The Edwards Ad: Unconstitutional Or Uncomfortable

John Edwards:

But if you don’t pass universal health care by July of 2009, in six months, I’m going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you

The constitutional issue is one thing:

But -- is Edwards saying he would deprive the children of legislators of health care if their parents couldn't agree? That sword of Damocles doesn't seem very Iowa friendly...

Comments

A transparent pander. Nice political soundbite but if this is how Edwards is going to try to govern the country I'm glad that his chances of winning the democratic nomination seem remote.

Posted by Korha | November 13, 2007 3:07 PM

"But -- is Edwards saying he would deprive the children of legislators of health care if their parents couldn't agree? That sword of Damocles doesn't seem very Iowa friendly..."

As Edwards said in Noam Scheiber's piece yesterday:

"People forget that being positive and optimistic is not inconsistent with being tough."

I think Edwards is better in touch with the essence of "Iowa friendly" than you are here, Marc.

Posted by Petey | November 13, 2007 3:10 PM

Crowds in Iowa seem to like it just fine: All reports indicate that it's routinely one of his surefire applause lines when stumping around the state. No doubt that's why the campaign saw fit to focus on it in their new spot.

Besides, I'm sure many folks in Iowa know somebody who doesn't have health care. If Congress isn't worried about them, why should they worry about Congress?

I'm pretty sure that most Iowans realize that any son or daughter of a Congressman is probably doing just fine, thank you very much. Indeed, I believe Creedence Clearwater Revival has some words on the subject...

Posted by Will | November 13, 2007 3:23 PM

D*mn but that'd be hilarious! And it'd especially serve the GOP congress-scum well, given their willing slavery to Bush. See how they like unitary executiveness.

Posted by Barry | November 13, 2007 3:47 PM

Of course, the more politically saavy approach is to flip the issue on its head, as Senator Clinton has done.

Her American Health Choices plan is based around offering the exact congressional health choices menu, the Federal Employees Benefits Plan, to every American citizen and employer.

Thus, to vote against her plan, a Congressman would have to say, "I'm voting against you being able to purchase my health insurance plan". A tough vote indeed.

However, by flipping the equation, Clinton forces them into a politically tough vote without taking a confrontational attacking stance against Congress -- a stance that never works well for a President trying to pass legislation. Her approach offers every Congressman a ready-made positive soundbyte for their districts: "I am voting today to offer each and every one of you the exact health care plan my family enjoys...."

Posted by hwc | November 13, 2007 3:48 PM

the reaction by Iowans is actually very positive .. watch for yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_k-fuYeYmk&eurl=http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/11/13/114418/30

Posted by Outside the Beltway | November 13, 2007 4:04 PM

Nice Marc--

I like how we're supposed to worry about the kids of well-off congress folk but not give a rat's ass about the kids around the rest of the nation.

DUH.

That's the whole point!

Posted by Joe Justice | November 13, 2007 4:22 PM

So...because we are supposed to worry about kids around the rest of the nation, we should implement an unconstitutional and industry destroying policy OR not provide health insurance to governmental employees?

Posted by Joel | November 13, 2007 4:40 PM

So the few who are making good money and have enough to eat and get health care even if they did not have insurance are more important than the millions who have no health care, and no means to ever afford it. That is a repug way of thinking Marc.

Posted by rosie | November 13, 2007 4:55 PM

It's something that casual voters will love. But once people actually take the time to think about what an empty and bombastic statement this is, they'll reconsider.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | November 13, 2007 5:47 PM

Will is right, crowds here do really seem to like it. They also seem to like attacks on Hillary's ties to lobbyists. FWIW, they LOVE the Monsanto story.

Maybe it's time to rethink "Iowa nice."

Posted by Blue in IA | November 13, 2007 6:49 PM

Yup. Maybe after 7 years of Bush and 2 years of weak congressional Dems, it's "Iowa angry." Wonder what the in-state "wrong direction" poll numbers look like.

Posted by Will | November 13, 2007 8:00 PM