Spit Out the Kool-Aid: The Public Option Was Never A Real Option: It Was A Negotiation Tactic

[David Zephyr]

Nearly two months ago, I wrote here that this day would come, that there would not be a public option. And now that day is here.

The use of the "public option" was only a negotiating tactic by Obama to push the Insurance Corporation's already arranged "compromise" through. That "compromise" known as a co-op --- which will be run by a board of insurance executives and a few "public" officials who are in the pocket of the insurance executives --- was always the plan.

The great PR scam will be this: "This is the American Way: Liberals had to give up some things and the insurance companies had to give up some things. Let's all applaud ourselves at our great reform."

One didn't need to be a soothsayer to know this was coming. Anyway, if anyone cares, here's my thread from two months ago which sank like a stone here.

Spit out the Kool-Aid, there never was going to be a government option. The people that own this country will remain in control of this country.

-----------

NATIONAL HEALTH CARE CO-OPTED BY A CO-OP: THAT'S THE RUG YOU FEEL BEING PULLED OUT FROM UNDER YOUR FEET.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5953522

The Insurance Corporations and Big Pharmacy have cooked up a doozey that is sucking Democrats right into their plan to kill the Public Health Option: A National Health Care Co-Op. And who would run the National Health Co-Op? Why the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical corporations with a few purchased politicians to give it an "official seal of approval" with the public.

So our hopes, our struggles for a national health-care public option --- a competitive government-run option for the public --- has been co-opted with a co-op card trick at the last moment.

The Co-0p is to Co-opt the true public plan.

Co-opt: to commandeer, to appropriate or take over.

That's the rug being pulled out from under your feet.

[Cleita]

1. No sinking this time.

Let the truth be said.

[ipaint]

6. Your post number 9 in that thread

is what is starting to happen here today. I saw several threads on the plus side of co-ops.
It's textbook and like you said certainly easy to predict given the history of the last 40 odd years.

I think Sibelius was perfectly aware of her statements and Obama was on board also. This state it, walk it back, state it, walk it back is part of the manipulation along with the vagueness, confusion and frustration it produces. Once this purposely stomach wrenching ordeal is over people will accept anything that has reform in the name.

[David Zephyr]

28. Once again, the people are defeated.

Money trumps people in the U.S. and has since the beginning of the nation. And, what's sad, is that it still sort of surprises me.

[devilgrrl]

2. K & R

:kick:

[mitchtv]

3. I'm stunned

I had "hoped" for more. Rev Warren was a harbinger.

[Recursion]

67. No, Rev. Warren supports taking care of sick people NT

[mitchtv]

77. well, what I meant was Betrayal

and kissing up to the RW and get nothing in return except the bad will of your base (only a defferent issue).

[scarletwoman]

4. Protecting the profits of the business class is the overriding priority of our government.

Profits over people -- it's the American Way!

sw

[sendero]

7. +1

... it really is as simple as that.

[scarletwoman]

14. Yes, it really is as simple as that.

I don't understand why people keep expecting something different -- "hoping", so to speak, that this fundamental principle will somehow cease to prevail if we just elect the right people.

[inna]

66. +1. bingo

nt

[HughMoran]

5. I think some insurance execs are going to be needing some healthcare soon

This isn't fucking funny.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

11. Hey Hugh

All animus aside for the moment you gotta admit folks like David and I were right on just every prognostication during the entire political farce and the following presidential election. Why were so many believing the hype when it really didn't take a crystal ball to see what was going to occur whether in the foreign or domestic policy arenas?

And no none of this is funny and quite frankly I wish that those of us who predicted such things (we were always called negative despite our extensive documentation) were very wrong. There is no solace in being right about these things which affect all of our lives in such an enormous and detrimental fashion.

K&R to you David.

[HughMoran]

12. Let's hope something good comes from this

I don't care much who was right, though I prefer to remain optimistic. If it goes this way, my anger will be directed at the insurance execs and their cronies.

[Taitertots]

8. Obama is already a lame duck

He needs to be on the bully pulpit letting these blue dogs know whats up. Instead of a public option we get an insurance corporation bailout. If he can't do anything, we need to consider who is going to replace him in the next election.

[Cleita]

10. I say Rachel Maddow. She's principled and fearless as well a so

politically savvy. So we would have our first woman President and our first gay President. Too bad she isn't Asian or Latina. That would be a trifecta. :-)

[Taitertots]

15. We need someone who is more mass media friendly

Not to be a slight against Maddow.

We need someone who isn't going to disappear after being elected like Obama. I can't turn on my TV with out hearing right wing bullshit, town hall busters, and tea baggers. Where is Obama? The campaign has only just begun and Obama is no where to be found. Is Maddow going to put herself out there enough to shut these reich wingers down?

[Cleita]

16. She has so far. Why would she suddenly change? n/t

[Taitertots]

34. Maybe that is what we need then

It is a clear failing of Obama when obvious lies about democratic health care reform cycle without opposition. He is just not working the media correctly.

[glitch]

72. I'd work to make that happen. nt

[Fire1]

9. "The people 'who' (btw) own this country will remain in control

of this country." Now, THAT is truth.

[Leopolds Ghost]

58. Technically "that" is gramatically correct for Lizard-people. ;-)

Instead of "who", that is

[David Zephyr]

59. Lousy grammar and misspelled words are the hallmark of a David Zephyr post.

It's been my trademark since 2001. Thanks for the assist, but I should have said "who" even though they are lizard. Great graphics! :hi:

[Fire1]

71. Gotcha! n/t

[Swamp Rat]

13. k&r

[crazy_vanilla]

17. so we were all fools to believe it, then? n/t

[Joe Bacon]

18. David, you told the truth

Sad thing is a lot of folks won't believe you.

[David Zephyr]

27. Feel used? We should.

It is sad. Thanks, Joe Bacon.

[MasonJar]

19. I f Obama keeps up the charade he has started there will be no dems

left. No investigation of war crimes, no public option, no end to war, continuous bailout of banks, but nothing to homeowners, no climate change bill, etc. We will be starting a new party or looking for a new candidate in 2012 or at least I will.

[crazy_vanilla]

21. ditto n/t

[chimpymustgo]

65. This shit has got to CHANGE. (shakes head)

Viewer on C-SPAN - "I voted for Obama because he promised free healthcare for all. Why is Obama so weak? When do the Dems always give in?"

The scales are falling off the believers' eyes. But it's too late.

[MasonJar]

20. I love Barbara Boxer. Wonder if she would run?

[WeDidIt]

22. Then fine, no more anything for the Democratic Party. n/t

[David Zephyr]

52. Obama's next three years will be a failure if he loses his base now.

And he will lose his base over this.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Well notihng will change until we decide to do more than just

complaint

Sadly I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime.

[maryf]

48. So do something yourself!!

Even if its just scream from your front porch, who knows what might happen...

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Oh and one more thing, whether it is the president

what we eat.

Or what we think, it is all manipulated for greatest profit.

And until people wake up to this little factoid, it is truly us vs them, it will not change.

As I said above, don't expect that to change in my life time... at all.

[Fire1]

31. That's why I'm making and stashing away as much as I can

before I retire and gettin the fuck outta HERE!!

[Juche]

25. The public option is already a compromise

It was a compromise of single payer HR676. So we have to compromise our compromise.

[David Zephyr]

30. Yep.

"So now we have to compromise our compromise." How true.

[Pharlo]

70. No, we're not 'compromising our compromise',

We're folding completely and trying to SPIN it as 'compromising our compromise'.

[glitch]

73. Very true. nt

[scarletwoman]

26. Kicking this back up the page. (nt)

[David Zephyr]

51. Thanks.

This will be a real fork in the road for Obama.

[scarletwoman]

56. You're welcome, I really appreciate your OP.

"This will be a real fork in the road for Obama." For Obama, or for those who voted for him?

I voted for Obama for the same reason I've always voted for the Democrat in presidential elections, because he was the lesser of two evils -- McGovern and Mondale being the two notable exceptions, I really WANTED them.

But I pretty much always saw Obama as just another mainstream corporatist politician, dedicated to preserving the status quo. He hasn't proved me wrong yet.

sw

[mzmolly]

29. I just wish we would have started with single payer and settled for a public option.

I hope whatever happens, actually effects much needed change DZ.

[Cleita]

32. That would have made more sense.

It seems that any one who ever had to buy a car would know how it works.

[John Q. Citizen]

37. People's ability to delude themselves is an amazing thing. The Public Option will be forever

a testament to how gullible Americans are.

The good news is that HR676 is being scored and we get a full debate and full floor vote in September. Hopefully some of the people who were fooled about the public option will decide what they really want (instead of being "sold" what they really want,) and will fight for what they really wanted all along.

We should see this as an opportunity to educate people as to why single payer makes the most sense to work for.

[amborin]

41. um, that 's what

K had recommended a long time ago....

and K had expressed dismay that O had not started from that position (asking for single payer and demanding universal coverage), if for no other reason than to start to bargain down from that initial demand

[mzmolly]

42. Forgive my ignorance but who's K?

:shrug:

[amborin]

43. you know

who;

p.k.

[mzmolly]

44. Paul Krugman?

:shrug:

[amborin]

45. yes,

just one 'g'


p.s.: i may have made a horrible mistake

<http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/why-not-single-payer/>

[mzmolly]

46. G-goodness, I thought my spelling was off tonight. ;)

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing.

[HarveyDarkey]

33. Kick for the truth

most of it anyway

[Capn Sunshine]

35. Agree with the premise David,

But there's no stopping the demand. The public option is about to be a cause celebre' because if they give that away, the whole thing will be almost meaningless.

We have the numbers to do this public option, and do it right. Outside of DC the air is clearer and you can see straight.

Just hang with us, remember how we got Obama in in the first place.

[David Zephyr]

50. Hello Capn Sunshine. I wish it were so, but my hope is not audacious.

If there is a co-op, then we will be worse off than we are now. Liberals really need to understand this. Co-Op is socialism...for insurance corporations.

It will be like the "faith" based initiative shit: once it's there, it's there for good.

[Leopolds Ghost]

57. As a populist sort of thing, I would support common-pool co-op insurance

If and only if the private industry is forced to divest health care as nonprofit-only, which can easily happen if (as they claim) it's a money-losing industry.

If it's not losing money then why are they saying it has to be "fixed" by forcing more Americans to purchase existing plans?

Single pay-in, infinite choice of provider plans, funded by bond issues like other pseudo-governmental nonprofits, common pool with multi-payout (Americans who insist on specialty care can pay into providers who offer that, basic care would be pooled to ensure a minimal deductible for basic care and set aside money for indigent care at hospitals, etc.)

Or, we expand Medicare to get single payer, although private industry will probably attempt to hobble it like you have with Amtrak vs. Railroads.

Of course, the current "co-op" proposal is a joke, designed to be run by the industry, like the various "watchdog" groups that oversee the financial sector, such as the SEC and the Fed (which is a model for this sort of thing, being a privately owned public entity - pure mercantilism!)

[Capn Sunshine]

61. Well, the entreaties to deluge the White House are having an effect

Note that an AP Story just crossed the wires; they are walking Sebelius back on her Public Option comment.:toast:

[earthboundmisfit]

36. K&R

Spot on

[jannyk]

38. Kick & Rec(#28)

[progressoid]

39. K/R (32)

[PurityOfEssence]

40. An interesting time for observation and reflection

Maybe it was intended, or maybe it was, as you say, an aggressive bit of negotiation to allow settling on SOME form of piddly progress.

As Sancho Panza said: "whether the rock hits the pitcher or the pitcher hits the rock, it's going to be very hard for the pitcher."

Then there's that old hippie joke: life is like a shit sandwich; the more bread ya got, the less shit ya gotta eat.

Obama has, for good and bad, always been fairly clear about being a middle-of-the-roader. Those who projected great godlike dreams of visionary whatever on him are culpable in their own confusion at this point.

Medicine, Incorporated it HUGE, and the for-profit, everything must be private enterprise ideologues are on a religious quest to crush ANY attempt to take away arenas of money-making. It beggars reason and even basic awareness, and they play for keeps.

Let's just see how this plays out, and let's keep making our voices heard, but it's pretty difficult to REALLY provide access to health care for everyone if one doesn't really try...

[David Zephyr]

54. You know, I use that Sancho Panza quote a lot.

Senator DeMint might have been right: this could be Obama's Waterloo. If he loses his base this early in his administration, the next three years will be a disaster. Karl Rove knew you have to keep the base or you won't get anything done. Well, Rove's clients got a lot of things accomplished in spite of our screaming, because he kept the right's base happy and bullied the moderates.

Obama is at a real cross-roads. I see that Sebellius has spokespersons saying tonight she "mis-spoke". She didn't mis-speak at all.

[PurityOfEssence]

62. Sloppiness is deadly

Just 'cuz someone asks you a question doesn't mean you have to answer it.

There have been a lot of little missteps of this sort throughout, and they play nastily into what will become the Achilles' heel of this presidency: wishy-washiness and careful evasiveness. This translates to deception, which is the typical action of a politician. Since Obama's rise is mostly attributable to a belief that he's "different", being shown to be the same with a vengeance will be taken as a real betrayal by many.

He's been awfully hot at the dice table for an awfully long time, and all sorts of people don't just believe, they KNOW that he's truly on their side and will fulfill their every abstract desire. The problem is that many of these people want different and often opposite things. One of the dangers of being a middle-of-the-roader is that you're surrounded by those who think you're with them, and that can and often does change to being surrounded by the same people who now think you're not.

With an administration based so much on hope and trust and change and unfounded vagueness in so many contradictory things, many will be disillusioned. The whole thing's like this big smeary pastiche of adjectives and feelings; it's some kind of soaring ambient heartwarming confidence that's grounded in full-spectrum wish-fulfillment for all to see and feel. We're fighting a campaign in Afghanistan designed to appease the peaceniks while slaking the blood lust of the thugs. We're fixing the economy by allowing the larcenists who helped the reactionaries to complete Reagan's dismantling of the New Deal to retain control of the system and patch up the old scow for yet another voyage of the dumbed. More Jesus than ever is being crammed into politics, while embracing other fantasists and intoning occasional inclusiveness to the heathens. Clean Coal. (No rhetoric needed there; it speaks for itself.)

Yes, much better than the alternative, but you'd think something would have been learned from the Clinton years.

More than anything else, this is an emotional movement; it's not based on hard-nosed policy or specifics, it's based on feelings. When people start to feel bamboozled, what's left?

I don't want that to happen. I want these cats to realize that sucking up to the reactionaries is never going to work, and it's going to cause defection and disillusion in their own ranks. There's a potential flaw in that line of reasoning, though: it presumes that they really want to take down the pillars of privilege and regulate our neo-feudalism.

It's been a long time since I've used the Pied Piper metaphor, but it bears keeping in mind.

Whether she was just thinking out loud or stupidly revealing the fall-back position (or REAL position, as you and others suspect), it was amateur in the worst way, and that kind of thing is getting to be somewhat fitting for this operation, isn't it.

[inna]

68. +1. brilliant post.

We're fixing the economy by allowing the larcenists who helped the reactionaries to complete Reagan's dismantling of the New Deal to retain control of the system and patch up the old scow for yet another voyage of the dumbed. More Jesus than ever is being crammed into politics, while embracing other fantasists and intoning occasional inclusiveness to the heathens.
...
I want these cats to realize that sucking up to the reactionaries is never going to work, and it's going to cause defection and disillusion in their own ranks. There's a potential flaw in that line of reasoning, though: it presumes that they really want to take down the pillars of privilege and regulate our neo-feudalism.

It's been a long time since I've used the Pied Piper metaphor, but it bears keeping in mind.

i share your sentiments completely.

[maryf]

47. The only option that ever should be: Public (National) Health Plan

Thanks for your prescience, kudos on your clarity and foresightedness, and K&R, of course...

[kentuck]

49. DZ...

If they wanted a negotiation tactic, why did they not start with a single payer plan and negotiate down to a public option?? What else do they have to negotiate??

[David Zephyr]

76. Excellent point and it merits notice.

Hi Kentuck - Obama should have begun with the single-payer plan, let all of the "socialism" screams be attached to that and then, possible punt with government option.

I am a strong advocate for single-payer. I doubt seriously that seeing how corrupt that many Democrats can be, that he could have gotten a bill for that. But the government option is a great step in incrementalized progress toward that goal. The insurance corps understand that which is why they are doing all they are now.

But he should have begun with single-payer and had that debate first.

As you said, "what else do that have to negotiate?" The answer is nothing now.

[Jack Sprat]

53. Credit given for the foresight.

I thought the fix was in after seeing the early cabinet appointments. Axelrod, Emanuel, Geitner, Summers. Then came Eric Holder, who agreed to look forward, not behind us..lol. If it isn't bad enough, nothing has been done to re-regulate a damn thing...the SEC is still a joke. No investigations, no regulating financial sectors, and the only universal healthcare reform is to somehow shift the public funds into the private insurance pool in the same manner as public funds were transferred from the public funds to AIG, Goldman Sachs, and the bankers. Nothing in return.. just rape them and tell them it's all good. What a country!

[inna]

69. +1. "and the only universal healthcare reform"

completely agree with your statement quoted below, except for one minor semantic point: i noticed that the "politically correct" term "health INSURANCE reform" is typically used instead of the term "universal healthcare" (the latter is, apparently, "un-American". :crazy: :eyes: )


"and the only universal healthcare reform is to somehow shift the public funds into the private insurance pool in the same manner as public funds were transferred from the public funds to AIG, Goldman Sachs, and the bankers. Nothing in return.. just rape them and tell them it's all good. What a country!"

[Leopolds Ghost]

55. Am I only one remembers reading how Insurance & DLC crafted Mass. plan to "STAVE OFF single payer"?

The Massachusetts plan crafted by Mitt Romney and now advertised as a "progressive model" (sic)

I was reading about this WAY back when in Time or NYT or somewhere and remarking on how the
industry was now pushing for its own option because they were afraid "otherwise we may get
single payer, and that's un-American, so we need to craft a plan that preserves industry
profits as a first step to fixing the system" or some such. Bush was a lame duck at the
time, remember? And the DLC still ran things on the left side of the aisle (*cough*)

It was crafted in think tanks such as the Brookings Institution (which has become a home for
center-right Democratic free-marketeers and hawks in recent years -- basically big-government
Republicans) BY the Insurance Lobbyists themselves -- and the Dems involved were proud of this,
saying "THIS time we will make sure the industry is on board"

The math was laid out in articles, way back then -- detailing how most people would choose
to buy insurance from existing suppliers if compelled to, and the remainder could be fined
and the fines used to pay for the niche market "public option" for the few who qualify as a
means-tested, private insurance "alternative" -- sort of like CREDO Mobile or those alternate
power suppliers that local power monopolies are required to set up.

It was considered a minor newsworthy item back in 2000 or 2004 (I think)
when Bush was already seen as a lame duck and the Insurance Lobby wanted
to come up with "The only alternative to single payer"

because of the impending retirement of Baby Boomers threatened to lower profits to the point where
the system would be "broken" unless either single payer or forcing more Americans to buy existing
overpriced and undervalued health insurance. The notion was to enable them to increase payouts
to a large cohort of elderly people, not reduce premiums.

Why would the insurance industry lobby to force 50 million people to buy their
EXISTING product if it created DOWNWARD pressure on demand for their product?
The only way "economies of scale" works is if an industry steps up production
of something to MEET demand. Demand controls are much worse than price controls:
while price controls are a (more or less) socialist idea that unfortunately results
in shortages by increasing demand, demand controls force Americans to buy something
from an existing supplier, thereby forcing the price up and impoverishing people further.

[snagglepuss]

60. K & R

[Kitty Herder]

63. K&R

[democracy1st]

64. this admin never even put up a fight

[LWolf]

74. I also saw it coming.

How many will allow this to be spun into a positive "American Way" solution?

I, for one, will not.

[DeadEyeDyck]

75. Well that is like going to a whore house for a kiss

If there is no public option, there is really no public health care program. Just a new czar or something.