Health care has the U.S. citizens heated up this summer. As the Obama administration pushes hard for a health care overhaul - trumpeted by a “public option” for health care – Americans have risen up at town hall meetings across the country. So…
“The Obama administration is easing up on its push for a government run insurance program.” “What’s important is choice and competition.” -- Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary
“The public option whether we have it or we don’t have is not the entirety of health care reform this is just one sliver of it.” –- U.S. President Barack Obama
While reasons abound over why the public option could get the can – the question we ask is; what does the flip mean for Obama politically?
We get our answers from MSNBC, FOX News, the Huffington Post and starting us off NBC’s Meet the Press.
On the show this week Rachel Maddow analyzed the backtrack in terms of the President’s political capital.
“…if the President decides to go with a reform effort that doesn’t include a public option what he will have done is have spent a ton of political capital, riled up an incredibly angry right-wing base who’s been told this is a plot to kill grandma and he will have achieved something that doesn’t change healthcare very much, that doesn’t save us very much money and won’t do very much for the American people. It’s not a very good thing to spend a lot of political capital on.”
Former Governor of Vermont and doctor Howard Dean on MSNBC seconds Maddow. Dean believes the President is looking for some “wiggle room” but believes he’s alienating his party who won’t pass the bill without the public option.
“I guess I’d even disagree with the President, to say it’s a sliver of the bill and it’s true technically it’s a sliver of the bill there’s a lot of other stuff in the bill but without a public option you’re pumping $60 billion a year into the private health insurance industry and I think that’s an enormous mistake and it hardly qualifies as reform.”
On FOX News Sunday, Democratic Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota defended Obama saying a compromise was essential if anything’s going to pass this Fall.
“The fact of the matter is there is not the votes in the United States Senate for the public option. There never have been. So to continue to chase that rabbit I think is just a wasted effort.”
But the Huffington Post’s Bill Scher explains Obama’s flippant position on the public option is nothing new. Scher analyzes Obama’s strategy saying it’s possible the Administration…
“…wanted to put it front and center as a punching bag, so they can take it off the table and “compromise” for what they always thought was politically realistic.”
So do you think this backtrack with help Obama get more votes to pass at least some kind of health care reform? Or will a compromise anger liberals and be seen as a sign of weakness?
Additional readings:
ABC News
