The R position is truly incomprehensible ~ and I'm hopeful that is becoming more and more obvious ~ Sooz

REFUSING TO TAKE 'YES' FOR AN ANSWER.... OK, so Republicans want health care reform to be shaped entirely by their ideas. But would they tolerate a plan that includes some of their ideas? Apparently not -- the existing proposal already does that.

Ezra Klein highlights an often-overlooked point this morning, noting that a surprising number of Republican proposals have already been incorporated in the reform plan pending in Congress. The Republicans' "Solutions for America" page lists four planks -- purchasing insurance across state lines, pooling customers together to lower prices, encouraging state innovation, and developing new malpractice systems -- and literally all four are included in Democratic proposals.

Now, some of you are probably reading this and thinking, "Then why is the White House going to bother with a bipartisan summit in a couple of weeks? If Republicans refuse to be reasonable, what's the point of reaching out?"

I'm not unsympathetic to the concern. The existing Democratic plan gives Republicans a great deal -- no public option, no Medicare expansion, no "government takeover," a huge reduction in the long-term budget deficit, and a wide variety of GOP ideas that have been incorporated into the plan. Republicans insisted Dems had to move to the middle with a centrist plan, and Democrats did exactly that.

And yet, the GOP refuses to take "yes" for an answer.

So what's there to talk about on Feb. 25? If the summit is really about striking a new compromise, this would seemingly be pointless. But if the summit is about delving into these plans, exploring what is and isn't in the proposal, and making it clear for all to see that Republican ideas have been considered -- and in several instances, embraced -- the gathering has the potential to change public attitudes and score a key public-relations victory.

Indeed, I can imagine a scenario in which the president spells all of this out explicitly -- writing out which provisions are included that make Dems happy, which provisions are included (and excluded) that make Republicans happy, and declaring the whole package a triumph of bipartisan compromise. The GOP will still almost certainly balk, but the result will give Democrats cover and put Republican intransigence on full display.

—Steve Benen 1:20 PM February 8, 2010

http://washingtonmonthly.com/

The Rs collective memories are more than just a tad revisionist ~ and the demands are insulting ~ not only to Obama and the Ds, but to the general public as well ~ I hope they DO refuse to attend the meeting ~ and I hope the most liberal of the 2 plans [the House plan, I think] gets rammed thru using reconciliation ~ which, as many Rs have publicly admitted, IS legal and ethical ~ the Rs are again showing themselves as nothing more than arrogant, pompous asses ~ emphasis/bolding below is in the original ~ Sooz


Top House Republicans throw cold water on health-care summit

By Michael D. Shear

Leading House Republicans raised the prospect Monday night that they might refuse to participate in President Obama's proposed health care summit if the White House chooses not to scrap the existing reform bills and start over.

In a letter to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) expressed frustration at reports that Obama intends to put the Democratic bills on the table for discussion at the Feb. 25 summit.

"If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate," Boehner and Cantor wrote.

Obama proposed the half-day summit on national television Sunday, but in their letter, the two GOP leaders offer their suspicion that the president is not serious about opening a bipartisan negotiation on health care.

" 'Bipartisanship' is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support," Boehner and Cantor wrote. "Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means."

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs responded by saying that Obama has sought Republican input since early last year, and the president remains interested in hearing ideas that the GOP believe will advance the cause of health care reform.

But he appeared to give little ground on the idea that Obama might abandon the months of work that produced Democratic bills that passed the House and the Senate late last year.

"He's been very clear about his support for the House and Senate bills because of what they achieve for the American people: putting a stop to insurance company abuses, extending coverage to millions of hardworking Americans, getting control of rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and reducing the deficit," Gibbs said in a statement.

"The President looks forward to reviewing Republican proposals that meet the goals he laid out at the beginning of this process, and as recently as the State of the Union Address. He's open to including any good ideas that stand up to objective scrutiny. What he will not do, however, is walk away from reform and the millions of American families and small business counting on it."

The Republican letter, and Gibbs's response, follow:

February 8, 2010
The Honorable Rahm Emanuel
Chief of Staff
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. Emanuel:

We welcome President Obama's announcement of forthcoming bipartisan health care talks.  In fact, you may remember that last May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats. 

Since then, the President has given dozens of speeches on health care reform, operating under the premise that the more the American people learn about his plan, the more they will come to like it.  Just the opposite has occurred: a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health care bills and want them scrapped so we can start over with a step-by-step approach focused on lowering costs for families and small businesses.  Just as important, scrapping the House and Senate health care bills would help end the uncertainty they are creating for workers and businesses and thus strengthen our shared commitment to focusing on creating jobs.

Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people?  Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is "absolutely not" resetting the legislative process for health care.  If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate.

Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation?  As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process.  Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people.

If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand?  Our ability to move forward in a bipartisan way through this discussion rests on openness and transparency. 

Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills?  This bipartisan discussion should reflect the bipartisan opposition to both the House bill and the kickbacks and sweetheart deals in the Senate bill.

Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion?  As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance.  Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills.

The President has also mentioned his commitment to have "experts" participate in health care discussions.  Will the Feb. 25 discussion involve such "experts?"  Will those experts include the actuaries at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), who have determined that the both the House and Senate health care bill raise costs - just the opposite of their intended effect - and jeopardize seniors' access to high-quality care by imposing massive Medicare cuts? Will those experts include the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has stated that the GOP alternative would reduce premiums by up to 10 percent?  Also, will Republicans be permitted to invite health care experts to participate? 

Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March.  Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one last month where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders.  Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion?

Of course, Americans have been dismayed by the fact that the President has broken his own pledge to hold televised health care talks.  We can only hope this televised discussion is the beginning, not the end, of attempting to correct that mistake.  Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of openness and transparency?

Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can't afford and don't support. 

'Bipartisanship' is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support.  Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means.

These questions are also designed to try and make sense of the widening gap between the President's rhetoric on bipartisanship and the reality.  We cannot help but notice that each of the President's recent bipartisan overtures has been coupled with harsh, misleading partisan attacks. 

For instance, the President decries Republican 'obstruction' when it was Republicans who first proposed bipartisan health care talks last May.  The President says Republicans are 'sitting on the sidelines' just days after holding up our health care alternative and reading from it word for word.  The President has every right to use his bully pulpit as he sees fit, but this is the kind of credibility gap that has the American people so fed up with business as usual in Washington.

We look forward to receiving your answers and continuing to discuss ways we can move forward in a bipartisan manner to address the challenges facing the American people.

Sincerely, 

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) 
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA)
****
Please find below a statement from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs in response to a letter sent today from House Republican Leader John Boehner and House Republican Whip Eric Cantor:
 
"The President is adamant that we seize this historic moment to pass meaningful health insurance reform legislation. He began this process by inviting Republican and Democratic leaders to the White House on March 5 of last year, and he's continued to work with both parties in crafting the best possible bill. He's been very clear about his support for the House and Senate bills because of what they achieve for the American people: putting a stop to insurance company abuses, extending coverage to millions of hardworking Americans, getting control of rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and reducing the deficit.
 
"The President looks forward to reviewing Republican proposals that meet the goals he laid out at the beginning of this process, and as recently as the State of the Union Address. He's open to including any good ideas that stand up to objective scrutiny. What he will not do, however, is walk away from reform and the millions of American families and small business counting on it. The recent news that a major insurer plans to raise premiums for some customers by as much as 39 percent is a stark reminder of the consequences of doing nothing."

By Michael D. Shear  |  February 8, 2010; 8:31 PM ET

http://voices.washingtonp....html?wpisrc=nl_politics

Sooz edit: corrected a typo in my own comment above ~

If not, it SHOULD be ~ at least as far as Congressional and fringe Rs ~ acting like 6yos, stamping their feet and threatening to take their toys and go home if they don't get their own way ~

Sooz
  

The last paragraph is especially keen ~ Sooz

WILLING TO TALK -- WITH PRECONDITIONS.... When President Obama announced on Sunday that he would host bipartisan talks on health care reform in two weeks, he offered congressional Republicans something of an opportunity. If the GOP wanted a chance to make a substantive contribution to the debate, air their concerns about the Democratic plan, present their ideas, and add openness and transparency to the process, here's their chance.

By late yesterday afternoon, however, Republican leaders were weighing whether to show up for the summit at all.

Republicans are effectively arguing that the only way to talk about the health care reform proposal is to ensure that there is no health care reform proposal. The plan that was crafted over months of debate, hearings, analysis, and scrutiny -- the one endorsed by the American Medical Association, American Nurses Association, American Cancer Society, and the AARP -- has to be thrown in the trash immediately or Republicans aren't interested in having a conversation.

This was especially rich.

I see. Republicans would be more willing to talk about health care reform if the president agrees in advance to give Republicans the opportunity to kill health care reform.

Tell you what, GOP. You take the filibuster off the table as a "show of good faith" and I'm sure Democrats would be willing to take reconciliation off the table as a "show of good faith." What do you say?

For its part, the White House seems unimpressed by the Boehner/Cantor letter, and does not appear inclined to meet the GOP's demands for "ground rules."

In the larger context, it's a reminder that the summit invitation puts Republicans in an awkward spot. If they participate, they'll very likely lose the policy debate. If they reject the invitation, they'll look petty and small (even more so than usual), giving Dems ammunition to further characterize the GOP as knee-jerk partisans, unwilling to even have an open and bipartisan conversation.

—Steve Benen 8:00 AM February 9, 2010

http://washingtonmonthly.com/

LMAO ~ as I suspected would happen ~ ~ Sooz

The R position is truly incomprehensible ~ and I'm hopeful that is becoming more and more obvious ~ Sooz

And the Obama administration is looking spineless.

Leading House Republicans raised the prospect Monday night that they might refuse to participate in President Obama's proposed health care summit if the White House chooses not to scrap the existing reform bills and start over.

Proceed without them and cram the results down their frigging throats! That was the Bush method.