ObamaCare Derangement Syndrome

Representative Herseth-Sandlin made it clear that she will vote no on the Senate ObamaCare bill, and opposes passing it by reconciliation. So far I don't think that a single "no" vote in the House has switched, while several "yes" votes are wavering. Subtract the "yes" votes that are no longer in the House, and that means that Pelosi hasn't got a majority to pass the Senate bill out.

The President has pleaded for a bill by the 18^th, but now Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is now talking about sometime after Easter. There are two pieces of bad news for the Democrats in that. One is that is suggests that the Democrats don't know whether they can get this thing out of the House or not. If they can't, it will represent a humiliating defeat for the party, angering anti-ObamaCare voters, and dispiriting the left.

The other bad news is that this thing keeps dragging out. Apart from the damage that the spectacle might be doing, it is sucking up all the oxygen in Congress and the White House. Neither the President nor the leadership in either house has time to do anything else than try to find ways to bribe a few no votes to come over.

This was evident, I think, in Speaker Pelosi's appallingly bad leadership in the Rangel affair. After Rangel was admonished by the House Ethics Committee (something that takes some doing), it was the job of an effective speaker to decide whether she was 1) going to defend him or 2) remove him as chairman of the exalted Ways and Means Committee. She should only have decided on one if it was worth the costs and if she in fact had the power to keep Rangel in his post.

What she did was to defend him, making some very embarrassing comments in the process, only to have to immediately change her mind and see him go. That's disarray. Then she had to decide who to replace Rangel with. She announced on Thursday that Pete Stark would step in as a "temporary" replacement. Her allies defended this choice on grounds of seniority.

But there were obvious problems with Stark. To begin with, he is a loose cannon, with a history of saying offensive things. He has called the Blue Dog Democrats, whom Pelosi is trying to court, "brain dead." Second, Stark is from California, and the committee leadership of Congress, and especially of the committees dealing with health care, is California-heavy already.

Again Speaker Pelosi was forced to reverse herself and push forward Rep. Sandy Levin of Michigan. This is very poor leadership at a time when Pelosi needs all of her clout and power.

The best explanation of Speaker Pelosi's sudden loss of control is simply that all of her brain cells, and those of her party, are completely dedicated to passing a health care bill. The CPU is running full and hot with that one issue.

Trying to pass a fundamental piece of reform legislation in the current circumstances (an economic crisis, pronounced public opposition, a string of election losses) has driven the majority party to distraction. There is a very good reason that Americans have lost confidence in their government. It's gone funny on us.

Comments

[conservative]

I cited your blog on the front page of Conservapedia. Nice post! You can see the citation here: http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

[Tom]

I think there's another reason Americans have lost confidence in government: Republicans. I read an interesting article in Time last week that said the Republicans strategy in the 90s was to stop government from funtioning and then point out that the government wasn't working (while a Democrat was in the White House). Republicans are the anti-government party so making government not work for the people prooved successful for them.

That what I see happening now. Why are Republicans voting against all of President Obama's agenda? Even on their own ideas? Because if they can stop our government from working and then point out that it's not working because of President Obama, then they think they'll score big in November. And they're probably right.

And that makes me mad. I want my government to work and it's not working right now. I think it's a good thing that people in Congress are trying to change the filibuster. Because what if Republicans take over Congress and then the Democrats start to prevent all of their policies from happening? Are we now in an endless cycle of frozen government? Something needs to change.

[Erik]

Tom: Excellent analysis, here. I would only add that the GOP under Gingrich's leadership in the mid 90's forced a showdown and basically shut down government. It didn't really work then, and let's hope it doesn't work now.

[George Mason]

KB and Tom; The shut-down occurred because Clinton wouldn't sign the budget. Issuing a veto instead. He then signed virtually the identical bill the next week. Clinton got what he wanted and the compliant media parroted Clinton's line and blamed the Republicans. Clinton went on claim that he balanced the budget while screaming that the Republicans were cutting programs. The media and other liberals were incapable of making the connection.

[KB]

Tom: When George W. proposed partially privatizing Social Security, what did the Democrats do? Offer their own solutions to fixing the long term fiscal problems of the program? No. They adopted a simple rule: find out what Bush is doing and make him stop.

Of course the Democrats were genuinely opposed to privatizing SS. The Republicans today are genuinely opposed to socializing American health care. Let's be honest: both parties have played their part in convincing Americans that their government isn't working.

But all this isn't the reason that Americans have suddenly become worried about it. It's the $10 trillion deficit that the Obama Administration is planning on adding to the public debt over the next ten years. Maybe that has something to do with the fact that they are skeptical about a new one or two or three trillion dollar health care program.