http://www.truthout.org/1026096
People Power Matters: The Public Option Lives!
by: Dean Baker,
t r u t h o u t : 26 October 2009
In spite of the best efforts of the insurance industry and their
followers in Congress and the media, it is still very possible that the
health reform bill passed by Congress will include a robust public plan.
This is a case where the simple facts and persistent grassroots pressure may
overcome the political power of a major industry.
If the bill passes with a serious public plan, it could make an enormous
difference for the future of health care in the United States. However, the
fact that the public option is even on the table at this point, after all
the political experts had counted it out, shows the enormous potential for
popular pressure to influence policy debates in this country.
The basic story is that President Obama and the Democratic leadership in
Congress had always been lukewarm in their support of a public plan.
President Obama had included it in his original proposal, but has made it
clear on numerous occasions that he did not view it as an essential part of
his health care plan.
Of course, that is not the way that presidents get measures passed that
they really want. President Clinton never said that he didn't view NAFTA as
being a big part of his trade policy. President Bush didn't say that
Congressional authorization of the Iraq war was a relatively small matter in
his larger foreign policy agenda. President Obama's statements, that a
public option was not essential, were an invitation to Congress to give him
a bill that did not include a public plan.
This could have been the end of the story for a public plan, except for
the determined efforts of progressive activists to insist that Congress
include a public plan. While the plan's opponents argued that the leadership
did not have the 60 votes needed in the Senate to end a filibuster, public
plan supporters pointed out that public plan opponents did not have the 218
votes needed in the House to get a health care plan approved without a
public option. The logic was simple, if progressive members in the House
refused to back a health care bill without a public plan, then any health
care bill that passes Congress would have to include a public option. A
large coalition of progressive groups kept up the pressure, insisting that
Democrats in the House insist that any bill include a public option. They
bombarded members with phone calls, faxes, emails and staged protests and
organized petitions. This coalition was helped by polls that consistently
show a large majority of the public support giving people the option to join
a Medicare-type public plan. In fact, a recent New York Times poll showed
people supporting a public option by a margin of 65 to 26 percent. The same
poll showed that overall health care reform package losing by a small
margin.
Supporters of a public plan have also been helped by the facts. The
Congressional Budget Office's analysis shows that a robust public plan, with
rates tied to Medicare rates, can save $100 billion over the next decade.
This is a substantial portion of the money needed to cover the cost of the
health care bill. Given the popular support for a public plan and the
evidence that it could save substantial amounts of money, it is clear that
opponents of a public option are not responding to constituents or concerns
over costs.
The sustained pressure from progressives seems to have firmed support
for a public plan in the House, but there is still the issue of getting 60
votes in the Senate. Here, it is important to make a distinction that the
media and political pundits have tried to hide. It is not necessary to get
60 senators who will support a public plan. It is necessary to get 60
senators who will allow the Senate to vote on a public plan. This is very
different.
Until recently, filibusters were unusual. It was standard practice for a
senator to support cloture - allowing a piece of legislation to come up for
a vote - but then to vote against the bill itself. Filibusters were reserved
for extraordinary issues that members of the Senate felt were especially
important.
Currently, Democrats have 60 seats in the Senate. This means that the
party just needs its members to allow the central piece of its president's
legislative agenda to come to a vote. That should not require too much party
discipline; after all, the senators could still vote against the bill
itself.
It's too early to know if this "no filibuster" path will succeed, but
the fact that a public plan is still in the mix is a testament to the
ability of grassroots activists to move the national political agenda. The
political insiders will do their best to deny it, but political pressure
from the masses can and does make a difference. It has made a difference in
the debate over health care and it can make a difference in other areas.
Let's see what a little grassroots activism can do for the Wall Street
banks.
People Power Matters: The Public Option Lives!
by: Dean Baker,
t r u t h o u t : 26 October 2009
In spite of the best efforts of the insurance industry and their
followers in Congress and the media, it is still very possible that the
health reform bill passed by Congress will include a robust public plan.
This is a case where the simple facts and persistent grassroots pressure may
overcome the political power of a major industry.
If the bill passes with a serious public plan, it could make an enormous
difference for the future of health care in the United States. However, the
fact that the public option is even on the table at this point, after all
the political experts had counted it out, shows the enormous potential for
popular pressure to influence policy debates in this country.
The basic story is that President Obama and the Democratic leadership in
Congress had always been lukewarm in their support of a public plan.
President Obama had included it in his original proposal, but has made it
clear on numerous occasions that he did not view it as an essential part of
his health care plan.
Of course, that is not the way that presidents get measures passed that
they really want. President Clinton never said that he didn't view NAFTA as
being a big part of his trade policy. President Bush didn't say that
Congressional authorization of the Iraq war was a relatively small matter in
his larger foreign policy agenda. President Obama's statements, that a
public option was not essential, were an invitation to Congress to give him
a bill that did not include a public plan.
This could have been the end of the story for a public plan, except for
the determined efforts of progressive activists to insist that Congress
include a public plan. While the plan's opponents argued that the leadership
did not have the 60 votes needed in the Senate to end a filibuster, public
plan supporters pointed out that public plan opponents did not have the 218
votes needed in the House to get a health care plan approved without a
public option. The logic was simple, if progressive members in the House
refused to back a health care bill without a public plan, then any health
care bill that passes Congress would have to include a public option. A
large coalition of progressive groups kept up the pressure, insisting that
Democrats in the House insist that any bill include a public option. They
bombarded members with phone calls, faxes, emails and staged protests and
organized petitions. This coalition was helped by polls that consistently
show a large majority of the public support giving people the option to join
a Medicare-type public plan. In fact, a recent New York Times poll showed
people supporting a public option by a margin of 65 to 26 percent. The same
poll showed that overall health care reform package losing by a small
margin.
Supporters of a public plan have also been helped by the facts. The
Congressional Budget Office's analysis shows that a robust public plan, with
rates tied to Medicare rates, can save $100 billion over the next decade.
This is a substantial portion of the money needed to cover the cost of the
health care bill. Given the popular support for a public plan and the
evidence that it could save substantial amounts of money, it is clear that
opponents of a public option are not responding to constituents or concerns
over costs.
The sustained pressure from progressives seems to have firmed support
for a public plan in the House, but there is still the issue of getting 60
votes in the Senate. Here, it is important to make a distinction that the
media and political pundits have tried to hide. It is not necessary to get
60 senators who will support a public plan. It is necessary to get 60
senators who will allow the Senate to vote on a public plan. This is very
different.
Until recently, filibusters were unusual. It was standard practice for a
senator to support cloture - allowing a piece of legislation to come up for
a vote - but then to vote against the bill itself. Filibusters were reserved
for extraordinary issues that members of the Senate felt were especially
important.
Currently, Democrats have 60 seats in the Senate. This means that the
party just needs its members to allow the central piece of its president's
legislative agenda to come to a vote. That should not require too much party
discipline; after all, the senators could still vote against the bill
itself.
It's too early to know if this "no filibuster" path will succeed, but
the fact that a public plan is still in the mix is a testament to the
ability of grassroots activists to move the national political agenda. The
political insiders will do their best to deny it, but political pressure
from the masses can and does make a difference. It has made a difference in
the debate over health care and it can make a difference in other areas.
Let's see what a little grassroots activism can do for the Wall Street
banks.
***
----- Original Message -----
From: NELA Health Action
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 7:12 PM
Subject: Oct 30 Health Care March
Demand Health Care Now!
March for Health care Public Option
Friday, October 30
5:00 PM
Echo Park Blvd & Sunset Blvd
You are subscribed to this list as epearlag@earthlink.net.
Click here to unsubscribe, or send email to unsubscribe.389265.296356606.3813447654948806094-epearlag_earthlink.net@en.groundspring.org.
Neighbors for Peace and Justice
neighborsforpeaceandjustice.org
Los Angeles, California 90026
United States
No comments:
Post a Comment