Emanuel Suggests White House May Support Public Option Alternatives
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel suggested Monday that President Obama wants competition injected into the private insurance market--even if that's accomplished without a public option.
Republicans and conservative Democrats have proposed a small handful of alternatives to the public option--all of which have been rejected by reformers. But according to the Wall Street Journal, Obama isn't standing so firm. "Mr. Emanuel said one of several ways to meet President Barack Obama's goals is a mechanism under which a public plan is introduced only if the marketplace fails to provide sufficient competition on its own." Emphasis mine.
This is the so-called trigger mechanism, and it's been roundly rejected by reformers who view it as an escape hatch for insurers who seek to at least delay the creation of a public option. Obama's openness to this idea puts him at odds with key Democrats in both the House and Senate. On Sunday, in words reminiscent of a pledge put forth by the campaign Health Care for America Now, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)--a key point man on the public option--said that a public "has to be available, on the first day, to everybody...so there shouldn`t be a trigger."
| TOPICS: Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Health Care, Rahm Emanuel
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Topic Fail
July 7, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Would you consider Obama to have failed if Health Care Reform did not include a public option?
http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=5688
.
July 7, 2009 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck youpolls and the horse youpolls rode in on.
July 7, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's hope this is meant to rile the base to put the pressure on the conservdems. Otherwise, kiss my ass Rahm!
July 7, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
STFU, Rahm.
July 7, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kind of true:
I think that it's time to stop attributing something that a person in the Administration says to "Obama". At the very least, someone should send Biden and Rahm a filter with an always on setting.
July 7, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're also missing the fact that the WSJ is paraphrasing rather than quoting him. Always a "danger-danger" signal to me. Sometimes they're right, but if they can make news (emphasis on "make") by engineering an apparent conflict, they'll do it every time.
July 7, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's like a twisted word jumble! Here's my take on what NCSteve stated:
Liberal blog site Talking Points Memo claims that the WSJ emphasizes dangerous paraphrases. The site also says that the WSJ "misses" facts, engineers conflicts, and inappropriately states that WSJ reporters "do it every time." Though we do not eschew our reporters having a healthy libido, we don't want a liberal blog like TPM making it an issue.
July 7, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
WSJ. Consider the source. There's nothing inherently wrong with a trigger mechanism in principle. The problem, of course, is that those advocating a trigger mechanism want one that would never get pulled.
July 7, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Note that unlike everything else in the article, there's also no actual quote for this part; it's just "Rahm said...". I suspect some mushy words were bent.
July 7, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the Wall Street Journal reports that Rahm Emanuel says that Obama might be open to the trigger mechanism. In other words, we really know nothing new at all.
By all means put pressure on Obama and the conservadems. But I'm not going to put much stock in a third-hand story reported by the Wall Street Journal.
July 7, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Me either. This just smells of trying to rile up the folks on the part of the WSJ Rubert Murdoch scum bag-owned
July 7, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wrote the White House and excerpted the above language from the WSJ. I told them that I was tired of being solicited on a weekly basis to donate for "real" health care reform when it's less than clear that Obama has a commitment to "real" health care reform.
I wish Rahm Emmanual would STFU -- it's not the first time he got out ahead of the WH, if that's what he did.
July 7, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
This isn't what most of us voted for in November. HOPE to most of us meant health care for all. If the government could get private insurers out of the way it would be simpler. They are merely pass throughs and are to the industry what government cheese is to the bowel system. Medicare does a better job than private insurers. Why can't we have a NATIONAL Medicare? The VA handles millions of cases and is as good or better than the profit systems. The obscene amounts of money have to be removed to be able to have a decent national health care system. Starting with the insurers, then pharmaceutical and then hospitals which include doctors. Those in congress against this are raking in millions of dollars from lobbyists from each group. A citizen's $50.00 contribution doesn't mean jack sh!t to these cretins.
July 7, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama provides very little that would allow one to maintain any enthusiasm for his administration. He protects the torturers. He extends war in Asia. He prefers insurance companies over ordinary Americans. Time for the kook aid drinkers to wake up. In comparison, wasn't Dwight Eisenhower somewhere to the left of where the Obama group is now? Good Lord, Obama has become a conservative Republican of the 1950s.
July 7, 2009 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
How so? Obama hasn't even done anything with regard to health care yet. All we have are second- or third-hand statements reported by the corporate media (whose sponsors, I might note, have a vested interest in making us believe that real health care reform is not going to happen).
The one concrete action Obama has taken with regard to health care is expanding S-CHIP. Not exactly the move of a hardcore conservative.
We need to keep one thing straight: this political game of telephone means NOTHING. Even if Obama issues a statement tomorrow declaring that the public option is non-negotiable, it won't get health care to anyone. The proof will be in the deed, and we won't know what health care reform under Obama looks like until September when he signs a bill. All this freaking out and hand wringing over vague statements accomplishes less than nothing.
As I said before, by all means call Obama, your senator and anybody else you can think of. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Obama is throwing us all under the bus just because the corporate media insinuates it.
July 7, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in addition SCHIP, there's also the repealing of the ban on funding for agencies that provide reprodouctive health care--that's a rather unconservative maneuver as well.
July 7, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi. Time to go back under the bridge, because there's no news here.
July 7, 2009 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
My current response to every democratic fund-raiser over the past few weeks has been: Stop asking me for money and go get it from Max. He seems to have plenty of campaign money.
Stop supporting "them" and start supporting those who are really for healthcare reform. Real reform like single payer.
AND - Join a campaign for public finance of elections. Let's get the corporate money out of politics and put "We the People" back in.
July 7, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh for Chrissake, it's the consistent rhetorical position of this administration that it's open to considering everything. That's fully consistent with the reality that many things which are considered will in the end be rejected. What counts is the end result. We should learn from their example and not prejudge. That's not to say we shouldn't continue to strongly advocate. But Obama has not betrayed us by taking an open approach. It's what he repeatedly promised while campaigning.
July 7, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is no betrayal here. Nothing has happened yet.
You all must be trolling today.
July 7, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
geez what you dont understand is amazing.
the end result will never be far from the speak.
you think the senators hearing this need to fight against it??
p a t h e t i c.
July 7, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
>>A day after his chief of staff suggested the White House could live with a public option-free health care reform bill, President Obama released a statement (from Russia!) reaffirming his support for a government-run health care plan:
"I am pleased by the progress we're making on health care reform and still believe, as I've said before, that one of the best ways to bring down costs, provide more choices, and assure quality is a public option that will force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest. I look forward to a final product that achieves these very important goals."
July 7, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm still in the game with this President.
July 7, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for sharing this information, FR.
July 7, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
blame raum?
lol.
wake up people.
of course obama will cave here.
thats what he does best.
and i will continue to ppoint that out.
even as long as you all continue to make excuses for him.
you sound like palin supporters.
July 7, 2009 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
And you wonder why you're dismissed as a lame-assed troll!
You see, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to OCCASIONALLY say SOMETHING nice. Otherwise, you might as might as well be ranting about teleprompters, birth certificates and Rev. Wright.
July 7, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have something against punctuation? Grammar?
July 7, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, he never learned any.
July 7, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Change we can believe in."
Stop it really! You're killin me with that one! That's gotta be the funniest line ever! LMAO!
July 7, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I always thought that that line was in support of the treasury not banning the penny.....
July 7, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Obama is not caving in.Public option , or else, no 2nd term.
July 7, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like Obama is already walking back Rahm's comments:
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0709/walking_back_rahm_c7e58c67-9f6b-4330-8e88-ec5cfeb5afa7.html
WALKING BACK RAHM? A day after his chief of staff suggested the White House could live with a public option-free health care reform bill, President Obama released a statement (from Russia!) reaffirming his support for a government-run health care plan:
"I am pleased by the progress we're making on health care reform and still believe, as I've said before, that one of the best ways to bring down costs, provide more choices, and assure quality is a public option that will force the insurance companies to compete and keep them honest. I look forward to a final product that achieves these very important goals."
C'mon folks, let's not get our noses bent out of shape over something Rupert said...
July 7, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Time to remind Rahm that the trigger was the November 2008 election...
July 7, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, this reptitious dynamic is getting to be so tedious it's giving me a migraine.
1. MSM manufactures fake controversy with an out-of-context paraphrase of something someone in the administration says on issue of paramount concern to "progressives." (Or by interviewing Biden and quoting him correctly but out of context. Same difference.)
2. Longtime Obama hater progressive faction, whose members ordinarily wouldn't take an MSM report that the sky is blue and water is wet at face value without first fact-checking it themselves, gleefully pounce upon obviously manufactured MSM controversy as proof, proof! that the betrayal of all that is good and progressive and otherwise goodthinkful to the forces of corporatist evil they have been predicting since the primaries is finally at hand.
3. MSM manufactured nontroversy is quickly shown to be inaccurate, false, contrived, empty hype, or otherwise mistaken.
4. Rather than question whether episode brings into doubt the validity of their long-cherished assumptions regarding Obama's self-evident perfidy, Obama haters unleash blast of derision at his supporters for their blind faith in "their messiah." Haters then insist that only their own immediate expressions of outrage postponed an obviously imminent betrayal of precisely the kind they have been predicting since the primaries and darkly reiterate predictions of certain perfidy to come.
5. Repeat.
July 7, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
But does the formula generate enough ad revenue, counting the loss of buyers once the formula is repeated 3 times in close succession? I bet the true way to use this formula successfully it to space it out a bit. As they are doing it in quick successions, originators of the formula (where's that TM circle thingy?) are dismayed that a good thing may become obsolete....
July 7, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or, alternatively:
1) White House floats trial balloon to see how much wiggle room they have in the progressives-vs-corporatists fight.
2) Trial balloon ignites shitstorm among progressives, who didn't get the "Obama is right all the time" memo, and who have gotten just a teeny bit tired of being rolled by the dominant corporate wing of the "Democratic" Party (see, e.g., larue's comment downthread).
3) Enduring shitstorm, White House walks back earlier trial balloon. Bonus points if they can characterize earlier reporting as inaccurate, false, contrived, empty hype, or otherwise mistaken.
4) Starry-eyed Loyal Obamies in the comments sections of liberal blogs take cue from loyal Bushies, spew baseless, fact-free and ad hominem rhetoric like "longtime haters," and otherwise bask in the glorious radiance of their fault-free leader.
5) Repeat.
July 8, 2009 3:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Late update:
Yep. Trial balloon confirmed. Shitstorm confirmed. Walk-back confirmed. NCSteve fail confirmed.
July 10, 2009 1:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I might add that this particular loyal Obamie was, less than two months ago, and with trademark contempt and sarcasm, assuring us out of his abundance of legal wisdom, that less than 30 days into a new administration, a federal appellate panel would not grant a reasonable extension of time to review a possible major policy shift on a matter of crucial policy importance -- and that the ACLU attorneys (opposing counsel in the case in question) would not stipulate to such an extension.
To do so, of course, this Wise One had to construct various strawmen, such as characterizing "reasonable" extensions as indefinite ones, ignore the other circumstances that I detailed directly above, and turn a federal appellate panel into a district judge.
All this in the service of defending or excusing a pretty outrageous position taken on state secrets -- a position that, I suspect, the Wise One would view very differently if taken by a different administration.
What more pearls of wisdom await us?
July 8, 2009 4:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it's 2:30 p.m. Eastern time and if Rahm Emanuel has anything further to say, like a denial, there's still the 6:00 p.m. news.
Otherwise, the Democrats have caved in again.
Anything new, lately?
July 7, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. That's it. Game over. Might as well give in and give up because you're totally sold out. One paraphrase of who knows what actual comment by the WSJ is all it took to prove it. Never mind that not one of the six or seven Congressional committees with jurisdiction has even reported out a bill yet.
July 7, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure the newsroom at the WSJ just loves reading these comments and seeing just how wound up so many progressives get about their rumor-mongering aka "news reporting".
July 7, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
You didn't read the WSJ article, now did you? Or is comprehension your problem?
There was no rumor-mongering; no unnamed "sources". The article consisted largely of direct quotes from Emanuel or paraphrases of his statements; and I've yet to hear him say he was misquoted.
Stuff like:
And:
And:
"Rumor-mongering," my ass.
July 8, 2009 3:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Folks, let's take a look at something, and get you pesky contrarians off our progressive backs.
1) Progressives want things NOW, that many of you Contrarians might not want or need NOW. We need them now, cuz we been burnt for 40 years now on too many issues.
2) Progressives really, and truly, want a country that takes care of it's poor, it's downtrodden, and also takes care of its middle class.
3) Progressives believe that the middle class should have jobs, fair working conditions and wages, medical care, education for them and their kids, and that these things should be available to the lower classes, too.
4) Progressives do not believe in deregulation, of anything, as that's been proven thru out history, and the US History, to benefit only the 1% at top. In fact, it coalesces their wealth, power and grip on manipulating all those beneath them.
5) Progs are for the most part antiwar, and don't believe in foreign interventionism as practiced since oh, Korea, Vietnam and such. That's going back to the early 50's post France's beating at Dien Bien Phu, when we flooded into S. Viet for bananas and rubber and sea routes.
So, progs have learned a lot in these defeats, as the GOP destroyed our country, and with the centrist dems, enabled the war machine, the healthcare machine, and the Wall St. machine to wreap ruin upon what was once a thriving middle class.
To get to the point, us progs have learnt to bark and shout loud at the SLIGHTEST provocation because we've learned when we're silent, the centrists, indies and the right wing take over, dominate, and ruin us, ruin we the people.
So the rest of you, back off, STFU, and let us keep the heat on Obama and anyone else to pressure them all to get what will be a benefit for ALL americans.
Healthcare for all, not just fucking health coverage, mandatory coverage that will break the backs of minimum wage workers and their families, but health CARE, and the coverage to get it.
Public plan, only. Single payer, is the goal. Nothing less.
While the rest of you folks sit back and whine about our over reactions, we'll be actually doing the work for you. And I promise, when we get what we want, we won't talk shit to you.
Although it will be really, really tempting seeing's how you people aint' doing shit to get us to a public option, and to single payer.
Harumph.
July 8, 2009 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, larue. Well put, and yes, we are tired of getting rolled.
July 8, 2009 4:13 AM | Reply | Permalink