Why Democrats Are Fighting for a Republican Health Plan

by: E.J. Dionne Jr., Op-Ed

Washington - Here is the ultimate paradox of the Great Health Care Showdown: Congress will divide along partisan lines to pass a Republican version of health care reform, and Republicans will vote against it.

Yes, Democrats have rallied behind a bill that Republicans -- or at least large numbers of them -- should love. It is built on a series of principles that Republicans espoused for years.

Republicans have said that they do not want to destroy the private insurance market. This bill not only preserves that market but strengthens it by bringing in millions of new customers. The plan before Congress does not call for a government "takeover" of health care. It provides subsidies so more people can buy private insurance.

Republicans always say they are against "socialized medicine." Not only is this bill nothing like a "single-payer" health system along Canadian or British lines. It doesn't even include the "public option" that would have allowed people voluntarily to buy their insurance from the government. The single-payer idea fell by the wayside long ago, and supporters of the public option -- sadly, from my point of view -- lost out last December.

They'll be back, of course. The newly pragmatic Rep. Dennis Kucinich was right to say that this is just the first step in a long process. We will see if this market-based system works. If it doesn't, single-payer plans and public options will look more attractive.

Republican reform advocates have long called for a better insurance market. Our current system provides individuals with little market power in the purchase of health insurance. As a result, they typically pay exorbitant premiums. The new insurance exchanges will pool individuals together and give them a fighting chance at a fair shake.

Republicans now say they hate the mandate that requires everyone to buy insurance. But an individual mandate was hailed as a form of "personal responsibility" by no less a conservative Republican than Mitt Romney. He was proud of the mandate, and also proud of the insurance exchange idea, known in Massachusetts as "The Health Connector" (the idea itself came from the conservative Heritage foundation). Romney had a right to be proud. As governor of Massachusetts in 2006, he signed a bill that is the closest thing there is to a model for what the Democrats are proposing.

Don't believe me on this? On The Wall Street Journal's opinion page earlier this week, Grace-Marie Turner -- criticizing Romney from the right, it should be said -- noted the startling similarities between the plan he approved and the one President Obama is fighting for.

"Both have an individual mandate requiring most residents to have health insurance or pay a penalty," she wrote. "Most businesses are required to participate or pay a fine. Both rely on government-designed purchasing exchanges that also provide a platform to control private health insurance. Many of the uninsured are covered through Medicaid expansion and others receive subsidies for highly prescriptive policies. And the apparatus requires a plethora of new government boards and agencies."

She added: "While it's true that the liberal Massachusetts Legislature did turn Mr. Romney's plan to the left, his claims that his plan is 'entirely different' will not stand up to the intense scrutiny of a presidential campaign, especially a primary challenge."

What does it tell us that Republicans are now opposing a bill rooted in so many of their own principles? Why has it fallen to Democrats to push the thing through?

The obvious lesson is that the balance of opinion in the Republican Party has swung far to the right of where it used to be. Republicans once believed in market-based government solutions. Now they are suspicious of government solutions altogether. That's true even in an area such as health care where government, through Medicare and Medicaid, already plays a necessarily large role.

As for the Democrats, they have been both pragmatic and moderate, despite all the claims that this plan is "left wing" or "socialist." It is neither.

You could argue that Democrats have learned from Republicans. Some might say that Democrats have been less than true to their principles.

But there is a simpler conclusion: Democrats, including President Obama, are so anxious to get everyone health insurance that they are more than willing to try a market-based system and hope it works. It's a shame the Republicans can no longer take "yes" for an answer.

E.J. Dionne's e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.

(c) 2010, Washington Post Writers Group 

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



"Here is the ultimate

"Here is the ultimate paradox of the Great Health Care Showdown: Congress will divide along partisan lines to pass a Republican version of health care reform, and Republicans will vote against it."

Yes, indeed!

That's because the Republicans & Democrats are playing on the same neo-liberal field. They are all neo-liberals. One field of neo-liberalism being more radical than the other, but both essentially expressing REPUBLICAN LAW MAKING.



"As for the Democrats, they

"As for the Democrats, they have been both pragmatic and moderate, despite all the claims that this plan is "left wing" or "socialist." It is neither."

Democrats have NOT been pragmatic and moderate. Obama had to negotiate this bill behind closed doors with health industry and biotech CEO's. That's how "moderate" it is from a (genuinely) Democratic perspective.

The truth is as follows: Obama is a conservative Republican himself. To win his election, like the elections of Diane Feinstein in CA, he had to change his party label, which Diane does from election to election.

Of course, as this author himself admits -- single payer is the RIGHT way to go. Given the logic here that the Republicans will vote NO on anything Obama produces, why is the common sense maneuver to push through single pay AGGRESSIVELY not happening? It's because of what I've stated over and over again and a fact admitted in this article: Obama legislates, thinks, and feels as a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN.

It's not just the Republicans, as this author observes, who've moved so far to the right that they are barely recognizable, as Republicans; the Democrats have done exactly the same thing.

SO what we have here, from a higher point of view, is a solidly Republican congress. You have the Republican scavengers, hateful of all government on the severe right, and then you have the rest of the Congress: moderate right wingers who are neo-liberal free market (solidly Republican, like Max Baucus) worshippers keeping government participation at an absolute minimum. We have a whole slew of Democrats who as a central feature of the political philosophy want to reduce government's involvement in all spheres of life. The reason"? It's a central tenet of neo-liberalism that government is inherent evil, "the problem" to be overcome. It's Adam Smith all over again.

Here's what we need: a return of the Democratic party of the 60s, Democrats who have faith in "big government." We need a return of the social state, only done better than it ever has been done before, as we see in GREEN and WAR FREE Scandinavia.

We need an Oval Office and Congress filled with Bernie Sanders-like-politicians. Otherwise, it's "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."



Whoever said the Democratic

Whoever said the Democratic Party was on our side? When was the last time any politician -- Republican or Democrat -- voluntarily did something to benefit anyone but the top 5% wealthiest Americans? They never budge without a lot of civil unrest to force the situation.



"We will see if this

"We will see if this market-based system works. If it doesn't, single-payer plans and public options will look more attractive."

More attractive for whom? All along a vast majority of the American people favored single-payer when it was properly described to them. What has clouded the debate and creation of the current legislation is propaganda. Right now, Republican John Boehner is claiming that the American people are screaming that this bill not be enacted.

If the majority of Americans were already in favor of single-payer, or at the very least a public option, what has to change? Will politicians be able to resist corporate campaign contributions and lobbyists? Will the health care industry decide that it is time they went softly into that good night?
Nether of these things seem likely.

Medicare has been proving that a government administered health plan can work since 1965. And although it is so successful that Tea Partiers cry that government should keep its hands off Medicare, Republicans continue to look for a way to kill it without appearing responsible for its demise.

This health insurance industry regulation bill is driving me crazy! All I wanted was something that made sense. The only thing that seems to make sense right now is that the Democrats hold on to political power by passing something. I was just hoping to get something that makes sense and that is also relevant to improving actual access for health care for all Americans. Big difference.



A proposeded 28th amendment

A proposeded 28th amendment is one interesting idea to keep the sharks semi-honest as they wheel and deal as backroom lobby parties:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."



I consider myself a far-left

I consider myself a far-left American. I am DISGUSTED by this "reform" bill and I do not want to see it passed. The mandate sets a precedent that we will seriously regret in the future and I, for one, will not allow the government to force me to purchase anything from the criminal insurance companies, I don't care how much of a penalty I will have to pay. This bill is a crime against all Americans and a gift to the rich corporations (insurance companies, etc.). Obama has betrayed us all with his back-room deal. Let's see if the men and women in Congress betray us, as well.



When Dionne says the health

When Dionne says the health plan is neither left nor right wing ( "it's neither"), after saying it's everything the Republicans should want, and therefore (they) should vote for it, he sticks his foot in his mouth and shows us his profoundly ignorant grasp of American politics. What we really have is a RIGHT WING GOVERNMENT, to the point of fascist, and he says this plan is neutral. I guess this man is immune to contradicting himself. Dionne, you are such a jerk.



Obama/Emanuel made deals

Obama/Emanuel made deals last summer to kill the public option. Obama's bipartisan bystander act enabled those deals to hold as an essentially Republican bill was crafted. Now Obama postures as a reformer. He is a lifelong servant of the power elite, a hollow man.



I hope, sincerely, from this

I hope, sincerely, from this shitty, self-contradictory, highly politicized, blatantly pro-right wing article, that Dionne's real character is exposed to all who read it, especially progressives. Dionne says two things at the same time: 1) the Republicans should be ecstatic over this bill and vote for it and that 2) it's "neither" a right wing nor left wing bill, a bipartisan bill. Can you believe this transparent double speak? Dionne is a first class propagandist with an obviously classless and despicably conservative character; this man is paid to write in such a way that Republican law making continues to dominate our Congress. This guy is a total loser and his articles should not be on TruthOut. It's like letting a fox into the henhouse. Get him off this website, please.



"But an individual mandate

"But an individual mandate was hailed as a form of "personal responsibility" by no less a conservative Republican than Mitt Romney" A form of personal responsibility? Where do these clowns in Washington come from? Being forced to purchase insurance isn't personal responsibility. It is the "parent" telling the "child" to do something and punishing them if they don't comply.



The entire health care

The entire health care deliberations have been bad theater from the beginning, with each side and each individual posturing to save face with both health insurance lobbyists and the american people.

The Republicans might like the plan but can't appear to be voting for it because of the expectations of their constituencies. However, they've managed to swing the thing so far to the right that it's hardly reform in any real sense.

All the posturing, fussing, fuming, anger and finger pointing between Democrats and Republicans makes for good TV, but backstage these people swap beers and play off each other like the actors they are.



yeah...this author has def

yeah...this author has def swallowed the cool-aid whole. most of his articles still use all the old paradigm 'game' mentalities and 'moves'. i guess he just still believes there is an actual difference between dems and repubs. he never seems able to consider looking farther up the food chain for answers.



hermes replica

must check hermes replica bag , for special offer wefLSlEE http://www.hermes--replica.org/