The Myths of The Battle of Health Care Reform

by: Mike Lux

Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 17:00


The relentlessly cynical and negative traditional media has talked itself into believing certain things about the fight over health care reform, whether there is any serious evidence beyond their own self-reinforcing stories or not. Unfortunately, what happens when these kind of stories are written, everyone - Congresspeople, unnamed lobbyists, unnamed administration, other journalists, progressive activists, and bloggers - then reacts to these stories, usually to reinforce their own point of view or their client's interest.

The problem is that so many of these assumptions are unproven/unknown at best, or downright mythological at worst. Having been deeply immersed in both the lasting health care fight in 1993-94 and this one today, I feel fairly confident in pointing out some of these things that most traditional media reporters seem to believe as gospel that in fact are not all certain. Let me just mention a few of the biggest:

Mike Lux :: The Myths of The Battle of Health Care Reform
I. Serious Health Care Reform is Dead or on "Life Support"

Versions of this story have been floating around for many months now, with reporters eager to cover a train wreck and flaming failure for Obama.

Now don't get me wrong: I don't want to imply that reporters particularly want health care reform, or Obama, to fail. They just like to declare everything a failure. In the 1992 campaign, reporters and pundits declared Clinton to be a walking corpse after Jennifer Flowers, the draft dodging thing, the didn't inhale quote, the brutal NY primary, after Perot got in, several other times as well. They declared the 1993 Clinton budget dead at least a dozen times before we passed it, and the same thing happened with the 1994 crime bill. After the '94 elections, they declared Clinton gone, irrelevant, powerless, certain to be defeated many times before he smoked Gingrich in the '95 budget battle and went on to another electoral vote landslide in '96. They declared that it was a matter of days before his resignation after the Lewinsky scandal broke, and that he would be forced out of office for sure after the news about her dress came out. They declared Gore toast before he won the popular vote in the 2000 elections, and Kerry dead in the primaries before he won in Iowa. They said Hillary Clinton was the nominee for sure in the fall shortly before Obama won in Iowa. This year so far, they declared the stimulus in deep trouble, right before it was passed, and Obama's budget in a world of hurt shortly before it passed.

A strong comprehensive health reform bill (yes, with a public option) has passed four committees so far, and according to public statements by members and private vote counts a lot of us advocates have been doing, we are well within range of victory. House Progressives have the votes to defeat anything without the public option, and they are still standing firm. Strong health care reform, with a public option, is far from a done deal, but it is quite alive, thank you.

2. The town halls and August recess have been a disaster for health care

The yelling, Hitler comparisons, and people bringing semiautomatics to events made for great theater, but the reality on the ground was very different. In the local newspapers and monitoring by Congressional offices I am aware of, supporters of health reform out-numbered opponents at most places. The swing Congressional offices I have talked to received more calls, faxes, mail, and email from supporters than opponents. And I have yet to talk to any members of Congress, or even their staffers, even the more conservative ones, who have said to me that they have come out of the August recess wanting to give up on or even slow down on health care reform.

3. Obama and the left are at war over health care reform.

Other than occasional unnamed White House staffers who enjoy dissing their progressive friends for their own reasons, and the occasional progressive blogger who takes everything Politico and Ceci Connolly says seriously and is therefore convinced Obama is out to do us wrong, I see little evidence Obama and progressives are at war over health care. It is progressives, after all, who are actually fighting for the ideas Obama laid out or health care in his campaign and earlier this year, ideas Obama has not renounced or said he is giving up on. From what I can tell, Obama is doing everything he can to try to get a bill out of Senate Finance and then out of the Senate itself, while continuing to support Pelosi in her efforts to get the strongest possible bill out of the House.

Having fought this fight in 1993-94 and so far this year, I know how tough this is to pass, and how ugly the process is. I take nothing for granted, and take nothing on faith. Health care reform could still die; war over what goes to the floor could still tear the Democratic Party apart; politicians including Obama could still sell progressive activists down the river to get a bill, any bill, passed. But all of the above is conventional wisdom, not fact and not a done deal.

The White House has just announced that Obama has raised the stakes even higher, through the roof in fact, by doing an address to a joint session of Congress next Wednesday. That means this White House is determined to pass a bill on health care reform by hook or by crook, by any means necessary. I hope that also means that the White House realizes passing some meager, small compromise of a bill, with the stakes this high, would be a political nightmare. But one way or another, they will show their cards next Wednesday. Will the President, in front of a joint session of Congress, meekly give up fighting for anything big? Will he declare war on his progressive friends? Will he announce that he no longer cares about keeping insurance companies honest? We will know the answers after his speech, but I wouldn't be drawing any firm conclusions until after you listen to the speech.


Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Obama May Not Be At War With Progressives Over Health Care (4.00 / 11)
But he's surely done enough to undermine trust that progressives are justifiably suspicious of him--which they should have been from the very beginning.

If folks think it's taken a long time for him to begin to learn the obvious about Republicans, the same could be said about progressives beginning to learn the obvious about Obama.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"


I knew from the get-go (4.00 / 1)
do I get a cookie?

But seriously, Obama was merely a desperation move to buy time for the grass roots transformation of people's hearts and minds.

The vast majority of people turned against the GOP because they failed to sustain their unsustainable lifestyles; never think otherwise.

Shall we expect Obama to attempt to do anything other than attempt to sustain the unsustainable? I.e. a massive welfare/warfare state without taxation or pain?

The failed Enlightenment of the 60s and 70s needs to be reignited, this time without the sapping effects of sex, drugs, rock-and-roll, and cults.

Instead of continuing to trod the only and difficult path to success I hear a cacophony of people telling me to "call my representative"?

Can we win, please? Life is too precious to waste it on fairy tales of horse-before-cart government.

Enlighten the people and build beautiful communities and success will follow suit, there is no electoral path to a sustainable society. Not with the people we have, anyway.


[ Parent ]
Yes, the mood of the 1960's and 1970's is upon us (0.00 / 0)
The failed Enlightenment of the 60s and 70s needs to be reignited, this time without the sapping effects of sex, drugs, rock-and-roll, and cults.

Great point. We can start by making the Sept 12 counter-march/demonstration for Health Care in Washington really big.

I think there is enough sentiment whipped up - the economy/bail out, anti-war in Afghanistan, mandatory health insurance purchase if this freaking bill passes...

Maybe Obama will come around if there is enough pressure from the people who elected him.


[ Parent ]
At BEST (0.00 / 0)
he's done a horrible job of both communicating his alleged "support", and willingness to fight for, the public option and other necessary aspects of strong healthy care reform, and of actually making them happen. More likely, he's just not that into these things, and has been condescendingly and patronizingly dancing around them for months in order to have it both ways, i.e. the illusion of strongly supporting them without the actuality of it.

So with apologies to those who still sincerely believe (or claim to sincerely believe) that Obama is not only strongly for these things, but willing and able to fight for them and make them happen, but they're either drinking the Kool Aid, or dispensing it--or both.

Photobucket

We've been punked.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)


[ Parent ]
On Town Halls (4.00 / 2)
I wondering if there is any way to calculate what percentage were actually disrupted? The sense in the M$M and even the inner toobs is that this tactic was somewhat effective (as you note), but a good number of the anecdotal evidence indicates that these were relatively minor and mostly pertained to the earliest forums. Overall, I'd say the rightwing noise machine failed on this effort.


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


They failed to disrupt the one (4.00 / 2)
I went to. They were there, but our side was too, and I'd say it was at least an even draw.

And this is in a red state, too.

Montani semper liberi


[ Parent ]
Ditto (4.00 / 1)
Except for the "red state" part.  

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


[ Parent ]
Excellent piece, Mike (4.00 / 3)
Appreciate very much your sober and rational perspective. Thanks a whole lot.

Calm, kind, inspiring fighter for the American people? (4.00 / 4)
If we are lucky, on Wednesday we'll see the emergence of Obama the fighter -- someone who fights hard and tough, but also honestly and without invective. Obama seems to want to avoid the nasty tone and viciousness that has characterized politics in the US in the last 30 years (and especially on hate-talk radio). I can applaud this -- it is nice to see a President rise above the mud and reach out to all Americans. Killing your opponents with kindness works well and also makes it possible for eventual reconciliation.

But we also need a President who will stand  up to the insurance companies and really fight for Americans. We need a President who doesn't take bullshit or accept crumbs. We need a President who will demand the best for the American people. I hope we see that Obama emerge on Wednesday. Yes he can?


I hope he watched the interview of Bill Moyers on Bill Maher this last week. (4.00 / 3)
http://www.youtube.com/view_pl...

Click the link eventually, its a playlist with all three parts of the interview, very very worth watching. Bill Moyers is very much a giant and the conscience of the nation. If anyone has the right tone and stature to scold, and inspire, Obama to action it is he.

Find time to watch.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


[ Parent ]
Thanks! (0.00 / 0)
Just checked it out. Bill Moyers, upper middle-aged white male - even he calls Obama out, says Obama needs to back up the campaign rhetoric with forceful decisions and leadership. No more excuses for Obama.  

[ Parent ]
Ah a solid voice! Thanks Mike. (4.00 / 1)
And the next thing to do is just what we have been doing. The chum being thrown into the water did ceat a feeding frenzy the bloggateria chowed down.

But through it all it was surprisingly strong in favour of keeping the eye on the ball, protecting the barricade for robust reform.

Thanks again Mike.

You could write here more often if you like. lol

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


BTW, I just posted this quickhit. (0.00 / 0)
Obama to address Joint Session of Congress on Health Bill Next Wednesday.

   WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama will deliver a major prime-time address to Congress next week on his plans to overhaul the nation's health care system, opening an urgent autumn push to gain control of the debate that has been slipping from his grasp under withering Republican-led attacks.

   Scheduling of the speech next Wednesday night, just a day after lawmakers return from their August recess, underscores the determination of the White House to confront critics of Obama's overhaul and to buck up supporters who have been thrown on the defensive. Allies have been urging the president to be more specific about his plans and to take a greater role in the debate, and aides have signaled he will do that in the address to a joint session of Congress in the House chamber.

   The speech's timing also suggests that top Democrats have all but given up hope for a bipartisan breakthrough by Senate Finance Committee negotiators.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.


peanuts (4.00 / 2)
Lucy = Obama
Charlie Brown = Mike Lux
Football = Health Care Reform

Funny stuff, I'm inspired (4.00 / 9)
paul_lukasiak=Linus
cynicism=his blanket



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


[ Parent ]
Starts with an "S" (0.00 / 0)
and plays in black and white.

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


[ Parent ]
Marcy = David Axelrod? (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Pigpen = Rahm? (0.00 / 0)
Linus = Jonathan Alter?

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

[ Parent ]
Snoopy = Bowers (4.00 / 1)
Joe Cool dancing the beagle in victory.


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


[ Parent ]
Are we in "Clap Louder" mode? (4.00 / 2)
It's time to reset and get back to what the Buddhists call "right view".

People with good incomes can afford their own health insurance.

Focusing on free "insurance" misses the real point that too many people do not have good incomes and/or do not properly manage the incomes they have.

The Welfare State can do something about that, but if it tries to solve it with a gigantic program for each symptom of the disease, the disease will kill the patient.

A lot of people are saying they will make Obama pay, etc.

Bullshit.

We need to go to the mat for Obama and the Democrats. Even these pretend and juvenile tantrums should be taboo.

Do you see the gun-toting whakos marching to the drum of the Shadow Government? They are real! All lovers of Civilization and human rights need to maintain their political discipline and sanity, because things are bound to get a whole lot worse before they get better.

We need a good 10 to 20 years before the modern right disintegrates.

Meanwhile, we need to be reaching out to libertarians and splitting them away from the fascists, Birchers and conspiracy nuts.


Yup (4.00 / 2)
Meanwhile, we need to be reaching out to libertarians and splitting them away from the fascists, Birchers and conspiracy nuts.

Now, how is this to be accomplished?

Obama speaks at NRA meeting? Disband the IRS?

Legalize pot?  

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


[ Parent ]
I'll take number three (4.00 / 3)


[ Parent ]
Um, most RW libertarians (4.00 / 2)
ARE Birchers and conspiracy nuts, and while not fascists, believe that Obama is one. You see common cause with THEM? Listen to CSPAN each morning. There's always a bunch of nuts who believe that the Likud, Obama, CFR, Bilderberg, Goldman Sachs and Barney Frank secretly run the world and are plotting to put everyone in camps, and at the same time Obama's a radical Marxist. These people are NUTS.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

[ Parent ]
I don't see it (0.00 / 0)
That's why I asked for clarification.

Relenting on guns and lifestyle issues may be a way in, at least for some. Although, the whole "let's bail-out wall street and our bankster friends and funders" thing probably already ruined it with many. If he's willing to talk to Ahmadinajad (sp?) he shouldn't hesitate to go to the NRA national meeting. Who does it hurt?



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


[ Parent ]
It's not about guns, abortion, "lifestyle issues", etc. (4.00 / 2)
It's about their being fundamentally nuts. These are people who believe that the 10th amendment makes the Federal Reserve (in ANY form), IRS, Social Security, Medicare, EPA (not to mention the Homestead Act and Erie Canal) unconstitutional, despite the fact that over 200 years of court rulings state otherwise (and which any sensible reading of the constitution render idiotic). I.e. they're NUTS. You don't talk to crazy people. You smile at them and move on. Especially if they have guns and wear t-shirts calling for spilling the blood of patriots and tyrants and call someone like Obama a radical Marxist communist.

Sadly, there is a thread of common cause with them, on issues like civil liberties, these wars, excessive executive power, etc., but their insanity (not to mention bigotry and intolerance) makes that meaningless for the present time.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)


[ Parent ]
Well, if they are truly "nuts" (0.00 / 0)
then they won't be interested in working with us.

I have a hard time writing off people so blithely and en masse. But, you do have a point.


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


[ Parent ]
There is some room for tactical alliance on some issues (4.00 / 1)
E.g. warrantless wiretaps, monitoring the Fed, abuse of executive power, etc. The problem is that most of these people come at these issues from an extreme, really radical perspective, that isn't really compatible with that of most progressives. E.g. they don't merely believe that the Fed should be monitored, or even more regulated, but abolished, not only because they object to it economically, but because they believe it to be unconstitutional, which is absurd (literally one of the first steps taken in the nascent US after the first congress and Washington were sworn in was to establish a central national bank, the forerunning of the Fed).

Also, while some of their ideological and political leaders might make some sense on some things, most of their followers are, as I said, nuts, e.g. the tenthers. There are also a lot of racists, nativists and assorted other Michelle Bachmann types among them.

I'm ok with collaborating with them legislatively on some issues, like the bill sponsored by Paul to audit the Fed. But more broadly, our differences vastly outweigh our similarities, and I just don't see the makings of more than the occasional tactical collaboration.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)


[ Parent ]
Much as I agree about folks like Bachmann (0.00 / 0)
I can't ignore the fact that she is popular in her district. Popular with people that are not any more "insane" than I am. People who are just as comfortable labeling me "nuts" for supporting a Rep like Keith Ellison.

My comments were directed more at my fellow citizens and the people I see everyday, not at the political "leaders" of either party. Its about taking away, or nullifying her supporters, not her leaders.



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


[ Parent ]
Of course they're "crazy" (0.00 / 0)
Not in the clinical, padded room sense, of course, but in the sense that they believe in crazy beliefs that make no sense, are not backed by facts or logic, and are utterly infantile and regressive. They are "crazy" in the sense that Naderites believed that he had a fighting chance to win, and that some people on the real "far-left" want the country to utterly collapse before it can be rebuilt. These are people who believe that Obama isn't an American, that he's a secret Muslim who wants to indoctrinate their kids in socialism, and that the constitution has been wrongly interpreted for over 200 years in very fundamental ways, and that we have to undo centuries of reforms. So sure they're crazy. Someone who yells "He's Hitler!" isn't crazy? Of COURSE they are. Which is why we can't, and shouldn't try, to work with them.

You can't build a bridge to nowhere, as has been shown in the past.

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)


[ Parent ]
"People with good incomes can afford their own health insurance." (4.00 / 4)
What do you base this assertion on? You're obviously not selfemployed. (Maybe you qualify for medicare?) I know people with six figure incomes who have health insurance and medical bills that would take the varnish off your teeth. Would you like to hear from them? Also people with chronic diseases who can't get health insurance don't get any special breaks if they happen to be middle class. They're still not covered!

[ Parent ]
You've shown me the line that separates negative capability (4.00 / 1)
from schizophrenia.

Sentences 2 - 4 don't show any outward signs of coherence, and the shift to defending Obama because he's opposed by freaks with automatic weapons doesn't help.  

What are you talking about?


[ Parent ]
Once again, OpenLeft keeps me sane. (4.00 / 2)
Thanks Mike!

We will see (4.00 / 6)
Wednesday, perhaps.

That we don't "know" about Obama after 8 months of presidency and 2 years of campaigning speaks voumes, though.

I hope you are right.

 


It seems that Obama (4.00 / 2)
is committing to a specific agenda while buying himself time before he does.  

What can we do in the meantime?  I live in friggin Manhattan for chrissakes - all my representatives favor single payer.  


Frustrating, isn't it? (0.00 / 0)
I've got no one to talk to, either.. they are all on my side!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
You have multiple representatives? (0.00 / 0)
You must live in the middle of 5th Avenue or Central Park.

:-)

(Mine used to be Nadler, until I moved west. Now it's McDermott. Same difference, really.)

The liberal soul shall be made fat. He who waters shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)


[ Parent ]
Basically: (4.00 / 2)
The Progressive Block matters; everything else is a sideshow and a distraction.

Therefore, we need to focus laserlike on the Progressive Block.

This seems like sound logic to me.

(Granted, what Obama does does also matter, even if it's not the deciding factor, but we have no power over him. I'll nonetheless be very interested to hear what he has to say at the AFL-CIO picnic and in the speech, whether he sides with Rahm Emanuel, or with his own better instincts when he chooses to listen to them. Remember that virtually of Obama's advisors were advising against doing healthcare this year, with the sole exception of the actual healthcare guy; it's Obama himself who decided to do it anyways.)


they need to make clear now (0.00 / 0)
that they will reject a trigger if the bill out of conference has a trigger. The White House is interested in the trigger again:

Senior White House officials, in conversations with reporters today, are floating the idea that President Obama is secretly negotiating with Sen. Olympia Snowe over a health care compromise that would phase in a government-funded health care alternative if private insurance companies fail to meet quality and cost benchmarks over a certain period of the time. The public discussion of the Snowe "compromise" is meant to test the reaction of House Democrats, who will pass a bill that includes an immediate public option added to a new health insurance exchange.  The White House hopes that, having voted for a public option, House Dems would accept a "trigger" as part of a conference committee compromise rather than putting the kibosh on the entire health care reform project.  


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

[ Parent ]
This is specifically (4.00 / 2)
for the Finance Committee...don't go nuts, the trigger compromise is specifically to get he bill out of Finance, then the fight to what include comes at that time.

Olympia Snowe is the only Republican left in the gang of six, which is now the gang of three. From what I'm hearing today, Snowe is replacing Conrad as the deciding vote in Finance.


[ Parent ]
OFA sent out a request for help today. (4.00 / 2)
You know what they wanted? Folks to send LTE's to rebut the death panel meme.

Never in my life did I think he would so woefully fail to utilize the list garnered during his campaign. I didn't like the politico article today, but the truth hurts.. and it fits (in different words) what we've seen so far on way too many fronts.

I agree it's not dead, but the four bills are inadequate at best. We should be talking about how to kill it almost as much as how to make it pass worthy.


I don't think it is actually possible for healthcare reform to fail this time (4.00 / 3)
Currently republicans are taking up the tack that they are defenders of medicare from the evil Obama who is going to cut their medicare.

Considering that the status quo would force severe cutbacks in medicare some bill is inevitable.

http://transgendermom.blogspot....


From your lips (4.00 / 1)
to God's ear.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
question (0.00 / 0)
you say:
Having fought this fight in 1993-94 and so far this year, I know how tough this is to pass,

what if americans just don't want 'managed competition' or the 'bismarck model' or to be forced to buy a crappy non-product from an industry that has been lying, cheating, stealing from them, and in some cases murdering them?

what if they would really rather have medicare for all?

just exactly why [or how] did clinton decide, back in the day, that we'd be better off with something other than single payer?


Deal? Not (4.00 / 1)
Clinton, IIRC, thought he made a deal with the insurance companies.  It had a Law & Order quality about it.  He offered a deal to either the docs/hospitals or the insurance lobby.  The first one to take it got a decent package; the one that sat out got rolled.  Only insurance took the deal and then rolled out Harry and Louise and their PR campaign.  In a real sense they got to play it both ways.

This time around, they get (once more) the same deal. Don't trust Insurance.  They "lie like a rug" (naturally, without thought, and as a deinition of their existence).  Speaking of Law & Order, maybe there is a reason that insurance companies frequently come out on the shows as murdering, lying, bean-counting, soul-less villains.  They are portrayed that way cause that's is who and what they are.


[ Parent ]
If they do (0.00 / 0)
what if they would really rather have medicare for all?

they have a really funny way of showing it.


[ Parent ]
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