health care

TOPICS Video Cafe
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (39)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (187)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

November 06, 2009 C-SPAN



TOPICS Video Cafe
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (82)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (395)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

November 04, 2009 CNN

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALAN GRAYSON: What the Republicans have been doing is an insult to America. They`ve been dragging their feet. These are foot-dragging, knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who thinks they can dictate policy to America by being stubborn.

(END OF VIDE CLIP)

BEHAR: You`re the greatest, "knuckle - dragging Neanderthal" apparently voters in New Jersey and Virginia didn`t agree. The governors- elect in both states both Republicans. I`m joined by the man that threw those bombs, Florida Congressman Alan Grayson, congressman. Thank you for joining me. I really do enjoy you, I must tell you.

GRAYSON: Same here. I enjoy you, too.

BEHAR: But you know the governor`s races were won in Republicans in Virginia and New Jersey. And Obama stump for both of them, what`s this say about Obama`s influence these days? Is it waning or is it OK, what do you think?

GRAYSON: Well look, there`s lesson for both parties. For the Democratic Party we have to activate our vote. The Republicans activate their vote. The Democrats this year have not done as good a job as the Republicans in that regard. The voter turnout in Virginia was down by half since last year. Now, I don`t think half of all voters in Virginia disappeared. What happen was some of them felt motivated to vote. And too many of people on our side didn`t feel motivated to vote. And that`s why there was a sharp drop in Democratic performance in both states. So we have to motivate our base.

BEHAR: It was interesting the exit polls in Virginia and New Jersey, all -- both of them said they still like President Obama. That their vote had nothing to do with him. Do you agree with that?

GRAYSON: Well look, people elected Obama, they elected me, they elected the Democrats and put us in charge of the government because they want change. And they need to see more of it. We need to deliver. We need to make sure that the people who voted for us with expectations in mind have those expectations satisfied. It`s that simple. There are lessons for Republicans too. You didn`t talk about the election in New York.

BEHAR: I`m about to ask you about that one because that was one for the team.

GRAYSON: Well listen, I think we`re witnessing the disintegration of a major political party. Something that happens only about once a century. The last time that two of those counties that New York congressional district were represented by Democrats was in 1850. 1850. So I think what we`re seeing is that the tea baggers are no longer obeying the corporate pay masters.

BEHAR: It`s interesting because both Limbaugh and Palin both backed the Republican up there. And it didn`t work. I love that. Does it mean the attack machine -- what is it about the right wing attack machine. That they`re full of bluster and they`re out there all the time voicing their hatred, a lot of it. And it still doesn`t translate into votes, by and large.

GRAYSON: They`re down to 20% of Americans identify themselves as Republicans now. And even at 20% split -- they`re split and splintered and falling apart.

BEHAR: What does it about independent voters, this whole thing, do you think?

GRAYSON: Well the independent voters have a lot of say. They`re the balance of power between the two parties. But I think at this point we`re down to 1 1/2 parties. Because the Republicans just can`t seem to get it together. They have nothing to offer ordinary people. You know you ask what people want for health care, for education, for jobs, the Republicans have no answers for any of that. They`re the party of no, and no don`t cut it anymore.

BEHAR: OK and thank you very much for joining us I hope that you`re going to keep speaking out and saying those wonderful things that you say. We like them.

GRAYSON: Thank you, Joy.


TOPICS

And here we have another nut job Republican who claims health care reform will destroy America. Where's the outrage by the Villagers over these statements?
Media Matters:

It's an impressive feat, but there may not be a Republican member of Congress who has been more openly scornful of President Obama's plans for health care reform than Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA).

In July, Broun declared that the public insurance option "is gonna kill people." Later in the month, he argued that "ObamaCare" would "give every single one of those illegal aliens health insurance." At a town hall meeting in September, Broun literally walked away from a constituent who couldn't get health coverage after telling him, "If you have a suggestion, send it to me." And, just a few weeks ago, he introduced "alternative" legislation that would eliminate Medicare altogether.

Yesterday, Broun escalated his attacks on the Democratic reform bill, saying that its passage "destroy America as we know it today."

Right -- if a liberal like Grayson calls out Republicans (who have no health care plan), they get their freak on. But I guess they have already been immunized to conservative insanity.

Oh, and we have Rep. Gohmert saying this: Dems Would Allow Seniors To "Die Off More Quickly"

This is standard conservative behavior that never gets mentioned by the media. It only comes up when a liberal is attacked and then they spend 24-48 hours to defend themselves and are forced to use these outrageous statement made by Republicans. And of course they have no traction, because of the defensive position the media puts liberals in.


Lessons

I was writing something pretty close to this and decided to link to the Great Orange Satan.

KOS:

There will be much number-crunching tomorrow, but preliminary numbers (at least in Virginia) show that GOP turnout remained the same as last year, but Democratic turnout collapsed. This is a base problem, and this is what Democrats better take from tonight:

  1. If you abandon Democratic principles in a bid for unnecessary "bipartisanship", you will lose votes.
  1. If you water down reform in favor of Blue Dogs and their corporate benefactors, you will lose votes.
  1. If you forget why you were elected -- health care, financial services, energy policy and immigration reform -- you will lose votes.

Tonight proved conclusively that we're not going to turn out just because you have a (D) next to your name, or because Obama tells us to. We'll turn out if we feel it's worth our time and effort to vote, and we'll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.

The choice is yours. Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home. And you aren't going to make up the margins with conservative voters. They already know exactly who they're voting for, and it ain't you.

Health care should have been passed by the August recess, but to have it go on and on has been a huge mistake. And waiting until next year only makes it worse.


TOPICS Video Cafe
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (37)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (77)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

November 03, 2009 C-SPAN

From the floor of the House Congressmen King, Akin and Hoekstra rally the GOP troops to come to Washington and let their Representatives see the "white of their eyes".


Okay, maybe requiring minimum IQs as a standard to run for national office is a bit harsh, but can we at least insist that politicians prove that they are actually human and not some mindless automaton programmed with talking points?

(In the past,) Foxx has claimed Democratic reforms would mean seniors are “put to death by their government,” that health reform is a “distraction,” and that “there are no Americans who don’t have health care.” She was at it again today on the House floor, arguing that health reform is a greater threat to our country than “any terrorist right now in any country”:

Everywhere I go in my district, people tell me they are frightened. … I share that fear, and I believe they should be fearful. And I believe the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room — this very room — and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill. I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.

Normally, this is where my head makes a very loud thunk against my desk at the stupidity, but instead I just find myself really angry at this illogical fear mongering and ugliness. But what can you expect from a politician ugly enough to call Matthew Shepard's murder "a hoax"?. Obviously her lip service towards valuing life doesn't really mean any living people.

Rep. Foxx, the lives of those 44,000 Americans who die needlessly every year because they do not have insurance is blood on your hands.


Mike's Blog Roundup

Linda R. Monk, J.D.: Let Us Now Praise Uppity Women (h/t Where’s the Outrage?)

The Plum Line: Harry Reid calls GOP's transparency bluff: Is your health care bill a secret, or merely non-existent?

AMERICAblog News: Top McCain campaign advisor running out of insurance. He has a "pre-existing condition."

Apoliticus: Top 5 annoying talents of President Obama

Bill in Exile (not work safe) : New York Twenty Three

Family and Friends blog: Our Achilles Heel


House Bill released: Open Thread

The House has released its health care bill. I'm going on a conference call now, so I can't really discuss the bill, but you can read it here with many other links provided.

Mcjoan discusses it here.

House leadership has released this fact sheet on the key elements of the House healthcare reform bill that will begin in 2010 [pdf].

Among the most important of these front-loaded provision are the creation of the high risk pool, extension of COBRA benefits (which should also include some sort of subsidy program, since COBRA rates are often unaffordable, though select groups do receive assistance under the Recovery Act), upping the age that people can be covered by their parents' plans, and the increased funding for Community Health Centers are all very good starts for 2010. The most key for staunching the bleeding in our system, if you will, are the high risk pool and the Community Health Center funding. More of the uninsured will be able to get insurance through the pool and the CHCs, which are absolutely critical to providing care for the uninsured, will at least see some increased ability to do so.

A handful of the reforms will immediately address issues for Medicare beneficiaries, all solid reforms that should also provide some political help in 2010--seniors vote.

Looks like the Blue Dogs won a victory in this bill, but they wanted to kill the public option all together. And remember when the media said the public option was dead completely?

I'm on a conference call with Nancy Pelosi right now. At least she's coming on to discuss it with us for a few minutes. Many politicians would not.

Please leave your thoughts down below.

UPDATE: The House has not respected the PHarma deal cut by the White House and the Speaker is happy about that.


Mike's Blog Roundup

MyDD : The worries of Joe Lieberman

MOMocrats: A cry for help

Amygdala: Let's burn all the Bibles!

PERRspectives: Broun joins Palin in backing GOP plan to privatize Medicare

Lean Left : Dumbest painfully serious political metaphor of the day

cab drollery: A top cop gets it


You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (1544)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (2215)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

In the wake of its shocking assessment that employer-provided health insurance now covers only 54.6% of the American people, Thomson Reuters released a disturbing assessment of wasteful spending in the U.S. health care system. Echoing the estimates of Obama OMB chief Peter Orszag and others, the analysis highlighted by Keith Olbermann Tuesday concluded that the United States wastes up to $700 billion a year - a third of the nation's total $2 trillion health care spending.

As Robert Kelley, vice president of healthcare analytics at Thomson Reuters and author of the white paper, put it:

"The bad news is that an estimated $700 billion is wasted annually. That's one-third of the nation's healthcare bill. The good news is that by attacking waste, healthcare costs can be reduced without adversely affecting the quality of care or access to care. That's the point of this report - to identify areas in the healthcare system that can generate game-changing savings."

Those game-changing savings, TR found, could be found across a broad range of health care spending. Between $600 billion and $850 billion, it estimated, is wasted on:

  • Unnecessary Care (40% of healthcare waste): Unwarranted treatment, such as the over-use of antibiotics and the use of diagnostic lab tests to protect against malpractice exposure, accounts for $250 billion to $325 billion in annual healthcare spending.
  • Fraud (19% of healthcare waste): Healthcare fraud costs $125 billion to $175 billion each year, manifesting itself in everything from fraudulent Medicare claims to kickbacks for referrals for unnecessary services.
  • Administrative Inefficiency (17% of healthcare waste): The large volume of redundant paperwork in the U.S healthcare system accounts for $100 billion to $150 billion in spending annually.
  • Healthcare Provider Errors (12% of healthcare waste): Medical mistakes account for $75 billion to $100 billion in unnecessary spending each year.
  • Preventable Conditions (6% of healthcare waste): Approximately $25 billion to $50 billion is spent annually on hospitalizations to address conditions such as uncontrolled diabetes, which are much less costly to treat when individuals receive timely access to outpatient care.
  • Lack of Care Coordination (6% of healthcare waste): Inefficient communication between providers, including lack of access to medical records when specialists intervene, leads to duplication of tests and inappropriate treatments that cost $25 billion to $50 billion annually.

But in its catalog of health care spending horrors, however, Thomson Reuters may have understated potential savings in one area while overstating them in another.

Continue reading »


TOPICS

The Bitter Man and his Republican Base

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (2723)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (3221)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

The Bitter Man strikes back.

Democratic moderates who control the balance of power on health care legislation balked Tuesday at a government-run insurance option for millions of Americans, underscoring the enormity of the challenge confronting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid one day after he unveiled the plan as a consensus product.
{}

The decision to include a government insurance option in his legislation had obvious appeal for liberals who account for a strong majority inside the Senate Democratic caucus, and it is likely to please labor unions and party activists in Nevada.

But it has gained less-than-effusive support from Obama, who is eager to have at least a dollop of bipartisanship for his signature domestic issue. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, the only Republican who has sided with Democrats in committee this year, has announced she will not support the bill Reid drafted.

Still, if Reid is pressed in coming weeks by moderates to fall back, he can explain to liberals that he was forced to do so because his preference — a government insurance option — proved to be unobtainable in the Senate. Already, that pressure is evident...read on

Joe Lieberman is a bitter old man who was looking for some media juice yesterday when he decided to spit in the face of Americans who want real health care reform. Can you trust either his motives or what he says anymore?

Joe Lieberman has once again rolled a political hand grenade into the Democrats’ tent.

The Connecticut independent obliterated any illusion that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) can quickly ram through health care reform with a public option, telling reporters on Tuesday that he would join Republicans in a filibuster to prevent a vote on Reid’s plan if it isn’t changed first.

“We’re trying to do too much at once,” said Lieberman, who signaled he would vote with Reid on the first procedural vote that requires 60 votes, the motion to proceed.

The media will never call out Lieberman over his bullshit.

And Lieberman’s justification on this is just nonsense – the public option would SAVE money for the government, to the tune of $100 billion dollars over 10 years according to the Congressional Budget Office. It also would cost nothing to the taxpayer, being financed by individual premiums.

The public option saves money and Holy Joe knows it. And the Senate will never take action against another Senator no matter how outrageous their behavior is.

But Lieberman’s fellow Connecticut senator, Democrat Chris Dodd, who faces a tough reelection fight in 2010, dismissed the idea that Lieberman would incur any retribution.

“No, no, no. People are going to be all over the place,” he said when asked if Lieberman should be punished. “The idea that people are going to be reprimanded because somehow they have a different point of view than someone else is ridiculous. That isn’t going to happen.”

Lieberman can thank President Obama for retaining his committees and unless he gets caught in bed with a goat, he gets to do whatever he wants. The House of Lords always protect their royal status over their constituents. Well, Mr. President -- it's time to reign in this herd of Conservadems if you really want the public option. All this could be the awesome kabuki dance that pols do as they negotiate legislation through the media. Well, Mr. President, you got him -- you own him now so make him pony up. Oh, wait -- Senators are immune to any type of accountability. Sorry, I forgot what I wrote earlier in this piece.

Too bad Ned Lamont didn't win in 2006, but we forced Joe out of the Dem Party and Ned is still speaking up against Lieberman. They did debate health care and Holy Joe was for "universal health care" at the time, but now he has a Republican base to protect.

I asked Lamont if he thinks that Obama, who intervened last November to keep Senate Democrats from stripping Lieberman of his committee chairmanship, was guilty of trusting Connecticut's junior senator too much.

"I would really hope that Senator Lieberman would have returned that courtesy by talking to the president's team before walking out on this filibuster plank," he replied.

Lieberman's seat will be up in 2012. His polls numbers have improved a little this year, but they're still very shaky, a 48-45 percent approval rating among all voters in the state. But among Democrats, they're poisonous. Does Lieberman's latest move mean he's abandoning any thought of running as a Democrat again in '12?

"He got re-elected in '06 with overwhelming Republican support," Lamont said. "So I guess he's just taking care of his base."

Do me a favor and contact Joe's offices and tell him to give us an up-or-down vote on health care and not to join Republicans in a filibuster. He likely won't listen, but it's important that he hear our voices.

One Constitution Plaza
7th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
(860) 549-8463 Voice
--
706 Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-4041 Voice

And please: Donate to Blue America's Campaign For Health Care Choice so we can continue to fight for health care reform. We have several actions we're working on...


Okay, Senate Is Including A Public Option; Now What?

So the pressure we brought to bear on Harry Reid's office over the weekend did have some effect. The bill does have a public option, despite mutterings from unnamed sources that the mythic and coveted 60 votes would be a whole lot easier without the public option. But we're not out of the woods yet, not by a long shot.

Now we get to see the Republicans really ramp up the scare tactics--telling the gullible and easily frightened that this is just one step behind the evil Soviet Empire that St. Ronnie slayed, with its government-run health care, all evidence to the contrary. Up until this point, Obama has kept the Senate dealings at arm's length, a political calculus that made some sense, looking at what happened to Clinton's attempt to get health care passed. But it's going to take some seriously strong political leadership now to make it untenable for any member of the Senate to vote against health care reform. As Mike Lux says, "Game On":

We don't yet know whether we will get the best version of the public option in the House bill, and the Senate version is not as strong as progressives have been pushing for. But strengthening the form of the public option can be negotiated over in conference committee, once we get there.

For now, we can thank Harry Reid (HCAN has a page here) and Nancy Pelosi for their gutsy leadership, and fight like hungry dogs to win the floor fight and deliver on this hope. In the coming weeks we will have an all-hands-on-deck, all out public war with the insurance industry over whether we finally pass comprehensive health care reform or once again fall short at the bitter end after coming so far.

Here's where things are as we head into the floor fight:

1. White House staffers confirmed for me this afternoon that they are backing Harry Reid's decision "100 percent." Now that's not to say they aren't a little nervous about it. I suspect that there are still some feelings by some people working in that building that progressives should have given up and rolled over, and let them cut a deal with Olympia Snowe on her trigger-written-never-to-trigger. That would have been easier than sweating what will undoubtedly be a very tough battle to get all 60 Democrats to go along with the rest of the party. But us irritating progressive folk got in the way of doing that, and now Obama knows it's time to stand and deliver. I believe my friends at the White House when they say they will do an all-out fight for this bill. They know that starting down this path, and not being able to pull it off, would be a huge embarrassment and destroy all the momentum we've built by making it this far. They are all-in, and know how much is at stake. Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina are famous for twisting arms and doing everything in their power to get the votes that are needed, and now is their time to deliver.

That's where you come in. Progressive Change has a petition for you to sign to ask President Obama to stand firm and fight:

"Every day, insurance companies deny care and let people die. Getting one Republican senator's vote is not worth delaying reform -- too many real lives are at stake. We need you to fight and state clearly that anything less than a strong public option is not change we can believe in."

Go. Sign. Make phone calls. Let your voice be heard.


TOPICS Newstalgia

Hospitals Of The Future - as imagined in 1956

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: 23
WMV
PLAYS: 13

1950s-house-of-the-future-poster-art1_1f99f.jpg
(Yes, even in the future - getting sick and paying for it will be painful)

It's always amazing to hear what the future is going to look like, as viewed from the past. Invariably, all manner of convenience will be commonplace, all menial labor will vanish, all worry about getting sick will still be around.

And who is going to pay for it? Even in 1956, they were scratching their heads. The writing was on the wall - more people on the planet, and more of them getting older and well . . .sicker. The good news was the leaps on modern medicine would be greater (that's happened), but people going broke over receiving those leaps would plague us seemingly forever.

In September of 1956, on the occasion of their annual convention, NBC Radio, via their Monitor series, hosted a panel discussion with members of the American Hospital Association (Albert W. Snoke, Lowell T. Codishall and Chicago Daily News Science Editor Arthur Snider), discussing just what this thing was going to be looking like in the future.

Arthur Snider (Chicago Daily News): “ I think foremost, is and has been for some time the matter of costs. For a considerable time people . . the anger was directed towards hospitals, but now with the introduction of hospital bill . . or hospital insurance plans, we have the matter of increasing premiums. And people now are being a little bit unhappy about that. They say, when they get their bills they could have enjoyed a nice couple of weeks at a fancy hotel for that price. I’m sure that argument is fallacious, I’m sure Dr. Snoke has a thought on that.”

Albert W. Snoke (American Hospital Association): “Everybody gets irritated over having to pay any kind of money for anything. They just don’t enjoy paying out money. I don’t blame them for being concerned about hospital costs and hospital charges. The thing that I’d like to first get clear is that there are two different problems we’re talking about. One is how much does it cost to run a hospital. And next, how much does the patient have to pay when he comes into the hospital. And cost and charges are two different things.”

Bear in mind in 1956 Health Insurance was a relatively new thing, but even in 1956 costs were spiraling out of control. Of course at the time no one thought to lay some blame at the feet of the insurance companies - they were still the new kids on the block.

So now that they've become the bullies of the neighborhood . . .


You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (1541)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1594)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

Harry Reid held a press conference earlier today and said he's including a "public option" in the Senate bill that will have a states "opt out" provision, which means that all the states will have to stay in the bill until 2014 and then have the opportunity to opt out of it.

Frankly I'm shocked that he stood up to the White House on the public option and said no to President Olympia Snowe. Remember when all the Chuck Todds of the pundit class said that the public option was dead and liberals supported it because conservatives didn't? Wrong again.

Obviously, Reid talked to the Democratic senators and feels like he has the votes, or I didn't think he would have said what he did.

Senate Majority Leader Reid confirmed this afternoon he would include a public option in the overhaul bill that allows states to opt out if they choose. Reid said he plans to send an overhaul proposal to CBO today.

He said he is not asking CBO to score a trigger alternative, one supported by Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, but added that the bill will include a version of a co-op.

Robert Gibbs from the White House applauds Reid via email:

"The President congratulates Senator Reid and Chairmen Baucus and Dodd for their hard work on health insurance reform. Thanks to their efforts, we’re closer than we’ve ever been to solving this decades-old problem. And while much work remains, the President is pleased that at the progress that Congress has made. He’s also pleased that the Senate has decided to include a public option for health coverage, in this case with an allowance for states to opt out. As he said to Congress and the nation in September, he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition."

I agree with mcjoan at Daily Kos when she says:

Everyone is on the same page moving forward, meaning that we're that much closer to having meaningful, comprehensive healthcare reform pass this year.

There is much to still discuss and learn about the merging bills, but I think it's a positive step.

Steve Benen has a nice roundup, and found a statement from Max Baucus:

Perhaps more interesting was the reaction from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who has been a public option detractor.

"It is time to make our system work better for patients and providers, for small business owners and for our economy. It is time for health care reform. For more than a year, we've been working to meet the goals of reducing the growth of health care costs, improving quality and efficiency and expanding coverage. There are a tremendous number of complicated issues that go into reform and the public option is certainly one of them. I included a public option in the health reform blueprint I released nearly one year ago, and continue to support any provision, including a public option, that will ensure choice and competition and get the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate. Success should be our threshold and I am going to fight hard for the 60 votes we need to meet that goal this year."

What's fascinating about this is that Baucus was reportedly fighting tooth and nail to keep the public option out of the merged bill. This statement suggests he's on board with Reid's bill, and almost seems to be trying to take some credit for it.

I know there are a lot of questions about the bill and we haven't seen it yet, but the fact the Reid put some form of the public option without a trigger is huge and I didn't expect it from him.

Americans United wrote this about Harry Reid:

Senator Reid's announcement that the Senate health care bill will include a public health insurance option, shows that he has refused to buckle in the face of withering pressure from the big insurance companies and sided instead with everyday health care consumers.

HCAN released their statement.

Today, you stood up and delivered the kind of leadership America needs in the health care fight. You put a public health insurance option in the Senate bill, something the vast majority of Americans support.1

For your leadership, you deserve our thanks.

The Republicans' response is pure comedy gold. They called Harry a "partisan bully." '

A primary reason Harry Reid is one of the most endangered incumbents facing re-election in either party next year is due to the fact that he is viewed by many of his constituents as a partisan bully," said Brian Walsh, NRSC Communications Director.

The idiot known as Michael Steele says he's "the cow on the tracks."

Josh Marshall has a good take on the news. So What Is the 'Opt-Out' Compromise?

Howard Fineman sounded like a blogger when he wrote this about President Obama's obsession with Mount Snowe:

But the pursuit of Snowe is pretty close to obsessive, which is not a good thing either for Democrats or for the prospects of health-care reform worthy of the name. First, Snowe's exaggerated prominence is both the result and symbol of Obama's quixotic and ultimately time-wasting pursuit of "bipartisanship." In case the White House hasn't noticed, Republicans in Congress are engaged in what amounts to a sitdown strike. They don't like anything about Obama or his policies; they have no interest in seeing him succeed. Despite the occasional protestation to the contrary, the GOP has no intention of helping him pass any legislation. Snowe may very well end up voting for whatever she and Democrats craft, but that won't make the outcome bipartisan any more than dancing shoes made Tom DeLay Fred Astaire.
--
Worse, the pursuit of Snowe isn't uniting Democrats; it is dividing them. Democrats who haven't been in the room with her as she bargains with the leadership bristle at her role, even as they personally like and admire her. She remains deeply skeptical of a publicly financed alternative to private insurance, in good part because of what she sees as the failure of Maine's version of the idea—and yet some form of a public option is favored not only by most Democrats in Congress but by most of the American people. If Obama and the Democrats really want such a plan, they may as well try to get tough. For inspiration, the president might consider a Longfellow aphorism. "In this world," the poet wrote, "a man must either be an anvil or a hammer."

More coming....


sestak and lamont_d0333.jpg

C&L is honored to have proud progressives Congressman Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania, and 2006 Democratic nominee for US Senate from Connecticut Ned Lamont, joining us for a live chat at 3 pm Pacific / 6 pm Eastern. The conversation will be wide-ranging, from health care and the economy to the upcoming 2010 mid-term elections. Ned Lamont endorsed Joe Sestak in the Pennsylvania Senate race earlier today.

Everyone is invited; if you haven't registered as a commenter here you will need to do that at this link in order to participate.