Democrats Risk Loss of Soul

In return for the hoped for Republican bi-partisan joining health care reform efforts, Senate Democrats accepted Republican negotiators' instance that the "public option" and other provisions be dropped. And then the negotiators admitted that none of them would vote for that which had been agreed. Democrats in the Senate, so far, have surrendered in hopes for compromise, all to no avail.

Last November, the American people elected a new president who had run on a platform promising innovation, far-reaching health care reform and, above all, creative change. Along with the presidency, the people elected a Congress in which progressive members held substantial majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives.

Each political party took its expected reaction to the situation. Will Rogers explained,

"Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans."

Democrats immediately split into factions, each favoring one or more particular reform measures and each finding flaws in other relatively minor sub-issues; Republicans took a more consistent and unified approach: agree to nothing, vote "no" to everything - including the "negotiated" provisions.

How and why did this come about? First, the Chairman on the important Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, decided to delegate the negating to six senators, three from each party, even though Democrats had a 13-10 majority. While one of the three Republicans, Maine's Olympia Snow, may vote for the negotiated result, two, Senators Charles Grassley of Iowa and Michael Enzi of Wyoming are likely not to vote for any reform that would help Democrats.

What comes next? The full Senate Finance Committee will have the opportunity to discuss, amend and then vote for a formal Committee draft that then goes before the full Senate for further discussion, amendment possibilities and then vote; the Senate bill then has to be reconciled with House bill and presented to the president for signature. Thus there will be opportunities to add a strong "public option" and other provisions that would offer immediate improvement rather than the postponed ones in the provisional "Gang of Six" proposal.

Second, much blame has to be placed with the president.

New York Times' Frank Rich describes this past summer as

"a silly summer, as wasteful in its way as the summer of 2001, when Washington dithered over the now-forgotten Gary Condit scandal while Al Qaeda plotted. The president deserves his share of the blame."

For the past month or two, up to last week's address to Congress, President Obama has remained calm and above the fray. He has delegated explanation of his health care wishes to surrogates and to Congress. The plan was consistent with campaign strategy but is a poor formula for governing. Mr. Rich asserts that the result was

"The inmates took over the asylum, trivializing and poisoning the national discourse while the president bided his time. The lies that Obama called out so strongly in his speech - from "death panels" to "government takeover" - ran amok. So did all the other incendiary faux controversies, culminating with the ludicrous outcry over the prospect that the president might speak to the nation's schoolchildren on a higher plane than, say, "The Pet Goat."

***

"That he let the hard-core base of a leaderless minority party drive the debate only diminished his stature. ... The right-wing fringe has become so deranged that it will yank its kids out of school to protest the president and risk yanking more Americans off assembly lines by boycotting General Motors to protest the administration's Detroit bailout. Even Laura Bush and Newt Gingrich stepped in last week to defend Obama's classroom homily from the fusillades by some of their own party's most prominent ideologues. The White House should have landed a punch before they did."

Is it too late? Not by a long shot. Polls show that Americans want immediate and comprehensive health care reform once it is explained to them. The honest and sincere protesters at rallies are frightened and ill served by a president that fails to explain that which he wants. That explanation and education has to come from the president, himself, and he must campaign as effectively and passionately for his plan as he did for the presidency itself.

No, it's not too late but, unless he takes the reins and fights, both Barack Obama and, more important, the United States people will have lost.