Washington Post columnist David Broder has made a career out of advocating a certain type of corporate centrism--earning him the honorary (?) title of the Dean of the D.C. Press Corps. The formula is pretty simple: Argue that Democratic politicians should move to the right. So with healthcare reform a major issue, Broder's formula is easy: Barack Obama should reject his party's support for a "public option" government plan that would compete against private insurance companies.

Why should Obama do this? Well, according to Broder, the appealing thing is that some lawmakers--mostly Republicans, though he mentions Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and Utah Republican Bob Bennett--are against setting up a public plan. Hence, advocating one isn't very "bipartisan." And therefore there is virtue in tossing the public option overboard:

The time may come--either before or after the House votes on its bill--when Obama may have to demonstrate his flexibility on the issue of a government-run option. Wyden and Bennett are potential allies if he removes what Bennett calls "the rock" blocking a bipartisan bill. And the president couldn't wish for better partners.

This is virtually the same thing Broder always advises: "flexibility," meaning giving up on something Democrats support. And what they would give up is an idea that seemingly has widespread public support-- as does a single-payer plan, but the David Broders of the world can't be bothered to take that seriously. (Broder's Post colleague Dana Milbank lampooned single-payer activists elsewhere in the same day's paper.) What's important to Broder is what's always been important-- for Democrats to be more like Republicans, or at least tailor policy to their liking. The columns write themselves.

Tags: Dana Milbank, David Broder, Washington Post

This entry was posted on Friday, June 12th, 2009 at 1:01 pm and is filed under Healthcare. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.