On Health Care Promises, I Agree With Obama: "We ARE Tired"

by: David Sirota

Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 16:46


There's a lot of righteous - and rightful - outrage that President Obama is now blatantly lying about his campaign promise to give every American a choice of a public plan for health care. But that's only the beginning of the broken health care promises if you watch this 48-second video:

So here you have candidate Obama on 10/4/08 reiterating how important the "detailed health care plans" are - how serious he thinks they are. And here we have President Obama now pretending he never "campaigned on a public option," even though it was right there in his campaign platform's detailed health care plans.

Let me echo candidate Obama in this video clip: Yes, indeed, "We are tired of watching as year after year candidates offer up detailed health care plans with great fanfare and promise only to see them crushed under the weight of Washington politics and drug and insurance lobbying once the campaign is over."

Of course, there are other health care promises still on the table. While much of the media discussion is on how the Senate bill's passage automatically means A) the health care negotiations are over and B) that a final health care bill will have no public option, I just want to remind folks that 60 House Democrats have pledged in writing - with no wiggle room - to oppose any final bill that has no public option. In other words, 60 House Democrats are on record pledging to kill a bill like the Senate's - and they have the mathematical numbers to do just that.

This is yet another reason the Senate should vote down the health care bill in front of it right now - because the House has already effectively said no to it. This is why Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), chairwoman of the powerful Rules Committee, just issued a CNN op-ed agreeing with my USA Today editorial today calling for the Senate to vote "no."

(h/t David Dayen at FiredogLake and Progressive Change Campaign Committee for the clips)

David Sirota :: On Health Care Promises, I Agree With Obama: "We ARE Tired"

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Or how about THIS obama (4.00 / 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Video from weekly address in july 2009 - we have been sold out, nothing honest about the process nor do the people that sold us out have any intergrity, including obama/rahm.


Calling all Congressional procedural experts (0.00 / 0)
What, if anything, can Rep. Slaughter do to effectuate her opposition to the Senate bill?  Are there legislative maneuvers which the Rules Committee can undertake to stop this train wreck?

Slaughter is already rowing back (4.00 / 1)
To repeat my comment just now on the other thread:

"According to Greg Sargent, at least:

... a spokesperson for Slaughter, Vince Morris, confirms she's not ruling out a vote for the final bill, even if it lacks a public option or other concessions sought by progressives.

"She's not ruling anything in or out at this point," Morris tells me. "She is hopeful that we can make the bill better in conference."

Slaughter is Chairman of Rules, of course, which serves as a tool for the leadership: she's the last Dem rep you'd expect to go off the reservation on such a vital matter.

And, from the quick row-back, it doesn't look as if Pelosi authorized her comments either."

Back in the day, Howard Smith was a holy terror to the leadership as Chairman of Rules:  since his time, Rules has more or less done what the leadership tells it to.


[ Parent ]
Hear, hear! (4.00 / 2)
Thanks David.  Unless there are a few, like you, with the megaphone who are willing to standup to this White House asphalt roller, nothing will ever change.  We must hold their feet to the fire.  And not just now, but in future elections.  These people must be made to know that actions have consequences.

Sometimes you must feel like the unknown Chinese standing in front of the tank.

"Oh. My. God. .... We're doomed." -- Paul Krugman
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...


The problem is structural. (0.00 / 0)
Of course people are tired of candidates saying one thing and doing another on big-ticket items like healthcare reform. But as Matt Yglesias (likely among others) has been pointing out throughout this debate, this is a structural issue which has little to do with Obama, although he is as much to blame as others who have done this in the past. Presidential candidates are expected to put forward detailed policy proposals for a variety of issue areas, and everyone indulges the fiction that these proposals are somehow a blueprint for legislation. In reality, of course, presidents do not write legislation, and they certainly do not control what comes out of Congress. These policy pledges are made for a hypothetical world in which the President, rather than Congress, controls the details of domestic policymaking.

I think this is a bad dynamic, but I don't see it ever changing. No candidate wants to be the policy-free lightweight who refuses to provide specific domestic policy proposals for the common-sense reason that such proposals rarely have much to do with the final shape of legislation. So these deceptive and largely meaningless white papers will continue to be produced, and people will keep looking to them as indications of what policy would be like if that candidate wins the presidency.


Absolutely not true (0.00 / 0)
And you want to site the obamabots at TP as "proof" - extremely misleading.

I guess anyone can proclaim they represent progressives, but very little at TP other than cult worship of obama.

Presidential candidates are expected to put together policy positions, but it is extremely disingenuous (and actually dishonest) to proclaim that "everybody does it and it isn't their fault" blah blah blah blah

It is the kind of psuedo-analysis I would expect from TP, but am not going to let that garbage go unchallenged here.

Be an obamabot if you like.  Support TP if yo choose.  Do not expect to dump the tripe from the threads over there into these and expect to get free pass.

TP endlessly flames and bans anyone to even question why obama does anything - nothing but "homers" over there.  Not the case here.


[ Parent ]
Little of substance to respond to. (0.00 / 0)
Your reply is just a diatribe against ThinkProgress. I don't "expect to get free pass" on anything, but I do expect or at least hope that people will provide actual substantive critiques of the ideas I put forward. I wasn't citing Yglesias in order to settle the issue or even bolster the position, but rather to acknowledge that he's the one who got me thinking about this issue.

Do you have any actual response as to the underlying political realities? Presidents don't write legislation, nor can they control outcomes in Congress. These are facts. Presidential candidates, however, are expected to put forward detailed domestic policy proposals which depend for their execution upon Congressional assent. This creates an unhealthy dynamic in which presidential candidates propose (or even promise) things which they will have no actual power to deliver on if they are elected. I don't point out the structural problem in order to excuse Obama, but rather in order to highlight the fact that this issue is much bigger than Obama, and may not be something that any one presidential candidate can control or change.


[ Parent ]
So they just can't help themselves... (0.00 / 0)
And it is OK and no one is responsible for it.

Little to respond to other than don't buy it and won't accept "experts" from TP - they don't represent progressive/liberals and don't allow them to participate in the dialog there either.

You and I will never agree because you refuse to accept the premise of my position (one increasingly common here and at sites like kos, but a position flamed and banned at TP).

And I won't accept your premise, that everyone is powerless because of structural blah blah blah - if this appears so, its only because folks like you (and the obamabots at TP) make excuses for it - an entirely contrived situation.

Call it learned helplessness if you will, false dichotomies, or perhaps functional fixedness.  

But when it comes from TP, it is really just group-think from a selected few obamabots.


[ Parent ]
Oldie But Goodie (0.00 / 0)


I am totally in favor of health care reform.
I am diametrically opposed to health insurance reform.


Or how about this "weekly address from last july (09) (0.00 / 0)

He. sold. us. out.


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox