nos-trum. pronunciation: \nos'-trum\. noun. Etymology: Latin, neuter of noster our, ours.
1. a medicine of secret composition recommended by its preparer but usually without scientific proof of its effectiveness.
2. a usually questionable remedy or scheme.
See here for more discussion.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

So Much Bad News On HCR That Dem Strategists Say, "Stay Away From It"

The accumulated reports of HCR's increased costs, loopholes and contradictions, and suppression of economic growth have finally penetrated.

Remember when Nancy Pelosi said, in the Healthcare Summit that the bill would be a jobs program?  Well, election strategists are telling candidates in the mid-term elections to avoid any claims for HCR except that it "needs to be improved,"  unless they want to lose.

As Politico reported (Aug 19), campaign advisors gave a confidential presentation to political supporters that said,
"Straightforward ‘policy’ defenses fail to [move] voters’ opinions about the law," says one slide. "Women in particular are concerned that health care law will mean less provider availability — scarcity an issue."   The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House's first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.  "Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy," says one slide.  The presentation's final page of "Don'ts" counsels against claiming "the law will reduce costs and [the] deficit."
Note, these are people who desperately want to be re-elected, but have run out of excuses to explain their voting record.  The presentation tried to be upbeat by recommending that candidates make some form of "it's a first step that needs work" kind of statement that will avoid them getting whacked by a furious public.  You can look at the whole powerpoint presentation here.

This is a huge collapse in the strategy that, "You'll love it after we pass it."  Even their own advisors recognize it now.

But the presentation doesn't mention all the incompetence issues in the legislation:  groups that were overlooked, deadlines that couldn't be met, unintended costs that dwarfed the expected ones.

And the assumption that people who saw taking $500B out of Medicare and using it elsewhere were too stupid to figure out how this couldn't "improve" Medicare and was a "savings".

In my view, this election will be a referendum, but not on the economy.  It'll be a referendum on contempt for the public and incompetence.

Doc D

No comments:

Post a Comment


What I'm Reading - Updated 3 May

Blog Archive