Here’s my question: IF Brown wins, and IF it scuttle the current bill (neither of which, as far as I can tell, is being sold as a guarantee almost anyplace), will it, like the failure during the Clinton administration, completely destroy any efforts to do so for another decade? Or is the climate different now? Both sides will point the fingers at each other, but who’ll get the blame? (To draw another Clinton connection, some argue that his failure hurt the entire rest of his six to seven years in office, though obviously it didn’t keep him from getting reelected).
It looks to me like health care is just another 3rd rail in American politics. Another is Social Security reform. Immigration reform. It’s an issue that is polarizing and therefore damages the politicians who engage it.
Bush tried to push immigration reform and Social Security reform, and he failed miserably at both. Both issues were dead for a long time after he took a swing at them. I suspect health care reform would be about the same.
There is one reason why it might not - the explosion of health care costs. This bill wound up doing nothing about costs, but they are a real problem that threaten to implode the budget of the U.S. in the next couple of decades, so politicians may be forced to come back to the issue over and over again until the problem is fixed or the country goes bankrupt.
One of the talking points I keep hearing is that we already pay for the Massachusetts healthcare plan so we shouldn’t have to pay extra for Nebraska. That Nebraska deal is getting mentioned a lot. People think we will be getting double-billed if there is a state plan and a national plan.
There are also a lot of people claiming that the state plan was Romney’s brilliant masterpiece but it has been ruined by the democrats who are now running it and spending too much money.
If this bill did nothing it would not have aroused such furious opposition or been so difficult to pass. It is an enormous step towards universal heath insurance providing better access to people with preexisting conditions, community rating and substantial subsidies for low-income insurers. If this bill fails now it will be decades before the US gets anything remotely as good. And it will be a disaster for the Dems in November especially for moderate members who are most worried about losing their seats. All of which is why in the end I think the Dems will absorb the short-term pain and find a way of passing the bill.
Quick prediction: there is a not insignificant number of people out there who believe that Brown being elected should stop the health care reform bill in its tracks completely and for all time. Should there be a way (is there a reasonable one? - that’s the topic of this thread, after all) for it to pass after all, those people will say it’s the result of some kind of “dirty trick” or technicality.
The House could try to pass the Senate bill as is, bypassing the need for reconciliation and re-vote in the Senate. I think reasonable people would considerate that a reasonable way to pass it but unreasonable people still would not.
The “dirty trick” shouters would be shouting that even if Coakley wins.
My expectation is that the Senate bill gets ping-ponged, with the progressives in the House won over by a package of improvements through reconciliation, which only needs 51 votes in the Senate. As much as possible of the most populist portions of reform will get moved up in date to take effect as soon as possible, while the Democratic narrative will pound on every possible positive the bill offers, like banning of denial for pre-existing conditions. Obama uses the State of the Union speech to hammer that home as a legislative triumph.
Next steps in the political dance? My predictions: The administration pushes hard for financial reform, and does its best to cast Republican opposition as support for the evil bankers. The Republicans can choose to oppose reform lockstep, thus playing into the narrative, or try to water down the package as much as possible.
I’m betting the GOP goes with unified opposition and the filibuster – at which point, if Harry Reid has any shred of backbone, he’ll make them actually do a real filibuster instead of the phantom ones that have been in play. Stand out there, Republicans, orate hour after hour about why you refuse to rein in the financial wizards who screwed over the country! Bring government to a halt with your obstructionism! That worked so well when Gingrich did it, right?
So the expectation is that some kind of health care reform is passed? To read the media and conservative pundits, one would almost think that any and all efforts will be immediately shot to hell by Brown winning, either by Republican ability to block it or enough Democrats getting cold feet.
The Democrats don’t have to go back to the Senate if the House ping-pongs the Senate bill. Getting so close and failing is a worse narrative for the Democrats than passing the foundations of reform. I’d be willing to bet that Pelosi has the votes to pull it off if she has to.
Dems push a bill through via parliamentary maneuvering, arm twisting and vote buying.
Dems give up and attempt to convince the voters that they really did want the bill despite what they really wanted. They blame Republicans for stopping the wonderful bill that the people really wanted despite not wanting it.
Dems decide to start over with a truly bipartisan approach. They accept tort reform, some deregulation (ability to cross state lines) and eliminate all the sweetheart deals. In exchange they get some of the more liberal rules about coverage that they want.
I predict #2.
I’d like to see #1 assuming it could be repealed in 2011.
I’d like to see the democrats stop trying to compromise to get a better health care system. Maybe losing a filibuster proof majority could cause that(highly doubt it). I loved Jon Stewart’s commentary last night. ‘The republicans didn’t have 60 votes and guess what they still did whatever the fuck they wanted to do’
My message to the democrats is make a plan your willing to stand solidly behind and support it. If people are trying to stop your plan make them stand up and fight against your plan. If your plan is good enough they people will see that and send their message to those opposing, voting them out if necessary.
Instead they stand weakly behind OK(at best) plans and cry because they can’t get anything done.
Agreed. I will admit that I don’t have high hopes for this, but my wish is that, having spent a year offering the GOP an open hand and getting it bitten and spat on, President Obama puts on some brass knuckles and grabs a sock full of quarters. The Democrats should push as much as possible of reform through via reconciliation, fight like rabid wolverines for a truly progressive agenda, and seize control of the narrative away from the Republicans.
This, of course, is somewhat more likely than my winning the lottery. But hey! I do win five bucks now and then!
Oh, I hope they do, too. Because if they are dumb enough to do that, 2010 will be a landslide for the Republicans. Dems will lose the house, and the Senate will up for grabs.
I’m guessing that Democrats in both houses will be in open revolt against Obama now. Thanks for leading us down the primrose path, Mr. President, and good luck getting anything done in Congress in the coming year.
I think the Dems need to take a deep, long breath and not panic. The worst option would be to abandon health care altogether. The simplest and best option IMO is to pass the Senate bill in the house without changes.
