Dems hedge on healthcare (www.thehill.com)

[caligirl]

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dems-hedge-on-healthcare-2008-04-23.html

By Manu Raju
Posted: 04/23/08 08:17 PM

Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult.

It is still seven months before Election Day, but already senior Democrats are maneuvering to lower public expectations on the key policy issue.

In the back of their minds is the damage done to President Bush’s second term by his failed attempts to change the nation’s Social Security policy.

For some senators, the promises made by Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) outside of Washington may not match the political reality on Capitol Hill.




“Healthcare I feel strongly about, but I am not sure that we’re ready for a major national healthcare plan,” Schumer said.

Schumer said he would focus “on prevention above all and cost cutting until we can get a national healthcare plan.”

“You don’t want to rush and do something and do it incorrectly,” said former Sen. John Breaux (D-La.), who helped negotiate the Medicare law.

Congressional Democrats have set smaller goals on healthcare next year, like an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which has been repeatedly vetoed by President Bush. But passing broader proposals aimed at insuring greater numbers will more than likely have to wait, they say.

Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.), a Clinton supporter who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, said “the money is not necessarily there right now” to enact the plans and said calls to end the war in Iraq might consume Washington’s attention. The healthcare proposals are a “really good start,” he said, but any promises that the next Congress would enact the healthcare plans “at even the beginning of next year to mid-next year would really be political talk at this point.

“I hear on the campaign trail, ‘This is what I’m going to do,’ as if there is not a Congress here with feelings and experience on this issue,” Meek said. “I think it’s important that everyone takes that into consideration and that this is not a kingdom, this is a democracy.”

[papau]

1. feelings and experience on this issue"? - read that as owned by the insurance companies & agents

[dflprincess]

2. I am not impressed with either Clinton's or Obama's health insurance plans

so my expectations can't get much lower. But I wonder if Schumer, etal have any idea how big an issue this is for a lot of people and announcing that nothing is going to change anytime soon is hardly going to help voter turnout in November.

I gather the insurance industry must really be shoveling money into candidates' (for all offices) campaigns.

[slipslidingaway]

5. Most likely these statements will not get much air time so most

people will be unaware of the lowered expectations, besides what are the choices in November.

:(

My feeling is that if health care was an important issue voters would have backed someone who was at least advocating for sweeping changing and willing to bring the plan directly to the people.

:shrug:

Also I believe that health care costs in the not too distant future will have a large impact on our economy and we should be looking at the whole system, not pieces here or there.



"But I wonder if Schumer, etal have any idea how big an issue this is for a lot of people and announcing that nothing is going to change anytime soon is hardly going to help voter turnout in November."

I agree with you that the Dems should not play up the issue of lowered expectations prior to November, although in a way, they already did IMO.

We get what we vote for :(

[dflprincess]

6. I think health care is a big concern for peope but,

a lot of people still get their news from the MSM. If a person isn't plugged into the internet (or is, but isn't a political junkie) they're not going to hear all the candidates positions and they're not going to hear just how many people are worried about health care. Those who protect the status quo in this country depend on this isolation - and write the rest of us off as activists nuts who can be ignored.

[slipslidingaway]

11. BINGO! The MSM is a barrier to change...

both with issues and candidates and like you said unless someone is connected they do not realize the extent of the media manipulation, I certainly did not.

And to clarify the statement below, it was more directed at the people who do pay attention on forums such as this one, it was pretty clear that the party did not want certain topics discussed.

:(


"My feeling is that if health care was an important issue voters would have backed someone who was at least advocating for sweeping changing and willing to bring the plan directly to the people."

[Fresh_Start]

3. this is the cowardly democratic party we

are all so familiar with.

[dflprincess]

12. It's not cowardly

It's bought and paid for by big campaign contributions.

[Fresh_Start]

14. I stand corrected nt

nt

[dflprincess]

15. Actually I should have been clearer

In this instance I think our alleged representatives are not being cowardly (though at other times they are) in this case they're just following the directions of their corporate masters.

[Fresh_Start]

16. I understood

I still think its cowardly that they don't stand for their constituents...but realize that they are mostly following the will of big money

[slipslidingaway]

4. Sad but not surprising to hear there is no money and that

a major change is difficult. So sorry we would like to, but we can't.

It was pretty obvious that the Dems did not want to discuss certain issues during the debates, single payer health care was one of those issues. The other candidates started from an already compromised position on health care and now the ground work is being laid to compromise even more.

:(

The three videos below are about 7 minutes total and Kucinich makes some interesting points.


Kucinich..."What's lacking is political leadership..."

"Des Moines Register Q & A : Health Care : Kucinich
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PcMb9SDbZ8


Kucinich on Health Care and Prescription drugs 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv8wkh4FMUo

Health Care
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOB0f3I1AXk


Kucinich has been consistent on this issue, he brought the issue of single-payer health care to the 2000 and 2004 Democratic Platform Committees, but the idea was rejected.

As he has said many times this is a fight within the Democratic Party.


When will the Democrats start truly advocating for a sweeping change to the system? Not in 2000, not in 2004, no in 2008.

From your article...

"...Making sweeping changes to health care issues often takes several Congresses to work through. For instance, a bill to create a drug benefit under Medicare passed the House in 2000 and 2002, but didn’t land on Bush’s desk until late 2003..."


For a more in depth discussion of a single payer plan see the interview in this link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=50402

[Armstead]

7. Maybe Schumer and Meeks ought to tell their candidate to stop running on it then

One reason Obama's plan makes more sense is that it is not (overall) mandated. ifg anything stalls healthcare reform, that's going to be the poison pill.

Maybe Hillary (promise them anything) ought to respond to her supporters downplaying of her plans too.

[OzarkDem]

9. Obama's is the plan preferred by private insurance companies

Their lobbyists helped write it.

Between federal subsidies to buy private insurance, little regulation and no caps on insurance premiums, Obama's plan is a boon for the private insurance and pharma companies.


Clinton's plan is less popular because it gives consumers a choice between buying from a heavily regulated private insurance pool (w/caps on premiums of 5-10% of income) or buying from a federal public/government insurance plan like Medicare.

Insurance companies don't like Clinton's plan, it regulates pricing and coverage and forces them to compete with a federal public insurance plan.

[caligirl]

13. Hillary's plan was heavily written by insurance co lobbyists on her

campaign staff. And another thing, as an RN I resent the lack of room at her table for the best patient advocate and least self serving, the RN.

[OzarkDem]

18. Wrong candidate; that was Obama's staff full o' lobbyists

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-04-15-obama_N.htm

[OzarkDem]

8. Hillary will push them to get something done

Her past experience on health care issues and the detailed policies she's developed for her campaign are more than enough evidence she'll not settle for weak, half measures.

She also knows the urgency in confronting the problem now, before it gets out of hand and does major damage to the economy.

I would much prefer her pushing reform through Congress than Obama.

[ellacott]

10. Health Care Reform was never going to move quickly

I was never impressed by any of their plans. You can't have universal healthcare and for-profit insurance companies. They insure every person in the country and still have terrible, life threatening care. Neither plan addresses insurance companies denying coverage for certain tests, resricting days in the hospital, the number of consultations allowed and other tools they use to cut costs.

Kucinich was the only one that had it right. Until you take the profit out of healthcare you aren't doing anything.

[rinsd]

17. HR 676 has 89 co-sponsors right now. That's almost close to half the House Dems.

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00676:@@@P

[slipslidingaway]

19. k n/t