3.19.2010

Healthcare and You Part III: Return of the Pragmatic Moderate

Having explained to you, the reader why the Healthcare Bill, in its current form should not be passed and established the case that the bill is indeed opposed by the majority of Americans for a variety of reasons, I will now give my alternative. For you see, it is easy to oppose something but it is much more difficult to present a true alternative. I also believe that if Republicans and Democrats could truly work together on a new bill it could become a harbinger of sorts of a new era in Washington. A return to the days when true statesmen created bills that really were based on compromise.

My proposal is based on the idea that most Americans are indeed themselves fiscal conservatives. Liberals point to the CBO numbers which show that the bill will actually decrease the defecit over the decade. I do agree with this. Yes it WILL decrease the defecit, but only over the decade. You see the CBO accounts for the fact that taxes for the legislation will begin flowing in sometime next year. At the same time, the benefits and entitlement programs in the bill don't kick in until three or four years later. Now it of course makes sense that if you spend three years taking money in without spending it, you would have a surplus. But this legislation is not for only the next decade, this will become the norm much like Social Security and Medicare have become. And all of the CBO numbers are based around the idea that the economy will indeed rebound very shortly and we will be back to Bush era economic numbers. Many business experts are predicting that unemployment will hover around ten percent for the next five years. Therfore I ask, can we realistically believe that Healthcare, in its present form, can actually reduce our defecit in the long run? The answer is of course no. Unless taxes go up radically, we cannot expect to cover thirty million Americans without increasing the defecit.

Therefore, I propose that this bill be scrapped. If the Democrats really want to help America, they need to come across the aisle and work with the Republicans in order to create true moderate reform. The problem is that Nancy Pelosi has created a sense of hyperpartisanship and has essentially banished the GOP out of the political process. And yes, before you tell me, I know that the Republicans did the same thing when they were in power. And I point that out as often as I can on this blog. However, to use the classic mom phrase, two wrongs never make a right. And they don't. The Democrats have the oppurtunity to truly create a historic situation: Bring back moderation. Barack Obama really could become a great president if he truly and honestly moved to the center and stayed there. The people elected him to be our leader. Not the leader of the left. And I will reiterate that the Republicans were just as guilty when Bush governed from the right. However we need a centrist now more than ever. And if President Obama is not that man, than I think that his party will be handed a defeat in November and he himself will be defeated in 2012. However if ce can indeed shift to the center, he has the oppurtunity to make his presidency truly historic and not just because of the color of his skin.

I propose that Congress pass healthcare in a series of bills, more akin to the New Deal. FDR fought the Depression not with one sweeping bill but with a series of bills. In similar fashion Congress should reform the different aspects of healthcare with individual bills that both parties can agree to. TORT reform, insurance across state lines, malpractice lawsuit reform, moderates can agree to all of these and create proposals that a true majority can embrace. Votes should not be along party lines. Only the fringe radicals like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul of the world should oppose true moderate reform, not half the country. We simply cannot continue to pass things with half the country screaming yes and the other half screaming no. This creates a toxic political atmosphere which in turn creates the very gridlock that we all are so sick of. Therefore I appeal to you the people: Let us truly establish honest compromise. Let us return to pragmatic moderation.

5 comments:

  1. I'd call the removal of the public option moderation. I am a moderate, and I definitely do not consider Obama to be "leader of the left" or anything like that. He is fairly moderate (liberal yes, but still moderate). And I believe he is pragmatic as well.

    Republicans don't want to be part of the process, they want to be the party of no at the moment. Why? It wins them support from the Tea Party in elections. This bill is not extreme, it has just been presented that way. There is no reason to scrap the bill if the other side has no good alternatives.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As I have said before, I am in no way defending the GOP. Yes, they are indeed guilty of obstruction. But let us look at the Democrats. All polls show a majority of Americans do not like this bill. Whether it is because it is too liberal or not liberal enough. Protest is indeed to be expected, but a bill should not be opposed by a majority of the electorate and be passed anyway. I really am in favor of health reform, but I do not favor such a narrow minded bill. This is what I have been getting at, this bill is far too narrow.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow Ross, you really should try to get that job in Marysville haha. I must say, you bring up a lot of pragmatic and sensible ideas here. It's obvious that in order to get anything done, everyone in Washington must work together(hello!) Oh and nice blog Ross, I will definitely be reading your posts.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really like the idea of unfolding a succession of bills instead of a single, sweeping one. What is the great aversion to this sort of solution in Washington, do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that the media has created an age of sensationalism in which we the people have grown particularly callous and indifferent to anything that isn't headline grabbing. Because of this we get angry at politicians for not taking any visible action when in reality the fact that the nation is running is a testament to their action. As a result, politicians tend to feel the need to engage in grand exhibitions of action just like the healthcare debate, in order to prove to their constituents that they are in fact acting on their (the constituents') behalf. We as citizens need to learn that sometimes the smallest actions are the most pragmatic though they may not appear that way.

    ReplyDelete