Did Obama “Campaign On The Public Option”?
Ever since Obama claimed to The Washington Post that he “didn’t campaign on the public option,” people have been slugging it out over the quote, with some arguing he accurately represented the spirit of the campaign, and others denouncing it as a straight-up falsehood.
Ben Smith, the gang at First Read, and Sam Stein, all of whom followed the campaign closely, concluded that he was basically right. Stein read through more than 200 campaign dispatches and found scant mention of the provision.
Think Progress, John Aravosis and others called out the President for fibbing.
My take: If you adopt a strict, literal interpretation of Obama’s quote it clearly stretches the truth. It was part of his plan, and he did mention it at times during the campaign — so he campaigned on it, even if he didn’t campign on it extensively. What’s more, he repeatedly declared his support for it this year, meaning he campaigned for it as president.
That said, it seems obvious that Obama didn’t actively seek to dissemble. It’s more likely that he chose his words inartfully. He probably meant to repeat his frequent claim that the public option wasn’t central to his campaign, either for president or for health care reform.
Indeed, the full transcript of his comments shows that he followed up by repeating a formulation he’s used frequently in the past: “I think it is a good idea but as I said on that speech on September 9, it just one small element of a broader reform effort.”
The really noteworthy thing here is the unwillingness on the left to cut him any slack for what clearly could have been a mere slip-up. People are so irked by the mixed messages that came out of the White House about whether Obama really wanted the public option that they’re much more in the mood to adopt the harsher interpretation: That he actively dissembled. Which is something the White House might keep in mind for future fights.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
He would prefer to have the Public Option. He never said that he had to have it, and that he would not sign a bill that did not include a Public Option.
I think the anger burst through not because people thought he was lying, but because the categorical nature of the comment–”I didn’t campaign on a public option”–finally ratifies the fear that’s been building since that egregiously inept trial balloon this summer: he’s NEVER really considered the public option important.
As to how he campaigned, apart from the inartfulness, he’s also attempting a parse of Clintonian proportions.
As I wrote yesterday on Kos, candidate Obama absolutely ran a campaign that included a “public plan” or a “public option” as a solid element of his health care reform philosophy, as Sam Stein expertly documents. There is no way he couldn’t have done that, as it was also a key component of Hillary Clinton’s plan.
It is true that he did not make it a central element of his stump speech or other public remarks. The reasons I see for that are simple, and twofold:
1. During the primary, there was no reason to do so. Most dedicated primary voters would already have been aware that there was very little daylight among the candidates’ health care plans. All the candidates were looking for ways to distinguish themselves from each other, and they ended up pounding away on the mandate, from both sides, which took up all the oxygen. When you get into that situation, where you may actually be getting some good traction, you want to be forceful and consistent, and you tend to trim your sails, and avoid bringing up other big elements that will not provide you any kind of leverage in your daily battle. The candidate can stumble in trying to explain it, or he may even open himself up to unexpected attack. Obama’s overstuffed stump speech was on the long side anyway, often more than 35 minutes.
2. Once he won the nomination, he had to change his strategy to take on McCain, and that meant veering toward the center in a bunch of areas (remember the fun FISA days?). Highlighting your plans for establishing a new government-run health care bureaucracy was probably the FIRST thing Axelrod crossed off the list after Obama clinched the nomination. Obama instead hit McCain effectively on his own woefully inadequate health care plan. (Ironically, he attacked McCain for advocating big cuts in Medicare payments, and for his desire to tax “Cadillac plans.” Politics can suck a lot.)
Obama didn’t “campaign on” a public plan, because he didn’t have to. IT WAS A GIVEN.
This is a complete non-issue. His statement could be taken as he didn’t campaign on it when the reality is that he maybe made it 10% of his total health care pitch. Why quibble about 10%?
good stuff, along, thanks. I think it crystallized a lot of things people were angry about, some of it perhaps not involving obama.
and yeah, Liam, that’s true — whether he campaigned on it or not he never declared it was an absolute must.
“Whether he campaigned on it or not he never declared it was an absolute must.”
That is not correct:
“[A]ny plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans – including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest – and choose what’s best for your family.”
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/obama-demands-the-bill-i-sign-must-include-public-option.php?ref=fpa
yeah, I remember that one, sbj…they argued that the “must” applied to the “exchange” and that the construction was inadvertent. make of that what you will…
Do any of you people have a clue as to how legislation gets passed?. A bill with a variant of the PO was passed in the House. One with any sort of PO, was not going to get passed a filibuster in the Senate.
No matter what President Obama did or said, he was not going to change that reality.
He said that he would prefer a public option in the bill.
Lieberman was never going to allow one to stay in, so you can pick your poison; a bill killed by filibuster, or a passed bill in the Senate, without a Public Option in it.
Those are your only two choices, and those are also President Obama’s only two choices. I would love to have the Public Option in the Senate Bill, but it was never going to happen, because Lieberman was going to make sure it would not.
Therefore; I support getting what we could. Grow up people. You are acting like spoiled children who have always got everything you asked for, by throwing temper tantrums.
edit:
get past a filibuster….
“yeah, I remember that one, sbj…they argued that the “must” applied to the “exchange” and that the construction was inadvertent…”
Didn’t this guy graduate Harvard? “Inadvertent” “chose his words inartfully” “could have been a mere slip-up”
Folks on the left won’t mind if he has to change his stance due to political realities, but almost anyone will take offense if they see a pattern of obfuscation developing. This is clearly stretching the truth and Obama himself wanted us to keep him on his toes when it comes to this sort of stuff.
Liam –
Wow. Great Comment.
Merry Christmas.
SBJ, now the self appointed spokesman for “Folks on the left”. LMAO
Sorry, did bill Clinton succeed? LBJ? Even the new progressive hero FDR? No. Obama achieved the biggest progressive win on health care in almost the history of the nation. He characterized the reality of how his push occured stupidly, but he isn’t wrong and this bill is a notch on his belt any pres would want.
Tena,
Merry Christmas to you too.
“Obama achieved the biggest progressive win on health care in almost the history of the nation.”
Not to exaggerate or anything…
Paul W., are you suggesting the President ‘acted stupidly’ and that we shouldn’t get all wee-wee’d up about it?
Obvious sarcasm aside I agree 100%. He isn’t wrong. He didn’t lie. This bill is historic any way you slice it, etc etc.
That’s the thing about being President. You can’t be ideological. It is almost impossible. I know all about the DLC and corporate Dems but I think Clinton is/was a true progressive and was constricted by the office and Congress. Same with Obama. And on the other side, same with Bush. They had 6 years with no checks/balances and as someone pointed out somewhere (Benen?) even THEY (the most arrogant, obnoxious Congress in recent memory) couldn’t pass social security privatization.
Political reality: POTUS is not an ideological job.
Republicans achieved the biggest Obstructionist failure in the history of the US Senate.
Republicans promised their supporters that they were going to kill the healthcare reform bill.
Did they fail, or did they just lie to the Teabagger Rabble that they roused?! Hmmmmmn.
Those who try to claim that President Obama lied to his supporters, must also then admit, that Republicans lied to theirs, since they did not kill the bill, or make it “Obama’s Waterloo”, like they had promised to do.
@Liam: If you say it often enough someone just might believe you…
What’s up with Rep. Louise Slaughter? You gonna start badmouthing her now?
““Obama achieved the biggest progressive win on health care in almost the history of the nation.””
I think it IS the most progressive win on health care in the history of the nation. Not almost, imho. And in fact I don’t think anything else comes close. For historians to decide, but I don’t think the initial bills that passed re: medicare and social security were nearly as progressive. They essentially blocked off a segment of our population for single-payer health care and long-term retirement assistance, respectively.
While this bill doesn’t go nearly as far as it could, most wonky folks, I think, agree that some/several of the reforms wouldn’t even have been possible a few years ago. Patient’s Bill of Rights on steroids is an example. Again, this convo is above my pay grade but imho these are the most progressive reforms of a major industry in my lifetime and imho the most progressive health care reform that I am aware of in American history (including SS and medicare).
Liam I love you – Great insight, good to know we’re not all completely surrounded by idiots.
SBJ, why are you asking me. Didn’t you just appoint yourself spokesperson for “The Left”. Did you lie to them, about your racial hatred of Obama, in order to get accepted in your new post?!
This can’t be for real!
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2009/12/uk-police-searching-for-butt-sniffer.html
via HotAir
I just received my December issue of Quitter’s World.
It has a great cover.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/-/q/2/sarah-palin-quitters-world.jpg
Happy Hour roundup posted:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/happy-hour-roundup-133/
perhaps he never declared it was an absolute must, but…
From REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT TO A JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS ON HEALTH CARE Sept. 9, 2009
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/remarks-by-the-president-to-a-joint-session-of-congress-on-health-care/
After one of his clearest and most compelling arguments in favor or the Public Option, the President said this:
“But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice.” (Applause.)
Uh-huh.
So now I guess he’ll say the “choice” our government will provide is the new OPM-administered national non-profit?
Gee, thanks for not backing down, Mr. President.
Rather than bashing the president and the Democrats, we need to find a way to do what the Republicans have done the whole time this president has been in office.”come together”. This healtcare bill will be a start, not the end of what can be accomplished under a democratic administration. but if we sulk,complain and stay home. we lose all the way around.
We need not let the Republican’s win. The way our Senate is set up, it’s easy for one member to impede progress and there’s nothing anyone can do outside of changing the rules. Those of us that have been following closely know that. The fact the Senate was able to pass a bill at all an enoumous achievement.
If we let the likes of Jane Hamsher and Grover Norquist tell us differently then we fall into then we let the Republican’s defeat us in a round about way. We need to stand strong.
Greg, is that tea-cup small enough for you all media hacks to stir the poutrage storm shite in ?
It’s astonishing how many commenters here are defending paying ransoms to corporate protection-racketeers.
Even more offensive is all these attacks on principled, substantive grievances.
It’s the kind of attacks that get responses like these:
what pragmatists do: Sell out.
Please STOP selling this corporatist cr@p sandwich as progressive ice cream.
“No matter what President Obama did or said, he was not going to change that reality [of the Senate's exclusion of the Public Option].”
Defeatist, “No We Can’t” nonsense.
Look, I get it, the President doesn’t like conflict, not many people do. But legislative sausage is BUILT on conflict.
Obama could have started showing up in the States of Senators that wanted to pull out the Public Option and started singing the Public Options praises: ‘The Public Option is the BEST measure to REDUCE COSTS!’
‘The Public Option is the most realistic way of providing quality care to the most people for the lowest prices.’
‘The Public Option means that you don’t have to pay ransoms to corporate racketeers.’
Instead, after repeatedly campaigning on the Public Option (saying otherwise was stupid), when it came to crunch time, Obama folded and wouldn’t even bring it up with opponents:
“Lieberman Says Obama Never Pressed Him on Public Option.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-jw-stickings/lieberman-says-obama-neve_b_401195.html
Where’s the Leader I Voted for?
This Bill MUST PASS!
This bill must pass for no other reason than to hand the Republicans and the shameful teabaggers the political defeat they truly deserve. We cannot validate all the racist, hate-filled lies and fear mongering that poisoned Town Hall meetings across the country. At this point in our history, we can even afford a giveaway to insurance companies much more than we can afford to give any kind of victory to tea partiers holding up signs depicting Obama as Hitler. The tactics that have been used by the right to fight any effort at healthcare reform were so reprehensible that just about any effort at healthcare reform MUST PASS. Just hear me out.
The Republican strategy was almost successful. The planned to filibuster any plan that the Democrats put out, making 60 votes necessary. They believed that conservative members of the Democratic caucus (i.e., those members taking a lot of money from the Health Insurance industry) would water the bill down so much that the liberal members would not vote for it. Leiberman was their ace in the hole.
(Digression: In the late summer and early fall, the Democrats had Leiberman on board with the public option — or at least Leiberman never said publicly then that he was against it. And Leiberman had definitely supported the early Medicare buy-in. It was only when the Republicans feared the Democrats had a deal to beat the filibuster that they asked Leiberman kill the public option, which he did. Republicans likely predicted that this would cause the liberal Democrats to defect and the bill would be killed.
With healthcare reform dead by their despicable efforts, the Republicans and teabaggers could employ the exact same tactic (with victorious fervor) to stop climate change legislation, then perhaps to stop reform of our trade policies, and so on. In fact, the tea parties for the issue of climate change have already been organized. Mainly, Dick Army and his satanic mignons will lie that such legislation will kill industry in this country and thus take away all of our jobs.
I agree that the Healthcare Bill is a giveaway to the insurance companies. In a way, it is the health insurance version of Medicare part D. However, the requirements set for insurance companies included in the bill, which basically transforms them into public utilities, will take a huge chunk out of that giveaway. In fact, in the long run, the health insurance industry will earn less money than it would have had we maintained the status quo. Not much, of course, but enough to piss them off. And don’t forget, most people will now have coverage one way or another.
The bottom line is that it would be disaster for this country if the teabaggers were emboldened in any way. And killing this bill would validate all their fake-grass roots, racist, and shameful stupidity. It would give such efforts legitimacy as a successful political tactic and that tactic would then come back even stronger and renewed vigor against the next liberal cause that Obama takes up.