« | Main | A bad bill as political laxative for US health care »

December 17, 2009


Paul Lukasiak

your conclusion is based on the assumption that nothing good can come out of not passing a bill at this point. I dispute that assumption.
if we pass nothing, we maintain the option of trying again in the near future. The public demand for change will still exist, and the biggest impediment to effective change will be the 'optics' -- Democrats will have to somehow convince the electorate that it was GOP obstructionism that defeated the bill, and make a 2010 midterms a referendum on health care reform, laying out a clear, detailed, and unequivocal platform for health care reform that they promise to pass in 2011.
But if this bill passes, all the steam goes out of the demand for health care reform -- especially since the provisions of the bill don't really go into effect until 2013 -- Dems and Obama will wind up campaigning on their "success" with the GOP able to campaign against what is a truly horrible bill. The best outcome of a "bad" bill is the status quo for at least 5-6 years, the most likely outcome is that the GOP is empowered to strip the most crucial parts of the bill from it prior to 2013 (the subsidies) leaving a complete mess that benefits no one but the health insurers and big Pharma.


If the bill fails, the Beltway CW will be that the Obama health reform effort has been "Clintoned", and it will be touted as the second Democratic health reform failure there is. In 2010, the Republicans will use this clown show as evidence for the incompetence of Democrats to handle the issue. If they win, you will see tort reform on the agenda in 2011. The Democrats will not campaign on blaming the Republicans for the failure of the effort, as that would be absurd, as the Republicans do not have the votes to block anything at this point.

The Democrats will not campaign on health reform at all in 2010, if no bill is passed now. It will have become poison. You are dreaming in technicolor if you think that defeating a bad bill will somehow punish the Democrats into behaving in a way you like. Progressives will be blamed and cast out.

And if the bill fails but the Democrats are still able to hold onto Congress in 2010, you can bet that they won't have it on the agenda in 2010. You will have to wait at least until 2013 or 2014 for the issue to return in any sense. At that point, the agenda will be attempting to return to the 2009 status quo from whatever further degeneration has occurred by 2013.

Passing a bill makes it seem as though it were possible to pass a bill, where once it was thought impossible.


Once the news of the individual mandates sinks into the public's mind, the Dems will pay at the ballot box, which is what Rahm Emanuel and the WH is trying to avoid by throwing away the public option, the Medicare buy in, and all the contortions made in order to get any bill passed, no matter how bad. How fatally flawed is the thinking here.


Actually, I hope the bill does pass for one reason. The consequences to the public stemming from it may at last mobilize an angry citizenry to raze the entire structure and form a new one.




Yeah, see, I knew you'd be excited.


You're right. Health is insurance. But we have to extra cautious too.
Rob@Insurance Agent Forum

The comments to this entry are closed.