Health Care Debate--1993 Redux

Okay, Politics fans, let's see how many parallels we can draw between 1993-1994 and 2009-2010. Ready, set, go!

1. A popular, young President is elected on the back of a message of change and hope.

2. His message resonates during a time of economic recession, against an aging veteran/war hero who just can't believe that the country would elect someone like his opponent.

3. With a mandate of voters in hand, the new President pushes for sweeping changes in government spending, with no bi-partisan support.

4. The new President pushes for the holy grail of politics--Health Care reform--only to finally be rebuffed as having "pushed too far" to the left for the country to accept.

5. The mid-term elections, (often won by the party out of power, due to the lax attention paid by the majority, and the fervent support of the minority party), undo the Democratic Majorities in both Congress and the Senate, where Republican leadership takes hold for over a decade.

Okay, the last two haven't happened quite yet, but point #4 is soon to arrive. Odds have dropped on getting a health plan passed at all, to about 50% (and I'm being generous at that!)

The interesting thing about this is that, despite the 2010 elections being 15 months off, the Democratic losses may already be a fait accompli. Why? That's simple.

Demographics--The whole concept of a "blue dog" democrat is kind of silly, when you think about it. What Republican would vote for a "Republican lite" Democrat, when they could have the real thing? I'd make the same point for Republicans. Lincoln Chafee and Gordon Smith are two perfect examples of good Republican Senators who lost their elections because a lot of Democrats said, "hey, I like Chafee, but I don't want Mitch McConnell running things in the Senate." Republicans were disgusted with his voting record because it was too liberal for their tastes. In the end, losing on health care, but "standing up for their blue-dog conservative values" will not help any of these guys get re-elected. Their liberal constituencies in these districts will desert them, and the conservatives in their districts will vote for the conservative candidate, hoping to get Nancy Pelosi out of power. It may not be enough to flip the House into Republican hands in 2010, but it will certainly be close.

Political savvy--The smart thing for the Blue Dogs, the Ben Nelsons, the Evan Bayh, Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln group of Senators to do on health care, is get something passed this year. If they delay, and take their time, and pass nothing, they are all in trouble. Bayh can kiss his seat goodbye. Lincoln will finally get some opposition. And Nelson will also face trouble in 2012. For the same reason as I noted earlier, these people will lose the support of the left, and the right will smell blood, and put up their own candidates to take these seats. There is one saving grace...

Economic Recovery--It's funny how people are less riled up when they all have jobs. Inflation will be a worry in the near future, should the economy turn around. However, a good economy is what saved Bill Clinton in 1996 (that, and a poor showing from Bob Dole). It could very well save enough of the Senators and Congressmen and women to keep Democratic Majorities in the Congress. But Republicans know how to win elections, and messaging has never been the problem (until recently, anyway).

(lack of) Courage--the Republican party is excited that they are finally able to recruit some better candidates and get some money in the coffers? Why? It's easier to run against a face of opposition, rather than hang onto a majority. Also,the Dems have controlled the debate, which means that the people who were used to their issues getting attention for 8 years, are particularly upset about having to deal with the "other guy's" issues for the past year or so. That's normal.

But the Dems are showing a surprising lack of courage in their approach to health care. It's almost incomprehensible that the votes for such a reform as health care wouldn't have been counted before pushing ahead with a "public option" platform. But it's clear that the Kent Conrads and others are not going to move forward with such a plan. Therefore, any good Republican candidate should be able to put their Democratic opponent on the ropes over this issue again and again. It won't work in places like Massachusetts or New York, but it will change the House representation in Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina, and other places where Democrats have made inroads into Republican territory.

So we will have to watch and see how the upcoming failure of Health Care changes Congress's appetite for tackling big issues. Obama's Waterloo may be just around the corner. But most Presidents face about 5 "Waterloo's" in their terms, and we'll soon see just what the new face of the Republican party looks like. Is it Sarah Palin, and her "death panel" postings that turned the tide? She may make that case to enough people, that her stature climbs significantly in the upcoming months.

Let's see how the health care debate plays out. Much more to come...