Obama to Convene Bipartisan Health Care Summit

[Frodo]

Anyone think anything will come out of this?

Obama to Convene Bipartisan Summit on Health Care

By JEFF ZELENY
Published: February 7, 2010

President Obama said Sunday that he will convene a half-day, bipartisan health care summit at the White House on Feb. 25 to be broadcast on television, so Americans can see Democrats and Republicans try to break the deadlock on health care legislation.

The president made the announcement in an interview on CBS during the Super Bowl pre-game show. The meeting would mark the first time in the long health care debate that leaders from both sides would be allowed to air their ideas publicly and see if they can find agreement.

Mr. Obama did not say what he was willing to give up in the negotiations or chart a specific legislative strategy for moving a bill through Congress.

“If we can go step by step through a series of these issues and arrive at some agreements, there’s no reason we can’t do this faster than it took last year,” Mr. Obama said in an interview on Sunday afternoon from the White House Library.

He added that he would not be supportive of starting the health care debate from the beginning, but rather would try to work from the existing proposals that passed the House and Senate to find agreement. It remained an open question whether this would be possible, given the hardened views of Democrats and Republicans alike.

But the bipartisan health care meeting on Feb. 25 is the latest example of how the White House is attempting to draw in the opposition party and highlight their ideas in the midterm election year, hoping that the Democratic proposals look better when compared to the Republican ideas.

[Beet]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

[Torie]

Very good move. I hope the GOP focuses on something that is not pie in the sky, as to which Obama will shred them - yet again. But the GOP leadership does not seem to have "the necessaries" sometimes when it counts. Quiz time: do you remember whose career abruptly ended when he used that term?

[Zarn]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

This mentality is the problem.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

This mentality is the problem.

Yeah, who is Obama to actually put Republicans in a position where they have to come up with policy proposals?

The bastard.

[Zarn]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

This mentality is the problem.

Yeah, who is Obama to actually put Republicans in a position where they have to come up with policy proposals?

The bastard.

That one went over you head, but I can't say I'm surprised.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bipartisanship is a one-way street.

[k-onmmunist]

R.I.P. Public option.

[opebo]

Unseemly.  If we're to continue the genocide, we shouldn't prod the dying in this way.  Just let them pass away in the bushes - they really won't be noticed.

[Vepres]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

[Franzl]

Gives the Republican leadership another chance to make fools of themselves....assuming it goes the same way as the Q&A went with the House Republicans.

[Vepres]

Gives the Republican leadership another chance to make fools of themselves....assuming it goes the same way as the Q&A went with the House Republicans.

I thought some did okay their. The guy from IL, and Paul Ryan were certainly civil, professional, and knowledgeable. But if only the leadership speaks, they're screwed

[opebo]

Gives the Republican leadership another chance to make fools of themselves....assuming it goes the same way as the Q&A went with the House Republicans.

Um, no.  No one watches that stuff, and anyway, didn't you notice that the 'public' profoundly supports the genocide?  That's why the Democrats have suffered recently in the pollings.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

Yeah, because the Democrats are being uncooperative.

[Vepres]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

Yeah, because the Democrats are being uncooperative.

I said both parties, no?

Democrats will blame Republican obstructionism and duck any responsibility despite being in the majority, while Republicans will act like its some socialization of the industry.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

Yeah, because the Democrats are being uncooperative.

I said both parties, no?

Democrats will blame Republican obstructionism and duck any responsibility despite being in the majority, while Republicans will act like its some socialization of the industry.

It's comments like this that make me wonder whether or not you understand anything or if you make a habit of being disingenuous. A Democratic Majority has nothing to do with it. If everything requires 60 votes it makes everything almost impossible to pass. The fact that you ignore this huge detail and try to pin the responsibility for the lack of action on Democrats and give Republicans a free pass is absolutely astounding.

[anvi]

The Republicans are being put on the spot here and they should be.  About one and a half weeks ago, some Republican Senators, even Hatch, were saying that if the White House brought them to the table to renegotiate the bill, a lot of things could be agreed on right off the bat, and I think Snowe would be even more inclined to this position.  But now that the White House has called for this "summit," lots of Congressional Republicans are demanding that the whole health care bill be scrapped entirely and that health care reform should basically be reduced to tort reform (a far cry from the "let's take more time to figure this out" line they towed during much of the previous year).  If they take the latter tack, they are running the risk of looking totally obstructionist (they look like this to many already, but if they plainly take that line, the tables could turn against them.)

The Republicans were able to mount effectiove opposition to health care last year, in no small measure because of the completely ineffective and eventually corrupt ways the Democrats handled the bill and themselves.  But Republicans, once they get some momentum behind them, do have a history of overshooting.  And they are dealing, despite what most of them apparently believe, with a president who is both politically smart and informed about his and their policies.  Lots of things can turn the tide in an election year, not just one's own plans.  I'll be interested to see how they deal with this challenge.

But, in a way, I also find all these short-term political strategies around this issue (and many others) depressing.  The Republicans, especially some Senate Republicans, should step up to the plate, show some leadership, and take the opportunity to do something constructive for the country on this most important issue.  If they don't, if nothing of any merit passes or nothing passes at all, then this problem will keep getting worse, health care costs will continue to skyrocket, government deficits will continue to rise, and we'll have to fix it later on anyway, only when it's that much harder.  Short-sighted political strategists might smile on Congressional Republicanths for sticking together and slamming the health care ball back in Obama's face, but history will judge them, along with this sorry batch of current Democrats, with exceeding harshness if the whole thing just fails now.

[Beet]

At this point, I think Obama needs to multi track many things. If Republicans are calling for a start from scratch, then start the debate on that basis... while also keeping a plan to modify and pass the existing bill. Start looking for things that can be agreed upon immediately and fast track those as single line items. If there's obstructionism on individual pieces then that's much harder to obfuscate. The same can go for other priority areas. The point is not to have everything locked up in one big, cumbersome bill.

[Torie]

Well, let them all get together with no preconditions. If the GOP hangs tough that they only want in insure another 3 million folks, or something in that neighborhood, then negotiations will break down, and Obama could probably peel off a few GOP votes, with something considerably more robust, and get it done. It will increase his popularity, and he will get a bill with some staying power. Heck if I were a GOP senator, I would peel off, and I don't think my GOP colleagues would like much what I had to say about it. JMO.

[anvi]

Just saw David Broder interviewed on Charlie Rose.  Very interesting.  But Broder reported that, based on his conversations on the hill, the Republicans aren't going to go for anything in the way of even small reforms on health care.  They, according to Broder, feel like they have the winds of public sentiment at their backs and that Brown's win in Mass. was really the final defeat of health care reform, delivered by the Mass. voters themselves.  So, there it is...

Broder, whom I love listening to because he is brilliant, fair and insightful, suggested that the only thing wrong with health care reform a la Obama was, not the motivation or the policy, but the timing.  The White House was, according to Broder, fooled by the million people ho attended the inauguration and thought they could push through a major piece of legislation effecting great social change in the middle of a recession.  Broder claims that the greatest social changes in America are only possible during times of great economic prosperity, when people are relatively more trustful of the government and the country's prevailing leadership.

Though, as mentioned, I think Broder is often right and he may have had a point about the current economic downturn, I disagree that major social changes occur only in times of great prosperity.  The Depression is what made the New Deal possible, and the slaves were freed only after a tumultuous war that tore the country into pieces.  Broder would have us believe that, for instance per my example, had it not been for the Lewinsky scandal, Bill Clinton could have passed health care reform in '99, when the country was doing well and he was popular, but never in '93.  I doubt this, actually.  When it comes to health care reform, what rules the day in the United States is self-interest, both in bad times and in good.  I hate that fact, but I think it's true.

[KeeptheChange]

Anyone think anything will come out of this?

Yes.  Obama will lie, play fast and loose with the facts and say, "uh, ahhh, err" a lot.

Oh.  And the media will fawn all over how brilliant and articulate he is.

Republicans will do what they have always done...stand firm on principle.

[Vepres]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

Yeah, because the Democrats are being uncooperative.

I said both parties, no?

Democrats will blame Republican obstructionism and duck any responsibility despite being in the majority, while Republicans will act like its some socialization of the industry.

It's comments like this that make me wonder whether or not you understand anything or if you make a habit of being disingenuous. A Democratic Majority has nothing to do with it. If everything requires 60 votes it makes everything almost impossible to pass. The fact that you ignore this huge detail and try to pin the responsibility for the lack of action on Democrats and give Republicans a free pass is absolutely astounding.

They have many options, they choose not to use them. They could have worked more closely with moderate Republicans or used reconciliation. They have the largest majority in decades of either party, yet those in the past got things done. It's one thing to say that Mitch McConnel is being obstructionist, that is to be expected, but there's a problem when not even Olympia Snowe is voting for cloture (and it's not the GOP's fault).

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My concern about GOP hubris was apparently well taken.

[James Rivington]

I think this is a good idea. Transparent and bipartisan, and puts Republicans on the spot. But regardless, I like the President taking some initiative! Even if it's a total flop at least it shows he's doing something other than calling basketball games and reading from teleprompters.

I think this is a good step, but I worry that members of both parties in congress won't really change their tone or attitude.

Yeah, because the Democrats are being uncooperative.

I said both parties, no?

Democrats will blame Republican obstructionism and duck any responsibility despite being in the majority, while Republicans will act like its some socialization of the industry.

It's comments like this that make me wonder whether or not you understand anything or if you make a habit of being disingenuous. A Democratic Majority has nothing to do with it. If everything requires 60 votes it makes everything almost impossible to pass. The fact that you ignore this huge detail and try to pin the responsibility for the lack of action on Democrats and give Republicans a free pass is absolutely astounding.

They have many options, they choose not to use them. They could have worked more closely with moderate Republicans or used reconciliation. They have the largest majority in decades of either party, yet those in the past got things done. It's one thing to say that Mitch McConnel is being obstructionist, that is to be expected, but there's a problem when not even Olympia Snowe is voting for cloture (and it's not the GOP's fault).

Aye, you are correct, there is indeed a problem, Olympia Snowe and her fellow Republicans have proven they don't give a damn about the poor. The only concern the GOP has for health care is how much profit insurance companies make off sick people.

[anvi]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My concern about GOP hubris was apparently well taken.

Oh, don't feel bad, Torie.  Democrats have plenty of hubris of their own.  It's why D.C. works so well, and makes us all so proud.

The constructive relationship between Pubbies and Dems nowadays reminds me of a joke a late friend from India once told me.  He was recalling the Cold War friendship between India and the Soviet Union, and he called it "the marriage of poverty and stupidity." 

Now, we've got our own game.