Anthony Weiner: ‘Howard Dean Is Wrong,’ We Shouldn’t ‘Let The Perfect Be The Enemy Of The Good’

[Cant trust em]

Source: Wonk Room

This morning, single-payer advocate and public option supporter Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) defended the merged Senate bill, arguing that it’s still worth passing. “It’s not that they got a bad bill on their hands, it’s a pretty good bill,” Weiner said. “I think that Howard Dean is wrong. And I don’t think we should let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

Asked “what is it in this bill that’s going to lower costs and provide more choice” since Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) insisted on stripping the bill of the public option and the Medicare buy-in provision, Weiner argued that covering more Americans would minimize the cost shift from the uninsured:

WEINER: No, that’s easy. I mean frankly, when you have 30 million people who are uninsured today going into hospital emergency rooms getting very expensive costs, passing along the burden. We in New York City pay $6 billion what could be in extra taxes for the uninsured. Theoretically, those people are going to be covered now, so they’re going to get better health care than they’re getting today.

O’DONNELL: How if there is no public option?

WEINER: I understand there is no public option but there are 30 million people who are going to be getting health insurance who don’t have it today. Those people are going to be getting more efficient less expensive care, not passing onto you and me higher costs. That’s a good thing. That’s an unvarnished good thing.

Read more: http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/12/18/weiner-dean/

---

I'm really surprised by these comments. A lot of conflicting recommendations from people I trust.

[madfloridian]

1. 30 million will be required to "buy" insurance.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/5404

Weiner certainly changed his tune quickly.

[Hello_Kitty]

13. Actually more than half of them will go on Medicaid.

Something that mandate proponents don't like to emphasize as they try to convince you that forcing people to buy private insurance is vitally necessary to covering "the poor". Like they couldn't have just, you know, expanded Medicaid without a giant giveaway to the insurance companies.

[bc3000]

43. Not the working poor.

I guess I either need to quit my job and go homeless or pump out a few kids to get covered.

[Hello_Kitty]

57. People at 133% or below FPL will qualify for Medicaid under the bill.

That's a lot of working poor and half or more of the "30 million Americans who will be covered". It's a bait and switch where the insurance companies get millions of subsidized new healthy customers while sloughing the poorest Americans (who tend to have a lot of health problems) onto the taxpayers.

[Kitsune]

68. The FPL that they're probably going to cut?

http://timesargus.com/article/20091215/NEWS01/912150361/0/archives

[dflprincess]

90. 133% of the poverty level for a singler person is only about $14,300.00

Assuming single people with no kids will qualify for Medicaid. Currently they don't in many states.

At least those who do qualify will be able to get care. Unlike many in the middle class who will be forced to buy policies, but will only be able to afford ones with big out of pockets that will still keep them from seeing their doctors.

[Hello_Kitty]

97. An awful lot of single people are getting by on that, and less.

Most single people drawing unemployment, like me, are in that boat. So if the bill were in effect right now, I'd get Medicaid. Which would be good for me, but still wouldn't justify forcing people who make slightly more than to buy private health insurance because "the poor" will be covered. As it is, I suspect 3 years from now I'll be one of the "lucky" people making "too much" for a subsidy and forced to buy insurance rated for an older person, since I'll be 45.

[quiller4]

112. Single people without children can qualify for Medicaid based upon income

even when they don't qualify for any other type of aid. States will still be able to negotiate offering Medicaid to those making more than 133% of the poverty level (WA and OR currently have such agreements in place as do several other states.)

Because of the subsidy a family of 4 making $50,000 (which is just under the median household income in my community) would pay a net premium after subsidy of just $302/month. Unlike today, preventive care will not be subject to deductibles nor will things like Paps and mamograms and other screenings.

[bc3000]

41. Exactly. This is unconscionable being the enemy of decency

[midnight]

100. Weiner already has insurance when he changes his mind, he doesn't loose a thing.

[madfloridian]

2. And Weiner said that a few days ago.

Wonk room just got around to it.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Sorry, Anthony, you're road kill

Go to it, purists.

[euphoria12leo]

35. I was going to add Anthony to my under the bus list with Sanders

but the thread was closed. However, I think that was written by someone left home alone. Well no more Weiner for President 2012. He blew it.


:shrug:

[No Elephants]

47. Purists? As opposed to those who accept any shit politicians allow the public to have and act

like someone is doing them a favor? If so, the latter group should get down on its knees and thank God for the purists.

[defendandprotect]

108. 2nd that one . . . !!!

[DJ13]

4. Remember how many here said that if Obama wanted a PO

he would send in Rahm to rough up a few of the Blue Dogs to get it passed?

Well, the opposite seems to be whats really happening.

Obama never wanted a PO, but he DOES want to sell us out to the insurance companies, so he sent Rahm in to rough up the liberals.

[FarLeftFist]

23. I think Obama did want a public option but....

These "NO" vote senators on the PO have heard every single side of the debate and aren't budging. There isn't a positive angle on the public option that hasn't been stated and debated, I think he wants this to be done with and to move forward. Further amendments can be added later, including a PO or medicare buy-in. Hopefully we will have a more progressive majority in the house then.

[Old Codger]

55. This crap

Is a sellout, giveaway and they rarely go back, if they actually pass this they will all strut around and crow about what a wonderful thing they did...and go home for christmas and open all their presents from their insurance santa clauses.

[C_Lawyer09]

104. You are exactly right

How many of those that helped to pass three strikes legislation later agreed it was garbage? When was it passed? Is the law still on the books? How much is it estimated to cost us? Yeah, let's push some garbage through now and we'll fix it later. Beat it to fit, and paint it to match.

[No Elephants]

56. You can't say further amendments will be added later. We now have an

overwhelming majority in the House, most of whom are members of the Progressive Caucus, 60 Senators in the Democratic Caucus and a Democrat in the White House. How long will it be before we have that configuration again--especially if this crowd passes a lousy health care bill on top of all their other corporate friendly bailouts and spending bills?

[rury]

88. Exactly. FarLeftFist

You hit the nail on the head.
President Obama did the best he could, but too many people believe he could pull votes out of his butt, or out of thin air.
Even more stupidly, many of his critics on the left ( and I am very much on the left) think he could somehow MAKE LIEberman and Nelson vote the way he (and we) wanted them to.
Who do they think these guys are? Bo the Obama family dog? Do they just think Obama can say vote and they'll vote, just like Bo sits when told to sit?
Newsflash...Congress is a co-equal branch of government and their job is to legislate, or write laws. The president is not their supervisor. He can influence, cajole and threaten them, but they can and did choose to ignore him in favor of the insurance companies who line their pockets and finance their campaigns.
That's just an ugly truth about politics.
Our ire needs to be directed at the recalcitrant conservative "Democratic" senators who would not budge, not at Preasident Obama.
The bill is not perfect, but has many strengths and should be passed and can be improved upon letter.
Let's work hard to elect more liberals to Congress so that our left-of-center president has more cooperation in advancing his and our progressive agenda.
Peace and OBAMA 2012!!!!!

[knixphan]

99. Zactly.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

61. and i still want proof of that BS claim about Rahm going around roughing up the liberals.

[pundaint]

71. The proof as they say, is in the shit pudding.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

79. in other words, there is no proof, and its just hyperbole

[NJmaverick]

5. The difference between a man in the position of having to lead and make hard choices

vs a man who has no responsibility and can bloviate to his heart's content.

[bertman]

82. WHAT fucking leadership on this??!! NONE from the President unless he was leading us by

telling us one thing then doing nothing constructive to get an EFFECTIVE healthcare reform bill.

From my perspective it's the President who's been bloviating about how we need to have a mechanism for competition with the healthcare cartel. Then doing nothing to push for competition.

[dflprincess]

92. You have to wonder whatever happened to "keeping them honest" n/t

[C_Lawyer09]

105. What about the all important transparency?

[JackDragna]

6. Except this isn't even the good.

This is a gigantic corporate bailout disguised as "reform."

[mzmolly]

7. Honestly, I think Howard Dean knows what he's doing.

He'll come around when all is said and done - mark.my.word.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

8. Should we let the not nearly good enough be the enemy of the shitty?

That's the real question.

[Cant trust em]

9. I got a pretty solid chuckle from your post title.

:)

[tomm2thumbs]

14. you will, of course, be selling shirts with that message won't you?

it's a natural

[EFerrari]

10. The insurance companies and Big Pharma couldn't agree more!

[Gregorian]

11. Tell that to someone with treatable cancer.

This bill process is complicated, no doubt.

[Cant trust em]

17. Hell yes it's complicated.

It's nice to hear someone recognize that around here.

[Thickasabrick]

12. Oh Anthony......what did Rahm say to you???? Sorry you were forced

to cave.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

62. and i am sorry you believe that liberals must be danged easy to make cave

[Milo_Bloom]

15. Unfortunately, they are trusting the insurance companies

to "do the right thing".

They haven't in the past, so they think they will do so now is a bit surprising.

Health Insurance and Banking stocks are the new oil stocks of the 2000's. These are the companies that are going to be allowed to run right over America without anyone stopping to question why.

[Hello_Kitty]

21. It's the Enron-ification of health care. eom

[reformist]

34. I was thinking the same thing.

Although this time, they will be the only stocks going up.

[No Elephants]

45. No one is trusting the insurance companies to do the right thing. NO ONE.

[pundaint]

69. Well since there is detection but no enforcement provisions in the proposed

legislation, If the drafters aren't trusting the insurers, then they are enabling them.

[Milo_Bloom]

73. Read the bill.

It puts all the trust in them to not use accounting tricks or act in concert, b/c every single rule in place can easily be avoided by them simply acting the way the oil companies did in the 2000's... just act in concert.

[tomm2thumbs]

16. if he keeps saying that, Lieberman will think he REALLY likes the bill and demand more changes

they need to keep the dems away from the cameras so as not to give Joey Boy an easy excuse to pull out children's health care

[dkf]

18. Can't trust em.

You really can't.

[autorank]

19. All hat and no cattle.

They must have leaned on Weiner very, very hard. This stand is an embarrassment for him given
his previous advocacy for real reform. From a guy who wouldn't back down to this sucks. Maybe he'll turn around but for now, just another member of the club.

[CoffeeCat]

20. Who cares what these moronic politicians say!

Congress is a convoluted dump--filled with corrupt dullards who are routinely bullied, blackmailed and
threatened into voting a certain way, or saying a certain thing or tempering the Progressives with
a soundbyte or two.

They're all playing games. It's all a big joke. Who cares what they say anymore. They're all bought and
paid for--or all influenced by threats, intimidation and God-only-knows-what-else.

This is part of their drama.

When one Progressive starts to cause trouble, they go to another Progressive--and bribe him into throwing out a
soundbyte or two for their side. This ALWAYS happens. Does it really make ANY sense to anyone, that one of the
most outspoken Progressive voices--Weiner--made a lot of noise for a while, then went silent for a long time and
how he's returned with pro-corporate bullshit?

Come on...don't even listen to this charade anymore.

The only way we're going to get any kind of change...is through "We The People". It's evident now. The entire
system is a mockery, a sham and a theater of lies.

[DebbieCDC]

27. Bravo Coffee Cat!

[reformist]

37. Campaign finance reform should be #1 on everybody's agenda.

As this health care debacle proves, the people will never get politicians to go against Big Business until we take money out of the election process.

[No Elephants]

44. You can't get it--rather, you can't KEEP it without a Constitutional amendment. Not with the

Roberts Court in charge of interpreting the First Amendment.

And Congress is unlikely to pass a controversial Constitutional Amendment bill ever again bc too much crap gets shoved into those bills for the purpose of killing them..

[reformist]

59. OK, how about a mandate that each candidate get 100 hours of free TV time?

Our government and courts seem to love unfunded mandates these days...

Let the rich spend all they want, but at least this way every candidate who got on the ballot would get his opinions heard.

[No Elephants]

64. I think the Roberts Court would have a problem with that, too, don't you?

[donco6]

76. +1

[ShortnFiery]

93. Awesome rant!

[regnaD kciN]

22. I'd like an amendment that calls for the death penalty...

...for any politician who uses the "don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good" line from here on in. It was O.K. to use it a couple of times early on, but, nowadays, just means "you have to support any crappy thing we come up with."

Seriously. It's the Democratic politician's equivalent of "Support Our Troops!"

:grr:

[No Elephants]

58. Actually, it was not even okay early on. It was always a lie. The public option was never "the

perfect." Single payer was. And mandates without either tight controls on private insurers nor a strong public option are the evil, not "the good."

[Davis_X_Machina]

24. Another corporatist sellout....

The count on real Democrats in the House is now under 20.
And the only real Democrats in the Senate are Bernie Sanders, who's not a Democrat, and Dennis Kucinich, who's not a Senator.

[Blue-Jay]

39. Umm...

Sanders *is* in favor of passing the Senate bill.

[Davis_X_Machina]

48. Oh dear...so there's only *one* Democratic senator...

....we can still expect to save us, and he's not a Democrat. All hope rests now with Lieberman. When he blows up the deal and votes against cloture on the bill anyways -- because everyone's looking at Nelson and not him -- he will have saved us from the passage of a Very Bad Bill. What will the correct netroots line be? Gratitude?

[No Elephants]

65. When did that happen? As of December 15, he was suggesting Kennedy's bill.

[Uncle Joe]

25. I believe Howard Dean is correct, as for the perfect and the good, the perfect was

left off the table at the very beginning of this process when universal coverage was all but dismissed out of hand. the good was sent packing when a strong public option was abandoned, the mediocre was neutered when a weak public option was dropped.

A mandate forcing the people; whose wages have been stagnant for well over a decade to buy insurance from the very same dysfunctional, inefficient and immoral greed based for profit "health" insurance industry which most contributed to the nation's health care crisis is vile and the only thing opposing the vile at this date is the decent.

Raise taxes on the very wealthiest to anywhere near what they were during the 60s and expand Medicare to cover every American from the cradle to the grave, that would be the perfect.

Graph on edit.

[No Elephants]

46. Obama campaigned against single payer, saying it was not workable in America bc of employer plans.

[Uncle Joe]

52. "Not workable because of employer plans"

What does that mean?

Couldn't those plans be changed, altered, or dropped?

[No Elephants]

53. Ask Obama. He's the one who said it, not I. I think single payer would have been the easiest,

cheapest, most humane system to institute.

[Raster]

26. So says the politician that has a high-end, low(er) cost GOVERNMENT health care plan...

...that you and I pick up the tab for. And GREAT, we "cover":rofl: another 30,000,000. How many do we NOT cover?

[regnaD kciN]

29. Uh...government health-care plans aren't exactly "low cost"...

We're covered by one. Even with most of it subsidized, it still costs us around $500/month for premiums.

[Raster]

33. I'm wondering what Mr. Weiner's health care plan costs him?

Sorry, Nick, but you're one of the "little people."

On edit: I've minorly edited my original post.

"We'll tell the pharmaceutical companies, 'Thanks but no thanks for overpriced drugs'..We'll stop drug companies from blocking generic drugs that are just as effective and far less expensive. We'll allow the safe reimportation of low-cost drugs from countries like Canada." -- Candidate Barack Obama, 2008

[No Elephants]

51. But, but, Obama did not outlaw re-importaion. Congress did. Obama has nothing to do with laws.

Nothing, I tell you. Nothing.


:sarcasm:

[pundaint]

72. The President votes with his signature pen

Has he signed it?

He's got the same veto power as War Criminal Bush had.

[freddie mertz]

28. It seems that almost all of the House/Senate Progressives have lined up

... Presumably under intense pressure form the Rahm Administration and the House/Sen leadership.

How they can look themselves in the mirror, or ask us to ever trust them again after the promises they made, is beyond me.

I'd never make a good politician I guess.

Have to learn to smile broadly and lie through your teeth.

[Laelth]

30. Weiner is being a good soldier.

Evidently, he was the victim of some serious arm-twisting. It's sad, really.

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[KoKo]

74. Probably twisted his arm close to breaking...with some thuggish threats

if he didn't come on board. Of course Lieberman got the "velvet glove" stroke. Dean gets the rotten tomatoes thrown at him. But, the bill get's done in time with spin that it's a win.

[AlbertCat]

31. We Shouldn’t ‘Let The Perfect Be The Enemy Of The Good’

No we shouldn't. We should let CRAP be the enemy of good. Who expects "perfect"? Take that strawman to the ER!

[Laelth]

32. +1 n/t

Kill the bill.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[stray cat]

36. So now DU labels Weiner a corporate hack DLCer and sell out that hates working Americans?

[martymar64]

84. No, I but I do think somebody got to him and made some serious threats

That someone is that pinche culebra Rahm. What the threat was, I don't know.

No hard evidence, but his support of this remaining abortion of a bill stinks to high heaven.

The only silver lining would be for him and the progressive caucus to turn around next year and ram the expansion of medicare and other parts removed from this bill through Congress and to the president's desk using the reconciliation process. There has been small rumblings about that by Howard Dean and others, but under the present circumstances, our Democratic congresscritters don't have the cojones to carry it out. They are just too big of pussies to do the right thing.

[Faryn Balyncd]

38. The public option was not "perfect" (just acceptable) - - And the Senate bill is NOT "good"

[No Elephants]

40. Again, single payer is the perfect. Strong public option is the good. Mandates without a public

option are the evil. So, stop with the Rahm "enemy of the good" bullshit.

Surprised at Weiner.

[dencol]

42. I will refuse to buy private insurance under a mandate.

I lost my job when the company fired all the gay employees from our department, and lost all of my benefits. I am young, strong, healthy, and don't regularly require care. I'll be damned if I pay into a system under these circumstances, especially when living off unemployment. If I break a bone, I will still go to the ER where those costs will still be absorbed into the system. I'm hard-working, well-educated, and extremely qualified in my field; if society refuses to protect my job from discriminatory practices, it can share in some of my hardships.

[No Elephants]

49. You'll just get taxed more if you refuse.

[WinterParkDonkey]

50. I know I am going to be.....

slammed here --- but I agree with the Congressman.

[Cant trust em]

67. There will probably be an exemption for your circumstance.

That's my understanding at least.

[mvd]

54. Question here

If in conference the public option and other things are added back in, could they still filibuster? Maybe he knows something about what will happen in conference.

Because the bill as written gives insurance companies a stranlgehold on health care, with not enough to keep costs down. I personally can't see that as good. All the good is negated by the mandates and lack of regulation of prices.

[Raster]

66. Uh-oh...obviously you did not get the pom-pom memo!

[quakerboy]

60. I think that this is very strong proof

That all the many posts about how Obama has no power over senators and congress persons are all just so much bullshit. The whitehouse clearly has just as much power to influence them as they choose to exercise.

[Tom Rinaldo]

70. Yup

To get the votes they need they can come down hard on whomever they designate as being obstructionists. It is clear that progressives are the ones getting that treatment. It is difficult to be in that position which is why that tactic works, because there are dozens of future issues and projects that can be adversely inpacted by being put on the White House shit list. The White House consciously chooses where to apply its pressure, and that choice is always telling.

[ElboRuum]

63. Well, in principle, I agree.

The perfect should not be the enemy of the good. But that's not really it here. If it were 'good', I wouldn't be half as pissed as I am right now.

[hulka38]

75. There must be enormous pressure on elected Democrats in DC to pass this thing.

[Arkana]

77. To the gallows with this Royalist!

Revolucion!

[julian09]

81. Weiner was always the one with 100 votes that would vote no without PO

His bluff was called by RHAM, he caved as did Palosi. They know that the bill going down, will cost the dems big in 2010. Rahm went after the liberals instead of the republican lite blue dogs. The reason people don't like it; is the best parts were taken out. There is some good things that remain, we all know what they are, heard a million times.
The republicans want to make sure that the Govt has no foot in the door, aim is to block any possibility of any path to single payer. To me that is the tragedy of this bill, it blocks hope to accomplish single payer in the future. We will be at the mercy of the ins companies for pricing, they won't be able to deny coverage for pre existing conditions, but they can make that coverage so expensive, people won't be able to buy them.
Any bill at any price, just to have a win, isn't good, pushing mandated coverage onto states "EXCEPT NEBRASKA" cause a lot of problems.

[depakid]

78. Cliches are the eney of effective public policy

and little more than excuses for the party's corruption and ineptitude on this issue.

[Libertas1776]

80. What a Wiener...

:eyes:

[DFW]

83. Two sides of the same coin

Both say the bill is inadqeuate.

One says take half a loaf.

The other says it's not even half a loaf--more like 1% of a loaf, and not good enough to warrant passage.

[still_one]

85. and after it becomes law, I believe it will get amended and become what it should have been /nt

[Javaman]

86. Sorry, no. This was more like, "don't let the good be the enemy of mild". nt

[mystieus]

87. Anthony Weiner is absolutely right. Could not have said it better myself.

[ShortnFiery]

94. Anthony Weiner sold his soul to the Insurance Cartel. eom

[change_notfinetuning]

89. But a sellout bill is our friend? No thanks. Neither is an overused line of

meaningless bullshit our friend. The line between friend and enemy is very blurred;, not so, this sellout.

[ShortnFiery]

91. Anthony Weiner is WRONG and he will LOSE his seat. eom

[Jennicut]

103. LOL! Weiner will not be losing that seat anytime soon.

[marasinghe]

95. in tune with your hackneyed cliche' weiner: the good die young; being, in this case, single payer;

and all the kids who don't survive the lack of health care - thanks to you greedy scum & cowardly sellouts.

get back to us when you develop a spinal column; or, at least, an original idea.

you have betrayed new york city.

[Jefferson23]

96. Uh oh, backpeddle, careful you don't crash Weiner. n/t

[Raster]

101. Boy, he's got it down to damn-near an artform, eh?

The Backpeddle should be an "official" event in the 2012 Olympics. The American Democratic Party Team would be a major contender for the gold.

[Jefferson23]

106. LOL, thanks for the laugh, I needed one. This is seriously wrong

and frustrating to watch the level of giving in by the Dems, just hideous.

[grahamhgreen]

98. But the crappy IS. The enemy of the good

[Larkspur]

102. A House whose foundation is built on shit will collapse

That's my response to the overused and abused phrase "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good".

The Senate bill is a piece of crap. The individual mandate coupled with tax money going to feed corrupt health insurance execs will doom the Democratic Party.

[defendandprotect]

107. Vote for the "lesser of evils" again . .. I say NO . . .

Wasn't Weiner one of those who pledged to protect public option and then dropped it????

Am I accusing him falsely?

[w4rma]

109. The perfect? No. The Public Option is how these "moderates" got progressives on board with this bill

No P.O. = progressive revolt = no bill.

We should kill the bill and get single payer on a state-by-state basis. It's my understanding that this bill prevents this from happening.

[Wardoc]

110. Perfect the enemy of the good? This bill is not "good" or simply "less than perfect". It is crap.

[damntexdem]

111. That has become an empty phrase:

it is used to mean "we shouldn't let the minimally-good be the enemy of the evil."