Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Peril of Positioning Dems as Managers, Not Leaders
Dumb move.
Medicare is one of the most popular, and well-run, health care programs in the world.
It may not be as efficient as it should be.
But this public program is dramatically better run than private insurance firms. And it produces far better results for Americans.
Perhaps most significantly, the Americans for whom Medicare produces results for those older Americans who remain the steadiest voters in off-year elections.
Of course, Saturday's attempt by Republican senators to restore about $42 billion in funding to Medicare's home health-care programs was cynical.
The Grand Old Party has a long history of wanting to slash rather than expand Medicare.
But the Democratic "strategy" of paying for health-care reform by nickle-and-diming Medicare is a fool's errand.
There is no question that Medicare programs can and should be improved. And, yes, efficiencies can be achieved -- especially if profiteering by the private-sector recipients of Medicare money is controlled. Senate Finance Committee chair Max Baucus, D-Montana, may even be right when he says of the assault on home health benefits that: "We are getting the waste out."
But, somehow, that just not have the same ring as the declaration by Senator Mike Johanns, R-Nebraska, that: "The cuts will hurt real people."
No matter which side is right about the details of these particular cuts, a plan to pay for health-care reform by squeezing Medicare makes no sense when there are so, so, so many better places -- such as the bloated Department of Defense budget or allocated-but-as-yet-unused funds for "rescuing" financial-service industry speculators -- to find money to pay for expanding access to health care.
To begin the health-care debate in the Senate with Democrats celebrating their successful defense of Medicare cuts is madness. What next? Reform education by slashing day-care funding? Address the mortgage crisis by bailing out big banks? (Oops.)
After the GOP amendment failed -- having gained just 41 votes from Republicans and four centrist Democrats -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, tried Saturday to put things in the best light, saying, "The fact is that our bill will, in short, save lives, save money, and save Medicare," Reid said. "It will make it possible for each and every American to afford to live a healthy life. We can't afford not to do this."
But that the GOP television ads in next year's tightest Senate races -- including Reid's reelection race in Nevada -- will talk about Democrats cutting Medicare.
The problem with cutting Medicare to find money for health care reform is that is positions the Democrats as managers rather than visionaries, as bean counters rather than reformers.
That's not a fair characterization, especially when contrasted with the GOP's "Party of No" behavior.
But if the Democrats score many more victories like the one they achieved on Saturday, they are going to suffer the fate of parties that manage decline rather than lead for change. And it is not a pretty one.
- 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...
11 Comments so far
Show AllThey really ought to dismantle their "Committee to Find New Ways to Shoot Ourselves in the Foot" because one cannot count the number of ways the Democrats manage to grab defeat from the jaws of victory. A bigger bunch of incompetent jerks does not exist. Problem is, they are tone deaf--they just don't listen to the people and they just don't get it.
What an utterly useless article. The Nation has so few quality articles it is almost useless for anyone that considers themselves progressive, socialist, green, or libertarian. I would not pay one cent for such a garbage periodical.
This article is a classic example. It does not ask any meantingful questions. It simply follows the meaningless details of institutionalized corruption and implicitly aplogizes for and legitimizes such practices.
Mr. Nichols, why don't you expose the systemic corruption, and structural barriers to a democratic process?
The details you outline offer no significant context and do not add anything to mitigating the problem. It appears to me as "sycophantic punditry"
This is supposed to be a publication of the left? No wonder there is no organized left in the USA. It has been co-opted
Here are some suggestions for article titles:
How the democratic process is completely broken
How the Senate is a corrupt and un-democratic body
How Democrats are complicit in Imperialism, Kleptocracy and Social injustice
How the two party system is a de-facto one-party system
The problem with cutting Medicare to find money for health care reform is that is positions the Democrats as managers rather than visionaries, as bean counters rather than reformers.
The Democrats haven't had a "vision" since John Kennedy's speech at American University in 1963, shortly before he was murdered. John Nichols, like The Nation magazine itself, is absolutely stuffed with wild blueberry muffins!
Politicians lie, and pundits lie about the politicians' lies.
I gather truthtellers and truth-telling sources like nuggets and flakes of gold in these Orwellian times. Even those have impurities, of course, but gold comes in many sizes and shapes, and when assayed, cannot be denied.
There is no credible medical care/insurance reform on the table in Congress at present AFAIK, and Harry Reid, the Dems, and Congress itself are not reliable. No doubt the facts of the procedures described are accurate, but I don't find anything shiny and useful in this article.
Obama and the Dumb-o-crats are not in Washington to lead. They are there to stage manage the Collapse until such time that St. Sarah of Alaska (or another of her ditto-head mouth breathing ilk) can ride into the White House on a wave of disillusionment and desperation, all the while proclaiming loudly how 'socialism' and 'hope' got the US into a mess only a strong, charismatic leader(despot) can bring the US back into God's good graces...
Come on, is JN kidding or something?
How is this not sinking the f**k in already?
They. Own. The. Place.
Hence, the POTUS is the GM; the Senate is Senior Management; the Congress is Middle Mngt.
But they all work FOR THE OWNERS.
IOW, the Dems are already management G-ddamnit! When was the last time anyone saw a real Dem leader anyway? They've been management so long, anyone who even shows the tiniest sign of leadership capability is kicked to the curb lest their lack of such be exposed.
Ugh...
dennis kucinich could vouch for this!
This article, like so many, completely misses the point. We live in a one party system. All Republicans and nearly all Democrats represent the people who send them to office--the corporations. The only politicians who don't fit this bill are a handful of Democrats and Bernie Sanders, the lone Democratic Socialist.
The Nation is concerned about how the Democrats are perceived? If the Democrats continue to be led by the likes of Reid, Nelson, Obama, Pelosi, Baucus, et al, what does it matter what the perception is?
What a smarmy reformy the Democrats got going! With 2 parties like these the American peoples got naught...
Nichols and The Nation magazine are a waste of time. The real dialogue is over at Chris Hedges article: Liberals are Useless.
Nichols should take a long look into his aristocratic eyes someday, bring a copy of Hedges article, and reflect.