Grassley: If Obama Doesn’t Publicly Renounce Public Option Now, He’s Not Truly Interested In Bipartisanship
Senator Chuck Grassley now appears to be throwing the gauntlet down before the White House in a way that seems explicitly designed to make trouble for President Obama at an extraordinarily sensitive moment — which will fuel charges he’s not negotiating in good faith.
Specifically: Grassley’s now demanding that Obama publicly repudiate the public option right now to prove he’s truly interested in bipartisan compromise. That, to me, is the most interesting news in this extraordinary interview Grassley gave The Washington Post:
In recent days, however, some Democrats have accused Grassley of trying to undermine the reform effort, for example by refusing to debunk rumors that the Democratic health bills would create “death panels” empowered to decide whether the infirm live or die.
On Wednesday, he denied those claims and fired back at Obama, saying the president should publicly state his willingness to sign a bill without a controversial government-run insurance plan. Such a statement, he said, is “pretty important … if you’re really interested in a bipartisan bill.”
This is partly a paraphrase. But presuming it’s accurate, it’s pretty striking. Grassley knows the White House is under tremendous pressure to contain a revolt on the left over the public option. It’s hard to imagine any reason for demanding Obama renounce the public option right now, before there’s even a bill out of the finance committee, other than to make life politically difficult for the President.
How does that compare with the White House’s treatment of Grassley? When the Senator endorsed the “death panel” claim, the White House reaffirmed its commitment to working with him. Dems quietly let Grassley claim a big victory by dropping the public option from the Senate bill he’s negotiating. And when Rahm Emanuel questioned the sincerity of GOP leaders yesterday, an apparent shot at Grassley, the White House rapidly walked it back.
Grassley, meanwhile, has now raised the bar yet again for what will constitute true bipartisanship on the White House’s part. Pretty telling.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
That conference call this afternoon should be rather interesting…
Obviously, the Obama administration’s claim that they are interested in bipartisanship is transparently a lie so long as they remain as the sole party in power in the WH.
And Yglesias points to this argument (which comes quite close to his own)… http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=letting_go_of_the_public_option
I’m not sure I agree but there’s nothing stupid there.
The President ought to put the boot in. He should tell Grassley that the days of double talk are over; and he does not expect to meet with Gassley again.
Its about time for President Obama to pull a Shaq and tell the media to ask Chuck Grassley how his a$$ tastes.
I mean seriously, I am one of his biggest defenders but its time to clap back on this fool lest he look like an impotent chump. Im just being real.
We’ll get more public niceties about Grassley from the White House, and the flacks will repeat the line about the public option being, in the president’s opinion, the best way to create competition on the exchange. The line to watch out for would be if Gibbs etc. say that the president has said he is open to another idea if it proves to better and that if Grassley has such an idea, we should hear it.
Sorry to double post, but Grassley’s increasingly a$$hole-ish rhetoric almost makes me think that the White House is encouraging it. Grassley gets to polish his hard-right bonafides to his voters as cover for his negotiations with Democrats while the White House gets a useful idiot on the right.
Hmmmm. … Nah.
It’s Obama who’s not negotiating in good faith. What does he really want? Leaders lead.
With all the deals our Pres. and Rahm have made with Phrma, insurance industry, AMA etc. I think the public option was off the table several months ago. The only way to get it back in is if we all raise money, demonstrate, write, call and put as much pressure as possible on the White House and Dems to give the people what they want. Grassley’s just mad because all the promises he got from the WH are falling apart.
There is no moving line for Grassley and the Republicans, there is just a wall stopping any and all attempts at reform. They value a political victory more than a chance to get this done right, and the idea that you can be bipartisan when the other side wants no bill as a starting point is ridiculous.
Paul W–Both Obama and Grassley “value a political victory more than the chance to get this done right.” At times (depending on the hour of the day) Obama has seemed willing to create an individual mandate and no public option. This, in my opinion, would make things markedly worse.
There was a time a month back when I said to myself: “Give the President and Rahm some latitude; they have to deal with Republican a**holes and they might just want to let Gassley (pun intended) hang himself. ” I gave too much credit to Gassley. He does not want to hang himself. He wants to hang the President.
Each day I think less of Gibbs. His gabs don’t impress me. But I am a DFH; so who cares about my opinion?
Commonbond- Funny how people can see the world so differently; I see Obama as doing what it takes to try and get some semblance of health care reform started; I see Grassley as doing what it takes to try and get any semblance of health care reform stopped.
I have read many compelling arguments from progressives that the public option is not all it’s cracked up to be. Still, why would Obama drop it now? No legislation is even being written. That would just lead the way to watering down the bill again in a few months. Obama is not stupid.
Grassley is setting himself to be Rush’s hero but I wonder how this will play with Iowa voters who voted by a large majority for Obama. I am not motivated to give money to a Democratic challenger in that state. Grassley has proven to be a ********* of the first order.
To the progressives who now say without a public option there is no real health reform, please read mare about it. The public option is already weak in the house bill and will only get weaker as it goes through the process. For millions of Americans who have pre-existing conditions or who go bankrupt because of lifetime health insurance caps this bill is a victory. We should keep fighting for everything we can get. But we should not throw out the baby with the bath water.
When did Grassley become the leader of health care reform? Did he switch parties? Let the GOP eat their own words and if meaningful reform is lost, then so be it! I’d rather see a strong stand for the middle class then drive billions more in profit into the ghoulish health insurance companies…
Let the GOP eat their own words and if meaningful reform is lost, then so be it!
It won’t work that way. The Dems. will take the hit, and the public will blame both parties.
Bernie, that Paul Starr article you link to through Iglesias is an interesting read. If nothing else, it raises the issue of whether it’s simplistic to consider the public option as the holy grail. I’m not generally a big Dan Balz fan, but his article TPM links to http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/08/19/in_the_absence_of_specifics_pu.html?wprss=44 has this paragraph which suggests much the same thing: “One reason the public option has gained so much attention is that it is one of the few concrete components of an otherwise arcane package of reforms. From both sides of the ideological divide, the public option was described with adjectives that inflated its importance in the overall context of health care reform. Opponents tagged it as a government takeover of medical care, while supporters attributed to it powers it could never have.” Maybe that’s something to think about.
To a Republican bipartisanship means – “give us everything we want and we’ll vote against it anyway.
The president should put a stop to this nonsense.
I don’t get this surrender on the PO vibe that’s out there. Do people not realize that if the public option is dropped and the mandates stay in that Dems will be destroyed in 2010 and 2012 and that the progressive caucus will be all that’s left of Dems in Congress (just due to the fact that they have the safest seats)? It’s simple calculus for me: I will not pay private insurance companies ever increasing rates because I am forced to by law. I won’t vote for Republicans, but I will be done with the Dems if they do this or allow this to happen, and I’m sure that millions of others will as well.
Support for the PO has nothing to do with liking it because conservatives hate it, or making it liberals’ last stand, it has to do with proving that our government can do what’s right for the majority of people in this country by insuring the uninsured, and not what further enriches some of the most hated industries in America. I don’t think Grassley and the Op-Ed writers who advocate we give the cause up understand that.
This post yesterday by Marc Ambinder is not encouraging, but probably still worthwhile reading.
It doesn’t matter what Grassley says. This will end up being a Democratic bill only.
Chuck: WTF !? Over…
For a guy with some of the best health care that tax-payer dollars can buy, you have no ‘reason’ to be ‘off your meds’, so… I MUST conclude that you are, indeed [and fact], NOT negotiating in good faith.
So, Chuck… save it for those the reich-wing rethugs & the fly-over corn fields of [bad] dreams [and, healthcare nightmares], we, the 66% of the contry that does want single payer or a public option [at a minimum] are choosing NOT to listen to you, you sad, mean, lying, little old man.
If it enriches the insurance companies, that’s perfectly ok with me as long as the people get universal, affordable, dependable coverage. Ditto for the public option – I can live without it if we can meet our goals otherwise. Unlike so many know-it-all commenters I read on this and other bolgs, I don’t feel competent to make the bald statement that meaningful reform is impossible without a public option. Let’s focus on outcomes, not on platitudes.
And can we please lay off the bit about I’ll never vote for another Democrat if… That’s brilliant! Handing power back to the Republicans will really help!
Starting small, but it could be a fun game. Check the Twitter tag #bipartchuck.
Example: I demand that you renounce beans, tomato juice, & ground beef to prove that you are serious about chili.
Perhaps we are going about this the wrong way. By chasing the limited Public Option, morsel, we are settling for crumbs, and will probably not get even those.
What we need is to have the vast majority of the public demanding a one payer universal health care system. They are not there yet, so we may have to create the conditions that will bring them to that point.
Why not let the Private Insurance Cabal, convince the public that they have to get rid of Private Health Care Insurance coverage.
How can we do that, I hear you say. I am glad you asked me, that question.
Here is one way to accomplish that task.
Pass a bill that contains no Public Option, and contains no price restrictions. All the bill must contain is regulations that forbid all Health Insurance Companies from refusing anyone coverage, because of their medical condition or history, and also forbids the dropping of any members, for any reason. Also require them to pay medical bills within a thirty day period, after billing has been forwarded to them.
Put enormous punitive damages charges on them, for each violation.
Think about what this will do. All people will be covered, but the Insurance Cabal will have to raise coverage rates through the roof. Businesses, both large and small will not be able to afford those rates, and only the richest individuals will be able to afford to purchase their own coverage.
Require that the new law go into effect on Jan. 2011. Before that date is reached, the new Insurance quotes will be reaching businesses, and they will not like them. The chamber of commerce will change their tune, and come begging for help.
Of course, we can not then reverse the universal coverage policy, and throw people out of the system, so the only solution will be to pass a Single Payer, universal coverage system.
Why not kill the Insurance Beast with kindness. Republicans and Blue Dogs will cast enough votes to pass it, and progressives can vote against it, and have the last laugh.
It has to get worse, before people are ready to revolt, so let us enable the Insurance Monster to accelerate the process, in order to more quickly get to the point where people will revolt, and demand a single payer system. We are headed down that path anyway, but we are just not traveling down it fast enough. Time to put a tiger in the Insurance Monster’s tank.
Addendum.
The bill must also forbid any government subsidies to the Insurance Monster, and remove the massive Medicare subsidy that is now being given.
Do nothing to help the Insurance Monster conceal the real costs that we the people are paying. Force them to put all those costs in the rates.
What Grassley didn’t say that he won’t support a bill without a public option either. So why bother with this so called leader.
How do so many people know so exactly what’s in the bill that hasn’t been written yet?
How do so many people know so exactly what’s in the bill that hasn’t been written yet?………….Good question.