Endless Summer
In his bid to push health-care reform through Congress, Obama is counting on a wave of political good will. But is he at risk of wiping out?
Barack Obama has a knack for riding political waves. I put that down to his upbringing in Hawaii, where surfing is second nature. He also yearns to make history. I put that down to his time as editor of the Harvard Law Review, where it dawned on him that a son of a Kenyan and Kansan could be president, and a path-breaker in the process. But now the president's skill at riding well-timed waves into history is being tested. In fact, he's in danger of wiping out. The reason is health-care reform. Why? Because his timing isn't good and his plan, at least what we've seen so far, isn't "reform."
Obama and his aides, fearing a loss of momentum, are trying to stoke a sense of urgency in hopes that the Senate will feel compelled to pass a 1,000-page-plus measure before its August recess. I asked a very plugged-in Hill Democrat whether the Senate would do so. "Less and less likely," he said. That doesn't mean that health-care reform is dead. It does mean at best that the fall is going to be dominated by a ferocious national debate, and that the outcome is far from clear.
Obama's timing is bad because of the recession, which puts more strain and focus on the federal budget, even as it makes devising a health-care plan that moves toward erasing deficits in the decades ahead—what's known as "bending the curve"—more difficult. The president knows that he needs to sell health-care reform both as a matter of morals and of money: that we can only avoid irreversible national bankruptcy by controlling health-care costs.
But every one of the three proposals put forth so far on the Hill would, as written, add to federal deficits, not ease them. What would have been a tough sell in the best of circumstances is now all the more difficult in the face of deepening worries, especially among independent voters, about the long-term federal debt.
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, told me that there are "curve-bending" provisions scattered through the three bills, but that those provisions need to be consolidated into a final bill for the whole thing to work. Here's another political problem: most of Gibbs's so-far-unaccounted-for curve-bending would be derived not from additional cuts in spending, but from raising taxes to generate revenue.
The president has vowed to make sure that his final plan is paid for, meaning that it won't add to long-term deficits, but that's far short of what he and his budget director, Peter Orszag, originally said they were aiming for. It's not a curve—at least not a downward one. If Obama is going to argue that we can't not afford to do this, the numbers have to show the chance for radical savings. So far, they don't.
The second reason why the health-care wave is fading is this: so far, this isn't "reform" in any thoroughgoing sense. The original idea was to rethink the entire convoluted and overly complex system, and to find ways to truly change the way we think about health care to both improve care and save money. There ought to be ways to do that. But the three bills to emerge so far seem like more of an attempt to buy off existing constituencies than a real rethinking of the mess.
Insurance companies are a good example. Yes, they would be required to sell coverage to people with preexisting conditions, but they would get something monumental in exchange for tighter regulation: a government mandate that everyone buy their product. No wonder an industry group has released an ad praising what Congress is doing. Yes, there would be tighter regulation of hospitals, doctors, and other caregivers, and cuts in Medicare and Medicaid spending, but all of the players would stay in place in pretty much the same relation to each other that they now have. So, yes, millions of people would get subsidized coverage at taxpayer expense, but we would be sending them into a system that everyone admits is dysfunctional and unsustainable now.
And why is Obama keeping his surfboard on this weakening wave? For one, he thinks that he can broker a deal among Democrats, which, in theory, would be enough. He believes that his powers of persuasion and patience for detail will prevail. He also wants to be able to proclaim that he's has made health care "available" to all.
But that's not technically what the bills do. They don't contain an entitlement in the strict sense; they don't directly state that every American is entitled to health care. But by forcing people to buy—and forcing companies to sell—insurance, and by offering assistance to those who can't afford coverage, the measure comes closer than we ever have to the vision of a national health-insurance program that President Harry Truman put forth more than a half century ago.
Obama wants to say, "I've redeemed the Truman promise." In other words, "I've made history." But this president is a long way from the beach, and no one knows which way the tide is running.
Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Howard Fineman is Newsweek's Senior Washington Correspondent and Columnist, senior editor and deputy Washington bureau chief. He is the author of "Living Politics," a column that began on MSNBC.COM and Newsweek.com and that now also appears in the print magazine. An award-winning reporter and writer, Fineman also is an analyst for NBC News and MSNBC, appearing regularly on "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," "Hardball with Chris Matthews" and "TODAY." The author of scores of Newsweek cover stories, Fineman's work has appeared as well in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The New Republic. His 2008 national best-selling book, "The Thirteen American Arguments," was released in paperback by Random House in the spring of 2009.
One of the nation's leading political reporters, Fineman has interviewed every major presidential candidate from (then-vice president) George H.W. Bush in 1985 to (then senator) Barack Obama early and often in the 2008 campaign cycle. His current work focuses on the Obama Administration and its top officials, as well as on Congress and politics throughout the country. Although based in Washington, Fineman travels widely in the U.S. and has covered politics and other events in 49 of the 50 states.
Fineman's work has produced many milestones and awards. A cover story in November 2001 featured President George W. Bush's first extensive interview after 9/11. Another cover, "Bush and God," was part of a series of articles that won the 2003 National Magazine Award for General Excellence. His reporting has helped Newsweek win many honors from the Magazine Publishers Association and the American Journalism Review. Other awards include a "Page One" from the Headliners Club of New York, a "Silver Gavel" from the American Bar Association and a "Deadline Club" from the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). In 2006 he received the Alumni Award from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism.
As a reporter and writer, Fineman ranges widely. Besides campaign-year covers, other projects have included: race and politics, the impact of digital technology on society, the influence of Hollywood on politics, the rise of the religious right and of conservative talk radio. He has interviewed business leaders such as George Soros, Bill Gates, Steve Case and Robert Rubin and entertainment figures such as Warren Beatty, Jane Fonda and Jay Leno.
Although now under exclusive television contract to NBC, Fineman over the years has appeared on major public affairs shows, such as Nightline, Face the Nation, Fox News Sunday, Larry King Live, Charlie Rose and the NewsHour. He was a regular panelist on Washington Week in Review on PBS (1983-95) and on CNN's Capital Gang Sunday (1995-98). He worked with Ted Koppel on Nightline specials, and has been a guest on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and "The Colbert Report."
A native of Pittsburgh, Fineman began his career at The Courier-Journal in Louisville, covering the environment, the coal industry and state politics before joining the newspaper's Washington bureau in 1978. He moved to Newsweek in 1980, was named chief political correspondent in 1984, deputy Washington bureau chief in 1993, senior editor in 1995 and senior Washington correspondent and columnist in 2008.
Fineman holds an A.B., Phi Beta Kappa, from Colgate, an M.S. in journalism from Columbia and a J.D. from the Brandeis School of Law at the University of Louisville. His legal education included a year as a visiting student at the Georgetown University Law Center. He received Watson and Pultizer Traveling Fellowships for study in Europe, Russia and the Middle East, and has traveled to more than 40 countries, among them China, Vietnam, Japan, Ukraine, Israel, Turkey and the West Bank Palestinian Territories.
Fineman is married to Amy L. Nathan, a senior counsel at the Federal Communications Commission. They live in Washington with their two children, Meredith and Nicholas.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.




Comments