The kill-the-bill caucus

[BzaDem]

If Republicans take control of Congress in 2010 due to progressives killing healthcare reform, progressives will become completely irrelevant. Obama will completely sidestep them and negotiate directly with Republicans. He'll have to -- they'll control what comes to the floor. That's what irrational progressives (who "won't vote" for anything other than a Medicare option) don't get -- there are many more votes in the center than in the left or the right, and as Clinton showed, presidents aren't afraid to go where the votes are. If progressives want to resign their majorities, there are plenty of Republicans to take their place as far as Obama is concerned. It is up to them. Either healthcare reform iwth no public option now with the possibility of passing it in 2011 (with expanded majorities), or welfare reform/tax cuts in 2011 (with a Republican majority).

[villager]

1. "In order to someday maybe have power, the Progressives should proceed with utter powerlessness"

I'm guessing you don't mean that in a Taoist way, do you?

[BzaDem]

2. Your framing is wrong, but the basic sense of that quote is absolutely correct.

I would dispute that the progressives are currently in a position of "utter powerlessness," but other than that, your sentence is spot on. The reason progressives don't have as much power right now is that there aren't 218 of them. By passing universal healthcare without a public option, the 2010 election might add significantly to the number of progressives in Congress. But by failing to pass any healthcare reform, not only will there not be more progressives, but the current progressives in safe districts will be completely powerless. Not only will they not be able to write any part of any bill (as they can write significant parts now), but they won't even be listened to by Obama. Obama would have no reason to even meet with them. A 10 minute meeting with them would become a 10 minute waste of Obama's time, because progressives would actually be powerless to influence any part of any bill.

[notesdev]

3. If we can't get a bill

that hasn't effectively come right off the desks of industry lobbyists (and we can't), one must ask how much power we ever had to begin with.

Gotta admit
I'm a little bit confused
Sometimes it seems to me
That I'm just being used

Go back and listen to the whole album, it is remarkably current for being 30+ years old.

[BzaDem]

4. If you think liberals are powerless now, you haven't seen anything yet.

Just wait until 2010 comes around without a healthcare reform bill.

[Hardrada]

5. One of the reasons why capitalism must be eradicated.

[BzaDem]

6. Good luck with that.

It's amazing how those with your attitude don't realize how much their actions push the country permanently towards the right.

[villager]

7. so, the left is to blame for the right, instead of the right?

Again -- while I appreciate your willingness to discuss/engage -- I'm just weary/wary of this whole "blame the left" cant. It's kind of Democratic apologetics, really, for repeatedly caving in to the right...

[BzaDem]

8. No one is caving anywhere.

If the progressives had 218 votes in the house, and then they still didn't pass the public option, then yes. Democrats would be caving. But progressives don't have 218 votes. They have far from 218 votes. That means that blue dogs control whether we have a bill. And many blue dogs would be much happier not to have any bill than to have a bill with a public option.

This means that the farther progressives go in opposing healthcare reform, the more they strengthen and empower the right. If they go all the way, the Republicans will go all the way and take control of Congress in 2011.

The correct way to push for progressive goals is to try as hard as one can to elect more progressives. It is not to defeat the best reform we can get because they failed to elect enough.