I think Republicans and Blue Dogs understand the power of “no.” But I’m afraid the progressives in Congress don’t understand it, and that’s why they’re losing the fight for health insurance reform, have sustained partial defeats on the stimulus package, and credit card reform bills, and are moving toward a partial defeat on the cap-and-trade bill.
From where I sit, the situation is a strange one, because the situation in Congress is a favorable one for progressives, if they will only grasp the leverage available to them if they would “just say no.” As we all know the Republicans are just saying no to anything offered by the Administration. And it is this that makes the situation favorable to progressives. In years gone by, Republicans mixed in their “nos” with frequent “yeses,” and it was then possible for “moderate” Republicans and centrist and even conservative Democrats to pass legislation over the objections of progressives. But now the Republicans’ determination to say “no” on everything prevents them from joining with blue dogs to run things, unless progressives play into their hands by compromising with themselves and the blue dogs, which, of course, is what they have been doing, thus far, giving Republicans influence over policy disproportionate to their numbers in Congress.
The power potential of progressives in Congress is not hard to see if we think about who most needs legislation passed to survive politically. Progressives are mostly safe from defeat because they’ve been elected in districts where Democrats won in the last election by more than 10 points. Republicans are safe because they’ve lost almost all the swing districts they’re going to lose, without a total collapse of the Party. Blue dogs are generally not safe because they represent swing districts or swing states, and have frequently been elected by a margin of less than 10 percent. Finally, the President is not safe because he was elected by a margin smaller than 10 percent and, in addition, support for the President can be very volatile compared to support for many in Congress in safe districts, because the country is in a period of transition between political parties.
So, who most needs health insurance reform to be passed in order to be re-elected? The President and the blue dogs, but not the progressives and the Republicans. And that means that the progressives and the Republicans have the greatest freedom to just say no without jeopardizing their political survival. Now that’s interesting because 1) the Republicans have been using their freedom to just say no to anything the Democrats propose, and 2) the progressives have not been doing that to anything that the blue dogs and the President have proposed. But why is this the case?
Perhaps it’s because the progressives care so much about real health insurance reform that they are not daring to just say no for fear that no health insurance reform at all will pass, and we will still be in the situation where 20,000 people per year are dying and one million are going bankrupt because they don’t have access to health insurance. I think that’s what is going on in the minds of progressives, and that the blue dogs and Obama are “guilting” the progressives into compromising with themselves, by reminding them that they very much want a reform bill to be passed, while also telling them that the President and the blue dogs will not accept a bill that the progressives want, so if the progressives really want to pass a bill, they have to pass one on the terms of the blue dogs and Obama (which, unfortunately, are not very attractive to progressives). In fact, the President and his minions are even rubbing in the progressives’ faces by letting it be known that they can’t imagine the progressives voting against any health insurance reform bill, if, without their votes, that bill would fail.
However, the truth is that Obama and the blue dogs are in a very bad position to play this kind of politics with the progressives, simply because they are the ones who really need something they can spin as a health insurance reform bill to survive the 2010 and 2012 elections., and the progressives are the ones who are necessary to pass such a bill, since the Republicans will not cooperate at all, and the Democrats can’t pass anything without progressive support. In short, the blue dogs and Obama are bluffing in their opposition to either a Medicare for All, or a strong public option bill similar to Jacob Hacker’s original proposal.
No doubt they would prefer not to pass such a bill, because in their infinite wisdom, they believe that that kind of health insurance reform would be more risky for their re-election chances than the kind of wimpy bail-out for the insurance companies change they are planning for us. However, progressives know that they are wrong about this, and that what they really need is a game-changing bill that will make people grateful to them for a generation. And we also ought to know that if we give them a choice of voting for, or supporting, a good bill, or having no bill at all, because progressives won’t vote for the faint-hearted horror they want to foist on the American people, they will, no doubt grudgingly, but, in the end, definitely, vote for the good bill, simply because it is they, and not the progressives, who are going down if there is no bill at all.
So, what progressive need to do now is to recognize that they have the power to say no, and no, no again, until they get the blue dogs and the Administration to support the bill that the progressives want, because the Republicans will never support any health insurance reform bill, whatever the Democrats do and so the progressives have a key advantage the Republicans don’t, namely that they can happily support a reform bill provided that it is a real reform, and not just an exercise in kabuki. Compromise on health insurance reform with the progressives is a possibility for the Administration and the blue dogs. But compromise with the Republicans is not.
So, what the progressives need to do is to recognize the real power situation, gather their courage, and “stick it to ’em” by just saying no, and insisting first, on HR 676, and only, if necessary later in conference committee, on a very strong, Jacob Hacker-type PO bill. That will be better for the American people, better for the progressives, better for the President, and even better for the blue dogs.
(Also posted at firedoglake.com where there may be more comments)