House Liberals Prefer Nothing At All To Compromise
Challenged to choose between their dual priorities of ideological purism and achievable health care reform, many liberals are choosing purism. Liberals in the House are threatening to vote down any reform that does not include the “public option” that will serve as their golden road to single-payer health care.
Since the votes for a “public option” road to single-payer do not exist in the Senate, the consequence of this threat, if carried out, is to have health care reform killed not at the hands of evil, mustache-twirling Republicans acting at the behest of their insurance company masters, but at the hands of purist liberals marching blindly in accord with clearly unachievable ideological imperatives and who are not willing to consider even the most subtle compromises, such as North Dakota Democrat Kent Conrad’s proposals for government-subsidized but still private health care cooperatives. The 47 million uninsured people who might be helped by these co-ops are apparently not so important after all, at least compared to the priority of … well, being doctrinally pure with regards to building central government power, I guess.
Aside from the serious public policy consequences of this newest surge of ideological purism, this move exposes as a fraud the common meme that it is exclusively the Republicans that are beholden to an unreasonable and extremist ideological base. Democrats appear to have at least equal claim to extremism. And since Democrats are the ones holding virtually unfettered government power (even on health care, the key locus of resistance is from conservative Democrats, not powerless Republicans), Democrats will be the whole owners of the resulting failure, regardless of whether they choose to admit it.
If it weren’t for the fact that a critical policy issue will once again to left to languish because of the intransigence of extremists, it would be funny to watch.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
Yes, we need the reform with public option. I agree with the author that there’s clearly impossible to pass the bill without it. The reform with no public option will make us pay $60 billion a year directly into the health insurance industry like what Governor said on MSNBC in this video!
http://www.newsy.com/videos/white_flag_from_the_white_house
Sorry, Obama. I don’t think this is going to happen.
Right, because in order to avoid paying $60 billion into the health insurance industry, we should instead pay $1 trillion into the government!
I can certainly see why you wouldn’t want to compromise on that.
Sorry, B Colb, I don’t think that is going to happen. If you really cared about getting coverage for the 47 million uninsured more than you cared about just demonizing the “health insurance industry”, your priorities might be different.
@B Colb
Wow, that was quite a compelling argument…. Except you forgot to say how and why the goverment should be allowed to do a worse job, for more money (and from what I have read, as the bill currently stands, that is what would happen) Usually the left goes for the options that asks American citizens to do “more with less”. (Reduce reuse recycle, (drive 55 to get better gas milage, etc.) That is the mantra of the left on every other issue, right? Why the 180 on Healthcare?
Democrats appear to have at least equal claim to extremism.
Yup. But quantification attempts just lead back to “They’re worse so we’re great!” arguments, so thinking both wings stink, I leave it at that.
Usually the left goes for the options that asks American citizens to do “more with less”
Don’t you understand, Jay C? Obama’s gonna wave his magic wand, the White House unicorn will fart some magic rainbows, the USAF will be re-tasked to spreading massive clouds of fairy dust, and we WILL get more for less!
But only if you clap your hands for
TinkerbellH.R. 3200 and really believe.good one Tully
Now we understand the ?wisdom of GWB
OK, granted its a bit Jack Handyish. But our President has discovered he needs more than an audience, nicely arranged words and a teleprompter. And the Dems have discovered that life was so much better when there was but one objective: berate and demonize GWB. Damn! When is Cheney’s book coming out?
Just looked at Rasmussen polling regarding the health proposals. Here’s the problem:
AND
What makes us think our congressional representative can come to some agreement if we Americans are so divided. If I were a Democrat I’d say Screw Republican support, just get it passed!
Fuller discussion here