Drudge: Democrats ready to go it alone on ObamaCare? Update: NYT link added

posted at 9:22 pm on August 18, 2009 by Allahpundit

A teaser for an NYT bombshell due out later. Normally I wouldn’t post on it until the article’s up but this can only mean that they’re going to go all out for the public option and use “reconciliation” if need be to nuke the filibuster in the Senate, no? Why cut the GOP out of negotiations only to settle for some watered-down alternative like co-ops? If you’re going to kick the minority party out of the room and anger half the country, you might as well make the bill as syrupy sweet to your own side as possible. And if that means having to take a precedent-setting step as draconian as reconciliation to deal with Blue Dogs like Ben Nelson who might not accept a public option, hey. Besides, Grassley and Jon Kyl all but told the Democrats today that they won’t vote for the final bill regardless of what’s in it, in which case it’s pointless for The One to keep making concessions. He might as well get the bill he wants, paint the GOP as “the party of no”, and hope that the inevitable ill effects of his program don’t appear before the midterms. Which they probably won’t.

While we wait for the Times piece, a few fun data points from the new NBC poll out tonight. Note the numbers on question 15. The One’s really rolling the dice here.

Update: Here’s the NYT piece. Nothing concrete.

[S]uch a change could alter the dynamic of talks surrounding health care legislation, and even change the substance of a final bill. With no need to negotiate with Republicans, Democrats might be better able to move more quickly, relying on their large majorities in both houses. Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan…

Administration officials, who maintain that Republicans are badly mischaracterizing the legislation that has emerged from three House committees and the Senate health committee, said they had hoped to achieve some level of bipartisan support. But they are becoming increasingly convinced that they will instead have to navigate the complicated politics among varying Democratic factions.

The officials said the White House hoped to make the case to the American people that it was Republicans who had abandoned the effort at bipartisanship. Republicans countered by saying that they simply opposed the legislation and that the public outcry had validated their view and solidified their opposition.

One senior administration official said the sense within the White House was that Republicans, in an effort to undermine President Obama and Congressional Democrats, had made a political calculation to oppose any health care legislation.

Thus did a party that no longer has enough Senate seats to pull a filibuster somehow become an obstructionist, utopia-destroying leviathan. Belated exit question: Is this all just a ruse by The One to put pressure on the Blue Dogs to accept a public option? Symbolically kicking the GOP out of the negotiations leaves the media free to focus on conservative Democrats as the true stumbling block to universal health care. Ironically, the “go it alone” move may be aimed more at his own side than at the GOP.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 8 9 10

We’re screwed, but at least we know Obama will be a one term President.

jeffn21 on August 19, 2009 at 9:35 AM

pannw on August 19, 2009 at 9:33 AM

Arizona went whole hog last fall and amended their constitution against federal healthcare.

elduende on August 19, 2009 at 9:36 AM

There is NO “Public Option”. It is either a Government or Government Funded option.

barnone on August 19, 2009 at 9:36 AM

It will be interesting to see if the Tennessee State Soverienty resolution passed by our legislature and signed by our (Democrat) governor last February will have any meaning. I imagine we’ll need other states to join with us.
pannw on August 19, 2009

Texas?

Seriously, it will come down to drastic measures to stop the socialist express……and what is happening is not socialist lite, it seems we are trying to mirror Venezuela.

Goodeye_Closed on August 19, 2009 at 9:39 AM

I really don’t believe the democrats in the senate are going to risk the kind of backlash they would face by going it alone.

Texas on August 19, 2009 at 1:55 AM

The DemCong will NEVER go solo on anything. They need the RINOs for cover and someone to rollover and blame. If they get a ‘public option/co-op’ and pass it with the congressional, gubmint woikers and unions exempted, you are going to see the biggest turnover in congressional history.

belad on August 19, 2009 at 9:42 AM

Well they did win…

CrankyIndependent on August 18, 2009 at 9:41 PM

And every single one of them took an Oath of Office to uphold and defend the Constitution. If they pass a piece of legislation that is blatantly un-Constitutional, it is a breach of their Oath of Office.

If they knowingly do that, they should be investigated as a domestic enemy for high crimes.

Its time to start REALLY holding them accountable. There are no consequences for their actions. Its time to change that.

dominigan on August 19, 2009 at 9:46 AM

If they knowingly do that, they should be investigated as a domestic enemy for high crimes.

Ha! And I suppose Richard Nixon’s universal healthcare proposals were also anti-constitutional. That’s why he was really threatened with removal from office.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:47 AM

If anyone can distinguish between Nixon’s proposals here and the kinds of things some people are calling “high crimes of treason” now, I’d love to hear it.

Nixon on Universal Healthcare

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:50 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Were there twenty million illegals back then?

OldEnglish on August 19, 2009 at 9:56 AM

And, vow to scrap it all once we get the House back.

Sapwolf on August 18, 2009 at 9:41 PM

Can’t happen, it’s like putting toothpaste back in the tube…once it happens, it’s over and they know it.

tatersalad on August 18, 2009 at 9:43 PM

Yes, it can. It has happened before, most recently with social security modification. If this gets through on reconciliation, it will be reversed.

Vashta.Nerada on August 19, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Were there twenty million illegals back then?

OldEnglish on August 19, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Wait a minute. Is the claim that healthcare IS within the province of the Constitution only in a country where there aren’t a large percentage of illegal immigrants? That’s certainly not close to anything the founders wrote. And I’ll add, at the time of the writing of the constitution there were LOTS of “illegal” immigrants all throughout the borders of the new republic.

But more importantly? Every bill that includes a public option excludes illegal immigrants from coverage. It would be nice if they included massive penalties for businesses who hire illegals in the bill, but then you’d have a whole other set of debates.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:59 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:47 AM

I wasn’t even old enough to vote… and yes, I would now support prosecuting EVERYONE who violates their Oath of Office to uphold the Constitution.

Stop trying to pigeonhole me into a convenient party for your misguided attacks.

PRINCIPLES OVER PARTY!

dominigan on August 19, 2009 at 10:01 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:47 AM

Debate me on the content of my comment.

What they are trying to pass right now for healthcare is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Each of them took an Oath of Office to uphold and defend the Constitution.

If they are knowingly violating their Oath of Office, they should be removed.

And yes, I was passive too long. The Dems have now stirred me up and I realize that principles MUST come first… and that ALL of our elected officials need to be held to the same standard. I don’t care what party they are in!

dominigan on August 19, 2009 at 10:04 AM

And yes, I propose we take back Congress in 2010, the Presidency in 2012, and repeal nearly every law and Government agency in the last few decades!

dominigan on August 19, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Has anyone noticed that the existence of public options has not prevented the success of private:

-education
-security firms
-housing
-shipping services
Why would it threaten private health insurance. What people against the public option consistently ignore is that few Americans “choose” their healthcare now. Most are covered under an employer plan which IS a massive single payer system, just contained within an employer.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM

How many private schools do you think there were before public schools came on the scene? Private schools by the thousands have closed since then. Look at the Catholic school system in Chicago now versus what it was.

Security firms are similarly a niche business. Shipping is a larger niche, but the public and private entities employ different business models, so don’t compete directly in the bulk of their operations. Housing is just a bizarre example, so I’m not sure what you mean. Most people choose their housing by location, not by who owns or runs it. Since most public housing is in locations that most people find undesirable, I don’t see how it competes with private housing.

As far as “choosing” health insurance providers, yes, as an employee I do not, but there is a staff of HR people dedicated to just that task, trying to ensure the best deal for the company.

So, neither your analogies nor your statement on health insurance in the workplace now make any sense.

venividivici on August 19, 2009 at 10:06 AM

It can’t be any better then this, a threat from democrats to thumb their nose at popular opinion.
The war they will be engaged in, will be with the people who supported them to power…they have lost the conservatives, it is the “middle” they need, and this is who they will have a fight with, not us.
Suicide…which is fine by me.

right2bright on August 19, 2009 at 10:11 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Your going back to Nixon? That is totally irrelevent. It was a long time ago, it didn’t go anywhere, etc.

I hope you don’t think this is an us versus them, Democrat versus Republican struggle here. We need to stop the direction our country has been heading for quite some time under both republican and democrat leadership. it has finally come to a head and we are at a pivotal moment. Either we will finally be swallowed whole by our government or we will restore our republic and get back to the limited government our founders urged us to protect with our lives.

Goodeye_Closed on August 19, 2009 at 10:12 AM

Has anyone noticed that the existence of public options has not prevented the success of private:

-education
-security firms
-housing
-shipping services
Why would it threaten private health insurance. What people against the public option consistently ignore is that few Americans “choose” their healthcare now. Most are covered under an employer plan which IS a massive single payer system, just contained within an employer.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Have you tried to buy private crop insurance or private flood insurance lately?

tmitsss on August 19, 2009 at 10:24 AM

And every single one of them took an Oath of Office to uphold and defend the Constitution. If they pass a piece of legislation that is blatantly UN-Constitutional, it is a breach of their Oath of Office.
dominigan on August 19, 2009 at 9:46 AM

People assumed that they would follow the rules and not Rahm things down our throats.
Does anybody think that they would have won if they had told us they would use these kinds of tactics?

An it doesn’t matter if they LIED Through their teeth about it, like they ALWAYS do.

They ran in the framework of the Constitution, those are the rules, that’s how the game is played.

Chainsaw56 on August 19, 2009 at 10:38 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:59 AM

First, I was answering your question as to what is different now, versus Clinton’s time.

Second, a great many people are of the opinion that the Constitution does not cover this sort of interference in people’s lives.

OldEnglish on August 19, 2009 at 10:46 AM

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:50 AM

So Democrats could have had UHC in 1974, but they chose to play politics instead. Color me surprised. They also had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the CRM, but to hear them tell it, they’ve been courageously upholding human rights since the Emancipation Proclamation.

Not that UHC is a civil rights issue, a Constitutional right or a human rights issue. Life, liberty and happiness — of which health is one of those — are rights from your Creator. The government has no business making life and death decisions for you. Period.

From what I understand, Nixon proposed Universal heathcare ACCESS not a guaranteed government bureaucracy to MANDATE healthcare. Given his basic conservatism, his success in China, the winding down of the War in Vietnam and his overwhelming re-election victory in 1972, Nixon’s push for a universal health care system that would be built on the concept of using existing employer-sponsored insurance plans and government subsidies for the self-employed and small businesses might very well have carried the day under normal circumstances.

We are not living in normal circumstances now. We have huge deficits — which Obama contributed to while dwarfing Bush spending — and a mismanaged federal bureaucracy. Medicaid/ Medicare and Social Security are bankrupt. Countries that have UHC in place are rationing care, closing facilities and reporting losses. Why are we trying to bring a system that is a known failure to the US? Why are the Democrats bringing up Nixon, when they opposed his plans before and their own healthcare plans bear little resemblance to his?

chunderroad on August 19, 2009 at 10:56 AM

Symbolically kicking the GOP out of the negotiations leaves the media free to focus on conservative Democrats as the true stumbling block to universal health care. Ironically, the “go it alone” move may be aimed more at his own side than at the GOP.

“I won.”

He kicked the GOP out of the negotiations a long time ago. He has been way too soft on his own party, who know what a far left radical he is and supported him throughout the primaries and the general election. They all staked their political fortunes to their “Jesus Christ Superstar.” Now that they’re all in the same boat together, time to row.

chunderroad on August 19, 2009 at 11:02 AM

So Democrats could have had UHC in 1974, but they chose to play politics instead. Color me surprised. They also had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the CRM, but to hear them tell it, they’ve been courageously upholding human rights since the Emancipation Proclamation.

Yup Democrats are useless. But so are Republicans so there ya go.

From what I understand, Nixon proposed Universal heathcare ACCESS not a guaranteed government bureaucracy to MANDATE healthcare.

Which is why I oppose a government mandate and support a government insurance option.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 11:05 AM

Which is why I oppose a government mandate and support a government insurance option.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 11:05 AM

Problem is that even a government ‘option’ will almost surely end up destroying private options, if for no other reason than the fact that they’ll have a huge consumer base.

Think about what kind of advantage a *private* insurance company would have if they could extract payments from nearly every American, like it or not, and who would then have to pay extra to get someone else’s coverage. It wouldn’t even be a contest.

Dark-Star on August 19, 2009 at 11:23 AM

Yup Democrats are useless. But so are Republicans so there ya go.

LOL I guess that’s why you’re a “cranky independent.” /sarc

I love the smell of moral equivalence in the morning. It smells like victory.

Which is why I oppose a government mandate and support a government insurance option.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 11:05 AM

Well, that’s not the plan. As Dark-Star so eloquently pointed out. You’re a liar and a shill. I’ll leave you to someone else. Goodbye.

chunderroad on August 19, 2009 at 11:28 AM

chunderroad on August 19, 2009 at 11:28 AM

I think CI is merely deluded and mildly ignorant of economics on this count, not outright lying.

Dark-Star on August 19, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Just 34% of voters nationwide support the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats if the so-called “public option” is removed. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 57% oppose the plan if it doesn’t include a government-run health insurance plan to compete with private insurers.

–latest from Rasmussen.

Jimbo3 on August 19, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Oh SNAP! For some reason I can’t comment on headline threads yet (is it because I’m a new registrant). But just had to post this. If Rasmussen is getting this than my reading of the poll numbers on healthcare are much better than I thought.

Public Option Kind of Necessary

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Well, that’s not the plan.

And if you could read you’d know I don’t support the plan in its current form. Christ….

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 11:56 AM

crankyindependent….FYI, the headline area are external links and not subject to comments from HA

Goodeye_Closed on August 19, 2009 at 1:27 PM

What this really means is the dem leadership knows they are in trouble and they are desperate. They really hate the new politic of America, where the people can actually scrutinize them and communicate with them, make their opinions heard.

The libs lived in an insulated ivory tower inside the beltway for seventy years and grew comfortable fat, stupid, lazy and corrupt. In the new politic, the people, the electorate, now for the first time really, have the ability to fulfill the promise and the plan of the founders, to step up and assume the mantle that is rightly theirs to take.

The electorate has learned that the phrase “of the People, by the People, and for the PEOPLE” is real!

And the libs absolutely hate it, but they are steadily losing their control…

dogsoldier on August 19, 2009 at 1:39 PM

That was one of the reasons we were founded as a republic. Hopefully to limit the damage of a democracy. Unfortunately, it is only delaying the inevitable.

Fighton03 on August 19, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Marx predicted it. Capitalism leads to a socialist economy when the population swells and monopolies are formed in the marketplace. Government entity has to step-in and regulate.

It’s just what happens. It’s been happening here for over 90 years and will continue to happen.

welcome_ghosts on August 19, 2009 at 12:59 AM

Post of the thread, especially in conjunction with welcome_ghosts posts ridiculing Sarah Palin fans. Comedy gold.

ddrintn on August 19, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Seeing the libs implode is like watching a slow motion train wreck, except that, they’re such weenies, they’d all be driving Priuses.

ted c on August 19, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Has anyone noticed that the existence of public options has not prevented the success of private:

-education
-security firms
-housing
-shipping services
Why would it threaten private health insurance. What people against the public option consistently ignore is that few Americans “choose” their healthcare now. Most are covered under an employer plan which IS a massive single payer system, just contained within an employer.

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM

Of course, how silly of us not to have seen that!

I’m sure everyone remembers when those provisions went into effect where, if there was any change in the private housing that you were in, you were forced to go to the public housing “option”. I remember it like it was yesterday…

That was in effect for schools too, remember? If you were going to a private school, and you liked your private school, you could keep it… unless, of course, they changed some aspect of it, and then you had to go through the public school “option”.

And who could forget when private security services were forced to go through government panels to determine if they met “minimum standards” as defined by the public security “option” before they could take on any new customers?

Who here remembers the bad old days when people could “opt out” of using the USPS without penalty? I mean, come on! Getting mail around the country is an expensive business. We can’t have people just choosing not to use it if they don’t think they need it… the system needs VOLUME in order to get those necessary “efficiencies of scale”. Boy, I’m glad we fixed that by imposing a ‘voluntary penalty’ of 7-8% of people’s adjusted gross income if they wanted to not do their “fair share”.

It wasn’t a tax, of course. That would have violated the President’s pledge that if you made less that $250,000 per year your taxes wouldn’t go up “a dime”.

No, you see, you had the (public) OPTION to do what you were told. If you didn’t take that OPTION, the penalty you pay is your own fault. It’s not a tax, even though it’s based on a percentage of your income.

I guess you’re right, Cranky. The current health care “public option” proposals are just like the examples that you provided.

VekTor on August 19, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Holy crappola! He wants an unstable country/therefore not only health takeover, but what’s next-martial state?

This is nuts!!!

ProudPalinFan on August 19, 2009 at 8:27 PM

What’s even more depressing is that the Republicans are totally milking the current outrage, but they don’t seem to have any ideas or arguments against the current plan.

Upstater85 on August 18, 2009 at 9:30 PM


+1!!!

ProudPalinFan on August 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM

Ed,

I’ve been wanting for some time to have a web-cam meeting amongst us. What say you? Allah, well, it’s near Halloween time (from what I see) so wear your fav character’s mask.

ProudPalinFan on August 19, 2009 at 9:01 PM

If anyone can distinguish between Nixon’s proposals here and the kinds of things some people are calling “high crimes of treason” now, I’d love to hear it.

Nixon on Universal Healthcare

CrankyIndependent on August 19, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Nixon also created the EPA and admitted to Milton Friedman’s face that he had become a Keynesian. What’s your point?

Were you under the impression that conservatives enshrined Nixon as a model fiscal conservative?

Khorum on August 19, 2009 at 9:10 PM

I’ve had all day to look at this – and it’s hogwash. I don’t think the Dems have the votes to pass this even if they do use the nuclear option.

Don’t start thinking this administration is crazy like a fox … they aren’t.

They are in full retreat – and firing shots over their shoulders while they high-tail it for the hills. This is Obama’s last stand – and in this – he will fare no better than Custer did at his.

Seriously – look at the polls, particularly the indie’s – he’s lost them and he won’t get them back. There will be a big backlash in next year’s elections. Further – this is going to degenerate into a Democratic Party Civil War – with the Hillary wing on one side and the ObamaNuts on the other. Really – it’s going to come to that – as the realization starts to sink in with moderate Dems when they come back from recess.

There will be no more significant items passed on Obama’s agenda. Why? Because all of those items are Socialist in nature and the backlash right now is against Socialism.

Stick a fork in him – he’s done.

You heard it here first.

HondaV65 on August 19, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Are we a More Perfect Union yet?

Cybergeezer on August 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM

Comment pages: 1 8 9 10