Bait and Switch

The edifice of health insurance reform is crumbling, and Democrats are swinging the wrecking ball. The logical path would be for the House to pass the Senate bill, then for each house to pass “clean up” bills to address the differences; the Senate can pass these through the budget reconciliation process to avoid a filibuster. Since this time would normally be spent negotiating differences in conference committee, there’s no real downside.

Except the House doesn’t trust the Senate to do the right thing and wants the Senate to go first. Harry Reid can’t even get 51 of the 58 senators he allegedly leads (not counting Joe Lieberman) to sign a letter pledging to address the House’s concerns after the fact. Their attitude is, “We passed our bill. We’re not going to spend three weeks on some other bill.”

Passing bills is not the purpose of a legislature; governing is. That means doing more than the bare minimum of work calculated not to interfere with fund raising. Members of both houses say how hard they’ve worked on these bills. Bullshit. Some members have worked hard. The great majority have been doing whatever it is they do, waiting for the relevant committees to send them a bill they won’t read so they can check their polls and lobbyists to tell them how to vote.

What is President Obama’s response to the crumbling status of health care reform? He says he’s going to get tough on the big banks. The MO of this administration is now clear, based on its handling of the stimulus and health care battles: lay low, commit to nothing, claim victory if it passes, and walk away if it doesn’t.

Health care reform has been a cornerstone of Democratic philosophy for as long as I can remember, which is a considerable length of time. For all three branches of elected “leadership” to walk away from it this close to success, when success is still within reach, is unconscionable. To paraphrase Ezra Klein in the Washington Post (because I can’t find the link), this is like taking the ball to the one yard-line in an overtime football game, fumbling, then conceding the game. Given the current Democratic majorities, this attitude is prima facie evidence of an inability to govern.

Ted Kennedy’s endorsement was key to putting Obama over the top in the 2008 nomination campaign; Democratic senators will push each other away from microphones to tell what a great friend he was to them. Abandoning the legislative goal most dear to him in the manner in which they’re doing it is shameful, and shows health care reform was only ever important to them when it became convenient to trot it out at campaign time. To abdicate their professed commitments to it, and to him, is disgraceful.

Dear Dr. Dean

I recently received a “grassroots” survey from the Democratic Party. I was, of course, free to make any contribution I wished when I returned the completed survey. Below is what I enclosed in the envelope.

Dear Dr. Dean,

I am returning your survey with mixed emotions. While I agree in general with the principles the Democratic Party has aligned itself with, I am disappointed at the shallow nature of these questions. Many of my responses are indicative of the choice that is the least unlike my views, as they were written with too broad a brush.

My greatest disappointment is with Question 1. Asking me to rate my ten most important issues, and leaving civil liberties off the list completely, shows how seriously out of touch the party is with what is important to me. Aside from Senators Leahy, Dodd, and Biden, I see little interest in rolling back the curbs on the freedoms our elected officials have sworn to protect.

I began this year with great hopes for the Democratic majorities in Congress; those hopes have been largely dashed. Majority Leader Reid is regularly outflanked by his Republican counterparts. His tepid responses, and continued compliance with the Bush Administration have become an embarrassment. Whether he lacks the courage of his convictions, or any convictions at all, is difficult to say, almost as difficult as deciding which is worse.

I gave $100 to a grassroots organizer on Connecticut Avenue in Washington last year; this year I will limit my contributions to specific candidates, such as Senators Dodd and Biden, until the party as a whole shows itself not only concerned about the issues I hold most dear for the good of the country, but willing to act on those beliefs. The politics of appeasement have failed us for almost seven years now. I am not arguing for confrontation, but merely that it is time for the politics of conscience to have its turn.