An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Obama Will Not Push for a Public Option (Guest Voice)

Obama Will Not Push for a Public Option

by Jon Wells

In a move recognizing the sober facts of political reality, President Barack Obama, according to Politico, is shifting his strategy on health care reform, including not insisting on a public option. It will enrage his liberal base, who flew into a tizzy when HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius floated the idea of the public option as a non-essential portion of health care reform. The President and his advisors are gambling it’s a face-saving move that will endear him more to the political center, who has been abandoning him in droves, leading to a 45% Rasmussen approval rating and a 42% Zogby approval rating.

With the shift, Obama is making a politically savvy triangulation reminiscent of the Clinton era. The question will remain whether the hard left in the House and Senate, along with their activist support groups, will reluctantly go along or explode in anger. I don’t know which way that particular fight will go, as it seems the public option is the Holy Grail for many on the left, a non-negotiable and essential piece of health care legislation that for many, including Rep Barney Frank and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, is just a rest stop on the highway towards a single-payer system.

With this move, it may turn out that Pres. Obama will become the George W. Bush of the left – excoriated by his base for “selling out to the center” and failing to move many opposition hearts due to his previous stances. At this stage he lacks the deftness of Clinton to nimbly move policy positions without upsetting large portions of the American voting public.

As for the left, the President’s shift indicates that opposition to the public option is real and politically viable. It’s no fluke that the poll numbers for Obama and the Democrats have tanked as public opposition to the current health care reform bill hardened. It might serve as a wake-up call to the left that their precious public option might not be as widely loved as the national Democrat-skewed polls have led them to believe.

In terms of leadership, it still leaves the Congressional Democrats in a bind. Obama’s move, while shrewd for his own personal political fortunes, has left his party without a clear path of action. They can oppose him at their own peril in the eyes of the political center, or they can hold fast to their liberal base and risk a fight with not only the public but the White House as well.

Will the President’s resolve stand in the face of his own party? I can’t answer that, but I must acknowledge that this is by far the best move he could have made strategically. How this will affect the larger Congressional game is up to the Democrats in the House and Senate.

Jonathan Wells is a 28-year-old husband and father who lives in Ohio and has a day job in the microbiology field. He notes that he tends “be conservative in most of my views, but by no means do I bear blind allegiance to a political party.” He stresses that he is open-minded and encourages “any civil disagreement (or uncivil agreement) any of you would care to express.” He likes to make people think – and does so on his blog Wellsy’s World. As he does in the above post — which is cross posted from his blog. Guest Voice posts do not necessarily represent the viewpoint of TMV or its many writers.

  • HemmD
    I don't believe there are enough votes without the public option.
  • Silhouette
    What, did Rahm wake up with a horse's head in bed next to him? lol...

    MedMob really does have a lot of punch eh? Or is it just that Obama's boys got gelded? My money's on the latter if the public option fails..
  • elrod
    More substance-free "centrist" analysis. The public option does not poll poorly at all. Independents have soured on Obama because the economy still stinks, not because they hate the public option. If they disapprove of Obama on health care it's because he hasn't stepped forward with specifics for ANY plan - public option or not.

    There is literally nothing to be gained politically from abandoning the public option. Obama and Democrats will not pick up a single vote by abandoning it. They WILL, however, stand to lose many votes in the Democratic base if they fail to pass it - or something very much like it.
  • DaGoat
    It seems to me the right tends to believe polls saying the public doesn't like the public option and the left believes the ones saying they do. Personally I believe the polls saying the public doesn't understand the whole issue very well, and much of that is because the actual "plan" is still so poorly defined. Although there is plenty of pontificating from both sides, I haven't yet heard a good description of the public option and how it would work from any Democrat leader. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just that it hasn't been articulated well.
  • DLS
    Though the childish and developementally defective proponents of the current effort will react in predictable ways, the best thing that could be done right now involves the latest cliche' from the Washington-centered chattering classses and their camp followers and useful idiots elsewhere.

    "Press the reset button."

    Sadly, it's almost certainly going to be worse than that. [sigh]
  • DLS
    "I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just that it hasn't been articulated well."

    Moreover, not only the proponents but the legislators themselves (like Conyers) have spoken or written about not reading the legislation that is being proposed (almost all the time, the House bill and its amendments).

    That only adds to the concerns of the public that things are inept as well as out of control, generally.
  • casualobserver
    Absolutely, DaGoat. The only explanation the liberals can come up with for months and continues today in this blog that Demcare has been defeated by a couple of radio personalities, a couple of Rep congressmen and a couple of protestors........all 32 of them saying "mean and nasty things" about Demcare.

    Now take that against a common sense check.........if the Dems had something people really and truly wanted, the people were given a straightfoward honest explanation of it and the Dems were perceived as honest and trustworthy, do you believe for one second that 32 people could derail it with some "mean and nasty" commentary?

    Of course, not.
  • DLS
    "the public option"

    Challenge to those Dems and libs with pretensions to adulthood -- again:

    Strip (remove) everything else from the legislation and have a straight, up-or-down, vote on this if you truly have faith in it and in your view of the public's view of it.

    Meanwhile, in the world, there's already talk among some Dems that I heard about today of some kind of (different, less controversial or inept form of) incrementalist strategic choice to replace the universalist "public option" strategy. (The alternatives have always been there, beginning with expansion of the less-controversial "safety net" approach, leaving all children and eventually everybody for later, as is logical.)

    Don't be surprised or too upset [chuckle] if the Dems start over -- even though I doubt they'll admit failure.
  • DLS
    "the actual 'plan' is still so poorly defined"

    That's been a progressively worse characteristic of the behavior in Washington all year. Kids playing...
  • DLS, I actually agree with you on that. I would like to see a pure "opt in to Medicare at any age" bill. It's simple and easy to explain. No qualifying, portable and relatively inexpensive. Would you like to buy into Medicare before age 65? If so, you can, at any age and for any reason. Prefer your private plan? Keep it.

    I do think either everyone should be able to pay it in pre-tax dollars, or no one should. Level playing field. Oh, and eliminate any limits on the ability of Medicare to negotiate relentlessly for lower costs -for doctors, hospitals and drugs.
  • mattreedah
    i'll believe this "shift" when i see it. Obama often gets credit for being moderate when he doesn't ever do or support moderate positions.
  • DLS
    "I would like to see a pure 'opt in to Medicare at any age' bill."

    That's not what the "public option" is, not quite, not yet, but that is what they really want, and your idea is more bold as well as more honest (i.e, it is better) than what the Dems are doing now or just the essence of it.

    "I do think either everyone should be able to pay it in pre-tax dollars, or no one should. "
    That leads me to another example the Dems might try instead. Transparent, risky, but it's there.

    If there's a restart of this effort, some other incrementalist measure will be tried, and among those I've listed would include expanding the scope of Medicare. Leaving aside the poor and children (the idea being to take the easiest incrementalist steps to universality as the strategy, leaving ordinary taxpayers last so they'll demand they become benefiaries, eventually), a revisitation of a Clinton idea perhaps might be tried (though it would be, as with the "public option," obviously transparent as an incrementalist takeover strategy):

    "Would you like to buy into Medicare before age 65?"

    Specifically, Clinton appealed to those many who currently have obsolescent views about retirement, and who want to retire eariler than 65 (the opposite of reality and how entitlements should be set up); he said that Medicare should be available to retirees (people) beginning at age 55 rather than at 65.

    It goes against reality (retirement entitlement ages should begin at 70 or beyond now). But --

    Do you remember? Hell, Obama could have Charming Billy himself out campaigning for this.


    http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/07/us/clinton-pr...

    http://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/18/us/clinton-pu...

    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=...

    http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan...


    * * *

    "Deduct "insurance" (pre-payment) costs? I'd say, why not all health costs? (GOP, where are you?)
  • matt, it's YOUR opinion that ditching the public option is "moderate". I disagree. My belief is that any pandering to greedy health care profiteers works AGAINST the public interest, not for it. That is not moderate. It's corporatist extremism.

    The CEO of United Health received ONE OF EVERY $700 spent on health care. That.Is.Outrageous.
  • DLS
    Obama has been allying himself with the extremists. This is one reason the Dem effort is hurting now.

    There's nothing wrong with abandoning the "public option." The public increasingly opposes it as well as the effort in general. The only big question about the nature of the opposition is how much truly is specific to this and how much instead is more general, given the record of the lib Dems this year.

    Not only is abandoning the public option moderate, but it is commendable on the basis of public opposition (for such good reasons) alone; moreover, it would be not only moderate and sensible but smart and welcome if abandonment were accompanied by real reform of the existing system "in exchange." Revival of this or other incrementalist measures is possible at any time it is propitious.
  • DLS
    OK --

    What's your bet on approval of the public option?


    Do y'all remember the Iowa Electronic Markets? They provided "betting" on the candidates last year.


    http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres08...

    http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_Pres08...


    Well, there is "betting" on the public option, too.


    http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd....
  • Silhouette
    Hey, do any of you guys and gals think there are paid bloggers and posters working 24/7 spamming sites such as this with anti-public option rhetoric? lol...

    So many Medmob/GOP bots, so little time.

    Guess what? 70%, yes, that's 70% of the american public wants the public option....

    Reality is so harsh at times...
  • DLS: The public increasingly opposes it as well as the effort in general

    Huh? From yesterday's poll:

    Extremely important: 58 percent (41 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
    Quite important: 19 percent (35 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
    Not that important: 7 percent (12 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
    Not at all important: 15 percent (8 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
    Total important: 77 percent (76 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
    Total unimportant: 22 percent (20 percent in June 2009 NBC/WSJ poll)
  • DLS
    The reality is this. The support is faltering, and the opposition is growing in strength. Note the strong opposition, greater than strong support, for the health plan. This is even true when the public option is looked at separately. Note that it retains support overall, and is the core of the plan that should be taken away from everything else and voted on separately.


    "Obama's health care plan — 48% favor it and 51% oppose"

    Favor strongly, 25%
    Favor only moderately, 23%
    Oppose only moderately, 10%
    Oppose strongly, 41%
    No opinion, 2%


    Continue working on those bills this fall and make relatively minor changes before passing final legislation, 25%

    Continue working on those bills this fall but pass final legislation only if major changes are made, 28%

    Start work on entirely new bills that would not be ready until some time next year, 25%

    Stop working on any bills that would change the country's health care system, 20%

    No opinion, 2%


    Which would make you feel more secure, the Obama plan, or the existing system?

    Current health care system, 52%
    Obama’s proposed system, 44%
    No opinion, 4%


    PUBLIC OPTION

    Favor, 55%
    Oppose, 41%
    No opinion, 4%

    but --

    Favor strongly, 27%
    Favor moderately, 28%
    Oppose moderately, 11%
    Oppose strongly, 30%
    No opinion, 4%


    http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/09/02/...


    Will Obama save this foundering S.S. DemCare? Or on September 9 will he be a lib Dem figurehead?
  • mw
    I am glad the President is finally going to be speaking out on health care reform. We are well overdue to hear from the President on this issue. It has been quite a while since his major health care reform speeches on June 15, July 17, his major health care reform press conference on July 22, his heath care reform town hall meetings in Wisconsin (June 11), at the White House (June 24), North Carolina and Virginia (July 29) , New Hampshire (Aug 11), Montana (August 14), Colorado (August 15) and maybe a few other major speeches and media events that I might have missed.

    This time the President will be telling us what he wants to see in health care reform now, as opposed to what he wanted to see during the campaign, or David Axelrod's chain-mail missive of August 13 outlining in detail what the administration expected to see from health care reform then.

    Speaking of which - I am doing my part. I have been diligently forwarding David Axelrod's chain-mail to every e-mail address I can find as he requested me to do.
  • Silhouette
    DLS, do you go to a bar to poll the citizens of a town on drunk driving? Are you going to a MedMob astroturf gathering to poll the "citizens" of the US on how they feel about health care. Hit the streets pal and do some polling. Find out how many people 'LOVE' paying huge premiums and having to ration grocery money to afford to do so. Find out how many people know a loved one who was bankrupted or died because they were denied coverage [google "claims adjusters"]. Poll the real americans everywhere. 70% of them [probably more in actuality] would rather eat dinner than pay health premiums to some yacht-owners.
  • Father_Time
    You know, I really love the Obamas. By now they are probably wondering just what in the heck they have gotten themselves into. I just want to hold them in my big strong arms and protect them from this insidious republican public onslaught.
  • Leonidas
    I don't believe there are enough votes without the public option.


    I know there aren't enough with it.

    In the words of Dr. McCoy: He's dead Jim.
  • Leonidas
    You know, I really love the Obamas. By now they are probably wondering just what in the heck they have gotten themselves into. I just want to hold them in my big strong arms and protect them from this insidious republican public onslaught.


    Don't forget to sing Kum Ba Yah while you at it.

    No denying its a tough job, especially for a rookie of limited experience, but thats why you don't put in people who can't hack it or who feel its above their paygrade. Are some criticisms unfair, sure, same with Bush, same with Clinton, but it comes with the job.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC