Death Panels Galore

My good friend Millie forwarded me this article from the New York Times Op-Ed section: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/opinion/09dowd.html?_r=1&em. Maureen Dowd wrote the piece. 

I appreciate Dowd's perspective and think this is a good article (finally she is back to thoughtful pieces, for a couple of years her writing was consistently loony!).

However, I disagree with a lot of the article. I, too, have been disappointed that Obama has not been more insistent on gay rights and a public option, typical "liberal" complaints identified by Dowd.  Yet, I can't help but see that Obama's tactics have some nuance to them that might be beneficial in the long run, for U.S. politics. By not responding to "death panels," he let the Republican/conservatives run out enough rope to form a noose. Even most conservatives now see that "death panels" was an inflammatory tool.

I am very concerned that the health care reform will be complete crap - but I can tell you that I was worried about that since I started studying health law in law school - there really is no great savior for health care - even a public option could fail. So, again, Obama's tactic of making Democrat legislators hash this out, is really not a bad idea. Ultimately, he needs these legislators to put themselves out on a limb for the programs, in order to ensure they will continue to fight to fund the programs after the initial legislation has past. A Dem who was scared into voting for a bill is less likely to support it in 1, 2 or more years; but if that Dem works and fights for the bill - her constituents will know it, her colleagues will know it and she is more likely to keep fighting for it over time. Thus, that gives whatever passes a better chance of achieving long-term change.

I do wish Obama and the Dems would form a bloc that would reject corporate money for campaigns - at least from corporations with an interest in the health care bill.  I know it is scary to campaign with less money, but I really think the level of corporate involvement in both sides of the aisle is hamstringing healthcare reform more than the ideological blowhards on Fox (or MSNBC...there are some there, too).

Corporations are entities that shield individuals from financial risks, should they really be allowed to enjoy 1st Amendment rights? Aren't they more of a fiction than a person?