Albert R. Hunt: Obamacare Can't Win an All-In Wager
[Albert R. Hunt is the Executive Editor, Washington for Bloomberg News.]
WASHINGTON — “Liberals have many tails,” the American writer and satirist H.L. Mencken observed, “and chase them all.”
The fate of the Obama health care initiative could rest in large part with some members of his party’s left wing, who threaten to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Several dozen members of the House of Representatives, a few senators and the incoming head of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. labor organization have complained that without a government-run public option to counter private insurance, any effort to remake health care is meaningless. Other liberals have complained about too-generous concessions to the drug industry or doctors.
In the end, this is probably a bluff. If not, they will blow an opportunity that will take them years to recoup.
Their reasoning ignores both the history of major legislation and the specifics of this health-care effort. With few exceptions, sweeping initiatives in the U.S. system start small, are often flawed and are then expanded — sometimes improved, sometimes not.
“If you can’t get a whole loaf,” Joseph Califano, who was President Lyndon Johnson’s top domestic adviser when Medicare was enacted in 1965, said in an interview with Charlie Rose of PBS on Sept. 9, “take a half, take a third.”
Medicare, the system that provides government-funded health care to senior citizens, is a classic illustration. It was a huge achievement, culminating a decades-long battle, yet in many aspects it was minimalist.
Over the next decade, the measure was expanded to cover more people, conditions and services: those under 65 or with disabilities, as well as chiropractic treatment, and speech and physical therapy. Since then, coverage has grown to include hospice benefits, mammograms and Pap smears to detect cancer, and most recently, under the Republicans, prescription drugs.
The left-wing skeptics should also listen to the most capable liberal legislator in Congress, Representative Henry Waxman. In arguing for a watered-down climate change bill earlier this year, the California Democrat urged his colleagues to see that “the essential thing is to get something in place.”
He knows the history of environmental legislation. The 1970 Clean Air Act was a landmark measure, authorizing federal and state regulations to limit emissions. Some of the real muscle to clean up the polluted air, however, came with the 1977 and 1990 amendments to the original measure.
In the current battle, President Barack Obama, who lost ground in a summer of discontent, got back in the game with a deft address to Congress last week, inspiring much of his liberal base and appealing to skeptical centrists. He refuted myths that the Democrats might establish “death panels” to make end-of-life medical decisions or that illegal immigrants would be given federal health insurance.
In an age of 24/7 media hype, such absurdities won’t vanish. Last month, as a New York Democratic representative, Anthony Weiner, championed the federal Medicare program, a cable television anchor asked him: If it was so good, why wasn’t he on it? The 45-year-old explained he was 20 years away from qualifying.
Still, Mr. Obama’s speech provided cover for fence-sitters on the fringe stuff. His major objective now is to persuade moderate to conservative Democrats in the House and Senate — along with perhaps a handful of Republicans — to support the start of intense negotiations during the next two months over the shape of a final bill. The odds slightly favor success unless the liberals get out on a limb and pull the plug.
“I am not interested in passing health care reform in name only,” said Senator Russ Feingold, a Democrat from Wisconsin. “Without a public option I don’t see how we will bring real change.”
In the House, Maxine Waters, the left-wing lawmaker from Los Angeles, warned the president to stop negotiating with conservative Democrats and Republicans. “We know that you are a nice man that would want to work with the opposite side of the aisle. But there comes a time when you need to drop that and move forward,” she said...
Read more...
Read entire article at NYT
WASHINGTON — “Liberals have many tails,” the American writer and satirist H.L. Mencken observed, “and chase them all.”
The fate of the Obama health care initiative could rest in large part with some members of his party’s left wing, who threaten to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Several dozen members of the House of Representatives, a few senators and the incoming head of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. labor organization have complained that without a government-run public option to counter private insurance, any effort to remake health care is meaningless. Other liberals have complained about too-generous concessions to the drug industry or doctors.
In the end, this is probably a bluff. If not, they will blow an opportunity that will take them years to recoup.
Their reasoning ignores both the history of major legislation and the specifics of this health-care effort. With few exceptions, sweeping initiatives in the U.S. system start small, are often flawed and are then expanded — sometimes improved, sometimes not.
“If you can’t get a whole loaf,” Joseph Califano, who was President Lyndon Johnson’s top domestic adviser when Medicare was enacted in 1965, said in an interview with Charlie Rose of PBS on Sept. 9, “take a half, take a third.”
Medicare, the system that provides government-funded health care to senior citizens, is a classic illustration. It was a huge achievement, culminating a decades-long battle, yet in many aspects it was minimalist.
Over the next decade, the measure was expanded to cover more people, conditions and services: those under 65 or with disabilities, as well as chiropractic treatment, and speech and physical therapy. Since then, coverage has grown to include hospice benefits, mammograms and Pap smears to detect cancer, and most recently, under the Republicans, prescription drugs.
The left-wing skeptics should also listen to the most capable liberal legislator in Congress, Representative Henry Waxman. In arguing for a watered-down climate change bill earlier this year, the California Democrat urged his colleagues to see that “the essential thing is to get something in place.”
He knows the history of environmental legislation. The 1970 Clean Air Act was a landmark measure, authorizing federal and state regulations to limit emissions. Some of the real muscle to clean up the polluted air, however, came with the 1977 and 1990 amendments to the original measure.
In the current battle, President Barack Obama, who lost ground in a summer of discontent, got back in the game with a deft address to Congress last week, inspiring much of his liberal base and appealing to skeptical centrists. He refuted myths that the Democrats might establish “death panels” to make end-of-life medical decisions or that illegal immigrants would be given federal health insurance.
In an age of 24/7 media hype, such absurdities won’t vanish. Last month, as a New York Democratic representative, Anthony Weiner, championed the federal Medicare program, a cable television anchor asked him: If it was so good, why wasn’t he on it? The 45-year-old explained he was 20 years away from qualifying.
Still, Mr. Obama’s speech provided cover for fence-sitters on the fringe stuff. His major objective now is to persuade moderate to conservative Democrats in the House and Senate — along with perhaps a handful of Republicans — to support the start of intense negotiations during the next two months over the shape of a final bill. The odds slightly favor success unless the liberals get out on a limb and pull the plug.
“I am not interested in passing health care reform in name only,” said Senator Russ Feingold, a Democrat from Wisconsin. “Without a public option I don’t see how we will bring real change.”
In the House, Maxine Waters, the left-wing lawmaker from Los Angeles, warned the president to stop negotiating with conservative Democrats and Republicans. “We know that you are a nice man that would want to work with the opposite side of the aisle. But there comes a time when you need to drop that and move forward,” she said...
Read more...