April 14, 2016
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/14/why-howard-dean-hates-bernie-sanders-health-care-plan/
Howard Dean MD, the one-time
“insurgent” candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, has since
lodged himself deep inside the sinister Washington establishment. Now
an employee for a health care lobbying firm and an unabashed
cheerleader for Hillary’s lusterless campaign, Dean has come out guns blazing
against Bernie Sanders’ call for single-payer health care, ie
Medicare for all. But should we be surprised? The answer is no,
we shouldn’t be startled in the least. For starters, the former Vermont
governor has a lengthy track record of opposing Medicare and has
even defended Bill Clinton’s disastrous welfare reform (so has Hillary),
which forced single-mothers into slave wage jobs and legions of black
and Latino kids into poverty. Dean and his fellow Vermonter Bernie Sanders have
little in common.
During the 1990s, Dean levied
restrictions for Vermont Medicare recipients under the guise of fiscal
responsibility. According to The San Francisco Chronicle and the Associated
Press, Dean claimed in 1993 that: “Medicare is the best argument I know why the
federal government should never be allowed to run a national health care
system.” He was later quoted as saying, “I think [Medicare is] one of the worst
federal programs ever.”
His statements put him
squarely to the right, not just of progressives on this issue, but of the
majority of Americans who favor a national health care system like Canada’s.
During the heated primary
race, Dean’s opponents pointed out that as governor, he supported Gingrich’s
plans to make senior citizens pay more and strip Medicare funding by up to $270
billion. As Dean said at the time: “I can tell you that the bureaucracy [is]
associated with capitulated care … far less than it is, for example, associated
with Medicare, which is, from my point of view, a bureaucratic nightmare.”
Dean also said, “I agree with
[South Carolina Republican Gov.] Carroll Campbell when he says the federal
government ought not to be allowed to administer a national health care
program. They’ve already [proven] that they can’t do that in a national health
care program for those over 65, which is Medicare.”
And according to a May 1992
Rutland Herald article, “As he has in the past, Dean stressed that the states
must move ahead of the federal government in reforming health care. Medicare,
which turns its recipients into ‘second class citizens’ and has been a fiasco
for health care providers, is ‘the best advertisement’ for why the federal
government must not be allowed to draw up the blueprint for national health insurance.”
When it came time to balance
his budget or eliminate the deficit, Dean often regarded these types of social
programs as secondary concerns. Of course, when Dean was criticized for his
Medicare quotes from the 1990s during the primary debates, he retreated,
insisting, “I spent 13 years of my life with senior citizens, and I can promise
you that as president of the United States [I will ensure] not only [that]
Medicare [will] not be cut but every senior citizen will have adequate health
care. Medicare will be shored up, and every senior citizen will have a
prescription benefit. I spent 13 years of my life doing this and I am not going
to let us backslide now.”
Not surprisingly, this move
was a hallmark act in Dean theatrics, as the presidential candidate
consistently shifted his policy stance on a number of issues, including
international trade, pre-emptive war, gay rights, and the death penalty, among
others.
The good governor was also an
adamant supporter of welfare reform. Jim Farrel wrote in a May 2003 issue of
The Nation, Dean has “said some welfare recipients ‘don’t have any self-esteem.
If they did, they’d be working’ and scaled back Vermont’s welfare program,
reducing cash benefits and imposing strict time limits on single mothers
receiving welfare assistance.”
Dean recognized the dangers of
creating new jobs under Vermont’s welfare program. As he explained, “What we do
that’s different is we don’t cut off all benefits; we cut off cash benefits,
which means people don’t get kicked out in the street.” And in a 2001
Associated Press article, Dean surmised, “The biggest danger in this is people
won’t be able to find a job. If you can’t find a job in our system you can
continue to get your grant if you work in a public nonprofit or a private nonprofit
job.” Nonetheless, his support for Clinton’s Federal program and Vermont’s
welfare program never waned.
Author and syndicated
columnist Norman Solomon criticized Dean’s welfare reform record in late 2003,
writing, “While some other Democrats angrily opposed Clinton’s welfare reform,
it won avid support from Dean. ‘Liberals like Marian Wright Edelman are wrong,’
[Dean] insisted. ‘The bill is strong on work, time limits assistance, and
provides adequate protection for children.’ Dean co-signed a letter to Clinton
calling the measure ‘a real step forward.’”
Though we now know that
welfare reform was really a step backwards, hindsight is always 20/20. But even
hindsight couldn’t offer perfect vision for Dean, who never saw through the
lies. On National Public Radio (NPR) in July 2003, he commended the Clinton
administration’s outlandish welfare policy, arguing that “What Bill Clinton did
was appropriate … let’s not forget that Bill Clinton ran on bringing health
insurance to every single American and balancing the budget, really somewhat
similar to the platform that I run on, and he won.” But as a political nubile,
Dean should have been reminded that, thanks to the president’s fiscal
stringency, Clinton’s platform failed most poor Americans. Would Dean’s platform
have failed them as well?
Indeed.
“I think welfare reform has
been an incredibly positive force,” Dean raved in an interview with the online
journal Liberal Oasis, “Vermont was the first state in the nation to institute
welfare reform, and we’ve had great success with it.”
