Alter’s New Book

The first draft of history is always going to be controversial, especially when it’s on something as touchy as health care reform – monstrous legislation the full effects of which we will not know for years to come. So it should probably come as no surprise that Jonathan Alter’s take on Barack Obama’s first year in the White House, entitled The Promise, President Obama, Year One would ruffle a few feathers on Capitol Hill, most notably on health care reform. Alter’s prism and narrative is through the eyes of the White House, whereas most on the Hill believe the credit lies at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, after all they’ve borne (and likely will most acutely feel in November) the brunt of the blame.

Newsweek’s Alter, a self-described progressive, is more than gentle on Obama’s handling of the process.

One of the big surprises for Obama at the beginning was how much he had to deal with the petty egos of Congress. As the health care debate heated up after Labor Day he spent dozens of hours in meetings with members. But because he lacked the elemental neediness of most politicians, he could never fully relate to their desire to be stroked. For the president, schmoozing members was like raising money or working a rope line. He didn’t loathe all the gripping and chit-chat; often he’d pick something up, the way Lincoln did in the 1860s when he took his “public opinion baths.” But he didn’t savor it either, as many politicians did. All things being equal, he would rather be upstairs reading a tome on nonproliferation or watching ESPN. And so he had to work at the part of being president that required being an actor. When he attended an event that didn’t particularly interest him, he wasn’t playing himself. He was playing “Barack Obama” in a costume he had carefully pasted together with a glue of self-interest, and he was playing himself well. The question was how long he could keep it up. He had convinced himself that charming members of Congress with room-temperature IQs was an important part of the presidency; his success depended on it. Or did it? Somewhere along the line the dimension of the job that he liked the least – dealing with Congress—had come to define his first year. In the name of getting things done, he had lashed himself to another branch of government – a broken branch.

Keep in mind, I received an advance copy of the book and the final version, Alter tells me, is tougher in some places. I was given the copy last week by Hill staffers upset at the way Congress was portrayed in the book, particularly in the two chapters on health care reform. It is hard to pity Obama for, well, doing his job. Getting legislation through Congress – leading and passing bills – is a huge part of the job description. And, though health care eventually passed, Obama was perhaps playing the wrong role. “[T]he President remained unfailingly genteel,” Alter writes. “He believed there was one sure way to alienate members of Congress and that was to throw one’s weight around.”

If only Obama had thrown his weight around! August 2009 through March 2010 might have been avoided. Defending this, Alter notes in a telephone interview a quote in the book from an unnamed White House official saying: “I love Max Baucus, but I wish we’d put our foot down harder and said, it’s over Max.” But Baucus wasn’t the only problem: Obama’s reluctance to say no to Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman’s demands for special deals caused more headaches for Dems than they were worth. His inability to reign in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer when – over Obama’s objections – they ditched negotiations with Maine Republican Olympia Snowe and made a final, and nearly fatal, push for a public plan. If Obama had only introduced his own plan – or even outline –six months before his address to the Joint Session, a lot of heartache and drawing of arbitrary lines in the sand might have been avoided. In fact, Alter scoops, the White House did actually have a secret 800-page bill of their own. Apparently throughout the summer of 2010 2009, Rahm (and, note to Alter, it’s pretty obvious who your sources are when you call everyone in the book by their last names except for “Rahm” and “Ax”) “worked his staff to the bone” writing the secret legislation that would be their contingency plan if all else failed.

The White House bill, which was never released, closely tracked what Obama said later in his speech before Congress: it taxed Cadillac plans, but with certain exemptions for labor; used tax credits (as favored by the Senate) to improve affordability; stayed neutral on the [OMB director Peter] Orszag’s “best practices” debate; and included a kind of modest tort reform Obama was already on the record supporting. It included no public option because the White House knew that was a non-starter.

Alter discounts the work of Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in finally seeing the bill done. He presents Pelosi – along with Obama’s entire political staff, Chuck Schumer, Byron Dorgan and Christine Romer – as staunch opponents to attempting health care reform. Obama alone is seen as willing to try, as the President himself calls it to Alter, “a Herculean lift.” “I remember telling Nancy Pelosi that moving forward on this could end up being so costly for me politically that it would effect my changes if I were to run for reelection,” Obama tells Alter. Obama argued back to her that it not now “it was not going to be done.”

Even though he did not draft the bill, it has come to be known as “Obamacare” and will be – for better or for worst – one of the crowning achievements that history will remember of Obama’s first term. “On the idea of winning- it’s always messy,” Alter tells me. “He has joined [Franklin] Roosevelt and [Lyndon] Johnson as a President of great domestic accomplishment. He gets the credit, even though he may have screwed up here or there, but in the final analysis he won and if he’d lost nobody would’ve given him credit for good intentions.” Yes, health care reform could not be done without Obama, but there’s a case to be made that it also couldn’t have been done without Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Max Baucus, Olympia Snowe and any number of people in the sausage making process. But sausage makers aren’t sexy and they don’t sell books. The Promise, published by Simon & Schuster, will be out May 18.

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: Barack Obama, book, Congress, first year in office, health care reform, jonathan alter, Newsweek, Barack Obama, Congress, Democratic Party, Harry Reid, Health Care, Nancy Pelosi, Republican Party, Senate, White House
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

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

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • tstar3

    Yawn, this CYA mentality in Washington is getting stale. When will reporters stop with the gossipy nature of anonymous sourcing. Next thing you know, they will be using facebook status updates as a reference…Oh wait

  • gysgt213

    Listen. I’m not impressed. And this is beyond stupid. Obama has been office all of less than 18 months. Its way too soon for a book praising or critical of him. WTF is the rush here? Let history happen than right a book for now report. That’s what you people are supposed to be reporters. I’m not singling out Alter here, because these are now the rules.
    .
    Even though he did not draft the bill, it has come to be known as “Obamacare”
    .
    Yea, I think Obama coined this term himself.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    “Obama has been office all of less than 18 months. Its way too soon for a book praising or critical of him”
    .
    Sh!t, Gunny, it only took 8 months for him to earn the Nobel “Peace” Prize!
    .
    And have you heard the latest?
    .
    “Iraq violence set to delay US troop withdrawal”
    .
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/12/iraq-us-troop-withdrawal-delay
    .
    I know this pales in comparison to Alter’s book, the latest in a series of access = favorable press

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Remeber that JNS covers Congress. She deals with these people daily. It’s no wonder she notices (and almost takes it personally) if their getting short shrift for the work that went into getting HCR done.
    .
    However it can’t be denied that Congress does indeed contain some “room temperature IQ’s”

  • http://policingwingnutwelfare.blogspot.com/ JJ

    but there’s a case to be made that it also couldn’t have been done without Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Max Baucus, Olympia Snowe…

    I’d say it was done *in spite* of Olympia Snowe, not because of her.

  • kbanginmotown

    Heck, it only took 3 months for the Tea Partiers to conclude that the USA had been socialized sometime between Jan-Apr, 2009.
    .
    The MSM is trying to catch up with the prognosticators…

  • sasquatch08

    “…some…”?

  • sasquatch08

    I totally agree that it’s too early to say what Obama’s legacy will be. Something could happen tomorrow that turn most of his detractors in his favor or turn most of his supporters against him. It’s impossible to know what the future holds in that respect.
    .
    The TEA parties do have a point (from my LIBERTARIAN point of view, before anyone screams I’m a GOPer as has happened so many times here). Certainly it is true that Obama’s stimulus cut the capital gains tax and you probably won’t hear that on Fox News. On the other hand the budgets he’s submitted are monstrous and I personally can’t see how spending $500 Billion plus a year in deficits is something you can blame on Bush for more than a year or two if you actually know how to count. Further with the expanding cost of certain programs mainly SSI and Medicare you either have to cut expenditures or raise taxes on practically EVERYONE. You can’t soak the rich out of this sorta money because they honestly don’t have it.
    .
    Therein lies the problem that the TEA parties SHOULD be talking the next ten years about rather than screaming about tax hikes that haven’t happened they need to have a real discussion about the future. With the projected expenditures for the next decade you can slash the military budget to $0 and same for NASA and the DEA and a half dozen other large government agencies and STILL not balance the budget. Hence someone has to pay more in taxes and since you will NEVER convince the public to slash the military, medicare or SSI by even 20% to say nothing of 40%(though I do agree a lot of money could be saved on wasteful programs like that damn Crusader Howitzer system that Rumsfeld killed which couldn’t cross any known bridge) you have to raise taxes on a lot of people in the future.
    .
    Personally MY concern here is that Congress has lacked a pair to do anything about this for a very long time and perpetually kick the can down the road. We can’t do that anymore and we’re going to have to pay the piper. There ARE ways to do that without sacrificing our status as #1 in the world, and without TOO much pain in domestic discretionary spending and without raising taxes through the roof. The problem is that special interest groups from defense contractors to the AARP will scream bloody murder about it and try to convince people that we’ll all die in a fiery war or old people will wither away and die because of SSI cuts. LIES all of it. The problem is that the right and the left pick which lie they like and then champion it to kingdom come (look at AZ) and prevent a meaningful, thoughtful discussion on ANY topic.
    .
    All that said, I again agree that it’s too early to judge Obama (personally I think some of the hardcore progressives in congress threw him over a barrel on certain things and then hardcore conservatives bent him even further into a sort of S shape.) On the other hand I don’t really feel bad for him on this. How many liberals screamed that the surge in Iraq wouldn’t work? How many people said Bush couldn’t be right about anything even before he said something? Lots. That’s the the nature of his job, it sucks but SOMEONE has to do it and they’re gonna get sh!t on by both sides no matter what they do.
    .
    And if you disagree with my you’re a homophobic racist that pours milk on kittens in the hope of turning them to cannibalism.

  • FlownOver

    “…most on the Hill believe the credit lays at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, after all they’ve born (and likely will most acutely feel in November) the brunt of the blame.”

    1. Either someone lays the credit (v.t.), or the credit lies (v.i.).

    2. They’ve borne the brunt.

    Maybe some Newsweek copy editors will be available soon, at reasonable rates.

    Best wishes,

    Your friendly neighborhood grammar Nazi

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    sasquatch08
    I share your concern about the budget, but not your pessemism. Clinton after all, showed that it could be done. As far as taxing the rich, I’m forced to quote a famous bank robber who once said, “Because that’s where the money is”

  • abdullah69

    Guys like Alter are rushing to get books out in case the President is assassinated. This way they can double up on the bet by publishing a post – assassination sequel.

  • Cliff

    Listen. I’m not impressed. And this is beyond stupid.
    .
    Once again, gunny gets there long before I do.

  • the committee

    Apparently throughout the summer of 2010, Rahm
    .
    This has not happened yet.

  • gysgt213

    “The first draft of history is always going to be controversial”
    .
    If only this was really a draft of history. What I suspect is really happening here is that Alter has authored a book telling a story that members of Obama’s administration and probably others want told. Making it something else besides any sort of draft of history.

  • gysgt213

    Apparently throughout the summer of 2010, Rahm
    .
    This has not happened yet.
    .
    Thank you. I thought I might have to quit drinking if its fall 2010 already.

  • Paul-no not that one

    It’s a *version* of history.
    .
    Sort of like most every other historical-political tome.

  • marvyt

    Exactly. Snowe was a no-show whenever her vote could be critical. She voted for the bill in committee (where ger vote wasn’t critical), but then hid in the closet for the rest of the process. She was hardly a “Profile in Courage”.

  • square1

    I hope the typos in the Alter quotes are JNS’ fault.

  • michaelfury
  • allthingsinaname

    One more quick buck. A one trick pony

  • square1

    Alter is comparing Obama to FDR and LBJ? What a clown.

    Look, here’s the deal. It is conceptually possible that a HCR bill could have been as vast in scope as the legislation pushed by FDR and LBJ. But it was nobody more than Obama, Rahm, and “Ax” who elected to not go that route.

    If one looks at HCR in terms of a decades-long series of negotiations, the Republicans had, more or less, had this offer on the table since the Nixon administration. However, agreement could never be made because liberal Democrats had, also for decades, been saying “not good enough.”

    Obama’s grand accomplishment? He convinced liberals in Congress to give in and say “we’ll take it” to the GOP’s offer (Calling a bill that the GOP unanimously opposed the “GOP’s offer” only seems weird if you completely ignore the decades-long history of reform proposals). The liberal capitulation occurred because the liberals were more open to dealing with Obama and the Blue Dogs in Congress since they were within the party, even if they were acting as proxy Republicans.

    Ironically, nobody helped Obama push liberals to capitulate more than teabaggers in Congress. Obama played the tried-and-true Good Cop-Bad Cop on the liberals. He basically pointed over to the crazies in the GOP and said to the liberals, “if you don’t cut a deal with Lieberman, Baucus, & co., the historical deal will be off the table and you will get nothing for another generation or more. I’m trying to help you here. But my partner on the other side of the aisle is sort of nuts.”

    What frustrates me about “insider” books like Alter’s isn’t that they are wrong on the facts (although they surely get some stuff factually wrong along the way). No, my problem is that the Alters of the world tend to entirely miss the fundamental political dynamics of what occurred. I have no doubt that if you read that book, it would be like reading about a parallel universe.

  • nflfoghorn

    Just like rushing to see little girls grow up. Everyone wants to be the first.

    Writing books because he could be offed before a sequel? What is this world coming to?

  • stuartzechman

    Let me get back to this when I have a few minutes, there’s some interesting documentation I’d like to share with you.

  • http://www.twitter.com/jnsmall Jay Newton-Small

    Thanks guys – I’ve fixed.

  • textee

    Jonathan Alter is a whack job’s whack job. Alter was on aMessNBC on November 9, 2000 and said this:

    “If it turns out that Al Gore wins the popular vote nationally, there will be intense pressure in this country to have him become the President. Most people think the guy with the most votes wins. Recounts are as much an art as a science. You have experts, consultants, who go around the country doing recounts. If the recount came out on behalf of Bush and Bush had lost the popular vote nationally they would go to court, there’d be another recount. It would become endless. And the political pressure would mount very quickly to, to certify Al Gore as, as the winner. Especially since you have a potential conflict of interest here with the Governor of the state that is handling the recount being the brother of Governor Bush.”

  • stewartiii

    NewsBusters: Newsweek’s Alter Obsequiously Crowns Obama with Statist ‘Achievement’ Like FDR and LBJ
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/05/14/newsweeks-alter-obsequiously-crowns-obama-statist-achievement-fdr-and-lb

  • alleykatwtf

    Am I the only one distracted by the use of reign instead of rein? I don’t think the reference is to royalty….

  • stuartzechman

    sqr1:
    .
    When you say the “GOP’s offer”, that’s not quite accurate.
    .
    link to the Democratic Leadership Council’s Statement of Principles

    DLC | Key Document | August 1, 2000
    The Hyde Park Declaration: A Statement of Principles and a Policy Agenda for the 21st Century
    .
    3. Promote Universal Access and Quality in Health Care
    .
    That more than 40 million Americans lack health insurance is one of our society’s most glaring inequities. Lack of insurance jeopardizes the health of disadvantaged Americans and also imposes high costs on everyone else when the uninsured lack preventive care and get treatment from emergency rooms. Washington provides a tax subsidy for insurance for Americans who get coverage from their employers but offers nothing to workers who don’t have job-based coverage.
    .
    Markets alone cannot assure universal access to health coverage. Government should enable all low-income families to buy health insurance. Individuals must take responsibility for insuring themselves and their families whether or not they qualify for public assistance.
    .
    Finally, to help promote higher quality in health care for all Americans, we need reliable information on the quality of health care delivered by health plans and providers; a “patient’s bill of rights” that ensures access to medically necessary care; and a system in which private health plans compete on the basis of quality as well as cost.
    .
    Goals for 2010
    .
    # Reduce the number of uninsured Americans by two-thirds through tax credits, purchasing pools, and other means.
    .
    # Create a system of reliable “report cards” on the quality of care delivered by health plans and providers.

    It’s neither the GOP’s nor movement conservatives’ policy to require everybody to buy health insurance, nor to establish HHS as an arbiter of new Sarbanes-Oxley for health system IT.
    .
    It isn’t that this is Bob Dole’s plan from 1995 so much as it is Daschle’s inclusions of compromise with Dole in a Third Way plan from 2000.
    .
    These people didn’t acquiesce to rightists, sqr1, they passed the policy agenda based on their principles that they’ve been declaring since at least 2000, not that anybody –especially the liberal rank and file– was listening. On first glance, this policy may seem similar to or appear undifferentiated from GOP-style fundamentalist marketeers, but that’s because we liberals are doing the looking. Movement conservatives are similarly unable to differentiate Third Way policy from socialism, just as many of us can’t tell it apart from free market conservatism. Of course, many liberals just heard the word “Universal” in “Universal Access to Insurance,” the way that the masterminds at the DLC/New Democrat Coalition wanted us to, and mindlessly hoped for change.
    .
    (That’s the both the brilliance and the stupidity of the centrists, their ideology and their messaging. It’s that we liberals can’t ever seem to figure out that “Markets alone” means “markets alone“, not “markets,” and that rightists can’t figure out that “Government should enable all low-income families to buy” means “government should make it guaranteed that business will sell,” not “the Kremlin is here.”)
    .
    Other than this point –that the plan wasn’t so much Republican (Nixon-era Republicans 40 years ago had more in common with Third Way Dems than movement conservatives today) as it is the result of decades-long history of Third Way policy pursuits– the rest of your piece is accurate and excellently put.

  • miscparty

    Teapartybell.com selects this as one of the top ten articles under healthcare category.

  • stuartzechman

    Jay Newton-Small:
    .
    Newsweek’s Alter, a self-described progressive…
    .
    Any idea of what that means, exactly?
    .
    Does he mean that he’s a “progressive” like John Podesta from Center for American Progress
    .
    (link to PDF of Podesta explaining that “progressive” is to the right of “liberal”)

    or like David Sirota from Open Left
    .
    (link to David Sirota explaining that “progressive” is to the left of “liberal”
    .
    ?
    .
    Which one of those two wildly different “progressives” is Jonathan Alter most likely to be describing himself as, Jay Newton-Small?

  • http://www.mrmedia.com andelman

    You might also enjoy this Mr. Media radio interview with Jonathan Alter from May 19, 2010. He talks about his book, “The Promise,” President Obama, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, FDR, “The Colbert Report,” his wife and even does an imitation of Joe Biden imitating Arkansas Senator John McClellan. Classic stuff!

blog comments powered by Disqus