Healthcare

President Obama's political organization has invited 13 million of its supporters to listen in on a healthcare "strategy session" with the President.

David Plouffe, the President's former campaign manager, invited everyone on Organizing for America's email list to either call in or listen online as the President discusses his strategy for passing healthcare reform. Supporters can also submit questions.

"The President will update us on the fight to pass real health insurance reform--what's happening in D.C. and what's happening around the country," Plouffe wrote. "He'll lay out our strategy and message going forward and answer questions from supporters like you. And we'll unveil the next actions we'll organize together."

Apparently the Oval Office wasn't big enough.

Democrats will not be able to "go it alone" on healthcare legislation and force through a bill with a public option on a party-lines vote, Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) said Wednesday.

"It's numerically not possible," Cooper, a centrist Blue Dog Democrat who has long focused on healthcare issues, said in an interview on MSNBC. "We don't have enough votes."

The New York Times reported Wednesday that Democratic leaders in Congress, along with the White House, had less faith in continuing to work with Republicans to craft a bipartisan health bill containing a public (or "government-run") option.

Cooper said that just as a matter of procedure, there is no way that Democrats would be able to accomplish such a thing.

"It's really not an ideological question; it's a question of how you pass a bill," he explained. "We don't have 60 Democratic votes in the Senate."

Cooper pointed to the prolonged absences of Sens. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), arguing that Senate Democrats were two votes short of forcing through any legislation past a filibuster, and would need to draw in at least two Republicans to support the final outcome.

"It's just a matter of arithmetic," he explained. "It's not ideology."

A public (or "government-run") healthcare option for Americans would function similarly to the way the post office does, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Ill.) suggested Tuesday night.

Jackson, in an appearance on CNN, said that just as the government-run post office keeps private mail carriers honest in their prices, so would the public option keep insurers honest.

"Look at it this way: There's Federal Express, there's UPS, and there's DHL," Jackson told CNN host Larry King. "The public option is a stamp; it's email. And because of the email system, because of the post office, it keeps DHL from charging $100 for an overnight letter, or UPS from charging $100 for an overnight letter."

The public option, in that sense, is a "market-based" plan, Jackson asserted.

Of course, that defense comes several days after President Obama ribbed the post office during one of his town hall meetings pushing for healthcare, which postal unions criticized.

"I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are," Obama said at his New Hampshire town hall, to point out that a public postal option hadn't forced out private companies.

"It's the post office that's always having problems," Obama added.

Jackson is one of several dozen liberal members of Congress who are demanding that the president commit to passing healthcare reform with a public option. He said any bill otherwise might be dead on arrival in the House.

"160 members of Congress already signed a letter indicating that without a strong public option, from their perspective -- including my signature -- that this bill is a non-starter," Jackson said.

The idea that 47 million Americans have no form of health insurance whatsoever and the idea that we would create a public option to help bring down costs is something that should be broadly accepted by the American people.

Proponents of healthcare reform are guilty of trying to sell Americans "snake oil," Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) asserted Tuesday.

"They don't want the snake oil that's being presented to them when it comes to the government taking over healthcare," Bachmann said during an appearance on the Sean Hannity radio show.

She took aim at one of her House colleagues, Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.), for selling that "snake oil," when he told liberal bloggers he'd be willing to vote against the interests of his district on healthcare.

"We may be calling him the ex-congressman," said Bachmann, who herself has been made a top target of Democrats in the 2010 election cycle. "I think that's about the only ad you'd need to run in the next election."

The conservative Minnesotan, in her second term in Congress, also reveled in being compared to former Alaska. Gov. Sarah Palin (R). Hannity said Bachmann was Democrats' second-most hated Republican, behind Palin.

"That is excellent company to be in," Bachmann said.

One Republican senator, in the midst of a tough reelection battle, indicated Tuesday he might break with his party's leaders and support a healthcare compromise establishing nonprofit cooperatives for Americans.

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said that he is "willing to entertain" the co-op compromise, which has been proposed in lieu of a public (or "government-run") option for consumers in order to win centrist Democrats' and Republicans' votes.

"While I haven't seen any specific details about these co-ops, I am willing to entertain any good idea as long as it covers all Americans, stresses wellness and prevention, and does not increase taxes or add to our national debt," Burr said in a statement today.

While he hasn't yet attracted a top-tier candidate, Burr is expected to face a tough reelection bid next fall, with Democrats bolstered by a resurgence in the Tar Heel state in recent cycles.

Burr's statement puts him at odds with the Senate's second-ranking Republican, Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who said that he opposed the co-ops and said that few GOP members of the Senate -- if any -- would as well.

Burr said that he'd examine the co-op compromise, but laid out some potential obstacles to his vote.

"If these co-ops are financed or run by the federal government, then they are no better than the public option and are just federally run health care under a different name," he said.

Update, 4:47 p.m.: Democrats point out that Burr might have gone even further than entertaining the co-ops when he told a North Carolina group: "It's ok if you want to have a government option but you've got to leave the private sector private."

"It is no surprise that Richard Burr is all over the map when it comes to finding ways to oppose health care reform," said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) Communications Director Eric Schultz. "Given that he has received $1.7 million from health and insurance interests, his loyalty to the insurance companies is completely understandable."

But Burr spokesman David Ward clarifies:

Senator Burr is definitely not in support of a government run, public option. This quote is misleading because viewers are not able to put it in the context of the question. Proponents of a public plan say it will improve competition among health insurance companies. Senator Burr was acknowledging the fact that if a public option were put into place then for competition to happen, the government cannot place additional restrictions, requirements, or mandates on private health plans. If the government does not leave the

"Blue Dog" Democrats are simply old-school Southern Democrats who've been scared off by the party's left flank, Rep. Dan Boren (D-Okla.) claimed Tuesday.

"A Blue Dog is a kind of hybrid," Boren, an especially conservative Democrat, told constituents at a town hall meeting this morning. "It's a Yellow Dog that's been squeezed by the left."

"Yellow Dog" Democrats were voters in the South who historically favored Democrats because Abraham Lincoln, the president of the United States during the Civil War, was a Republican.

Boren told constituents that he'd decided to oppose the House healthcare bill after returning to Washington in September because he'd spend the August recess reading the bill.

"I actually had the time to sit down and read the bill, 1,000 pages," Boren said, according to the McAlester News-Capital.

Boren has been one of the most outspoken Democratic lawmakers against the healthcare bill and leaders in the House over the past few months' worth of debate over the healthcare reform effort.

Only 11% of Americans believe the claim that healthcare reform will lead to "death panels," a new Research 2000 poll finds.

But there's a striking partisan divide in the poll's results. For example, 26% of Republicans believe the "death panel" claim, and another 31% say they aren't sure.

On the other hand, just 5% of Democrats and 8% of independents buy the "death panel argument," and just 7% and 16%, respectively, are unsure.

So put it this way: 57% of Republicans are at least somewhat persuaded by the death panel argument, compared to 12% of Democrats and 24% of independents.

The poll also found a partisan divide when it comes to interpreting a "public plan." Here's the question Research 2000 asked:

QUESTION: Which of the following do you consider to be the most accurate reflection of the health care reform plan being considered by President Obama and Congress? (ROTATED): A government take over the entire health care system OR The government will provide a non-profit health insurance option to compete with private firms.

74% of Democrats chose the "non-profit health insurance" answer, while 60% of Republicans chose "government takeover."

The poll was sponsored by the liberal blog Daily Kos, and has a margin of error of +/- 2%

The leader of the House Republicans' conservative conference signaled Tuesday that a healthcare compromise including non-profit cooperatives might not be opposed by his group.

Republican Study Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.) left the door open to backing (or at least not opposing) legislation containing co-ops in lieu of a public (or "government-run") insurance option for consumers.

"We welcome any discussion of new ideas that will bring patients closer to the care they need without government getting in the way," Price said in a statement. "A co-op by definition, however, does not include government control."

The Senate has been considering a bipartisan compromise on healthcare favoring co-ops, but House liberals have openly revolted against that, promising that a health bill without a public option would go down.

Price's statement, though, was notable for not having ruled out supporting co-ops, while liberal Democrats have openly speculated that some conservative Republicans would

But Price cautioned that the way a co-op system is crafted would be key for some GOP members.

"The specifics of including a co-op are murky at best," Price said in a statement. "Patients should be wary of a wolf in sheep

Congressional Democrats and the Obama administration are trying to create a "diversion" on end-of-life care to distract from their healthcare bill's failing chances, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) asserted Tuesday.

Grassley said that attacks on him for having spoken about concerns on end-of-life care at a town hall meeting in Iowa last week were meant to distract from a "miserably poor" healthcare bill in the House.

"I think that there's a bigger goal that they have here -- a diversion away from what's wrong with the Pelosi bill," Grassley said during a phone interview on Fox News.

"I think that this is what a president or speaker of the House has to do when they have a miserably poor healthcare bill that's not being received well by the people," he added.

The veteran Iowa Republican said that President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) were "intellectually dishonest" to criticize Grassley's words on end-of-life care, which some conservatives had derided as "death panels" for the elderly.

Grassley also echoed what Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) had said on Sunday, that the public (or "government-run") option on healthcare for consumers wouldn't be able to pass through the Senate.

"Kent Conrad's absolutely right," Grassley said of the public option's prospects. "That couldn't get through the House or Senate."

Lawmakers in both parties will have to ignore their leaders in Congress if healthcare reform will be accomplished this year, one Republican lawmaker said Tuesday.

Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) suggested that his own party's leaders were not especially engaged in the issue, and asserted that Democratic leaders have also played a role in stalling reform.

"There are many of us who are anxious to work on this, sit down and work in a bipartisan fashion," Burgess said during an appearance on CNBC.

Burgess was a practicing physician before joining Congress, and founded the Congressional Health Care Caucus, a Republican group, earlier this year.

"This is going to take the rank-and-file members of Congress working around their leadership to get done," Burgess said. "I don't think the leadership on the Democratic side, and quite frankly, my own leadership is engaged as it should be."

He said, for instance, that the House might have been able to pass some reforms for the uninsured before the August congressional recess had lawmakers in both parties been more free to work with each other.