EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Daschle Admits -- Then Denies -- That White House Agreed With Industry To Scrap Public Option
In a candid interview with the Center for American Progress [on Tuesday], former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle acknowledged that the public option didn't survive the health care debate because of a "understanding" that the White House reached with health care industry stakeholders -- particularly with hospital and insurance company trade associations. But the White House has long denied this suggestion -- which was, until now, based mostly on speculation -- and within hours of the report's initial publication, Daschle, a close White House ally, retracted his statement entirely.
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle acknowledged that the public option didn't survive the health care debate because of a "understanding" that the White House reached with health care industry stakeholders. He later walked back this admission. (File image) "I don't think it was taken off the table completely. It was
taken off the table as a result of the understanding that people had
with the hospital association, with the insurance (AHIP), and others,"
Daschle told Wonk Room's Igor Volsky. "I mean I think that part of the
whole effort was based on a premise. That premise was, you had to have
the stakeholders in the room and at the table. Lessons learned in past
efforts is that without the stakeholders' active support rather than
active opposition, it's almost impossible to get this job done. They
wanted to keep those stakeholders in the room and [the public option] was the price some thought they had to pay."
That rendering flies in the face of the White House's narrative, so
TPM emailed Daschle to ask whether his statement reflected first-hand
knowledge of the stakeholder negotiations, or was a conclusion he'd
drawn independently. In response, he walked back the entire claim.
"In describing some of the challenges to passage of the public option
in the health reform bill, I did not mean to suggest in any way that
the President was not committed to it," Daschle emails. "The President
fought for the public option just as he did for affordable health care
for all Americans. The public option was dropped only when it was no longer viable in Congress, not as a result of any deal cut by the White House.
While I was disappointed that the public option was not included in the
final legislation, the Affordable Care Act remains a tremendous
achievement for the President and the nation."
And so the game of whodunnit continues.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
86 Comments so far
Show AllThis is why this guy lost and should have; however, It's a shame it was to a republiCON!
Obama seems not to be bothered with facts. The adulation has rendered him incapable of fallibility in his own eyes. His wish is fact as far as he is concerned. A foible shaed by his cronys.
How can I ever forgive the Democrats for voting for the Republican Healthscare scam?
this should be on every bumpersticker.
we need to change this saying to: bad cop\worse cop...
even better would be 2 bowls of shit only difference is one smells a little worse than the other.
matt
A respected proctologist said that the only difference between Democrat shit and Republican shit is the texture.
Since you guys brought up the topic, both wings of the Corporate Party are ten pounds of shit in five-pound bag.
lol you guys crack me up. if ten pounds of shit is too much for the five pound bag then it goes right through the bottom and it's a shitty mess everywhere. wait that is kind what our elections are like with dims and repugs.
vote green
matt
harris county green party
A lot of Democrats seem not to realize that "Obamacare" was originally a Republican counter-proposal to the attempt by the Clinton Administration to reform healthcare in the 90's. Not surprising, considering that it helps to have a very short memory if you're going to be that much of a Kool-Aid-drinking blind follower. The Democrats wouldn't be facing losing control of the House were it not for the fact that a lot of voters want to *SLAP* the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party for forcing this absurd boondoggle down the country's throat. Not that I think it ultimately matters which corporate party controls the national legislature, but the whole thing will be interesting to note should the Democrats at least lose the House and the Democratic Party Kool-Aid drinkers subsequently refuse to recognize that they have Obamacare to thank for this loss.
Yes, they wanted to keep the "stakeholders" in the room and it reveals so explicitly how they really think. We, the public, the users of health care services have no stake in the system, are not stakeholders, therefore we are not in the room. We are the "f--king retards" who want something like Canadian style Health Care. The ultimate contempt they have for us is that we aren't even a factor in their political deal making. Until election time when we are told to "buck up." When elections come we are supposed to be loyal, we are supposed to get out the vote, we are supposed to help Barrack fight his enemies like corporate for profit health insurers. A measure of Obama's disrespect is that he feels that no matter how he treats us he can count on our support. If we give it to him we really are the "f--king retards" that he has always considered us to be.
The insurance industry has amassed trillions by squeezing the American public with inflated overhead and profit. If you're rich, if you're a "winner", then you're a "stakeholder", no matter how sleazy and unethical your methods.
Well said.
This sniveling, craven son of a bitch (Daschle) will be Barry's new Rahm Emanuel.
The health-care industry (sic) bought Barry and the rest of the sellouts in CONgress long before any discussion begain about single-payer. Whom do they think they are kidding?
Nonsense. It's a first step. Read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/economy/06leonhardt.html?_r=1&hp
I agree that Obamacare is a "first step"...to advanced fascism wherein the US government forces citizens to buy defective products from corporations that own said government.
The lawsuit challenging the "individual mandate" will result in a decision to determine if there is any chance of redirecting the advance of US fascism.
i predict that the "mandate" will stay in place and all the decent provisions like no upper limit - no rescission - no denying pre-existing claims etc
will get thrown to the curb......
and the democrats wonder why the people aren't all excited!
in greed we trust.....
It is not greed that motivates people to claw their way to the top of the heap - whatever heap, big or small, in every nook and cranny of society - rather it is the desire to control and dominate others. Money is the tool used to dominate and control others.
Rarely is it the greedy person who fights to get into power. (Power and wealth are one and the same in our culture.) It is the control freaks, the people who are unwilling or unable to relate to other human beings as equals and so must control them and dictate to them.
When we see the problem as greed, we turn it into being about stuff. The battle is about freedom versus domination, not about stuff. As it exists, the way to freedom is to gain power over others, and the way to do that is to amass capital, and the way to do that is to deprive others of freedom and of life. That dynamic operates at all levels of society, regardless of absolute wealth, and the lust for domination and control over others precedes the accumulation of wealth.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-health-politics-money-20101005,0,4869233.story
"The insurance industry is pouring money into Republican campaign coffers in hopes of scaling back wide-ranging regulations in the new healthcare law but preserving the mandate that Americans buy coverage."
I tried to tell some Tea Partier on my Facebook "Friends" list that this very thing would happen, and I got clusterbombed with nonsense "TP" (such a fitting acronym!) rhetoric about "socialism" in response.
With respect, I do not see your point. The only step I see is the health insurance (sic) industry got 30 million new customers by executive fiat with no restriction on what it can charge for premiums. The article compares McDonald's ridiculous offer to its wage slaves to what most civilized nations in Western Europe offer their citizens. It clearly demonstrates that single-payer health insurance offers care at least as good as one can get in Amerikkka at a fraction of the cost.
The "concessions" regarding the cherry-picking of those who can be insured that the article calls the "three-legged stool" doesn't take affect for several years, allowing the insurance corporations to figure out ways to weasel out of any real and meaningful reforms. This is the same tactic that our so-called representatives and the banksters used in what is euphemistically called banking reform.
Barry says that he wanted to keep the "stakeholder" in the room, but the door to that room was locked when it came to the customers of this corporate give away. I think you are naive to believe that anything that comes out of the duopoly that controls Washington will serve anybody but the corporate paymasters who own these criminals.
Just read the article, all I can say is "ha,ha,ha".
Obamacare is bogus - as Daschle admitted, before he got his patty slapped by the White House, this plan was a result of agreement between the insurance industries and the WH. Daschle's correction is revelatory - Obama he said "fought for the public option just as he did for affordable health care for all Americans.", which means not very hard, as he took the only option that has any chance of providing such coverage, single payer, "off the table" from the get go. As far as its "viability in Congress" is concerned, that is easily taken care of by the same forces that "took care of" the WH. Why would Daschle make his initial, candid claim? The truth always has a way of slipping out in unguarded moments - the bill was apparently largely written, for Pete's sake, by Baucus' aide Liz Fowler, a former insurance co. exec.
This bill was conceived as a way to head the single payer movement, that was clearly gaining strength, off at the pass and pushed through for that reason and as a way to appease the industry's alarm, nay, panic, at the prospect, while giving the admin some good PR for the public.
As this article reveals, though that is not its intent, apparently, is that it is already falling apart at the seams and will continue to reveal its flaws because it was never designed to actually provide "affordable care to all Americans". The american private ins co.s WILL NOT, because of their genetic business model, do that and any plan based on using them as a vehicle CANNOT deliver that, no matter how much it is tweaked. The whole scam would have been obvious if all the provisions were to take effect in the near future, but by cleverly spreading them out for YEARS, the Dems can continue, "reasonably", to their way of thinking, to say "be patient, wait for the whole thing to unfold". You can keep promising there are wonderful things inside a gift box as long as you don't open it ...
"all I can say is "ha,ha,ha"."
Say's it all!
Mighty,
Is that agreement, or disagreement, with my post?
"It's a first step."
What a crock. This class war between workers and the parasites who feed off of them began when Narmer appointed himself branch office manager in Egypt and it is still being fought today.
Don't be fooled by meaningless distractions like nationality and religion. There have only been 2 competing groups throughout history, and it has always been about the money.
Oh, it is a first step, all right. The question is this - a first step to what? It is a first step to silencing the Left and making sure that universal health care never happens, or at least not so long as the Democrats can prevent it.
This "fist step" nonsense is persuading no one. You must know that it is persuading no one. Do you intend it to? Do you care if it does?
You, and so many others, so desperately want to believe these liars. Why? What could you possibly gain from that? Think about what you are losing by harnessing your integrity and honor to your perceived need to defend liars at all costs, no matter the cost.
"It is a first step to silencing the Left"
Actually, i think it's more like the 99th step, or the 1,762nd step, or .......
Why? The Democratic Party is basically religion for people who claim to be atheists and agnostics. Just go take a gander at Reddit.com on any given day if you don't believe me. After all, human beings seem to need something in which to believe, even if that something does nothing other than continually give them black eyes and broken noses. Co-dependency is not a phenomenon restricted to interpersonal relationships.
How can you possibly argue with such political drivil as that? And Barky was going to give this guy a job in his administration! Brazil just elected a guy who was as an illiterate clown to public office. He got the most votes of everybody running. I'm not proposing that we go that far, but maybe electing a couple of millwrights, plumbers, automotive line workers, sanitation workers and some firemen would be a good place to start! Electing such people would be way better than professional politicians and out of work business people! You know, all the bitchs and bastards that intentionally screwed evrything up in the first place!
"Brazil just elected a guy who was as an illiterate clown to public office. He got the most votes of everybody running. I'm not proposing that we go that far ..."
We already have.
P.S. Yes, he is not illiterate. He can easily read the instructions that Goldman Sachs sends him.
True! The public option was not pushed. We are disappointed. BUT we must go to the polls to make sure the Tea Party Neanderthals don't get elected and decimate social security, medicare, education. health care etc.
"BUT we must go to the polls to make sure the Tea Party Neanderthals don't get elected and decimate social security, medicare, education. health care etc."
Does that mean we should go to the polls and vote Dem to make sure that THEY, and not the Reps, will be the Neanderthals who get to "decimate social security, medicare, education. health care etc."?
I think you have just insulted Neanderthals ....
Thank you. There it is for everyone to see. The demands that we vote Democratic have nothing to do with how anyone votes, but are a dishonest way to try to curtail discussion and eliminate dissent.
You are saying "we must vote Democratic" but the unspoken strongly implied second half of that statement is "so pay no attention to what the Obama administration did, because it doesn't change anything, so stop talking about it."
Shame on you for trying to distract people and to sweep this story under the rug and suppress dissent and free and open discussion, and for cloaking that in the seemingly noble cause of stopping the Republicans. You have fallen into the depths of moral depravity, and for what? What could you hope to gain? Is it merely to escape some uncomfortable emotional feelings? For that you would mislead and deceive people, try to manipulate others through fear-mongering, defend liars, promote corruption, and prostitute yourself? Bad trade off. You might want to rethink this.
I would suspect that the reason you want to shut people up is because you are suffering from cognitive dissonance - you are in a bitter argument with yourself that you can't even control and are only peripherally aware of. The rationales for what you claim to support and the rationales for what you actually support contradict one another, and the things people are saying here make it impossible for you to hide from that painful truth. This is causing emotional discomfort for you, and since your personal emotional comfort is the entire basis for all of your political "ideas" you are willing to sacrifice everything - principles, ideals, integrity and honor - in a futile effort to shut up the voices and ideas that are causing you emotional pain.
TA,
Maybe there's a simpler explanation, maybe this person is just a "genetic" Dem., they do exist you know ....
Two Americas,
We agree here.
Well said.
Public Option was off the table before the election - typical Obama.
Progressives are the new blacks of the democratic party. Blacks have voted (D) religiously for fifty years and what have they gotten. 50% unemployment in Detroit and Bill Clinton ending welfare as we know it. Like Rahm said, 'They have no where else to go - screw them'. I will never again vote for a DLC/Corporate (D) - period. I would sooner elect a clown like Palin or O'Donnell. Let the fur fly. Bring on the end times, this death of a thousand cuts is killin' me.
Daschle sez: "The President fought for the public option just as he did for affordable health care for all Americans."
***
That sentence can be corrected with the removal of just a few words:
"The President fought ... affordable health care for all Americans."
"That premise was, you had to have the stakeholders...."
Stakeholders? I thought the American Public were the ultimate stakeholders in this country??! Not some corpora-fascist pig CEOs and congressional creeps.
You know ...a gov't of, by and for the People, protecting our inalienable rights to life.....
maybe it was a misprint - maybe he meant "steak holders" ...
All those guys holding their steak in the Great American Circle Jerk.
maybe it refers to the stake held over a vampire's heart just before being driven in for the kill...
Tho in this case it would be the stake held by the vampire after taking it from the person who had tried to impale the vampire with it but hesitated at the critical moment with compunctions because "this vampire too, used to be human"
it's funny but to these fascist bastards the only "stakeholders" for the greedy money grubbing corporations and their lackey's.....
but WE THE PEOPLE who actually need the health care to survive aren't considered "stakeholders" by our so-called leaders -
even the one's that the press wrongly claims are liberal - like that jerk daschle -
and any 10 yr old knows from playing games in the yard to not give up your main negotiating point BEFORE the game starts!
the fix was in from the start -
and obomba wonders why we aren't supporting him -
when you support us obummer we'll support you - until then - screw you!
oops! that'll put me back to the top of the no-fly list for extremists I'm sure!
so much for liberty and freedom -
Bravo!
isn't this schmuck's wife on the health care lobby payroll?
fuck you daschle!
i'm sure your greedy fat ass is on the "public option" for life
I don't think even any of the 20th century dictators (Hitler, Stalin etc.) forced anyone to buy anything, did they? I honestly don't know for sure but I would say no.
What the "mandate" is equivalent to historically is feudal era "taxes" which peasants owed to lords of the manor. In other words, to find an historical corollary, you have to go back many hundreds of years, at least 500 years, right? I don't know the exact number of years you have to go back because I never thought that feudal history would have any bearing on my life so I never studied it. But like every other economist I know a little bit about feudal economics so I know a feudal “tax” when I see one.
Aside from all the obvious problems like unconstitutionality and how the “mandate” subsidizes an industry that already has devastated the health care system and the economy overall, its just basically absurd at a fundamental level to try to force someone to buy something, thus the tens of millions who will refuse.
Actually, since Russia held on to feudalism for quite a long time after the rest of Europe discarded it, you only need go back about 200 years. Though I don't much care for the idea of the USA becoming like the Russian Empire under Czar Nicholas I!
Barry doesn't do anything for the average person because it might offend the people who elected him to the Presidency, not of the United States, but of the Harvard Law Review. This rule of the Ivy League only graduates has to end. Look at the results-Vietnam, Iraq, Wall Street meltdown ad infinitum. If this the best and brightest we're doomed.
incidentally, i believe all members of the Supreme Court are either Harvard Law or Yale Law. Kagan's life at Harvard was referred to as "real-world" experience.
we are doomed.
It was taken from the American People by Barack Obama. Now his party is to be judged by the same people Obama denied single payer to. They will be judged harshly.
The most advantageous outcome for the majority of Americans would have been a public single player plan or, at least, a public option (like a medicare buy-in).
So Daschle is saying that Rahm "fuckin retard" Emanuel cut a deal with insurance and hospital corporations to eliminate the public option because the millionaire congressmen and senators wouldn't support such a plan.
Of course, congress callously and summarily dismissed the group of Doctors and Nurses that wanting to discuss the public option at open hearings. They were arrested and no talk of the public option was entered into the congressional record.
Who exactly is representing the American people?
How could anyone vote for these sleaze-bags? Don't vote Republican or Democrat, but do vote.