Let me start with stating I understand that this will be a controversial diary. However, I ask that I be heard out and I would like to take this opportunity to discuss this reasonably without this devolving into flame-throwing.
I have come to the conclusion that there will be no public option without a major strategic change on behalf of supporters. This is based on my reading of the current state of the discussion in the media and statements by leading political figures.
I have been called a defeatist for even bringing up this possibility. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I believe that this is the realist position. I understand that many here have worked harder than almost anyone in the media to enable real health care reform. And I think I speak for most in saying we are extremely proud of what you have done and recognize this community's accomplishments.
However, I strongly believe that the sooner we all accept that this is the current trajectory, the sooner we can determine a new strategy to knock the current political reality off course (or back on course depending on your perspective).
Please follow me after the jump for my rationale and recommendations.
If we knew there was a dead-end 30 miles down the road, would we continue driving to make sure the map isn't wrong and say at least we made the trip, or would we recalculate our route on our GPS?
For those of you that know the game of poker, you will be familiar with the idea of tells. For those more politically inclined, you are familiar with trial balloons. Well, the tells and trial balloons are out in force, and for some reason many are simply trying to deny them as opposed to reacting accordingly.
My prediction is based on 4 key observations or tells.
1. The President has not proactively mentioned the public option in a public forum for the past week.
He has continued to include it in written statements. If this is THE week, I find it awfully strange that the term public option was not even mentioned in the Saturday address.
2. None of the Administration's public surrogates have proactively mentioned the public option since Monday.
This includes an NPR interview with Rahm Emanuel, Kathleen Sibelius on various morning shows, and Robert Gibbs and David Axelrod on Sunday talk shows. Nancy Pelosi also was unwilling to say a public option was required on State of the Union this morning.
3. This trial balloon floated from the White House last week. You can call it the "walks like a duck" meme.
I know some will write this off a Chuck Todd being Chuck Todd. But he admitted in his interview with Glenn Greenwald that he basically feels he is speaking for the WH, even when he forgets to mention it. It is my opinion that this was directly floated from the White House.
4. The President's original choice for HHS, is quietly advocating around Capitol Hill that the public option is dead on arrival.
We have the person the President trusted the most on health care, actively pushing against the public option. We can not ignore or underestimate the impact that this has within the halls of Congress.
I believe all of these tells, as well as other more minor signs, are evidence that the public option will not be part of the final bill out of conference.
I will readily admit that the House is likely to pass a public option. I will readily admit that the Progressive Caucus states they won't sign off on any bill without a public option. I will readily admit that Chris Dodd is making noise in the Senate.
"There is a false assumption that anything you can work out with a handful of Republicans will be embraced by Democrats in the House, the Senate and across the country. That is totally wrong."
But none of that will impact the final calculus because none of those items has the ability to move recalcitrant Senators off of their paid and bought positions of "No Public Option". All Congressional reporters are stating that conservative Democrats in the Senate are the ones pushing back on the public option the hardest, not Republicans.
In poker, if you see a tell and know your opponents hand has you beat, you have two options. You can either fold, or you can bluff to try to push the opponent out of the hand. Right now, we are doing neither.
Clearly, folding is not an option. While I fully support the efforts pushed here and elsewhere to continue calling Senators and Congresspersons, I simply do not believe this will be enough to save the public option. It will take something much more dramatic.
I see three options.
1. Mass Demonstrations on the scale of the March of Washington or the Million Man March.
I personally believe this would be the most effective way to make our voices heard. Otherwise, the only voices truly being heard are the lobbyists. However, as Markos states, many times demonstrations of this scale are hijacked by other interests and don't have their intended effect. Many have asked why don't I organize one. While that is a great debating tactic, it is actually silly. I am not an organizer and clearly don't have the skill set or audience to be effective. However, I do have the ability to provide the recommendation to a broader audience that may have the appropriate tool set to make this happen if there is a general agreement. However, I view this as the least likely option.
2. Begin building on our strengths instead of focusing on our weaknesses.
The standard plan is to call Senators leaning against the public option and true health care reform. Clearly, this is not having the intended effect. We have clear majorities in both the Senate and the House. As an alternative, we could focus on providing a backstop for liberals and progressives in the Senate and the House. We could attempt to get more Senators and House members to support the Progressive Caucus' bottom line of no public option, no support for any bill. This position has to hold up after conference. This means calling supporters and asking for more, instead of calling opponents and asking for a minimum. Why is the majority voice being muted? It could be because we are amplifying the minority voice through our emphasis.
3. Work unwaveringly to convince the President to issue a veto threat for any bill that does not include a public option.
This is the most dangerous strategy. It is the All-In option. It means the President is willing to put his re-election at risk, but it also tells wavering Blue Dogs and Conservative Senators, you are going down with me. Everyone needs to clearly understand, that a major failure in the first year puts them at risk more than the President. He has three years to recover. They have one year. I would make it abundantly clear the Clinton was re-elected while many Congressman on his side were out of work 2 years earlier. This is not a make friends option. It will cost incredible political capital. But this is the big play. Call their bluff. Who do you trust, the lobbyists who say they will support you enough to overcome mass public disapproval of Democrats, or me, the person who got you elected? Force them to make a decision. In poker, that is usually a winning strategy, but it also can cost you a lot.
Regardless of the option selected, the immediate action the President should take is to call for Congress to remain in session until a bill is passed in both the House and the Senate. Max Baucus and Kent Conrad have slapped the President over and over again. They have both now stated on the record:
We're ready when we're ready.
They must be dealt with. The President must make it clear that he can not be walked over, if, the goal is to have a public option and robust bill. The President should return fire. He should make a clear statement and show forcefulness, letting the Senate know that the idea of him being a pushover should cease NOW:
"I will give you all of the time you need Senator Baucus. But it will be on a time frame commensurate with the urgency of the issue. I am calling for the Senate to stay in session until the Baucus led Finance Committee is "ready".
If the goal is just to pass a bill, this action would be counter productive. But if the public option truly isn't the President's goal at this point, we have even larger issues.
Until we are able to get the public option back on the current path, we will be destined for a watered down bill that will result in higher costs and Democratic demise within the next few years.
These are clearly risky strategies, but remember, if you assume that we have the losing hand at this point, sometimes taking a risk is worth it. In poker there are many times that the only way you can win a pot is by making another more risky bet. I believe this is one of those times.
This is the moment to demonstrate leadership as a party. With Republicans despised, Democrats should seize the opportunity to overcome the long held apprehension about the principles of the ability for the Government to serve the greater good. The can change the public's mindset about progressive principles.
Unfortunately, the message being sent to the public is that there are no progressive principles. If Democrats are unwilling to stand up for the Democratic platform,
Families and individuals should have the option of keeping the coverage they have or choosing from a wide array of health insurance plans, including many private health insurance options and a public plan. Coverage should be made affordable for all Americans with direct financial assistance through tax credits and other means.
what will they stand for? As the old saying goes, stand for something or fall for anything.