Kennedy Historians: It’s False To Conclude Kennedy Would Have Ditched Public Option For Compromise
Since Ted Kennedy’s death, it’s been widely asserted that one of his greatest regrets was that he turned down a health care deal with Richard Nixon. Having learned this lesson, goes this line, Kennedy would have wanted Dems to sacrifice mightily for a compromise with Republicans this year on health care — perhaps even giving up the public option.
But several Kennedy historians have now told us in interviews that this is a severe oversimplification of history that shouldn’t lead us to that conclusion at all.
The assertion was perhaps made most aggressively by Steven Pearlstein, who wrote that Kennedy’s “greatest regret as a legislator” was “his refusal to cut a deal with Richard Nixon on health care.” Pearlstein said Kennedy would have wanted liberals to “quit fuming about all the compromises forced upon them” and instead “make the best deal you can get.”
The claim has been echoed far and wide by pundits, Dems, and Republicans alike. Recently ABC’s George Stephanopoulos said that “Kennedy the compromiser” would likely have advised fellow Dems to ditch the public option.
It’s true that Nixon and Kennedy negotiated over how to do universal health care — Nixon wanted to do it through private insurers; Kennedy through the government — and that both sides ended up walking away from the table.
But the notion that Kennedy “regretted” his failure to cut a deal with Nixon is largely bogus, according to Adam Clymer, a former Times reporter and the author of “Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography.” Rather, Clymer says, Kennedy’s regret was that the differences between both parties were unbridgeable, making agreement impossible and losing a historic opportunity — not that his side had failed to give up enough to get that agreement.
“Kennedy was sorry that they didn’t reach an agreement” and that both sides “never reached closure,” Clymer told our reporter, Amanda Erickson. He dismissed the idea that Kennedy regretted not giving up enough: “That’s not the same thing at all.”
Clymer also disputed the relentless focus on Kennedy’s willingness to sacrifice. “He was always anxious to reach an agreement,” Clymer said, “but that didn’t mean any agreement.”
Dr. Janet Heininger, who interviewed Kennedy extensively for the Kennedy Oral History Project, said the two historical moments — each with different proposals and public moods — are not remotely comparable. She said the parallel is too tortured to conclude much of anything, let alone that the lesson is to “compromise with Republicans now.”
“I don’t think that’s what he would have wanted us to take from it,” she concluded.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I’d like to hear from some of his staffers. I’d guess they would know better than anyone else.
Republicans lying about health care reform? Shocked, I say. Shocked!
Republican strategists were at Arlington spitting into the open grave before Teddy got there, and they’ve been dancing on it since after he did.
Who’s suprised?
So the senator who championed Medicare-for-all would drop the public option??
/facepalm
Patches, there is always the niggling Medicare for All angle…
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/what-would-kennedy-want-government-run-health-care-key-to-both-of-his-final-efforts/
Aren’t his memoirs due to come out later this month? Perhaps we can find out then exactly what he thought.
Already with the fighting over this? Who cares what he would have done. He’s gone.
Greg:
Back on Aug 27th, you referred to Stephen Hayes as Dick Cheney’s “hagiographer”. Today, you refer to Adam Clymer simply as an “author” of Ted Kennedy’s biography.
According to a NYT review (hardly a conservative echo chamber), Hayes’ book provided a “rich context” on Cheney, and says that “a tenet of journalism is that you show the readers, you don’t tell them, and Hayes does that well.” The review, of course, has its criticisms, but certainly not that Hayes was worshipful towards Cheney.
On the other hand, Clymer’s book tells us that Kennedy “towered over his time”, was “one of the greats” of the Senate, and “wise in its workings”. He also reminds us that Kennedy “chang(ed) the lives of far more Americans than remember the name Mary Jo Kopechne.”
My question to you: Do you have the slightest idea what the word “hagiographer” means?
And there’s nothing more important to know about the public option than the “right” answer to this question.
No wait, what does Charlie Rangel think about the tax increases that will be necessary to pay for it? That’s a better question.
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/09/something_new_on_health_care_ultimatums_from_the_president.php
Ambinder with important news.
There is another lie out there about Ted Kennedy backing a compromise with Bush on Medicare Part D. Jed Lewison did an excellent job of debunking this in a video montage.
http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002089/
uhhh Scott, NYT had Bill Kristol writing op eds for them for a while. When you quote from NYT, you have to specify if you’re quoting OpEd’s or an actual journalist.
Baby Huge, the public option savings estimates were somewhere around $150 billion in savings. Remember that close to $1 trillion CBO estimate on the HELP bill, and remember when they included the public option in it it dropped down to around $800 billion?
“# quarterback | September 1st, 2009 at 02:04 pm
…Who cares what he would have done. He’s gone.”
Compassionate conservative personified.
Maybe we should ask Cheney what Kennedy would have done since he can somehow predict things without any actual proof?
“”"mike from Arlington | September 1st, 2009 at 02:22 pm “”"
Ding ding ding. We have a winnah!
Let us go the other way.
Pass a bill that removes all Federal funds going to Private Health Insurance companies, and also requires them to cover all people, regardless of their medical histories, or how much has been spent on treating them.
That will drive the Insurance rates sky high, and the public will get sticker shock, and be ready for Single Payer.
KISS. Kill the Insurance Scammers, with kindness. Make them cover all, with no funds from the Federal Government,and let their avarice take care of the rest.
We have to let things get worse, before people revolt against the Insurance Racketeers. We could pass such a measure with a majority of Republicans backing it. When the people get sticker shock, the Republicans’ fingerprints will be on it, so they will be in no position to defend the status quo.
As things now stand, the odds are greatly against getting a real reform bill passed, so why not take a step back in order to reset the public attitude about the Insurance Sharks.
Republicans will do and say anything to kill health care. Watch this video of Hannity and guest claiming that Democrats care more about Kennedy’s vote than they do about Kennedy himself.
Just vulgar!
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2764
For heaven’s sake – Kennedy wrote a letter to the pope about this and said that his life’s work was getting universal health care for Americans. A cardinal read the damn letter out loud at the gravesite.
It was his dying wish that America have public option.
Oh well, if it was Ted’s dying wish, that changes everything . . . how?
What I want to know is what Mary Jo would want. What do you suppose her dying wish was, compassionate liberals?
Actually, I’m with quarterback on this one. (pukes a little)
Kennedy is gone – and while I hope that’s a wakeup call to the Dems in the Senate, it’s not something I’d “use” in some way (and Dems aren’t really). If it gives them some backbone in reminding them he has been fighting for a form of a public option since the 60’s, then great. But you don’t push an agenda on it. You have to work with what you have, and while I think Kennedy would have fought vigorously for a public option – as a compromise from single payer – it doesn’t change what we have.
On the flip side of that…it would be f***ing fantastic if Republicans would stop blatently lying about what he would have wanted. Universal Health Care was the goal of his life – and he said so ALL THE F***ING TIME. He last introduced a “Medicare for All” health care bill – a single payer plan. To say anything other than that is a disgrace to the man, and the decades he spent serving in public office and making this a better country.
mike from arlington, I’m sorry I haven’t been clear enough in the past: I think you and yours are liars so don’t bother quoting what savings Dear Leader is promising. He also claims he favors market solutions and that this won’t end up in a single-payer system, but he says the opposite when he has a friendly union crowd. And I believe his unprecedented pressuring of the CBO is well-documented.
@Baby: thanks for admitting that you’re nothing but a troll. You have no interest (or capability, more than likely) in any sort of intellectual back and forth. Your sole interest in being here is to irritate and outrage. So, you’ve made your point….why don’t you do all of us a favor now (and probably the world), hold true to your principles and go Galt?
Schroedinger’sCat: guess which observation I am hoping for?
I am looking forward to seeing the Employee Free Choice Act get moving. That will be a hoot explaining to you folks why that one doesn’t catch on.