Just Cuz You're (D) Doesn't Mean You're Gettin' Re-elected, Congresscritter.

[ElboRuum]

For all the flap about Obama preparing to start to begin to drop the ball on health care, there seems to be one obvious point that doesn't receive nearly as much voice here on DU. In our system of government it takes two to tango a good idea down the garbage chute. Obama is only one half of that pair.

Congress is the other half. Now granted, bagging on Congress isn't nearly as sexy as penning righteous screeds about Obama's failure to address the point, but it's just as necessary. As far as I'm concerned, the Dems in Congress, if they were so inclined (which they apparently aren't), could force this issue by championing the public option. They have not.

It's a fact. If the country wants a public option (it does by a wide margin), but your distinguished (D) Congresscritter appears to be in someone's pocket, then what we need to do is threaten the jobs of those who are coming up for re-election in 2010. No satisfactory public option, no 47th consecutive term. Let's face it, ducks, it's the only thing they respond to. Hold the numbers in front of their faces, as well as a pink slip, and dare them to continue on this shabby path.

Personally, I could give a rat's ass what the Democratic Party's agenda is as a whole, you can shove the DNC and the DLC and any other "leadership" council that may exist. We support them and elect them, and if so motivated, we can crash down their little house of cards. As Frank Herbert penned in Dune, "He who can destroy a thing controls a thing" and without the support of the left, the Democratic Party becomes what the Republican Party is now, a hollow husk, a fart in the wind. It's about the people's agenda, not theirs, and every couple of years or so, when we should be reminding them of that. But typically we don't, preferring to measure our political advantage by number of seats rather than the quality of those sitting in those seats.

It's just not enough to be a Democrat anymore, you have to MEAN it. If they don't, we should find someone who does.

[avaistheone1]

1. I am ragging on all of them from top to bottom.

[Jennicut]

2. Congress is the main problem here imo.

There are many conservadems that just might as well be Rethugs at this point.

[HopeOverFear]

5. I agreed with Bill Maher when he said last week

that Democrats are the new Republicans.

[ElboRuum]

10. I saw that too, and as depressing a statement as it is...

...I can find no fault with it.

[avaistheone1]

3. Obama has responsibility in this too.

I don't thing Reid would remain in his position if Obama did not approve of how Reid handles things. I also don't think Max Baucas would be managing the health care debate in the Senate Finance Committee if Obama did not want him there. Last but not least, Obama did not invite single payer advocates to the White House Consortium on health care, and only due to great pressure were they allowed an invitation at the last minute. So I think criticism of Obama as well as many other Democrats is justly deserved.

[ElboRuum]

8. Exactly. However, Obama's job is not immediately threatened...

...and that's part of the problem. Plus, his numbers are high. But I think that, due in no small part to the fact that for the past century we've seen the Presidency become the "elected kingship" that was the purpose of the separation of powers in the Constitution to prevent, we tend to be first critical of the king and forget that the king can only be held accountable so far and, in our zeal to hold the king accountable, the aristocracy often gets a pass.

The fact is that 2010 comes before 2012, and while we should continue to exert pressure on Obama to do what we want, pressuring the legislature to take the leadership role with much greater fervor than we have should yield much better results.

Just for the record, I can't disagree with anything you said, however, politics being what it is, what we see is often only half the picture. We are assuming that political pressures endemic to Washington are NOT taking place when we overblame Obama and underblame Congress, and I categorically reject this idea. While "smoke-filled backrooms" may be a metaphor better suited to a time where smoking was more socially acceptable, the metaphor is apt to what still goes on as a matter of course. It's the stuff you don't hear about which tends to guide policy.

[izquierdista]

4. Holding their feet to the fire

Here's a great group that is getting results: http://change-congress.org/

I hope they have Blanche Lincoln (D-Walmart) in their sights.

[Autumn]

6. That is the point

I have reached. They can no longer take my support for granted.

[WI_DEM]

7. how does anybody here know Obama is going to drop the ball on health care?

[ElboRuum]

9. No one knows the future before it is the present...

...however, I've consulted the Magic 8-Ball and it says "Signs Point to Yes."

Seriously, now. Obama's track record with truly progressive ideas hasn't been particularly spectacular up to this point. After watching the back and forth between single-payer advocates and the administration, not to mention the death/rebirth cycle of a public option of any sort, it has all the earmarks of legislation which, if passed, will do nothing more than reaffirm the status quo with perhaps a little lip service paid to regulating the industry with little, if any, real teeth behind it. We aren't going to get the public option unless we exert pressure, and that's just the size of it. Without that option, any health care "reform" is a dropped ball. Insurance companies have no reason to compete with each other without a public plan to compete with.