« When Will The Recovery Begin? Never. | Robert Reich's Blog | Goldman's Back, and Why We Should Be Worried »
The Health Care Clock, and Why Obama Has to Act Quickly
Universal health insurance won't happen unless Obama can light a fire under the Senate Finance Committee this week. Within the next two weeks, the Committee must report out a bill that contains a public option and a credible source of money (either limiting deductions of the wealthy to 28 percent or capping tax-free employer-provided health care, or some of both). Obama then has to get both the Senate and the House (which reports out a bill today) to approve their respective bills before August 7, when Congress heads home for recess.
Why is timing so important? Because the health-care clock is ticking, and doesn't have many weeks left. Universal health care is so complicated -- touching on so much of the economy, stepping on the toes of so many vested interests -- that to allow the bills to languish past recess risks the entire goal. Speed is essential. Recall that after Bill Clinton was elected, universal health insurance looked inevitable; a year later, it was doomed. As Lyndon Johnson warned his staff after the 1964 landslide, "every day while I'm in office, I'm gonna lose votes."
Republicans don't want any bill. Blue Dog Democrats are afraid of the costs of any bill. The AMA, private insurers, and pharmaceutical companies would be delighted if universal health care died. If bills aren't passed in the House and Senate before August 7th, the fights in both chambers over the public option and money will carry over into the Fall, where they'll become more intense and more prolonged. Obama won't have a bill on his desk before the end of the end of the year. That's a death sentence for health-care reform. The gravitational pull of the mid-term elections of 2010 will frighten off Blue Dogs and delight Republicans.
Why is timing so important? Because the health-care clock is ticking, and doesn't have many weeks left. Universal health care is so complicated -- touching on so much of the economy, stepping on the toes of so many vested interests -- that to allow the bills to languish past recess risks the entire goal. Speed is essential. Recall that after Bill Clinton was elected, universal health insurance looked inevitable; a year later, it was doomed. As Lyndon Johnson warned his staff after the 1964 landslide, "every day while I'm in office, I'm gonna lose votes."
Republicans don't want any bill. Blue Dog Democrats are afraid of the costs of any bill. The AMA, private insurers, and pharmaceutical companies would be delighted if universal health care died. If bills aren't passed in the House and Senate before August 7th, the fights in both chambers over the public option and money will carry over into the Fall, where they'll become more intense and more prolonged. Obama won't have a bill on his desk before the end of the end of the year. That's a death sentence for health-care reform. The gravitational pull of the mid-term elections of 2010 will frighten off Blue Dogs and delight Republicans.
Advertisement
Heathcare reform is not something we are going to get.
It can only be something we are going to take.
July 13, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can't "take" anything quickly. There is no mechanism for "taking". We can "take" away votes from neoliberals, Blue Dogs and centrists, but then you have to replace them with people of virtue. We need more Graysons and Kucinichs. That will "take" time.
July 13, 2009 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
i thought pharma was supporting the public option with those tv ads. they get more customers, etc.
is that wrong? is pharma just for the bait-and-switch measure with no public option?
July 13, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pharma isn't for a public option at all. What they are for is mandates on insurance making it possible for everyone to have their medications paid for with only a copay. Think of how much money those parasites will make if coverage is mandatory for all. They love that idea as do the insurance companies. It is essentially a subsidy scheme for insurance companies and drug makers. Those ads never say they are for a public option at all. They only push universal coverage. Big pharma is every bit as rotten as the health insurance leeches are.
July 13, 2009 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Medicare part Double D!
July 13, 2009 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It sounds like Obama is on the same page. He's considering making them work through the August recess. Momentum is quickly lost, and the R's know it.
July 13, 2009 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Time to fax, or call, or (last resort) email our Reps and Senators. It isn't as hard as you think. Just a half hour effort for your voice to be heard.
July 13, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Congress is talking about "health insurance" reform--NOT "health care" reform. Only universal coverage single payer for all citizens really changes the game. Anything else is fairly worthless.
July 13, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Thanks for pointing that out. Health CARE and Health INSURANCE are rapidly becoming oxymorons.
July 13, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hear! Hear!
Given that single payer is really the only way to go, how is it that the people lose out if the insurance reform bill (aka insurance subsidy bill)doesn't get through Congress? Who has to answer for the failure? Democrats ought to lay the defeat at the feet of the insurance industry, etc... and use that to bludgeon the Republicans next year but they don't have the balls to do that. They will cower in the corner and say there's nothing furhter they can do because of the big bad opponents and their ominipotent Republican allies. Nonetheless, I think we're better off with nothing than we are with a half assed bill like Obama has put forward that costs more than it needs to in order to keep the parasites happy and then doesn't even cover everyone. Better to let it fester even more, regroup and next time come at them full bore with a real plan for single payer.
July 13, 2009 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I continue to not 'get' it. As far as I can reason, the government is already subsidizing health care.
If health care benefits were taxable income, employees would be paying $126 billion/year more in income taxes. By way of the back door employer-provided health care is a $126 billion/year government health insurance system.
What I don't 'get' is the argument - according to Repubs and brain-dead Dems - that letting the government into the health care system dooms us all to a fate literally worse than death.
(Of course, when considering the $1 million/day going into congressional coffers from the health care industry, I do 'get' it.)
July 13, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a sorry argument with no legs, but for something with no legs it sure gets around! That's because the Big Guys who have to most to gain also have the most money. They've managed to pull this off so easily even they must be amazed.
And they must be TOTALLY amazed that they're still getting away with it.
I blogged about this today and I don't think I'll stop drawing attention to it any time soon. If you haven't seen it already, you might want to read Bill Moyers' comment about the Washington Post publisher's private, strings-attached invite to the Insurance guys so they could lobby the gov'mint without the nosy-noses getting in the way.
He also interviewed a Cigna whistleblower, a former insider who knows the ins and outs of the insurance scams. The video is a half-hour long but well worth the time.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html
Just two of many disgusting revelations when it comes to the unbridled, reckless power of the powerbrokers.
Where's "Power to the People" when we need it?
July 13, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
And the most outrageous part of it all is that our august members of Congress and the President know full well that the industry line (which Obama pushed in his commercials last fall saying he opposed "government run" healthcare) is utter bullshit. But because it is their mission in life to kiss the asses of the wealthiest interests, they go along with the charade.
July 13, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pharma and the insurance companies both want a public option, but one with no ability to compete for customers, or one that is delayed in starting until at least 8 years go by.
I agree with Duncan, if we want a health care reform bill that provides a viable public option, with enough teeth to drive down health care costs, we have to force Congress to pass it. And, that would take precious time away from American Idol, so ....
July 13, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think I should expand on this: The only way to force Congress to do anything is to begin right now, all over the country, lining up a viable primary opponent for every single Democrat who opposes or is foot dragging on this bill. Then, we need to begin heavy donations to that candidate, to demonstrate to the incumbent that we will elect a replacement. Who is going to spearhead this national effort?
July 13, 2009 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
July 13, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the point of trying to get a public option you now they will design to fail? You know that is exactly their plan if they have to stomach a public option. Why not just do the right thing and fight those bastards and implement a single payer system as we should have done 40 years ago?
July 13, 2009 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It has been a pretty slick political move as to how Obama and co. never even put a single payer system on the table, so taking it off became a moot point. Now people have just accepted that it isn't a 'realistic' solution to our healthcare problems and have decided to settle for the crumbs of a 'public option' whatever that comes out of committee looking like.
July 13, 2009 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, a classic case of DC Democrats doing what they do best: sabotaging real change while still convincing most gullible citizens that they really, really did the best they could.
July 13, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is meeting with Rangle and Baucus today and is considering asking the leadership to delay the August recess to get this done.
Nothing will lights a fire under a Congress member's ass then them knowing that their Summer vacation will be delayed.
July 13, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Odd thing about the Republican opponents to a public option: they claim it will drive out private competition. Aren't these the same people who wanted to add a "private option" to Social Security? They seemed confident that the private interests would compete quite well in that arena.
July 13, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent point, Smithers.
Consistency has never been one of their strong points, because such ideological consistencies aren't important. All that is important is winning. Government is where the real money is - they know it, and they know that only by having the reins of power can they loot the public coffer. Or put it this way - if robbing a bank from the inside were legal, wouldn't you do and say just about anything to get a job at the bank?
July 13, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Their support is a function of whether the money is flowing toward them or in another direction.
July 13, 2009 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd be worried about rushing something this important through committees. This is too big an issue to get wrong. I have zero trust in either party to not screw us behind closed doors at midnight. We need to know what is in the bill. Our lives may literally depend on it.
July 13, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a fairly safe assumption that most of this policy has been written for years. They're not hammering out the particulars of policy and how things work. They're figuring out how far they don't have to go and what they can get away with. They're figuring out the political implications of those policies and which ones give them the biggest bones to throw.
Rushing things through committee will keep the opposition off balance. The Patriot Act proved that.
Now, who is the opposition? That remains to be seen.
July 14, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whenever a bill is introduced that moneyed interests oppose, they line up on Capitol Hill (or "Capital Hill" ... what's the dif?) with cash in hand to grease the palms of outstretched Congressional paws. The moneyed interests get their way... we get an improved-upon screwing... and the powers that supposedly be moan, "The lobbyists are just too powerful!"
(Well, who the hell is giving them the power? The idiots in Congress of course - in case anyone here didn't already know it).
SO WILL SOMEONE PLEASE POINT THIS FACTOID OUT TO THEM the next time they bleat excuses at us? As if we're somehow going to go away if only they recite the words "The lobbyists are just too powerful!" - over and over and over again.
Dear Congress:
You gaveth; you taketh away. Quit hiding under your desks and do what the people elected you to do. We're not asking you anymore. We're telling.
July 14, 2009 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone keeps asking, "How do we get our elected representatives to vote in favor of the American people? Calls, letters, petitions, PACS, polls, statistics, bloggers, journalists, physicians, nurses, dying patients, whistelblowers, Michael Moore, NOTHING... is getting through to them... What do we do?"
Get mad already, people! If what's been going on doesn't piss you off, then I don't know what will.
Get MAD!
Say it out loud: "We're MAD as HELL, and we're NOT going to TAKE it ANYMORE! Then get together ...in public... with other mad-as-hell individuals and keep on yelling it at the top of your lungs until the spineless wonders pass meaningful health care reform.
Until then, consider us ignored.
July 14, 2009 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Two issues -- financing and a serious and genuine public option, the latter the kind that obviously the blue-nosed Democrats won't accept. The problem with the latter is that it's precisely what's GOOD about the public option, that it keeps medical care prices (and superprofits) in check and puts pressure on MediCapitalism that is what is objectionable. Like the focus on the "death tax" or left "judicial activism" it's just another canard that covers invidious interest and reactionary ideology. Precisely because the basis of their politics is meritLESS, it is that much more difficult. It's not a win/win situation, it's the kind people don't like to face up to, a win-lose situation. And single payer makes that invidious interests and such even MORE uncomfortable, because it is harder to fudge than the public option, which inevitably WILL be fudged in this Congressional term, and with the PROGRESSIVES being too weak and lacking really forceful progressive leadership from the White House, it doesn't look like they will be so good at bringing these issues well-drawn to the public in the next election. Obama may not be as bad as Clinton for progressives, but something from the left will HAVE TO seriously pressure him to avoid him again being the kind of Democrat we have had in the White House w/in the last 40 years. Maybe it really is just like Lucy and the football.
Financing should be less of a problem -- taxing pollution (and maybe certain scarce resources) if done in a very politic way (eg WHO is going to try to oppose a tax on mercury emissions?) there could be enough money raised. This is one of those many situations where the best solution (like alternative, including hydrogen, energy have been for many sectors for decades, and are becoming even more and more) is blocked precisely BECAUSE it is the best solution, and even secular interests don't explain it. We get into the realm of the underground repression that progressives generally have been too unwilling to confront, and are the scourge of the earth
July 14, 2009 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink