The networks and cable news channels won't do it. But somebody ought to remind everyone of the meaning of and the rightful place of "compromise" in the political setting.
This weekend the US Senate has apparently reached a compromise on the health care bill that is claimed to be backed up by 60 Democratic votes. We'll see. The actual votes are scheduled later today and in the coming days.
But even if the Senate bill passes, we are a long way from final legislation getting signed by the president. The Senate compromise contains provisions that liberal House Dems had previously said would be deal breakers. So there is still some compromising to occur if agreement is to be reached.
And if those who are commenting are accurate and honest then the chasm still to be bridged is quite wide. Several important votes on opposite sides of the debate have declared that they will not move beyond certain specific lines drawn in the sand. And the "No Man's Land" appears large.
So, do people on both sides prefer no bill to one that violates whatever mandate they've declared must be met? Perhaps. They seem to act as if a "no decision" is a valid fall-back position if they can't round up enough votes to support their preferred position. Such thinking, however, seems to me to be faulty. Keeping the status quo in the absence of a bill is not a "no decision". It is a conscious action to allow current unencumbered powers to proceed as they wish. Costs will rise without the benefit of extending coverage. Insurance companies will feel empowered to act with impunity. (After all, if they were not suppose to protect their own interests and profits then Congress would have passed something addressing the question, right?)
It reminds me of football teams that play a weak zone defense. They are fine as long as the other team runs pass plays where they have adequate coverage. But the other teams don't play fair, do they? No, they run the play to the "seam" of the zone coverage. They throw the pass to right where the zone defenders each think his neighboring partner defender will take over.
But, back to the health care debate. I hope a compromise does get worked out. A compromise bill, even if called a "bad bill" by extremists on both ends of the debate, would represent an improvement over the status quo. Take what the defense gives you. Kick your field goal and wait for a later opportunity to sneak in a touchdown. That's my game plan.
4 comments:
Thanks for visiting and following my blog. I always enjoy connecting with new people.
It took a while, but some compromise has now been reported. The White House and major labor unions have reportedly reached some agreement on the amount of and timing of the tax on "Cadillac" health plans offered by these unions (among others). I have mixed feelings about the wisdom of this, borne in part by my ignorance on the specifics of this part of the issue. Had unions known these health insurance plans they negotiated with their employer would eventually be taxed more heavily they likely would have stuck with seeking contracts that did not include them as heavily. (They would have sought higher pay raises in stead.) But how this particular compromise works out we don't yet have full details to evaluate. Nevertheless, I stand by my original thesis that compromise is necessary and tends to be better than no compromise.
Now that Brown won the MA "Kennedy" Senate seat, it will be interesting to see if Democrats are able to compromise among themselves in such a way as to pass health care reform without Republicans blocking it.
My advice: Go with Lou Saban's advice and take "half a loaf". It's better than none. And to add in another random euphemism it "kicks the can" down the road.
Dennis, excellent and beautiful logic on this point: "They seem to act as if a "no decision" is a valid fall-back position if they can't round up enough votes to support their preferred position. Such thinking, however, seems to me to be faulty. Keeping the status quo in the absence of a bill is not a "no decision". It is a conscious action to allow current unencumbered powers to proceed as they wish."
Post a Comment