Open Left

Are you joking about Kucinich? (4.00 / 17)

I am angry that single-payer supporters Kucinich and Massa were happy to let any hope of health care reform for a generation die because the bill wasn't everything we hoped it would be.

There are four reasons that this is absurd:

1. Their votes weren't necessary for passage.  We don't know how Kucinich would have voted if his vote was critical for passage.

2.  The bill sucks, okay. The bill sucks.  We aren't talking about demanding perfection. We are talking about a bill that, in many ways, is worse than the current situation.  A public option that is too small and weak to drive cost savings is just as likely to shrivel up and die as it is to be expanded and improved.  The "camel's nose in the tent" theory of legislation is erroneously treated as gospel in some quarters.

3.  The idea that health care reform would be lost "for a generation" if the legislation stalled now is laughable.  This isn't 1993.  The system is in total crisis.  You think that if Congress fails now that the public is going to let them ignore the issue for another 15 years?

4.  Good negotiation requires credibility.  The Congressional Progressive Caucus drew a line in the sand, demanding a robust public option. They didn't get it. Then they voted for the bill anyway.  Way to flush your credibility down the toilet.  Maybe Lux doesn't have much experience in negotiation, but I can assure people that empty threats are a big no-no.

---

by: space @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 18:54:10 PM CST

You are largely correct (0.00 / 0)

but you misconstrue the "camel's nose" argument.

The actual argument is that, having botched the overall governing strategy by putting health care reform so high on the agenda, a defeat here jeopardizes the entire agenda.

There is no choice now but to "win*" in some form.

Now that we are committed to "win", we can at least salvage the situation by turning a notional "win" into a real win IF AND ONLY IF Democrats retain the government and improve the law later.

If the GOP gets back in...

well, let's just not go there. It's too depressing.

* a "win" can actually be a GOP filibuster. They will take the mantle of "anti-change" from Obama, even though we all know better.

---

by: Paul Goodman @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 20:01:06 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

Yes (4.00 / 1)

The idea that health care reform would be lost "for a generation" if the legislation stalled now is laughable.  This isn't 1993.  The system is in total crisis.  You think that if Congress fails now that the public is going to let them ignore the issue for another 15 years?

The system was in crisis back in 1993, and people were in denial.  People are still in denial.. look at all the people who say that they are happy with their health insurance/care?

EVERY time someone tries to fix the system, politicians lose their jobs.  It happened after Medicare... it happened in 1994, and it will happen now.

Politicians will not touch this again with a 10 foot pole.  Without the health care reform attempt, Obama's approval would still be in the 60's and our congresscritters woudln't be so nervous...

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!

---

by: lord_mike @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 20:23:15 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

Hmm (4.00 / 1)

I'm not sure I agree he'd be in the 60's.  Definately higher than now, but the 10% unemployment rate is hurting more than anything.

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 21:21:46 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

don't agree (0.00 / 0)

It just can't be true that 85% are happy with their health insurance, and 60+% support single payer.

Also, as the % of GDP stolen by the insurance companies continues to raise unabated, the issue gets bigger and hotter. This increase projected not very far into the future amounts to more money than exists.

This issue, regardless if the curent bills (as they are now worded) succeed or fail, will come up again and again in shorter and shorter intervals between fights until the proper result is reached. That being some top to the % of GDP required for health care which still results in affordable coverage for the general populas.

If we can educate the voters as to which politicians blocked this attempt, then the elected officials responsible (party of NO) will be the ones the voters turn against. This will be MUCH easier if they are stupid enough to filibuster.

Government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob..... FDR

---

by: reggiewhitefish @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:06 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

Yeah, that anti-Kucinich/Massa remark was a real misfire (4.00 / 5)

unless you totally don't support the Progressive Block idea. (And Kucinich and Massa didn't even stop the bill!  What are you complaining about?) If you care about "fixing it later", as the ones who opposed the bill from the left, Kucinich and Massa will be the spear-carriers in the effort to "fix" the health care law.

You really ought to rethink your criticism of these two.

---

by: liberalmaverick @ Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 20:57:45 PM CST

[ Parent | ]

They were hard no votes. (0.00 / 0)

They refused to budge or accept any compromise language language.

---

by: Mike Lux @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 10:33:38 AM CST

[ Parent | ]

what compromise language? (0.00 / 0)

mike, your comment makes no sense whatsoever unless you tell us what compromise language they didn't accept.

as of now, i'm glad to have their "no" votes on this pos bill.  

---

by: selise @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 10:59:38 AM CST

[ Parent | ]