Print
As the likelihood grows that Republicans could win the special election in Massachusetts, it's worth thinking again about alternatives for health care reform in case that happens. I see three, in descending order of preference:
1. Finish up the House-Senate negotiations quickly and hold a vote before Scott Brown is seated. Republicans will scream, but how could they scream any louder? It's a process argument of murky merits that will be long forgotten by November.
2. Get the House to pass the Senate bill, and maybe use a reconciliation bill (which only needs a Senate majority to pass) to implement as many House-Senate compromises as possible.
3. Go back to Olympia Snowe. I have not seen any persuasive reporting, or even conjecture, about what Snowe is actually thinking. Her substantive demands have been met. By the end of the process, her only demand was to delay the bill by some unspecified time period, which is such a vacuous demand that it's hard to believe it represents her actual beliefs. Did she turn against the bill completely? Did she decide that she couldn't take the heat for voting yes? Or did she figure that, with sixty Democrats, her voted wouldn't really be needed so there was no reason for her to take the heat? If options 1 and 2 fail, we may find out about Snowe.
Obviously, the alternative is option 4: Crawl into a hole and die. Now, the Republican mantra is that we should kill this bill and "start over." But the truth is, there isn't and has never been a real Republican plan on the table to deal with, and even the conservative plans that Republicans haven't embraced are unworkable or do nothing. So walking away means admitting you did nothing on the issue that consumed most of your time, and wait for your November beating as a failed Congress running with a failed president. Numerous conservative pundits have advised Democrats to take this approach, but I don't think it's a very sensible plan.
For more TNR, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
COMMENTS (9)
Of course, option 1 might be difficult because of the need to get scoring from the CBO before any bill can be put through both houses. It's estimated that might take a week, and from what I have heard the Massachusetts Sec of State has 10 days after the election to certify the result. That would be really cutting it close.
(But if the result is a squeaker for Brown, things could be stalled for weeks if necessary--and the GOP can squawk all they want while the Dems remind everyone how long it took to seat Al Franken.)
Of course, option 1 might be difficult because of the need to get scoring from the CBO before any bill can be put through both houses. It's estimated that might take a week, and from what I have heard the Massachusetts Sec of State has 10 days after the election to certify the result. That would be really cutting it close.
(But if the result is a squeaker for Brown, things could be stalled for weeks if necessary--and the GOP can squawk all they want while the Dems remind everyone how long it took to seat Al Franken.)
Irony abounds. Kennedy's home state. The most liberal state in the nation. A state with a relatively high proportion of residents who would benefit from this health care reform legislation. Isn't it great that the Democrats chose health care reform as their signature legislation. Sorry, snarky comments won't help. But I have been highly critical of the way the Democratic leadership has framed the health care reform effort: near universal coverage achieved by large transfer payments (some would call it welfare) with lots of time spent talking about raising taxes and eliminating or downgrading highly popular generous health care plans, rather than health insurance reform designed to pro ... view full comment
Irony abounds. Kennedy's home state. The most liberal state in the nation. A state with a relatively high proportion of residents who would benefit from this health care reform legislation. Isn't it great that the Democrats chose health care reform as their signature legislation. Sorry, snarky comments won't help. But I have been highly critical of the way the Democratic leadership has framed the health care reform effort: near universal coverage achieved by large transfer payments (some would call it welfare) with lots of time spent talking about raising taxes and eliminating or downgrading highly popular generous health care plans, rather than health insurance reform designed to protect Americans from the capricious behavior of large health insurance companies. If health care reform is defeated because the Democrats lose Massachusetts, of all places, on the eve of the final vote on the legislation (seriously, can we really expect Lieberman and the other fence sitters to go along with the options described by Chait), I hope the Democratic leadership goes back to school on framing major legislation. And don't tell me it's the economy: if Massachusetts is now blaming Democrats for the economic debacle, only one year after sending GWB and his friends packing, something is seriously wrong with their communication skills.
"So walking away means admitting you did nothing on the issue that consumed most of your time..."
and so what? it happens to all of us. better that than embrace a sunk cost fallacy.
"So walking away means admitting you did nothing on the issue that consumed most of your time..."
and so what? it happens to all of us. better that than embrace a sunk cost fallacy.
So... you don't think a Brown win would wreck Pelosi and Reid's razor thin majorities on this bill? Betcha.
So... you don't think a Brown win would wreck Pelosi and Reid's razor thin majorities on this bill? Betcha.
And another thing -- I'm sure the White House and the congressional leadership haven't devoted even a moment's thought to this. It'll totally take them by surprise, like Palin cleverly using the Bill Ayers connection to derail Obama completely.
Oh I forgot, Obama won the election that time . . .
And another thing -- I'm sure the White House and the congressional leadership haven't devoted even a moment's thought to this. It'll totally take them by surprise, like Palin cleverly using the Bill Ayers connection to derail Obama completely.
Oh I forgot, Obama won the election that time . . .
OK, option 5. The realities of trying to do what no other country has done - rely on multiple for-profit insurers to pay for health care - tanks. No 60 votes. Then, Obama remembers way back, when he said we need a Democratic President, Senate, and House to get a single, not-for-profit system. He says how we're spending an extra trillion a year (17% of GDP instead of the industrial country average of 8 to 9% of GDP). So, he starts to push it: everyone can get covered, coverage is secure, choice of providers is wide open/not changing with changes in insurers. The country comes around. Republicans finally have something real to yell about. People start thinking there really is change we can bel ... view full comment
OK, option 5. The realities of trying to do what no other country has done - rely on multiple for-profit insurers to pay for health care - tanks. No 60 votes. Then, Obama remembers way back, when he said we need a Democratic President, Senate, and House to get a single, not-for-profit system. He says how we're spending an extra trillion a year (17% of GDP instead of the industrial country average of 8 to 9% of GDP). So, he starts to push it: everyone can get covered, coverage is secure, choice of providers is wide open/not changing with changes in insurers. The country comes around. Republicans finally have something real to yell about. People start thinking there really is change we can believe in. Could be worse.
Crucial margin in Congress at stake. Bad candidate, bad campaign, bad weather on the out-of-sequence election, zero national attention until it was, probably, too late, then putting Obama personally on the line...
Looks like Option 4 guys. Another example of the chronic tendency of Dems to project the sense of personal entitlement and the arrogant superiority of an aparatchik into American politics.
Crucial margin in Congress at stake. Bad candidate, bad campaign, bad weather on the out-of-sequence election, zero national attention until it was, probably, too late, then putting Obama personally on the line...
Looks like Option 4 guys. Another example of the chronic tendency of Dems to project the sense of personal entitlement and the arrogant superiority of an aparatchik into American politics.
I've already made my plan come Wednesday, when I hear the results of the election. Since my COBRA benefits run out soon and I have pre-existing conditions (as well as being female), I know I have a snowball's chance in hell of being covered. Looks like it's going to be option 4 for me. I won't die ill & poor. I'll die with dignity, and leave the rest to the kid.
I've already made my plan come Wednesday, when I hear the results of the election. Since my COBRA benefits run out soon and I have pre-existing conditions (as well as being female), I know I have a snowball's chance in hell of being covered. Looks like it's going to be option 4 for me. I won't die ill & poor. I'll die with dignity, and leave the rest to the kid.
Spoken like a true Stalinist. Maybe Option 4 would be to listen to the people who elected these representatives and senators to represent their views and not the views of a clique of Washington insiders, second rate pundits, ideologues, and others who are more interested in Statisit world view.
Spoken like a true Stalinist. Maybe Option 4 would be to listen to the people who elected these representatives and senators to represent their views and not the views of a clique of Washington insiders, second rate pundits, ideologues, and others who are more interested in Statisit world view.