House passes health-care reform
Story by Chris Graham
freepress2@ntelos.net
The House of Representatives voted Sunday night to pass a health-care reform bill mirroring legislation that had passed the Senate in December. Democrats were able to muster a 219-212 majority to pass the legislation, which will extend coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans, expand prescription drug coverage under Medicare, increase federal subsidies to help people buy insurance and ban denials of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
Fifth District Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello voted in favor of the legislation after publicly wavering on the issue in recent weeks.
“At the end of the day, this decision for me came down to whether working families would see savings at the kitchen table. They will. I asked whether seniors will see the Medicare Trust Fund extended and the cost of prescription drugs drop. They will. As I have heard from our major hospitals that endorsed the bill, this legislation will improve health care and bring down costs for Virginians,” Perriello said in a statement.
Perriello had said late last week that he would only vote for the bill if there was written assurance from a majority of the Senate that they would follow through on changes in the legislation including removal of items like the Cornhusker Kickback that had been inserted to gain the support of key Democrats in the Senate in the fall.
“For more than a century, our leaders have promised affordable universal health care to all Americans. Today we delivered that result in a way that our local hospitals say will improve quality and reduce costs for patients,” Perriello said. “Middle-class families will save $1,000 to $2,000 per year, and small business owners will see the cost of covering their workers drop. This bill will help our rural hospitals and clinics keep their doors open, improve health care for over 400,000 local residents, reduce the federal deficit, and provide coverage to 48,000 more individuals in the Fifth District alone – more than the population of Danville.”
Sixth District Republican Congressman Bob Goodlatte voted against the bill, which passed without a single Republican vote.
“With complete and total disregard for the will of the American people, House Democrats pushed through their health care legislation, which is defined by federal regulations, mandates, a myriad of new big government programs, and a significant increase in federal spending and debt at a cost to our country too high to bear. This legislation, which I voted against, gives Washington bureaucrats ultimate control over what is best for you and your family – deciding when and what treatment you can receive,” Goodlatte said in a statement.
Big political win for Nancy Pelosi. Even a couple of weeks ago, health care reform seemed dead in the water. And then somehow Pelosi gets Bart Stupak and Dennis Kucinich on the same team. LBJ would be proud.
Obviously Barack Obama comes out a winner. He has done something that Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon and two Roosevelts couldn’t do. That’s four pretty effective politicians there, and Obama outflanked them all at a time of heightened political parity, even for American politics.
Still seven months until Election Day. My friend Quentin Kidd, a political-science professor at Christopher Newport University, told me back in the fall that Democrats would attempt to pivot from health care to a hot-button issue aimed at putting Republicans on the defensive, and predicted that the issue would be immigration.
Notice how there was a big immigration rally in Washington this weekend?
Quentin knows what he’s talking about, one. As for the two, will it work – stay tuned. But I’d expect that we’d be on issue two or three or even four past health care by November.
I don’t have a crystal ball or claim to be any smarter at politics than the average bear, but I’ve always thought Democrats would have a better shot in November with health-care reform as an accomplishment rather than having a failed effort in their recent past a la 1994.
My best guess at this point is that Democrats lose 25-30 seats in the House and 5-7 seats in the Senate, maintaining slim majorities in both that are actually less ideologically diverse than the majorities in place right now, because the losses will kill off many of the Blue Dogs in both chambers.
If that scenario comes to pass, you may see Democrats have an easier go at getting legislation passed in 2011 and 2012 than they’ve had in 2009 and 2010.
Chris,
I posted the following on another local blog yesterday before the House votes. With it in mind, I wonder what your thoughts might generally be on any Republican efforts to run in 2010/2012 on an appeal-health-care platform and specifically whether our congressman would venture to do so.
“In our congressional district (VA 6) roughly 14.9 percent of the population under the age of 65 is uninsured. Which of you, standing up and using your real name, will tomorrow tell that portion of these 84,477 individuals (Source: American Community Survey 2008, US Bureau of the Census, September 2009) that receives health insurance as a result of this legislation that you want to take it away?
Do you think Congressman Goodlatte will be willing to do that?”
Wow, repeal? OK, I see it. That would be a logical extension of the position of Republicans in this debate.
I can’t say that I’d recommend that any of them actually go forward with running on a repeal platform, but maybe they’ve backed themselves into that corner.
The problem from a policy perspective is that the earliest they could repeal anything would be 2013, assuming even then that Republicans have the votes to take majority control of both houses of Congress and then win back the White House.
And I’m not assuming that they win a majority in either house in 2010 or 2012. Or that Obama falls short in his re-election bid. I expect the congressional races to be tight this November, but the slimmer majority for Democrats in Congress will be more effective with the losses I expect to come that will eliminate most of the Blue Dogs from the party caucuses.
I then expect leaner but meaner Democratic majorities to be much more effective in 2011 and 2012, setting the stage for solid wins in November 2012 for Democrats.
Back to our hypothetical: By 2013, we’re three-plus years into the reform era. That seems too late to change course, at least to do so in any kind of responsible manner.
Running as health-care reform repealers is the easiest way for Republicans to figure out what happened way back when to the Whigs.