Health Care Reform High Noon: It Picks Up Key Democrat Factional Support
It’s High Noon now for President Barack Obama and the Democratic party’s dream of health care reform.
Many analysists say it is now and if not necessarily “or never,” then now or for many years — or a generation. But the past 24 hours brought some good news for those who seek to enact the controversial program: the measure picked up key support yesterday from balking parts of the Democratic party’s often self-defeating de facto electoral coalition, raising the prospect that the goal of health care reform that can be built upon is closer than ever.
But another factor lingers in the background: given the fact of how polarized and partisan American politics has become — “post-partisan” is but a dream and “mega-partisan” is the reality — Republicans now threatening to run on repealing whatever could pass signal the beginning of a new era of perpetually warring and dismissive political sides, each out to thwart the other legislatively:
The call for future repeal of any reform that materializes is likely be less an empty political battlecry than a harbinger of what is likely to actually happen when political power (inevitably) shifts from one party to another sometime in the future.
So a form of health care reform looks within Democrat’s grasp…for now.
And if they grasp it, it could be taken out of their hands sometime in the future.
But the Los Angeles Times notes the big developments yesterday — as the Democrats returned to coalition building and placating as they tried to round up the votes for health care reform’s passage:
Lingering fear of defections from the Democratic left — among those who believe the bill does not go far enough to expand access to healthcare — was allayed Wednesday when Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio) became the first liberal opponent of the House bill approved last year to announce that he would support the more restrictive Senate legislation.
“If I can vote for this bill, there are not many others that shouldn’t be able to,” said Kucinich, a leader of the movement to provide universal healthcare by offering the Medicare program to all Americans.
Among social conservatives, the legislation won an important new endorsement from dozens of leaders of Catholic nuns, including a group that says it represents more than 90% of the 59,000 nuns in the United States. That contrasted with the staunch opposition of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which issued a statement Monday arguing that the bill would not adequately guard against using federal funds for abortion. The nuns disagreed, and so did a retired bishop.
And a senior antiabortion Democrat, Rep. Dale E. Kildee of Michigan, issued a statement Wednesday announcing that he would support the bill.
The political pressure intensified in the Capitol, as the House’s telephone switchboard was jammed with incoming phone calls — apparently about the healthcare bill. Democratic leaders pleaded with uncommitted House members — even if they were inclined to vote “no” — to stand ready to support the bill if their vote would be decisive.
Obama continued calling and meeting with uncommitted Democrats.
AND the LAT also gives these details:
Even before the letter from the Catholic nuns and comments by retired Bishop John E. McCarthy, some of Stupak’s allies had been persuaded to support the bill. Kildee decided that the antiabortion language was strong enough after he met with his priest. Then Kildee, who spent six years in a Catholic seminary, issued a statement and sent a letter to the White House declaring his support.
And late Wednesday, McCarthy, 80, bishop of the Austin, Texas, diocese from 1986 to 2001, told the Associated Press in an interview that he supported the legislation. “This is not an abortion bill,” he said. “This is an extraordinarily important bill providing healthcare for 30 to 40 million people who don’t have it.”
Kucinich faced a different quandary. He has built a national following on his support for universal healthcare, which was central to his unsuccessful bid for the White House in 2008.
But Obama made a personal plea for his support when he visited Ohio on Monday and gave him a ride on Air Force One. Kucinich emerged convinced that the healthcare system and Obama’s presidency would be irrevocably damaged if the legislation were defeated.
And the phone calls? A good chunk of them were motivated by the man who some think is now one of the most influential voices in the party, talk show host Rush Limbaugh. The Hill reports:
Rush Limbaugh’s call to arms to kill the Democratic healthcare legislation has resulted in 500,000 phone calls to Congress.
The Chief Administrative Office (CAO) estimated that since Tuesday afternoon — when it first noted the spike in call volume — as many as 40,000 calls per hour have been routed through the House switchboard during business hours.
A spokesman for the CAO, which handles members’ technology needs, said that just as many callers were trying to reach lawmakers through the Capitol switchboard, but they have not been getting through.
The unusual call volume, which has pushed House phone lines to near-capacity levels, began Tuesday afternoon after Limbaugh made a plea on his website for fans to call lawmakers. He posted toll-free and local phone numbers for the Capitol operator, plus the message: “Call the Capitol Switchboard,” followed by “Code Red: Click Here for List of Targeted Congressmen.”
He also make his case to listeners on the air.
“I think it is pedal-to-the-metal time, and even if you have been e-mailing and faxing and calling, I think it’s time to intensify it,” he said. “You call the local offices. You call the Washington office of these people, the Democrats and so forth … The Republicans can’t stop it. Not with votes. They don’t have the votes to stop it, but you can.
“I normally don’t do this, but time to throw down the gauntlet here and really ratchet it up, to go along with all the other pressure that is being brought to bear elsewhere throughout the rest of the media.”
And if passes?
The Christian Science Monitor notes that figuring out which Democrats will be most vulnerable for voting yes is not as simple as it may appear at first glance.
And the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder — a great reporter as well as a great analyst — notes that health care reform could prove toxic for Democrats among one important group of voters. But here again: political nuance may comprise ultimate reality more than the high concept talking points drama you hear on television or radio or read in parts of the new and old media. Ambinder notes:
Right now, one thing is clear: the whole shebang — Obama-Democratic-branded health reform — is a disaster with voters who don’t lean towards either the Republican or Democratic Party. We’ve known that Republican opposition to health care is stronger than Democratic support for it. Republicans, seeking to scare the wits of out congressional Democrats, are distributing a poll from On Message Inc. that finds that of those voters who don’t express a preference on the generic ballot question — would you rather vote for a Democrat or a Republican in Congress — between 58% and 60% have a negative view of health care reform.
I don’t know whether this question was primed by others where negative information was provided about the bill, but I bet that Democrats wouldn’t dispute the core premise. The counter-point is that generic health care reform — and the specific proposals that Congress will vote on, when NOT LINKED to Democrats, Obama or the events of the past year — remain popular. Thus is the wellspring of hope for the Democrats that the bill will be disassociated with its the factors behind its conception by November.
Also, since it’s too early to construct likely voter models, it’s safe to say that a good number of true independents, who make up less than 10 percent of the electorate, won’t vote in midterm elections unless they are absolutely compelled to send a message of disapproval. They might — but remember — the Republican Party is just as unpopular as the Democratic Party.
And the future? Projecting into the future in the 21st century, the prospect that emerges doesn’t look too pretty.
American politics has come to resemble one, big partisan grudge match where the goal often seems to be almost as much about high-fiving your fellow partisans in times of triumph and/or thumbing your nose (or using another form of communication that only involves fingers on a hand) at the other side.
If we project the existing spirit of American politics, it’s not unrealistic to imagine a cycle of repeals, re-enactments, amendments and repeal of amendments on health care reform as the thirst for better policy is coupled with the equal thirst for partisan political dominance as historical political majority shifts unfold.
Rubbing their noses in it as you enact or unenact could become the rule of the day….or century.
Now you can follow Joe Gandelman on Twitter.
6 Responses to “Health Care Reform High Noon: It Picks Up Key Democrat Factional Support”
“Rush Limbaugh’s call to arms to kill the Democratic healthcare legislation has resulted in 500,000 phone calls to Congress.”
One thousand from Limbaugh's herd is worth one average American viz. intellectual curiosity, honesty and ideological self-awareness.
So, 500 dissenting voices, more like.
Kucinich's switch was understandable. (He has apparently given back donations he got that were given to him because of his earlier desire for “single-payer.” Classy additional move.) He's holding his nose and voting aye to get the Dems through the Wall.
Don't anyone rush wrongly to conclude that “means” that Stupak and others “have” to do the same.
This isn't over. Coming close to the final goal-line play, though. Dirty Dem play and all…
most pro-life supporters do not consider far left pro-choice nuns an influential endorsement on pro-life issues. our bishops have been fighting for health care reform since before obama was born. if they cannot support this bill there is a good reason. they are not conservative right wing thinkers. read the bill. it is right there in black and white.
Where were Republicans and DINO’s when Bush and the Republicans passed an unfunded deficit bill allowing Medicare to make payments to insurance companies? I opposed it then. The GOP, Tea Parties and Republicans do not tell you, that, this is what the Democrat party and Obama want to cut from Medicare. They use a broad term “cut Medicare”. These payments forces the federal government to pay $1.15 to insurance corporate fat cats for every $1.00 spent on medical issues. In simple math, for every $1.00 spends using a government sponsored Medicare payment, the insurance corporations get an additional 15 cents. The idea then, was that having insurance companies provide part of Medicare, rates would go down: THEY HAVE NOT!
The insurance lobby and the Chamber of Commerce got the Republicans to pass this unfunded deficit behemoth with no opposition. I am a Republican who supports healthcare reform. The issue affects me since I am a medical student. The idea that bureaucrats will “take over healthcare” is poppycock. Day to day, I see insurance company bureaucrats deny care to patients, and withholding payments for what the doctor and patient deem necessary for care. These insurance bureaucrats are like customer service representatives who have no background in health policy, yet make decisions that override a Doctor's decision about care that patients' need.
The GOP calls for competition across state lines. I support this to some extent. However, the GOP plan does not create a baseline as to what basic care should be covered under these plans, nor does it provide a baseline for cost. It means that like credit card companies, insurance companies will flock to states that have little or no regulations, states that have the least basic coverage, and states whose costs are at higher premiums to customers. Example: the credit card companies. Credit card companies are primarily based in Delaware and South Dakota because regulations there allow credit card companies to charge exorbitant and creative fees. The same would happen with insurance, except that patients' lives would be at the mercy of these fees from so-called competition across state lines. What the Democrats want, is a baseline set of items that would be covered by these insurance companies?
Real competition should also include allowing foreign corporations to establish cheaper insurance companies here, than the American insurance corporations. As with the autos, technology, motor cycles, steel and textile industries, we would get a higher quality product at cheaper costs. Even it means failure of the American Insurance Companies; I want foreign competition for insurance companies.
Creating High Risk Pools: The GOP likes this idea. How many of you have children? That is considered a pre-existing condition. Yes. The party of “family values” and their insurance lobby considers the act of having children a pre-existing condition. As such, women will be at a disadvantage for higher premiums under the GOP plan. Elderly people would not be able to afford rates if they are placed in a high risk pool, as the GOP plan calls for. How many of you have Grand Parents? It is true that the GOP plan would offer coverage to “everyone in the pool”, however, most working Americans would not be able to afford these plans because of the pre-existing loopholes. The plan put forth by my party, the GOP, does not provide limits on costs to American patriots who need insurance most.
Tort Reform: The issue of tort reform is also moot. I see infections due to preventative mistakes by medical professionals. Most inpatient infections are caused by a lack of washing hands by medical staff. Other negligent medical costs come from errors by physicians such as operating on the wrong side or wrong thing. Should innocent patients who seek medical care be denied a financial recourse as the legal system provides?
In Texas and California, which has the most stringent Tort Reform laws (limiting liability to $250, 000 max), so-called [defensive] diagnostic tests have increased, while the number of medical errors continue to increase in both states. Moreover, Texas leads the nation in uninsured working Americans. Recently, I was an unemployed mechanical engineer. Prior to attending medical school, I saw my insurance rates increase from $1200 in 2006 to $3600 in 2010, and I have never filed a medical claim, in my previous job for an oil company. This year Shell Oil will be moving their operations and 13000 American jobs to India and Brazil. The reason issued was the high cost of healthcare benefits to American employees. The issue of tort reform is moot when one looks at the supposed cost savings from these reforms. Both states Texas and California lead the US in uninsured Americans.
The farce of Death Panels: The provision in the bill was placed by a REPUBLICAN Congressman from Georgia at the request of insurance companies and the American Medical Association. End of life consultations are already being performed in hospitals around the US every day, would be paid for under the bill. Currently, these expenses are paid for out of pocket by families since it is not covered. Unless one works in the medical field, or is faced with end of life decisions, it is easy to label these “Life Panels” as death panels. The Healthcare bill in Congress provides payments to medical professionals and their families who receive counseling during the palliative phase of life. Consultation in many cases also means extending life of loved ones. Today we already have [death panels] within the insurance companies via their bureaucrats, many of whom have no background in the medical field, nor social services fields. These Customer Service Representatives and clerical staff at insurance companies make life and death decisions based on costs, and which overrides patients and Doctors' recommended care. These insurance clerks and bureaucrats deny care every day to working families, costing the US 45000 deaths per year.
Obama is right when he links high insurance costs to shrinking jobs. Most major oil companies that once viewed Texas as a bastion of free market enterprise are shifting more workers in expatriate jobs overseas, because of never ending increases in insurance prices per each employee. Why would anyone start businesses here in the US when they can incorporate themselves overseas to avoid paying high insurance costs for employees? As a conservative who with experience on both sides of the issue, I believe that without healthcare reform, the US is doomed to failure when it comes to reestablishing jobs.
The New England Journal of Medicine has an article that shows since the Massachusetts Health reform was passed, abortions decreased.
Havard Medical School research shows that that the CBO score is conservative and will actually reduce the deficit by even more than was published today.
Yet, Bart Stupak stand in the way. Connie Saltonstall is running for Congress to challenge Bart Stupak in Michigan primiaries.
Help Connie Saltonstall by visiting: http://www.actblue.com/page/defeat-bart-stupak to pledge your support.
I follwed Rush Limaugh's advice and so did 37 members of my family. However, as Catholic Conservative Christians, we called to express our support.
Should the health reform pass, for the first time this year, I will be voting a straight Democratic ticket…..it is the CHRISTIAN thing to do!
Also, we found it troubling that big corporations were running ads against the reform. Like the good patriots that we are, we were skeptical of these ads. These anti-reform ads and Rush Limbaugh's scare tactics are back firing.