The more I think about the power over health care reform that has been handed to the "Gang of Six" on the Senate Finance Committee, the more enraged I become. They are such a non-representative group -- not only in the minuscule portion of the population they represent, but in their starting views on reform. With them, the public option was dead from the beginning.
Three of the six are Republicans; count them out for any meaningful reform. And Baucus and Conrad oppose it -- Baucus supposedly because he says the votes aren't there for it, but Conrad has been very vocal against it as an idea.
So why have the Senate leadership and the White House given them the make-or-break power, when there is another Senate bill and three House bills already passed that include a public plan?
I retract my suspicion that Obama himself is influenced by money from the health corporations. But, just as much of an obstacle, I think he feels obligated to them because of the agreement they forged in secret to get their cooperation. Is there still some further secret "understanding" between them that we don't know? Like his promising not to go all out to push the public plan?
This tendency to get consensus and bipartisanship, rather than using the political capital the election gave him, may prove to be his biggest flaw as president. We excoriated the bush administration for letting the ends justify any means. It looks like Obama's fault is the exact opposite: letting the means justify (or at least determine) the ends.
Yes, politics is the "art of the possible," but Obama seems to be stopping short of what's possible.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
On the other hand: if Obama had been able to pull off health care reform with the support of at least some Republicans AND some of the health care industry itself -- what a coup that would have been.
ReplyDeleteAnd we would be talking about his political genius instead of a flaw.