Obama’s Aces in the Hole

[babylonsister]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090720_obamas_aces_in_the_hole/

Obama’s Aces in the Hole

Posted on Jul 20, 2009

By E.J. Dionne


It was not the soaring rhetoric that is Barack Obama’s signature, but he recently offered the sound bite that may define his presidency: “Don’t bet against us.”

There are reasons to believe that his confident words—they were about health care reform, but have broader application—were not the bombast of a bluffer exaggerating the strength of his hand. They reflect the high cards that Obama holds and has only now started to play.

snip//

And with 60 votes in the Senate, Democrats can, in principle, work their will on health care without any Republican support. Obama is bound to make compromises, partly to bring moderate Democrats along. But the size of the Democrats’ Senate majority means they won’t be able to blame the Republicans if health reform dies. This increases the pressure on moderate Democrats to get something done.

There is thus an irony to the game Obama must play. He will continue to speak in bipartisan terms to keep open the possibility of picking off Republicans if they’re needed—Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, already seems inclined to work with him—and because such an approach appeals to moderate Democrats whose sensibilities he must soothe.

The open-to-the-other-side style also helps him hold support from political independents around the country. He needs them to preserve his good approval ratings, which are themselves a form of political capital.

But Obama must simultaneously persuade Democrats that they are not living in the Republican congressional eras of 1995 or 2003—that if it’s necessary, they have the strength on their own to win. This was the implicit message Obama conveyed to Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., to push him to conclude his frustratingly protracted health care negotiations with Republicans in the Senate Finance Committee.

Getting Baucus to move this week is essential to maintaining momentum. If Obama seems likely to win, interest groups will be more forthcoming, his own party will be more likely to hold together, and more Republicans will be inclined to cut a deal.

And that, finally, is why Obama wants to make sure his party bets with him, not against him. His core message to fellow Democrats is that the only things they have to fear are the fears and insecurities bred into them when they were a battered minority. Obama is free of those doubts because he never knew them.

[pinto]

1. Interesting take.

:kick:

“Don’t bet against us.”

[ray of light]

2. I do hope that he's found a way to make an honest man out of Baucus.

My fear is that Baucus's plan will come closer to private insurance protectionism than it does to the people!

[ErinBerin84]

3. Mika on Morning Joe was just asking Doris Kearns Goodwin

about Obama's (gasp!) six point approval ratings drop, and Kearns said "Yes, but who would think that a rookie president would poll so high on personal leadership?" She then said that presidents have to act bipartisan in the beginning, but now is the time for Obama to just pressure Congresspeople to get exactly what HE wants in the bill, since he tried for bipartisanship at the very beginning and at least made the effort. Mika didn't look like she liked that answer, heh. Oh, and Mika's been calling it "Obamacare", as if that will turn people off of health care reform or something.

[babylonsister]

4. I heard that exchange, then read the WaPo article about Obama

'taking the baton' this week. He's doing exactly what Kearns Goodwin suggested. Mika must be distraught. :evilgrin:

[Jennicut]

6. Mika has no brains anyway. Its all over her head.

[Clio the Leo]

7. His personal approval numbers are higher than when he was elected....

..... unless the GOP can find a way to overcome that, they're screwed.


(according to Pew Reasearch)

[MarjorieG]

5. Dems need to be convinced of their failure to reform worse for re-election than obstructing.

[bvar22]

8. I have no doubt that something called "Health Care Reform" will get passed.

I also have no doubt that it will contain something called a "Public Option".

However, the current bill in The House that was scored by the CBO last Friday (HR 3200) that was being trumpeted by Pelosi's Website is woefully inadequate, and more of a gift to Big Insurance than to the American People. It DOES contain something called a "Public Option".

Here are some things Americans should know about HR 3200:

*ONLY 10 Million Americans will be covered by the Public Plan by 2019.
Big Insurance should be very happy.
With the MANDATE that ALL Americans MUST purchase Health Insurance and only 10 Million in the Public Plan after 10 years, they will be raking in the money.
Billions of it will be YOUR Tax Money buying Resorts and Yachts for the Big Insurance CEOs.

If the Public Plan only enrolls 3% of Americans, will they have any negotiating power to drive down Health Care Costs?

The House bill actually increases the number of people who receive coverage through their employer by 2 million (in 2019) and shifts most of the uninsured into private coverage. By 2019, 30 million individuals would also purchase coverage from the Exchange, but only 9-10 million Americans would enroll in the public option, the rest would enroll in private coverage."

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/14/house-bill-comes-in-at-1-trillion-undermines-gop-talking-points/

*Health Insurance will be mandated for all Americans, but Providers will be able to refuse Public Plan Participants.

Provider participation is voluntary – Medicare providers are presumed to be participating unless they opt out."

*The Public Option "should" be about 10% cheaper than Private Insurance.
I guess that is something, but a Publicly Owned Government Administered Plan that is open to ALL Americans could cut costs by at least 25%. (Difference between Medicare and Private Insurance administration).



*Many that are receiving Employer Based Insurance will be locked out of the "Exchange" and forced to keep their more expensive insurance.

"Under the main health bills being debated in Congress, many people with job-based insurance could find it difficult to impossible to switch to health plans on a new insurance exchange, even if the plans there were cheaper or offered better coverage. The restrictions extend to any government-run plan, which would be offered on the exchange.

<snip>

But critics argue that the rules run counter to suggestions from health care reform advocates that an overhaul could provide people with a broader choice of insurance options. The rules, they say, could be especially unfair to some lower-income workers who are enrolled in costly job-based insurance. Also, they argue, the restrictions would hurt the proposed public plan by limiting enrollment."

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/healthquest/for-many-workers-insurance-choices-may-be-limited-after-health-care-overhaul

There are many other details that need to be examined, but the one MOST glaring is the prediction that ONLY 10 Million will be enrolled in the Public Option by 2019. That is minuscule compared to what America is demanding.

Do you believe that the 72% of Americans who are calling for a "Public Option" will be satisfied with this?