The Summit was a Tie -- And That's Good News for GOP

By: Marc Ambinder
Topics: Health Care

(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

The political world watched the proceedings at Blair House looking for theatre: instead, a policy fight broke out. This time, both sides came armored, and there was no referee. It was a wash -- and the tie goes to the Republicans.

The key question on the table was not whether Democrats and Republicans could come up with ways to compromise; it was whether the White House could move public opinion in a way that helps Nancy Pelosi get the votes she needs to pass the Senate bill in the House. That's unlikely.

Dick Durbin, the Senate's number two, even made a point of hinting to reporters midway through that the Senate was ready to pass health care legislation under reconciliation rules, which avoids the 60-vote threshold.

Indeed, Republicans were successful when the focus of the debate was on process -- the details of the deals that Democrats and the White House struck with key states and the (seeming) lack of transparency. The Democrats have an answer to this: if you want to find a pure debate on a pure bill, you'll have to look to…another universe entirely, because this is how legislation gets done.

But the Democratic answer is callous, and Republicans know it: this debate is not about a weapons system, it's about a fifth of our economy, it's about life and death -- and deals that take health care goods from one state and transfer them to another just don't play.

Of course, Republicans have been just as callous: their bill doesn't really expand coverage and rests on questionable policy premises, something that the president -- probably really the smartest guy in the room -- was at ease to point out, repeatedly. (Dozens of good Republican ideas were adopted by the Senate and the President; the thrust of both bills -- a market-based insurance exchange -- is a conservative idea).

All the Democrats asked for, really, is more money to pay for people who can't afford insurance and a rebalancing of the rules on insurance companies. Once the bill became political poison (thanks to Republican demagoguery and Democratic errors), not a single Republican could resist the political temptation to kill it.

For a year, Democrats have been on the defensive about their health care proposals. Republicans have been generally dishonest about them -- the Congressional Budget Office, for example, predicts higher premiums for a small fraction of folks who will get better insurance plans. To the extent that the president kept returning the focus to substance, it was to defend, rather to press the fundamental case for health care reform.

He did a good job of it -- much better than the Majority Leader, Harry Reid, whose presence was mandatory but whose contribution, at least from the standpoint of Democrats, was minimal. (To a person, every Democrat I've e-mailed or talk to about the summit replied to my 'how'd it go' question with a variant of: "More Obama, Less Reid.")

What now? Democrats have a month to figure this out. ("Baby steps don't get you where you're going," the president said. He's not going to start over.) Now, at least, there is no illusion about where the President stands, and what he wants. There is no illusion about whether Republicans will support the bill. There is no illusion about the scope of the changes Democrats want to make.

Here's a way to think about the future: does the fact that it appeared, at times, as if the Democrats and Republicans DID agree -- or were closer to an agreement -- than they really are benefit the Democrats or Republicans? Does it give Democrats in the House enough cover?

More Coverage of the Health Care Summit:

Live Blog: Hotsheet Tracked the Whole Summit Point by Counterpoint
Marc Ambinder: The Summit was a Tie -- And That's Good News for GOP
Reaction and Analysis on Washington Unplugged
Fact Check: The Health Care Summit
Obama Urges Republicans to Do Some "Soul Searching"
Obama: Americans Aren't "Sultans" Who Can Afford Great Health Coverage
Few Women at Health Care Summit
Obama to McCain: "The Election's Over"
All Coverage of the Summit

The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder is CBS News' chief political consultant. You can read more of his posts in Hotsheet here. You can also follow him on Twitter.

116 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 116 Comments

by archconservative February 27, 2010 7:46 PM EST

Since when is it the government's job to provide health care to anyone? Most of the dramatic increase in medical costs is the result of medical care being separated from market forces. Government intervention (Medicare, red tape, etc) only increases that divide. Let's not forget the impact of malpractice lawsuit abuse.

Competition will provide decreased costs and increased quality. But we, as a nation, have become too squeamish to try anything that doesn't have a "guarantee" of success. So, we look to the almighty government for help with things we should do ourselves.

The Founders believed the federal government had one, legitimate role: protect the rights of the individual citizen. They allowed for a few, limited, roles beyond that; with very specific reasons. Healthcare is not a right.

I live in China. There is NO government subsidy for healthcare. When I need a doctor, I pay for one. Same with medication. Healthcare here is very cheap, people eat healthy food, and smoke like chimneys.

If you (as a compassionate liberal) want to help those without adequate health insurance, pay for someone's insurance or healthcare out of your own pocket. Your phony compassion extends only as far as another person's wallet. When you say it's our moral duty as a nation to provide healthcare for everyone; you are forcing YOUR morals on everyone else. I don't force my morals on you, don't force yours on me.

Reply to this comment


by Solarrays247 February 27, 2010 9:22 PM EST: archconservative February 27, 2010 7:46 PM EST
Since when is it the government's job to provide health care to anyone? Most of the dramatic increase in medical costs is the result of medical care being separated from market forces. Government intervention (Medicare, red tape, etc) only increases that divide. Let's not forget the impact of malpractice lawsuit abuse.

Competition will provide decreased costs and increased quality. But we, as a nation, have become too squeamish to try anything that doesn't have a "guarantee" of success. So, we look to the almighty government for help with things we should do ourselves.

The Founders believed the federal government had one, legitimate role: protect the rights of the individual citizen. They allowed for a few, limited, roles beyond that; with very specific reasons. Healthcare is not a right.

I live in China. There is NO government subsidy for healthcare. When I need a doctor, I pay for one. Same with medication. Healthcare here is very cheap, people eat healthy food, and smoke like chimneys.

If you (as a compassionate liberal) want to help those without adequate health insurance, pay for someone's insurance or healthcare out of your own pocket. Your phony compassion extends only as far as another person's wallet. When you say it's our moral duty as a nation to provide healthcare for everyone; you are forcing YOUR morals on everyone else. I don't force my morals on you, don't force yours on me.
***************************************************************

You are so-o-o-o-0 wrong! Most of the dramatic increase in medical costs got their start in the late 1980's! In order to stave off anything like "universal health care" at that time, the insurance companies made a deal with the United States government! They promised and assured the United States that if the PPO and HMO platforms were adopted, that the runaway medical costs could be contained! THEY LIED!

Do your homework! Think for yourself!

I've had enough of health insurance CEO's banking millions of dollars in bonuses, while my fellow Americans are being dropped from their policies at the first sign of a serious illness!

I've had enough of my fellow Americans being denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions!

I've had enough of 45,000 of my fellow Americans dying last year for lack of health care!

So go back to China! They have a great reputation for human rights, don't they?


by pnut134 February 27, 2010 10:17 PM EST: I'm a conservative and I have insurance. To hell with the rest of you. I don't care if people die. I don't care if people cannot see a doctor. I am a conservative and the rest of you can go suffer. I won't pay one red cent to help any of you. But, can I change my mind if I lose my coverage?

See all 5 Replies


by petermkurtz February 27, 2010 5:38 PM EST: The only thing I've learned from these comments is that a two minute conversation with any voter is all it takes to prove Socrates' statement that democracy is the lowest form of governemt save tyranny.

For the love of heaven do some research before shooting from the lip!; Reply to this comment

by -One_American- February 27, 2010 1:56 PM EST

The latest CNN poll says that only 44% of Americans still support Barack Obama.

52% don't want him in the White House any more.

The old "Yes We Can" crowd is now saying "Maybe We Shouldn't".

Reply to this comment


by pnut134 February 27, 2010 10:30 PM EST: Conservatives can do nothing but lie, even when the numbers go their way, they still have to lie. The real poll numbers are 49 to 50%. Why do you insist on lying even when you don't have to? This is what America will get if the repugs are back in power, continuous lies.


by lucilioness February 26, 2010 3:00 PM EST: HEY MARK, OBAMA RULED THAT SUMMIT FROM BEGINNING TO END. STOP TRYING TO THINK FOR PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY WATCHED IT...ALL OF IT. THE OLD FARTS (REPUGNANTS) THAT HAVE LIVED OFF THE BACKS OF THE AMERICAN TAX PAYERS FOR SO MANY YEARS GOT SCHOOLED YESTERDAY. AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SAW THEM FOR WHAT THEY REALLY ARE; MOSTLY, OLD JEALOUS, RICH WHITE MEN, WITH THE BEST HEALTHCARE IN THE LAND, THANKS TO MIDDLE AND LOW INCOME TAX PAYERS LIKE ME. JOHN McCAIN, WITH HIS SIX OR SEVEN HOUSES! BONERTANHEAD, WITH US PAYING EIGHTY-THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR FOR HIM TO PLAY GOLF!! HEALTHCARE ORGANIZATIONS ACTUALLY PAYING THESE FOOLS TO DENY AMERICANS AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE, SO THEY CAN REAP THE UNBELIEVABLE PROFITS! AND...WE PAY FOR THESE LOSERS TO HAVE THE BEST HEALTHCARE IN THE LAND. IT'S TIME FOR ALL OF US WHO REALLY BELIEVE THAT THESE PATHETIC, SELFISH, EVIL MEN ACTUALLY GIVE A RAT'S A$$ ABOUT US. THROW THE BUMS OUT!!!; Reply to this comment

by gekkobear February 26, 2010 12:24 PM EST

"thanks to Republican demagoguery"

Right, but the Dems have been up front and honest. This bill will lower the overall costs of health care. AND according to Pelosi this week, it will create 4 million new jobs. No demagoguery or political chicanery, these are certainly true, right?

So we're going to give 4 million people jobs... while not paying them? Is this impossible? Really bad math? Or are we reinstituting slavery? I think there's a Constitutional issue here if it's the latter; although we've been ignoring any Constitutional issues so far, so maybe they'll just ignore this as well.

Reply to this comment


by miami_don February 26, 2010 1:26 PM EST: by Solarrays247 February 26, 2010 12:18 PM EST
TheRealJackSheet February 25, 2010 10:20 PM EST
Profit motive is why the United States has the best health care in the world. In fact, profit motive is why the United States has one of the highest standards of living, too.
__________________________

Solar we are rated number 13 in health care not number 1. In regard to profit you are right someone is:

A Swiss pharmaceutical company with a registered American branch develops a new pill. The company is allowed to recover it?s research cost in America. So, the company produces the pill in Ireland and sells it in the US for $25.00 a pill. However, the rest of the world is paying $00.25 a pill.

You go to see a specialist for a eye condition. You go to his office to find it packed with people all on the same HMO plan. After a two hour wait to see the Dr. He examines you and determines you need surgery. The day you go to the hospital for your surgery you discover the Dr is conducting 26 surgerys just like yours on the same day. Your Dr is running a factory of surgery for profit.

Spanky. It's broke. It don't need a bankaid. It needs an overhaul.

by mikew31907 February 26, 2010 11:11 AM EST

Lakota,
If you follow th epolls yu will see that the majority of America don't want anything to do with this type of change. WE need something but it certainly isn't this trash. Fix what we have through legislation, fix the pieces. Worry about the little things and the big ones fall into place.

Reply to this comment


by miami_don February 26, 2010 1:14 PM EST: by mikew31907 February 26, 2010 11:11 AM EST
Lakota,
If you follow th epolls yu will see that the majority of America don't want anything to do with this type of change. WE need something but it certainly isn't this trash. Fix what we have through legislation, fix the pieces. Worry about the little things and the big ones fall into place
___________________________

Are you serious? We are the only industrialized country in the world without Univeral Heath Care. Have you ever ask yourself why?

We are the richest nation on the planet and yet we are rated 13th despith the fact that we pay more per individual than anyone else in the world.


by pnut134 February 27, 2010 10:22 PM EST: Actually the polls show the people want a Public Option and to get rid of insurance companies. You are listening to Bonehead too much.

by mikew31907 February 26, 2010 11:05 AM EST

The constitution of the United States does not allow for health insurance. It says life liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. It doesnt say you have a right to health insurance, just like it doesn't say you have a right to own a house. The government through the community reinvestment act, and the government mandatory change to Standard Accounting Practices (MArk to Market) brought down the economy and the housing and financial industry. They will with the help of people who do not undersatnd what is going on bring down the Insurance Industry as well. There is a large amount of people who make plenty of money to have health insurance. HSA are not just for the rich. Put the money aside and then buy high deductable insurance. But no, they will not pay for it even though they make 70-100,00 per year. They would rather go to the emergency room and drive two cars and have three or four mobile phones in the family. Giveme a break get your own damn insurance and stop waiting for the governement to take care of you. It is getting old folks. Take care of you and yours. Get another job, move to a cheaper state. Take charge of your life and stop depending on the Government.

Reply to this comment


by Solarrays247 February 26, 2010 12:03 PM EST: mikew31907 February 26, 2010 11:05 AM EST
The constitution of the United States does not allow for health insurance. It says life liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. It doesnt say you have a right to health insurance, just like it doesn't say you have a right to own a house. The government through the community reinvestment act, and the government mandatory change to Standard Accounting Practices (MArk to Market) brought down the economy and the housing and financial industry. They will with the help of people who do not undersatnd what is going on bring down the Insurance Industry as well. There is a large amount of people who make plenty of money to have health insurance. HSA are not just for the rich. Put the money aside and then buy high deductable insurance. But no, they will not pay for it even though they make 70-100,00 per year. They would rather go to the emergency room and drive two cars and have three or four mobile phones in the family. Giveme a break get your own damn insurance and stop waiting for the governement to take care of you. It is getting old folks. Take care of you and yours. Get another job, move to a cheaper state. Take charge of your life and stop depending on the Government.
********************************************************************

You are absolutely right, mikew31907!

The Constitution of the United States does not allow for fire fighters...policemen...military...road departments...ambulance services...food inspectors...Federal Drug Administration...product safety...etc....etc....etc....etc!

What in the hell were we thinking of?!?!?!?!

Oh....and I already GOT MINE....to hell with you!!!!


by lakota2012 February 26, 2010 10:48 AM EST: socalsupersage:
"I'm smart enough to take the less of the two evils keep our health care away from the federal government."
----------------------------

Is that you "ronnie the rat" raygun, back from the grave, still spewing the same old, tired lines from the grade "B" actor?

I'd bet heavily, that you're just another old, white, retired teabagger, benefiting from both trust funds -- Social Security and Medicare -- hypocritically railing against your "socialized" health care.; Reply to this comment

by ianlou February 26, 2010 10:37 AM EST

History has shown, Republicans adamantly fight to PRESERVE existing social programs that they adamantly fought to PREVENT at their inception: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are examples of this.

My prediction is, in 20 years, Republicans will be fighting to prevent any Dem proposed change that might diminish the benefits provided by the same Federal Health Care Program they are currently trying to kill.

A conservative is someone who tries to conserve today what they tried to prevent way back when.

Reply to this comment


by lakota2012 February 26, 2010 10:53 AM EST: Absolutely!

Just look at any picture of the delusional teabaggin' morons, where a majority of old, white retirees are protesting against their "socialized" Medicare and Social Security. Just as long as they have theirs, they could care less about the majority of Americans!

by Solarrays247 February 26, 2010 10:36 AM EST

Marc Ambinder, I disagree with your opinion that the summit proceedings was a wash, a tie. I watched the entire summit with the exception of the first 35 minutes. President Obama was one of the few grown-ups in the room! It was quite clear that most of the Republicans, and some Democrats, simply used this affair for posturing....John McCain was observed changing his posture, etc. whenever he thought that the camera had him in it's sights, even just for seconds. It was comical, yet sad in a way.

In my opinion, Obama carried the day. His grasp of the facts, yes...I said facts, put to shame those who attempted to continue with the facade and tired old rhetoric that has been dis-proven time and time and time again throughout the past sixty years!

In my opinion, Obama made many in that room at Blair House yesterday look like little school boys who did not do their homework! It is pathetic to think that these guys have actually been elected to represent we fellow Americans! Most of those Republicans who spoke yesterday would have been dumped into Boston Harbor along with the tea over two hundred years ago. They have brought great dishonor to the Republican Party! Pathetic!

Signed,

An EX-Republican

Reply to this comment


by lakota2012 February 26, 2010 10:55 AM EST: All the republiCONS had yesterday, was the same, old, tired talking points from FAUX NoNooz. When miNOrity leader boner opened his mouth about federal funding of abortion, Pelosi made him eat crow, since it was nothing but another conservitard LIE and talking point!