Who Will Step Into Ted Kennedy's Shoes on Health Care

Watching the health care reform debate from the perspective of an interested citizen in Maine, I cannot help but mourn the absence of Ted Kennedy. But not for the reasons you might think.

At the time of his death, Senate leaders noted that the passage of a major health reform package through his beloved Heath Committee was a fitting tribute to his years of dedication to the issue.

No, it wasn't.

A fitting tribute to Senator Kennedy will be President Obama's signing of a significant health care reform package that is supported by more than just the Democrats in Congress.

Some see Kennedy's legacy as the roaring liberal lion, ready to express moral outrage and defend his views on the controversial topics of the day. And surely he was that.

But his lasting legacy may well be the respected liberal legislator who could reach across the aisle to find common ground with equally respected conservatives -- to forge truly bi-partisan solutions to the nation's most pressing problems. Ask Orin Hatch.

This week the House Democrats gleefully unveiled their health care package. In many ways it was a testimony to the skillful leadership of Nancy Pelosi, mastering details, negotiating compromises on an issue which, while crucial to her party, was not one at the top of her personal agenda. However, Pelosi's negotiating, compromising, and arm-twisting were all within her own caucus. Her "victory" will be in passing a bill with near unanimous Democratic support. No Republicans have even talked of signing on.

In the Senate, Majority Leader Reid has crafted a slightly different bill, with the key political proviso being the possibility of states opting out of the public option. That "deal" might win a Democratic majority, but it seems likely to result in a GOP filibuster that the Democrats cannot break.

Reid's deputy, New York's Chuck Schumer, favors his Leader's plan -- perhaps because it is best for their party's political prospects in the fall of 2010. But Schumer's political sidekick, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, his partner in forging Democratic majorities in both houses in the last election, has another variation on the public option in mind. Emanuel and President Obama remain interested in working with Maine's Olympia Snowe on a "trigger mechanism" to bring a public option into play only after private alternatives have demonstrated that they will not work.

Let's be clear. The substantive differences are small, particularly considering the scope of the entire health care package. But the political differences are huge.

Schumer and Reid and Pelosi want a win for congressional Democrats, and they are willing to trample the Republicans to get it.

Emanuel and Obama want at least one Republican on board, to show that they have attempted to work in a bi-partisan spirit. They have. But one Republican hardly constitutes bi-partisanship any more than did the three who voted for the President's stimulus package.

Obama ran for the presidency promising to bring a new kind of politics to Washington. And he has tried. And mostly failed. The acerbic partisanship that has plagued the Capitol has not abated. Congressional Democrats seem to have given up on the effort.

But Olympia Snowe has not. Emanuel, reflecting what is best for his boss's legacy, has not. However, what is missing is the deal maker. What is missing is Ted Kennedy, a respected liberal leader who can step in front of his caucus and say, "We are going to give them enough to make reasonable Republicans comfortable voting for this package -- not because we think the package will be better, but because we know that legislating major social reform should not be a partisan endeavor. And you are all going to come along with me."

Kennedy could do this because no one distrusted his liberal instincts. No one could say he was caving. His credentials were rock solid.

I see a number of Republicans -- not a large number to be sure but more than one or two -- who would welcome that kind of overture. I don't see the Democrat powerful, committed, or "big" enough to make it.

The President understands the importance of health care. He also understands that you cannot pass a piece of legislation affecting one-sixth of our nation's economy based on a straight-line partisan vote. What is needed now is a Democratic Senate leader ready and able to assume the mantle of Ted Kennedy and lead that charge. Big shoes to fill, and so far no one is stepping forth to try them on.

L. Sandy Maisel is director of the Goldfarb Center for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement at Colby College.

 

 

Comments

[eden4barack08]

Seriously Mr Maisel? Have you been following this progress since its inception? It would appear not!

[solomon sez]

There is no replacing TEDDY. there is no bi-partisanship anymore.We have two arms of one CORPORATE party.WE are a plutocracy now and have been for 30 years! TEDDY knew this in his heart and still kept fighting the good fight because he wasn't owned by any of them . CLINTON AND OBAMA are both CORPORATE DEMS...Jus­t follow the money. They say the right things to get elected...­At least conservatives are honest. they hate everybody equally...­WHAT to do??? All i know is we have to keep obama alive . Let him maneuver this mine field as best he can.He is surrounded by sharks on both sides. Whiny liberals are almost as horrible as obstrucionist conservati­ves...Neit­her really wants to govern.The­y just love seeing themselves on the T.V. TEDDY loved to legislate and thats how anything gets done!!! YES, we need him now. Anybody believe in reincarnation ? we may be doomed after all.

[wildedge]

"A fitting tribute to Senator Kennedy will be President Obama's signing of a significant health care reform package that is supported by more than just the Democrats in Congress."
This show is over; the health insurance reform bill we will get will not significantly change health care in America; the Republicans obstructed until it no longer means anything, and were allowed to do that by Blue Dogs and by Obama himself. Progressives need to vote down this bill, nothing will be accomplished until we have a true progressive in the White House.
And since the show is over, this article is past-tense.

[sc300nc]

Senator Kennedy's devotion to healthcare is extremely over-exaggerated. Where is all of his proposed legislation over the years? Did he introduce any significant legislation?

[dwmulenex]

You've forgotten that Liebermann and a handful of his deputy dawg buddies have acted all along as proxies for the GOP to compromise almost all the reform out of health reform, and that what's left is a backs to the wall, bare bones bill--despite its length.. You can't bring the GOP naysayers on board without gutting the rest of the fish, especially since they're ready with the frying pan and oil already. Obama and Emanuel's early deals with the industry preempted the tough negotiating stance a Kennedy would have brought to the compromise table. Obama's weakness and Emanuel's cynicism are doing more harm to health reform than any Republican. We'll see what happens, but if we get the Snowe job version of reform, Obama can be very sure I will opt out of supporting his party in 2010 and his reelection bid in 2012.

[justobserve]

The behavior of the Republicans in this health care debate should have shattered any illusion that the Repubs will compromise for the sake of bipartisan. That's NOT their purpose. They already declared this is Obama's Waterloo, they spread lies and misinformation to derail a real reform so what hope do we get from them? In fact, Obama doesn't act a a leader of a majority government at all unlike Bush, he pushed for his agenda, trampled on opposition by all means, to get what he wanted without any thought of bipartisan even though his was not a majority government! The big losers of a weak Obama, supposedly the change president, are the people who voted him in to change for the better. He now just follows DC"s business-as-usual: Corporate America trample on the Main Street! If they make bad decisions in their businesses, we, the taxpayers bailed them out but if they make big profits, they share among themselve, not with the taxpayers! Thanks but NO thanks to bipartisan!

[escofield]

There was never any "reaching across the aisle". Republicans never compromise­., never negotiate. If they don't get everything they want, they just filibuster or vote no. They've been laughing all the way to the bank for 30 years. Did anyone watch C-SPAN during the last 30 years? Democrats are the only ones who ever "reach across the aisle" (aka cave). We need a US Progressive Party headed by Kucinich et al. - representation we know won't cave in to corporate interests. The other spineless Dems can join up with their counterparts across the aisle and call themselves what they really are - Republicans.

[dwillisno1]

Could he reach across the aisle because he was respected, or was he respected because he could reach across the aisle?

[wilinot]

I miss Ted Kennedy. The whole conversation about this would be different if he still had a voice in it.

And I don't buy their whine. Divide it in sections and let your aides read it. That's what has been done in the past, and it works.

[mergina]

Absolutely, POSITIVELY no one.

[IWW]

WE the Free Americans are obligated to read all Bills before Congress in order to take a stand for what is MORALLY RIGHT. Please don't discuss Health Care Reform unless u read the Bill, all 1900 pages.
Our Elected reps. whine about reading what they are paid to read. Don't depend on FOX or any other network to promote the truth. Fox clearly, is paid by the insurance companies. WE as ordinary citizens are not paid by anyone.
Study the "facts" make ur decision.
Exercise your freedom.