In a move that may be shrewd, or may reveal that he is still struggling with the learning curve, President Obama has called for a health care “summit.” Lawmakers of both parties are supposed to get together on February 25 to discuss health care reform in a publicly televised forum. Leading Republicans are saying they won’t attend unless the Dems agree to scrap the work they’ve done already and start over. The White House response seems to say that won’t happen, but it’s not clear.
Steve Benen: “Republicans would be more willing to talk about health care reform if the president agrees in advance to give Republicans the opportunity to kill health care reform.” Yeah, pretty much.
Benen continues,
In the larger context, it’s a reminder that the summit invitation puts Republicans in an awkward spot. If they participate, they’ll very likely lose the policy debate. If they reject the invitation, they’ll look petty and small (even more so than usual), giving Dems ammunition to further characterize the GOP as knee-jerk partisans, unwilling to even have an open and bipartisan conversation.
That’s probably the real purpose of the summit — flush the Party of No out into the open. It could backfire, however.
An editorial at The Economist does a great job of summarizing Republican “ideas” about health care reform. After explaining why Republican ideas are ridiculous, the editorial continues —
But the fact that Republicans’ ideas do not realistically address America’s health-insurance crisis doesn’t mean they would not be able to present them effectively in a big public forum. Mr Ryan, for example, can give an extremely convincing pitch, focusing on market competition and bending down the curve on health-care inflation. Other Republicans could pretend that we can solve our health-insurance problems by limiting malpractice awards. Democrats can explain that Mr Ryan’s plan would hugely increase the number of uninsured and that malpractice reform is insignificant, but in an open, free-form debate, the arguments would swirl indefinitely in a “he-said/she-said” zone of confusion. Democrats may ignore non-feasible Republican ideas, while Republicans continue to claim that their solutions were never tried. This will only exacerbate the mess.
In other words, just the same nonsense we’ve been having, only televised.
The President has offered to do malpractice reform—in fact, he co-authored such a bill with Hilary Clinton back in 2005, I think. This is potentially a massive game of “chicken.” The Party of No wants to kill the existing bills because they understand that if they pass, however modified, it is a victory for Obama.
I think success or failure of the proposed debate may well hinge on how it is structured. A talking heads style free for all, with people talking over each other, won’t accomplish much. Nor will windy recitations of party talking points. Same goes for airy claims v. counterclaims that fall into the he said/she said category, where the “truth” becomes simply a matter of opinion.
But I think it could work if both parties picked their best and brightest horses to present their solutions and to defend those positions under cross-examination by the opposition. Now that could be well worth watching.
Something tells me, though, the Republicans would never go for it.
“But I think it could work if both parties picked their best and brightest horses to present their solutions and to defend those positions under cross-examination by the opposition.”
If each side is allowed to present their “facts,” however challenged by the opposition, then no decernable benefit will be derived from the discussion. The participation of knowledgeable others, where they are permitted to question the “facts” presented, will be necessary to escape the inevitable spin and confusion both sides will employ. How this is to be done, when the facts of the matter are crucial to public understanding, is unkown to me. But without such a set up, the broadly uninformed public will remain so.
Yikes. HuffPo is reporting:
I say “Yikes” for two reasons. One: eleven months ago, I had the same procedure done. Two: this is the reason patients or their families should be allowed to sue for malpractice; the Dems need to watch what they give away.
Things like this need to get way more exposure than they do, but since MSM is corporate owned that’s not too likely to happen. Record profits in the previous quarter and yet they raise rates by 39%? Tar and Feathers are too good for the Health Insurance Industry.
http://www.americablog.com/2010/02/hhs-investigating-blue-cross-of-ca-for.html
This is just a ploy. They have already had their ideas incorporated.
See Ezra: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/five_compronises_in_health_car.html
BTW, why is it that a great chunk of information like this will not become the universal subject of all the talking heads? I know it is more complex than a few words written on someone’s hand, but wouldn’t it let all those superficial blatherers apologize to their audiences for getting all wonky and then fake some sincerity about their jobs?
I think, given his talk to the Republicans, that Obama is continually looking at the endgame.
What has to happen to make the political systems of this country healthy again? We have to end the partisan warfare.
He has to give them the chance to be grownups, to admit that this *is* a very moderate bill with good, conservative ideas used throughout. He has to let the moderate Republican become the people who get things done, because that will make it beneficial to be a moderate Republican. Once it’s good to be a moderate Republican, the wingnuts will be crushed.
If he *doesn’t* give them the chance to be grownups, then the wingnut obstructionists are the ones who are most attractive, and they’ll grow stronger, and the country will be in worse shape.
It’s scary because it’s so obvious, and sensible… but it seems cunning, given our political environment.
I thopught President Obama had already explained to the repugs in the republican convention retreat that he could find no economist either dim or repug, that could go along with thir proposals?
Seems to me that we already know what is going to happen, the publicant’s have already played their cards “this will be Obama’s waterloo”. Nothing will change, this should make the righties look like morons but with the corporate media running interference for big insurance the message will be lost. So as a PR stunt I believe Obama is wasting his time, but at least he is trying something. I still don’t know why Pelosi didn’t try to pass the senate bill, big fucking mistake in my opinion.
Pingback: Tweets that mention The Mahablog » The Health Care Summit -- Topsy.com
I think we saw this show during the stimulus “debate.” They presented their ideas in a working session, the Dems incorporated them, and the Repubs took pride in 100% “no” votes.
The Repubs will come and they will cooperate, weaken the bill, then vote no anyway. Then pat themselves on the back for doing so. They’ll show up because they smell blood in the water. This is a game they know how to win.
I sat through as much as I could take of SarahPalin’s performance the other night. One minute fifteen seconds, I’d had enough she just seems spiteful!
I understand the longing for the “grownups” and “moderates” of the Republican Party to “Come out, come out, wherever you are,” but it ain’t gonna happen.
They’ve had over a year to show how “grownup” and “moderate” they could be. They haven’t. Not once.
If Snow and Collins haven’t, who will? Graham and McCain? Inhofe? The new Republican mix of JFK and ‘James Bond’ in MA – Brown?
Jesus, it’s hard enough to get OUR assholes to not be assholes. And you know old Lieberhimself will go against anything the Dem’s propose. Why? ‘Cause he can (thanks CT, and now you, too MA).
This is all for show. And it had better be a good one, that’s all I have to say…
We’ve already given away 7 slices of the ‘health care pizza’ and now we’re going to negotiate on that last slice? No wonder the automobile business is a mess. Democrats must have been the car salesmen, giving away vehicles to make quota.
They’re so eager to look for a deal to ‘cover their asses (from what, I have absolutely no clue),’ we’ll be lucky to keep the f&*^ing mess we have already.
If it’s really just showbiz, I nominate Stephen Colbert as moderator.
Dave S:
That’s just it – if the House passes the Senate bill, and fixes it via reconciliation, the Republicans lose. So, either the Republicans bring working ideas to the table, and vote in favor of cloture, and get a working bill – or, health care passes without them – “Sorry guys, you had a chance to participate, so stop whining.”
*If* this is the plan, and *if* they have all their ducks in a row, then it’s rock solid either way.
I’m still nervous about the Democrats being able to screw this up… but there is a good path to a win for health care, and *maybe* even a win for moderation and sensibility.
I’m not sure. Obama did a good job of “dunking on them” (Jon Stewart’s term) last time around, and as someone else has pointed out, they really only have two or three “ideas” anyway, so it’s not like the Democrats can’t be prepared and shoot them down.
What am I saying? Obama will be prepared and shoot them down. The Democrats will be cowering under the tables.