I’m quite prepared to delete this if I’m breaking site policy but the topic seems relavant to me.
I’ve been fighting something of a lonely battle at Daily Kos arguing with people over the health care debate and real possibility of the Obama administration dropping the so called ‘public option’ in order to bring conservative Democrats in congress onboard in order to pass a bill.
Most have drawn their proverbial line in the sand and are committed to opposing any bill that does not include a robust public option. I have no doubt that many posters here at SSP also hold this position. I respect it but cannot agree.
This mcjoan diary from earlier today seemed to be totally off base and I said so.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…
They are fixated on the polls that show support for the public option in theory but refuse to even acknowledge the existence of the polling that indicates the electorate has turned against the plans that are actually under discussion. As we all know perception is reality in politics.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/…
The reason I believe we can and should discuss this here is because of the real paradox that this has created. On the one hand Democrats in conservative districts won by John McCain or narrowly won by the president last year are clearly concerned about supporting a bill that is unpopular among their constituents. Their rationale is to remove the public option. But of course this is a sticking point for progressives particularly in the House.
I think this impass is a recipe for disaster. Though I don’t think the health care failure in 1994 was the only factor in the Republican Revolution it was clearly the coup de grace after all the scandals and the contentious votes taken that cycle particularly on the budget and on the assault weapons ban. There is clear evidence that Dems in conservative districts that year who voted for those bills were likely to go down to defeat while those who voted no all survived.
Though the author is a bit of a winger and RCP in general leans conservative this article is quite persuasive.
http://www.realclearpolitics.c…
I know Dave Wasserman at The Cook Political Report has come to the same conclusion and Nate Silver posted a link to the article yesterday and made many of the same points.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com…
It is clear to me the pragmatic solution would be to find a compromise that can find the necessary votes in both chambers. Kossacks seem determined though to stand their ground even if it means no bill at all. What do y’all think?
Voting yes? Voting no? Can they survive no bill at all?
is strength, unity, and good, effective, legislation–including the public option. Everything else is up to the economy (but that ship has probably partially sailed because the stimulus was too small).
2010 is a base election, and Democrats need an incentive to turn out.