Why Is Health Care Reform Stalling?

It would probably be more of a priority if he were involved

Money really is the root of this evil-- and, although the American people are ready, ready, ready-- members of Congress, particularly members of the House of Lords, have taken such a great deal of money from the Insurance Industry and the Medical-Industrial Complex that they just can't bring themselves to kick the addiction. As Paul Krugman put it in his column today, if there's a failure to pass comprehensive universal health care it will be "because a handful of Democratic senators are still determined to party like it’s 1993."

Krugman would rather not name names-- he implicates only two of the worst: Ben Nelson (DLC-NE) and Kent Conrad (DLC-ND). But the Democrats who have taken great sums of lobbyist and corporate money from the Insurance Giants and from the Medical-Industrial Complex and who now oppose single-payer-- or even the public option compromise-- include Max Baucus (DLC-MT), Mary Landrieu (DLC-LA), Blanche Lincoln (DLC-AR), Arlen Specter (R-D-PA), Tom Carper (DLC-DE), and Kay Hagan (D-NC). Krugman doesn't bother with the Republicans-- they're all in obstructionist mode and will "do all they can to make the Obama administration a failure. Their role in the health care debate is purely that of spoilers who keep shouting the old slogans-- Government-run health care! Socialism! Europe!-- hoping that someone still cares."

The polls suggest that hardly anyone does. Voters, it seems, strongly favor a universal guarantee of coverage, and they mostly accept the idea that higher taxes may be needed to achieve that guarantee. What’s more, they overwhelmingly favor precisely the feature of Democratic plans that Republicans denounce most fiercely as “socialized medicine” -- the creation of a public health insurance option that competes with private insurers.

...The real risk is that health care reform will be undermined by “centrist” Democratic senators who either prevent the passage of a bill or insist on watering down key elements of reform. I use scare quotes around “centrist,” by the way, because if the center means the position held by most Americans, the self-proclaimed centrists are in fact way out in right field.

What the balking Democrats seem most determined to do is to kill the public option, either by eliminating it or by carrying out a bait-and-switch, replacing a true public option with something meaningless. For the record, neither regional health cooperatives nor state-level public plans, both of which have been proposed as alternatives, would have the financial stability and bargaining power needed to bring down health care costs.
Whatever may be motivating these Democrats, they don’t seem able to explain their reasons in public.

Thus Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska initially declared that the public option-- which, remember, has overwhelming popular support-- was a “deal-breaker.” Why? Because he didn’t think private insurers could compete: “At the end of the day, the public plan wins the day.” Um, isn’t the purpose of health care reform to protect American citizens, not insurance companies?

Mr. Nelson softened his stand after reform advocates began a public campaign targeting him for his position on the public option.

And Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota offers a perfectly circular argument: we can’t have the public option, because if we do, health care reform won’t get the votes of senators like him. “In a 60-vote environment,” he says (implicitly rejecting the idea, embraced by President Obama, of bypassing the filibuster if necessary), “you’ve got to attract some Republicans as well as holding virtually all the Democrats together, and that, I don’t believe, is possible with a pure public option.”

Honestly, I don’t know what these Democrats are trying to achieve. Yes, some of the balking senators receive large campaign contributions from the medical-industrial complex-- but who in politics doesn’t? If I had to guess, I’d say that what’s really going on is that relatively conservative Democrats still cling to the old dream of becoming kingmakers, of recreating the bipartisan center that used to run America.

One of the worst of this lot is Arkansas conservative Blanche Lincoln. In terms of crucial, substantive votes since Obama has become president, only 5 Democrats have voted more frequently with the GOP than with the Democrats: Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, Arlen Specter, and Ben Nelson. Lincoln and Specter are up for re-election next year and each-- a major recipient of legalized corporate bribes far beyond what an average senator gets-- is a determined opponent of health care reform. Blue America may well get involved with the Pennsylvania Democratic primary. Right now, though, we are determined to make certain that Arkansas voters are aware that their senator isn't actually their senator, but the senator of corporate special interests.

Digby has been working with Brave New Films, producing television spots, and Jacquie has been putting together an on-air campaign to blanket the state in waves between now and the election. In a few days we'll be showing you the ads here at DWT, on Crooks and Liars, at Digby's Hullabaloo and on Firedoglake. Over 300 350 people have already contributed and we're on schedule to raise the money we need to help ignite a robust debate in Arkansas about Lincoln, while serving notice on the state's other wavering, conservative senator, Mark Pryor. Please consider helping us make this an effective campaign. If money is tight and all you feel comfortable giving is $5 or $10, remember that Blue America has managed to bring in close to $2 million by aggregating lots of $5 and $10 donations. We don't get any corporate contributions. Please learn more about our campaign and contribute to it, here at our Blue America page, the Campaign for Health Care Choice.



UPDATE: Air America Tonight

Nicole Sandler, an old friend, saw this post and invited me to discuss health care reform with her on her Air America show tonight at 8pm (PT). Tune in if you can.