Health Care - The Cupboard Is Bare

Jay Rockefeller continues to rock his own candidate; now he is telling us the truth about health care reform:

“We all know there is not enough money to do all this stuff,” said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), a Finance Committee member and an Obama supporter, referring to the presidential candidates’ healthcare plans. “What they are doing is … laying out their ambitions.”

Uhh, who is the "we" that is so knowledgeable about fiscal reality?  I daresay it is not the multitude of Hope and Changers eagerly awaiting their new health care plan, a centerpiece of the Obama campaign.

Oh, well - as Gail Collins noted wryly and the NY Times editors noted despairingly, Obama has foresworn the type of tax hikes needed to pay for his grandiose visions.  Perhaps he has moved on to "Hope, and Count Your Change".

Let's snip from the Times editorial:

Empty Talk on Taxes

One of the toughest questions that will face the next president is what to do about taxes. There can be no real progress on health care, rebuilding the military or any other major issue without dealing with rising budget deficits and mounting debt from nearly eight years of profligate spending and tax breaks for the wealthy.

And that is why it has been so distressing to see all three of the presidential hopefuls pretend they can make good on their promises without broadly raising taxes.

A McCain bashing interlude is then followed by this:

Sadly, blundering and blustering on taxes is a nonpartisan affliction. In their debate before the Pennsylvania primary, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both took the bait when George Stephanopoulos, one of the ABC News moderators, asked them about a “read-my-lips,” no-new-taxes pledge.

Mrs. Clinton promised to not raise taxes on “middle-class Americans, people making less than $250,000 a year.” Mr. Obama pledged to cut taxes starting at incomes less than “$200,000 and $250,000.”

Apart from their rather odd definition of middle class, neither candidate’s numbers add up. In the United States today, anyone making anywhere near a quarter-million dollars a year is in the top 3 percent or so of taxpayers. (The median income is about $50,000.) Even in the states with the largest percentage of taxpayers making above $200,000 — Connecticut and New Jersey — only 6 percent of the population makes that much.

In effect, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are saying that they can pay for their promises mainly by raising taxes on the top 3 percent of taxpayers. That’s neither politically nor economically plausible.

Perhaps the candidates are afraid the American people can’t handle the truth about what it would take to meet the nation’s economic challenges. Or perhaps they are underestimating those challenges.

In either case, it’s hardly confidence-inspiring at a time of war and economic crisis.

No worries - Bill Clinton promised a middle-class tax cut in 1992, but that was gone, if not forgotten, in 1993.  And can we deliver a great class-warfare quote?  Yes we can!  Here is an enduring classic discussing the travails of 1993:

"Voters never believed in the middle-class tax cut, because they have never seen anyone get a tax cut," said Mr. Clinton's chief poll taker, Stanley Greenberg. "They always believed their taxes would go up whether Bill Clinton became President or George Bush was President.

"They voted for Bill Clinton because they believed he was going to submit a program to change the direction of the country, to improve the economy and to create jobs. They will be mad as hell if their taxes go up and there's no genuine commitment to change. But if there is, they will be willing to contribute."

"It is critical," Mr. Greenberg said, that the rich be seen as punished most by Mr. Clinton's tax increases.

Substitute "Barack Obama" for "Bill Clinton", and we have coverage from 2009 today.  Don't tell Andrew, but the new politics is going to play out just like the 1993 adventure with a new kind of politics.

COOL, KINDA:  Matt Yglesias admits that he has known all along that the Dems are delivering BS:

John Edwards clearly marked himself out as someone who was willing to put deficit concerns aside for his programs, but neither Clinton nor Obama have followed him down that path. But in context, a promise to reduce the deficit amounts to both candidates having their fingers crossed behind their backs when they talk about substantial new spending on health care, education, or anything else.

"[F]ingers crossed behind their backs".  Hmm, when Republicans do it, it's called lying.  Or was the actual chant, "Bush crossed his fingers, people didn't linger (in this world)"?

Well, since pundits want a substantive debate, why can't we have reporters ask the candidates how they propose to pay for their programs?  Or would that be more rude, 'gotcha' politics of the past distracting voters from a discussion of the real issue of hope and change?

And keeping hope alive, The New Republic sees the Rockefeller pronouncement as just the first salvo.

 

Comments

[DebinNC]

What words will/does Obama substitute for Clinton's call for "the privileged few" to "pay their fair share"?

[syn]

"dealing with rising budget deficits and mounting debt from nearly eight years of profligate spending and tax breaks for the wealthy."

A group of wealthly Hollywood celebs come out today to support Wesley Snipes tax evasion case.

Empty talk on taxes indeed empty.

[Gmax]

Stanley Greenberg knew this how? He took a poll that asked " if Clinton lies to you but you get some ill defined Change will you be ever so down with that?"

Democrat pollsters act in a similar capacity to the MSM, they cover and enable Democrat politician behavior. And Greenberg is big fat Democrat for sure.

[Gmax]

Stanley Greenberg knew this how? He took a poll that asked " if Clinton lies to you but you get some ill defined Change will you be ever so down with that?"

Democrat pollsters act in a similar capacity to the MSM, they cover and enable Democrat politician behavior. And Greenberg is big fat Democrat for sure.

[Appalled]

OK -- Here is Obama on fiscal issues. It is vague:

Barack Obama's Plan

Restore Fiscal Discipline to Washington
Reinstate PAYGO Rules: Obama believes that a critical step in restoring fiscal discipline is enforcing pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budgeting rules which require new spending commitments or tax changes to be paid for by cuts to other programs or new revenue.

Reverse Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy: Obama will protect tax cuts for poor and middle class families, but he will reverse most of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers.

Cut Pork Barrel Spending: Obama introduced and passed bipartisan legislation that would require more disclosure and transparency for special-interest earmarks. Obama believes that spending that cannot withstand public scrutiny cannot be justified. Obama will slash earmarks to no greater than year 2001 levels and ensure all spending decisions are open to the public.

Make Government Spending More Accountable and Efficient: Obama will ensure that federal contracts over $25,000 are competitively bid. Obama will also increase the efficiency of government programs through better use of technology, stronger management that demands accountability and by leveraging the government's high-volume purchasing power to get lower prices.

End Wasteful Government Spending: Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense. Obama has called for an end to subsidies for oil and gas companies that are enjoying record profits, as well as the elimination of subsidies to the private student loan industry which has repeatedly used unethical business practices. Obama will also tackle wasteful spending in the Medicare program.

Make the Tax System More Fair and Efficient
End Tax Haven Abuse: Building on his bipartisan work in the Senate, Obama will give the Treasury Department the tools it needs to stop the abuse of tax shelters and offshore tax havens and help close the $350 billion tax gap between taxes owed and taxes paid.

Close Special Interest Corporate Loopholes: Obama will level the playing field for all businesses by eliminating special-interest loopholes and deductions, such as those for the oil and gas industry.

[MayBee]

End Wasteful Government Spending: Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense

Ha! I agree with this, but don't see the Department of Education on his list.

[JB]

"Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense."

He will also send a strike force into Iraq if AQI acts up. Pretty substantive if you ask me.

[boris]

Substandard is more like it.

[Cecil Turner]

I think he was joking. (Hope so, anyway.) Otherwise, I'd like to see a few logistical details on that "strike force" concept.

[JB]

Cecil,

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/04/obamas_magical_strike_force.asp

OK, the strikeforce sounds like just enough troops for a Viet Nam-style evacuation when the poo hits the fan.

[JB]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/04/obamas_80000_man_strikeforce_f.asp

[boris]

Link

[pagar]

"Restore Fiscal Discipline to Washington" Using the skills he learned from his friend and campaign financier Tony Rezko.

"Make Government Spending More Accountable and Efficient:"
Using the skills he learned from his friend and campaign financier Tony Rezko.

"End Wasteful Government Spending: Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense."
Using the skills he learned from his friend and campaign financier Tony Rezko.

The list goes on and on
All the political experience Obama has is tied to Tony Rezko.
When he wants to buy a house, He turns to Tony Rezko for advice.
That's supposed to be the type of experience needed to be President of the US. I don't think that is what is needed.

[hit and run]

pagar:
"Restore Fiscal Discipline to Washington" Using the skills he learned from his friend and campaign financier Tony Rezko.

Just words.

[MikeS]

Obama will also increase the efficiency of government programs through better use of technology, stronger management that demands accountability

This sounds like a great idea! I wonder if we should try something like that in education?

[JB]

Let's not give Obama any ideas. "Better use of technology" in education might involve showing YouTube videos of his crazy uncle Jerry to elementary schoolers.

[JB]

Obama cabinet appointments:

Secretary of Education: Bill Ayers

Secretary of HUD: Tony Rezko

Secretary of HHS: Jeremiah Wright

Secretary of Defense: Dick Durbin

[hit and run]

Secretary of State: Michelle

[JB]

Change We Can Believe In.

[Cecil Turner]

OK, the strikeforce sounds like just enough troops for a Viet Nam-style evacuation when the poo hits the fan.

Ah, thanks, I'd missed that one. So, his advisors are talking 60-80,000 men, and he's saying "strike force"? Sets a whole new standard for that sort of thing, eh? One of the few times when Barack being full of crap actually makes me feel better about something.

[pagar]

"Here is Obama on fiscal issues"

From a Huffington Post

"If Obama's For Real on the Sub-Prime Crisis, He'll Dump His Campaign Finance Chair"

I think the subject is better addressed by this Article

"I wanted to share these words from a victim of the Pritzker family and with everyone around the world. Fran Sweet just left this comment on my blog (a victim of Superior Bank):

"I’m the person mentioned in the article “Breaking the Bank” published in In These Times, 11/08/02."

"As of this date I have not been repaid full the amount stolen from me by Penny Pritzker & Superior Bank. To add insult to injury approximately one year after stealing $42 million, the Pritzker family gave a $30 million dollar gift to the University of Chicago. My letters sent to Edgar D.Jannotta, Chairman of the Board of Trustees University of Chicago and other board members asking them to examine their conscience on receiving this money from the same family that stole $42 million dollars from Superior Bank depositors went unacknowledged."

"I wonder if Michelle Obama was associated with the University of Chicago Board of Directors at during this time?"

"In addition, except for Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, letters sent to the 21 U.S House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigation members regarding the Pritzker theft went unacknowledged. Included in this committee were Luis V. Gutierrez (IL) and Janice Schakowsky (IL). These people have no regard for everyday people, caring only about the billionaire class. Needless to say, I have no respect for Senator Obama who has aligned himself the likes of these people."

"Could Senator Obama actually be considering Ms. Pritzker for a position on his administration?"

These are the people who are going to talk about fiscal policy? These people should be in jail. Want a real look at what is going on, check out the LARGE donations to Move-on from the sister of Penny Pritzker.

[glasater]

"End Wasteful Government Spending: Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense."
Using the skills he learned from his friend and campaign financier Tony Rezko"

Well sure--the US wants to have the the ME mafia run our country.

[glasater]

$17,000.00 a year health care plan

[M. Simon]

Strike force is a sop to his union backers.

[M. Simon]

Reverse Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy: Obama will protect tax cuts for poor and middle class families, but he will reverse most of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers.

Said tax cuts actually increased government revenue according to Mr. O.

So he wants to decrease government revenue and punish the rich. A twofer.

And ear marks? The BO has hundreds of millions. McCain ZERO as in 000,000,000.00

[M. Simon]

Say Tom,

Did I mention that this new comment arrangement totally Sux?

Are you being influenced by Obama's Hope and Change Mind rays?