Put Kennedy’s name on a weakened bill, and you’ll likely be able to break the progressive bloc in the House in two seconds flat when "the Kennedy bill" comes out of conference with the individual mandate but no public option, and progressives are faced with having to oppose "the Kennedy bill." As strong as they’ve been on holding firm in their demands, putting the Kennedy name on a weak bill — and remember, nothing at all prevents this — can only drain their resolve.
[]
With the Kennedy Health Care Plan intact in the bill, there’s no reason the legislative vehicle that creates it cannot also bear his name. But while there’s still a fight ahead about just what will be in this bill, if we’re going to lend Ted Kennedy’s name to something, let it be done in a way that keeps him in the fight to fulfill his vision right to the last, and which keeps his name on people’s lips when they are finally able to take their families to the doctor without fear of financial ruin, saying, "We’re covered by the Kennedy Plan."
Putting Kennedy’s name on the HELP bill means that they can join it with the Finance Committee bill in any way they see fit and still call it the Kennedy Bill. Like they’re going to take his name off of it without a public plan? A chorus of ex-Kennedy staffers like Paul Begala would swell up to tell us how he’d be proud of this form of "compromise."
Then, as Kagro said, it would be used to bludgeon a progressive block in the House who were not only "killing health care," but "betraying Kennedy’s memory."
Kennedy fought for affordable universal health care, not a mandate to bail out the insurance companies. Kagro is right — Kennedy’s name should be given to the public option, not used to push through a bill that obliterates it.
39 Comments
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Advanced search
It would be just like them to split the bill in two (per lieberman), slap Kennedy’s name on the bad half, and then deep six the PO by tabling the “controversial aspects of the deal” for “later consideration”.
dies in committee.
because, even more than wanting universal health care as a basic right, rather than privilage, Teddy believed deeply and truly in bipartisanship. and there is already a long line of republican senators who are testifying to that fact.
Kennedy was instumental in getting the states to set up the high risk insurance pools many years ago. As fate would have it that’s where I ended up. Were it not for him, I would have no insurance…at any price.
I can definitely see these asshole opportunists hanging Kennedy’s name on a dogshit bill and ramming it through before anyone knows what hit them. Very ugly stuff, and it must be stopped.
this is a terrific post Jane, very insightful and staying a step ahead of those who oppose what Kennedy wanted
I think it’s a good idea to get progressives on this immediately, let them know that they should be “appalled” if a bill that carries his name does not include the public option
great post
Sound right, but I’ve already received and signed two petitions in regards to Public Option and the bill having Senator Kennedy’s name attached to it. So, I hope that both of those petitions are altered to speak to your amendment.
Putting Kennedy’s name on the HELP bill means that they can join it with the Finance Committee bill in any way they see fit and still call it the Kennedy Bill.
Precisely. As I wrote yesterday, Congress likes to do the easy things and avoid the hard things. Putting Kennedy’s name on a bill is easy. Living up to what Kennedy wanted is hard. Guess which way they’ll go.
Better check in with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee who are running a petition at honorkennedy.com to name the health committee bill the Kennedy Bill. Jane, perhaps you know someone to call?
We haven’t done anything urging Kennedy’s name be attached to anything.
Not me!
Don’t put his name on the public option either. Wait and see what the public option is actually going to look like first. We are saying “robust public option”, but there is no definition of this. Only put his name on a bill if it is something with which he would be happy. My two cents.
There was a question in one of the comments to one of the healthcare threads asking how Baucus got the power to decide all this.
Interesting article I read in my local print version of the paper today from AP by Eileen Sullivan and Matt Apuzzo about how the stimulus moneys for border security were being distributed. Very busy border crossings, which were high on the list for needed improvements, like Laredo, which has more than 55,000 travelers and 4,200 trucks a day, got nothing. Whitetail, Montana, which has 3 people coming through a day, got $15 million. Baucus and Tester were lobbying Janet Napolitano on this. Jon Tester boasted about this in an April news release. Napolitano’s home state of Arizona got $199 million for a crossing that also wasn’t high on the list.
Wish I had a link, but it’s in my print paper.
I think what she means is that it would be good for those petitions to be altered regardless of whose petitions they are.
Exactly.
Perhaps the widow Kennedy will speak to the propriety or impropriety of naming ANY bill that does not reflect her husband’s specific goals for health reform.
I know, I was referring to the same one that DanRockRidge mentioned. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee. And for the second one: I got that wrong. It was actually a petition to send to Feinstein to speak up and get on board with the public option.
I hope I didn’t get suckered and blow it by signing on to the one from Progressive Courage.
I’m totally for a strong public option, but I have to wonder why Kennedy didn’t come out strong for it before he died. He expressed concern about his replacement being named sooner, but he didn’t exactly plead for a strong public option.
Or did I miss it?
“TeddyCare.” It’s simple, easy to remember and with a cute teddy bear logo, would be a marketer’s dream.
A name means little. It’s the content. This is like getting worked up over the actual flag. It means nothing it’s a piece of cloth.
Baucus and the craven Blue Dog Caucus joined by the New Democrat Coalition are certain to do exactly as Kagro and Jane suggest – Attach Kennedy’s name to a bill that is nothing but a gift to the Insurance Industry and dare everyone not to vote for it.
IMHO, they’re working on doing this very thing at this moment. What a great opportunity for them. Make a horrible bill and name it Kennedy.
This must be nipped in the bud.
LOL, I can almost visualize a bunch of teh stoopids facial expression after reading that. And can almost hear their heads exploding.
I’m seeing it as a discussion here about how to market, which I believe is important. We want to get true health care reform. Marketing is important in order for the message be heard.
Teddycare should be nothing short of medicare for all.
PW already beat you to it. See her cute logo for Tedicare
excellent point.
Kennedy actually favored true universal coverage through Medicare for All, not the watered-down “public option” even if it does come with the “robust” label. It would be the most shameful and craven act of political opportunism to slap the name “Kennedy” on the public option.
In Boston, local coverage — Motorcade winding its way through Boston streets now, people lining the streets and holding their flags. Each time the hearst turns a corner, people start clapping, waving their flags, and then applauding more as the cars with the family come by, windows down, some family members visible, waving back, Caroline, grandkids, the huge family rolls through the capital and by Fanueil Hall — bells ringing.
aw – i’m so sad to see him go.
What’s the difference between Ted Kennedy and Maurice Schwenkler?
One was a reckless Democrat who will be planted in Arlington, and the other is a reckless Democrat who was planted in Denver.
And here’s where we need to turn the “Senior Bill of Health Care Rights” back on the Repugs. Ask them why only seniors deserve such a “Bill of Rights”. Note that many of the illnesses that Seniors confront are based upon things that should have been dealt with decades before they were eligible for Medicare. Point out that Senior quality of life is dependent upon the health coverage they need when in their middle-age..if not earlier.
Yeah, it is sad.
On a totally different topic (nothing WHATSOEVER to do with your post GW),
PLEASE DON’T FEED THE STUPID.
K. Thx.
Kennedy is the one who “slapped his name on the public option”:
He also kept single payer advocates out of his weekly meetings when he was crafting the bill…as you well know.
Motorcade approaching the JFK- Kennedy Library, where there will be a memorial service. An Honor Guard of all services will apparently take the casket inside. Local tv talking to former staff from Ted’s offices — “cream of the crop,” understood to be working for “the best Senator” and many went on to service US in various positions, diplomats, Party leaders, agency officials.
“It would be the most shameful and craven act of political opportunism …”
Ah ha!
Apparently, Paul you are unfamiliar with my patented “method” of accurately anticipating American History?
It goes like this: 1.Look at the “situation” in question. 2.Look at the “players” involved. 3. Imagine the worst possible outcome, under the “circumstances”. 4. …Well there is no number four, ‘cuz you’ve just accurately predicted, more or less, what will happen.
You can bet on it.
You will “win”.
You will be right and you can tell everybody that you told them so.
Unfortunately, experience has shown that there is little or no satisfaction which attends this exercise.
But, there it is.
(I think this predictability arises from America’s fundamental “Exceptional-ism” and antipathy as regards paying any attention to history. Whatever the cause of the underlying “pattern”, statistically, it is damned close to 100% accurate.)
DW
Thanks for the info, Jane.
How about we leave his name off it completly so it lessens any political implications of his name? What happens if it’s a weak public option and it has his name on it? Also, it would quite the shinny object for the right to use a fodder to feed it base.
Honor Guard now removing casket to take into the JFK Library — family members have left their cars to go inside, waiting. Total silence in the crowd. Families follow behind the guard.
as you well know, Jane, the resolution that you cited was so weak as to be essentially meaningless. (From the same article…)
Kennedy has co-sponsored a resolution introduced by Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and 26 other Democratic senators … purely symbolic…The resolution does not specify what form the public plan must take.
Trying to pretend that Kennedy spent his last months fighting for a “public option” is “shameless and craven”. Kennedy was, ultimately, a deal-maker, and with a President who was making backroom deals with PhRMA, AHA, and AHIP, and who didn’t want single payer on the table, Kennedy simply had neither the time nor the energy to effectively act as an advocate for the policy that he favored — and the result is the truly awful bill that emerged from his committee.
The HELP committee bill is not something that Ted Kennedy would ever have allowed to happen had he not been sick — it is, in fact, a reflection of how sick he really was for the past six months.
LBJ pushed through civil rights and the voting rights legislation after the assassination of JFK. Both acts where to further the rights of people denied constitutional protection and due process, at the state level.
Due process and rights afforded corporations as a result of the 14th Amendment’s ratification, which addressed the issue of citizenship, i.e. Dred Scott, now is directly pitted against the life and liberty of every American.
Jefferson and Madison wanted restrictions on monopolies and corporations. They did not want corporations to have the same rights as living people. The monied interests in health care will seek to perpetuate their way of doing business just like the Kind of England, figured he could!
Since one’s health is intrinsically attached to “Life,” healthiness is a right! Health insurers who have operated under the guise of Not for profit are really tax exempt corporations, abusing a legal opening under subsection F Exempt Corporations of the IRS Code as it interacts with public charity laws at the state level.
Senator E.M.K. was my senator for many years. I did not agree with him on many things. I believe Senator Kennedy in death will enable President Obama to deliver liberty and justice for the American people, from corporations and monied interests surely as LBJ pushed through Civil Rights Legislation and Voting Rights Legislation, after the assassination of JFK, to address the inadequacies of the 14th amendment, which addressed Justice Taney’s decision in Dred Scott which in essence found; slaves where property, not entitled to constitutional protection, hence the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain Scott’s case.
The suspension of logic required to rationalize Taney’s decision in Dred Scott vs Sanford, is again being exhibited in the health care debate. To argue that one’s health is not related to one’s “Life” and believe it is not a right, is as inane as to believe that “individuals are property.”
Dred Scott’s denial by the SJC to due process and to petition his government, was for the protection and benefit of slave owners who relied on uncompensated enslaved labor. Like Scott, health care reform should not be about protecting tax exempt corporations who exercise legalized discrimination under the color of law, while being considered ‘Public Charities, ” for tax law purposes. Health care reform is about protecting people form corporations who exploit law for profit, at the expense of Liberties and Live’s of Americans.. Senator Kennedy understood this!
you guys are killing me with this stuff. how the hell can I stay starry-eyed when you keep dumping this reality on me?
It is a reasonable comparison to suggest that those who argue that universal access (not “insurance”) to health care is too “expensive” (for that is the crux of the “can’t afford it” crowd) are very like those who opposed ending slavery in America (and in the rest of the world) on economic grounds.
A similar suspension of logic and moral rectitude was required of the Supremes to hold that money equals free speech …
the measure having been voted out of teddy’s senate health committee should become the law of the land, no more and no less. let those who stand to object, obstruct or obfuscate be warned: you will hear us in your next primary when we vote against you!