Posted by
Patrick Henry on Thursday, February 25, 2010 10:43:58 PM
Winston Churchill once said of the British Royal Air Force during the German blitz,
"Never was so much owed by so many to so few," To parody, one might say of Barack
Obama's touted "bipartisan" healthcare reform summit, "Never have so few wasted so much
time and accomplished so little, so loudly."
Instead of a genuine attempt to bring the two sides together, Thursday's nationally
televised meeting was a Democratic attempt to badger Republicans into adopting their
misbegotten healthcare reform boondoggle or, alternatively, to embarrass them into
silence. It failed on both counts, and ended with Obama threatening to "move on without"
Republicans if they don't climb aboard quickly.
One of the defining moments in the debate occurred when Senator Lamar Alexander
(R-TN) pointed out that according to the CBO, health insurance premiums would rise
under the proposed Democratic legislation. Obama retorted that Alexander was factually
incorrect, but after a whispered message from a staffer conceded that they would go up
for many by 10-13%, BUT they would have better coverage. That, of course, begs the
question as to whether they need or even want "better" coverage at a higher out-of-pocket
cost. Rrepresentative Eric Cantor then pointed out that since under the Dem plan, the
government would be setting minimum standards of coverage for the offered policies,
taxpayers would (a) have no say over whether to be insured, since the legislation makes
it mandatory, and (b) could not opt for less coverage, i.e., "catastrophic" or high deductible
coverage. In ther words, under the Democrats' plan the government would say to Americans,
"You're going to take the coverage WE deem approrpiate and you're jolly well going to
pay more for it." The racket from the founding fathers flipping over in their graves was almost
deafening.
In another sharp exchange, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), told Obama that Americans
were soured on the process as much as the bill itslef because of the backroom deals, bribes
and kickbacks required to pass it, and because it deprived most Medicare recipients of
the popular Mediace Advantage programs while allowing those in "favored states" to retain
them. Obama's response was that "the election is over." Not only was Obama patronizing
McCain, he was scolding Americans who dislike corruption and manipulation in
government and want no part of anything that smacks of them. It was a cheap shot put
down, not an answer. But what answer did he have? It's a fact!
Cantor finally said , "Mr. President, it would be nice if everybody could have what they
wanted, but we just can't afford thi bill." The representative had reached the crux of the
matter. Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) further read a letter from the CBO showing that
Obama had double counted Medicare savings, spending them on his healthcare reform
bill and then claiming that they reduced the Medicare deficit. Grassley's argument that
the president could have it one way or the other but not both fell on deaf ears, or should
we say ears that had no wish to hear.
Post-summit polling showed little movement in public sentiment, with most favoring
dumping the Democratoc bills and starting over. Yet Obama and the Democrats made
clear their intent to move ahead with the current bill, setting aside normal Senate rules
to pass it through "reconciliation," requiring only 51 votes for passage. Whether they can
actually get away with that is unknown. Whether the House would even pass the original
Senate bill to enable it is in doubt. But if they do it -- excluding Republcans from the
process and disregarding the clear wishes of the American public -- they might as well
put a .44 magnum in their mouths (politically speaking) and pull the trigger. If it wasn't
going to be so hard to undo the awful mess they'd make, that idea actually sounds pretty
appealing.