Super Egos
September 30th 2009 19:33
Yesterday, after emotional pleading by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, both liberal Democrats, for two different proposals to create a government option for health insurance, the Senate Finance Committee, with some Democrats joining all of the Republicans on the committee, rejected both plans.
The liberal wing of the Democratic Party knows that it will be next to impossible to get a health care bill through both houses of Congress with a public option attached, yet, prodded by unions and its own militant members, it continues to fight, holding up every other part of a bill that is close to being acceptable to both parties, and further polarizing the right wing of the Republican Party.
Both Schumer and Rockefeller had to know that they were spitting into the wind when they made their pleas to the Finance Committee, but they did so anyway. Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, whose bill does not include the public option and which has the greatest chance of being adopted, voted against adding a public option amendment to his bill; Baucus said he voted against both amendments because his bill with either amendment would not get the required sixty votes to overcome an anticipated Republican filibuster. Both Schumer and Rockefeller said that they would continue their fight “so the bill that lands on the president’s desk has a good, strong, robust public option.” Schumer can defy the President, the defacto head of his own party, who wants a bill but is willing to compromise, because the President can only run for office one more time, and he might not get re-elected, while Schumer, who has to run every six years, will probably get re-elected every time.
The Democrats have a problem here. On the one hand we have a Democratic President who is a moderate. He wants to give the people a health care plan that reigns in the power of the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies, controls costs, and gives those who can’t buy insurance anywhere else a chance to purchase it at reasonable rates from the government. On the other hand, he is willing to compromise; he has said just that as long as he gets what he promised the American people. If Congress can’t agree on a public option, then make sure there is some other way that all people can purchase affordable insurance, that nobody is turned away due to a pre-existing condition, that nobody loses their insurance when they lose their job, that there are no limits to coverage and that people can keep their current health care provider. If the Republicans can do this with private insurance companies, fine.
On the other hand, we have Democrats in the Senate and the House of Representatives who want all or nothing, their way or the highway: no compromise. They don’t care if they embarrass the President as long as they appear strong to their radical constituency, just as the Conservatives have to appear strong to their reactionaries. Where is Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Dick Durbin, the Senate Majority Whip in this fight? What about the House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina? The House is heavily influenced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is pushing the public option, so don’t expect quick compromise when the Senate bill arrives for debate in the House.
Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Democrat from Nevada faces re-election in 2010, and his chances do not look good. A public opinion poll conducted in 2007 showed that 51% of Nevadans viewed Reid unfavorably. If Reid fails to gain re-election, it has been suggested that the next in line to succeed him would either be Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York, or Dick Durbin, Democrat from Illinois. Durbin is more conciliatory and middle of the road than Schumer while Schumer, the supreme egotist, is more liberal and divisive (I can’t stand Schumer and his New York accent, and I’m from New York originally and have the same accent). While both are said to claim they have no thoughts of wanting the majority leadership, both would certainly scheme to get it, should the Democrats retain control of the Senate.
For the rest of us, while the super egos in Congress fight among themselves, ostensibly for our good, the “haves” will continue to be able to provide health care for themselves and their families while the “have nots” will have to wait. I wonder which group Schumer, Rockefeller, Pelosi, Reid, and the entire Republican Party feel most akin to?
The liberal wing of the Democratic Party knows that it will be next to impossible to get a health care bill through both houses of Congress with a public option attached, yet, prodded by unions and its own militant members, it continues to fight, holding up every other part of a bill that is close to being acceptable to both parties, and further polarizing the right wing of the Republican Party.
Both Schumer and Rockefeller had to know that they were spitting into the wind when they made their pleas to the Finance Committee, but they did so anyway. Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, whose bill does not include the public option and which has the greatest chance of being adopted, voted against adding a public option amendment to his bill; Baucus said he voted against both amendments because his bill with either amendment would not get the required sixty votes to overcome an anticipated Republican filibuster. Both Schumer and Rockefeller said that they would continue their fight “so the bill that lands on the president’s desk has a good, strong, robust public option.” Schumer can defy the President, the defacto head of his own party, who wants a bill but is willing to compromise, because the President can only run for office one more time, and he might not get re-elected, while Schumer, who has to run every six years, will probably get re-elected every time.
The Democrats have a problem here. On the one hand we have a Democratic President who is a moderate. He wants to give the people a health care plan that reigns in the power of the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies, controls costs, and gives those who can’t buy insurance anywhere else a chance to purchase it at reasonable rates from the government. On the other hand, he is willing to compromise; he has said just that as long as he gets what he promised the American people. If Congress can’t agree on a public option, then make sure there is some other way that all people can purchase affordable insurance, that nobody is turned away due to a pre-existing condition, that nobody loses their insurance when they lose their job, that there are no limits to coverage and that people can keep their current health care provider. If the Republicans can do this with private insurance companies, fine.
On the other hand, we have Democrats in the Senate and the House of Representatives who want all or nothing, their way or the highway: no compromise. They don’t care if they embarrass the President as long as they appear strong to their radical constituency, just as the Conservatives have to appear strong to their reactionaries. Where is Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Dick Durbin, the Senate Majority Whip in this fight? What about the House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina? The House is heavily influenced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is pushing the public option, so don’t expect quick compromise when the Senate bill arrives for debate in the House.
Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader and Democrat from Nevada faces re-election in 2010, and his chances do not look good. A public opinion poll conducted in 2007 showed that 51% of Nevadans viewed Reid unfavorably. If Reid fails to gain re-election, it has been suggested that the next in line to succeed him would either be Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York, or Dick Durbin, Democrat from Illinois. Durbin is more conciliatory and middle of the road than Schumer while Schumer, the supreme egotist, is more liberal and divisive (I can’t stand Schumer and his New York accent, and I’m from New York originally and have the same accent). While both are said to claim they have no thoughts of wanting the majority leadership, both would certainly scheme to get it, should the Democrats retain control of the Senate.
For the rest of us, while the super egos in Congress fight among themselves, ostensibly for our good, the “haves” will continue to be able to provide health care for themselves and their families while the “have nots” will have to wait. I wonder which group Schumer, Rockefeller, Pelosi, Reid, and the entire Republican Party feel most akin to?
| 15 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
