Health Insurance, Republicans, and Insurance Companies

by: Mike Lux

Wed Jun 10, 2009 at 11:58


CNN interviewed me earlier this week for a story they were doing on the differences between this health care fight and the last one, during the Clinton years. The story Jim Acosta did is here, but I made a couple of points to them that they didn't put in the piece that I thought were worth sharing with you, namely about bipartisanship and the insurance industry, which are highly linked topics. I also want to highlight Bob Creamer's terrific new post on the same issue.

There are some similarities and lots of big differences between this health care fight and the last one. So far, Obama has shown that he has learned the lessons of the last fight well - he made it a top priority, he said he wanted to get it done in the first year, he put a down payment on reform into his budget. All of those are good strategic moves that Bill Clinton did not do. But the biggest difference by far is that Obama and the Democrats agreed to have the option to put health care reform into the reconciliation package, meaning we would only need 50 votes instead of 60.

So here's the point I made to CNN: Obama is doing a great job of including the insurance companies and their stalwart Republican defenders in the discussions, welcoming their ideas, etc. But this bill does not need to be bipartisan, and if the Republicans want to insist that the insurance industry gets what they want, we can do this without them. We will need 83% of the Democrats in the Senate, and 85% in the House, and an effective popular President can get that done.

And to those who worship at the alter of bipartisanship, who say we need a bipartisan bill for something to be "sustainable," I would suggest you check your history books: many of the greatest reforms in our nation's history - including ending slavery and most of the great New Deal reforms - came without much or any bipartisanship. So, look, if you Republicans want to stop carrying water for an insurance industry desperate to avoid legitimate competition from a public plan, you are welcome to the table, come on aboard. But if not - as I said to CNN - we will just roll you and muscle this one home.

Mike Lux :: Health Insurance, Republicans, and Insurance Companies

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The bill will be bi-partisan (4.00 / 1)
Both parties are trying to find ways to fuck it up for us.

Feeding us shit by a different name still smells like shit to me.


I figured Hatch was whining ... (0.00 / 0)
just to get on TV ... so I can tell him to go Cheney himself

the HMOs and other industry elements give more to Democrats nowadays, no? it's not at all the GOP -- (4.00 / 2)
this is about Congress and the administration doing what HMOs want -- not what the public wants or needs.

and this is life and death stuff too -- for real.


Apparently, the bispartisan part is (4.00 / 1)
"carrying water for an insurance industry desperate to avoid legitimate competition from a public plan".

Insurance and Pharma have red and blue players on the field, or around the table.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
I hope you are right. (0.00 / 0)
You are closer to the machine than I am, so if you believe this could really happen then that gives me hope. Thanks.

Montani semper liberi

For those who don't know (4.00 / 1)
Robert Creamer whose article you linked to is the husband of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, D-IL.

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search