Health Care: Obama Engages More Deeply

Is Barack Obama finally channeling LBJ to save his health reform initiative? As we’ve noted before, the President until now has stayed away from the nitty-gritty of the negotiations on Capitol Hill, largely because he wants to avoid the mistakes that the Clintons made in 1993, when they tried to dictate to Congress precisely how to transform the health system. His role, as he saw it, was to make the case on the outside, with the public, to convince Americans that health reform is needed–and needed now.

But that kind of hands-off approach to the legislative process hasn’t been working so well lately. The Democratic committee chairmen in Congress seem to be losing sight of one of Obama’s major goals, which is to bring long-term health care costs down. As a result, the whole effort is coming under growing criticism from such diverse and credible quarters as the Congressional Budget Office and the Mayo Clinic. As recently as last night, Obama was telling liberal bloggers that this wasn’t a real problem, and that any defects in the legislation could be fixed after it passes the House and Senate, when it reaches a conference committee.

With Congress looking less and less likely to make Obama’s deadline for House and Senate passage by the August recess, however, there are signs that he is shifting into a different gear. One close Obama ally predicted to me: “He’s going to become increasingly specific–and increasingly persistent–about the things he does and doesn’t want” in the health care bill. This afternoon found the President knee-deep in negotations with the conservative Democrats known as “Blue Dogs,” who have been slowing down Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman’s efforts to get a bill through his panel. And as a result, the President and the conservative Democrats are making common cause on one cost-containment measure that both would like to see added to the House bill.

In a conference call with a group of reporters after the session, Obama Budget Director Peter Orszag said that the White House and the Blue Dogs agree that the “biggest missing piece” of the House bill is a proposal–similar to one championed in the Senate by Democrat Jay Rockefeller–to take the job of setting Medicare reimbursement rates out of the hands of Congress, and turn it over to an independent agency that presumably would have more expertise–and more insulation from political pressure. (You can read our earlier discussion of it–and Orszag’s argument for it– here.) The idea has also won words of praise from the Mayo Clinic on the very blog where it criticized the House bill yesterday. And Obama’s engagement may be bringing the Blue Dogs aboard.

As the Obama adviser told me, there is simply no one else who can close the deal the way a President can. “There is something about the President of the United States calling you as a member and asking you to do something, and not just calling once, but twice and three time,” he said. “It is awfully hard to say no to a President of your own party.”

Related Topics: Barack Obama, Congress, Democratic Party, Health Care
  • Latest on Swampland

    Morning Must Reads: Secret

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

    A Tale of Two Economies: Mitt Romney vs. Republican Governors

    The great recession has left the state of Ohio battered and bruised–and Mitt Romney would have you believe it’s Barack Obama’s fault. Writing in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer on May 4, Romney advised Ohioans that the President has delivered them “paltry results,” and that their state is in need of “a fundamental change in direction.”

  • yutsano

    It may be looking at things that aren’t there, but I think the lobbying success over the F-22 funding has emboldened our President and made it clear that the hands-off approach isn’t going to work with this herd of cats. It’s time to get in the trenches and get something that’s workable and doable.

    Fantasy moment: what if Obama finally decides the only solution is singly payer? (Walks self back from cliff slowly…)

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    If only!

    Arrgh!

  • pafro

    Two different bills are going to pass the House and Senate. Details like the shift of the Medicare rate setting to IMAC need only be in one of the bills to get included in the final bill.
    Bush Dogs whining about this is nothing more than their typical preening for the camera.

  • spob

    Didn’t Obama just admit that he doesn’t even know what’s in the House bill?

  • shepherdwong

    It’s getting interesting isn’t it? Thanks again for the window, KT.

    I guess it won’t surprise you to learn that I no longer consider The Mayo Clinic a “credible quarter”, especially related to Medicare policy. Like nearly everyone else, they have a dog in this hunt and we’ve already heard them make an unqualified statement of fact about what will happen to both quality and cost in the future should the currently proposed legislation be enacted. That’s political BS, pure and simple.

  • jcapan

    From Time’s Q&A with Howard Dean:

    “The last thing I want to say is I don’t see this as a vote between the Democrats and the Republicans and the liberals and conservatives. This is about whether you’re going to vote for the insurance companies or whether you’re going to vote for what your constituents want. And we’ll be watching.”

  • sacredh

    It’s about time the President got more directly involved. The longer this gets dragged out the chances lessen of serious reform taking place. He needs to twist some arms and make a few thinly veiled threats. The 2010 elections are going to be here before we know it and there’s always the chance the republicans will pick up enough seats to throw a serious monkey wrench in the works.

    He’s been placing too much faith in the members of his own party putting aside their petty bickering and working for the people they serve. I hope he finally realizes that relying on their own “good intentuions” is wishful thinking. They need a swift kick in the ass to get them moving.

  • spob

    More wisdom from Howard “the scream” Dean . . . .
    .
    (And yes I know how deeply unfair the coverage of the scream really was . . . ., and no, I don’t care).
    .
    And if they turn over the rate setting to an independent agency, how are they going to keep costs down?
    .
    Here’s another question–will the contribution by people on public plan be solely income based? What about assets?

  • spob

    And how is Massachusetts doing under its healthcare system? That seems relevant here too. Right?

  • jcapan

    Sacred, by “the people they serve” you mean their corp sponsors, then I’m in full agreement…. The real question for the health care experts (and I’m not one of ‘em) is whether Obama is putting muscle behind a deeply flawed bill, mindful primarily of “victory” over substance. Thoughts–P-luk, SZ?

    Here’s a blog post by The Krug that I missed the other day. Interesting that he makes the pt. that progressive economic pts of view are unwelcome in the Obama admin. And we all just thought it was the MSM that shunned us.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/morning-joe/

  • jcapan

    “if by”

  • gysgt213

    KT-So its his health reform initiative. This will have impact on no one else but Obama? I’m just asking because when you phrase it like that. People tend to think that’s the way it is. Prior reporting would suggest that this is not really Obama’s health care initiative, but one he can get behind. Is there a difference?

  • spob

    “The Democratic committee chairmen in Congress seem to be losing sight of one of Obama’s major goals, which is to bring long-term health care costs down.”
    .
    Three choices, efficiency, rationing or squeezing suppliers.
    .
    You won’t get more efficiency without nuking a lot of the tort lawsuits–good luck with that one, guys. Don’t you remember who runs the Democratic party? Rationing? So what’s up with that “counseling provision” where you tell the elderly about end-of-life decisions (hey, I thought libs were against mandatory counseling–remember, abortions?) And squeezing suppliers–well, that would never happen, would it? (And if suppliers get squeezed, they will pass along costs to private insurers, which will drive up those costs and hurt those people, but hey, they only work for a living, so f ‘em.)

  • spob

    “Interesting that he makes the pt. that progressive economic pts of view are unwelcome in the Obama admin.”
    .
    Yeah, funny how the adults shun the dormroom Marxists.

  • theotherjimmyolson

    No.

  • theotherjimmyolson

    Better than Idaho.

  • spob

    well, Jimmy, beware of signs that say hidden driveways.

  • gysgt213
  • sacredh

    I might be overly optimistic when I say the people they serve are the average voters and not their corporate masters. It’s hell being an optimist. Confusing too.

  • sacredh

    That’s a neat trick. Very existential thinking. It reminds me of a painting I once saw titled “White Cow in a Snowstorm”. Being loaded at the time…all I saw was a blank canvas.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Gunny: It is indeed his health reform initiative. If it suceeds, it will be viewed as the biggest achievement of his presidency. He chose to take this on, when even some of his own advisers urged him not to. So, yes, it’s his.

  • destor23

    KT — can I rephrase gunny’s question for you? Well, I will and I think you’re uniquely qualified to answer this — it’s not “is it Obama’s bill?” in the sense of “will its passage of failure be part of his legacy?” It’s, “Is this the kind of reform he campaigned on?” Did his reticence to get involved early leave him with a congressional bill that’s kind of like what we thought we were getting when we voted for him or is it something else?

    How about — is this a bill for Obama supporters?

  • jcapan

    Here’s Rep. Kucinich on Democracy Now:

    Well, it’s not close to the idea of single payer. It’s mandating that people buy insurance. And it’s telling insurance companies they have to sell insurance. Well, you know who wins in that deal.

    The fact of the matter is, this debate is all skewed right now. You know, there are—both political parties are in trouble on the issue of healthcare. Our political system is failing the American people, and it’s a bipartisan affair. So, what we have right now is a mishmash, which is being offered up as reform. Well, no wonder it’s in trouble from all sides.

    I mean, if people were offered a clear choice of a single-payer plan or not and told what the advantages are of having the government paying the bills, eliminating the overhead, enabling all Americans to have not just basic coverage with doctor of choice, but vision care, dental care, mental healthcare, prescription drugs, long-term care, all covered, if people knew that was the choice they could have, there wouldn’t even—there wouldn’t be much of a debate at all.

    But we’re falling back on old ideological arguments, when the fact of the matter is the insurance companies are running Washington and we have to break their hold. And that’s why the single-payer amendment that I offer that gives states an option is a small step in the direction of trying to give states the ability to be able to determine their own destiny, and then hopefully America will be able to see in these laboratories of states that we can have a single-payer plan that can save people money and protect people’s economic security and their health. Healthcare is a basic right. We still don’t hear of that talked about in the major debate here in Washington about the bill that is being presented.

  • jcapan

    And KT, if WaPo can say it…

    “Baucus’s fundraising prowess underscores the enduring political strength of the health-care lobby, which led all other sectors in donations to federal candidates during the last election cycle and has shifted its giving to Democrats as the party has tightened its control of Congress.

    The sector gave nearly $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008, with 54 percent going to Democrats, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. The shift in parties was even more pronounced during the first three months of this year, when Democrats collected 60 percent of the $5.4 million donated by health-care companies and their employees, the data show.”

    Again, folks, the enemy of true reform right now are wearing big f’ing D’s on their chest.

  • shepherdwong

    I think this reader over at TPM answers the “is it all about Obama” (or even politics) question pretty eloquently:

    Just to mention something that is obvious, but hopefully not overlooked, i.e., if this country cannot pass a bill which insures that every citizen has access to medical care, which every developed country has managed to do (and got done many many years ago), there is something very fundamentally and structurally wrong with this country.

    Such an event, in my mind, would confirm that we live with a completely corrupt and dysfunctional form of government. Forty nine states, each with bicameral legislative bodies, some of which have distinguished themselves recently with unabashed levels of incompetency and cluelessness. Then, graft a federal government over that, which is also bicameral, the non-representative portion of it being filled with officials who are certifiable morons and/or who are bought and sold like whores by wealthy contributors.

    Talk about a Waterloo.

    This is a defining moment in our history. Do we fulfill our supposed status as a “shining city on a hill” or continue our long slow decline into a second rate oligarchy?

    I am not one prone to hyperbole.

    I believe this to the depths of my soul.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Whether this is a bill for Obama supporters is something that Obama supporters will have to decide.

  • jcapan

    Thanks for that Shep. It’d be awesome if it weren’t so spot-on & depressing. Again, everyone should be looking to CA–it vividly foreshadows the American future writ large.

    “We will have to repent in this generation not only for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.”

    Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail

  • destor23

    Hmm KT, guess I phrased it badly. What I was asking you is a question of fact that you would probably be able to answer. Is this bill consistent with what Obama campaigned on or not? I’m not trying to get you to say yes or no, I really don’t know the answer and I think you do.

  • Matt

    It was beyond time for Obama to personally take control of the health care debate and dialogue.

    And Jim DeMint is a real folk hero for Dems…

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • Cliff

    The Tao that can be spoken is not the Tao.

  • Cliff

    You may as well just tell him that this is a political blog, not a healthcare blog, KT.

  • jcapan

    Here’s Digby commenting on progressive groups attempting to target Baucus in MT:

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/mad-max-by-digby-meet-winner.html

    Here’s the ad they hope to run, if they get enough $

  • ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®©

    As we’ve noted before, the President until now has stayed away from the nitty-gritty of the negotiations on Capitol Hill, largely because he wants to avoid the mistakes that the Clintons made in 1993, when they tried to dictate to Congress precisely how to transform the health system.

    I don’t appreciate that frame, K.T.

    This country made an enormous mistake back in 1993-1994. And we’re still paying for it.

    Bill Kristol and company hope we make the same mistake again.

    That’s where the K-Street bucks are.
    ~

  • square1

    “dormroom Marxists” = Nobel prize-winning economists.

    I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that spob has been spotted passing a hat around the dorm for another keg more recently than Joseph Stiglitz.

  • mgibson1973

    Hi,

    I’m reading this from Australia, a country where we have Universal health care for our citizens – which is free to those who cannot afford to pay for health care. It is funded centrally by the federal government so is effectively paid for by the taxpayers, and is not really free for people like myself who work and pay tax.

    The debate that goes on in America has always been an interesting one for us, as we take our own system for granted. Like Canada’s system, our’s is based on the premise that those who can afford it, subsidise those who cannot. I know this is sometimes viewed as a little too ‘socialist’ for the US, but when you see a system like our’s working, and compare it to the plight of the uninsured in the US, I don’t see how any argument against it can stand up to scrutiny.

    Our system is not perfect, and many choose to pay for private health insurance (as I do), but I simply couldn’t imagine being one of the uninsured in the US.

    Mick

  • kbanginmotown

    Exactly! It’s about time that the Dems, blue-dogs and all, realized that their success depends upon the President being successful.

  • themaverickformerlyknownasbasilbrush

    You’ve captured the mind of spob perfectly. Rabidly white, totally empty.

  • ohiolib

    The problem, Mick, is that there are rabid RW nuts over here who are terrified that someone might get something they don’t “deserve”. Combine this with the massive amounts of money that pharm companies can and do spend, and you have a recipe for howling yahoos as soon as a serious attempt at actually covering our uninsured is made.

  • yutsano

    They REALLY need to simplify how you get to the donor page there JC-san! Otherwise yes the pressure needs to be laid on and thick. This ain’t gonna happen until people start screaming to the high heavens for it. That means pressure, pressure, and more pressure.

  • cincinnatus est exterminata!

    “This is a defining moment in our history. Do we fulfill our supposed status as a “shining city on a hill” or continue our long slow decline into a second rate oligarchy?”
    .
    Yeah. Absolutely. I’ve seen this coming for a while and I truly believe we are at the crossroads of history now. Not a recession, a blip, or a cycle but a fundamental fork in the road. Climate change, dwindling water supplies, over population, drought, a failing economic system, but perhaps the greatest hurdle we face is our own stupidity.
    .
    I really hope the Mayans were right about December 21, 2012, because this must all end.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    I be sayin’ th’ answer be AYE! Vict’ry o’er substance!

    YARR!

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    It be ri’ strange tha’ jcapan be findin’ Kucinich talkin’ ’bout single-payer, bu’ th’ MSM don’t even be knowin’ th’ option exists!

    Arrgh!

  • yutsano

    It’s so difficult to explain to Europeans/Australians/Canadians what exactly American conservatism is like. It’s the most extreme right-wing reactionary party you have there. Now go even further right than that. That’s where American conservatives are right now.

  • yutsano

    Is that a deafening silence Gunny? No seriously how did you pull that trick off?

  • shepherdwong

    “…I truly believe we are at the crossroads of history now. Not a recession, a blip, or a cycle but a fundamental fork in the road. Climate change, dwindling water supplies, over population, drought, a failing economic system, but perhaps the greatest hurdle we face is our own stupidity.”

    The status quo will be maintained by the elites until it no longer works for the elites . So the stupidity is continuing to let the status quo work for the elites.

  • plukasiak

    Its not an inaccurate frame insofar as it describes what went wrong legislatively.

    The problem with it is that it is an incomplete frame — it ignores the mechanism that lead to the legislative failure, i.e. the vast sums of money spent by the health care parasites to defeat the Clinton plan.

    The ‘Obama’ plan is going to be an even bigger failure, because its being written by the same parasites who killed the Clinton effort. So instead of a good plan that isn’t passed (leaving us with the option to try again), we’re getting a completely horrible and ridiculously expensive plan that is merely a form of corporate welfare for the insurance and Pharma industries masquerading as accomplished reform.

    Its inevitable failure will set back any effort toward true reform for decades….

  • plukasiak

    Don’t blame our problems on “conservatives”.

    The real impediment is that when Democrats are given the opportunity to lead the country in the right direction, they are more concerned with keeping power than improving the country.

    Real change always entails a political cost. LBJ changed this country for the better, and the Democrats suffered mightily for it. Reagan and Bush II also changed the country (but for the worse), and the GOP is now suffering the consequences.

    But the corrupt and weak leadership of the Democratic Party in Washington has sold out the American people to the Wall Street bankers and the health care parasites. We had an “once in a generation” opportunity handed to us this year to effect real change, and Obama, Rahm, Axelrod, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, Baucus, etc have chosen to line their pockets in an effort to perpetuate their own power rather than actually reform our economy and health care systems.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “When I asked Baucus what he needed from the White House in order to help pass a viable health care plan, his answer, more or less, was nothing — as in, the most helpful thing they can do is butt out and let the Senate worry about the details”
    NYT Sunday Magazine June 7th 2009

    “Basically, the president is not helping us,” Mr. Baucus said. “That’s making it difficult.”
    Baucus from KT’s post
    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/07/16/big-setback-for-health-reform/

    I get the feeling that BHO stayed away from overt involvement to be deferential to Congress but, like with the stimulus bill, he HAS to be front and center to get anything done.

    Old Max sure seems to be milking his position for all he can right now, as if tomorrow never will come.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Sorry. Didn’t mean to blow that off. This bill is consistent on one level with what Obama promised. It dramatically expands coverage. However, what we have seen thus far does not dramatically transform the health care system. That’s why you are hearing critics from the CBO to Mayo Clinic and Orszag. There are “pilot projects,” but no real teeth in anything that would change the incentives for health care providers and health care consumers to continue to spend money on health care that is ineffective and inefficient.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    Have just posted a belated answer to Destor at #21.

  • kathy

    yutsano – I figured this out a few months ago when I was speechless, and figured I had to find a way to show that. I’ll tell you if you want, but I just want to assure you that what you have to do is emphatically say nothing, with the tools we usually use.

  • kathy

    oops- Gunny must have a new trick; mine didn’t work this time.

  • gysgt213

    Kathy-yutsano: The way I did it was unintentional. I attempted to embed the following.

    And since I had no text when I hit the submit it saw the code and accepted as a comment but of course a blank comment came up.

  • gysgt213
  • destor23

    And a good one, too! Thanks KT! And sorry, I phrased my question pretty badly the first time, I think I was trying to be clever. But your answer was really helpful for perspective.

  • destor23

    And a good one, too! Thanks KT! And sorry, I phrased my question pretty badly the first time, I think I was trying to be clever. But your answer was really helpful for perspective.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    I were seein’ tha’ gunny – it be bloody frustratin’ tha’ th’ only people takin’ health care reform serious be th’ fake news shows.

    I swear, I be ready t’ be packin’ it in regardin’ political involvement! Wha’ be th’ point? I be ready t’ commandeer th’ rum rations, lock meself into me cabin, an’ pickle me brain into oblivion – if Rome be goin’ t’ burn, I mi’ as well be happily fiddlin’ whilst th’ dark ages be dawnin’!

    YARR!

  • Tom in The Swamp

    Tort lawsuits are the cause of less than two percent of the cost of hea;th care in America. The real driver for our high-cost low-performance health care (the quality of our health care is rated 37th in the world, between Costa Rica and Slovenia) is the for-profit nature of our profiteering health-insurance and pharmaceutical companies, combined with the fee-for-service approach to paying physicians.

    Doctors should be paid high salaries by not-for-profit organizations who emply them , as is done at our best hospitals, like the Mayo Clinic and the Cleveland Clinic. This will prevent patients being subjected to unnecessary and expensive procedures that can actually do more harm than good, just because it profits hospitals and physicians to perform them.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    ‘ere be some questions fer ye, KT –

    Instead o’ “reportin” on all th’ process cr*p, why don’t ye concentrate on’ th’ specific details o’ actual PRODUCT(S) tha’ be under consideration?

    An’ wha’ th’ benefits/consequences o’ adoptin’ any o’ those current products be?

    An’ who be benefittin’ an’ who be consequentin’?

    An’ comparin’ whether a single-pay system, in tandem wi’ other reforms, be a viable alternative ‘r not – speakin’ strictly ’bout solvin’ th’ actual problem, instead o’ th’ political aspect o’ it?

    ‘Cause, th’ main reason single-payer be considered no’ politically viable be ’cause th’ MSM be ignorin’ it complete – no’ be coverin’ th’ possibility, an’ no demandin’ answers as t’ why Congress an’ th’ President no be considerin’ th’ possibility!

    Ye don’t be mentionin’ th’ part single-payer could play t’ be pluggin’ th’ fundin’ gaps, nor t’ quarantee access t’ health care, nor t’ change th’ delivery model, nor nothin’ else single-payer could be contributin’ t’ reformin’ health care.

    Ye don’t see it, ye don’t hear ’bout it, ye don’t speak ’bout it, ye don’t be askin’ questions ’bout it – like a well-behaved bunch o’ trained monkeys!

    Oh wait – it all be dependin’ on th’ dispensers o’ th’ monkey pellets! None o’ ye wants t’ be bitin’ th’ hand wha’ feeds ye!

  • gysgt213

    Here’s a report that finds almost 265 billion in savings through healthcare reform in health care insurance administration over 10 years.

    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/Files/Publications/Issue%20Brief/2009/Jul/Admin%20Costs/1299_Collins_how_hlt_care_reform_can_lower_costs_ins_admin.pdf

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    I thank ye, gunny, and th’ others who be workin’ t’ ferret out th’ information tha’ be nowhere t’ be found in th’ TV an’ print media most people be payin’ attention to.

    Bu’, be tha’ not th’ JOB o’ JOURNALISTS??? Th’ reason they be no’ doin’ their jobs be bein’ needed t’ be highlighted, along wi’ why Congress, and even th’ President be no’ willin’ t’ do wha’s best in health care reform!

    I b’lieve media feet be needin’ t’ be held t’ th’ fire just as much as Democrat feet be!

    YARR!

  • sgre144

    Make the Medicare contribution proportional, i.e., all wages and salary are subject to the 2.9% medicare rate, and $70 bil in revenue would be available. That would fund most of the revenue needed to fund universal care.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    An’ it be time th’ President were realizin’ tha’ ‘IS success d’pends upon passin’ real, fundamental, health care reform – no’ th’ smoke an’ mirrors health insurance give-away masqueradin’ fer reform tha’ be under consideration now!

    Arrgh!

  • spob

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/07/obama-bush-policies.html
    .
    More secrecy from the Obama Administration. Hope and change; hope and change.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    I have been writing quite a bit about the products that are under consideration. for instance:

    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/06/19/house-health-care-plan/

    and

    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/07/02/a-senate-committees-health-reform-bill/

    and

    http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/07/17/health-reform-bending-that-curve/

    i could give you dozens more links as well, if you want them.

    but the process is important, too. also worth noting: hardly any of that stuff mentioned in the commonwealth report “scores” for CBO purposes, because it deals with administrative costs to the private insurance industry.

  • http://twitter.com/ktumulty Karen Tumulty

    And while I have written about single payer, i am also covering an actual legislative effort which deals with something that might actually happen. i think it is more important to give my readers information about that. both the president and the congress have taken single payer off the table. they are not going to put it back on the table, no matter how many swampland blog items are written about it.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    KT – they be not puttin’ it back on th’ table ’cause no one in th’ media were makin’ a peep when they were takin’ it off th’ table, an’ no one in th’ media were ever demandin’ an explanation fer WHY it were off th’ table, an’ no one in th’ media were educatin’ th’ public so’s they could be demandin’ in an effective manner tha’ it beput back on th’ table in.

    In short – they took it off th’ table, an’ remains off th’ table ’cause YE (th’ mainstream media) LET ‘em!

    YARR!

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    An, fer th’ record, I no’ be considerin’ false equivalency “he says/she says” stenography to be journalism.

    Arrgh.

  • deconstructiva

    Karen, I *politely* disagree (politely, of course). One reporter’s article CAN be a catalyst for change (without taking sides, *gasp*): examples abound, such as Bethany Mclean’s “Is Enron Overpriced?” It took awhile since market lag didn’t yet tank ENE stock, but media scrutiny FINALLY began there. Imagine if Ben Bradlee had reacted to first Watergate break-in story, “What, a break-in at the Dem’s office? So what else is new, boys? Ever hear of politics? And Howard Hunt was with the CIA? Old news, rookies. Go back to the Hill and get me some pithy Sam Ervin quotes already, do I have to make every (gosh dang) decision around here?” If you write something like “Bridget Jones and the Political Footsie Under the Table: Why Congress Won’t Discuss the Family Taboo Known as Singleton Payer” it just might work, go for it….

  • shepherdwong

    “And while I have written about single payer, i am also covering an actual legislative effort which deals with something that might actually happen. i think it is more important to give my readers information about that. both the president and the congress have taken single payer off the table. they are not going to put it back on the table, no matter how many swampland blog items are written about it.”

    Fair enough, KT. However, It would be illustrative if you would simply connect the dots between Village complaints about the current legislation’s lack of cost controls and the decision by the Village (please don’t pretend that your industry doesn’t play a key role in determining what the president and congress can consider) that the most cost-effective known solution is “taken single payer off the table [and] they are not going to put it back on the table…”

    The sheer self-serving hypocrisy and stupidity of the Village and their choices for the rest of us may partly explain why Swampcritters aren’t that interested in letting it go.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    I be takin’ ye t’ task ’cause ye’re all we got, lassie!

    Ye could o’ given Senator Sanders more play. Ye could o’ given Kucinich more play. Ye could o’ given anyone tryin’ t’ get th’ word out ’bout single-payer more play, bu’ ye didn’t. Ye (all) adopted th’ frame ye were handed, no questions asked.

    Ye had months an’ months t’ be reportin’ on an’ comparin’ th’ upcomin’ options so’s more people could’a been better informed, bu’ ye didn’t do it.

    Ye (all) didn’t do th’ most fundamental job o’ a free press, an’ ye’re (none o’ ye) no’ doin’ it now.

    When we end up wi’ a pile o’ sh*t, a fair ration o’ th’ blame fer it will be a’ yer (all’s) doorstep!

    YARR!

  • Art Pepper

    both the president and the congress have taken single payer off the table. they are not going to put it back on the table,

    True enough. This may be the closest admission I’ve seen in the MSM that neither Congress nor the President feel any need to answer to the voters.

    I swear to God I’m voting against Maria Cantwell. But I’ll be voting for the Green Party or Donald Duck or something, because I’ll never vote GOP. So Cantwell doesn’t need me. (Although her campaign has the nerve to send me fund-raising requests.) The party machine understands all of this, and they know their real masters are the corporate lobbies.

  • http://acmeanvil.wordpress.com/ acmeanvil

    Massachusetts was only about expanded coverage, it did not address cost containment. That was a flaw we don’t intend to repeat.

  • davethompsonmpls

    Single payer doesn’t solve the problem of out-of-control health care costs. Case in point: Medicare. If we don’t figure out how to reorganize the health care delivery system, national health insurance is an impossible dream.

  • shepherdwong

    The exact purpose of single-payer is “to reorganize the health care delivery system”. You’re speaking in empty and contradictory industry bullsh*t, nothing more.

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    I were never sayin’ single-payer be solvin’ all th’ problems, bu’ I b’lieve it be an absolute necessary component!

    Thar be plenty o’ changes tha’ could be made in reimbursement an’ delivery models tha’d be cuttin’ cost, bu’ as long as insurance remains a market commodity, th’ whole thing be impossible t’ manage.

    Thar be REASONS why countries wi’ single-pay systems be spendin’ so much less an’ gettin’ so much higher quality an’ better outcomes than we be!

    Arrgh!

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    Thank ye, shep – I were thinkin’ after givin’ KT such a lashin’ I’d best be backin’ off fer a bit ;) !

    Arrgh.

  • shepherdwong
  • jcapan

    What P-luk said

    And I’d say some of the “good people” below work in the MSM:

    “We will have to repent in this generation not only for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people.”

    Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail

  • pirate wench (demwoman)

    Aye – tha’ be why thar be needin’ t’ be pirates!

    ARRGH!

  • http://botd.wordpress.com/2009/07/23/top-posts-1182/ Top Posts « WordPress.com

    [...] Health Care: Obama Engages More Deeply Is Barack Obama finally channeling LBJ to save his health reform initiative? As we’ve noted before, the President [...] [...]

  • http://politicsorpoppycock.com/2009/07/24/house-deal-on-cutting-health-costs/ House Deal On Cutting Health Costs « Politics or Poppycock

    [...] Swampland’s Karen Tumulty reports more deep presidential involvement to come: “One close Obama ally predicted to me: ‘He’s going to become increasingly specific–and increasingly persistent–about the things he does and doesn’t want’ in the health care bill. This afternoon found the President knee-deep in negotations with the conservative Democrats known as ‘Blue Dogs,’ … as a result, the President and the conservative Democrats are making common cause on one cost-containment measure that both would like to see added to the House bill … The [commission] idea has also won words of praise from the Mayo Clinic on the very blog where it criticized the House bill yesterday. And Obama’s engagement may be bringing the Blue Dogs aboard.” [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus