Bipartisan Health Care Reform: Not Likely, Not Necessary

As Carl Hulse and Jeff Zeleny reported in the New York Times, the Democrats appear to be preparing to go it alone on health care reform while trying to hang the obstructionist tag on the Republicans.

While there are obvious dangers to abandoning bipartisanship on such a hot-button issue, you have to wonder what took them so long.

Bipartisanship sounds like a good idea and polls show most Americans want the parties to work together to solve big problems. This of course led President Obama to talk about reaching across the aisle during his campaign and in the early days of his presidency. He took it one step further and appointed Republicans to high-ranking positions -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Ambassador Jon Huntsman among others.

And bipartisanship gives the governing party some political cover. It would be hard for Republicans to criticize the Democrats about the outcome of health care reform if they voted for it.

But the reality is that bipartisanship is hard to achieve and is no guarantee of public policy success.

For example, The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution passed the Senate with only two dissenting votes, hastening the escalation of the Vietnam War. Perhaps a little obstruction might have been a good thing. Similarly, the Iraq War resolution passed with broad bipartisan support, as Democrats tried to burnish their war on terrorism credentials.

On the flip side, some very successful public policy has been enacted along straight party lines. Medicare passed without a single Republican vote and is today one of most successful and popular of all government programs.

Bill Clinton's economic package of budget cuts and tax increases passed in 1993 without a single Republican vote, ushering in eight years of prosperity and balancing the federal budget.

In the end, the success of health care reform will not be judged by how many Republicans (or Blue Dogs) vote for it. It will be judged by how well it works. Democrats won't be punished for pushing through reform without Republican support. They will be punished if they fail to act, or if what they unilaterally enact fails.

The stakes are high for both parties, but sometimes going it alone is not so bad.

Comments

[AntonioSosa]

We all would like to IMPROVE our health care system. Obamacare, however, has NOTHING to do with improving our health care system. It's just another power grab that will further destroy our health care, destroy our economy, steal money from our children and grandchildren, multiply our deficit, and enslave us through lies, manipulation, intimidation and coercion.

Additionally, Obamacare is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The U.S. Constitution does not give the president or Congress the power to control our health care.

Imitating Hugo Chavez, Obama wants to nationalize everything, including our health care system! "Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama!" Chavez cheered on Venezuelan TV. He added that he and Cuba's Fidel Castro would now have to work harder just to keep up.
http://www.hacer.org/report/2009/06/us-obamas-red-chorus-investors-business.html

[230AL]

to hell with the republican­s.vote it in now.democr­ats are in control.fi­nally someone had enough.bar­ney frank rules.

[BillZBubb]

If the Democrats really believed in their ideas and ideals, they would push through a single payer system--say Medicare for all. They would tell the voters why they did it and what they expect to be the results. If successful, they would stand to gain even more ground against the Republicans.

Sadly, it is hard to say what the Democrats believe in as a party.

[Montanus]

The historic fact that Medicare passed without a single Republican vote ought to be on billboards across America.

It's a truth that could set us free.

The democratic concept of majority rule needs to be dusted off and explained to the news media. Filibustering is the extraordinary procedure. 50 + 1 is meant to be decisive.

Once in place, the public option will be both popular and a relief. As G.M. finally figured out, it's good business in a globally competitive world not to be forced to carry the expense of providing health care benefits.