Bottom Line on Health Care Summit

February 26, 2010

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama strongly signaled that Democrats will move forward on a health care overhaul with or without Republicans, preparing his party for a fight whose political outcome will rest with voters in November.

Delivering his closing argument at a 7-1/2-hour televised policy marathon Thursday, Obama told Republicans he welcomes their ideas — even ones Democrats don't like — but they must fit into his framework for a broad health care remake that would cover tens of millions of uninsured Americans.

That's the deal.

It's a gamble for Obama and his party, and it's far from certain that Democratic congressional leaders can rally their members to muscle a bill through on their own. At stake are Democrats' political fortunes in the midterm elections and the fate of Obama's domestic agenda pitted against emboldened Republicans.

"The truth of the matter is that politically speaking, there may not be any reason for Republicans to want to do anything," Obama said, summing up. "I don't need a poll to know that most Republican voters are opposed to this bill and might be opposed to the kind of compromise we could craft.

"And if we can't," he added, "I think we've got to go ahead and some make decisions, and then that's what elections are for. "

To the nearly 40 lawmakers in the room with him, the message was unmistakable.

"Frankly, I was discouraged by the outcome," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. "I do not believe there will be any Republican support for this 2,700-page bill."

Democratic leaders — who preside over majorities in both chambers_ were having none of that.

"It's time to do something, and we're going to do it," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

Still, no participant publicly called the daylong exercise a waste of time. Despite flare-ups now and then, they had a remarkably civil debate on an issue that has divided Americans and polarized political partisans.

Sen. John McCain said Friday that Republicans are still willing to negotiate changes in the health care system with Obama, but only on a "step-by-step" basis.

McCain said on ABC's "Good Morning America" he believes the White House summit on the medical care system was beneficial and many people learned a lot from it.

But he also said it is time "to start over. What we're saying is, let's start out on the areas we agree upon." The Arizona Republican said the GOP would be "seriously interested" in negotiating a less complex, less sweeping health care bill with the Obama administration.

Obama's plan would require most Americans to get health insurance, while providing subsidies for many in the form of a new tax credit. It would set up a competitive insurance market for small businesses and people buying coverage on their own. Other changes include addressing a coverage gap in the Medicare prescription benefit and setting up a new long-term-care insurance program. The plan would be funded through Medicare cuts and tax increases.

At the summit, there were some areas of agreement, including barring insurers from dropping policyholders who become sick, ending annual and lifetime monetary limits on health insurance benefits and letting young adults stay on their parents' health policies into their mid-20s or so.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who has a track record of working across the political aisle, said he would try to broaden common ground. Obama said he was willing to incorporate medical malpractice changes into his plan.

Yet on the core issues of how to expand coverage and pay for it, the divide was as wide as ever. Democrats argue a stronger government role is essential, and with it higher taxes and new rules for private companies. 

"We have a very difficult gap to bridge here," said Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the No. 2 House Republican. "We just can't afford this. That's the ultimate problem." 

A Democrats-only strategy is no slam-dunk. The House would have to pass a Senate bill that many House Democrats find unacceptable. Indeed, House Democrats appear to hold the key to the success of Obama's gambit. 

To make the Senate bill more palatable to the House, both chambers would pass a package of changes. In the Senate, that would be done under special budget rules allowing majority Democrats to get around the requirement for 60 votes to shut off bill-killing filibusters. Democrats are one vote shy. 

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., asked Democrats to swear off the tactic, known as "reconciliation." Reid defended it. 

Obama said Americans want a decision on health care, and most think "a majority vote makes sense." 

Yet a USA Today/Gallup survey released Thursday found Americans tilt 49-42 percent against Congress passing a health care bill similar to the ones proposed by Obama and Democrats in the House and Senate. Opposition was even stronger to the idea of Senate Democrats using the special budget rules, with 52 percent opposed and 39 percent in favor. 

Congressional aides said top Democrats will take a few days to gauge the summit's impact on the public and, perhaps more importantly, on moderate House members who will likely determine whether any health care bill will pass. 

If the effort fails, Democrats may try a scaled-back plan to insure about 15 million more Americans, rather than the 30 million covered under the congressional bills. Among other things, the fallback plan would require insurance companies to let people up to age 26 stay on their parents' health plans.

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press

Last night at 1:00 A.M., the Senate was narrowly able to overcome a Republican filibuster of a key defense spending bill. On Saturday at midnight, money for the Department of Defense is set to run out – including the money that funds our troops overseas. Republicans had sought to use filibustering of defense funding as a way to delay further debate on health reform.

The New York Times reported:

With Democrats trying to inch toward a final vote on the health care plan before Christmas, Republicans are using every tactic at their disposal to try to thwart progress. Delaying a final vote on the Pentagon measure was just the latest and probably not the last.

Republicans acknowledged their resistance to the Pentagon measure was due to their desire to prolong the debate over the Democratic health care overhaul.

... Asked if he would vote for the defense bill, which Republicans routinely support, Senator Sam Brownback Republican of Kansas, replied bluntly: “No. I don’t want health care.”

The defense spending measure also includes a two-month extension of unemployment benefits and health insurance for out-of-work Americans.

This morning, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer wrote that "This is not a controversial bill – nearly 400 house members supported it and the vast majority of Republicans are expected to vote for it. It’s political gamesmanship at its worst."

The depth of the hypocrisy involved is stunning.  Back in 2007, when Congress was debating how to bring the war in Iraq to a responsible close, many of these same folks launched blistering accusations about Democrats' commitment to our troops.  Here are just a few of the things they said:

"Playing politics with the critical funding that our troops need now is political theater of the worst kind." – Sen. John Cornyn, [Press Release, 4/26/07]

"We have plenty of time and plenty of opportunity to have political debates... but it’s just unconscionable to me to tie the hands of the very troops that we all say we support." – Sen. John Cornyn, [Transcript, Senate Republican News Briefing, 4/10/07]

"Every day we don’t fund our troops is a day their ability to fight this war is weakened." – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Press Release, 3/31/07]

"No way to treat the troops, and it is entirely inconsistent with [Senators’] expressions of support for the troops." – Sen. Mitch McConnell, [Congressional Record, 10/4/07]

"I don't understand this attitude of, ‘We can play with; we can risk the lives of these troops by waiting until the last possible minute to get the funding to them." – Sen. Jon Kyl, [FOX News Transcript, 4/10/07]

"Our obligation to those troops must transcend politics." – Sen. Jon Kyl, [Press Release, 11/8/07]

Now though, as we debate not foreign policy but health care, the Department of Defense funding can wait? Incredible.

The Senate is expected to resume debate on health reform tomorrow morning.

Republicans have been railing against President Obama and Congressional Democrats for months, falsely claiming that our federal deficits are a result of the policies Democrats have pursued. Today, a new analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities determined that the nation’s current budget deficits are largely a consequence of Bush-era policies. According to the Center, the Bush-era tax cuts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the economic downturn account for almost the entire deficit over the next 10 years:

"…If not for the tax cuts enacted during the Presidency of George W. Bush that Congress did not pay for, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that began during that period, and the effects of the worst economic slump since the Great Depression (including the cost of steps necessary to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term…"

The Center concluded that the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan accounted for “$500 billion of the deficit in 2009 and $7.1 trillion in 2009 through 2019…” Absent the current economic downturn and the fiscal policies of the Bush Administration, the budget would have balanced over the next decade.

Why is this important? Commentary from the Washington Monthly:

"...It's important for the public to realize who's responsible, in large part because it's important for the public to weigh policymakers' credibility. If GOP lawmakers embraced policies that are almost entirely responsible for the deficit those same lawmakers are now complaining about, it's a relevant detail."

Food for thought.

This afternoon the House passed its version of financial regulatory reform - the Wall Street and Consumer Protection Act - by a vote of 223 to 220. No Republicans voted in favor of the bill. The New York Times called it “the most significant legislative act to confront the financial crisis that exploded last year...”

According to the Times, key provisions included in the bill include:

The bill’s principal provisions establish a process for dismantling large, failing financial institutions; set up a council to identify and regulate firms that are so big, interconnected or risky that they need heightened supervision to keep them from bringing down the whole financial system; create a new consumer financial-protection agency to squelch unfair and abusive practices; and for the first time, regulate over-the-counter derivatives markets. The bill also contains provisions on executive pay, investor protection, credit ratings, hedge funds and insurance.

DNC Chairman Tim Kaine issued the statement below after the vote:

“Today, thanks to the leadership of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and other leading Democrats, the House took an important step towards creating a more stable financial system by passing the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009. The Act will reform the way we regulate our financial sector by creating new rules that will make our system more stable, while reining in the irresponsible practices that nearly led to the collapse of the global financial system. The legislation would also create a new consumer financial-protection agency that would stop unfair and abusive practices that harmed consumers.

“Unfortunately, not one Republican voted for the bill. Not one.

“Last fall, the excessive greed and risk taking of Wall Street brought Main Street to its knees. Now, instead of standing up to the special interests and supporting action that would ensure a regulatory framework that puts an end to unrestrained risk-taking, Republicans have once again sided with their banking industry friends instead of helping working Americans who are already shouldering the tab for Wall Street’s reckless decisions. Republicans are once again on the sidelines - defending their special interest friends and failing to offer any new solutions.

“Democrats will continue to work with President Obama to craft final financial regulatory reform legislation that makes sure our financial system works for the American people.”

Today President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law, legislation that will extend new federal protections to people who are victims of violent crime because of their gender, sexual orientation or identity, or disability.

DNC Chairman Tim Kaine issued a statement after President Obama signed the bill into law:

“Today, President Obama signed into law legislation that was first championed by the late Senator Ted Kennedy and has been more than a decade in the making.

“The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act will help state and local officials prosecute hate crimes by providing them with additional tools and resources. President Obama and his Administration are committed to equal rights and fairness for women, LGBT Americans, persons with disabilities -- indeed, all Americans.

"There is still much work ahead, but today, 11 years after the tragic deaths of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., President Obama has delivered on his promise to sign an inclusive hate crimes bill into law.”

To listen to some Republicans in Congress, you’d think they had nothing whatsoever to do with our current economic mess and now they have no responsibility to help the country clean it up. If you believed what folks like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell and Jon Kyl said, you’d think they’d been sounding warning bells all along about the dangerous and irresponsible policies of the previous administration.

Ummm, not so much. Those guys were right there, in the mix, supporting more tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent, as they whacked away at help for the middle class and turned a blind eye to the fat cats getting rich off the lax regulation of our financial system.

And now they offer nothing but more of the same and shouts of "NO" to any of the President's ideas to clean up the mess we're in.

The President has often spoken of our mutual responsibility to one another. And he has worked tirelessly to set right what went wrong the previous eight years. While he's rolled up his sleeves, he's called on all of us to pitch in and work together.

But the GOP has eschewed that responsibility. Instead they have rooted for failure and said NO to needed reform of financial regulation, the health insurance system and how we use and produce energy.

To them we say three simple words: Grab a Mop.

What I reject is when some folks say we should go back to the past policies when it was those very same policies that got us into this mess in the first place.

Another way of putting it is when, you know, I'm busy and Nancy busy with our mop cleaning up somebody else’s mess –- we don’t want somebody sitting back saying, you're not holding the mop the right way. Why don’t you grab a mop, why don’t you help clean up. You're not mopping fast enough. That's a socialist mop. Grab a mop –- let’s get to work.

-- President Barack Obama, October 15, 2009

By now, anyone who’s paid even a little attention to the Governor’s race in Virginia has heard about Republican Bob McDonnell’s thesis. The paper – which McDonnell authored just two years before winning elected office for the first time – articulates a right-wing social agenda. It argues that working women are a “detriment to the family” and denounces “equal pay for equal work.”

Bob McDonnell says this election is all about the economy and creating jobs. He says his ideas about social issues won’t affect the way he handles Virginia’s economy.

But he’s wrong. His far right-wing views would directly threaten Virginians ability to get a job and make a living.

From 1996 to 2004 McDonnell served on the Board of Trustees of Regent University, which has a long-held practice of giving hiring preferences to men over women. In effect, the school’s policy says distinctions based on sex are sometimes legally permissible and regularly denies otherwise qualified women jobs – a hiring policy McDonnell repeatedly approved of during his decade-long tenure on the Board.

McDonnell has also promised to revoke a Virginia law – an executive order signed by Virginia’s last two governors – that prohibits discrimination against LGBT Virginians in hiring decisions.

McDonnell’s thesis wasn’t the result of misguided youth (he was 34 years old when he wrote the thesis), and it’s clear his far right wing ideas haven't stayed in academia (he also pursued a socially conservative agenda during his 14 years in the Virginia Assembly).

Denying otherwise qualified women jobs and denying LGBT Virginians protection from discrimination in the workplace (a law thats been on the books for 8 years) can be directly traced back to the radical ideas laid out in his blueprint for governing thesis. McDonnell isn't only denying Virginians basic civil rights – he’s also denying them basic economic security.

President Obama is in Montana today, holding his second health insurance reform town hall this week. At the event this afternoon (which is set to begin at 2:55PM EDT) he is expected to emphasize rescission, a common insurance industry practice of retroactively canceling an insurance policy after a policy holder becomes sick.

You can listen to a live audio feed from Montana over at OFA’s blog. We’ll have a round up of the event once it’s over.

Tomorrow President Obama will hold a health insurance reform town hall in Grand Junction, CO. The focus of discussion? Exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses, co-pays and deductibles.

Earlier this evening President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum that will provide steps towards equality for Federal employees. The memorandum extends many benefits to same-sex partners of Federal employees that are already granted to partners of heterosexual Federal employees. After outlining the details of his Memorandum the President went further by calling on Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act;

But this Presidential Memorandum is just a start. Unfortunately, my Administration is not authorized by existing Federal law to provide same-sex couples with the full range of benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. That's why I stand by my long-standing commitment to work with Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. It's discriminatory, it interferes with States' rights, and it's time we overturned it.

Surrounded by Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank as well as Senators Joseph Lieberman and Susan Collins he declared his support for the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009.
The President then closed his remarks with this statement;

As Americans, we are all affected when our promises of equality go unfulfilled. Through measures like the Presidential Memorandum I am issuing today and the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009, we will advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded and continue to perfect our Union.