The most infuriating part of Congressional Democrats and the Obama administrations stubborn refusal to embrace smart progressive policy, beside making regular people to unnecessarily suffer, is the fact that going with progressive policy would have almost always also been the better political choice.
Ezra Klein has a good take on the trouble Obama has created for himself with health care reform as a result of not making the progressive goal of immediately helping regular people his top goal.
Will this quiet the furor over the waivers? Of course not. That’s not how these things work. But it is a case study of how seemingly sound political choices can backfire. At each point in the process — keeping the 10-year price tag beneath $1 trillion, creating early benefits, minimizing disruptions in advance of the real reforms — the administration thought they were protecting themselves from attack. But ultimately, the waivers required for the disruption created by the early benefits that were needed because the law doesn’t start until 2014 have become perhaps the most effective ongoing assault against health-care reform.
The one glaring problem with Klein analysis here is that there was nothing seemingly sound about these political choices.
The Democrats somehow managed to delude themselves into think voters cared more about CBO scores than actually getting help in the middle of a massive recession, they don’t. Does anyone thinking Democrats would have lost one more seat in 2010 if it was $1.15 trillion instead of $900 billion?
The party also manged to convinced themselves a law would become popular even if it did basically nothing to help anyone for years, it can’t.
If instead the party had been less concern with the CBO score and more focused on the progressive goal of actually helping people, by for example immediately expanding Medicaid, 2010 probably wouldn’t have been as big a bloodbath.





28 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Democratic Party leaders’ response to Jon Walker:
Thanks for the laugh. Spot On
Yep. Nail: meet hammer. Spot on. If I didn’t laugh, I’d be crying bitter tears.
Not to mention the bloodbath that could well be 2012.
The progressives didn’t have the votes. We got what we could get.
x2. And Klein was part of the scam, step-by-step.
For him to now say, “But it is a case study of how seemingly sound political choices can backfire” is absolutely preposterous. All of the supposedly “sound political choices” — which sold out Obama’s progressive supporters — were rationalized and justifed by Klein, Yglesias, Marshall, and others. And they ALL backfired.
And they backfired on purpose. Destroying their own party’s political fortunes is clearly part of the Democratic agenda. (No snark, just fact.)
Um. The point of healthcare reform wasn’t to help people. It was to expand the protection racket that PhRMA exploits in our patent system and to provide government subsidy to providers and insurers.
I can’t tell if constantly missing that critical point is a sort of tongue-in-cheek naivety or not. At any rate it’s a form of deference and civility that has long outlived its usefulness.
You can keep calling it a “mistake,” but I have a hard time characterizing outright malevolence in such polite terms.
EXACTLY!
Neoliberal hacks like Klein bobbed and weaved as they huckstered every last one of Obama’s ACA sellouts. Now Klein sets himself up as a critic? Disgusting, really disgusting.
including the whole point now of this:
evernewecon commented on the diary post Countdown to Netroots Nation, Episode Fifteen: Partying for a Good Cause by Phoenix Woman.
Dear P.W.:
This is preposterously off point but deserves a raised eyebrow.
I actually trust EverNewEcoN will be forgiven for this.
http://goo.gl/eWHaz
IS IT JUST MIGHT HAVE BEEN A CALAMITY, ONE WE CAN STILL AVOID.
And when we take a gene from a crop coding for a pesticide and
insert it in another, you not only generate pest resistance
to the new product but to the defensive mechanism of the
donor crop, and at an accelerated rate.
So we need to structure ambition with the common good.
Hard core capitalism done right.
https://sites.google.com/site/evernewecon
I can go along with what you’re saying. I’ve pretty much been characterizing it that way, myself. I agree that the way so-called “HCR” shook out was NO mistake. It’s a feature, not a bug.
Being “polite” about it does no one any favors. Obama & the pols in Dee Cee are out for whatever payola & favors they can curry by carrying water for the obscenely wealthy & well-connected. Pretty obvious, in fact.
Obviously, Obama didn’t care for the national politics of HCR, because he willfully ignored 70% of the country who at the very least wanted a strong public option. The only political constituency that mattered to Obama was K Street, Wall Street, and the boardrooms of the Health Insurance Industry…and the checks they would write for him in 2012.
Funny how that’s not working out as well as he’d planned.
Obama cares about MONEY not what is good for the country…guys like EK have been carrying the water for Obama over 2 years and they dissed people like Ralph Nader…well Ralph was right! The Progressive C is touring the US and they are stopping near my home…I plan to hear them out and if need be call them out!
Ezra, fatuous tool that he is, may actually see the handwriting on the wall that says O’Sellout may not win in 2012… in which case he’s simply preparing his next pivot point for his career when the Repubs take back the White House.
Obama’s political philosophy biting him in the backside once again…..in his ongoing effort to get everyone to like him and not risk any political skin, he managed to alienate everyone. The GOP doesn’t like him because they understand the term “opposition party” and his own party is aggravated with him because he squandered his chance to create a better system by pandering to special interests and continuing with status quo.
Cue the apologists, who’ll insist what he did was better than nothing(except if your female and living in one of those states where your reproductive health is now threatened by shutdowns of planned parenthood.)Sigh. Have I mentioned how much I despise BOTH parties lately?
sadly, i think the evidence does not support this conclusion. party insiders worked very hard to delude supporters (bogus polling, etc — see cynthia lake) that their insurance friendly approach to reform was what the american people wanted as well as politically “feasible.”
great job, but you are missing the first act….
ACT 1
Focusing everyone’s attention on
CBO scoresan undefined public option slogan was integral to our efforts to wean people off of thesurprisinglystubbornly popular single payer legislation proposal.By focusing everyone’s attention on
CBO scoresa public option marketing slogan (via a $40+ million propaganda campaign, combined with a long term and usually underground campaign of false statements and bad mouthing of single payer “or die” supporters), we were able to successfullymove from different types of public options, to a triggered public option, to weaker types of public options, to no public option but an expansion of Medicare to Americans ages 55-64, until we finally achieved our goals:cloud the actual policy issues involved and con people into either believing an insurance industry friendly reform was the first step to single payer, or better yet that an undefined public option and false claims for universal coverage were the same thing as single payer. Success at this stage allowed us to move to act 2:ACT 2
….
btw, this reminds me of glenn greenwald’s comment from about a year and a half ago:
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/02/23/the-glenn-greenwald-dramatic-reinactment-of-the-health-care-timeline/#comment-90071
Glezilla totally nailed it then, and like Jane, has figured out O’Sellout from the start. Too bad we didn’t know in 2008 what we know now.
don’t feel bad…at the time we had enough of Bush ugh! the Choice was McCain and sideshow Sarah or Obama..he fooled a lot of people…I think we should in the short term push to get progressives back in control of Congress and get Obullshitter out of the WH…longer term progressive in the WH and work like hell to somehow get corporate money out of DC
Anyone who would be concerned with the CBO score, knows it is as phony as a 3 dollar bill.
Total waste of Kabuki.
I don’t disagree with the comments that the healthcare “debate” was a sham and the legislation protects corporate profits, but I think it’s worth noting the other ongoing problem. Too many Democrats both inside and outside DC, mistakenly believe that you just have to point to the appropriate facts and statistics and then you can move public opinion, as if people are little rational computers. You can’t win when you are deluded about human nature in that way.
They’ve even decided they need to put up their own approved critics. They want total control of the agenda out here. Its just a matter of time before “real” dissent ( anything they don’t approve of beforehand) will be labeled as Terrorism and those doing it will be put in camps.
That’s about it. We might have popular opinion on “our” side but Obama is only interested in the Corp. cash.
i only wish (see the missing act 1). but no sense rehashing it all now though.
It should be apparent to everybody by now that Barack Obama has neither the character nor the competence to be President. I find it very easy to believe that he promised Wall Street that if elected, he would betray the Democratic base to such an extent that they would never be a problem again. Whether that promise was explicitly stated or merely “understood” is unimportant. Although I was one of the many millions of volunteers whose efforts succeeding in electing our first black President, I now support his removal from office by whatever legal means, including impeachment. I think we could “persuade” B.O. to resign quietly w/ just 290 House votes, roughly 67% of the House, and w/o a vote in the Senate: Simply state in the impeachment resolution that “no federal funds shall be spent on Secret Service protection for any Federal officer who is removed from office through the process of impeachment.” If he resigns quietly, with his tail between his legs, he’ll keep SS protection and our mission will be accomplished. If he decides to take his chances in the Senate, he risks having to live like Salman Rushdie. That would make one hell of a movie, wouldn’t it?
Progressive policies by Democrats – and by the GOP – are pretend these days.
Today we had Senator Dianne Feinstein amend the Public Works and Economic Development Act to end the ethanol waste of $6 billion a year in subsidy but that bill is unlikely to make it to the president’s desk, so this vote was a freebie with no real consequences. Coburn got 40 nearly all GOP only votes for his similar bill for the same reason.
I don’t for a second agree with Ezra Klein’s idea of what the Obama Administration was thinking, but for any progressive politicians who do think that way, I wrote some time ago why they should do the right thing. You’re going to get hit anyway, so why not catch the pass?
Hell, it was even a football metaphor, and they still didn’t get it.
“… the fact that going with progressive policy would have almost always also been the better political choice.”
The ‘better political choice’ depends on who one serves. That is, everyone knows the Dems will screw it up, so therefore they can serve the insurance lobbyists who come knocking. Then they can blame the Republicans and the nascent (at the time) teabaggers (remember when they called themselves that?)
The point is that politics is not about what’s good. It’s about what deal you can make. The only deal in town is the one that has the huge bag of money attached. It’s no wonder that Obama chose the bag of money, or the power threats, or whatever they finally hit him with that caused him to cave.
And cave he did.