TPM LiveWire
Weiner: Health Care Reform Needs 'Full-Throated, Muscular Presidential Leadership'
Jillian Rayfield | January 20, 2010, 10:20AM
Share
Send to a friend!
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) called today for President Obama to take a more prominent role on health care reform, saying that "big issues like this never happen without clear, full-throated, muscular presidential leadership."
On MSNBC, Weiner talked about the Massachusetts senate race, and allowed that "it might not have been only about health care, but it's clear we've got a problem on that issue."
"We've got to keep it much more simple," he said. "To get 60 votes we've kind of lost sight of the fact that the American people don't look at this as a vote-counting exercise, they look at this as their lives and their health care."
He also called for the president to "stand up" in his State of the Union address and "essentially recalibrate" and say "here are the basic things we're trying to do."
"Big issues like this," said Weiner, "never happen without clear, full-throated muscular presidential leadership."
He also commented on his (low) expectations for bipartisanship: "I don't hold out any hope for my Republican colleagues. From almost the word go they've made it clear their strategy has been to stop anything from happening. That's a given."
Comments (18) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
calchala
January 20, 2010 10:44 AM
WTF is he talking about? Just yesterday Weiner was talking about NOT doing healthcare in spite of the fact that Obama still wanted it done. So now he's saying it requires greater leadership? What the legislation needs is less weak congressional democrats who shoot their mouth all over the place at any given moment. STFU Weiner. Get the Senate bill passed and move on. Any alterations can be made in the budget.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cheesemoose
January 20, 2010 10:57 AM
Weiner's right. Dems can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by passing a simple bill that is popular and transformational. A one-sentence bill extending Medicare to all will save Democrats' political skin. It would be a tangible good that would brand the Dems as the party of the people.
All Democrats have to do is figure out who they want to serve. If its corporate interests, they will lose. If it's the people, they will win. It's real simple and all it needs is real leadership.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
3star2nr
January 20, 2010 11:03 AM in reply to Cheesemoose
yup 100% right.
An expansion to Medicare even if they do it premium based (i.e. very strong public option) can survive reconciliation as well.
At this stage thats the only play the repubs have
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 12:27 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
That's pretty much the only way out of this. Actual Leadership. Who'd have thunk it?
God bless Anthony Weiner for having the balls to politely call out the precious mannequin in the White House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr. Conspiracy
January 20, 2010 12:49 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
You're still working under the illusion that they want actual reform, rather than a method whereby to deliver fresh millions to their corporate constituents. Medicare for All was the way to go from the beginning. It made the most sense, would have cost the least, and could have been implemented in stages, with the first groups gaining coverage this year. It would have been enormously popular and easy to understand and sell to the public. The Republicans would have been creamed if they opposed it.
Which is why it was never on the table. The purpose of politics is to create just enough conflict to prevent action, but not so much as to require action.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cheesemoose
January 20, 2010 1:01 PM in reply to Mr. Conspiracy
You may very well be right. The whole game may be fixed. All I'm saying is, if the Democrats want to serve the people instead of the corporations, they have an easy path to victory. Just pass something people like. Simple.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnny2Bad
January 20, 2010 2:15 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
Regarding passing something "simple, "popular" and "transformational".
I have three words for you.
Not. Gunna. Happen.
Nobody has the balls (or ovaries) to get this done because it would in fact take a Lyndon Johnsonian effort.
You've got to line them up on a wall and say ok boys, lets get this done or else...
...ready, aim...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cr8nguy
January 20, 2010 2:55 PM in reply to Cheesemoose
amen, amen, a-thousand-times AMEN
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
January 20, 2010 12:12 PM
I agree with Weiner on this: where the fuck is Obama?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr. Conspiracy
January 20, 2010 12:31 PM
89 dimensional chess at work here. Ever wonder why they dropped the ball on Coakley? All you have to do is look at the statements from yesterday and today, which basically say, "The House must now pass the Senate version of the bill."
This was done on purpose. Obama never wanted 60 votes in the Senate, and neither did the Democratic leaders in the Senate. That kind of majority virtually assures you have to deliver something. Life is much easier when you can throw up your hands and say 41 Republicans.
Watch. Obama will become the strongest voice for progressive reform, now that it is no longer possible. Joe Lieberman will stop being obstructive, and Max Baucus and Evan Bayh can go hardcore conservative without having to worry about whining from the left. This is the best thing that could have happened to the Senate, for the people who are currently Senators. Not so much for us.
It's professional wrestling. It's all scripted. Coakley lost because she was supposed to lose, because Al Franken wasn't supposed to win.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 12:37 PM in reply to Mr. Conspiracy
That's a crazy thing to say. And yet what was said yesterday - there are no surprises in the Senate? Who said that last night?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr. Conspiracy
January 20, 2010 12:44 PM in reply to again
Eggsactly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to Mr. Conspiracy
Okay, I got the quote wrong. It's not that there are no surprises in the Senate. Pelosi was trying to make a point by contrasting House leadership with the Senate.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/it-didnt-take-long-for.php?ref=fpb
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also weighed in on Coakley's misfortune and took a shot at her colleagues in the Senate.
"We're always in touch with our members," Pelosi said at an afternoon press conference. "In the House, we don't have surprises when it comes to elections."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PJCoco
January 20, 2010 1:45 PM in reply to Mr. Conspiracy
I agree. Now all Obama has to worry about is what kind of job corporate America will give him so he can become one of them--a wealthy oligarch AND an historical footnote in Encyclopedia Britannica--what an honor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnny2Bad
January 20, 2010 2:18 PM in reply to PJCoco
"...so he can become one of them..."????
Uh...HELLOOOO???
That train left the station long ago.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnny2Bad
January 20, 2010 2:19 PM in reply to PJCoco
"...so he can become one of them..."????
Uh...HELLOOOO???
That train left the station long ago.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mr. Conspiracy
January 20, 2010 4:28 PM in reply to PJCoco
Josh confirms:
Senate staffer - The worst is that I can't help but feel like the main emotion people in the caucus are feeling is relief at this turn of events. Now they have a ready excuse for not getting anything done. While I always thought we had the better ideas but the weaker messaging, it feels like somewhere along the line Members internalized a belief that we actually have weaker ideas. They're afraid to actually implement them and face the judgement of the voters. That's the scariest dynamic and what makes me think this will all come crashing down around us in November.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
May 21, 2010 1:24 PM
You're still working under the illusion that they want actual reform, rather than a method whereby to deliver fresh millions to their corporate constituents. Medicare for All was the way to go from the beginning. It made the most sense, would have cost the least, and could have been implemented in stages, with the first groups gaining coverage this year. It would have been enormously popular and easy to understand and sell to the public. The Republicans would have been creamed if they opposed it.
Which is why it was never on the table. The purpose of politics is to create just enough conflict to prevent action, but not so much as to require action.
cialis lovegra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?