Also, the “framing” around climate change is all wrong. It’s all about economic pain vs “business as usual”. Well, sorry, but most people will take business as usual in a heartbeat because the phrase doesn’t convey any information about the severe negative consequences of inaction.

A better story is “rafting a waterfall” or “heading towards a waterfall” or something similar. Nobody in their right minds wants to raft a waterfall. The smart thing to do is to paddle away, but the longer you leave it, the harder the paddling will go. The alternative to paddling away is not the passive “business as usual” but the active “heading straight for the edge.”

Some people deny the waterfall exists. Others say we don’t need to change course because by the time we reach the edge technology will have advanced to the point where we can build wings for our raft. Governments tend to be of the opinion we only need to change course by a few degrees.

The best option is to start paddling.

1) On Health Care he should say very strong and clear: “We cannot reform health care without a public option. Therefore we WILL have a public option. There is no alternative and no point in entertaining compromises that eliminate the public option. Neither I nor the nation will compromise on creating a public option. We must make it happen and we will.”

2) On the Climate Bill he should say equally strong and clear: “This is simply the right thing to do. It is the thing we must do to protect and preserve our children’s future. We will compromise no further on the provisions of the Climate Bill and we will pass it now.”

Of course, both of those things would be easier to say and to stick to if there were in fact a “President’s Health Care Bill” and a “President’s Climate Change Bill” before the congress which he could point to and tell the people “This is my legistlation. Call your congress people and tell them to vote for it.”

So far all the proposals have been a big muddle with no Presidential Seal of Approval on any of them, so the only thing coming through loud and clear has been the consistent, loud, clear cries of denial and obstruction from the opposition. It doesn’t matter if they are wrong, because they are coming through loud and clear and the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress are not.

We all like Medicare for all, but right now that’s not what Congress is offering, in fact Congress is getting ready to lock people into current employer-provided care even if its rotten.

Read Matt Taibbi on Rolling Stone, lots of devilry in the details per Congressional aides, 9/5/09

http://www.http://www.rollingstone.com/ politics/ story/ 29988909/ sick_and_wrong

Also cross-posted on Common Dreams dot org

Then call the White House and give em heck.

“the public option” is slightly worse. I think most people have some vague concept of what “cap and trade” might mean.

2) Tell me in one sentence what team Obama says is the benefit of passing a health care reform bill.

The US will become more like Canada and Canada as everyone knows is a healthcare paradise.

3) Tell me in one sentence what team Obama says happens if we fail to pass the climate and clean energy bill.

They haven’t said anything about that as far as I know.

______________

The messaging is poor because team Obama doesn’t want to communicate as much as they want to do what they want to do. “Just trust us” should be their catch phrase.

I work in healthcare. We KNOW that we need this change. We have a great healthcare system if you are wealthy enough to buy the care you need. I have good coverage but know that I can lose everything I have worked for if I have catastrophic needs. There are just insufficient checks and balances. National policy must set the ground rules for everyone to follow to have reasonable healthcare available to all. That IS the role of federal government. Everyone has to abide by universal traffic regulations (with minor state idiosyncracies). The nationally acceptable minimums must be determined by the democratically elected government.

I think his approval numbers are dropping because he is not being clear and firm enough. I am an independent and a supporter of his Administration, but I for one, am disappointed he is not being more firm and clear in pursuing his announced agenda. That was his electoral mandate. I think he DOES have the backing of the people for a public option. What do we need to do to convince him and to pursued our senators that they need to get on board?

I also see the media as giving far too much airtime to the right wing ideological anarchists who want him to fail. I believe there is much more quiet support for getting this done FINALLY.

Go for it Barack! Don’t settle for a watered down, emasculated health care bill that does not solve the problems. It is time for a paradigm shifting change in healthcare. The vested interests are destroying quality healthcare for everyone.

I agree that the Dems have done a lousy job communicating here. Even the senator who held the town hall I referred to didn’t seem well prepared.

But even if he had been, I don’t think he would have gotten five words out of his mouth before people started screaming “socialism!”.

I found Joe Klein’s description of a town hall in Arkansas eerily familiar:

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/09/03/it-gets-worse/

Here’s the money quote from Klein:

“Could I just say that the intensity of this getting pretty scary…and dangerous? We are heading toward a cliff and the usual brakes of civil discourse are not working.”

I would like to add, however, that we have to hold the general public responsible in this process as well.

I recently attended a town hall meeting held by one of our US senators, and it was a depressing experience. The majority of questions and comments were from ill-informed people rambling on about how Obama is a Marxist, how the UN is going to take over our schools, how Obama has appointed over 30 “Czars”, many of which are radical communists, etc.

If these people backed up their assertions with some evidence and a coherent argument, that would be one thing, but most were just spewing talking points they heard from Glenn Beck or “researched” on the internet. And no matter how well Obama hones his message, these wingnuts are essentially unreachable, because they suck at evaluating evidence. This is a critical problem, IMHO.

Relative to health care, the Administration has not put out a crisp US performance vs OECD countries message: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/18/43305158.pdf; and has not followed with a crisp message on how his/Congress’s proposal will enhance US performance, which is disgraceful in terms of $s spent and outcome. By the way, we have elements in our health care system that reflect all three of the best international approaches and leave millions uninsured and our costs are 40-60% higher than theirs. The Administration/Congress went down the legislative sausage-making path and the R/corporate interests caught them in the messy process in August. Ds need a quick crisp re-boot message and I hope we get it this week.

Relative to climate change/energy security, as we know global energy security is a huge issue (including associated securities: e.g., food, water, health, & ecosystems [including ocean acidification]), which we cannot drill/mine our way out of in any fashion because of peak fossil fuel/demand issues. AGW is primarily a response to our fossil fuel use, which releases GHGs, and exacerbates our security issues with increasing intensity. Crafting national/international agreements is a very difficult task in the US with R/corporate interests (for $s) attempting to obfuscate the peer-reviewed science, which must inform the decision-making processes. In addition in the US, we have corporate interests attempting game the legislative process for maximum corporate profit. Another point is that the US has by far the greatest per capita/total net GHG emissions making international push-back on per capita emissions in countries like China and India as part of the December meeting difficult. It seems China is beginning to approach the table for the meeting, but that US R/corporate interests are not ready. So, what is the crisp message? I am not sure that one does exist unless one focuses on an aggressive near-term renewable energy bill (with efficiency/conservation) that moves us forward to mitigate AGW.