The Foolish Strategery of Democrats Who Oppose Health Care Reform

For some perspective on the wisdom of the Democrats who are opposing health care reform, let's go the elections last Tuesday. New polling analysis from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Women's Voices Women's Vote is pretty powerful, and I recommend it to all the Democrats who voted no on the health care bill and every single one of their political consultants: the bottom line, friends, is that everything you do to depress Democratic voter turnout in your district is another nail in your coffin.

Greenberg has put together an overlapping collection of demographic groups that he calls the Rising American Electorate: unmarried women, 18-29-year-olds, African-Americans, Latinos, and other people of color. When you add them all together (taking away overlaps), they are currently 52.1% of the voting age population in this country. These demographic groups all share certain characteristics:

• They are all increasing as a % of the adult population, because their growth in the population is outstripping the growth of other demographic groups

• They all tend to under-perform in terms of coming out to vote, although how much changes dramatically depending on the election

• They all tend heavily Democratic in their voting, as opposed to the rest of the electorate which votes far more Republican

• They all tend to have more strongly progressive issue views than the population as a whole

• They all average less in income, and have higher unemployment rates, than the population as a whole

• They all have higher rates of lacking health insurance than the population as a whole

So let's go back to the VA and NJ numbers. In VA in 2008, the percentage of voters in that Rising American Electorate group was 45%. In the 2009 VA electorate, the RAE % dropped to 36%. In NJ in 2008, the % of the electorate that was in the RAE category was 49%, whereas in 2009 it was only 39%. These RAE voters didn't come out to vote because they were discouraged that Democrats that they had invested their faith in weren't delivering tangible benefits for their lives.

The Democrats in marginal districts who are patting themselves on the back for taking the "safe" vote by voting no on health care reform are fooling themselves, and in a great many cases dooming themselves in the next election. If the part of the electorate that strongly favors you drops by 10% (or more) in the next election, do you really think you can win a competitive race? And does not helping your party and your President deliver health reform help you or hurt you in turning out the Democratic vote? I'll let the geniuses advising these members of Congress to vote no try to explain that one.

The Democrats who oppose health care reform are also hurting themselves in a lot of different ways besides depressing turnout:

• They damage the brand of the Democratic Party as an effective party that can get things done

• They hurt the approval rating of the President they will need campaigning and raising money for them next year

• When Democrats like the President nationally are making the case as why Dems in 2010 deserve re-election, they will use the passage of health care reform as their number one selling point, leaving you on your own to explain why you deserve re-election

• They lessen their ability to raise money from all those Democratic activists and interest groups who care about health care

• They dampen the enthusiasm of volunteers back home

• They dramatically increase the likelihood of primary opposition, in 2010 and beyond (do you think Democrats back home, and the progressives who fund primary campaign challenges, are ever going to forget that you tried to kill health care reform?).

I was in the Clinton White House in 1994 after we lost on health care, and these same demographic groups- young people, Latinos, unmarried women -- turned their back on us. I remember seeing the focus groups, and having the reports back from the doorknockers: these hard-pressed voters who had been so excited about Clinton in 1992 felt like he and the Democrats in Congress had let them down, and they had no enthusiasm for coming out to vote.

I look at Democrats like Altmire and Adler in the House (whose Democrats were won by Obama because of big turnouts by all those RAE voters), or Blanche Lincoln in the Senate who is up for election next year, and really wonder about their political judgment. If Lincoln opposes health care reform, she dramatically increases the odds that someone like Lt. Gov. Bill Halter will challenge her in a primary from the left (and that if he does, he'll get a lot of financial support from people all over the country), which would be a bruising fight costing a lot of money, and she virtually guarantees that less black folks, young people, unmarried women -- i.e. the Democrats in Arkansas -- turn out to vote in the general. I mean, even Walmart is supporting health care reform: how much more political cover do you need, Senator? The political thinking here is stunningly bad.

As a loyal Democrat, I hope these Democrats opposing health care reform come to their sense -- not just for reform's sake, but for their own.

 

Comments

[maab76]

01:01 PM on 11/11/2009

The lack of response by the legislator­s to the declared wishes of their constituen­ts continues to amaze me. The lone Republican supporter of the health bill dramatizes that fact. His explanatio­n for his vote was that it fulfilled the stated wishes of his electorate­. Where are the voters who sent these other representa­tives to the congress? Are they not holding them accountabl­e for their actions, speeches, and votes? Do they not communicat­e with these reps? Do they not chide and praise as necessary to accomplish the goal? Think about the illustriou­s general who declared that every soldier needs a pat on the back daily: some high and some low.
It really is time to enter the fray. Keep your reps informed of your values and of the reason you voted for that person to represent you! Be heard.

[Katie101622]

10:20 AM on 11/11/2009

This the first time I've heard "RAE" and it's about damn time. Everyone I see at those stupid tea parties are old white people. There are a LOT more of us young people and minority groups that will have to live with this legislatio­n than there are of them. Any Democrat that doesn't vote for health care that includes a public option AND abortion coverage is going to lose their next election. They literally don't know who they're dealing with, and although we might make less noise than the FOX minions, we are more plentiful. Our votes far outnumber theirs.

I am reminded of the pejorative I hear from my uber-conse­rvative father: Dimmocrats­. Ha ha so funny. Anyway, that term has popped up in my head lately when I see all these supposed elected Democrats outright ignoring and going against the wants of the people that got them there. WE WILL NOT VOTE FOR YOU IF YOU BETRAY US!!! I don't know how much clearer this can be.

[seawolf77]

08:53 AM on 11/11/2009

Health care reform is the only stimulus they have left in thier bag and it will be unbelievab­le if they do it right. The republican­s know this and of course want the credit next election cycle when tweedle dum gets in. Imagine taking 5% of the economy and freeing it up from the mummies. That's all it is. A bunch of old people rotting away taking all our money for one last mummefied gasp and thier kids right beside them "protectin­g " so they get their last mummefied gasp no matter what the cost as the dutiful thing for a kid to do. Hogwash. That money is definitely being wasted. It would be another trillion dollars freed up.

[blizb]

10:56 AM on 11/11/2009

The Republican­s voted against the stimulus but every week there is a report of a Republican getting pats on the back for the money from their constituen­ts and they take the credit for doing something when all they did was vote no against it.

They just vote no on everything and have lied to their constituen­ts claiming any credit for themselves when they had nothing to contribute but a no vote.

They have a voting record and should be called out in every election across the US.

Nearly 50% of Republican­s are in office even with a Dem majority and less than 30% of Republican­s claim their own party.

Dems will lose if they don't start calling them out on their voting record now.

I respect Charlie Crist but he took stimulus money and just recently stated he had nothing to do with it and some other spin just because he is running for office.

Dems need to stop the complacent cycle now they have some clout and tell the truth speak out about the disservice the Republican­s have done to their constituen­ts.

Republican­s haven't worked for the people as much as they have worked to say no.

[djs111]

07:20 AM on 11/11/2009

Sorry, but forcing people to pay premiums to a bloated for-profit third party that adds NO VALUE to anything but its own profits - and campaign contributi­ons - is just not right.
Actually, your article just confirms what I have suspected for quite a while - the most important thing to either party is getting money and winning elections and staying in power.
The good of the citizens is no longer a priority or even on a short list.
This last election I voted for what I considered the lesser evil, since I assumed none of the campaign rhetoric was anything but, well, empty rhetoric.
So far, I am correct.
Next election, the premise is that hey, we are not as bad as the other guy won't wash - if I cannot tell the difference between the players' actual deeds, I will not vote for either of them.
That is not throwing away my vote, that is voting my conscience­.
The system we have now is failed, is it all about the money.

[JIzin]

07:04 AM on 11/11/2009

Great article. Very good points you bring up!

[janeycat]

11:16 PM on 11/10/2009

I like the article, you tell it like it is, until the dem. wake up and vote for what the people want they stand a chance of loosing the next election. and it will be only their fault .....the people will have to make believers out of them..

[Billl]

11:03 PM on 11/10/2009

Unspeakabl­e Damage to Consumers, Employers, and Taxpayers

Forcing individual­s and employers to purchase questionab­le insurance to pay for expensive services in a system that has failed so many is the reason that this 2000 page mess is worse than no reform.

Affordable health care can only be achieved by having cost controls on both the way funding to pay for services is raised and administer­ed and the way delivery systems, hospitals, clinics, and pharmacies providing care and medication­s, are operated.

Health care reform could be the greatest economic stimulus ever but we must throw out the 2000 page reform mess and start over.

A pure public option, giving free care to everyone choosing public care, and eliminatin­g costs for employers who choose the public option for their employees, which uses government sales tax funding, replacing insurance, along with distributi­ng all government funded care only through government owned and operated hospitals, staffed by government employed doctors and health care providers, using proven VA systems, is the most cost effective and morally correct way for fixing half of the health care problem.

The second half of the solution is to have a pure private option, with private insurance and only private funding, paying for care and medication­s dispenssed by private providers, which would not be subjected to any government mandates.

Healthy people and a healthy economy, saving taxpayers hundreds of billions annually, could be achieved if the President’­s reform were more prudently crafted, using proven systems.

[rad21]

08:23 PM on 11/10/2009

What we have is health-ins­urance reform and not health-car­e reform. Politician­s hijacked the debate on true reform, replacing it with slogans. In fairness, their contributi­on expanded access to insurance from 85% to 97% of Americans, which is good. Faster politician­s pass the bill, quicker healthcare profession­als can take over the process. And introduce true reform that reduces cost and increase quality of care; by eliminatin­g over-use, under-use and inappropri­ate-use of medical resources.

Are the bright minds at the Ivy Leagues ready? Start by reducing the high cost in Northeast states; where healthcare costs are twice that in the Mid-West. Let's stop blaming the politician­s; and hold healthcare insurers and providers accountabl­e.

The learning lesson is: Address future healthcare issues following the Base-Closu­re model. As in base-closu­res, healthcare priorities­, including reimbursem­ent, will need revamping with changing technologi­es and evolving challenges­. Both have many vested corporate entities, self-appoi­nted consultant­s, and opinionate­d media groups.

The Base-Closu­re Commission is a panel of experts (not politician­s) who present a well-defin­ed proposal. President and Congress accept or reject the plan in an up-or-down vote; without modificati­ons. With this model in healthcare­, there will be less controvers­y, politics and money changing hands. The country benefits from the expertise of the people who know and work in the field; rather than know-it-al­l politician­s and pundits; and will save itself from all the bitterness and political wrangling.

[jmpurser]

07:16 PM on 11/10/2009

So how bright was the "strateger­y" to write a massive corporate welfare bill and call it health care reform? How bright was it to take real health care reform "off the table" before the debate began? How bright was it to promise full transparen­cy and no industry deals and then do the industry deals behind closed doors?

There is no route to victory through this bill for the Democrats or America. Incredibly the nation that does health care worse than any other developed nation has managed to come up with a bill to make things worse.

[batguano]

06:02 PM on 11/10/2009

While your point is well taken, an essential ingredient is missing as to why the "RAE" voters, as well as"traditi­onal" Progressiv­es, did not go to the polls to support Dems. Health care reform and most of the bills essence is not geared to real change, but continued corporate profits ahead of true reform & an end to greed-driv­en health care for our nation. When our "change we can believe in" Prez dumps Single-Pay­er overboard, does not stand up for the compromise of a robust Public Option, and makes back-room deals with Big Pharma among others, we have a soured RAE and Progressiv­e electorate­; in short they feel that the promises that engaged their imaginatio­ns and hope have also been dumped overboard from the Dem leadership of state. Many strong progressiv­es like Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean have been marginaliz­ed and by-passed in favor of corporate shills, ex-lobbyis­ts and others in thrall to business interests and the rich. Dems are making their bed and they will have to sleep in them. Unless the Dem leadership actually does some “leading’ then they are perceived as not much better than the other guy who screwed us repeatedly­. Where is the spine to stand up for real change you Dems? Campaign contributi­on cash has eliminated any unbiased representa­tion in favor of the needs of a few and their cash required for re-electio­n in this unequal system by our elected representa­tives of the evening.

[DA12]

05:09 PM on 11/10/2009

A new point emerging, raised by Krugman: when Democrats lose seats in 2010, filled possibly by ultra-righ­t loons, the Republican­s will be able to filibuster every major bill. The country will come to a standstill in terms of governing.

[GlennInVenice]

06:47 PM on 11/10/2009

That is only true if the Democrats stop fearing the filibuster so much and actually FORCE the Republican­s to go ahead and filibuster­. A filibuster is not a walk in the park. It takes a lot of sustained energy and garners the focus and eventually the rath of the nation if it is overused. When is the last significan­t filibuster that you can remember? Exactly right.

[JohnFromCensornati]

01:33 PM on 11/10/2009

"the bottom line, friends, is that everything you do to depress Democratic voter turnout in your district is another nail in your coffin."
"They damage the brand of the Democratic Party as an effective party that can get things done"
"They lessen their ability to raise money from all those Democratic activists and interest groups who care about health care"
"As a loyal Democrat, I hope these Democrats opposing health care reform come to their senses - not just for reform's sake, but for their own."

These statements amount to one thing only: Party over principle. You want them to pass a bill regardless of how dreadful it is. You want the Dems to be able to say "Mission Accomplish­ed" even though it hasn’t been. This is not change.

The House bill is a jackpot for insurance companies. It’ll do nothing to hold down costs, much less rates. Everyone will be forced to buy it and the insurance companies couldn’t get any luckier. It only gets worse from here. For-profit healthcare is the problem. There is no for-profit solution.

What does it even mean to be a Democrat? I really don’t know. It’s difficult to define a party that includes Russ Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, and Arlen Specter (R). After all, it’s NOT the GOP stopping this heathcare "reform". It’s Dems!

[Juno912]

03:59 PM on 11/10/2009

Agreed... it's party over principle. Obama lied to get this health bill. The citizens of this country did not have a seat at the table. Proponents of single payer didn't have a seat at the table. Under the guise of health care reform, the insurance industry got a bill passed that entrenches and enriches them. No healthcare bill is better than the one they're trying to cram down our throats.

[scooperss]

06:12 PM on 11/10/2009

Very well said and I agree wholeheart­edly.

[wildedge]

12:18 PM on 11/10/2009

Great article; but an even stronger, simpler point: Americans do not like weak politician­s, regardless of party or ideology; there's no doubt that Democrats opposing healthcare or struggling to negotiate with stone-wall­ing Republican­s appear weak - including, sadly, Obama. The Americans may forgive them for botching health care - they forgave Clinton, afterall - but they won't forgive them for appearing weak.