Wall Street Journal — Liberals Fear Losing Public-Plan Option
As Examiner colleague Susan Ferrechio showed today, many in the Senate are expressing new hope for a compromise health plan that that includes state-level, participant-owned health care co-operatives but not a new national health insurance plan. The idea, partly financed by a tax on high-end insurance policies, is likely the only one that could control costs and adequately protect private insurance from a taxpayer-subsidized competitor enough to get 60 votes in the Senate. And even that is an optimistic forecast for a bill that still has a lot of moving parts.
But as writers Laura Meckler and Naftali Bendavid explain, the small surge of momentum for the compromise plan and the White House’s tacit encouragement of it has infuriated liberals who have already made big compromises – and not just on this bill.
What the 70 Democrats in the House Progressive Caucus and like-minded members of other groups really wanted was a single-payer health system, but accepted the idea of a government insurance plan in the hope that it would eventually come to dominate the market. Now they may be asked to support a co-operative plan that is designed to be weak. Stung by passing corrupted cap and trade legislation for the sake of compromise, liberals are preparing to push back when the administration and Speaker Nancy Pelosi ask them to sell out again.
“Some Democrats are threatening to oppose any bill that excludes this option, and sympathetic outside groups are pressuring wavering lawmakers. Health Care for America Now, a liberal group, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees spent $800,000 on television ads targeting moderate Democrats, citing their opposition to a public option.
Meanwhile, MoveOn.org announced a series of television ads Monday to run in Washington, D.C., and on national cable networks accusing the Republicans of playing political football with health care. Americans United For Change, another liberal group, announced a radio ad targeting moderate Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, a key swing vote.”
New York Times — Health Care Reform and the Unpopular T-Word
One of the problems with passing a health plan funded in part by taxes on “gold-plated” health benefits is that so many health plans fall into the category.
As writer David Leonhardt points out, there is broad agreement that taxing health benefits is good policy since it allows market forces to work against waste and in favor of good outcomes.
But despite what every politician will tell you, good policy is rarely good politics.
Most of the gold-plated plans belong to union workers, particularly government unions for whom craven elected officials who gave lavish benefits in negotiations rather than facing voters after handing out another pay raise to public-sector employees.
Leonhardt argues convincingly for taxing benefits for the upper tier, even if he doesn’t acknowledge the ferocity of the political battle that lies ahead.
“With this narrow approach, the tax would raise only a small share of the revenue needed to cover the uninsured, and Congress would still need to rely on a hodgepodge of other tax increases and spending cuts. But starting to lift the exclusion would still help — especially if Congress set the threshold for the tax to rise more slowly than health costs have been rising. That way, more and more of the most expensive, least efficient plans would eventually be bumping up against the tax.
For all the budgetary elegance of the tax, though, its real importance is much larger. It would begin to chip away at the perverse incentives in our medical system.
That’s what matters. The idea isn’t to punish Goldman traders or, for that matter, unionized workers who have their own generous plans. The idea is to give companies and workers more incentive to choose medical plans that try to reduce unnecessary costs. Without that incentive, is there any wonder our health care system is so troubled?”
Washington Post — The House Gets a Dose Of Its Own Medicine
Writer Joel Achenbach shows that the Republican attack on Democrats moving big legislation without knowing what’s in it is starting to have the desired effect.
Burned by unwittingly approving big bonuses for AIG executives in the slap-dash stimulus process and later by Rep. John Boehner’s taunting during the debate over cap and trade, Democrats held a half-day tutorial for its members on the current House health bill. But the problem with a member of Congress reading a bill or even having someone else read a bill and explain it to her is that they may start to think they understand it.
The reason the House has committees is to prevent too many fingers from getting into the pie. By teaching her members about it, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi invites more of the extortive tactics used by swing members in any close vote. Worse, it will make demonstrably stupid people feel capable of talking about an issue that total ignorance might have kept them quiet about.
“Monday’s question-and-answer session started about 7 p.m. and lasted two hours. Participants described the questions as being all over the map. Members of the committees with jurisdiction over the bill have already had a chance to get granular on the details, but some of their colleagues on other committees are still trying to get up to speed.
Rep. Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut said there’s no way to reform the health-care system with a few simple strokes.
“This is a complicated problem, with a complicated solution,” Murphy said. “If you’re going to fix it, it’s not going to come in four pages. The last Harry Potter book was 700 pages.”
New York Times — Obama Faces Court Test Over Detainee
A federal judge is threatening to release an Afghan who badly injured two U.S. troops with a grenade attack because of a lack of criminal evidence.
A hearing, set for Thursday, will be a test of the Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling that the Guantanamo Bay inmates have constitutional rights. The hearing will also be a test of the Obama administration’s willingness to argue for indefinite detention.
The president’s men have argued that there is no place to send the 17 inmates ordered released by the courts but still in the prison. With Mohamed Jawad, though, Afghanistan would welcome him home. As it relates to a former teenage fighter who has been housed with some serious baddies for seven years, that’s not a decision that would be popular with members of the U.S. military who are still being attacked by Afghans with grenades.
The administration is hoping to migrate other fighters and terrorists into the American civilian justice system to avoid more fast-track releases. But as writer William Glaberson points out, that’s no longer an option in the Jawad case, leaving the Obama administration no good options
“One of Mr. Jawad’s lawyers, Jonathan Hafetz of the American Civil Liberties Union, said that the Obama administration’s focus on civilian prosecution as their habeas corpus case grew troubled seemed reminiscent of the Bush administration’s repeated changes of strategy in the courts.
Mr. Hafetz said Mr. Jawad was hopeful but bewildered. ‘Every time he is on the verge of winning and proving his innocence, the government seeks to change the rules of the game,’ Mr. Hafetz said.
Judge Huvelle’s terse order on Tuesday did not explain her plans. But in angry remarks from the bench on July 16, she expressed suspicion that the government might try to keep her from ordering Mr. Jawad released. She said she would not delay her case so the government can ‘pull this rug from under the court at the last minute’ by moving Mr. Jawad into the civilian criminal justice system.”
Washington Post — Cabinet Will ‘Retreat’ to Blair House to Hand Out Report Cards
It’s gut-check time for the Obama administration. Summer is fading and the recent trend has been bad for the White House. Surprised by resistance to their plans and distracted by unforced errors, the still newish Obama team is going to do what academes do and hold a conference.
Writer Michael Shear learned that the top-tier of the administration – 22 cabinet members, czars and czarinas – will meet this weekend for a strategy session and a little bonding to try to get things on track.
No word on how much time the president will log in this re-launch effort, but it seems like it is aimed at getting a cabinet that has thus far produced few standouts beyond already established figures like Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder and Robert Gates into shape and able to back up Obama.
One of the big problems that must be addressed is that Obama depends on a group of Chicago insiders, leaving the rest of the team out in the cold. Presumably, this will be a moment to bring everyone up to speed on where the goalposts are now.
“The gathering, to be held at Blair House and the White House Conference Center, across Pennsylvania Avenue from the executive mansion, will feature all 22 Cabinet-rank members for a series of policy presentations, several officials familiar with the planning said Tuesday.
Two sources characterized the session as an attempt at ‘bonding.’ Another said the gathering, which a top aide said has been long-planned, would be modeled after similar corporate events designed to provide an assessment of how the administration is doing halfway through the year.
There will be a dinner on Friday night, followed by a meeting for several hours on Saturday, a senior White House official said.”
