Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Progressive Members of the House Think We’ll Accept Co-Ops As Public Plan, Think Again

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-20-09 11:43 AM
Original message
If Progressive Members of the House Think We’ll Accept Co-Ops As Public Plan, Think Again

Matt Taibbi says that Rahm Emanuel's health care debacle could be to the Obama administration what the Iraq war was to George Bush.

He's right.

Matt says that progressives in the House might not vote for a bill that does not have a public option. If that's true, it's because of external pressure, not internal resolve. They were dragged kicking and screaming to that position. They knew -- as we did -- in late June that co-ops were going to be fobbed off as a "public plan." They did not want to publicly commit to draw a line in the sand.

June 15: Max Baucus announces his "co-op" plan, which was quite obviously developed to substitute for the public plan. Jerrold Nadler rightly calls it a "fake public plan."

June 23: We announce our whip count effort to get members of Congress to pledge to vote against any health care bill without a strong public plan. "The American public is on our side, and they need to know that Kent Conrad's co-op plan is just kabuki."

June 24: Leaders of the Quad Caucus come together to say that they represent 117 members of the House who will vote against any health care bill that does not have a robust public option. But when readers call the offices of individual members, nobody will confirm this. We're told by Hill staffers that they believe naming no names makes this stronger, and they're angry at us for calling attention to the weakness of their strategy to hide under the umbrella of the caucus.

July 1: Donna Edwards, someone that the online community raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for in her two runs for the House, who campaigned on health care reform, won't return my emails or calls for 10 days, so I write about it.

July 9: Lynn Woolsey says she's got 60 votes who will vote against any bill that doesn't have a public option. I wrote that "if Lynn Woolsey's got 60 votes, I've got leprechauns in my laundry room." Having been through the supplemental battle and knowing the value of having those commitments be public, I said if she had them, she should name them.

June 9: When progressive members of congress simply will not answer our questions or those of their constituents about what they'll do if there's no public plan in the final bill, we hire Mike Stark to go up on Capitol Hill and confront them with a simple question: will you or won't you commit to voting against a bill that does not have a strong public option?

Continued>>>
http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/08/20/if-progressive-members-of-the-house-think-well-accept-co-ops-as-public-plan-think-again/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-20-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
1. You got that right. This is truly "a line in the sand."
Why do we pacify the corporate blue dogs and the DLC when progressives provided the lion's share of support and campaign funds/time in order to support this Administration.

Dammit! This is NOT a game and the lack of a public option in this reform bill is a "NO GO" for continued support.

WHY don't the whores in our M$M care and fully address and correct THE CORPORATE LIES?!?

Follow the money. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ernesto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-20-09 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's go DU'ers!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-20-09 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
3. Co-ops are divide and conquer. Little regional bits that can be micro-managed to death.
Typical thug bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-20-09 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. Very interesting. k&r for exposure. n/t
:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC