Print This Page Email This Page See Most Sent

Note Archives, updated weekly.

E-mail us: Tips, Compliments, Complaints.

On a stage in a synagogue on New York's Upper West Side Wednesday night, Gore made this stunning announcement to several hundred people in response to a question from the event's host.

Gore suggested he was hesitant to reveal his position at this forum — but then declared that he had come "reluctantly" to the conclusion that single-payer is the best solution to the nation's health insurance crisis.

He offered no details for what kind of system he would favor, or how he would propose transitioning to such a massive change.

Afterward, a Gore spokesman said that the former Vice President would offer more specifics in the future for what kind of plan he envisions.

Long supported by the left, single-payer plans involve all money spent on health care being collected by some public agency or trust fund, which then pays for comprehensive coverage, delivered privately and publicly, for all citizens.

Issues of taxation, quality of care, availability of care, and medical innovation are all implicated in such a system, with Canada's plan often used as the basis for understanding and analysis.

For Gore, this represents a shocking switch. Although many of the people who worked with Hillary Clinton and Ira Magaziner on the Clinton health care plan at the start of the Clinton/Gore Administration were intellectually and morally sympathetic to single-payer, it was rejected as being simply too radical and too big a political target.

Even Bill Bradley, who frequently charged Gore during the 2000 presidential primary with being timid on finding health care solutions, disappointed many of his own supporters by not coming out for single-payer.

And if Gore is a presidential candidate for 2004, this gambit would allow him to outflank on the left even Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, whose calls for massive new spending on health care so far do not include support for single-payer.

Gore in the past actually has rejected single-payer. In fact, Ralph Nader in 2000 made criticism of Gore for not supporting single payer into a major platform plank. LINK

Other groups in 2000 also criticized Gore from the left explicitly for refusing to endorse such a plan. LINK LINK

The Log Cabin Republicans of Houston once criticized "Clinton/Gore and Hillary Rodham … [who] continue to lead the fight against a single-payer, Canadian-style system." LINK

Time and place matter in politics, of course, and if Gore had come out in favor of single-payer at any time before November 2000, when he was Vice President or a Veep running for president, this would have been gigantic news.

Now, in this strange situation that Gore finds himself in vis-a-vis the media, sometimes he says things that are really important and interesting, but they don't get much coverage. As another example, consider his speech on civil liberties in Delaware, which got barely a ripple in the press despite his scathing criticism of the Bush Administration.

The fact that Gore came out for single-payer on W. 83rd Street, in the midst of his book tour, in front of (as best The Note can tell) only two members of the media, means that perhaps it will drift away.

Or, perhaps, we type self-consciously, longtime health care reform advocates, potential Democratic rivals in 2004, Senator Clinton, Republican opposition researchers, and our fellow political journalists will read these words and start buzzing.

At a minimum, perhaps Gore communications wonder Jano Cabrera's cell phone and 'berry will start going off incessantly with demands for clarification.

Gore's decision to go public with his new position could be viewed as part of his reported avowal to speak more from the heart on big issues he cares about, feeling less encumbered by what polls and focus groups might say is popular.

His informal survey of his audience last night (presumably, given the location, made up mostly of liberals) did not seem to reveal immediate, overwhelming support for single-payer, although one Gore supporter afterward attributed that to ignorance on the part of the audience (imagine accusing Upper West Siders of ignorance!).

Some surely will see Gore's switch as part of a series of calculated moves perhaps intended lock up the left wing of the Democratic party in hopes of securing the party's presidential nomination.

Others will say that Gore isn't even necessarily running for president, and is feeling liberated enough to speak his mind and take bold policy positions deriving from his nearly unparalleled experience in, and knowledge of, a range of foreign and domestic policy issues.

It is surely the case, though, that potential 2004 rivals Gephardt, Edwards, Kerry, Lieberman, Dean, and Daschle can all be expected now to take positions in relation to single-payer.

American politicians and interest groups across the political spectrum, including in the White House, agree that solving the problem of the uninsured is one of the most important and urgent tasks in the United States today. But few mainstream players support single-payer.

Perhaps Governor Dean will stake out his own position as soon as this evening in his big speech on Democratic party principles, health care chief among them, at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel at 6:00 p.m..

Yesterday, The Note interviewed The Interviewer. Today brings exclusive excerpts of the "pins and needles" portion of Barbara Walters' interview with with the former Vice President — which you will see in its entirety on ABCNEWS' 20/20 on Friday at 10:00 p.m. ET.

WALTERS: Later, you hear that the exit polls were not accurate and around two in the morning the networks declared George W. Bush president. Could you believe it?

GORE : Well, at first I didn't. And of course it took a long time to determine whether the exit polls were accurate or not. Maybe they were. But no. I couldn't believe it. And yet, I felt I had a duty to accept the decision of the American people if that indeed was their decision.

And so, when we checked the numbers and every single network and all the different forecasters said this were the results, I felt this election had been so close and so divided, I've got my duty to do. And so, I … I called Governor Bush. We headed down to make the concession speech and we were in the motorcade. We got a telephone call. One of my aids … got a call from Florida saying "Wait, wait. Those numbers are not holding up. They're changing right as we look at them." It was amazing. We got out of the motorcade. I was prepared to go and give the speech. And we all had a huddle and got the latest report from Florida. This incredible situation that was beginning to unfold there. And so, then we said, "Okay, wait a minute." So I called Governor Bush back and said, "Look, this turns out to be very different from what it looked like when we talked … a couple of hours ago."

WALTERS: What did George W. Bush say?

GORE: (Laughs.) Well, I think it's been reported publicly that he said that well my … my little brother tells me that Florida was over with. And I said, "Well, with all due respect, I don't think your little brother has a final word on this." And I didn't, you know, mean to be … disrespectful about it. But … we had a … an exchange then and … and I just said, "Well look, you know, I have to respect the situation for what it is. We're going to wait and count all the votes."

WALTERS: Is it true that you said, as reported, "Well, you don't have to be snippy about it."

GORE: (Laughs) That is true.

WALTERS: What made you say it?

GORE: Oh, it's some comment that he made. And you know, and I … and I fully understand incidentally. Because, they had experienced as a family the full flush of victory and celebration. And here it was being possibly taken away from them. I understand that … that their … their emotions got kind of … mirrored ours from the opposite side of the fence.

Gore today will stop at Harvard to take part in a closed-press academic symposium, after which he will tape Letterman for Friday airing, post-20/20.

Amidst all of this, there's been some buzz about Joe Lieberman holding a meeting or meetings with kitchen cabinet types to discuss his political future. One source tells us that such a meeting was held last Thursday, with no plans to convene another one. According to the source, the discussion — like much of Lieberman's thinking time these days — focused on what a Lieberman presidential effort would look like and what the rationale for his candidacy would be.

We ask for your patience once again as we continue to tinker with structuring a mini Note from a high-powered speedboat (think "Live and Let Die" meets "Sneakers").

But there's simply too much going on for us not to weigh in, much of it having to do with the (mostly) leftward repositioning of the Democratic party and its leading lights, including Nancy Pelosi's likely election as Minority Leader today.

As we went to press (to use an increasingly old-fashioned statement in the cyber era), House Democrats appeared to be gearing up to elect Rep. Nancy Pelosi as their new leader, despite a late entry by Rep. Harold Ford, Jr. and an even later entry by Rep. Marcy Kaptur.

"There's little doubt that on issues of trade, gun control and tax cuts, House Democrats are about to take a left turn … Two years after leaving office, Clinton, still scarred by scandal, isn't in a strong position to defend his New Democrat legacy. Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), Gore's running mate in 2000, is the only prominent presidential hopeful proudly carrying the centrist banner — and he says he won't run if Gore does." LINK

On the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, the Democratic Leadership Council's Al From holds forth on what Democrats need to do to take the White House back in 2004: look outside Washington for centrist, innovative ideas that appeal to the center, after establishing national security bona fides and rejecting tired appeals to party special interests.

While 1,000 flowers bloom within the Democratic party about "what is to be done," one has to wonder if the words of Mr. From, given his track record of actually picking (if not necessarily "breaking") the Republicans electoral college lock, will be given extra weight.

Above From on the same page, Senator Zell Miller (D) makes no explicit reference to his party's massacre in his home state, and yet comes out for saving the party with such things as more tax cuts, a national lottery, restructuring Head Start, bureaucracy reform, and crime fightin'.

Al Hunt has a must-read "Memo to Nancy Pelosi" that gives her a lot of (seemingly) good advice about how to do her job, and contains the finest euphemistic description of Congressman-elect Rahm Emanuel of all time.

Hunt tells Pelosi some clever things (stop fighting with Steny Hoyer, hire better people), but Al, no mention of Richie Ross?!!? LINK

USA Today and the Los Angeles Times broaden their focus to include Republicans and the risk they run under their new leadership of going as far to the right as they like to predict Democrats will go to the left. LINK LINK

Mike Janofsky's New York Times ' write-up of General/Historian Rove's remarks in Utah is a fabulous must-read. LINK

DNC spokeslady Jennifer Palmieri disputes Rove's premise that the country is shifting to the BushGOP.

The Washington Post takes on the two Nancy Pelosis: LINK

She doesn't accept the liberal label. LINK

But the Washington Times doesn't let up. LINK

Pelosi's tapping of Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina sends a signal to some. LINK

Rep. Marcy Kaptur also wants the House Democrats' top job. LINK

Rep. Harold Ford has two cells phones. LINK

Reps. DeLay and Pelosi: strange fellows who don't share a bed. LINK

DeLay is a New York Times man in the news. LINK

Meanwhile, no one pushed harder to win the 2004 Democratic nomination convention for Boston than Senator Ted Kennedy, who pulled strings on the financing front, on possible labor disputes, and on the diversity issue. And the Boston papers are bursting with coverage. LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK

Both the Globe and the Herald look at what a hometown convention might mean for Candidate Kerry. LINK LINK

A few other stories of Note:

Just as Barry Bonds was put on earth to hit home runs, Bob Novak was put on earth to write about the palace intrigue of the economic policy teams of Republican administrations. The Beloved Prince of Darkness goes right out on that limb today, saying that Secretary O'Neill and Larry Lindsey are both headed toward the door; and that Glenn Hubbard sure comes out looking awfully good in a lot of stories with background stuff; and he fails to come up with a convincing name to replace any of the economic team who might leave. LINK

And the Washington Post 's Milbank covers President Bush's economic remarks yesterday and heralds the potential return of voodoo economics. LINK

Matthew Dowd tells Ralph Z. Hallow that Republicans knew they were going to win big heading into election day, but didn't let on. LINK

David "Simply the Best" Rosenbaum uses the good pages of the New York Times to handsomely write up the nation's various overtime races. LINK

Don't forget the Louisiana Senate run-off, is our message to y'all and outgoing GOP Senate campaign committee chief Bill Frist's message to his colleagues. Per Roll Call 's Kane, GOP candidate Suzanne Haik Terrell will be in DC for a fundraiser tonight. LINK

Jesse Jackson told the Washington Post that Democrats are incompetent when it comes to reaching out to black and Latino voters; a lot of black activists and academics at a forum yesterday said basically the same thing. LINK