Skip to main content

View Diary: Four gutless Dems kill single-payer in California (212 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama couldn't get single payer (14+ / 0-)

    ..these guys can. No excuse. Obama knows goddamn well single payer works best. He went for what he felt he could achieve. CA is in a much better position for single payer to pass.

    If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

    by rhetoricus on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 09:46:40 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Excuses, excuses (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brown Thrasher, atana, PALiberal1

      there are just never enough excuses for why Obama can never seems to do anything to help  or even listen to the voices of the American people, yet seems to be able to spend endless/all of his time  listening to the corporations and the 1% and has done countless things for them, such as crafting one set of rules for the monied crowd (none) and another for the 99% (more persecutions of whistleblowers than all previous presidents combined), showering billions on the corporations with no accountablity and insisting on 'austerity' for the 99%... on a bright note, Obama has made one positive contribution, if indirect, to the American people - the rise of OWS.

      "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
      Platform of the "New" Neoliberal Democratic Party
      Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

      by Sanctimonious on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 11:59:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, for fuck's sake (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Fonsia

        Why is EVERYTHING about what a corporatist whore Obama is? Save us the Naderizing, we get it.

        Yes, Obama should have played hardball like Johnson, strategized with Reed to limit the filibuster before Congress convened in 2009, and then rammed single payer through when he could, as well as Wall Street reform and nationalization of the banks. He took Rahm's advice and tried to find some middle ground, tried to play nice with soulless fascists, and that rookie mistake cost him and us bigtime. We GET it, for the love of God.

        However, Single Payer in CA doesn't face near the kind of hurdles that Obama did. 4 "abstaining" Democrats between us a single payer is ridiculous.

        If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

        by rhetoricus on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 12:10:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, why is nearly EVERYTHING (0+ / 0-)

          Obama does is to strengthen the corporations at the public's expense?! There is only one logical answer that I can think of - because he receives some kind of PAYBACK from same. I don't buy that Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, is a poor hapless sap at the mercy of Congress, so pre-hobbled that he could not so much as lift his little finger to fight for the most important legislation in modern times and his 'signature' bill. Glenn Greenwald pretty well demolishes that assertions (oh noes!! Free Speech alert: Greenwaldite, Greenwaldite!!):

          The weak, helpless, impotent presidency

          As I noted earlier today, there is a newly minted Obama apologist meme that has been created and is being disseminated by Obama-defending pundits far and wide:  namely, liberals are blaming Obama for too much because the Presidency is actually quite a weak and powerless office, and he’s powerless to do most of what liberals advocate.  This claim was articulated by Jonathan Bernstein in response to my post documenting how Barack Obama — by supporting Blanche Lincoln rather than remaining neutral or supporting her primary challenger — likely swung the election in her favor.  I argued that the central role Obama played in Lincoln’s race illustrates that Presidents possess substantial means for influencing members of Congress.  In describing my argument as “ignorant nonsense that betrays a deep lack of understanding of how the government of the United States works,” Bernstein did not bother to address, let alone refute, that extremely formidable presidential leverage that Obama just used to help Lincoln win in Arkansas.  

          As I noted earlier today, there is a newly minted Obama apologist meme that has been created and is being disseminated by Obama-defending pundits far and wide:  namely, liberals are blaming Obama for too much because the Presidency is actually quite a weak and powerless office, and he’s powerless to do most of what liberals advocate.  This claim was articulated by Jonathan Bernstein in response to my post documenting how Barack Obama — by supporting Blanche Lincoln rather than remaining neutral or supporting her primary challenger — likely swung the election in her favor.  I argued that the central role Obama played in Lincoln’s race illustrates that Presidents possess substantial means for influencing members of Congress.  In describing my argument as “ignorant nonsense that betrays a deep lack of understanding of how the government of the United States works,” Bernstein did not bother to address, let alone refute, that extremely formidable presidential leverage that Obama just used to help Lincoln win in Arkansas.  

          itially, this issue arose in the context of the health care debate, when progressive critics were complaining that the Obama White House was doing nothing to ensure passage of the public option.  In response, Obama defenders insisted that the fault lay not with Obama, but with Democratic members of Congress over whom Obama had no leverage.  All year long, they told their readers not to blame Obama for the lack of a public option because there was just nothing the helpless, powerless leader could do.  Except now it is conclusively clear that Obama never wanted the public option from the start — Russ Feingold said as much, and The New York Times revealed that Obama secretly negotiated away the public option in deals with industry representatives very early on in the process.  Thus, critics who were complaining that Obama was publicly claiming to want to the public option while ensuring it would not be enacted were correct, while those who kept telling their readers that the fault lay with Democratic members of Congress — not Obama — were engaged in pure apologia.  

          And here comes the ubiquitous "Nader" reference, when you have no idea or proof of what I feel about Nader; whip out the old and tired  guilt by imagined association.

          "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
          Platform of the "New" Neoliberal Democratic Party
          Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

          by Sanctimonious on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 12:48:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  This is all straw man. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LABobsterofAnaheim

            You're arguing with someone other than me. I never said Obama went for the public option. I said he knows damn well it's the best option, but he tried to do a Clintonian incrementalist strategy to win himself GOP favor, rather than swinging for the fence. Don't quote Greenwald to me, I read him every damn day. And yes, I do think Obama's trying to ride the line about what interests gang up on him, in an era of Citizens United, and I think he's trying to be strategic.

            Listen, it's an election year. It's not about Obama vs. Van Jones, or Obama vs. Alan Grayson, or Obama vs. Kucinich. It's about Obama vs. either Newt or Romney. And yes, the Nader reference is apropos, because you don't seem to understand that now ain't the strategic time to be screaming about Obama's obvious shortcomings, because the alternative is infinitely worse. And if you don't think so, you really didn't learn anything from the Nader debaucle.

            If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

            by rhetoricus on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:05:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  He got a universal health care bill passed. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rhetoricus

          It wasn't easy. It took almost 100 years. For the first time in our history, health care is a right, not a privilege in this country. Once it goes completely into effect it will be impossible to overturn.

          And there have never been more than five or six votes in the Senate for single payer. No strategizing with Reed could change that.

          He did play hardball. He also played smartball. He got it done. He did it against the advice of Rahm and everybody else. The president alone is the prime mover behind the ACA. Everybody, all his advisers, Rahm, Axlerod, everybody, told him not even to try it.

          And in the bill is a clause that says states can pursue single payer if they want it. (As you say, the Naderites have a bit of trouble explaining that.)

          I'm amazed at what Obama got done. Clinton couldn't do it (and he had both houses of Congress at the time), as good as he is. Nor Hillary. Johnson couldn't do it--he tried, and had to settle for just Medicare (which Kennedy had been unable to get), and that was with a congress completely dominated by Democrats. Truman couldn't do it. Shoot, FDR didn't even try (he had to limit Social Security drastically to satisfy his southern Democrats).

          Great Ceiling Cat--Obama accomplished the progressive dream: universal health care. Ten, twenty years from now, Progressives who hate him now will claim him as their native son.

          Enjoy the San Diego Zoo's panda cam!

          by Fonsia on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:04:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Universal coverage my ass (0+ / 0-)

            it doesn't do a DAMN bit of good because it doesn't stop insurance companies from pricing folks with pre-existing conditions out of insurance, but nonetheless legally requires us to carry it. It's complete, utter bullshit that, while it's better than any GOP plan, it can't come near to single payer.

            If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

            by rhetoricus on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 02:08:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually it does. (0+ / 0-)

              Right now you can get into the temporary program if you have pre-existing conditions. Here in California it costs about $450 per month, which is a pretty good price.

              Once the law kicks in, it will be illegal for insurance companies to refuse coverage. And if they try to charge you too much, you'll have plenty of other places to find coverage on the exchanges. Several of those will be non-profit plans.

              I won't have to worry about any of that because I'll qualify for the expansion of Medicaid. It'll be the first time I'll be able to get health care of any kind in about twelve years, as I said below, so I have a rather different perspective than others on this site.

              Enjoy the San Diego Zoo's panda cam!

              by Fonsia on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:37:08 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Insurance isn't care. (0+ / 0-)

            And 10-20 million out completely in the cold isn't Universal.

            Fear is your only God.

            by JesseCW on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:06:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't have insurance. Result: I don't have care. (0+ / 0-)

              In 2014 I will qualify for the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA.

              I'm getting cataracts. I haven't had a cancer screening in twelve years (preventative care will be FREE under the ACA--no copay).

              So I'm looking at the thing from a different perspective than most good progressive purists.

              Enjoy the San Diego Zoo's panda cam!

              by Fonsia on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:28:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Many people do have insurance, and can't (0+ / 0-)

                afford to access care anyway.

                They die easily preventable deaths; you call those who mourn their loss "purists".

                But, if you got yours, I guess it's good enough.

                Fear is your only God.

                by JesseCW on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 09:06:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You didn't read my post. (0+ / 0-)

                  I don't have insurance.

                  Haven't had it for over a decade. And I'm 61.

                  But I'll get it in 2014. Apparently you don't know that there are already restrictions on the insurance companies, and those are getting stronger. The cap on benefits has been lifted already, for example.

                  If those folks can't afford their co-pays, they need to change insurance companies. If they can't get coverage due to pre-existing conditions, they become eligible for the PPIC, which is pretty cheap in most states.

                  And if their insurance companies won't pay for care they need to stay alive, they need to contact HHS, 'cause that's illegal now.

                  I'm done with you.

                  Enjoy the San Diego Zoo's panda cam!

                  by Fonsia on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 11:55:02 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You made it clear that you're happy as can be (0+ / 0-)

                    that you get something out of this bill, and just can't be bothered to hear about those who got fucked over so you could have it.

                    You don't care that millions of poor and working people will get nothing but a tax hike out of this.

                    You realize that 60% actuarial value means the insured wind up paying 40% of the costs, right?  That's the plan poor and working people will get subsidies to buy.

                    That's not Insurance.  It's a fairly shitty discount card.

                    Lifting the cap on lifetime benefits?  That doesn't matter if you're dead because you couldn't afford 300 bucks to find out whether it was indigestion or a heart attack.

                    "Just change providers"?  That's a Mitt Romney answer, a bizarre claim that magical markets will make it better through competition.

                    Your refusal to admit how very wrong you've been demonstrated to be on point of fact after point of fact shows that it's the truth you're "done with".

                    Nothing has changed in three years.  It's the same counterfactuals, the same frustrated hand waving retreat, and the same cheerful disregard for "the sacrifices"by those who think they personally stand to gain.

                    Every day I see people who desperately need oxygen go without because of deductibles as small as 500 bucks a year.  

                    Trying to force poor and working people to buy junk insurance like that just so you can get medicaid?

                    It's wrong.

                    Fear is your only God.

                    by JesseCW on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 08:33:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  BTW as you seek to revise history - (0+ / 0-)

            It forbids states from attempting Single Payer until at least 2017.

            Fear is your only God.

            by JesseCW on Tue Jan 31, 2012 at 08:07:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Unfortunately Obama does listen to (0+ / 0-)

        the public, which listens to the corporations. Most people would much rather watch corporate-sponsored entertainment than listen to politicos, especially left-wing politicos. We love to hang our hats on one poll question that supposedly finds Americans supporting Medicare for all, when looking deeper finds that actually the views of most people are very mixed. If people really wanted Medicare for all/single payer/socialized medicine they would vote for progressives instead of the moderate Dems or Republicans that most prefer, since that's who gets elected.

        "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

        by Alice in Florida on Wed Feb 01, 2012 at 08:52:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site