NEWS
Debate’s Path Caught Obama by Surprise – Washington Post
President Obama’s advisers acknowledged Tuesday that they were unprepared for the intraparty rift that occurred over the fate of a proposed public health insurance program, a firestorm that has left the White House searching for a way to reclaim the initiative on the president’s top legislative priority.
Democrats Seem Set to Go It Alone on a Health Care Bill – New York Times
Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks.
Analysis: Liberals tired of health care compromise - Associated Press
Frustrated liberals have a question for President Barack Obama and Democratic lawmakers: Isn’t it time the other guys gave a little ground on health care? What’s the point of a bipartisan bill, they ask, if we’re making all the concessions?
Kyl Says Cooperative Health Plan Won’t Win Support – Wall Street Journal
The number two Senate Republican said Tuesday replacing a public health care option with a nonprofit private cooperative wouldn’t win any more Republican support, saying they are essentially the same thing.
House demands compensation data – Politico
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce has sent letters to dozens of major health insurance companies …
PhRMA defends itself from Boehner criticism – The Hill
The prescription drug industry’s lobbying arm is defending its deal with President Barack Obama in the wake of criticism from House Minority Leader John Boehner, who charged it with “appeasing” the Obama administration.
Snowe takes to the street, talks health care – Sun Journal
A "Main Street walk" turned into a Main Street stop for U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe on Lisbon Street on Tuesday, as Mainers intent on selling their influential senator on the merits of a public-option health-care plan crowded around her.
Grassley says status of ‘public option’ is unclear – Des Moines Register
U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley said Monday that he was unsure what to make of suggestions that President Barack Obama would drop proposals for a new government-run insurance plan.
Frank LoBiondo Supports Taxes To Fund More Private Health Care – Irregular Times
U.S. Representative Frank LoBiondo likes to present himself as someone who’s against raising taxes in order to support health care reform. In a recent statement, Representative LoBiondo explained that he would vote against Democrats’ health care reform legislation because the legislation would increase spending, thus requiring higher taxes and a bigger federal budget deficit.
OPINION
GrassleyWatch: Tracking Grassley’s Efforts To Obstruct Health Care Reform – Think Progress
In March, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised eyebrows when he urged opponents of health care reform to continue lying about the consequences of comparative effectiveness research and electronic medical records. Since then, the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee has adopted the rhetoric of the far right, routinely referring to health care reform as a government takeover of health care, disingenuously misrepresenting reform legislation, and even going so far as to endorse and sign a copy of Glenn Beck’s book.
An Alternative to the Public Option I Could Live With – Mike Lux
The folks who read my blog posts might be surprised to learn that there is an alternative to the public option I could live with (besides single-payer, of course, that being my preferred option from the beginning). I have been an advocate for a very hard line on the public option, as I discussed here yesterday. But there is one other alternative I would feel okay about, and Bob Creamer outlines it today in his great post, Three Reasons Why a Strong Public Option is Likely to Be Part of Health Insurance Reform. Here’s the part of Bob’s post I’m referring to.
Conrad On Whether His Co-Op Proposal Will Bring Down Costs Of Health Care: ‘Uhhh, No’ – Think Progress
This morning on CNN, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), the author of the health care co-op proposal that is apparently gaining traction among many Democrats, argued it’s a “very successful business model.” But when host John Roberts repeatedly pressed Conrad on whether the creation of non-profit, member-driven health care cooperatives would drive down costs for consumers, Conrad acknowledged they would not.
Why Is Max Baucus Sticking by Chuck Grassley? – Ezra Klein
"I walked away from Senator Grassley. I tend to work with Senator Grassley. But there comes a time when you just gotta say, ‘Sorry.’ These things get watered down too much, it’s just not right, so I just broke with him on that and pushed through a Medicare bill that finally got 60 votes. We had to work hard to get those 60, because Grassley didn’t agree, but that was the right thing to do. So when Ted Kennedy walked on the floor to cast the 60th vote, that’s a moment I’ll always treasure."
Health Care: Let the Majority Be Heard - Bob Borosage
The editors of the Wall Street Journal say that the public option in health care reform has been "sent to the death panel." Obama "concedes" the public option, reports the Financial Times. Even liberals seem to agree. The public option is "all but gone," writes Bob Herbert of the New York Times. The American Prospect’s Mark Schmitt mourns its "likely death."
Diagnosis: Inertia – The New Republic
‘If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan, period." The line comes from President Obama’s recent address to the American Medical Association, but it could have come from virtually any public statement he’s made about health care in the last two years. That is no accident. Polls show that Americans think their health care system has severe problems, enough to warrant a major change. But the same polls show that a large majority are happy with their current health care arrangements.



17 Comments







Jason:
I’m still curious to know why you don’t regard two stories where MT Governor Schweitzer endorsed Canada’s single payer system — when introducing President Obama! — as newsworthy (links). Surely Schweitzer didn’t take this bold step out of the goodness of his heart, but because of constitutent pressure. Don’t those grassroots activists deserve some recognition for there efforts?
Would you please explain the process of editorial judgment that led you to this conclusion?
In particular, when asked this question yesterday, you replied that there were “no guarantees” that the links would be listed, though they were “good reads.”
If you exercised your own judgment in not publishing a single payer story, how do you square that with the title of this column — “Health Care News”?
If you went to somebody else for the judgment — as “no guarantee” implies — who is your supervisor? We would like to contact them.
Finally, if this post is also cross-posted to HCAN, would you announce that? Thanks. Your readers would welcome greater transparency in all of these matters.
it’s not healthcare news if it’s being censored to exclude news about the healthcare policy favored by a majority of progressives. i could repost my comment from yesterday, but hopefully it won’t come to that.
i second your suggestion, lambert. jason needs to re-title these diaries “Daily News from HCAN”
Selise: There are several ways to disentangle the HCAN and FDL brands to create some transparency and avoid the appearance of obvious, though covert and unaccountable, bias in a “News” column. Any one would do.
These are put together for HCAN quickly in the morning, so my apologies for the oversight of not adding in the transparency aspect like I do on other, more carefully worded posts. I’ll make sure to do that in the future.
That said, feel free to push your own links in the comments of these posts, no matter what their viewpoint.
Oh, gee, thanks. you don’t feel a little weird about posting daily “health care” news without reporting anything that advocates single payer?
Jason:
Will you check with your supervisor at HCAN and see if this story on Rep. Anthony Weiner endorsing another single payer advocate in Brooklyn should be posted or censored?
Thanks!
Jason:
Surely you must see how non-responsive you are being. Let’s take your points in order.
1. Your columns are put together hastily. I assume that’s not the reason you never cover single payer news. (If it is, you’ll find news.google.com a great time-saver, and I personally find subscribing to feeds by keywords very helpful.)
And surely haste is no reason for a lack of transparency, as you aver. There are three solutions I proposed to take a truth-in-packaging approach for your column: (1) Add an HCAN logo to it; (2) Change the name to “HCAN News” instead of the generic and deceptive “Health Care News”; and (3) note where the original post came from if you’re cross-posting at HCAN and FDL. (These aren’t mutually exclusive, of course.) #3 involves a few seconds work on your part; #1 and #2 involve a request to the administrators at this site, who I’m sure would be happy to accomodate you.
2. Feel free to push your own links in the comments of these posts. That’s not the issue. The issue is your… Let’s not euphemize and call it “selective coverage,” let’s go ahead and call it what it is: censorship of single payer information. Come on. In what universe is it not “News” that Montana’s Governor Schweitzer endorsed the Canadian single payer system when warming up for Obama?
The issue isn’t how unpaid commenters can clean up after paid staffers by doing their work for them and covering censored stories; the issue is why the stories were censored in the first place.
I ask again the questions I asked yesterday. In response to a comment undoing your censorship of Schweitzer’s single payer endorsement, you wrote:
I responded:
So, who determines the editorial policy for “Health Care News?” You personally? FDL? HCAN? Who’s accountable for the “guarantee”?
NOTE If the column isn’t labeled “News,” then there’s no question of censorship — you can advocate for whatever policy you want. But to label a column “news,” and then produce “advocacy” instead is, if not reprehensible, at least prehensible. So please check with your supervisor and find out whether you can go forward with this project on an open and transparent basis, or not.
I never said the coverage was anything more than my selected coverage. It is, after all, posted under my byline.
I’ll ask my supervisor your questions, but I think we both know the answer.
There is no censorship here. You are free to post your own version of health care news in the diaries, just like this post is every day. Nobody will censor it.
But if you’re asking for me to do what you want, well, then, it’s my decision, isn’t it?
(And sorry for the slow response. As you said, I’m a paid staffer, and I do have other responsibilities. But I try and get back into the comments as much as I can. As you can imagine, the health care world is fairly busy these days.)
Jason:
When you get paid to write a column and run a forum at a prestigious blog, label that column as “news,”* and then refuse to cover single payer events that are obviously newsworthy, then what you are doing is, precisely, censorship. There’s no difference between what you’re doing and, say, what the Times did when they held back on Risen’s scoop on warrantless surveillance until after the 2004 election. And that a reader could write a letter to the editor about that after the fact, just like we can comment, doesn’t make the original act of censorship go away.
If you want the credibility that comes from covering the news, then don’t censor newsworthy items. It’s really as simple as that. But it looks to me like you’re running a PR wire under false pretences. That doesn’t make you, HCAN, or FDL look real good. Unless you think looking like Bill Keller or Lanny David means looking good.
So, if HCAN’s policy is that you are not allowed to link to a single payer story that could possibly be construed as favorable, could you just say so? And get the title of the column altered to reflect that, or slam an HCAN logo on it, or something? Just so we know what we’re dealing with here?
NOTE * In other words, it has nothing to do with your byline — or lack thereof. Reporters have bylines; opinion makers have bylines; the operators of PR wires don’t have bylines, because they aren’t delivering news, and because their opinions are not their own, but whatever it is they’ve been hired to shill.
Yeah, I’m not sure I’m looking for, or will get, credibility with you. Seems likely to be as fruitful as negotiating with Chuck Grassley.
grassley? that is both completely false and out of line.
it’s really easy, you’re just being asked the same thing we ask from anyone claiming to present the news:
1) don’t censor based on your own (or your employer’s) ideology. especially when what you are censoring is news of the policy that most readers prefer.
2) if you can’t do #1 at least tell the truth about that.
it’s not rocket science.
(some background here and here)
A disclosure line has been added to my news roundup today, and will be there in the future.
This feels a lot like astroturf. Certainly the Schweitzer articles fall under health care news, and would be of interest to the readership.
Jason:
Will you check with your supervisor at HCAN and see if this post on Mad as Hell Doctors for single payer should be posted or censored?
Thanks!
Jason:
Will you check with your supervisor at HCAN and see if this story where Jacob Hacker, who proposed the original bait in the public option bait and switch, says that public option won’t lead to single payer and was never meant to should be posted or censored?
Thanks!
P.S. Your supervisor might appreciate knowing that many of the “I support single payer but“ folks took that line: That public option would evolve into single payer incrementally. So this would bring a welcome clarity to the debate, wouldn’t you agree?
Thank you for the review! Let those with another perspective put up their own sources and quotes. They can post a diary just like we can. Do read the diary entry: HOW TO Reinvigorate the Public Option.
By the way, a true single payer system would facilitate the North American Union. I still choose USA as an independent nation, thank you.