home

When The Health Care Reform Battle Was Lost: The Baucus Stall

The moment is easy to spot - when Democrats allowed Max Baucus to delay delivery of the Finance Committee proposal in July.

Prior to that, President Obama had said earlier in July:

President Obama: Well, here's what I've said. We cannot delay any longer. [. . .] I think it was telling that some of you may have seen. A Republican Senator saying this weekend saying. "we're just going to delay and delay because if we can stop Obama on this, this is going to be his Waterloo. We'll break him." [. . ]. We are working as hard as we can and I've told Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that it is critical that we see serious forward motion before people leave [for August recess.]

When Democrats allowed the Baucus stall, they effectively took reconciliation off the table, even though Obama said in July:

President Obama: Keep in mind that the way we had structured the reconciliation issue several months ago, we moved forward on the basis of the assumption that we can get a bill through the regular order and the regular process by October. If I think that that is not possible, then we are going to look at all of our options, including reconciliation. [. . .] And I remain confident that we can pass a bill in the absence of reconciliation. But I do think that the bottom line for me is give the American people a serious reform package that lowers costs, increases choices, covers Americans, improves quality, changes our delivery system in a way that's rational and makes our healthcare system a lot smarter and efficient than it is right now. And I think that's achievable and I continue to believe that there are enough people of good faith who want to see that happen that we're going to get it done through the regular process.

(Emphasis supplied.) Of course, at the same time, the Village Blogs were selling the idea that there was no need to worry what came out of the Senate because it would be "fixed" in conference:

[T]his is the clearest indication we've gotten that the White House sees conference committee as the focal point for its efforts. But that's the message. The audience for this call -- which I was not originally invited to, but was able to listen in on -- was mainly progressive bloggers, and so the underlying argument was that liberals should have some faith that a disappointing draft out of the Senate Finance Committee is not the end of the process, and they should not lose heart.

Most of us scoffed at that, and unfortunately, have been proven right. In hindsight, it is easy to see where the battle was lost - the day Democrats agreed to Baucus' delay in July. Any hope of getting a good bill through regular order evaporated once reconciliation was de facto taken off the table. And the reason why is the White House wanted a bill by Christmas - so that it could be trumpeted in the January 2010 State of the Union Address.

Once the July date slipped, the leverage was gone. Because getting a bill through reconciliation in time for the State of the Union was not possible after that date.

Was this done with the approbation and direction of the White House? We'll never know and it does not really matter. What is clear is that the Obama Administration and the Democrats in the Congress have failed on health care reform. Not because of the numbers. Because of a failure, intentional or not, to use the proper strategy for getting a good bill.

Speaking for me only

< Now It's Ben Nelson's Turn | What Was The Important Part Of The "Reform" In The Health Care Reform Proposals? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Any "hope" of a "good bill" (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Andy08 on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 08:58:04 AM EST
    could have hardly existed without any leadership from the WH on the subject. Their "laisser faire" approach; folding their arms and leaving it all to Reid&Pelosi's Congress was doomed to produce a monstrosity. Whatever bill they'll sign now I fear will end up being a nightmare for millions of americans and for what will be highly debatable....

    typo meant "laissez faire" (none / 0) (#3)
    by Andy08 on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 08:59:13 AM EST
    When you say 'we can't delay any longer' and then (none / 0) (#1)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 08:31:16 AM EST
    accept a delay, you have put yourself on a level with the incompetent middle manager everyone can identify at their own jobs. Dilbert's boss.

    Also true when you say you think a Public Option (any public option at this point) is the best way to keep costs down, but it is not essential.

    I like Obama personally. But I have no respect for him as a leader.