White House Official Lays Ultimate Slam on Howard Dean: "He's Irrelevant" The Left is Mostly Baffled

Via Memeorandum
Ooh burn, such a low blow against the champion of the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Savannah Guthrie reveals the anger over health care debate is not reserved for Joe Lieberman but for Howard Dean who in recent days has called for the death of widely despised health care bill.

Mika Brzezinski I won’t name names, but I heard it from several people in the Administration: Howard Dean, very not pleased, with Dr. Dean speaking out about health care reform and this plan.

Savannah Guthrie: Yeah, very irritated. Yes, isn’t it fascinating they don’t seem to be too angry at Lieberman, they’re reserving their fervor for Howard Dean, but actually, one senior official who I talked to this morning paid the highest insult which was to call him irrelevant to the entire health care debate. You know he kind of had his moment in the sun in the last week when this Medicare expansion looked like it was going to be the thing that broke the logjam between the progressives in the party and the moderates, but, of course, because of Lieberman, the Medicare expansion is gone, and now Dean is having what one official called “a tantrum.”

And they think it’s just not helpful, but they say he’s irrelevant because, bottom line is, even though he was meeting yesterday with all the Democrats, a lot of liberals did blow off steam, there’s a lot of frustration, they’re annoyed that the public option is gone, that then they compromised to do the Medicare extension, now it’s gone. At the end of the day, the moderates are holding sway over this bill, but at the end of the day the President’s been able to hold them in line and they think progressives will be with them.

Dean hasn't been shy in his criticism of the current health care bill

"This is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG," former Democratic National Committee chairman and medical doctor Howard Dean told "Good Morning America's" George Stephanopoulos today. "A very small number of people are going to get any insurance at all, until 2014, if the bill works. "This is an insurance company's dream, this bill," Dean continued. "This is the Washington scramble, and I think it's ill-advised."

Obviously his call to kill the bill has the White House enraged.  Dean's statements reflect the thinking of much of the left wing blogosphere who are baffled by the attitude towards both Dean and Lieberman:

 Joe Lieberman, who held a legislative gun to President Obama's head and threatened to kill all of health care reform, endangering the Democrats' prospects for holding on to control of Congress in the next election and endangering the President's chances at being re-elected, got personally thanked by President Obama yesterday. Thanked for trying to kill health care reform, thanked for shilling for the insurance industry. Howard Dean, who is simply advocating for the President's own campaign promise, is now being dissed by the White House.

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake explains in a piece written for Politico; it's all about those secret deals the White House made:

Marriage of convenience between White House and Insurers is headed to divorce court

Uh oh, looks like the insurance industry is about to claim irreconcilable differences in their ill-fated union with the Democrats and Obama administration.  Ceci Connelly writes in the Washington Post the insurers plan to oppose the current health care reform with a report prepared by PriceWaterhouseCoopers warning that premiums for health insurance could cost $4,000 more than projected for a typical family by the year 2019.

The report was paid for by the American Health Insurance Plans.   Karen Ignani, President and CEO of the group informed board members of the specifics of the report on Sunday:

The report makes clear that several major provisions in the current legislative proposal will cause health care costs to increase far faster and higher than they would under the current system. The report finds that the proposal “will increase premiums above what they would increase under the current system for both individual and family coverage in all four market segments for every year from 2010-2019.”
For example, the analysis shows that the cost of the average family policy is approximately $12,300 today and will rise to:

• $15,500 in 2013 under current law and to $17,200 if these provisions are implemented.

• $18,400 in 2016 under current law and to $21,300 if these provisions are implemented.

• $21,900 in 2019 under current law and to $25,900 if these provisions are implemented.

In fact, between 2010 and 2019 the cumulative increases in the cost of a typical family policy under this reform proposal will be approximately $20,700 more than it would be under the current system.

Nancy Ann DeParle dismissed the report claiming:

"Those guys specialize in tax shelters, clearly this is not their area of expertise."

Accounting is not one of the services offered at  PriceWaterhouseCoopers?  Aren't they the guys who tabulate the votes for the Oscars for the uber elites in Hollywood?  Wait for the smear campaign against PriceWaterhouse to begin in 3, 2, 1...

Considering the vote  to take BaucusCare from committee to the floor was scheduled for Tuesday, the timing of the report signals all gloves are off in the health care war over reform.  Things are about to get ugly.

For More See:
Scared Monkeys who also links this post
Pat at And so it goes in Shreveport
H/T: Memeorandum

If the Baucus Bill was a Movie Claude Raines Would Star as the Invisible Bill

That headline was my response to Prof. Jacobson's important reminder There is No Baucus Bill .  The CBO analysis of the "Invisible Bill"   is a review of a movie that hasn't been made:

CBO and JCT’s analysis is preliminary in large part because the Chairman’s mark, as amended, has not yet been embodied in legislative language.

Just like Claude Raines in "The Invisible Man,"  the bill has no body, none.

If that is not clear, let's go to "Schoolhouse Rock:  I'm Just a Bill:



Change the lyrics a bit:
I'm just a bill.
Yes, I'm an invisible bill.
And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.

The Baucus Bill is Invisible - It hasn't been written

H/T: Memeorandum

Clinton's Advice on Health Care: Pass Anything

Taegan Goddard reports on a policy discussion held last night with Bill Clinton.  The topic of health care reform seemed to be the highlight with Clinton predicting Democrats will pass health care, "because they have to."  Clinton thought the hang up on on the public option was foolish and Democrats should pass any bill that increases coverage and reduces costs in order to increase pressure on any future Congress to improve whatever piece of garbage is passed.

Clinton is really only looking out for the prospects for Democrats in the rapidly approaching midterms which according to Sheriff Joe Biden, could spell the end of the Obama agenda.   If Democrats pass health care, particularly the Baucus Bill the repercussions for Democrats are uncertain.  Clinton predicts Obama's poll numbers will increase by 10 points immediately after passing a health care bill.  Furthermore, he predicts his numbers will be up by 20 this time next year when voters see none of the terrible predictions about health care come true.

Should voters be under the mistaken impression that none of the consequences of passing garbage legislation were legitimate, it would only be because they failed to make the case that this or any of the other bills on the floor will be fully implemented until 2013, well after the President has run for re-election.  Passing any health care legislation gives both parties reason to rally voters to the polls.  Republicans can carry a message of undoing the more harmful effects of Baucus/Obama Care while Democrats can rally their base to the polls to protect the gains they've made and possibly promise taking further steps towards universal coverage.

Clinton advises passing any legislation by any means.  Though he prefers going the route of securing 60 votes in the Senate he would absolutely pass it by going nuclear with reconciliation.  The latter will surely secure big GOP gains in 2010, but as Megan McArdle notes any party line vote will likely result in Democrats losing the House.  Americans do not want this massive legislation passed without strong bipartisan support. 

Nevertheless, I agree with McArdle's assessment, health care reform is looking inevitable.  Olympia Snowe seems willing to give the Democrats their 60th vote.  Baucus Care enjoys a tentative CBO seal of approval that is contingent upon Congress making Medicare cuts as written in the bill.  This is not likely, as Director Elmendorf notes himself:

These projections assume that the proposals are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation.

This could leave a Republican controlled House with the nasty task of making the unpopular cuts Democrats trade away in order to get anything through the House and Senate.  It is entirely possible that negotiations and heavy lifting  still necessary to get health care reform passed will continue to drive opposition to the reform up in the polls to the point that the moderates facing re-election can't stomach giving their vote as the prospect of midterms draws ever nearer.  The pressure will be great, however, within the confines of the DC bubble to follow Clinton's advice.  For those who don't relish the prospect of undoing or making workable lousy legislation, now would be a good time to follow the advice of Samuel Adams:

It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds. - Samuel Adams

Obama Officially Called Out on the Nontax Tax

Yesterday, George Stephanopoulos resorted to reading the dictionary definition of tax when arguing with Obama the fine for not complying with the insurance mandate in the Baucus Bill was not a tax:

STEPHANOPOULOS: That may be, but it's still a tax increase.

OBAMA: No. That -- that's not true, George. The -- for us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you any more than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that, if you hit my car, that I'm not covering all the costs.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it may be fair, it may be good public policy...

OBAMA: No, but -- but, George, you -- you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase. Any -- if I -- if I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 percent or 8 percent or 10 percent next year, and you say, "Well, that's not a tax increase," but, on the other hand, if I say that I don't want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage, even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then...

STEPHANOPOULOS: I -- I don't think I'm making it up. Merriam- Webster's dictionary: Tax, "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean, what...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, but...

OBAMA: ... if what you're saying is...

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

Jazz Shaw at The Moderate Voice points out it is right in the bill, no need to look at Merriam-Webster's dictionary. From page 29 of the Baucus Bill:(link above)

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is between 100-300 percent of FPL, the excise tax for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or an individual claimed as a dependent) is $750 per year. However, the maximum penalty for the taxpayer unit is $1,500. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is above 300 percent of FPL the penalty for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or as an individual claimed as a dependent) is $950 year. However, the maximum penalty amount a family above 300 percent of FPL would pay is $3,800.

Why does any of this matter?   First, Obama wants to deny the obvious; this is a tax on the middle class and this shows him not only reversing his campaign position on mandates but pretty clearly breaks the "not one dime," promise.  Obama can never play it straight when it comes to the implications of his health care debacle.  He resorts to his usual strategy of deflecting with a straw man attack on his critics:

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I'm taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we're going to have an individual mandate or not, but...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it's a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

We can't have a legitimate debate about mandates if the President of the United States can't even be straight with the American people about what the definition of a tax is.  Mandates are the only way to offset the risks of guaranteed coverage for all regardless of pre-existing conditions.  The President prefers to make this about personal responsibility, again avoiding any pretense of legitimate debate:

What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you any more than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance.  Nobody considers that a tax increase.  People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that, if you hit my car, that I'm not covering all the costs.

As Karl points out in The GreenRoom the President can't have a legitimate debate on mandates because it is unlikely he would even attract Democrats. When the President decides he wants to have a legitimate debate about health care maybe then he should take to the airwaves with yet another full court press.  As Obama is scheduled to appear on Letterman tonight, there appears to be no reason to believe he will resist the bright lights of television appearances any time soon.  Until he does, maybe we should take his advice and call out those who misrepresent what’s in the plan. Mr Obama, consider yourself called out.

H/T:  Memeorandum