The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Daschle Urges Obama To Drop Government Plan

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Daschle Urges Obama To Drop Government Plan

By Philip Klein on 6.18.09 @ 2:04PM

Tom Daschle, the man originally tapped to lead President Obama's health care push, is now urging him to drop the idea of offering a government-run plan.

According to ABC, the former Democratic Senate Majority leader had this to say:

"While I feel very strongly that consumers should have the choice of a national, Medicare-like plan, my colleagues do not. . . But we were concerned that the ongoing health reform debate is beginning to show signs of fracture on the public plan issue, so in order to advance the process of developing bipartisan legislation and to move it forward, it's time to find consensus here," Daschle said.

"We've come too far and gained too much momentum for our efforts to fail over disagreements on one single issue," he said.

This is significant news not merely as a result of his relationship to Obama, but because Daschle is somebody who is recognized for his network on Capitol Hill, his ability to shepard legislation through Congress and strike compromises. If he is coming out and saying this publicly, it's a pretty good indication that Democrats simply do not have the votes to pass legislation that would include a government plan.

While this is a positive devolopment for those of us who oppose government health care, I should emphasize that this doesn't mean that we're in the clear. One of the things that supporters of free market health care have feared all along was that Democrats were merely using the government plan as a bargaining tool, so that when they drop it, they can say, "Ok, we gave up something we really wanted, now let's strike a deal." They will use this to label anybody who doesn't go along as an obstructionist. But a "compromise" that still provides subsidies for individuals to purchase government-designed health care plans on a government-run exchange, imposes mandates on individuals and businesses, and steps up regulation, is not much of a compromise. It's a major victory for the left.

That's why this language by Bob Dole is troubling:

"I had a lot of trouble with [individual] mandates just as Tom had trouble with the public plan. ... But if we can't compromise, how do we expect anyone else, how are we going to get a bill passed," Dole said. "We weren't going let two or three issues derail our total effort."

Fortunately, Dole isn't in office anymore. If Obama follows Daschle's advice and drops the government plan, Republicans shouldn't simply roll over. That provision would have made it easier for government to takeover the health care system, but it is far from the only way.

View all comments (6) | Leave a comment

ShyAsrai| 6.18.09 @ 6:07PM

let's face it. Dems are backing off now because they've just been hit with the reality that THEY own the now obvious failure of the massive spending bills. they thought reckoning on that mess wouldn't show up until sufficient time had passed and they could claim some sort of individual 'plausible deniability'.

they don't want to be holding the bag on this debacle as well.

John G.| 6.18.09 @ 6:31PM

Phil---you were right to allude to Dole's comments.

Shy--I agree with your comments for the most part.

Let's not underestimate the power of the liberal grassroots, the netroots, to mobilize their resources to hold wavering Democrats to the fire.

Peruse their blogs and you will see that they are not giving up their fight. They will reach out to their readers and activists and have them in turn, reach out to their senators and representatives.

Health-care reform is the crown jewel of the progressive agenda and for Obama's legacy, and he knows it. They won't let this die easily.

It would help if the Republicans were able to put forth some credible and practical health plan of their own. Im afraid that's asking too much.

Sherri| 6.18.09 @ 10:11PM

I urge all of you to let your senators and representatives know that you are against government run health care. We can't afford to let the liberals be the only ones who are contacting their members of Congress.

mentalpestilence| 6.19.09 @ 8:49AM

Single-payer health care is a system whereby all medical treatments are paid for entirely by one entity (ie. the government). In other words, an individual has complete freedom of choice to which doctor they would like to visit, which hospital to be admitted to and so on. The difference being that the payment would come from just one payer instead of the hundreds of private (mostly for-profit) insurance companies we have in place today.

So that's that. Same system of health care delivery we have today. Same hospitals, same doctors, same procedures. Single-payer would just take advantage of being a non-profit, consolidated and more efficient means of paying those doctors and hospitals. I find that the Physician's for a National Health Program sum the situation up quite eloquently:

"Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans’ health dollars.
Single-payer financing is the only way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do."

- www.mentalpestilence.com

anonymous| 6.19.09 @ 3:21PM

Mentalpestilence is wrong. There's no such thing as single payer healthcare; if the government is paying for healthcare ALL of us (well, at least the ones making a living for ourselves) are paying. The government's purpose is to protect our country, not play Robin Hood.