Republicans missed an opportunity to take control of the health care debate and shape their own electoral futures. As a result, they are like a bad team limping toward the post-season, relying on the losses of others. A better option would have been to attack the big bill and offer their own, incremental, alternatives.
Several weeks ago I wrote that “yes” is the only rational vote for Democrats on health care reform. If the bill fails Democrats – all Democrats – will be punished because the Party failed to deal with an issue important to the American people and because the Party proved that even with strong majorities and a popular President it couldn’t get anything done. If the bill passes, all Democrats will have to defend it. As such the best option for Democrats is to vote for the bill and promote the bejeebers out of it, talk about the need to keep making a good bill better, and change the conversation to jobs.
Like Democrats, Republicans are relying on hope. They are handing a small child a hammer and a Coke in a Pottery Barn and are shouting “you break it, you bought it” at the kids’ parents. If the health care bill fails to pass, Republicans can tell the American people “I told you they were incompetent , vote for us” and if it passes the Republicans will do all they can to stall implementation and muck up the process so that they can say “I told you they were incompetent, vote for us.” The problems with this strategy, as a number of observers have noted , are that the bill will likely pass and may not be unpopular (and might even be a success) and there is no reason to vote for Republicans. Attacking Democrats gives voters a reason to hate Democrats – but not a reason to like Republicans. It also further damages our political system. Running against Washington on a platform of hate and anger makes everyone hate politicians and angry at Washington; that’s not good for deliberative Democracy.
A better option would have been to mix the attacks of the large bill (attacks on legislation because of page-length is a whole other subject) and to offer smaller solutions. For example, Republicans could have introduced a bill a week starting in September, each focusing on element of the larger legislation on which there is agreement such as removing the anti-trust exemption, allowing people to buy health insurance across state lines, preventing insurers from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, and so forth. This would have forced Democrats to block votes on the individual measures in order to keep the whole bill together. If the bill doesn’t pass they still win, if it passes and is popular they can say they made it better, and if passes but is unpopular Republicans can say it’s because of all the other gunk the Democrats insisted on. Hoping for the failure of others isn’t a good way to run, govern (or live).
