In his Saturday radio address, the president sought to debunk “willful misrepresentations,” “outright distortions,” and “outrageous myths” in the health-reform debate. First on his list:

Let’s start with the false claim that illegal immigrants will get health insurance under reform. That’s not true. Illegal immigrants would not be covered. That idea has never even been on the table.

His earlier denials were more arfully Clintonian, denying that health reform was “designed” to cover illegals. But the bald statement that “Illegal immigrants would not be covered” (note he didn’t say “undocumented”) is simply false. The provision of the bill that purports to bar illegals from receiving the insurance subsidy is meaningless, and specifically intended to be so; when Rep. Dean Heller (R., Nev.) offered an amendment to require verification of eligibility via the SAVE system (which is used to check applicants for other forms of government assistance), the measure was voted down on party lines. Regarding a different provision of the bill, Rep. Nathan Deal (R., Ga.) offered an amendment to verify the eligibility of applicants for expanded Medicaid, and it too was voted down by the Democrats (though a few were permitted by the House leadership to cast CYA votes with the Republicans). Actions mean more than words, and congressional Democrats and the White House have been very clear that they want to make sure illegals can get taxpayer-funded health benefits. (See more details here.)

Mickey Kaus agrees with me that the Dems will eventually cave and agree to verification, because it could be the only way to get some kind of health-care bill passed, though it will be politically costly: “it’s almost worse to offer sweeping denials that are only 90% accurate than not to offer them at all. The 10% proves the distrusting paranoids were right.” But in trying to figure out why the Dems are going through the “sweeping denials” phase, Mickey asks:

Why not just skip the Kabuki/BS phase where Congressional Dems try to sneak de facto health care for illegals through while showily saying the opposite, and just immediately agree to verification–avoiding the bleeding interval in which the ruse is sniffed out by the Right? Isn’t that what a White House that was in charge of the process would insist on? Or did Obama’s aides underestimate public anger on the health-care-for-illegals issue? (They don’t any more, not after the August town halls.) Or–Alternative #3– does the White House know what a hot button this is but feel it has to try to placate the Latino caucusers (since the immigrant legalization they want ain’t happening anytime soon)? Or–#4–did they actually think they could get away with it?

My own sense is that it’s Alternative #3; here’s what La Raza had to say:

Others, like Jennifer Ng’andu, deputy director of the National Council of La Raza’s Health Policy Project, believe any plan that doesn’t include undocumented immigrants won’t last. They make up about 15 percent of the nation’s approximately 47 million uninsured.
“If we don’t talk about integrating communities that have been traditionally shut out, we’re going to be talking about health care reform again in 15 years,” said Ng’andu, who has been talking to legislators and to health care advocates on their behalf.

But there’s good news. Over at Atlantic’s business blog, Derek Thompson, who favors amnesty, writes that “If Democrats lose health care over immigration, then they don’t just lose health care — they also lose immigration reform.” Yes we can!