The Anthony Weiner Strategy

Steve Benen today:

Roosevelt, the towering political figure of the 20th century, with an electoral mandate, a Democratic Congress, and the stench of a failed Republican president fresh on the nation’s mind, had to take what he could get on Social Security, which was far less than what he wanted.

And, naturally, this is equally as important:

Indeed, let’s be clear. There may be some Dems who say, “Well, the reform bill could be better, so could the original Social Security bill have been, so let’s not fight too hard for progressive goals.” This attitude is entirely wrong and self-defeating.

Exactly. To be clear on my position, while I can see the upside of passing the public option and then improving it a la Social Security and SCHIP, it’s still important to fight for the strongest possible public option and the strongest possible bill in the meantime. This was true when we were blitzing the Coalition of the Corrupt & Spineless, and it was true when Baucus announced his terrible plan, and it’s true today.

And in doing so, there are effective ways to go about this and there are ineffective ways. Screeching about how so-and-so is selling us out is a waste of time that could be better spent strongly explaining why a more robust public option is better policy — not to mention better politics. In other words, it’s important to be heard, but it’s also important to be taken seriously. The Anthony Weiner Strategy.

Consequently, we’ve fought hard for the best possible bill without marginalizing ourselves in the eyes of the party leadership — who, like it or not, we can’t afford to scare away.

This entry was posted in Healthcare and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • cjo30080

    If you want something to smile about, here’s a list of Democrats who live in red districts, but voted for the health reform bill anyway.We thought our job was finished in November of 2008. In fact, we need to buckle in. Significant progress is a life long effort.

  • Allen Frederick

    The problem with this logic is that there HAS to be an acceptable baseline to build on, and the current bill is not even close. As noted on this very site, we have a health care emergency NOW. It needs to be addressed NOW. Even if the bill were sufficient it will take several years to implement.The opposite reality, taking a watered down bill as a compromise to build on, is risky at best. If Republicans get power back, they have already pledged to kill whatever reform was implemented. The weaker it is, the easier it will be to kill.Do we really want to place our hopes on something that has the potential to be built upon over a nebulous period of time, all the while hoping Democrats will be in office to consider such moves?I don’t know about you, but I heard something about change in last year’s campaign. I didn’t vote in a Democratic super-majority for this constant capitulation. Neither did anyone else.

  • cjo30080

    Allen –To the shock and disappointment of many of us, we flooded our Congress with ConservaDems. The reality is that we’re not going to get the bill we want NOW. My acceptable baseline is ANY progress, no matter how limited. I won’t refuse progress out of spite.Yes, I want single payer. Yes, I’ll settle for a robust public option. But I got Lieberman, Nelson, and Lincoln instead. So if I only get the Senate Finance Bill, then I’ll rejoice at the end of pre-existing conditions and rescission, the elimination of coverage limitation caps, limits on out-of-pocket expense caps, mandated preventive care, negotiated drug prices for seniors, the reduction of the Part D donut hole, etcera — and then I’ll go to work to elect more progressives in 2010 and beyond.

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Allen:>>>>The problem with this logic is that there HAS to be an acceptable baseline to build on, and the current bill is not even close.If October taught us anything, it taught us that game-changing momentum is possible in a very short period of time. We went from ‘the public option is dead,’ to a pledge from Reid for the public option in the Senate bill. That’s a long road in a short time. What I’m saying is that there’s time to still push for a robust public option — but to do it in a sensible way.>>>>>I don’t know about you, but I heard something about change in last year’s campaign.And we’re getting change. But turning around the shitstorm from the Bush years will take a little longer than 10 months. Meanwhile, the man you voted for has achieved more on healthcare reform than one of the faces on Mt. Rushmore. That’s pretty significant.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    “If Republicans get power back, they have already pledged to kill whatever reform was implemented.”

    Well said, Allen. I’ve said the same many times myself. Thom Hartmann says that conservatives in European countries would never dare attack their health care system for fear of backlash. I think he seriously underestimates the crazies in the Republican Party.But you know what would be way easier for them than killing whatever reforms we enact? Sitting back and watching as “progressives” kill the reform before it even gets started.

  • Allen Frederick

    Yes, understood. Good points all. If the final bill has at least something resembling a robust public option, then I will be somewhat pleased. Don’t underestimate the Republicans drive to kill anything they view as an entitlement. They will never stop trying to kill whatever the Democrats put in place. Just look at what they’re trying to do to Social Security after all these years. If the initial reform is weak, and they get back into power – they will kill it.

  • Allonfla

    @Allen: You voted in a super majority of what? Progessives? No, Liberals? No – When that happens, then you should expect to see bills that you like coming out of Congress. Right now, we have plenty of Conservadems that will keep things at a pace that you don’t like. I remember when it was announced we had a super majority and there were a few lone voices saying don’t get excited. They were brushed off and now we see that they were right.No matter what you think of the bill, there is enough good in there that any one in the GOP who tries to kill it once its passed, will get a shocking reality check.Part of the change message was that we the people are the ones who make things happen. I’m not going to stand by and “hope” that Dems stay in power and I’m not going to “hope” that the Senate does the right thing. I don’t think that’s what the post implies. I agree with Cesca on explaining to these guys how the public option is better policy, but I think the Left has to really really emphasize the politics. At this point that’s all that matters to the holdouts. Actually it seems to be the best way to get through to most politicians. “How do I benefit, politically?”

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    Exactly, Allen. Their attacks on Social Security, Medicare, SCHIP, et al have been relentless and sometimes marginally successful. Sometimes I think that progressives and liberals pass really great measures, then go off and live their lives. Meanwhile, conservatives and crazies are working tirelessly to undo any good that is done by others. We have to remember to be vigilant. If they had their way, they’d privatize every government service under the sun.We still have time to strengthen the bill. We have now, and Thor willing it’s passage this year, we have next year to tweak things before the midterms. But giving up now is not a good idea.

  • Stranahan

    The Public Option is only going to get weaker in the Senate. There’s no path at all to making it stronger.That’s why passing a strong House bill was the only hope. That failed thanks to the sell out of folks like Mr. Weiner who supported a Robust Public Option right up until it mattered, to paraphrase Allision Kilkenny .

  • http://politicalpartypooper.wordpress.com/ Political Party Pooper

    Just out of curiosity, has anyone even bothered doing a CBO Estimate comparison on a Single-Payer system? Anyone bothered to compare the OVERALL costs of a system of payment that requires profit and oftentimes demands that hospitals pick up the slack for any payments they refuse to make versus a system that pays for everything without requiring profits?Seriously, has anyone compared what the actual overall costs of single payer would be to what we have now? Seeing as how there is not one bit of healthcare in this nation that is not paid for at some point, wouldn’t taking the profit out of the payment system actually save money and reduce the deficit?If Democrats had truly wanted that type of legislation, proving the worth of it would have been their first priority.

  • Norman Shutters

    But you know what would be way easier for them than killing whatever reforms we enact? Sitting back and watching as “progressives” kill the reform before it even gets started.

    Eloquently (and accurately) stated. Here’s hoping the Stranaterri Napkin and its ilk might pay some attention to the words.

  • Irish Girl

    Unfortunately, I’m afraid Lee is right on this one thing…..the bill can only be weakened in the Senate. Worse yet from my perspective, the bill will only pass the Senate with the Stupak Amendment intact.Here’s something NO ONE has mentioned on this blog and this worries me GREATLY–The Stupak Amendment tells insurers that they can decide to cover or not cover abortions. AND all abortions are NOT for an “oops I had unprotected sex”. Tens of thousands of women lose children during pregnancy. The fetuses’ heartbeat can stop at any point and when it does, the woman’s body doesn’t always go into “miscarriage mode”. IE, the woman’s body doesn’t always expel the fetus and other tissues. When this happens, the woman is in increasing danger that gets worse as time passes.The woman can “wait” and see if her body chooses to miscarriage (in the old days a lot of women simply died from infection because this never happened), or she can take a “chemical” to force miscarriage (go through your normal life while bleeding profusely, cramping and passing large clots of tissue–”hi it’s so nice to be at work feeling this horrible!”) OR she can have a D&C and be better within 24 hours and back at work.Hmmmmm….what’s the humane thing here? Should be a no brainer, right?In this case the abortion is “optional”….but the options aren’t good and it always insurance covered. I will bet you every last penny I have that if this amendment stays, insurance companies will stop covering D&C’s like this. More women will be at risk. Rich women will be able to pay for the privilege of the quick and easy D&C. Poor women will either be at risk of infection and potentially death (or they’ll just wait until she is at this state of risk or in “crisis” before allowing the D&C–doesn’t mean much for prevention does it?) OR she will have to “bleed it out” missing more days of work (that they can little afford to miss in the first place.)I was in the position only about a month ago. I had FMLA to cover me at work….but I was very close to be ‘unpaid’ time off and I’m the only source of income for my family right now.Sorry to be so graphic, but, in general, men are clueless in regards to this kind of thing. And if it helps you to understand what this law means to women, then I will paint the city red if I have to.So pass HRC, but we damn well better challenge that Amendment afterwards……

  • skywriter1

    Frankly, I’m getting tired of the whole Liberals Who Trash Reform because it’s not “enough”.First of all, besides joining up with the Party of Do Nothing Wingnuts to shout down the current health reform, you’re playing right into the hands of the insurance industry.Frankly, if we had a more robust liberals-wet-dream-public-option WITHOUT all the other rules and regulations about pre-existing conditions, recision, caps on expenses, etc. then the public option wouldnt mean a damn.So why not work to make it as robust as possible, get it passed, and then work to enhance over the next several years?If you’re not going to work FOR reform, real reform we can have now, then GTFO of the way.

  • Stranahan

    Actually, if we had a robust public option that didn’t have pre-existing, recission and so on – and we DIDN’T regulate those things for private insurance…it would kill private insurance. People would flock to the much better Public Option.The people getting in the way of reform are the people supporting this bill – that’s what more and more people are seeing.This bill makes the insurance industry richer and more powerful. They are getting more than they are giving – that’s an established fact. How does that possibly help reform?

  • Norman Shutters

    The people getting in the way of reform are the people supporting this bill – that’s what more and more people are seeing.

    Citation needed.

    And, seriously, would you just fuck off already? You’re not here to engage in a rational discussion, you’re here for a Lee-Stranahan-is-great-and-right-about-everything circlejerk. It’s all very masturbatory, so just GTFO already.

  • J

    This health care bill, to me, is a lot like the stimulus bill of last winter. Good enough? Not even close. Better than nothing? Abso-fucking-lutely.[For example, last year all Repubs could bitch about in terms of the economy was that the government shouldn't do a damn thing and let everything sort itself out--free market FTW! Now, when it's clear that government intervention had a positive effect (however small) and that the PEOPLE believe this, it's "why isn't the government doing more to give you a job"?]

  • skywriter1

    @JCouldnt have said it better myself! I think you just summarized what was in my head over the last few days in a way I hadn’t thought of before.

  • Stranahan

    Norm – no, I won’t fuck off. Go it – you don’t like me and the ideas I’m discussing threaten your worldview. There, I have you some attention. Now, do you have anything to add?The cite is the number of articles and comments I’m seeing where people are getting over the ‘historic’ high and realizing how much was given up.Even the people here strongly defending the bill admit that it has big problems. Nobody I’ve seen is really saying it’s a good bill.And it’s going to get worse. The Senate version will bring more badness and most of the people apologizing for this bill will apologize for that one, too.This bill makes the insurance companies richer and entrenches them even further. Do you dispute that?J – I’d say the healthcare bill is a lot like the bank bailouts, actually. Presented as a emergency and not only doesn’t it solve the underlying problem but it makes it worse.

  • J

    @Stranahan: I can see that. Although, I’d say that even if the bailouts made things worse, they didn’t get as bad as they would have without them. Obviously, that is a point on which many people disagree. But I think that what people would have suffered in the event of a collapse of the banking system as we know it wouldn’t have been worth the possibility that we might have built something better in the aftermath.

  • Norman Shutters

    Your ideas have nothing to do with it — it’s you that I don’t like. Plenty of people are expressing sentiments that are similar to yours, but most of them are doing it in a way that doesn’t cause them to come across as an überdouche. After your little “everyone here hasn’t done anything for healthcare, look at me, I’m Lee Stranahan, I made videos and, therefore, I’ve done more than all of you” rant the other day, I have very little patience for your condescending bullshit. Now fuck off.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    You know, it’s time for us to move on. All this “discussion” with the Stranahans is keeping us unfocused and right now there are a number of Dems that need to hear from us. The bill is passed, conference is up next, Harry Reid is dragging his droopy ass. Time to get on it.All in favor of getting to work?

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Entrenches!

  • Norman Shutters

    Right-o, Nano. Let’s all flush the Stranaterri Napkin, and not let it derail us from helping to make positive progress on HCR.

  • Stranahan

    Bob – explain to your readers why you support a bill that doesn’t really make things better, as shown by the people profiled in the film Sicko.Donna Smith starred in Michael Moore’s Sicko, along with many other Americans with health care issues.Watch her video. I’d love to hear your comments.http://www.mefeedia.com/watch/24691402And yes – it entrenches. Do you have a better word? Do you deny it?

  • eljefejeff

    Jeezus Lee, we have a better shot at succeeding in Afghanistan than we do passing single payer or even getting a robust public option. It ain’t happening. Congress sucks, they’re all self-serving and paid off, no matter what party they belong to.Bitch about it all you want, but if Lieberman is going to filibuster an opt-in public option, what do you think he’s gonna say about single payer? It’s not gonna happen. It just isn’t. Let’s lay the groundwork with this bill and expand later. The consequences of this bill dying could very well mean a replay of 1994 and delay the possibility of health care reform another 15 years. Is that what you want? That’s my line in the sand. I refuse to let that happen. I’ve had enough with Americans dying and going bankrupt and we can’t spare any more. Maybe you’re willing to be patient while people die, most of us here aren’t.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    “Bob – explain to your readers why you support a bill that doesn’t really make things better, as shown by the people profiled in the film Sicko.”

    and

    “Watch her video. I’d love to hear your comments.”

    I don’t get it. Why do you believe it’s your job to come here and demand answers from Bob? Where do you get off?I’ll say it again. This has nothing to do with HCR. It’s personal and you haven’t gotten your victory yet, so the hectoring continues.

  • Stranahan

    Nano – you are projecting. For YOU it’s personal. For me, it’s obviously been about the issue. I say obviously, because I didn’t just randomly show up.I have been writing / making videos about health care reform for months. My position has been consistent – I support, at minimum, a robust public option because I care about people’s lives. I haven’t been trying to make anybody make excuses for a bad bill that doesn’t solve the big problems.Did you watch the video? Weren’t you moved the slightest knowing that this bill doesn’t solve those people’s problems?I didn’t make the video, so try watching it without without flipping your shit.

  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe_Tone

    Did you watch the video? Weren’t you moved the slightest knowing that this bill doesn’t solve those people’s problems?

    I’d like to know how killing the bill (and thus doing nothing) solves their problems.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    So, you’ve been consistent and Bob has not. Why has Bob not being consistent (in your mind) so bothersome to you? Why are you here demanding that he state his position and then never waver from it?Are you the Progressive Blog Monitor now, here to strip us of our credentials? We’ve obviously not toed the line as you would prefer and now you’re here to let us know.But why do you keep hammering away at Bob for some alleged behavior that has aggrieved you so?And no. Note to you and Terri: I rarely visit any page you copy/paste and doubt anyone else does either. It’s usually a response to someone’s response to one of your ridiculous charges. Again, you don’t want to discuss, you want to brow beat us all, especially Bob, into agreeing with you and you haven’t figured out yet that it’s not going to happen.Disrupt. Belabor. Harass. Ah, the life of a troll…

  • Stranahan

    Wolfe – the key is demand a better bill. The House Progressives caved. They shouldn’t have – they should have held their ground for a robust public option.Here’s a great new piece from RJ EskowDemocratic Party Out of Bounds http://ow.ly/ASoi

  • http://www.bobcesca.com Bob_Cesca

    Lee:>>>>>Wolfe – the key is demand a better bill.In Lee’s vernacular, “better” = “KILL THE”.

  • Norman Shutters

    Nano – you are projecting. For YOU it’s personal. For me, it’s obviously been about the issue. I say obviously, because I didn’t just randomly show up.

    Lee, sometimes I wonder if you realize what a pretentious douchebag you are.

    He’s not projecting — anyone who is a regular at this blog knows that you’re full of yourself (and shit, as well) and like to make things about you, personally. Nano didn’t randomly show up here, either. He’s a regular, as am I, and there are more than a few GDAB regulars who wish you would just fuck off already. F-U-C-K O-F-F.

  • BenR

    Hi there. I’m an Australian and I’ve really appreciated this blog for helping me to understand the cut-and-thrust of American politics as HCR has been unfolding. The comment threads have been just as enlightening…if a little scary at times.

    I thought I might share the perspective of an (somewhat-ignorant) outsider.

    Australia is one of those nations caught in your orbit. We had troops in Iraq and we have troops in Afghanistan, we were affected by the GFC, we’ve suffered civilian casualties due to Muslim extremists in Indonesia (and you know they were made bold by 9/11) and your culture pervades ours.

    All this means that I celebrated when Obama won the election, like most of the world did. I can understand why he won the Nobel Peace Prize and I can understand it being dubbed the “He’s not Bush Award”. Because from the perspective of most of us, Bush would have been laughable if he hadn’t have been so disastrous for us all.

    I love that Obama has changed the tone of US Foreign Relations. But I also love that he’s trying to change the tone of US politics. Because the world needs you guys to get your shit together.

    But at the end of the day, Obama is a politician who must do politics. He is the most gifted politician I have ever seen. 6 years ago he was a state senator. He was a black man with an muslim-sounding name. He was facing the Hilary juggernaut with few powerful allies. And now he’s President. So why do progressives suddenly think he’s cracked under the pressure of the office and wimped out?

    In 9 months – 9 months! – he’s reversed significant anti-American sentiment around the world, achieved significant change (or signalled serious intent to change) in key areas of policy and has somehow managed to get HCR on the table and through Congress. And yet he’s being sniped by his own ‘supporters’!

    With all that in mind…Stranahan, what are you on? Even from halfway around the world, it’s obvious that the bill you wanted to see would never pass a congress and senate so beholden to lobbyists and craven self-interest. You can’t really think that the President talking big and tough could overcome that, do you?

    So, following your advice, Obama would consume masses of political capital and credibility to urge the impossible? Wasn’t a lack of political capital and credibility Carter’s downfall? Is earning all those progressive brownie-points worth Obama going down that track?

    And all this talk about insurers getting stronger and richer…do you think they can buy any more politicians then they’ve already got? Can they buy your vote? Yes, they are fat, rich and evil. So attack them instead of Obama. And attack those that have been bought.

    Everybody knows that what sort of bill you wanted to see. But you didn’t get it and you won’t get it. You’re entitled to state your case, but you’ve been heard now so it’s time to move on.

    You want a better bill? Well, get a better senate and a better congress…you won’t get a better President in your life time and you know that’s true. Especially if this one gets shot down and neutered by his own party-base.

    How do you get better representation? Well, I reckon it’s through all those votes the insurance industry can’t buy. The millions of uninsured, under-insured, pre-existing condition-suffering potential voters who suddenly have access to something more. The millions of people who know there are better more robust options possible for a fearless majority. Rally them with the shocking fact that this bill is the best you can expect and that it is not good enough. Then in 2010, 2012, 2014 and as long as it takes demand better candidates and elect better representatives until the situation changes.

    Stop caring so much about being right and put all your influence, intelligence and passion into MAKING things right. Deal with how things are, not how you want them to be.

    To use 2 of my least-favourite cliches: stop talking about kool-aid and start making lemonade.

    Thanks for listening.

  • Kat

    Marry me, Ben.

  • likala

    G’day BenGreat insightful post. Good on ya!Please consider moving it to the top thread where more people (one in particular) will see it as I’m afraid it won’t be seen by many here.

  • stacib

    Fantastic post, BenR.I wonder why both Lee and Terri don’t put more energy into running for Congress and then they can show us all how it’s so incredibly easy to push through an agenda.If I remember correctly, Terri did run for local office and got smashed. She couldn’t convince a couple thousand people, yet she sits in such judgement of Obama who convinced MILLIONS that he was the right guy for the job.To Lee and Terri — get a platform, run for office and institute your change. I’ll be waiting.

  • LK

    BobMaybe add Ben’s post as comment of the day?!?Kudos, Ben for saying so well how many of us feel here. It is really nice to have your perspective. Thank you for sharing!

  • eljefejeff

    Ben, that was VERY VERY well said. We appreciate your input. Thank you.

  • veralynn

    Ben–that was Goddamn Awesome!!Thank you. Your perspective is much appreciated.