Rhetorically Speaking Obama Knocks One Out Of The Ball Park-- And Now For The Hondelling

President Obama:

I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform. And ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell Sr. in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.

Our collective failure to meet this challenge-- year after year, decade after decade-- has led us to a breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle-class Americans. Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer. Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are
still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or expensive to cover.

...The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals:

It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses,
and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge-- not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals. And it’s a plan that incorporates ideas from Senators and Congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans-- and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition.
As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some
arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of
America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies-- because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse.That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.

That’s what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan-- more security and stability.

Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job
or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange-- a
marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how
everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves.

...This is the plan I’m proposing. It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight-- Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks
ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.

But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old
tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are
sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.

That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed-- the ones who suffer silently, and the ones who shared their stories with us at town hall meetings, in emails, and in letters.

If you're reading this right after President Obama's speech, you're reading as I'm driving. I'm on my way to the Air America studios in Burbank where I'll be one of the guests trying to figure out the implications of the speech (from 7 to 8, PT). First, for the sephardim (and other non-Ashkenazi) among us, you need to grok the concept of hondelling-- because that's the whole ball game from here on:


Substantively, the president's two main points tonight were to hold down costs-- and end unfair practices like prior conditions and recission-- for those who already have health insurance and to come up with a way to offer affordable coverage to those who don’t. Ideologically and politically there aren't half a dozen Republicans in Congress, despite Sarah Palin's misleading OpEd in today's Wall Street Journal who care at all about the second goal and there aren't many more who-- along with Blue Dogs and other conservative Democrats would prioritize the first goal over the interests of the Medical-Industrial Complex and Insurance Industry that has bumped well over a billion dollars into lobbying and thinly-veiled bribes over the past four and a half congressional terms alone! There's a lot of nervousness that Obama is insisting on reforms that are aimed at cutting back drastically on the unsustainable-- if not suicidal-- growth in the cost of health care (which has doubled in the same period that those industries mentioned above have spent all that money on Congress). There is no indication whatsoever that without drastic measures that growth rate will slow or even not continue to increase.

This morning Nate Silver did a thorough district by district analysis showing clearly that it isn't their constituents that Blue Dogs fear to anger by supporting the public option. Their constituents-- or most of them-- want that kind of meaningful health care reform. It's the Blue Dogs campaign donors who want to kill it. Silver finds a "relationship between support for the public option and the poverty rate. Kentucky and Nebraska, for instance, each gave Barack Obama 41 percent of their vote. But in Kentucky, the public option is supported (barely) at 46-45, whereas in Nebraska it's opposed 39-47. What's the difference? Kentucky is much poorer than Nebraska-- 17.0 percent of its residents are impoverished, versus 11.5 percent in the Cornhusker state. Likewise, Nevada gave Barack Obama 55 percent of its vote, whereas Cooper's TN-5 gave him 56. But in Nevada, the public option is supported 52-40, whereas in TN-5, the margin is much larger: 61-28 in favor. TN-5's poverty rate is about 50 percent higher than Nevada's."

Republicans barely even make believe they give a damn about poor voters; few Republicans court them or win their votes and Republican policy is, at best, unfriendly towards their and their families' aspirations. Blue Dogs would rather not, but they generally have to count on these voters and they do pay attention to them-- though usually only every other autumn. Going back to that Palin OpEd referenced above, it is clear that the Republican Party is still as eager to terminate Medicare as it is to end Social Security and phase out the minimum wage. Get them started and we'll wind up with an electorate based on property qualifications for white male voters and everyone else will have to count on the good will of those who, like father, know best.

Palin's protestations are nothing more than classic conservative fear-mongering against the march of progress towards equality and away from elitism. GOP trolls like David Vitter follow her but few serious legislators take her seriously, although many are delighted that she can rile up the hysterical low info base that now calls the shots for the GOP. "Common sense," her ghost writer claims, "tells us that the government's attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats' proposals 'will provide more stability and security to every American.'" Let's look at a fact check of Palin's and the GOP's fear and smear tactics against health care reform:

DEATH PANELS

The conservative-leaning Associated Press looked into this outlandish claim by the clueless ex-governor and found it to be devoid of anything resembling veracity. Back on August 11th they reported that "nothing in the legislation would carry out such a bleak vision. The provision that has caused the uproar would instead authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care, if the patient wishes. Here are some questions and answers on the controversy: Q: Does the health care legislation bill promote ‘mercy killing,’ or euthanasia? A: No. Q: Then what's all the fuss about? A: A provision in the House bill written by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) would allow Medicare to pay doctors for voluntary counseling sessions that address end-of-life issues. The conversations between doctor and patient would include living wills, making a close relative or a trusted friend your health care proxy, learning about hospice as an option for the terminally ill, and information about pain medications for people suffering chronic discomfort. The sessions would be covered every five years, more frequently if someone is gravely ill.”

Three days later the NY Times said much the same thing more succinctly: “The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama’s health care proposals would create government-sponsored ‘death panels’ to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks.” Well, not exactly from nowhere. They were invented by propaganda specialists from the Insurance Industry and put into the public forum by a worthless, money-hungry shill, one Sarah Palin. FactCheck.org agreed that Republicans were blatantly lying and doing so for partisan gain at the expense of American families.

On former Sen. Fred Thompson’s radio show, former lieutenant governor of New York Betsy McCaughey said that the House’s proposed health care bill contained a provision that would institute mandatory counseling sessions telling seniors how ‘to do what’s in society’s best interest … and cut your life short.’ House Minority Leader John Boehner made a slightly more measured statement, warning that the same provision ‘may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law.’ In truth, that section of the bill would require Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling sessions helping seniors to plan for end-of-life medical care, including designating a health care proxy, choosing a hospice and making decisions about life-sustaining treatment. It would not require doctors to counsel that their patients refuse medical intervention. … McCaughey misrepresents the content of page 425 of the bill. That section would require Medicare to pay for some end-of-life planning counseling sessions with a health care practitioner. … At least two Republican leaders have echoed this end-of-life distortion. On July 23, Republican Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the House minority leader, released a statement, along with Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, saying that the bill would encourage euthanasia.

Both conservative Republican Senator Johnny Isakson (GA), who called her "nuts," and Politifact pointed the finger of Truth right at Palin: "Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, urged her supporters to oppose Democratic plans for health care reform on her Facebook page. ... We have read all 1,000-plus pages of the Democratic bill and examined versions in various committees. There is no panel in any version of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person's 'level of productivity in society' to determine whether they are 'worthy' of health care. Palin's claim sounds a little like another statement making the rounds, which says that health care reform would mandate counseling for seniors on how to end their lives sooner. We rated this claim Pants on Fire! The truth is that the health bill allows Medicare, for the first time, to pay for doctors' appointments for patients to discuss living wills and other end-of-life issues with their physicians. These types of appointments are completely optional, and AARP supports the measure. ... But that's not what Palin said. She said that the Democratic plan will ration care and "my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care." Palin's statement sounds more like a science fiction movie (Soylent Green, anyone?) than part of an actual bill before Congress. We rate her statement Pants on Fire!"

Her state's own senior senator, Lisa Murkowski, like Isakson a conservative Republican, cringed at Palin's lies and fear-mongering: "It does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there's these end-of-life provisions, these death panels. Quite honestly, I'm so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn't (in the bill). There is no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill.”

Extremist Republican hacks like Palin and Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan have done more than just fallen back on tried right-wing methods of spreading fear and misinformation. They've also come up with proposals to roll back gains working families have made since the Great Depression. Doubling down on the fear and confusion they've helped incite, these reactionaries are now angling towards privatizing or abolishing Medicare. Obama's speech tonight was not for die hard obstructionists in Congress and not for misguided dittoheads and KKK sympathisizers who kept their children home from school Tuesday. But what Obama has to face up to is that even the so-called "moderate" Republicans-- all one of them-- oppose, when push comes to shove, meaningful and effective health care reform: