Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Joe Conason: Healthcare Didn't Have To Go This Way

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 03:39 PM
Original message
Joe Conason: Healthcare Didn't Have To Go This Way
Healthcare didn't have to go this way

Obama gave away the store on this crucial issue. It's time to take it back

By Joe Conason

Sep. 04, 2009

Achieving humane and affordable healthcare in America was never going to be easy, even with an audacious new president and large majorities in both houses of Congress. Compromise between the Democratic Party’s diverse representatives -- let alone with the tiny handful of Republicans who actually care about the need for reform -- was always inevitable. And when the moment for compromise arrived, the result was certain to disappoint many of the president’s most ardent voters, who cherished his campaign’s promises of change. But the mundane grind of making legislation need not have been quite as painful as it is today, when progressives feel betrayed, and Democrats feel deflated.

The essence of President Obama’s problem can be found in an anonymous quote, attributed to a White House official, that appeared on the front page of the New York Times last Wednesday. “It’s so important to get a deal,” confided the unnamed aide, that the president “will do almost anything it takes to get one.” Such desperate confessions of politics as usual, which have appeared in dozens of such remarks in the press over the past several months, not only serve the president poorly but damage the fresh brand that he brought to Washington after his triumphant election last year. They are the residue of an ill-conceived strategy that has left Obama politically vulnerable, attenuated his connection with loyal progressives, and blurred his most important message.

That message was Obama himself, of course -- meaning what he represented and what he meant to accomplish. From the outset of the 2008 campaign, the rationale for his long-shot candidacy was that he stood firmly for a set of principles in policy and governance and against political business as usual, as well as a style of politics that emphasized citizen activism. He would drive the corporate lobbyists away from Capitol Hill, the White House and the federal agencies. He would insist on transparency and integrity in conducting the people’s business. Above all, he would pursue the public interest forthrightly rather than inch forward triangularly and incrementally.

Perhaps none of these happy promises was likely to be fulfilled, and perhaps that was something Obama and his campaign aides always understood. But as the new White House came to terms with the realities of Washington, they seem to have thrown off their original images and ideals insouciantly -- as if unburdening themselves of unfashionable baggage that embarrassed them in the big city.

Nowhere has this fundamental mistake been more visible than in the effort to reform healthcare. From more than six decades of struggle over the question of universal coverage and cost control, the Obama team must have known that they would face enormous opposition. They should also have known, from the ugly mood of the Republican campaign during the final weeks of the election and the partisan history of the past 15 years, that chances for bipartisan agreement were minimal. And they ought to have realized that the energy of the progressive movement, expressed in their own campaign, could become their most formidable weapon in that battle.

-- By Joe Conason

more here...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/09/04/conason/index.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. Which is why others have succeeded so brilliantly in the past in securing health care reform
Edited on Fri Sep-04-09 03:53 PM by frazzled
I honestly wish all the arm-chair pundits would volunteer to give it a go themselves for a week. Let's see how far they get.

Everybody is buying into the same conventional wisdom: that somehow if Obama were just more (a) passionate; (b) steely; (c) prescriptive; (d) name your adjective.

Conason seems to think Obama promised up to leap tall buildings in a single bound, driving all the lobbyists out of Washington in a fell swoop on the day after inauguration. Well, he didn't. He said it would be hard.

I am not saying we cannot be critical of the way he's been doing things on this front. But I don't think that if he were it would make a damned bit of difference. This is like trying to slay Goliath with a stone.
I'm critical myself ... but I'm not willing to capitulate to the Mighty Wurlitzer, to the conventional wisdom of the media (even Joe Conason's conventional wisdom) ... because it is even more defeatist than the situation we're currently facing, and it's not helping things a bit.

I've tried to do my small part: arguing with my Congressman's office to get him to join with his fellow Progressive Caucus members (sheesh, he's even on the Black Caucus); going to the health-care vigil; signing the petitions; keeping myself informed. What I'm not going to do is start (a) giving out advice on how to move an incalcitrant Senate; and (b) listening to conventional wisdom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I wonder if Obama agrees with FDR here, "I agree with you. I want to do it. Now make me do it."
When progressive leaders approached him with a wish list of reform programs and liberal legislation, he nodded. "I agree with you, I want to do it. Now make me do it." Although Roosevelt biographers consider that story apocryphal, it expresses a truth of political history that remained salient from the labor organizing of the Depression through the civil rights, antiwar, feminist and environmental movements. For a president who wants reform and change, citizen agitation is an important instrument of power, not an obstacle to deal making.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/09/04/conason/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The social security bill that FDR passed was very weak, but it was a step
We've gone through that history before: the original Social Security bill left out agricultural workers and many other groups; it didn't provide for disability; it reached only a segment of society.

But it laid the groundwork for legislative improvements over the years, to create the system we all (well, except the wingers) admire and depend on now.

I want the best possible bill ever ... and yes, Obama has explicitly said "make me do it." But if he ends up with a less than perfect bill at this moment--but one that has all the structure we need to build on-- I still have the hope that we can get the rest done in my lifetime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. I do not disagree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Many others have.. Just not Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
4. Truth to power. More voices like this needed in the WH, not lobbyists turned staffers.
Happy karma to one and all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-04-09 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
5. Conason thinks the president shouldn't admit to what everyone already knows?
That he stands to lose face if he doesn't get reform passed? I dunno--maybe Conason thinks that more would have been accomplished had Obama acted uninterested? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
7. Kicking for those who missed this excellent piece. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democracy1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
8. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
9. Well written piece that I completely identify with
key sentence for me -

"But as the new White House came to terms with the realities of Washington, they seem to have thrown off their original images and ideals insouciantly -- as if unburdening themselves of unfashionable baggage that embarrassed them in the big city."

Insouciantly is a brilliant description - blithe unconcern. And it happened so rapidly, as if to say - "you didn't really believe all that idealistic we're-gonna-fight-for-the-public-interest-crap, did you"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's the sentence I read out loud to my husband. nt
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 12:05 PM by polichick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hieronymus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-06-09 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
12. Excellent piece by Conason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC