The Villagers Ask Themselves Who Killed Healthcare Reform And Happily Point At Progressives

Nevermind that Republicans-- one and all and in absolute lockstep-- were in obstructionist mode from even before Obama's 365-173 electoral vote sweep was officially announced. And forget that their spokespersons were talking screaming about hoping he fails and bringing about his Waterloo. And forget that right-of-center corporate Democrats and prima donnas like Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Max Baucus, Claire McCaskill, and Tom Carper (not to mention Lieberman) were at all times working against the interests of ordinary working families-- and the Democratic Party-- to promote the narrow corporate interests of the check signers who have financed their miserable political careers. Instead, let's blame the dirty fucking hippies who have bent over backwards and eaten shit to accommodate-- some say far too much-- this pack of craven, selfish criminals.

When I read that Senator Nelson was leading the chorus yesterday, I instantly thought of Senator Ben Nelson, a former Insurance Industry executive who represents his past and future employers far more than the poor schlubs in Nebraska. After all, the Insurance business has lavished $1,259,799 on him, more than any other sitting senator besides McCain, Dodd and Kerry, each of whom was a presidential candidate. Nelson was never that; just their #1 errand boy and political patsy on Capitol Hill. But I wasn't phased in the least to learn it was another reactionary Nelson, Bill denouncing progressives this time. And he's only taken half the bribes from Big Insurance that Ben has! Pushing Obama to "re-think" reforming health care, Nelson pleased the MSM by giving them what they always love most: "I think he's allowed the left wing to pull him too much in that direction."

So far this week, though, the big healthcare story isn't the mean-spirited and self-serving narratives by ConservaDems and Villagers. It's Steve Benen's Memo to the House and Senate Democratic caucuses in the Washington Monthly, The way forward on health care reform in 2010. He has 10 easily digestible explanations of why he thinks the most effective path forward is also the most obvious: the House should approve the legislation that has already passed the Senate, and the Senate should extend assurances to the House on pursuing improvements through the budget reconciliation process. And I really, really suggestion that anyone who isn't already positive they know exactly what needs to be done about healthcare reform, read Benen's memo. I was absolutely fascinated with the historical introduction though, which says little about how to fix the problem but an awful lot about why we're in it.

About 16 years ago, William Kristol crafted a lengthy strategy memo for congressional Republicans, advising them on how best to deal with then-President Clinton's health care reform initiative. At the time, a variety of Republican offices had every intention of presenting alternative reform plans-- in part to help shape the debate, and in part to demonstrate the GOP's interest in addressing a chronic national problem.

Kristol, however, noticed that his party lacked direction, and offered his vision as a way forward. His memo offered a simple and clear response: the GOP had to kill the Clinton reform plan at all costs. The merit of the reform proposal and its ability to improve the lives of Americans was deemed largely irrelevant-- Kristol argued that a successful reform effort would position Democrats as the "protector of middle-class interests," a fate the GOP could not allow. The Republicans' principal goal, Kristol added, should be to focus on handing the White House a "monumental setback." (He declined to use the word "Waterloo," but the sentiment was hardly vague.)

The memo became the basis for the GOP strategy in 1994-- it remains the guiding principle of the Republican Party today-- and was integral in killing what was thought to be the best chance at passing meaningful reform since the days of Truman. Clinton's approval ratings suffered dramatically; Democrats developed a reputation for being unable to deliver on their own agenda; and less than a year later, Democrats lost their congressional majority. Republicans, far from being punished for their obstructionism, reaped the rewards of health care reform's demise. (Indeed, the public blamed the White House and the Democrats for overreaching, grinding on for months, and having little to show for it-- a task made easier when Democrats blamed each other in ways that played into the Republican narrative.)

As the health care system worsened, the issue of comprehensive reform became toxic for Democrats, and it would be nearly two decades before a president with an impressive electoral mandate, working alongside huge Democratic congressional majorities, chose to take on the domestic policy challenge that has burdened the United States for generations.

After grueling, often thankless work, and overcoming seemingly-insurmountable hurdles, the task of fulfilling the promise of reform was all but complete less than two weeks ago. The door that appeared locked forever was finally open, with Democrats poised to make history by crossing the threshold.

As is now well known, there have been recent setbacks that make taking the next step difficult. Some may see the value in leaving the door ajar, or perhaps coming back to it at a later time. Opponents would have lawmakers believe we'd all be better off if they just closed the door and walked away.

It is imperative for the country, the economy, the party, and the Obama presidency that Democrats resist the temptation to let this rare opportunity slip by.

Don't forget to do yourself a favor and read the body of the memo.
Howard Dean, who, as DNC Chair, had 100 times more to do with winning Congress for the Democrats and setting up Obama's lay-up shot than a cageful of Rahm Emanuels and Debbie Wasserman Shultzes came to a similar conclusion from a different perspective, although his healthy contempt for the Village-- and it's absolute delight at making up its own reality-- is a fine jumping off point.

The Massachusetts vote was a populist rebellion by voters on the left, in the middle and on the right, mobilizing against a Washington that they see as both unresponsive to and ignoring their needs.

The American electorate was promised change. So far they have not seen it. The Republicans have skillfully opposed everything, and then blamed the Democrats and the president for failing to deliver. The Republicans can't govern, but they sure are good at opposition. And we play the role of collaborative punching bags all too well. George W. Bush, with an assist from the Supreme Court, gained power because we simply weren't tough enough, and we are seeing it happen again.

Our country cannot afford another Republican government. The last one brought us to near economic collapse.

And what the good doctor prescribes for Obama is... well something to grow a spine is how I'm reading it. He suggests Obama "lead with conviction" and ignore the puffed up, geniuses who have swallowed whole their own carefully cultivated hype-- Rahm Emanuel comes to mind-- and who are trying their own hand at 32 dimensional chess before mastering pick-up sticks.

The populist winds are strong, but they can shift direction quickly. The Republicans have that wind temporarily because Democrats have demoralized our own base, which gave President Barack Obama and our Congress their seats. But the Republicans cannot lead. So far they have only been able to say no, and to obstruct. That cannot make them winners, but it can make us losers. Unfortunately their pathetic strategy works when we fail to stand up to it and stand firmly on our values.

Be bold. That is what we promised. Bold leadership with less attention to politics in Washington and more attention to the desperation of ordinary Americans for real change is what will put Democrats back in the driver's seat where we belong, and which we earned in 2008.