Lipstick On A Pig: Obama Willing To Settle For Anything On HCR?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 07:42:49 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Via John Aravosis, The Hill reports:

Are Democrats dialling down expectations on what can be acheived under the banner of healthcare reform this year? Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) seems to be concerned they are. Rockefeller emerged from the Senate Democrats' weekly luncheon Tuesday afternoon, which featured an appearance by President Barack Obama's communications guru David Axelrod, wondering aloud (perhaps rhetorically) whether the White House's get-it-done message to Congress wasn't bold enough.

"David’s in there -- Axelrod -- saying we’ve got to try to get ‘something.’ So, the new benchmark is, ‘Well, if we can do something, if we can do anything, then we can say we did healthcare reform,’" Rockefeller said.

If that's true, that would provide the answer regarding the efficacy of Obama's Theory of Change. It would be, in the words of Dick Gephardt, a miserable failure.

Speaking for me only

< Feature, Not A Bug: Conrad's Co-ops Useless | Mary Travers, R.I.P. >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Lipstick On A Pig: Obama Willing To Settle For Anything On HCR? | 21 comments (21 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

After Rockefeller's FISA performance (5.00 / 3) (#1)
by magster on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 07:47:23 PM EST

who'd have thought that he'd become one of the most forceful advocates of real reform at clutch time?

: Yeh, I won't forgive him for that, but (5.00 / 4) (#4)
by Cream City on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 08:52:48 PM EST

he's getting points from me now for this -- for making Axelrod look like a creep who could care less about the American people. Okay, I know that's not news, but it's fun to see it as the news.
But I thought this was gonna be the White House without any leaks?

Miserable and pathetic. (5.00 / 4) (#2)
by oldpro on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 08:04:22 PM EST

This is the 'no we can't' vision of the future.

These people are a joke but no one I know is laughing.

No, it's the (5.00 / 10) (#3)
by Anne on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 08:48:12 PM EST

"Hey! It's Better Than Nothing!" party test-driving its new standard...watch for it in all kinds of issues to come.

This is what we get when we elect someone whose priority is winning, and who will keep lowering the standard until he can claim victory.

Not even remotely funny - more and more people I talk to are checking out of the whole process, which is not going to bode well in 2010. If there is anyone who even cares by then.


Afghanistan in the news (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 03:32:04 AM EST

this week. Listening to NPR discussing what we need to win in Afghanistan. I snorted at that premise and said to my husband "How do we "win" in Afghanistan?". He looked at me, shrugged, and said "Leave?".

That's where Obama's Better Than Nothing philosophy would suit me fine. Signal the all clear, give everyone hugs and kisses and leave.


Remember when our party (3.50 / 2) (#16)
by BrassTacks on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 03:48:44 AM EST

Protested wars and wanted American soldiers home? How about we do that again. I want OUT of Iraq and Afghanistan! Are we all just wimps about wars now? Or is it just our wimpy leaders?


: My guess (none / 0) (#17)
by Fabian on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 05:34:28 AM EST

is that Obama's fear of perceived failure strikes again. Better any bill than no bill? Don't want to be seen as weak on terr'rists and national security?

People checking out (none / 0) (#20)
by star on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 08:58:53 AM EST

I totally agree with you there. I am feeling pretty depressed for dems in 2010. I live in florida but know people who voted dem mostly. Of late I hear so much disenchanment with their choice and second guessing.. these are people who never voted anything but dem. i hope this WH takes these protests seriously bring out some GOOD policies. at the end of the day, good governance ONLY can save the day.. constantly crying racism at the face of any challenge is not to help ... in fact it is seriously turning off people, espescially when nothing good is coming out of this administration and the base is constantly being ignored.


This is (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by Left of the Left on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:19:49 PM EST

as depressing as it is unsurprising.

reading a lot of tea leaves (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by mikeel on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:20:29 PM EST

So Obama is saying one thing on the trail and acting differently in private meetings with Congressional Democrats.

I just find that hard to believe, otherwise that's a huge credibility problem.

no, i think you speak (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by cpinva on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:22:05 PM EST

for lots of us.

to be blunt, any idiot can get legislation passed into law, that hardly constitutes "change". real "change" would be getting a bill passed that actually provides value for the average joe.

If I had a hammer... (5.00 / 5) (#10)
by Dadler on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:33:46 PM EST

...OT, but we need that hammer, and Mary Travers (of Peter, Paul and Mary) has passed away. One of the sweetest voices of my childhood.

: If you miss the train I'm on... (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by Anne on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:43:40 PM EST

you will know that I am gone; I can hear the whistle blow 500 miles...
Am so sad to hear this news.

Sometimes less is more... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by masslib on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 11:00:17 PM EST

I agree with your idea, BTD, of taking the best parts of the proposals and passing them only. Here's my suggested reforms:

Raise Medicaid to 150% FPL(all the proposals do this to varying degrees), make it available to childless adults(all the proposals do this), nationalize it(all the proposals do this), and fund it(not sure any of the proposals give it full funding). That right there covers half the currently uninsured.

Raise SCHIP to include young adults up to 26.

Offer Medicare buy-in for 55-64 year olds(baucus actually proposed less but something like this this spring, Rockefeller has a proposal for this on the table).

Pay for these buy giving negotiating power to Medicare Part D, and cutting subsidies to Medicare Advantage.

The first rule of thumb, do no harm. HR3200 builds exchanges that will not work, it mandates private insurance, it offers a meager PO that virtually no one can get in to, and it further entrenches us in the private insurer market.

So, I think Obama can help lots of people obtain health care without the big bill that's actually pretty crappy.

: Yes (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 06:48:39 AM EST

I am imagining my "Do No Harm" post at the appropriate time.

Affordable health care for people (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by MO Blue on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 08:38:08 AM EST

with preexisting conditions is the driver behind much of the support for health insurance by groups such as the Susan G. Komen Foundation. These groups are spending a lot of time and money because they believe the Dems will deliver on this promise. Yet, the Baucus plan has provided insurers a built in mechanism to get around the preexisting provision.

The first shocker in the Baucus bill came early on in the draft. Since I've worked in health insurance underwriting I have a certain familiarity with these kinds of numbers. I was stunned to see that the bill allows insurers to charge up to five times as much for some enrollees as for others, based on age. (By contrast, the House draft bill only allows them to charge up to twice as much based on age.)
One of the things we've been hearing from the President and other Democrats is that insurance needs to be affordable to everyone, including those with pre-existing conditions. This new provision, however, is a back-door way to let insurers essentially evade that provision. High-cost medical conditions, including chronic (and therefore pre-existing) conditions, aren't restricted to older people, of course. But they become increasingly common as we age -- so much so that indexing costs to age addresses a lot of the difference. The Baucus bill allows insurers to use age as a proxy for costly medical conditions and make coverage prohibitively expensive for those who need it the most. HufPo

Not only does this renege on what Obama has promised it will also increase how much money the government will have to pay out in subsidies.

Keep in mind that Johnson (none / 0) (#8)
by Exeter on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:23:08 PM EST

had 68 Dems in the Senate and 295 in the House when he passed Medicare and many other landmark legislation that was probably the most productive Democratic Congressional in Amerian history. That said, I think they can still get the public option passed. Who is standing in their way? Liebeman? Baucus? Maybe we need a new Majority Leader that was tough SOB like LBJ.

Here I thought (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by Left of the Left on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:35:20 PM EST

we already had picked a new one just this past Nov.


I agree (none / 0) (#9)
by kenosharick on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 09:26:05 PM EST

about a new leader. Reid seems like a total wuss on this and other issues rather than a true leader.


: Yeah (3.00 / 2) (#13)
by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 10:10:52 PM EST

but what do you do when the President is a wuss too?

Umm, Johnson had republican support (none / 0) (#21)
by DWCG on Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 01:43:35 PM EST

How so many forget that fact:

http://www.ssa.gov/history/tally65.html

More than half of the GOP Senators and nearly half of the GOP House.

The reality was, despite the fact that they called it socialized medicine and called it a takeover, they didn't want to allow Democrats to unilaterally claim credit for a popular measure.

This insurance industry bailout with the false label of "reform" is nothing of the sort. Repealing it will be a cornerstone of Republicans and they'll get populist support once people come to see it as the sham it is.
