Before, it was healthcare every 15 years, from now on it’s going to be [revisited] every single year.
if I could construct a system in which insurers spent 90 percent of every premium dollar on medical care, never discriminated against another sick applicant, began exerting real pressure for providers to bring down costs, vastly simplified their billing systems, made it easier to compare plans and access consumer ratings, and generally worked more like companies in a competitive market rather than companies in a non-functional market, I would take that deal. And if you told me that the price of that deal was that insurers would move from being the 86th most profitable industry to being the 53rd most profitable industry, I would still take that deal.
To put it bluntly, the idea that Lieberman now finds the very same proposal a grave threat to the public good is simply not credible. And while I understand the rules of strategic gamesmanship, somebody who took health care reform seriously–somebody who genuinely cared about ending the misfortune that visits people without affordable medical care–simply would not have made such a strong stand, over such a tiny issue, at such a pivotal time.
The proof, I think, is in the actions of Lieberman’s adversaries. Sherrod Brown supports the public option just as passionately as Lieberman opposes it. The same goes for Jay Rockefeller. But Brown and Rockefeller have already made a series of huge concessions, because those concessions were necessary to move a bill through Congress. Last night, both men signaled they were prepared to make one last concession–to give up on the idea of a public plan altogether–because that’s what it will take to pass the law.
Brown and Rockefeller, in other words, acted to promote the greater good. I can believe some of their adversaries are doing the same. I find it hard to believe Lieberman is among them.
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.’
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.
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.
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.
Then: All you need to know is there are 1,990 pages,” griped House Minority Leader John Boehner about the House bill. “It is longer than War and Peace and not near as funny,” said Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX)
Now: “And we talk about 2,074 pages, which seem like a lot, and it would be for a normal bill that you could debate in a limited period of time, which is what we’re being asked to do. But 2,074 pages isn’t nearly enough to cover health care for America. So why is it only 2,074 pages?” Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY)
“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.
Lemkin 