On the precipice
Three reasons why the House Democrats may well pass health reform, again
On the precipice
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
All signs indicate that America may soon lose its ignominious status as the only advanced western nation without universal health care. House Democrats appear to be on the precipice of an affirmative vote this Sunday - the first crucial step toward final passage, followed by a presidential signature - for a number of reasons:
1. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office delivered its key verdict yesterday, concluding that the health reform package would slash the deficit by $138 million during the first decade and by roughly $1.2 trillion in the second decade. The Republicans naturally assailed the CBO report as mathematical trickery - as the old saying goes, "when you have the facts, pound the facts, and when you don't have the facts, pound the table" - but the GOP's table-pounding is irrelevant. What matters is that several dozen House Democratic fence-sitters now have political cover. They can vote Yes on reform and tell their constituents that the CBO report quelled their fears about cost.
2. The anti-abortion House Democratic faction - the so-called Bart Stupak bloc - has splintered. A number of those holdouts now plan to vote Yes; as Dale Kildee of Michigan said on Wednesday, "There is nothing more pro-life than protecting the lives of 31 million Americans," a reference to the uninsured population that would get coverage under the Democratic reform plan. The anti-abortion Democrats had long been resistant in part because Catholic leaders - led by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops - seemed so determined to sink reform, because they didn't like the abortion provisions in the bill. But other influential Catholic voices have now surfaced in favor of reform. Earlier this week, 60 leaders of religious orders representing 59,000 nuns announced their support (from the nuns' letter: "This health care reform is a faith mandate for life"), the Catholic Health Association has announced its support, and yesterday the National Catholic Reporter editorialized for a Yes vote: "The current legislation is not 'pro-abortion,' and there is no, repeat no, federal funding of abortion in the bill." These groups give political cover to anti-abortion Democrats who represent heavily Catholic and socially conservative constituencies.
3. With House Democrats drawing closer to the 216 votes for passage, fewer Democratic fence-sitters are willing to say No and thus risk being tagged as the people who blew the best chance for health reform in our lifetime. If reform was poised to go down by a wide margin, there would be plenty of places to hide - but that's not possible now. Nor would many of these fence-sitters want to be tagged forever as the Democrats who politically whacked Barack Obama. Indeed, Obama has reportedly persuaded some of the late holdouts that the viability of his presidency is at stake; consider, for instance, the statement issued yesterday by Illinois congressman Luis Gutierrez. He now says he'll vote Yes because, even though he thinks that immigrants get a raw deal in the reform package, "a success and a victory on health care will allow this president to be strengthened and to be able to carry out, with more political capital, our ultimate goal."
And perhaps the best indicator of likely Democratic success is the increasingly unhinged tone of the opposition. The Freak Out Award (so far, anyway) is hereby shared by Iowa Republican congressman Steve King and the inimitable Glenn Beck. Yesterday, on Beck's radio show, they thundered that the House Democrats, by scheduling the big vote on a Sunday, are dissing the Lord Himself (or Herself). King said, "They intend to vote on the Sabbath, during Lent, to take away the liberty that we have right from God." To which Beck replied, "You couldn’t have said it better. Here is a group of people that have so perverted our faith and our hope and our charity, that is a - this is an affront to God...something our founders would have never, ever, ever done. Out of respect for God."
It is "never, ever, ever done?" There has "never, ever, ever" been a vote on a Sunday? It's fascinating how the unhinged know so little about history, even when it's recent. As I well recall, the Senate Republicans voted in 2005 to allow the federal courts to intervene in the medical case of Terri Schiavo, during an emergency session that the GOP leadership staged...on a Sunday. In fact, it was Palm Sunday.
With respect to this particular Sunday, and the likelihood of an historic House vote (up or down), I will try to weigh in here shortly after it happens.
Comment removed.- Comment removed.
The wingnuts and whackos have been trying to derail this legislation for over half a year now; passing it will be an absolutely monumental defeat for the forces of greed and ignorance, and as Gutierrez says, will build momentum for passing more of the "American recovering from 30 years of fairy tale economics" agenda. Cue the howler monkeys, indeed!— Yersinia Pestis- The wingnuts and whackos have been trying to derail this legislation for over half a year now; passing it will be an absolutely monumental defeat for the forces of greed and ignorance, and as Gutierrez says, will build momentum for passing more of the "American recovering from 30 years of fairy tale economics" agenda. Cue the howler monkeys, indeed!— Yersinia Pestis
- If this passes without an up and down vote, it is unconstitutional. Using the "deem" rule is a slap in the face to the citizens of our country. Only giving 72 hours to read this bill and purposely allowing that 72 hours to end on the day congress votes and a Sunday is insulting and dangerous. This is not democracy. This is communism.— frankfj
- One thing we can all agree on, though - this blog posting software is the worst excuse for commercial software ever!— Yersinia Pestis
- Comment removed.
- Billy - get your head out of the sand. There are plenty of solutions out there, nearly none of which are in this bill.— Mirror
- This bill will strike a disastrous blow to our security! Wake up! Lower income youngsters will no longer be forced to choose the armed forces to get health insurance. I told you he was an empty suit, barry teleprompter, obamao. Just wait until the government takes your guns so they can take over your lives; they are your overlords! Truth does not come from the CBO, only Fox News, and Pole-man knows it, that's why he called them the enemy! Oh wait, maybe he only meant "enemy" in the context of the FN-WH relationship... doesn't matter! He is a liberal hack for the democrat party.— puttinonthefoil
- Comment removed.
- I would pay more in taxes to insure the uninsured. What is so complicated about that?— HeywoodEm
- the boondoggle continues!— palmyra21
- Just listen to these defeatists.— p-diddy
- How much will my insurance premiums go down? Anyone? Dick?— CD75
- All this proves is that progressives/liberals will go to any means necessary to push through their agenda, the public be darned. Once the amendment is passed and the Senate version is deemed passed, there will be no more debate. I doubt the Senate will even take up the amendment for consideration, wishing to put the healthcare issue behind them and move on to the next item on the Obama agenda. Therefore, we will have the Cornhusker kickback, we will have the Florida seniors exempt from the Medicare Advantage cuts. We will have the tax on cadillac plans (which, since my spouse is a teacher, will cost me thousands of dollars). Caterpillar came out today and said the Senate bill will cost them $100 million. There were 130 economists who sent a letter to Pelosi saying this bill will discourage hiring and lower wages. I will be curious to see how some on this site who's employer drops coverage since the fine will be lower will feel once that happens. Will they still be so gung ho on this "reform"? This bill adds 16 million to Medicaid, and the 14 million it says will be insured is net of the 9 million estimated to lose their coverage. The 14 million also assumes everyone who does not have insurance will buy it under this "reform", which will not happen. To think, with all the items not included in the cost of this bill (like the "doc fix") that this will reduce the deficit is naive. Recall how far off the CBO was on the MEdicare prescription drug program, because Bush and Congress did not tell CBO everything?— tom - wilmington, de
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
