Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
EMANUEL ON HEALTH CARE.
Back in the dark recesses of my mind, I could swear I remembered some sort of Politico article in which Rahm Emanuel laid out his vision of health care reform. After a lot of searching today, I found it. Thanks, Google! In the piece, John Harris and Jim VandeHei sit down with Emanuel to talk through his memories of 1994, when he was one of the political strategists who advocated early compromise and was frustrated by Clinton's stubborn intransigence. The central question for any health reform battle, argues Emanuel, is when to hold -- to go for the whole bill -- and when to fold, getting a piece of something rather than 100% of nothing:
Emanuel says the lesson of the first Clinton presidency is that Democrats must head into any reform battle reaching for the Holy Grail — coverage for everyone — but with a clear exit strategy if that proves out of reach.[...]In an interview in his Capitol office (with a Dire Straits CD playing in the background), Emanuel noted that, roughly once every generation since Harry Truman, Democrats have believed they are on the verge of achieving this victory. Each time, they have fallen short, even while gradually expanding coverage for specific segments of society (Medicare for the old, the CHIP program for the low-income young). Compromise, he said, is not such a bad thing.
“You’ve got to have a plan for universal coverage. But you also have to have some product at the end of the process you can deliver.”
He argues the fallback plan should be covering new portions of the population, not all of the insured. Atop the list: covering all children, allowing early retirees to buy into Medicare at a higher premium and permit small businesses to create purchasing pools to insure their employees. He recognizes this is not necessarily what everyone in his party wants to hear. “‘Emanuel: Go Small;’ is not the headline I’m looking for,” he said.
COMMENTS (9)
U know his brother is Ezekiel Emanuel, right?
I can't imagine what Thanksgiving at their house must be like.
Posted by: anonymiss | November 6, 2008 3:41 PM
Sounds like good advice to me. Aim high, but have a coherent fallback plan.
Posted by: Ted | November 6, 2008 3:46 PM
There's another article from the past few weeks that had another interesting nugget-- that the lesson of 94 is not that you do health care first, you do health care last-- after you've accomplished everything else you want, because health care is such a beast. Who said this? Emanuel. (I'm 80% sure) Either in a Politico or New Yorker piece, so put those Google skills to work.
Posted by: wisewon | November 6, 2008 4:07 PM
As long as you actually aim high, of course...
Posted by: Stefan | November 6, 2008 4:07 PM
Actually, Emmanuel's fall-back plan would be a huge step forward for parents, older people, and small business...a nice distribution of reward, demographically speaking.
Posted by: Kit Stolz | November 6, 2008 4:28 PM
Ezra! You've fallen victim to the very style of commentary for which you castigate the MSM! You present this piece article about Emmanuel from last year, but you don't actually comment on it. My weak, plebian brain cannot decide on my own and as a result I have decided to vote for GW Bush because Kerry clearly was a traitor to his country during Vietnam. Seriously, I'm curious what thought of the article. Emmanuel sounds like kind of a mixed bag.
Posted by: dsulz | November 6, 2008 5:12 PM
All right, so he's not perfect, but I'm willing to say, "OK, he's a decent pick with good political skills, and this could work if Obama lives up to his campaign promises".
Posted by: AB | November 6, 2008 6:11 PM
I'm with dsulz, Ezra -- I want to hear your take. I'm really having trouble getting a grip on how I feel about this.
But the thing I don't get about Rahm is, why be such a dynamo for moderate policy? His passion seems disproportionate to his policy ambition.
Posted by: Darrell | November 6, 2008 10:50 PM
Sometimes, events hand you the tools you need to work with.
Ezra, what do you think are the opportunities from the GM meltdown for healthcare?
Is it a chance for ... a model? A way to jumpstart a larger effort, by starting smallish with something "that must get done"?
Is it a test case to define the future roles of States (childrens' health care) and Federal coverage?
Is it a test case for some element of the original Obama plan (buying cooperative? Open up the Federal Plan?).
Is it a way to get at decision quality information that sorely needed, but in private hands?
Is it a lead-in to all the auto-suppliers, which represent not only a LOT of workers, but also a very interesting demographic for the Democrats to pursue?
Posted by: Amicus | November 7, 2008 4:24 AM