Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The "Family Planning" jettison; An Obama "cave" or a deliberate setup?

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
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:07 PM
Original message
The "Family Planning" jettison; An Obama "cave" or a deliberate setup?
Before everyone jumps on Obama for nixing the family planning provision in the stimulus package, think a moment about why it was initially included.

Would it have been nice to have it included? Yes. But did Obama likely consider it a crucial component of the bill? No.

Quite possibly it, as well as other provisions, were placed in the bill with the intent of irking the Republicans. The Republicans have been very vocal in their opposition to this part of the bill, and now it's gone. Also gone is the Republican cover to complain about how none of their suggestions are being implemented in the bill. They highlighted the contraceptives and Obama has nixed them. How very "bipartisan" of him. Now that the Republicans have gotten what they went on the TV and demanded, can they risk demanding more? Can they risk being seen holding up the stimulus when their most vocal demand has already been met? Can they risk being seen to vote against the stimulus in lock-step when Obama has already accommodated their demands in such a "bipartisan" fashion?

So family planning is out, and that's too bad. But contraceptives are such a "sexy" topic that the MSM can't help but talk about them. So they'll get the experts on talking about how Obama was smart to remove this because it really belongs in a healthcare package, and hey, while we're at it, let's talk a little bit more about how badly our nation needs that healthcare package passed....

Brilliant.

Kudos to another DUer who is thinking along the same lines:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8144437&mesg_id=8144658


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nancy Pelosi did a piss-poor job of selling this component when she appeared on George S's show
last Sunday.

Truly awful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. That doesn't surprise me.
Nor does it change my opinion about why family planning was included in the bill.

My God, Boehner couldn't stop himself from marching out of the WH the other day and crowing about FP. But of course he was going to do that. The Republicans are always looking to rile-up the fundies, and I have to think that Obama knows that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. did any other dem do a better job selling it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Maybe they didn't want to be seen defending something they knew was going to go.
If the Obama administration had marked this as a "must save", Dems would have done a better job defending it.

It's good policy, but critics do have a point that it won't be generating jobs or money back into the economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Not that I know of. It was (facepalm) city.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'll say this
Every time I have concluded Obama screwed something up, he's proven me wrong and that he's playing a much longer game.

We'll see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Either way...
There will be many more chances to get this passed and I hope Obama and the House Dems will get it in the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
4. I didn't think it belonged in this package. The funding will come
but not in this package. Smart move if it was intentional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. I think it's a cave
I think it was put in there because it's good solid policy. And I think it's good strategy to load the stimulus package with as much good policy as the dems can manage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Time will tell.
If the administration and Congressional Dems highlight it, it was probably strategy. If they don't and allow Boehner to become emboldened and demand more, it was probably a cave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. I agree with the previous poster that funding will come for this, but . . .
in the meantime, just for the hell of it, we should all email Boner our thanks for trashing birth control. Don't forget to mention how the next kid you pop out will make your welfare payments go up and how bad you feel that you can't get a job or finish your education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Now is the time for Dems to come out in defense of it....
Saying that they recognize the necessity of compromise in order to get the stimulus passed, but that family planning is important policy for a, b, c, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Another alternative: Was thrown in at behest of someone who wanted it there,
and in such a goddamn enormous bill a lot of dumb shit is going to be in there. Passed preliminary oversight because, like DUers, the Dems thought, "Hey, family planning's a good thing, keep it in."

Republicans, not being ideologically predisposed to approve of that spending, say, "Family planning has no business in a stimulus bill." Obama says, "Yeah, actually, in this case you're right." He cuts it from his proposal, because they have a point: this is a stimulus bill, not a random-projects bill. If a project has no stimulative effect, it should be somewhere else. That's just good government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Entirely possible.
And that is definitely how the Obama administration wants this to come across publicly.

But, personally, I have to think that the administration was much more on top of the first major piece of legislation they're trying to pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. I don't have quite the same faith in their oversight capabilities.
Generally speaking, I'm usually more predisposed to believe in incompetence over malice, missteps rather than feints, and institutional flaws rather than hierarchical premeditation. I trust Obama knows what he's doing, but I don't trust that his presence has ended the pervasive, chaotic, contradictory, unsteady, and often bumbling nature of Washington.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
15. Deliberate set-up. He knew full well the Pukes would jump all over it.
Now he can take it out; saying he compromised. The provision needs to be attached to healthcare reform anyway, not the stimulus package.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
16. The Senate would of scrapped this anyway
Edited on Tue Jan-27-09 01:27 PM by Thrill
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. The question is whether you think Obama anticipated that? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Yes. He needed to show he was willing to give a little
and since this was their main talking point. He can give, and come out looking good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
20. Occam's Razor: Obama playing nice and Democrats playing
like wimps.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sohndrsmith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
21. Msnbc has been talking about health care... hats off to you! : )
Well, played. Beautiful.... : ).
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 30th 2024, 08:38 AM
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