this statement by Lieberman counts as real progress. He’ll go back on it by tomorrow morning, but at least we’ve got tonight.

Memo to Joementum and all his friends: Doing nothing will do harm. It will add to the deficit, and, according to this latest bit from the CBO analysis, it will cost families and individuals money, no matter what bracket they are inhabiting. Oh, and doing nothing leaves ~30 MILLION PEOPLE uncovered that would, in fact, get health coverage under the Senate plan. Those people need to shape up and go die in the streets like good American Citizens.

But, by all means, let’s play pretend that doing nothing is not only a viable option, but the only sane option. And media: let’s continue to let people say shit like this without challenge of any sort. To ask if they have any sane reasoning behind their obstructionism just wouldn’t be polite.