Last week we discussed the latest polling data out of Israel responding to Obama’s policy push, the settlements question and a two-state solution. Now Bernie Avishai has a much more fine-grained look at the data — both the bad news and the good.
Whatever your political persuasion on this issue, I strongly recommend you give this a read. Among the many things it shows is how deeply divided Israel is today (much like the Palestinian community in the territories) and the simple reality that neither side of this conflict can resolve this on their own — outside pressure is necessary.
It is frequently said that Israel’s chaotic low-bar-to-entry parliamentary system makes the country hostage to single-interest splinter parties which obstruct the popular will.
But though he doesn’t say it explicitly, Avishai’s analysis makes clear that this isn’t really true. It is probably fair to say that while a majority doesn’t support the settlement project and would like a two-state solution eventually — that a consistent majority favors not facing up to the hard choices and perpetuating the unsustainable status quo as long as possible.
Which is essentially what the political system has provided.
Hillary Clinton declares that President Obama has in fact passed the “3 a.m.” test. That and other political news in today’s TPMDC Sunday Roundup.
Following the lead of this post by Jon Taplin, you really must read this article in the Times on the battle over including a ‘public option’ in the new Obama health care reform bill. If you’re not familiar with the lingo of this debate, the ‘public option’ refers to allowing the federal government to sell its own insurance plan which would compete with private health insurance providers. Think of it as a version of Medicare that everyone could buy into.
Here’s the key graf from the Times piece …
But critics argue that with low administrative costs and no need to produce profits, a public plan will start with an unfair pricing advantage. They say that if a public plan is allowed to pay doctors and hospitals at levels comparable to Medicare’s, which are substantially below commercial insurance rates, it could set premiums so low it would quickly consume the market.
As Taplin suggests, these ‘problems’ sound remarkably like ‘the point’ of the whole exercise. Most of the argument here is that a big government plan would just provide the insurance ‘service’ much more efficiently and cheaply than private carriers. And that the private carriers wouldn’t be able to make any money off selling the service any more. But this is the argument that single payer advocates routinely make — namely, that a lot of the money that goes into private health insurance goes to paperwork, much of which is tied to finding ways to deny people coverage. That, and the need to earn profits on providing the service.
Presumably if there were other quality advantages to the private plans, the carriers wouldn’t be so worried that everyone would switch to the public plan. I think I might be open to some effective scare-mongering on that front. But the private carriers don’t seem to have much confidence there’s much to scare people about.
In her first Sunday interview as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton weighs in on whether Barack Obama has passed the “3 a.m.” test that she first raised in her famous campaign ad against him in the 2008 primaries. That and Newt Gingrich’s description of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor evolves from “racist” to “racialist.”
Full-size video at TPMtv.com.
The health insurance industry learns to love health care reform — if it includes a requirement that people buy insurance. That and other political news in today’s TPMDC Morning Roundup.
This morning, President Obama’s Israel/Palestine envoy said the president wants “immediate” talks between the parties aimed at securing “a comprehensive peace and normalization of relations between Israel and her neighbors.
The background here is that Prime Minister Netanyahu wants talks aimed at economic development in the Occupied Territories, not a final settlement and not a territorial compromise.
Also: Here are some quick comments from former head of the Israeli Navy and later the Shin Bet, Ami Ayalon on the import of the Cairo Speech.
Meet the GOP’s official Twitterer-in-Chief: Seventy-something Senator Chuck Grassley (R). He’s not just twittering. Anyone can do that. He’s managing to sound like he’s thirteen years old doing it.
As Greg Sargent reports, the big brouhaha in the GOP today is finger pointing and figuring out who disinvited Sarah Palin from tonight’s big GOP fundraiser and now who will be able to convince her to come after all now that there’s a big blow up over the ‘snub’. Did Sen. Cornyn do it? His counterpart in the House, Rep. Sessions? And who will find a way to lure her out of her epic post-snub sulk?