Progressive caucus co-chairs post-speech letter to Obama

[ProSense]

Post-Speech Letter to Obama from the CPC Co-Chairs

(PDF)

Congressional Progressive Caucus

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov

83 Strong and Growing: Open to New and Different Ideas

Dear President Obama: We congratulate you on the inspiring speech you gave last night. We appreciate your tireless work with Members of Congress to draft a health care reform bill that will provide the real reform this country needs and demands.

We were pleased that you explicitly expressed your support for a public option as a central piece of achieving true reform. We look forward to meeting with you regarding your support for defining the public option in any final health care reform bill and request that the meeting take place as soon as possible.

Public opinion polls continue to show that a majority of Americans want the choice of a robust public plan and we stand in solidarity with them. We continue to support the robust public option that was reported out of the Committees on Ways and Means and Education and Labor.

Mr. President, the need for reform is urgent. Every day, 14,000 Americans lose their health care coverage. We must have health care reform that will bring down costs and significantly expand access. A health care reform bill with a strong public option will achieve these goals, providing the nation with the stable and secure health care this country so desperately needs.

Thank you again for reiterating your support for a public option during the Joint Session of Congress. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the importance of your continued support for a robust public option in the final bill.

[DevonRex]

1. So the Progressive Caucus liked it. And says that Obama supports

the public option. Fantastic! Thanks for posting. :hi:

[ProSense]

2. Yes, awesome letter. n/t

[quantass]

3. Sounds like a psychological threat letter to the president wrapped with a smiley face.

which is what progressives need to do to make sure the president gets the message that this thing is non-negotiable. I have been reading the latest news that top democrats are going soft on the public option which is still incredibly inline with what Cenk (of TYT) is predicting could happen that would ultimately lead to a trigger being in place thus ultimately making the public option worthless and a big pay day for insurance companies (through mandates).

I'll give US politics one thing...its interesting. I still find it baffling that debating Healthcare reform can be an issue and yet fighting unnecessary, expensive wars is not.

Campaign Finance reform is the KEY to making America healthy again..until then healthcare reform, and everything else important is a bit of a waste of time.

[ProSense]

4. Coming from someone who believes the bill is crap, this comment is not surprising.

Cenk? He's somewhere eating crow.

[DevonRex]

6. Yes, where IS

Cenk these days? :rofl:

[Spazito]

8. So, just to be clear, your post advocates the status quo re health care...

until campaign finance reform has been accomplished? Really? If not, what, exactly are you advocating in this post?

[LisaM]

13. Just picture whole towns filled with people who hold Don Cherry's political views

who have a disproportionate say in Congress due to the fact that states whose population is less than that of Seattle still get two senators.

[cali]

20. h, I suggest you get in the way back machine to inform yourself

of how contentious the IWR was.

[jenmito]

5. K&5thR! Let's keep the most recent and accurate articles/info. at the top of the page!

:hi:

[DevonRex]

7. ITA. I think it's important that CURRENT stuff is at the top.

:hi:

[goclark]

9. Me too! Keep it front and center

[jenmito]

12. Yup!

:hi:

[Baltoman991]

10. Thank you

for posting this.

While the haters were shitting all over the board yesterday I tried to educate them and tell them to listen for themselves but alas, they chose not to.

Had they of listened they would have tuned in to CSPAN and listened to Rep. Woolsey and Rep. Ellison, two members of the progressive caucus, stating how pleased they were with President Obamas speech and how thrilled they were that he is standing his ground on the public option.

The agenda from some here is crystal clear as shown by one of the posts in this thread.

[joeycola]

11. They are politely telling Pres. Obama they want a 'robust public option". I hope

he gets the strong hint.

[Baltoman991]

14. Oh bullshit!!!

Perhaps you missed this part of the OP:

Thank you again for reiterating your support for a public option during the Joint Session of Congress. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the importance of your continued support for a robust public option in the final bill.


They're not telling him anything. They're thanking him for his CONTINUED support.

Why the hell do people keep insisting on telling us what shit really means when they don't have a damn clue?

He's been for the public option since day one and it doesn't matter how many people here try to tell us he isn't, the progressive caucus knows that he is.

[joeycola]

15. Whatever.

[ProSense]

17. That's your response to an obvious fact? n/t

[democrat2thecore]

18. The president re-defined the Public Option. The Progressive Caucus....(more inside)

made it clear in that letter that they still want a PO as a PO REALLY IS and not as the newly re-defined version of "exchanges" run by private insurance! In other words, they were being friendly, but letting him know with the word "robust" that they mean what Public Option meant up until Rahm Emann......err...uh....President Obama re-defined it on Wednesday night with sleight-of-hand oratorical skill.

[ProSense]

23. Actually, I think you're redefining the letter.

"Thank you again for reiterating your support for a public option during the Joint Session of Congress. "

Read it again.

[democrat2thecore]

24. You tell me

And the Progressive Caucus knows a Public Option (as defined by Obama for over a year) is a plan that anyone could by into and work as a competitor to private for-profit insurance. It's a case of "let's just ignore his re-definition as a part of exchanges run by private insurance that only the uninsurable could by into" and tell him we're glad he reiterated support for the Public Option. The way WE understand it. It's called political games - and they're right to play this one. The president DID re-define the Public Option. ProSense, if you feel he did not - explain how it's the same as a plan to compete with private insurance that anybody could select if they so choose. He simply is using the same term for a completely different plan. And again, if that's not true, explain how I'm wrong.

[democrat2thecore]

27. ProSense? -nt

[ProSense]

29. Did you think repeating the same thing would result in a different response? n/t

[democrat2thecore]

30. Ahh....clever....I asked if Public Option means the same TODAY as it did LAST WEEK

Does it? If I am wrong, as you have suggested, and Public Option has not been re-defined, and it still means to the president what it meant to EVERYONE just last week - have you not paid attention? You said I was WRONG, that the term "Public Option" has not been re-defined. Do you stand by that?

As for your non-response "response" --- YES, repeating a question when the question is dodged means I was expecting an answer to the question, not another dodge. I know how to play this game. You play it well, too. It's all about politics and spin to you; many of us here care about outcomes and real POLICY.

[joeycola]

26. well said. Thank you.

[joeycola]

31. I do not see your "fact" as a fact.

[slipslidingaway]

16. Jane Hamsher On How Liberal Groups Are Being Silenced By...

Somehow these threads are related...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8647752&mesg_id=8647752

:shrug:


Enlightening and maddening article...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=369101&mesg_id=369101

"...Soon after the election, the Administration began corralling the big liberal DC interest groups into a variety of organizations and communication networks through which they telegraphed their wishes -- into a virtual veal pen. The 8:45 am morning call co-hosted by the "liberal" Center for American Progress, Unity 09, and Common Purpose are just a few of the overt ways that the White House controls its left flank and maintains discipline.

My own experience with the Veal Pen came indirectly, when some of them had the temerity to launch a campaign against Blue Dogs. They were rebuked and humiliated in front of their peers as a lesson to them all at a Common Purpose meeting, which is run by lobbyist Erik Smith. White House communications director Ellen Moran attends. It isn't an arms-length relationship between these groups and the administration.

A few weeks ago, Rahm Emanuel showed up at a Common Purpose meeting and called these liberal groups "fucking stupid" for going after Blue Dogs on health care and ordered them not to do so any more. Since that time, to the best of my knowledge, none of them have.

These organizations may kid themselves that they're doing no harm, but that's not true. They are the institutional liberal validators who telegraph to liberals that there are problems, that things are happening that are not good for them. They are trusted to decode the byzantine rituals of government and let the public know when their interests are not being served, that it's time to pay attention and start making a racket. When they fail to perform that task, the public is left with a vague feeling of anxiety, intuitively understanding that something is wrong but not knowing who or what to blame..."

[EndElectoral]

19. "Robust public option "...or there simply is no cost control and we'll end up with rising premiums

[democrat2thecore]

21. Exactly - and that's not "exchanges" run by the people who got us IN THIS MESS! -nt

[slipslidingaway]

22. How is this related to the Jane Hamsher interview?? nt

[Clio the Leo]

25. I have to say I'm actually surprised.......

.... at how well the far left is taking it. I thought I, as head Obama cheerleader, southeastern division, could NEVER underestimate the man. And he didn't even say anything different than what I understood his positions to be.

So either I was clueless as to what the left thought or they were clueless as to what he thought ....... who knows ...... but there is a noticeable tone on the board as well ....... either he REALLY did some (good) damage ...... of he shut some folks up.

lol, either way, i'll take it!

[Mass]

28. So, they reaffirm the importance of the public option without getting threatening.

Good way to proceed, more intelligent than what I see here (probably why they are elected officials). Let know those who could concede without fighting that you hold them to what they said.