LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 20, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

Rise Up or Die

The Lotto Symbolizes the False Promises of Barracuda Capitalism

Obama Unscathed by Scandals, Mayor Denies Smoking Crack, and More

Truthdigger of the Week: Sen. Angus King

Is Democracy in Trouble?

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * What Will Tighter Restrictions on Trade in Iran Do?
 * NEW! * Is Democracy in Trouble?
 * NEW! * Rise Up or Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals
The Girls of Atomic City

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar
1876

1876

By Gore Vidal
$16.00

more items

 
Reports

Some Healthy Summit Skepticism

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Feb 10, 2010

By Ruth Marcus

I’ve been trying, because I’d truly like to see health reform pass, to find something nice to say about President Barack Obama’s plans for a summit. Another summit, that is, nearly a year after the first one. Here’s the best I could come up with: It can’t hurt. Consider it “Chicken Soup for the Legislative Soul.”

When the president used his Super Bowl Sunday interview with CBS News’ Katie Couric to launch this Hail Mary summit pass, he explained that “what I want to do is to look at the Republican ideas that are out there. ... ‘How do you guys want to lower costs? How do you guys intend to reform the insurance market so people with pre-existing conditions, for example, can get health care? How do you want to make sure that the 30 million people who don’t have health insurance can get it?’ ... And if we can go step by step through a series of these issues, and arrive at some agreements, then procedurally, there’s no reason why we can’t do it a lot faster than the process took last year.”

Sure, like in the movie “Dave,” where the faux president and his accountant buddy order some chow, roll up their sleeves, and straighten out the budget books. Except this time, in half a day at Blair House with the opposition party pulling up a chair. On live television.

To take this at face value is to assume that (a) these conversations have not been occurring over the last year, which flies in the face of Democratic assertions that they have accepted numerous Republican ideas, or that (b) Republicans are correct that they’ve been shut out of the sausage-making, which ignores the endless weeks of negotiations among the Senate Finance Committee “Gang of Six.”

But the president’s proposal was not really meant to be taken at face value. In case the president’s ducking of Couric’s question about his willingness to “start at square one” wasn’t clear enough, the White House came out to emphasize that, no, the president wasn’t backing away from the measures that have already passed both houses of Congress. He plans to come to the table with a merged Democratic blueprint as his starting point. Republicans should feel free to chime in, though.

Advertisement

To call this Kabuki is to insult the Japanese art form. I am no fan of the House Republican leadership, but under these circumstances it’s hard to fault Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia for suggesting that they might have better things to do than serving as Democratic stage props.

As a general matter, I’m a summit skeptic. Summit-as-educational-launching-pad is fine—like the one the administration held last March—but the time for this has passed and, in any event, the gabfest/summit requires follow-up to be worth the time. The administration made a big fuss about its fiscal responsibility summit last February, and promptly dropped the ball.

Summit-as-Yalta-map-drawing-moment is promising, in theory. But it requires two sides willing to cut a deal and the private space—sorry, C-SPAN—to accomplish it. Think congressional leaders behind closed doors at Andrews Air Force Base. The president’s mistake wasn’t in failing to live up to his promise to televise health care negotiations, it was making such a cynical promise to begin with. Cynical, not naive, because surely candidate Obama, even as he milked the applause line, didn’t really imagine the cameras would be rolling.

So a summit aspiring to be more than show would require Obama to deliver his promised break from politics as usual. A cardinal rule of political negotiation is never to give something for nothing. But what if the president were to offer Republicans an inducement—say tort reform? He has pointed to defensive medicine as one contributor to rising health costs. If “that’s a real issue,” as Obama told doctors last June, why not add it to the existing Democratic plans?

I can see them in the White House now, snickering. Would this kind of pre-emptive strike entice Republicans to cooperate? Not en masse, but enough such flexibility might pick off a few. It would show a Democratic Party willing to stand up to its own special interests for the public good, and a Republican Party—assuming it balks—unwilling to compromise.

If you’re going to serve chicken soup, Mr. President, might as well ladle some meat into the bowl.
   
Ruth Marcus’ e-mail address is marcusr(at symbol)washpost.com.
   
© 2010, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By hark, February 12, 2010 at 9:58 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Republicans won’t govern, the Democrats can’t govern.

At least the Republicans are true to their ideology - they believe government is always the problem, never the solution, so obstructionism is the game they play when they are occasionally out of power.  They believe they serve the country best by immobilizing government, dismantling it, except, of course, for the war machine.  That’s what they do, and they are good at it.

The Democrats are just plain incompetent.

Report this
LostHills's avatar

By LostHills, February 11, 2010 at 7:11 pm Link to this comment

“Bi=partisanship” is just another word for selling out. If the Democrats wanted to
pass real health care reform they would have done it already.

Report this

By John Kace, February 11, 2010 at 2:53 am Link to this comment

If all of my health care needs and the health care needs of my dependents were covered 100% no matter what. I would volunteer a portion of my pay if within reason. What we realy need is more Doctors less lawyers and elections more often, every year I think. Make voting like heroin and war addictive. Drain the coffers of corruption.

Report this

By Filler Crowley, February 10, 2010 at 9:12 pm Link to this comment

This article was alright, except that Ruth seems to believe that the best course of action would be for the Democrats to just abandon their work and just do whatever Republicans want. So actually now that I think about it this article is actually really terrible, like everything else Ruth writes. How about we stop letting writers for the Washington Post shit all over the good thing we’ve got going here, Truthdig?

Report this

By lichen, February 10, 2010 at 4:22 pm Link to this comment

How about a national referendum on single-payer health care; allow no advertising, and see what happens.  A majority would vote yes, and then we could have real human rights in this country.  We don’t need the f!@#$%^ democrats and republicans, with their petty partisan politics and far-right political ideologies to be in the way.

Report this

By bozh, February 10, 2010 at 8:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The word “reform” has many cheery connotations and that’s why the word was chosen.
But the congress now being 98% to 2% bipartisan in favor of the minority, minority will get what it wants.

The change might be slightly worse for some people, ab the same for others, and still better for some others.

But in the end, one or two% owing 99-100% congress, wins once again.
And even the law wld have been fulfilled! That’s the greatness of america;i.e., america numero uno or the twopercenters!

Report this

By Vic Anderson, February 10, 2010 at 7:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Summit ... slummit! Just(ly) insist upon single-payer (AS PROMISED) and veto
anything else, Until DEMiserpublicans DELIVER!! LEAD, Obummer!!!

Report this

By altara, February 10, 2010 at 7:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Republicans respond to President Obama to the televised bipartisan meeting to exchange ideas on health care reform. In addition to demanding that Obama scrap the pending health care legislation (after almost a year of work and countless pages) the Republicans demand that the President renounce reconciliation. This strategy harks back to the Bush rules on talks with opposing nations: ” give up your positions and we’ll talk.”

homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com

Report this

By idarad, February 10, 2010 at 5:55 am Link to this comment

Maybe the summit won’t hurt - but health insurance protection (aka health care reform) certainly will.  It would be best to walk away from this farce, and focus on getting out of the torture and killing game, reduce the Pentagon, eliminate the NSA, CIA and JSOC, take those moneys and hire people to fix the infrastructure.

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.