The Party of ?No, But Here?s A Better Idea?

Since the election of President Obama, the Democrats have been very effective at portraying the Republican Party as the ?Party of No.? Depending on your political persuasion, this could be completely true, completely false or somewhere in the middle.

In the last couple of weeks, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has been hammered by Erick Erickson of RedState and Michelle Malkin for not fighting to the very finish on the recent Senate passage of a health care reform bill. On the one hand, these criticisms are of delaying tactics would only have slowed the vote by twelve hours, which would have done nothing in the halls of Congress but would have, as Ed Morrissey points out, given the media less time to cover the vote?s aftermath. On the other hand, if the Republican leadership had held firm on the many opportunities they had to slow things down, for example by following Senator Judd Gregg?s (R-NH) advice, and Senator Tom Coburn?s (R-OK) wish to read every part of the Senate bill, among other tactics to slow the bill, senators would have had to go home for Christmas a) without a bill, and b) to face their constituents, the majority of whom dislike the Democratic versions of health care reform and whom are increasingly against them as time goes on.

Senators Gregg, Coburn and Jim DeMint (R-SC), among many others, have been vilified for their articulate and unyielding opposition to health care reform and other Democratic measures. However, they are also the poster children for what Republicans should be about- namely, being the party of ?No, But Here?s A Better Idea.? All of these senators, along with other Republicans, have jammed the Democrats but also offered their own solutions to the various issues facing America. They have also worked with Democrats in a bipartisan fashion on a case-by-case basis.

When it comes to dispelling the myth that Republicans have been, and are being, merely obstructionists, let’s start with Senator Judd Gregg. On the one hand, Gregg voted for Secretary Geithner?s nomination, nearly accepted a position as President Obama?s Commerce Secretary, offered support for the bipartisan Wyden-Bennett bill and has worked with Democrat Kent Conrad (D-ND) on a debt commission. On the other, Gregg has hammered Obama on debt, passed around a virtual handbook for Republican obstructionism and taken the lead on opposing Democratic reconciliation. Additionally, however, Gregg has offered his own bill as an alternative to the Democratic proposals.

Senator DeMint is probably most famous for his Waterloo statement and his numerous delaying tactics on health care reform (see here and here for examples). However, he has also worked with self-declared socialist Independent Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on halting the Bernanke nomination and bringing transparency to the Federal Reserve. As a representative of the Party of ?No, but here?s a better idea,? he too has put forth a health care alternative to the Democratic proposals.

Lastly, we have Senator Coburn. Coburn has slid in two gun amendments this year to two Democrat-supported bills, halting the DC voting bill in its tracks. He has also held up funding for veterans because he wanted to use unused stimulus funds for the benefits and loudly opposed the stimulus package. He also forced a reading of Senator Sanders? single-payer amendment to the Democratic bill. However, at the same time, he has maintained a friendship with President Obama, pushed a transparency bill with then-Senator Obama (D-IL) into law in 2006 and sponsored a Republican alternative to the Democratic health care bills on, of all places, Huffington Post. In fact, he wrote on Huffington Post not once but twice. This is a guy who clearly wants his message to get out to all Americans, not just his constituents or fellow conservatives.

Other ?No but here?s a better idea? Republicans include Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI), the numerous Republican co-sponsors of the Wyden-Bennett bill and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

The fact is that Republicans are trying to stop a very bad makeover of a massive portion of America in ways that swing from bad policy to unethical to unconstitutional. For an example of the latter, with respect to David Frum?s recent piece supporting the individual mandate?s constitutionality, he is wrong- an individual mandate is clearly unconstitutional. Other bad components include the Senate bill’s abortion funding, the House bill’s public option and the lack of legitimate tort reform in either bill.

Personally, I think Republicans should have fought tooth-and-nail for a post-Christmas vote on the Democratic health care reform bill in the Senate. They should have offered amendments, yes, as Frum has said- but they have a responsibility to stop the bill first and foremost. That is what the minority is supposed to do with a bill as bad as this one, with as little power as Republicans and conservatives have right now- stop the legislation cold and start over with a bill that includes conservative and free market principles and ideas. Some Republicans are just being the Party of No, but sometimes saying?saying?’no’ is necessary, despite what some Democrats may say.

Health Care Officially Passes Senate

It passed on a party-line vote, too. However, do not despair yet:

1. The White House is outright lying about President Obama’s campaigning on the public option. Desperation?

2. According to Politico, the White House is admitting negotiations over the bill may go past the State of the Union address in late January or very early February. Given that there have been multiple passed deadlines already, and primary season hits full stride in May, will vulnerable Democrats like Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) be willing to pass this monstrosity in the final vote? Their constituents will be (and are) paying attention, and 2010 is going to be a Republican year anyway, so conservative Democrats are going to continue to be very careful.

3. Democrats in the House have felt ignored and trampled for much of the health care debate, and The Heritage Foundation has compiled a number of issues the House and Senate will have to overcome to get a final bill passed. Question: will the House be willing to cave? That verdict is uncertain.

4. Politically influential conservatives, liberals and moderates are against the Senate bill. Polls show Americans are increasingly against the so-called “ObamaCare” version of health care reform. Again, will vulnerable Democrats risk voting for the bill?

5. The designed-to-be-a-pain federal legislation process is in America’s favor.

It’s Christmas- let’s enjoy the day, thank God for sending us His son and enjoy our time with family and friends. Let’s also pray for the guidance and ability to prevent this bill from gravely harming Americans by not letting it pass.

Government Pays More Health Care Than Private Industry

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service has released information showing that government spends more on health care than the private sector. While this should come as no surprise- the vast majority of health care costs are borne in the last months to years of life, after all, and that is what Medicare is for-? Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) is taking full advantage of the information to once again show how government is the problem in health care spending.

RightSideNews.com, where I found the above information at, also compares a number of government health care negatives not as well-known as they should be. Take a look at the first link’s comparative information- it’s kind of interesting when contrasting Medicare with the private sector.

P.S. Coburn is also causing problems with Democrats in Congress- many of whom are backing his amendment for all Members of Congress to join a public option if it’s legalized. Kudos to those Democrats who have so far volunteered to join the public option if it passes, and support the Coburn amendment. I disagree with their public option support, but respect their putting their money and health care where their mouths are.

No Ma’am-o-grams.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, which is described as:

An independent panel of experts in primary care and prevention that systematically reviews the evidence of effectiveness and develops recommendations for clinical
preventive services.

has released findings discouraging women between the ages of 40-49?years ?from getting annual, or even biennial,?mammograms.? The ‘expert panel’ (which does NOT include a single oncologist) reversed their original recommendation because they figured that the mammograms were just costing too much and saving too little.?

“With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them,” Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society.

Get ready folks, this is what we have to look forward to when the government becomes increasingly involved in health “care”.? Interestingly enough, one of the prime arguments about the cost of health care is the fact that there is not enough preventative care for people, or preventative steps?carried out by people, in an effort to keep more drastic and costly ailments from occurring.? This is undoubtedly a step toward government “suggested” rationing, which will become “mandatory” for people who end up signing up for the government run “public” option should we continue down this present course thanks to our legislators.?

-rj

Senator Reid Is Going To Bite The Dust- Again

You saw it here first (or second, or third (twelfth?)- the point is, you saw it here). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is going to lose on the public option, and it’s going to crush health care reform, his ability to effectively lead the Democratic caucus and possibly his already-tough reelection. Here’s what’s going on:

On October 21, a delayed cloture vote on the so-called “Doc Fix” failed miserably in the Senate. Watching the vote happen with trepidation, I was very pleased that the vote went against the bill, which the CBO estimated would have cost over $240 billion?for the next?ten years. The vote was 47 in favor and 51 against, something of a surprise given Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) expectations of a victory in the vote. As David Frum and The Heritage Foundation explained, Democrats wanted to pass the bill outside of the final health care bill because doing so would?allow the a deficit-neutral bill to pass without noting the cost of the “Doc Fix” in the final legislation.?After the vote, it became clear that the most likely method of including the “Doc Fix” in this year’s health care bill would be to put it in the final bill, adding $247 (or so) billion to the final cost of the bill (or some variation thereof).

Normally, this wouldn’t be a huge blow to Reid- after all, losses happen all the time in Congress. However, he delayed the vote at least once (it was originally supposed to be held on October 19), and by putting?up and losing out on the?cloture vote, it’s becomes clear Reid was blindsided. Embarrassingly, just before the vote, Reid blamed the AMA for misleading him, which is a very unseemly way to act as a leader.

Now Reid is claiming he has the votes to pass the public option. Or, as is also claimed, he has the votes to pass the procedural step of getting the 60 votes necessary to move it forward, before only getting the required 51 to push the final bill through. To me, this smacks of desperation, making the claim so soon after the major loss regarding the “Doc Fix,” where he also thought he had the votes. Remember, too, that numerous Democrats have claimed opposition to the public option, and so has Republican Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), possibly the only Republican who will support a final Democratic health reform bill.

In the end, I suspect Reid will end up looking as bad as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) did after miscalculating the first House bailout vote last fall. Boehner barely held onto his leadership slot, but given the criticism of Reid offered by the influential Daily Kos (see here, for example) and other popular liberal voices in and out of Washington- in addition to the support for the public option by Senators such as Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Charles Schumer (D-NY)- I think Reid is setting himself up for a huge loss in leadership support.

In short, the public option will probably not make it into the final Senate bill, showing Reid’s inability to lead his caucus, costing him support from Senator Roland Burris’ (D-IL) and other Democrats for the final bill. This will shut down health reform, showing his caucus it may be time for “change” within the party leadership and also setting up a race in Nevada where Reid’s constituents may very well decide it’s time for “change” to come to Washington from their state.

No Public Option, Be Wary The Ides of September

With the Congressional recess coming to a close it was further reported last night that the Obama Administration would not seek a public option.? Obama may be looking to save his campaign promises for health care reform by coming to terms with what the outspoken nation deems inappropriate.? But I must say, be wary of this tactic, it has been used before.? Magicians use it.? They call it slight of hand.

It stands to reason that exiting the recess, bold, and highly visible claims of back tracking could easily lead to less public attention of a bill that would include a revised or partial public option.? The next several weeks and months will be a key time to zone in, not to zone out based on these initial claims.

Be aware as well that as Congress boots back up, the Al Gore Business Plan cap and trade legislation will also be entering the Senate.? This is another bill to keep a watchful eye on in the Fall season.

-nick

Public Option Dead, Obama Administration A Failure?

The AP is reporting that the Obama Administration has decided today to scrap the Public Option in health care reform.

Government provided health care was central to his candidacy.? One has to now wonder if the administration is in someway ultimately considered a failure if the central policy of his platform has crumbled before our eyes.

If Obama fails in this key component of his platform would you consider his administration a failure?

-nick