"White House Rethinks How It Sells Health Overhaul "

Audience members react to an answer from Democratic Rep. Dan Boren during a town-hall meeting on health care in Muskogee, Okla., on Tuesday. White House officials concede that the anger that has surfaced in town-hall meetings on TV is shifting the debate on the health overhaul.
Jonathan Weisman (Wall Street Journal):

President Barack Obama, trying to regain control of the health-care debate, will likely shift his pitch in September, White House and Democratic officials said, as he faces pressure from supporters to talk more about the moral imperative to provide health insurance to all Americans.

The rethinking comes amid a struggle by the White House to clarify its view on a public insurance plan, which liberals see as a critical part of a health overhaul. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Sunday that a public plan isn't the "essential element" of a health bill, prompting sharp words from liberal groups.

The muddle continued Tuesday, with White House spokesman Robert Gibbs facing repeated questioning at his news briefing on whether the position has changed and how the president will respond to the liberal concerns.

Mr. Gibbs said the president's "preferred method" is the public plan "but he's certainly open to looking at and discussing other ideas." Ms. Sebelius insisted, "We continue to support the public option."

She said her earlier comments on a CNN program got too much coverage. "Sunday must have been a very slow news day because here's the bottom line: Absolutely nothing has changed," Ms. Sebelius told an audience in Washington.

While trying to placate liberals, White House officials also want to beat back broader public unease fed by critics' charges that the Democratic plan would cost too much and lead to excessive government control over family health-care decisions.
More

* Washington Wire: NBC Poll Finds Myths Endure on Health Care, Highlighting Doubts on Overhaul

The president is expected to present a more emotional appeal during a conference call Wednesday with liberal religious groups. A senior White House official said the message would be tailored to the groups' moral emphases, although he cautioned the president's message to religious groups may not herald a broader shift in themes.

"This is such a technical issue, it's easy to get bogged down in the weeds," said Dan Nejfelt, a spokesman for Faith in Public Life, one of the groups scheduled for the Wednesday call. "It's important to have a voice saying, 'This is about right and wrong. This is about honoring faith.'"

The president's revised health-care emphasis is likely to roll out as summer ends, when White House officials believe a broader group of voters will tune into the debate. The new strategy envisions speeches rather than informal town-hall meetings, said a senior official.

The president began his health overhaul this year with talk about cutting health-care costs. In the past few weeks, Mr. Obama has focused his message on what his plan would do for Americans who already have medical insurance. He has said, for example, that his plan would cap out-of-pocket expenses and protect people from losing insurance if they get sick.

A senior Republican Senate aide agreed that Mr. Obama's appeal to the pocketbook of middle-class Americans is likely the best strategy. He said, however, the president has failed to persuade Americans that they have something to gain. At this stage in the legislative process, he said, Americans will balance personal costs with ideals, and, he added, ideals almost always lose.

Mr. Obama has come under criticism from supporters who say the president has been mired in the details of insurance regulation, rather than promoting the lofty themes that got him elected.

A Democratic strategist said, "If you are going to sell something as big and monumental and transformative as health care, you cannot get small with it. You've got to be larger. You've got to call on the better angels out there."

Obama campaign officials ridiculed Hillary Clinton's efforts to line up Washington power brokers behind her. Now, the White House boasts of having interest groups and the health-care industry -- from the AARP to drug makers to health insurers -- in support of health-care changes.

White House officials disagree with much of the criticism, saying a campaign message is different from a legislative push that requires cooperating with interest groups. Democratic officials involved in the White House health-care push said details that can be ducked by a candidate can't be avoided by a president. They say the message on improving health insurance is getting through.

But polling indicates the current White House tack is in trouble. An NBC News poll released Tuesday continues to show 41% supporting the way Mr. Obama is handling health-care reform; 47% disapprove. In April, 33% wanted a complete overhaul of the U.S. health-care system. That is down to 21%. Now, 31% said they want only minor changes, up from 21% in April.

"Everybody's very nervous," a senior Democratic leadership aide in Congress said Tuesday. Members of Congress have been asking for the five words they need to explain the health-care imperative, the equivalent of "It's the economy, stupid," the aide said.

White House officials concede that the anger that has surfaced in town-hall meetings and been broadcast on TV is shifting the debate. William McInturff, a pollster for The Wall Street Journal and NBC News, said most Americans in the political center aren't following the details of the legislation. They hear people yelling and see the president stymied even with a strongly Democratic Congress. Many conclude, he said, that something is wrong with the Obama health-care effort.

"The Stranger Election Control Board" liveblogs the primary election

SLOG, right here.

Matt Taibbi: "No Public Option Will Mean a Revolt Among Progressives" (video)

Crooks and Liars, with video (04:32):

Rachel Maddow talks to Matt Taibbi about what is going to happen to the Democratic Party if the White House settles for a bill with no public option. Taibbi feels that this is the moment the progressive wing of the party draws a line in the sand. They note that Bernie Sanders in the Senate and Anthony Weiner in the House have both said that if there's no public option, there will be no bill at all.

Taibbi thinks a deal was cut from the beginning between the White House and the insurance and pharmaceutical industries and that they never intended to have a public option. As both Taibbi and Maddow note it doesn't matter what the Democrats do, they're not going to get any Republican support for the health care bill, so wooing Republicans doesn't make any sense.

Taibbi has an article coming out at Rolling Stone Friday titled Sick and Wrong: How Washington is Screwing up Health Care Reform and Why It May Take a Revolt to Fix It. Sounds about right.

"Power of online politics" (video)

MSNBC, video (03:48).

Howie P.S.: Carlos Watson talks with Ari Melber about how the netroots are influencing electoral politics.

BusinessWeek: “The Health Insurers Have Already Won” (with video and audio)

Democracy Now! with video and audio:

In a cover story for BusinessWeek earlier this month, reporters Chad Terhune and Keith Epstein argue UnitedHealth and other insurers maneuvered to shape healthcare reform for their own benefit. The story is titled “The Health Insurers Have Already Won,” and the authors argue that the insurers have “succeeded in redefining the terms of the reform debate to such a degree that no matter what specifics emerge in the voluminous bill Congress may send to President Obama this fall, the insurance industry will emerge more profitable.” We speak with Chad Terhune, senior writer at BusinessWeek, where he’s covered healthcare for several years. [includes rush transcript]

Howie P.S.: If this true, why are they fighting Obama so hard?

Jon Stewart: "Health Care--Heal or No Heal?" (video)

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Heal or No Heal - Medicine Brawl
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Spinal Tap Performance

.Comedy Central, video (06:51)

Howie P.S: I call this one Jon's "Red State Update."

Krugman: "Nick Beaudrot explains it all"

Paul Krugman (NY Times):

Health reform’s consequences:

Howie P.S.: "Nicholas Beaudrot is an accidental political observer living in Seattle, Washington. By day he writes software for Amazon.com, snowboards, and plays ultimate frisbee. By night [and morn] he posts to this blog, runs the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally, and tries to cook decent Italian cuisine."

mcjoan: "Pelosi Maintains House Support for Public Option " (with video)

mcjoan:

The Senate likes to think it's the only game in town, and Kent Conrad likes to think that his is the only vote that matters, but there's another chamber and another congressional leader who holds quite a few cards.

Nancy Pelosi reminded the White House of that today with this statement obtained by Greg Sargent.

"As the President stated in March, ‘The thinking on the public option has been that it gives consumers more choices and it helps keep the private sector honest, because there’s some competition out there.’

"We agree with the President that a public option will keep insurance companies honest and increase competition.

"There is strong support in the House for a public option. In the House, all three of our bills contain a public option as does the bill from the Senate HELP Committee.

"A public option is the best option to lower costs, improve the quality of health care, ensure choice and expand coverage.

"The public option brings real reform to lower costs over the 10 year period of the bill."

Pelosi has the numbers behind her statement. To date, at least 64 members have made the pledge: no public option, no yes vote. CPC chair Rep. Raul Grijalva reiterated that as well in a statement today (via e-mail):

"The public option is central to healthcare reform. Real reform, which lowers costs and ensures all Americans get the quality, affordable healthcare that they deserve, cannot be accomplished without a robust public option. As we have stated repeatedly for months now, a majority of the members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus will oppose any healthcare reform legislation that does not include a robust public option. Our position has not, and will not, change. As Co-Chair of the Progressive Caucus, I look forward to working with my colleagues to develop comprehensive legislation that allows all Americans to choose the healthcare plan that’s right for them and their families. But I will not support any bill that does not include a public option."

The number of members who will not support a bill without it is actually more like 100, if you can believe Rep. Anthony Weiner (via FDL):

WEINER: The President does seem like he's moving away from the public plan, and if he does, he's not going to pass a bill. Because there are just too many people in Washington who believe that the public plan was the only way that you effectively bring some downward pressure on prices, and if he says well we're not going to have that, then I'm not really quite sure what we're dong here.

BECKY QUICK: So you would not vote for a bill that made it through, if it got through...

WEINER: Not only I but I think there's probably a hundred members of the House, who believe for various reasons that you need to have something to bring down prices. Otherwise you're basically, what you're doing, you're keeping the cost arc. . . the CBO agrees with that. You know as it was, I think the public plan had been watered down so much. So if the President thinks he's cutting a deal to get Senate votes, he's probably losing House votes.

The House Progressives are becoming much more aggressive and vocal in their demands for the public option, and it's extremely significant that they have Nancy Pelosi backing them up with statements like the one above, reminding the White House that Kent Conrad and Max Baucus aren't the only Dems that need to be heeded. The House members need, as Greg says, to "Lay down their marker and refuse to budge." They've made a very good start on that.

Maybe a good enough start that some of the more progressive members in the Senate--and particularly those on Senate Finance (Rockefeller, Schumer, and Cantwell, who have all stated support for a public option) will torpedo the crappy Baucus/Conrad co-op plan.

Howard Dean: "We will have a public option" (video)

MSNBC, video (07:21).

Howie P;S.: In order to hear Dean, you have abide Morning Joe and Mika.

"Bloggers Back Obama's Agenda, Not His Strategy" (with video)

Ari Melber (The Nation), with video (06:38):

It's cool to be a liberal blogger again. Just ask Bill Clinton.

Speaking to the fourth annual Netroots Nation convention in Pittsburgh, where a slew of bloggers, online activists and traditional pols gathered this weekend, the former President heralded attendees for elevating "public discourse" and pushing their agenda with transparency and partisan vigor.

Bloggers take sides, Clinton said appreciatively, and they "don't have to pretend" that they are neutral. The line not only celebrated a netroots ethic--it implicitly rebuked the traditional media's claim to disinterested objectivity. Heated media criticism is a passion that the blogosphere and The Big Dog have always shared. On domestic policy, by contrast, there are more disagreements. Yet Clinton's appearance resonated more for his stature in the party than where he falls on the progressive axis. Campaign season has given way to an era of Democratic governance, when volunteer armies and small donors matter less, but the netroots can still draw some of the most powerful people in politics. The current White House sent one if its most sought-after emissaries, senior adviser and longtime Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett, for a keynote appearance. And that's only counting Democrats.

Netroots Nation also drew a rather unlikely guest: a life-long Republican senator who recently joined the Democratic Party because, as he told the bloggers, he "has a good job" and wants to keep it. Arlen Specter, the resilient, 79-year-old pol who has now managed to seriously rile the base of both political parties, took questions at a session focusing on his 2010 primary. I co-moderated the event, with Pennsylvania blogger Susie Madrak, and a companion session for his opponent, Rep. Joe Sestak.

Specter made a blunt, detailed and explicit case for netroots support. He ticked off his putative credentials, from current policies (pro-choice, public option, labor voting) to current alliances (Obama, Biden) to great moments in progressive pushback (voting down Robert Bork's Supreme Court nomination) to, yes, his ginger embrace of new technology. In under an hour, Specter asked attendees to join his text message program, huddled with bloggers so they could watch him make a promised cell phone call Sen. Chuck Grassley--to rebut misinformation about health care - and Specter capped it off by tweeting , typo and all, the happenings in real-time: "Called Senator Grassley to tell him to stop speading [sic] myths about health care reform and imaginary 'death panels.'"

While those moves could have been empty gimmickry--one politician simulates calling out another without actual dialogue--the 75-year-old Iowa senator also tweets. Back in June, Grassley made waves by tweeting that President Obama had "nerve" to chide Congress' timetable on health care when his colleagues were "even workinWKEND" -- suggesting his missives are drafted without staff filtering. And just one hour after Specter's salvo, Grassley packed a stern riposte into 140 characters:

"Specter got it all wrong that I ever used words 'death boards'. Even liberal press never accused me of that. So change ur last Tweet Arlen"

The fast fight drew coverage from ABC, MSNBC, Politico, The Hill, and UPI, among others, while the satirical blog Wonkette appraised the human costs: "Evil Liberal Bloggers Strain Grassley, Specter Friendship, On Twitter."

Sure, the messages are short and the stakes may seem small. Yet the exchange also demonstrates the utility of new media politics. Beyond his "position" on health care reform, I asked Specter about countering misinformation from his former allies because, once again, a big political debate has been hijacked by dishonest operatives, enabled by a (mostly) complicit press corps. In other words, the lies may count more than the votes. And bloggers in the audience yelled out for Specter to contact Grassley immediately based on two basic premises: our representatives should deal in public, and fact-checking is a communal, political activity that cannot be left to media gatekeepers.

As it happens, governing in the Obama era is starting to feel more like another desperate, frantic election campaign, where overheated symbols substitute for genuine policy discourse and feckless referees grant equal time to lies and facts alike. So it's really no wonder liberal bloggers are back. We need them.

"The Public Plan as Political Play"

Peter Sudeman (Daily Dish):

Is the public plan dead? It's not entirely clear. Yesterday on CNN, Kathleen Sebelius suggested that a public plan isn't essential to reform. And at a town hall meeting on Saturday, Obama said that it's "just one sliver" of the overhaul he has in mind.

But as Marc Ambinder reports, some administration officials are now backing away from what Sebelius said.

Still, yesterday's comments took a lot of the wind out of the public option's sails. And that's bound to disappoint the public option's many liberal supporters. As Patrick pointed out, Rachel Maddow thinks that losing the public plan would mean wasting a lot of effort. Perhaps. But viewed another way, it also looks like a fairly smart political play.

How's that?

Marc also noted that, although Obama clearly supports a public plan, he's also viewed it as a "bargaining chip." By putting it forward in earnest, giving it major support, and then reluctantly withdrawing it (if that's what he chooses to do), Obama will be able to make a major concession without killing reform entirely.

More than that, the public plan has drawn fire away from other parts of the plan that might normally have received a lot of criticism from the Right -- the individual mandate in particular. Indeed, as Ramesh Ponnuru wrote last week, it's been somewhat surprising how little attention reform opponents have paid to other potentially controversial aspects of the plan:

It seems to me that those of us who oppose the Democrats’ health-care legislation in principle — who believe, that is, that it takes our system of financing health care in the wrong direction rather than that it moves too fast — should start concentrating less of our fire on the “public option” and more of it on the individual mandate.

...[T]he basic outline of Obamacare can survive ditching the public option. It can’t survive ditching the individual mandate. You can’t, for example, have a ban on insurers’ taking account of pre-existing conditions without such a mandate.

No doubt Obama would prefer to see a public plan included in reform. But he's also been consistent about hedging his support for it, refusing to say that it's a must-have.

As he continues to play the difficult, delicate political game that health-care reform has become, it may turn out that the public plan's primary value has little to do with whether or not it's good policy -- and everything to do with its usefulness as a political play.

Howie P.S.: Good luck getting labor and the progressive netroots to see this as anything but "caving."

Seattle Hempfest 2009 (photos)

Seattle P-I (photos).

Howie P.S.: Here's the story in the Seattle Times, "Playing down its tie-dye image." The Seattle Times also has a story about policy: "Hempfest puts marijuana policy back on front burner."

The Campaigner-in-Chief pushes back in Montana and Colorado (video)

MSNBC-video, (17:31).

Howie P.S.: More pushback. specifically about "death panels" from Obama, speakng in Colorado. video (02:48).

Barack Obama

"Fears for Barack Obama's safety as healthcare debate fuels extremism"

A protester at a healthcare rally in California waves a doctored poster of Barack Obama at a town hall meeting in Alhambra, Calif, Aug 11, 2009. Photograph: Jae C. Hong/AP

Guardian UK:

As storm over Barack Obama's healthcare reforms rages, surge in rightwing extremism is fanned by opponents---The message was clear. The sign carried by a 51-year-old man last week outside a raucous town hall meeting on healthcare in Hagerstown, Maryland, read "Death to Obama". Just to emphasise his point, a second message was also scrawled on the cardboard placard. "Death to Obama, Michelle and 2 stupid kids," it stated.

Welcome to the disturbing new face of the radical right in America. Across the country, extremism is surging, inflamed by conservative talkshow hosts, encouraged by Republican leaders and propagating a series of wild conspiracy theories. Many fear it might end in tragedy.

Obama has been labelled as a threat to democracy and an anti-white racist by senior presenters on the TV channel Fox News. Republicans, seizing on the fierce debate over Obama's plans to reform healthcare, have called him a socialist who plans "death panels" for the elderly. Rumours have circulated that Obama was not born in America and that he plans to ban firearms. Despite having no basis in fact, they have become widely believed. A recent poll in Virginia showed only 53% of voters believed Obama was born in the US. In neighbouring North Carolina, 54% of voters shared that opinion.

Such extremism is becoming a major security issue, prompting fears of an attack on Obama's life or some other incident of domestic terrorism. "This is a very dangerous situation that can spin off 'lone wolf' individuals who decide now is the time to act against people they see as an enemy," said Chip Berlet, author of a book on rightwing extremists.

Federal authorities have launched a programme to try to detect any individuals who might be planning rightwing attacks similar to those that in recent months have killed a Kansas abortion doctor and a black security guard at Washington DC's Holocaust Museum.

At the same time, the watchdog group the Southern Poverty Law Centre has issued a report that warns of rising numbers of potentially violent rightwing militia groups. The number of hate groups has grown from 602 in 2000 to 926, the organisation found. Its report quoted one senior federal law enforcement official, Bart McEntire, as saying: "This is the most significant growth we've seen in 10 to 12 years. All it's lacking is a spark."

Many experts believe that spark is no longer missing. Critics say that Republican politicians have let loose a wave of anger tied to the healthcare debate. Fuelled by racial issues and the economic crisis, it may be impossible to control. "The idea that they are going to be able to control what they have unleashed is plain wrong," said Professor James Corcoran of Simmons College, the author of two books on US domestic terrorism.

Republican leaders have moved to scupper Obama's healthcare plans by inflaming myths and lies about the system. Sarah Palin has refused to back away from her comments over "death panels" despite the fact that the part of the healthcare bill she is referring to does not set up such things and was drawn up by a fellow Republican. Other Republicans have been equally vociferous in attacking Obama.

Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley warned his constituents that Obama's plan could "pull the plug on grandma". Former senator Rick Santorum, who is a possible 2012 presidential hopeful, recently sent out an email warning that Obama was "determined to remake America as a socialist utopia". Oklahoma congressman John Sullivan told supporters in his home state that Obama was creating an "enemies list" of those opposed to healthcare.

The cacophony of gibes and unfounded claims is loudest, however, on rightwing TV and radio. Fox News presenter Glenn Beck, who last week came to British attention following a negative interview about the NHS with Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan, has claimed Obama dislikes white people. "This guy is, I believe, a racist," Beck said. Beck has also discussed allegations that Obama is setting up a network of secret internment camps and joked about poisoning Democratic congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh, whose weekly radio show is listened to by millions of Americans, has compared the Democrats to the Nazi party. Perhaps taking him at his word, some healthcare protesters have carried signs featuring swastikas and Obama with a "Hitler" moustache.

It is in the so-called "birther" movement that the radical right has gained the most traction. The myth, which has been debunked, holds that Obama was not born in America. Numerous Republican politicians have floated the idea based on the false allegation that Obama cannot provide a birth certificate. The theme has been picked up by the media, including mainstream outlets such as CNN. Experts say such rhetoric inflames individuals who might already be planning acts of violence. "It is a climate where extremists in society will start to believe their views are mainstream," said Corcoran.

The SPLC report warns that the militia movement in the US had a long history of smaller attacks in the 1990s, leading up to the terrorist bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City by Timothy McVeigh in 1995. It believes the same pattern could be about to repeat itself and points to numerous incidents in recent years. Last week, William Kostric, a gun-rights advocate, turned up at an Obama town hall meeting in New Hampshire with a loaded handgun strapped to his leg.

Some were more worried, however, by the sign that Kostric carried which referred to a Thomas Jefferson quote about refreshing the "tree of liberty" with the blood of patriots. That was the same quote on a T-shirt McVeigh was wearing when he was arrested.

Barack Obama

Queen Anne / Magnolia News: "Mallahan...is the only candidate who can beat Nickels.."

Queen Anne/Magnolia News:

How lackluster this year's mayoral race (a surprising testament to Seattle's apathy) can best be illustrated by its average and below-average contenders. Not one has the obvious spark and buzz needed to trade blows against a media-battered incumbent whose very name conjures the screw-ups that led to last year's immobilizing winter.

That said, of the six contenders, only two have a prayer of beating Greg Nickels. They are Joe Mallahan and Mike McGinn. And of those two, the best bet would be Mallahan. McGinn is smart, caring and stands by his decisions. All good qualities, but his undoing will be the race's primary issue: the deep-bored tunnel. He's the only candidate against it. Sorry, that ship has sailed. The tunnel is going to happen. Washington voters voted for it last November and those in charge of seeing it through have already sunk time and money into it. For McGinn to hang his entire campaign on scrapping it is a mistake.

Mallahan on the other hand, is for the tunnel, has proven management skills and has rested his campaign on fiscal reform. He has outlined solutions to the city's woes without marginalizing any group. He wants to continue density but not if it's going to forsake neighborhood individuality. His ideas include protecting the environment and the troubled Sound by, for example, adding street sweeping efforts that will reduce runoff. Anticipating exponential growth in the senior population, he wants to encourage private businesses to hire seniors who want to continue to work. He also wants the city's employment resource center to help more seniors find jobs, part time or otherwise.

But perhaps most compelling is his rebuke of the Mercer Street project. He said it won't help move vehicles or freight. He wants to reallocate the $70 million in levy taxes for other neighborhood transportation priorities-or until land owners in Southlake Union agree to bear more of the burden. Nickels, on the other hand, continues to push to make Mercer a two-way street which will all but ensure rush-hour gridlock.

Nickels is leading the race, according to a KING-5 TV poll, with 22 percent of the vote. He also leads with $529,971 in campaign contributions. That almost assures him a space on November's ballot. But just behind him and gaining on both counts is Mallahan. He is the only candidate who can beat Nickels. The News endorses Mallahan and Nickels to make it through the primary and onto November's general election.

Howie P.S.: They are damning Mallahan with faint praise.

Red State Update: "Sometimes the price of freedom is being an *sshole" (video)

travisandjonathan, video (04:17):

Jackie and Dunlap on the passionate give and take and polite dialogue between opponents of Obamacare and those who want to kill old people and sick babies.

H/t to Darryl.

Seattle Hempfest 2009

All the details here.

"Sestak and Specter in Pittsburgh"

Booman may have begun a whole new format for blogging by putting his observations in the comments section. A reader helpfully posts full invitation details on the after party @ The Shadow Lounge. That's my kind of coverage.

Howard Dean tells Netroots health care bill will happen, but will be 'ugly process'

Louis Corsaro (Pittsburgh Business Times):

Howard Dean is confident a health care bill with a public option will eventually land on President Obama’s desk, but says getting there won’t be easy.

“It will be an ugly process,” he told a group of 2,000 people attending the 2009 Netroots Nation convention at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh on Friday.

Dean, former governor of Vermont, a 2004 presidential candidate and chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 2005 until his retirement earlier this year, expects that, when all is said and done, Sen. Max Baucus, a Democrat from Montana and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, knows he must deliver a bill to the president that includes the public option.

“The only piece of reform left (in the bill) worth doing is the public option,” Dean said. “We have already compromised.”

That compromise, he said, was leaving single-payer health care off the table from the beginning. Despite any disagreements within the Democratic Party, Dean said he believes a bill with the public option will survive and every Democrat will have to vote for it.

Some of those Democrats who have differed with Obama’s plan are the so-called “Blue Dogs,” a group of moderate and conservative congressmen. While the Blue Dogs have taken a lot of heat for their stance on health care reform, Dean commended them for getting the small-business opt-out into the bill. Any small business with a $500,000 or smaller payroll will be exempted from offering employees health care. While Dean said he would be in favor of making a $1 million or less payroll and/or a company with 50 or fewer employees exempt, he said the provision makes it a better bill.
The framing of the debate

Asked about the contentious town halls that have been held around the country, where lawmakers have been shouted down and, in some cases, faced threats, Dean said “the debate is over.”

“The town halls are not about health care,” he said. “They’re about being angry.”

It’s also about generational change, he said, indicating the majority of the protesters at the town halls were older people, and their group was getting smaller and smaller.

“They don’t look anything like the generation that voted for Obama,” Dean said. “These people feel threatened.”

He likened it to when he signed off on civil unions as governor of Vermont. When he went to neighborhoods where he normally would be treated with applause and gratitude, he would instead be greeted by people shouting at him. The key, he said, is some people are resistant to change, because “a certain set of things they could believe in” were taken away.

While many progressive Democrats have decried Obama’s insistence on a bipartisan bill, claiming it was a useless exercise, Dean said Obama was being a savvy politician.

As long as Obama is entering into understanding he’ll get no Republican support, Dean said, it is important for the president to show he is trying to reach out across the aisle. And if there is no bipartisanship to be had, “let the Republicans say that.”

He claimed Republicans are uninterested in supporting any health care reform and cannot vote for it because they’ll take too much heat from their party’s leadership and base supporters.

In the end, Dean emphasized the critical nature of the public option in health care reform, and urged people to call lawmakers who are holding up the health care bill. A calling station was set up for Netroots attendees immediately following Dean’s address.

Dean made several other points during the question-and-answer session:

* Cost control is a must, he said, because health care costs have risen at 2.5 times the rate of inflation for about the last 30 years.
* Despite the criticism heaped on the pharmaceutical industry for their advertisements and high prices, Dean noted that they take up a small percentage of the cost of health care, and deliver innovations critical to Americans.
* He said the U.S. must raise reimbursement for primary care and help young doctors deal with the debt they incur for their education. These steps, he said, would encourage more doctors to enter primary care.

Countdown: Howard Dean on "Death Panelitis and Paranoia" (video)

MSNBC-Countdown, video (05:12).

mcjoan @ Netroots Nation: "Howard in the House!!"

mcjoan (daily kos):

We're ready for a barn-burner from the good doctor here at Netroots Nation, if his interview with Sam Stein yesterday is any indication.

"I do think there will be primaries as the result of all this, if the bill doesn't pass with a public option," Dean said, in a phone interview with the Huffington Post....

As he has done before, Dean criticized talk of substituting a government run program with co-operative insurance plans, calling the latter a "fig leaf."

"This talk about co-ops is a political compromise it is not a policy compromise," he said, of the discussions currently underway in the Senate Finance Committee. "And I think most people, on both sides of the aisle know that co-ops won't work."

Asked about a column by long-time Democratic strategist Paul Begala, urging progressives not to shy away from tackling health care in a more incremental approach, Dean shot back: "The public option is incrementalism.... But there is no incrementalism without the public option." He explained: "If you don't have a public option this bill is not even incremental, in terms of adequate health care reform... Paul is not entirely wrong. It is just that the last shred of reform is the public option."

So follow along and I'll try to keep up here liveblogging. And of course, we're streaming it (the video is down below).

YEEEEEEEAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

:::

Update: You can use Twitter to send in questions: #DeanNN

Update 2: Current system will not work to control costs--ever. Have to have public option simply to control those costs.

Update 3: On the "death panel." "These town hall meetings are not about health care." People angry for 3 reasons--Rs have been angry for 30 years and the leaders have exploited that--polling for anger points. Second--who is shouting their congresspeople down? Not the generation that elected Obama--these are the people who feel threatened. As they get smaller they get angrier. Third--a president they're not accustomed to seeing in the WH. Change is hard.

Update 4: Q on reproductive rights--will our reproductive rights/womens health care remain protected? A: Will only probably be relevant to public option--Congress not designing benefit package, but by separate panel. People who have injected this issue into the debate are the people trying to derail the bill. Debate we're now seeing ought to be handled not by putting in language to prevent reproductive health care, but to put it in the hands of the panel. We're much safer having this issue dealt with by people who aren't politically influenced.

Update 5: Q: have the politics changed enough to get it done this time? A: we know we're winning now by the desperation of the other side. Blue Dog positive influence because you have to have someone from the moderate/conservative side represented, since the Rs refuse to participate. The $500,000 exemption for small businesses good. Would be a "huge boost" to small business. "We're in good shape on this bill." There will be a good bill in the House with a strong public option, the Dodd bill is good. Thinks it will end up in reconciliation in the Senate.

Update 6: Q: why didn't the Dems start with single payer? Was it a strategic mistake? How do we make the public option the centrist option? A: It was a mistake. Leadership somehow thought single payer had become like the word "liberal" and that by taking it off the table we'd have a reasonable debate. Debate is done, Rs aren't interested regardless. SP is more efficient, controls administrative costs (4% overhead compared to upwards of 20%)--would have had a better, more comprehensive debate if it had been on the table.

Update 7: Q: How do we get more providers in the debate? A: AMA has endorsed E&C bill--great accomplishment. Significant majority of primary care docs support SP. Some docs are worried, but they're not dumb. They realize they're better off with real reform and that we need change.

Update 8: Q: What can be done to create economic incentives for more people to go into primary care? Is there anything in the existing bills will help? A: Ironically Blue Dogs helped because Medicare rates are too low. Need to raise reimbursement rates for primary care. Need to lower debt from med school, so that they're not attracted to specialties to make more money and pay their loans. Use qualified medical staff like nurse practitioners, physician assistants and get people used to going to them for primary care. And more federally qualified health care centers. (But DemFromCT says that they have limited hours and often have to send their patients on to ERs after hours).

Update 9: Q: How do I frame the hcr debate when I talk to my representative? A: First, who gets to choose? The people or Congress and the insurance companies? Second, American people have made very clear that they want choice, so ask your representative whether they represent you or the insurance companies, and remind them that you'll be having that discussion with them again in 2010. Follow-up: the public option will make the insurance companies honest. The problem is the insurance companies are just an extension of what's been going on on Wall St. They're in it for profit, not for health care.

Update 10: Q: How do we make this bill affordable for middle class as well as low-income people? A: The key is the public option. The stakes are so high for that that it's not worth fighting over anything else. The fee-for-service system needs to change, docs don't particularly like it. So there will be cost controls, and the public option will lead the way.

Update 11: Q: How do we keep medical innovation in reform? A: There is a critical role for private sector--we need to keep the extraordinary innovation of pharmaceuticals and med tech companies. The other role for the private sector is employers to encourage healthier lifestyles. That's an investment in prevention that works. We don't need to run away from what the private sector does right.

Update 12: Q: What about "bipartisanship"? Should he keep working with the Rs? A: The tactic of allowing the Rs to show their true colors to the American people is smart. BUT--bipartisanship shouldn't be the goal. A good bill needs to be the goal.

Update 13: Q: What about co-ops? A: They're a "waste." They're too small. We've already tried it (Blue Cross/Blue Shield) and they got eaten up by the big insurance companies. We don't want to do anything to help the insurance companies. We want them to serve us better. In the long term the co-ops will fail and be crushed. They are a political compromise that will not work.

Update 14: Q: How do we make sure that we have mental health parity in the reform? A: The brain is an organ that needs to be treated like any other organ. There should be no limits on mental health coverage. Hopes that the panel will do that.

Update 15: Q: How do we keep the message on the public option clear? A: We don't spend all our time refuting the BS. This debate is about two things: are we going to allow the American people to choose for themselves? Will they get a full range of choice, or does Congress and the insurance companies get to choose? The second part is who are you representing: are you standing up for the American people or the insurance companies.

Update 16: Q: If the public option passes, will it become the dumping ground for high risk, otherwise uninsurable people? A: No--because guaranteed issue and community rating will be in the bil--they have to let everybody in to private plans. There is a higher proportion of people in the uninsured pool who are higher risk, so uninsured pool might be more likely to sign up for public option and there might be more high risk people in it. But it won't make the public option fail because it has more room for increased risk because it's more efficient. But the reality now is that we're paying for it anyway because these people do need care now--in ERs and in public hospitals. We're paying for these people anyway, and the care will be must more rational in a public system.

Update 17: Q: On exempting small businesses from employer mandate--in 1993-4 there was backlash from medium and large business because of level of subsidies to small business. Will that happen again? A: Small business create 80% of new jobs in America, so this should be even more small business friendly. The large businesses will just have to deal.

If he was in charge? He'd give everybody under 30 for free, and not have mandates. You can't make the under 25 crowd do anything, so forcing them to have health insurance doesn't work. It's the hardest group to sign up for anything. For the over 55s, they could buy into Medicare. Wouldn't create a separate public option but open up Medicare to more people. Wouldn't do away with employer based insurance, even though it's not great. You can't change the system that drastically yet.

But Obama's bill gives us choice. Instead of trying to force everyone out of the system we already have, we need to let people choose what they want--including what they have now if they like it. Allows the pace of reform to go at the pace the American people is comfortable with.

Update 18: Q: How do we help? What does the netroots do to make this happen. A: Speaking as a paid consultant for DFA, go to DFA and take action there. Talk to your Dem Senators and remind them that we are supporting the Democratic President's plan, but only your Senators. Contact your friends in the states of the people who need to be pressured, and encourage them to call their reps.

Majority Dem caucus wants public option, Senate Finance will have to recognize that. We can be polite, but be firm. We've already made our compromise, and there will be no more. The Democratic Congress needs to support the Democratic President (and the crowd goes wild!).

Howie P.S.: Politico interviewed Dean yesterday in a bookstore where he was doing a book-signing: "Howard Dean responds to 'outlandish' health claims."

Breaking: "Bill Clinton Heralds Blogs, Answers Heckler"

Ari Melber (The Nation):

Pittsburgh, PA

9:42pm 8/13/2009 President Clinton just took the stage at Netroots Nation, opening with a joke about how many Republicans think President Obama was born in the United States, teeing off earlier remarks by Rep. Brad Miller. Then he turned serious, crediting the netroots for playing a constructive role in American politics.

"I'd like to thank you for what you do and the contribution you have made to dramatically elevating of our public discourse and the base level of knowledge of people [in politics]," he said at the top of his speech. "I keep a file with me on economics and a file on energy," Clinton continued, "I was looking it through it the other day and was stunned at the number of articles that came from blog sites."

Clinton also credited bloggers for being candid about their policy and partisan preferences. Bloggers takes sides, he told the crowd, and "you don't have to pretend you're not [taking sides]."

The former president turned to a few general issues, saying he hoped to provide "grist" for the mills of the netroots. "It matters whether this Congress passes a comprehensive health care reform bill for this President to sign," Clinton said, to applause, and he later said he has always favored a public option for health care reform.

Clinton declared that the new era of progressive politics could last 30 to 40 years "if we do it right." He reminisced about his time working for Sen. William Fulbright, and noted that after 1968 Republicans managed to build a long-term coalition based on cultural division and corporate economics. Then, taking a page out of the Fox News playbook, Clinton jokingly hurled the c-word at one opponent, arguing that President Nixon looked like a "communist" compared to later, more conservative Republicans.

Then, ticking through recent politics, Clinton credited his successor, George W. Bush, for tapping a new mood in the country by promising compassionate conservatism and a more open, tolerant stance towards immigrants. (Clinton also took a moment to knock Bush v. Gore as "one of the five worst decisions" ever handed down by the Supreme Court.) "America is a different place today," Clinton continued, stressing that "the culture" is now with progressives, based on racial progress and global interdependence. The U.S. will have no "majority race" by 2050, Clinton added.

About 20 minutes into his address, Clinton was briefly interrupted by blogger Lane Hudson asking about a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." First Clinton joked that the interruption sounded more like a health care town hall. Then he turned serious, answering the question by noting that at the time, Congress built a "veto-proof" majority that would reverse any attempt to admit gays in the military by executive order. The crowd interrupted several times to applaud Clinton's defense. Continuing the multi-point defense, Clinton pointed to the conversion of Gen. John Shalikashvili, who opposed gays in the military at the time, and has since reversed his position. Stressing the complexity of the issue, Clinton said he "hated" what happened and regretted that gays remain excluded from open service in the military.

"While we're at it," the former president continued, "let me say one thing about DOMA [Defense of Marriage Act]." Clinton defended the bill as a means to avoid an anti-gay constitutional amendment that, he argued, would have been worse for gay rights.

Turning back to his prepared remarks, Clinton urged attendees to continue their work on health care. He returned to discussing the blog posts he read, suggesting that some health care posts may be too technical to win over the general public. The former president emphasized that President Obama needed help to win the larger argument and moral imperative of health care reform, and that activists should be careful not to bog down in specifics. Clinton also credited the President for doing a great job at his New Hampshire town hall, and he touched on some of the conservative misinformation that has been percolating about health care reform. Finally, Clinton predicted that even if the public wavers on reform now, once a bill passes, it will draw significant public approval.

9:30pm 8/13/2009

The Big Dog is running late.

Organizers at Netroots Nation already pushed their first night schedule back to accommodate the late addition of President Bill Clinton, but now he's late for that, too. In the packed ballroom here, which is dotted with the most recent annual report from Clinton's foundation, people don't seem restless.

Attendees are cheering on Rep. Brad Miller, a dry speaker who still manages to be a netroots favorite. He just told the crowd that bipartisanship should not be prioritized in the Democrats' health care strategy, a gentle but clear rebuke to President Obama's tack, and is also knocking Republicans for comparing the President to Hitler. "I can't reach them all," he says, "you have to."

11:10am 8/13/2009

Netroots Nation, the official convention of the progressive blogosphere, kicked off its fourth annual gathering on Thursday, welcoming a slew of bloggers, activists, politicians and one former President to this industrial capital.

Bill Clinton is scheduled to give the keynote address on Thursday night. It is the first time that a former president has addressed the convention, which has previously featured Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, Harry Reid, (then-Senator) Barack Obama and (then-Senator) Hillary Clinton.

On Friday, local politics will take center stage, as Sen. Arlen Specter and Rep. Joe Sestak are appearing to make their case to attendees. Specter, a recent convert to the Democratic Party, is fighting off a primary challenge from Sestak, who has drawn support from the netroots. Both politicians, however, hold positions that are largely to the right of the progressive blogosphere.

I am co-moderating their appearances on Friday -- along with Susie Madrak, a former reporter who blogs at Suburban Guerrilla -- and I'll be posting updates from the convention to this blog post. If you have question ideas, the conference is hosting a portal for people to submit and vote on questions for both candidates.

Update: Nation reader Mask replies: "Mr Melber, while you and the Technophiles are fighting it out in the 'blogosphere'... the real fight, for good or ill, is in town hall meetings."

I hear that, and Sen. Specter definitely held a lively town hall meeting this week. To be clear, though, this forum is also an in-person, town-hall style gathering -- though hopefully more civil than what went down in Lebanon, PA -- so it will be more physical than digital.

Joel Connelly: "The big dog of organized labor has a bone to pick with some Democrats"

Joel Connelly (Seattle PI):

As leader of a progressive, growing union with 2 million members, half employed in health care, Andy Stern has a stern message for Democratic politicians who seek support from the Service Employees International Union.

"We will walk with you but hold your feet to the fire," Sally O'Neill, a nurse at the Swedish Hospital child care center in Ballard said Wednesday, as the president of her union nodded with approval.

Stern, whose union was a big backer of Gov. Chris Gregoire in 2004 and 2008, pointedly criticized Washington politicians for a "lack of courage" to deal with a tax structure that delivers low revenue at times of highest social need.

Underscoring his point, Stern and local SEIU activists -- known as the "purple wave" for shirts worn at political rallies -- met for a sit-down at an Elderhealth Northwest center. The daycare program for the elderly and disabled was deeply cut by the Washington Legislature last spring.

"We had a lot of disappointment with the recent legislative session," Stern said.The SEIU has set aside a $10 million "accountability" fund. Stern says he expects "a lot of that" money will be spent supporting primary opponents of Democrats "who have let us down."

As recently as five years ago, the liberal-progressive side of America's political spectrum was being out-thought, out-organized and outfought by forces on the political right.

The left has since made up lost ground. A new generation of "net roots" Internet activists helped deliver congressional victories in 2006. The Obama campaign ended the 2008 campaign with 3 million contributors plus 10 million names on its mailing and e-mailing lists. Unions have backed "farm teams" to train candidates and activists.

The gains have been at the grassroots. It's still nearly impossible to turn on your TV and see outspoken progressives on network news programs, except for MSNBC's "Countdown" which caters to liberal true believers.

Typically, on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Thursday, old-style Democrats, consultant Bob Shrum and ex-Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., were urging President Barack Obama to offer up the so-called "public option" as a sacrifice to move health care reform through Congress.

But a new generation of progressive activists is challenging conservative and centrist Democrats. They masterminded the 2006 Democratic primary defeat of Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, an outspoken supporter of the Iraq war.

But Lieberman went on to get reelected as an independent. The SEIU rolled in a huge purple van, filled with phone lines, to support a 2004 primary challenge to Democratic State Rep. Helen Sommers. Sommers won. A labor-backed group called Progressive Majority failed in a bid to oust Democratic state Sen. Tim Shelton, who usually votes with Republicans.

The political right has an enforcement arm. The Club for Growth (aka "Club for Greed"), fueled by Wall Street free market supporters, has targeted those it called RINOs for Republicans in Name Only.

The Club helped primary opponents oust moderate Republican congressmen in Michigan and Maryland. But Democrats captured both House seats. It helped elect ultraconservative Idaho Rep. Bill Sali, only to see Sali lose his seat in a solidly Republican state.

With its take-no-prisoners ads, however, the Club for Growth is telling Republican lawmakers to take a hard, obstructionist line in the current health care debate.

"If there wasn't this pressure, they (Republican senators) would try to find a solution," Stern said.

The SEIU is, for the moment, working shoulder-to-shoulder with Democrats. It has turned out members -- labeled "SEIU Goons" by bloggers on the right -- to counter protests aimed at blocking health care reform.

Stern isn't impressed at those who have disrupted lawmakers' town meetings. "A lot of these people have been screaming at the moon for a long time," he said. The SEIU feels the status quo in health care is so bad -- and insurance so expensive -- that

Americans will reject fear and embrace change.

But ...

What if the Obama administration finds that dumping the public option is the price of achieving other goals, such as no longer letting insurers deny coverage because of pre-existing health conditions, or making insurance affordable to the working poor?

"Is it important enough to take care of nearly 50 million people without health care?" asked Stern. "We'll have to make that decision."

Even when you're holding people's feet to the fire, sometimes there comes a time to chill.

"Mallahan responds to Nickels attack with his own online ad" (with video)

Seattle Times, with video (00:48):

Seattle mayoral candidate Joe Mallahan has put out his own online-only attack ad in reponse to the ad released Wednesday by Mayor Greg Nickels' campaign.

Nickels' ad goes after Mallahan for lacking the knowledge to be mayor. Mallahan responds by accusing Nickels of making mistakes.

Dean: "There Will Be Primaries" For Dems Who Vote Against Public Option

Sam Stein (HuffPo):

Former Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean fired one of the clearest warning shots at hesitant Democratic lawmakers on Thursday, insisting that if the party was unable to produce a health care bill with a public plan, there would be electoral consequences.

"I do think there will be primaries as the result of all this, if the bill doesn't pass with a public option," Dean said, in a phone interview with the Huffington Post.

The former Vermont governor added the caveat that he thought "cooler heads" would ultimately prevail and that a government run option for insurance coverage would be passed. But his remarks are some of the most threatening yet to be directed at Democrats from within the party.

Dean, who is a keynote speaker at the Netroots Nation conference at Pittsburgh this week, said he was "in favor" of holding recalcitrant senators and congressman accountable on health care related issues.

As he has done before, Dean criticized talk of substituting a government run program with co-operative insurance plans, calling the latter a "fig leaf."

"This talk about co-ops is a political compromise it is not a policy compromise," he said, of the discussions currently underway in the Senate Finance Committee. "And I think most people, on both sides of the aisle know that co-ops won't work."

Asked about a column by long-time Democratic strategist Paul Begala, urging progressives not to shy away from tackling health care in a more incremental approach, Dean shot back: "The public option is incrementalism.... But there is no incrementalism without the public option." He explained: "If you don't have a public option this bill is not even incremental, in terms of adequate health care reform... Paul is not entirely wrong. It is just that the last shred of reform is the public option."

As for the reported deal between the White House and Big Pharma, in which the government would refrain from using its purchasing power to lower drug price in exchange for $80 billion to expand coverage and help with reform, Dean called the topic a "side show."
Story continues below

"I'm not going to comment on those things," he said. "I'm not going to make other criticisms. Would I do this bill differently? Sure, read my book. But I'm not going to criticize the House or the Senate because they have the hard job to do. They have to vote. They have to make all these different constituency groups mad."

Dean was more willing to weigh in on the eruption of town hall protests and spreading of disinformation about the president's health care agenda by conservative media figures and lawmakers. He said he was "disappointed" in Sen. Chuck Grassley, (R-Iowa) - one of the chief Republican negotiators on the Senate Finance Committee - for perpetuating the patently false rumor that Obama was setting up death panels that would "pull the plug on grandma."

For Dean, those remarks only confirmed a long obvious reality. "I think the Republicans have no interest and they have never had an interest in a bill," he said. "[Sen.] Jim DeMint, (R-S.C.), spoke for the Republican Party when he said what we want is to make this Obama's Waterloo. It is exactly what they did 15 years ago. They don't have an interest in the bill because they believe they can hurt Obama. They have basically put their party ahead of the country."

All of which, he concluded, might not be a bad thing in the long run. The earlier the White House realizes it's negotiating against itself, the quicker it can produce a bill that better satisfies the people who actually got the president elected.

Seattle Muni League: Mallahan is "Outstanding"--Nickels says "woefully inexperienced" (with video)

Whose judgmment do you trust...the Seattle Muni League or Greg Nickels? Here's Mallahan's latest ad, "Joe Mallahan Picking Up Steam," video (00:30).

McDermott on health care reform: 'This is war'

Photo by Patrick Oppmann (CNN)

Joel Connelly (Strange Bedfellows):

As West Seattle Democrats convened to hear their congressman talk health care, the loudest noise came from the political left - a group of elderly singers called the Raging Grannies.

The appearance of Rep. Jim McDermott Wednesday evening did draw a small group of protesters decrying what they argue is the threat of government health care. "If we went to a single-payer system it would bankrupt the country," said protester Thomas Schafer.

But the greatest number of people turning out at the Hall at Fauntleroy came to demand health care reform and a so-called "public option," in which a government-run program would compete against private insurers.

The blood lust was on the left.

"The insurance industry wants it just the way it is," McDermott said. "Insure the healthy and let the rest of us ...."

"Die!" came cries from the crowd.

Outside the hall, before McDermott spoke and afterward, a free-form debate took place with very much a Seattle character to it.

"Are you a Christian?" Loren Nelson, a critic of President Barack Obama, asked the man with whom he was debating.

"I am a Buddhist," replied Michael Law.

Craig Keller, an Obama critic and Republican, stood on the sidewalk and said: "I want to ask McDermott..."

"You're not going to get in," Schafer told him.

The 34th District Dems eventually adopted a Solomon-like compromise. Critics were allowed into the hall, but Democrats got to question McDermott.

Outside, one elderly leather-lunged protester, ranted at people as "socialists," and kept repeating, "Obama is a liar."

Another protester carried a sign showing America's 44th president as Batman's nemesis, The Joker, but somewhat sheepishly defended the sign on grounds that Democrats once drew a similar likeness of President Bush.

The most martial rhetoric came from McDermott.

"This is war," he declared to cheers. "This is a war over whether Americans can have health security and economic security."

The original call for protest came from Steve Beren, a Republican who has twice run against McDermott. McDermott took 290,000 votes last Nov. to about 57,000 for Beren. "It was very hot in there. I stood against the wall: It was quite a crowd," Beren said afterward.

McDermott is a leader of the House Progressive Caucus, who has twice been to the White House to talk health care with Obama.

Beren is on the outside looking in, but undaunted. He had addressed an open letter to Obama that concludes: "Your socialized medicine plan would restrict our liberty, increase government control over our lives...and contradict some already existing rights."

McDermott pictures another future.

"We ultimately will have a bill, and I think we will have a bill with a strong public option coming out of the House of Representatives," he said.

The 400 people inside applauded and whooped.

Maddow: "Health care fight turns hazardous" (video)

MSNBC-Rachel Maddow, video (13:43).

"Howard Dean stumps for national health care in East Hampton"

East Hampton News (NY):

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean’s whirlwind visit to East Hampton last Thursday and Friday was a rare chance for the public here to talk with a major political figure about the health care debate and the state of the newly resurgent national Democratic Party.

Dr. Dean, who is a medical doctor and an East Hampton native, first met with supporters at the home of Democracy for America activists Bonnie Maslin and Yehuda Nir in Springs on Thursday evening, along with his mother, Andrée Belden Maitland, and his brother, Jim Dean, who is the chairman of DFA, a political action committee that Howard Dean formed after his unsuccessful 2004 presidential bid.

Ms. Maslin, who introduced Dr. Dean with an almost tearful gratitude, credited him for bringing about a national sea change in favor of Democrats as a result of his strategy of working to strengthen party organizations in all 50 states.

“Not only did Howard give us hope in the time of our greatest despair, but after he was not able to be our presidential candidate, he took over the party and created an unwavering commitment to the 50-state strategy. No political office is too small,” she said.

“The whole purpose of DFA is about helping folks take responsibility over the political process,” said Jim Dean. “It is the stuff that makes the world go round. Seventy percent of our candidates are local.... We’re changing the way Democratic politics operates.”

As the sun set in front of him over Gardiner’s Bay, Dr. Dean first praised the youthful voters who volunteered their time and came to the polls in record numbers in the 2008 election.

“It’s just an earthquake,” he said. “It’s the first multicultural generation in history and it is an amazing generation. They view what we did in the ’60s as history.”

“We made a big mistake,” he said of his generation, which he said turned to the excesses of drugs and the counterculture, and then to the comfort of material success in the ’80s and ’90s when they saw little progress through the political process. “We exhausted ourselves and decided we could take a vacation from politics,” he said. “Being in politics is community activism. It’s investing in your society.”

Dr. Dean, whom President Obama replaced as head of the party with Virginia Governor Tim Kaine at the beginning of the year, has taken advantage of his respite from the public eye to write a new book, “Howard Dean’s Prescription for Real Health Care Reform.” He said that he believes Governor Kaine shares his commitment to the 50-state strategy, and said that he believes Democrats have a good chance to win Texas in the 2012 presidential race.

The bulk of his talk Thursday, and of his appearance at a book signing at BookHampton in East Hampton on Friday, was about the health care debate.

“Obama’s plan is the best plan I’ve seen, politically,” he said of the current health care bill, which he said had a greater chance of success than previous bills because it provides a choice for people who already have health care.

“Eighty percent of the American people have health insurance and 80 always beats 20 in a democracy,” he said. “We want to make sure nobody can be turned away and that they have health care that follows them everywhere. That is the public option.”

Dr. Dean said that 72 percent of Americans believe they should have a choice of health care plans. He added that the primary reason that the free market does not work in the area of health care is because the consumer finds it nearly impossible to direct his or her own course of treatment, and instead must rely on the health care providers, whose incentives are not always in patients’ best interest.

Dr. Dean said that he believes the opposition to the bill from conservative Democrats, the so called Blue Dogs, helped create a stronger bill that provides more health care options for small-business owners.

“I welcome the participation of the Blue Dogs,” he said. “They represent people who are real. The Democratic Party is a big tent.”

Dr. Dean said that he believes the bluster of the bill’s opponents, which has become more animated as members of Congress returned home to find angry crowds of anti-health care reform protesters at town hall meetings during the summer recess, will be just hot air before Democrats turn to a reconciliation bill in October that can pass in the Senate by a simple majority, with little opportunity for filibusters from the plan’s opponents. He said that he believes Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is in favor of a reconciliation bill.

Melissa Harris-Lacewell on racism and health care town halls (video)

MSNBC-Countdown, video (07:05).

Health care reform opponents: "No bill and no compromise" (video)

MSNBC-Rachel Maddow, video (09:28).

Viaduct: 'The state is building that tunnel'

Chris Grygiel (Seattle PI):

Mayor Greg Nickels says challenger Michael McGinn's desire to tear down the Alaskan Way Viaduct and disperse traffic on surface streets would cost the city just as much as replacing it with a tunnel -- $930 million.

McGinn disagrees, and says with so much money on the line Seattle voters should have a chance to vote on the tunnel option.

All this talk is just so much noise to Rep. Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, who chairs the state House Transportation committee.

"The state is building that tunnel," she said in an interview. "It's a done deal."

A week before the Aug. 18 primary much of the discussion in the mayor's race is centered on the viaduct, the aging, double-decker roadway that carries more than 100,000 vehicles a day along Seattle's waterfront. People have been arguing about the viaduct since a Feb. 28, 2001, earthquake further damaged the span, leading engineers to say the structure must be replaced or made stronger.

Tunnel agreement, despite 'no' vote

Earlier this year the Legislature approved the $4.2 billion tunnel replacement option, on which Nickels, Gov. Chris Gregoire and King County signed off. The state has agreed to pay $2.8 billion for the project, including $1.8 billion for the bored tunnel itself.

McGinn has made opposition to the tunnel the main point of his campaign and this week Nickels' campaign went after the former Sierra Club leader directly, vowing to call thousands of city voters to combat McGinn's "distortions" on the subject. Recent polling show Nickels ahead in the mayor's race, but by an uncomfortably small margin. McGinn is in third place, polling shows, with T-Mobile executive Joe Mallahan in second. The top two finishers in next week's primary move on to the general election.

Many voters may feel as if they've already heard enough about the viaduct issue.

In 2007 Seattleites were presented with a convoluted ballot measure asking them how they wanted to replace the viaduct. They were asked to choose between a surface-tunnel hybrid and an elevated structure. They rejected both options. McGinn's preferred surface-only replacement was not on the ballot.

McGinn has seized on the 2007 vote, saying that Nickels is foolish to pursue the expensive tunnel option, which 70 percent of city residents rejected. In this bad economy the $930 million the city will spend could be better used on many other initiatives, McGinn says.

Nickels' campaign spokesman, Sandeep Kaushik, counters by saying McGinn is misleading voters. They'd still have to spend $930 million, even if plans for a tunnel were scrapped and a surface-only option was chosen.

"In the best case scenario (i.e. state does not back out entirely, and agrees to fund a portion of the surface option) Seattle would be on the hook for all the improvements to local streets and other local improvements it has agreed to -- $936 million," Kaushik said. "More likely the state would pull back the $2.2 billion of the $2.8 billion they have committed, and Seattle taxpayers will be on the hook for billions more than they are now."

McGinn disagrees.

"We can widen I-5, add transit service, improve the waterfront and repair the seawall within $2.4 billion," he said. "It is simply not true to say that the city has to spend the same amount regardless. When you pick the most expensive option like Nickels did, it costs the city more."

McGinn also doesn't think the state would take its $2 billion back. "The $2 billion was approved by the voters as part of the I-912 vote in 2005 (when voters upheld a gas tax increase). I really don't think elected officials should threaten voters when they don't get their way. In a democracy, that confuses who is in charge."

However the vast majority of money coming from the state is from the gas tax. Gas tax revenues must be spent on supporting highway programs, so state money almost certainly could not be spent on transit service and the seawall replacement.

And any decision on the viaduct would have to be approved again by the state, because State Route 99 is a state highway.

For Clibborn, the debate is over.

"The state will build the tunnel," she said.

Howie P.S.: I believe Joe Mallahan agrees with Clibborn on this.