I watched the whole interview and did not get the impression that he was taking the auto industry to task for providing health care to their workers, or for their past history of being against universal coverage. I thought it was just a continuation of his comments earlier in the show that a more efficient and cost effective health care system would help businesses that provide health care to their employees keep their costs down too. Clearly they are trying to counter the “it’s too expensive (so let’s not do anything)” crowd, whom Schieffer’s questions referred to. The CBS transcript reads that way, too.

SCHIEFFER: ….let’s talk about this budget, because it was a whopper …. Republicans say it’s going to increase the size of government by one-third …. It produces a deficit of $1.75 trillion…. the largest since World War II, probably larger than the last five combined. …. (video of Newt saying “biggest govt. effort to remake America since Great Society”)

EMANUEL: …. There’s a challenge now to the Republicans. Because the president is very clear. We can subsidize the HMO industry on 114 cents on the dollar rather than pay 100 cents on the dollar for health care. Will the Republican budget continue down the path of subsidizing the health care industry and the insurance industry in particular, while in fact coverage and premiums — lack of coverage for the uninsured continues to go up? The fact is that premiums go up for the rest of America, and also America’s life expectancy goes down. ….

……

SCHIEFFER: …General Motors is now losing $100 millions a day. They have already spent, we are told, two-thirds of what they have already received from the government. And we’re hearing they want some more. …another $16 billion. Is the president going to dothat? Because the question I have is, how long does this go on?

EMANUEL: …. they [GM] have a health care cost structure that’s outdated. And as, sort of, an example, we talked earlier, Bob, about the fact that their health care system is affecting their business and their employers — and their employees, rather. And it’s an example, in my view, of what the president’s saying for this country. The day of reckoning, of making sure that we had a policy on energy independence, a policy that ensures that our health care costs were under control and our ability to make sure that coverage was expanded to those who are uninsured, as one way to also bring costs under control — that is the challenge we face as a country.

Today, that conflict is going full bore. Insurers profit by denying coverage, while companies that still offer plans want to tout their benefits – and remind their employees of its costs – while minimizing them in practice. That’s why the issue of health care reform can’t realistically be undertaken only by talking about health care costs.

The discussion must also critically analyze where each dollar paid for health insurance now goes. (Only the very wealthy pay health costs directly in cash, without benefit of insurance.) Public policy makers will have then laid the foundation for justifying why changes to that pie chart are essential if improved health care is to be delivered by those who need – which is American communities as well as American families.

And please spare me the “saving the world” drivel. I don’t want to hear it.

GM has to be [edited to remove violent reference] instead of being at the mercy of the Greenpeace alarmists. Screw this, I’m lusting after a made-in-Nippon Nissan 370Z. No point in supporting GM if they don’t build what I want to buy.

Back in the 1950’s when Walter Reuther headed the UAW, he tried to get GM/Ford/Chrysler and the rest of the smaller automakers (yes there were some!) to join the union in lobbying the Federal Government for universal health care or something similar.

The automakers refused – believing that if the gov’t provided health care it would be bad for their business.

Well, now it is and they are blaming everyone but themselves for that fact.

Rahm is right.

The automakers STILL don’t like the idea of universal health care – for what possible reason I cannot fathom. They have passed the health care costs for generations over to the union at this point – and basically haven’t given them any of the money they promised to fund this – the union is being forced by the ‘bailout’ to take GM’s worthless stock instead.

What a stinking pile of crap.

I think we need the automakers. But I also think that the history of this mess needs to be out there too.

Sorry I’m so late to the thread.

But you can’t argue those points, because you are only worried about the impact of the cost of health insurance on the well being of corporations. Where is your concern for lives lost by those whose well-being depended upon your moral strength and humanity? Where is your indignation that I have just called you a corporate whore?

Rahm’s point was a larger one about the burdens of health care in this country, not just at GM. We are the only industrialized country that does not provide health care for all its citizens.

when and if rahm or obama come out in favor of providing health care for all (hr676 is ready and waiting), i will be among the cheering crowds. but that hasn’t happened yet, and indeed since obama campaigned on not-universal insurance based health care reform, i have no idea how you are reading that into rahm’s statement now.

We finally have a strong Democratic president in office. President Obama has paradigm-shifting visions for our country. And we’ve all been waiting a long time for this to finally happen. But Obama is also a realist who understands how difficult it is to successfully effect change.

Rahm was making the healthcare quote within the larger context of restoring American competitiveness. I do not disagree with this argument but believe real universal healthcare (which I do not believe Obama is advocating) is primarily a good because its helps Americans and not just the corporations they work for.

As to your quote above. Obama ran on change. He did not run on “Change is good but . . .” Obama ran promising a paradigm shift but instead has given us more of the same. This isn’t realism except in the most cynical sense. It is pure and simple dishonesty.

I have no proof but I suspect the little punk had much to do with keeping Hoard Dean away from the HHS position. Now we see these kind of remarks from a guy who has unlimited access to the Pres.

What is his agenda anyway? My guess is he wants to use govt money to pay insurance health care premiums. No reform there – just money down the hole in the form of massive subsidies to the insurance cos.

This needs some diggery . . .

And what we do is hold Obama and Rahm accountable. You know, what we complained about the Republicans not doing to Bush.

I want Obama to do well. But I will help Jane and anyone else call him out when he’s talking BS or bowing to the corporatists. Just because he claimes to be a Dem, doesn’t mean he gets a free ride on issues of importance.

This knee-jerk opposition to the Obama administration by my fellow democrats on this site is disheartening. We finally have a strong Democratic president in office. President Obama has paradigm-shifting visions for our country. And we’ve all been waiting a long time for this to finally happen. But Obama is also a realist who understands how difficult it is to successfully effect change. It is not going to happen immediately. Look how hard the other side is already kicking and screaming over proposed changes. And we’re only a month in.

For Fire Dog Lake to completely throw Rahm Emanuel under the bus for a quote that was clearly misinterpreted is hugely disappointing. Will Rodgers was right:

“I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”