I've got this one figured out. Everyone but me is asking why Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won't push through health care reform now. I know why. It's a painful truth that smacks of prejudice, but it's not a smear against Senator Reid or the group to which he belongs and about which I am going to generalize. It's just the way he is, because...
Harry Reid is a Mormon! He is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Adherents to that uniquely American faith have a strong tradition of cooperative, group action. They, more than any other group I can identify, have a deep and sincere trust in their community. Growing up in this trusting, nurturing environment, they instinctively gravitate toward group consensus. Their culture is one where individual action, that is, striking out on one's own as a result of personal conviction, is almost unheard of.
I've met some non-Mormons who have had extensive exposure to large groups of Mormons, such as by living in Utah, who decry this "hive mentality" as if it were a horrible psychological defect. I don't agree at all. From my experience with Mormons, this way of thinking works very, very well most of the time. Mormons generally are good workers and very conscientious. They are nice. They get along with everyone. They don't smoke or drink coffee, so they don't waste time with breaks. They don't drink alcohol, so they don't come in late or hung over. In fact, every Mormon I've ever worked with has liked to come in as early as possible. They are incredibly straight-laced; I've never met one who shows any evidence of ever having seen pornography, let alone become obsessed with it. They're all business, working from early morning straight through to lunch, which they like to wash down with a large glass of milk, then all afternoon until the whistle blows, when they scurry home to a family dinner with their homemaker wife and a brood that resembles the bench of a sports team. I know these are all stereotypes, but think about it! Of all the Mormons you've ever met, how many of them fit that stereotype to a "T"? Yep. In general, that's the way they are.
As benign and wholesome as this characterization is, there are some aspects of Mormon character that rankle those of us outside the fold. There is a certain aggravating blandness that becomes apparent only when a little passion and verve are called for. At its worst, the congenial pursuit of consensus results in meandering "group think", which can lead to paralysis and inaction when the proper course of action is not apparent. I'm absolutely convinced that Mormons love to waste more time in meetings agonizing over what to do than non-Mormons. I've seen it first hand. If your boss is a Mormon, be prepared to spend a lot of time in meetings. Is Reid's ineffectual leadership beginning to make more sense now?
In the Mormon religious community, leadership is the gentle and compassionate enforcement of inviolable rules. Everyone knows what "the right thing to do" is because it is simply preservation of the status quo. The problem with Mormon leadership of a greater community that includes non-Mormons is that the Mormon leader may have difficulty understanding why all the troops aren't falling into lockstep and demonstrating unquestioning obedience. They are not used to assertive upstarts speaking up with conviction and rocking the boat. But, since they are such nice guys, the Mormon leader doesn't crack the whip or bitch-slap troublemakers; he just ignores them hoping they will eventually quiet down.
Having stated the premise that Reid's peculiarly Mormon outlook makes him incapable of bold leadership, let's examine his behavior. Regardless of whether or not you agree with my stereotypical generalizations, observe how this model, being a timid milquetoast, fits with what he has done. We have observed him both as minority leader and now as majority leader in the Senate. As minority leader, he did a great job, meekly submitting to the blustering hegemony of sociopath Republican martinets. He begged and pleaded, hat in hand, for tiny crumbs and concessions in legislation. He was a good fellow, cooperative as can be, and didn't even squawk when execrable swine were hurriedly ushered onto the Supreme Court. What a swell guy!
But, now that the tables have turned, and Harry Reid is "the man", Senate Majority Leader, backed up by his party's overwhelming majority in the House of Representatives and a President ready to sign progressive legislation passed by a Democrat-controlled legislature, could we please have a single payer health care system bankrolled by the federal government through general taxation? No? Why not?
Surprise! It's not Harry Reid's fault! If you think it is, then you were not reading closely above. If you skimmed over my critique of Mormon culture, finding its bigoted flavor repugnant, reconsider the points made. Mormons are nice. Mormons like to get along with everyone. Mormons don't like to do anything without an overwhelming consensus. There's the nub of it. The Democrats aren't really for health care. Does that give you an inkling as to what is really going on?
Harry Reid tells us that he is not able to push through health care reform because he simply doesn't have the votes. I forgot to mention another important Mormon trait. They are scrupulously honest and generally do not like to lie. They will, but it makes them feel really, really bad. Harry is telling us the naked truth. He has polled his caucus and he knows exactly how many Democrats, plus the Independent Socialist Bernie Sanders, want public health care. He knows exactly how many phony blue-dog Democrats say they want health care publicly, but have made it clear that they will not vote for it. Their insurance and pharmaceutical company corporate masters have called in all the markers bought with lavish campaign contributions. They have given them their marching orders and the directive is, "Stall, water down and do what you have to do to maintain control of health care by private corporations." Too many senators have been bought off and are beholden to big money interests to pass anything. All 41 Republicans are locked down. That is, after all, how they got elected in the first place. I'm pretty sure exactly 36 members of the Democratic caucus are equally beholder. I know exactly who they are, too.
You may wonder exactly how I know this. Check out the Public Option Whip List brought to you by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. They have made it easy to see if your senators are part of the problem or part of the solution. If they have signed Senator Bennet's letter to Leader Reid asking him to use reconciliation to pass health care reform, then they have taken a stand to be on the right side of history. If they have not, then they are not really for health care reform at all. Any senator who has not signed that letter, by nature of being a Republican or being a sniveling, disingenuous blue-dog pseudo-Democrat, is a craven corporate lackey, an execrable weasel of a class traitor, and should run out of office.
This is the final showdown. All the cards are on the table and we know exactly who everyone's master is. Reid, of course, won't sign the letter himself, urging himself to do what he should have done long ago, but I'm fairly certain that he's been bought off as well. Otherwise, there would have been no point in his dragging his feet and doing as little as possible to advance health care reform. Everyone sees that he is doing that, and asks why he doesn't "get a spine" or "man up" and act like Lyndon Johnson. Only yours truly, the Disgruntled Curmudgeon, has the temerity to excoriate a nice guy like Harry Reid and tell you exactly why he doesn't do the right thing. Sometimes, it takes a bitter, intensely cynical person to be objective. Harry can't kick ass on health care precisely because he's afraid to be mean to anyone.
It's just not in his nature to drive the troops toward his objective. He's waiting for the consensus to form, and he will swoop in at the last minute, waving the banner and acting as if he had been the great champion of health care all the while. It's the Mormon way.
We're not done here today. If you live in a state like mine, Washington, where the Democratic senators have not signed Bennet's letter, you may be wondering what you can do. I suspect that there isn't much given that none of us, individually, has enough money to buy off a U.S. Senator. Still, I thought it worth the effort to see if I could rattle their cages a bit. I wanted to see if my ire would get a rise out of either Senator Murray or Senator Cantwell. Instead of calling on the phone, I used their web site e-mail forms to request that they sign the letter and come out strongly for health care reform. I wanted to see it in writing rather than hear it from a staffer why both these ladies are being such jerks and still expect the Democrats in this state to keep them in office.
I shouldn't be surprised that neither Murray or Cantwell is getting behind health care reform. In the closing days of the last election, which was an off year for both of them, there was a strange ad on TV paid for by the pharmaceutical industry asking all of us to, "Thank Senator Murray and Senator Cantwell," for the great job they were doing in getting health care for us. What? The drug companies like them? I said, "Oh-oh. They've been bought off. Don't expect them to back any kind of health care reform." It's galling how arrogant the corporations can be in thumbing their noses at us. That ad was tantamount to saying, "See? We've got your senators right here in our hip pocket and there's nothing you can do about it!" The last 15 months have shown that I was right. I haven't heard a peep out of either of them.
Big Pharma may be right, too, in their smugness about having locked down both our senators. Neither of them has lifted a finger in this congress to advance the cause. I was curious if my veiled threats to withhold support from their next re-election campaigns would elicit any response. Cantwell stonewalled me and has as yet not replied. Murray (or more accurately, a staffer) sent me a nice note trying to convince me that she is still a supporter of health care reform and that signing Bennet's letter is not important to achieving that end. Right. You're fighting for health care, but just can't come out for it publicly by, perhaps, signing a letter asking Leader Reid to please jam it through. I'm not not buying it, lady.
What a crock. I like Patty; I've met her personally and have talked to her a couple of times (by nature of being a party hack and state convention delegate during her first Senate race). But, trying to get me to swallow that line is hypocrisy. She's been bought off, just like her protegée Maria. At least Senator Cantwell has got the crust to just blow me off like the inconsequential peon that I am. I expect that from her because she has never been a champion of working people. (Who's the Senator from Microsoft who always backs their efforts to bring in more foreigners on H1-B visas and take our jobs, eh?) OK, girls, I know where you both get your bread buttered.
Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell can collectively kiss my derrière. I've had it with both of them and their empty promises. I want some nice socialized health care before I keel over. I've been waiting 18 years for Murray to deliver on health care and all she has done is shine me on. I've never trusted Cantwell and all my worst fears have been borne out. She's a corporate lackey who does nothing for ordinary working people.
Murray is up for election this year, 2010. I'm not giving her a nickel and am sitting on my hands this time around. I won't be walking precincts or even voting for her in the primary. If she has competition from any Democrat who will fight for health care, I'll vote for the one with the best chance of beating whatever Neanderthal the Republicans field. Murray's seniority in the Senate doesn't mean squat to me if she can't deliver health care. Like Reid, she may be in big trouble this election because of her diffidence on health care.
Cantwell is up again in 2012. Between now and then, I'll be hunting around for someone to unseat her in the primary and be a real Democrat in the Senate, like Al Franken, or even a Socialist like Bernie Sanders. It could happen.
Of course, either of my state's sitting senators could regain my favor, and support, if she came out strongly for real health care reform and added her name to those of the courageous Democrats and the Socialist who signed Senator Bennet's letter. It won't be too late for them if they get on the bandwagon soon. Otherwise, it's, "Bye, bye, Patty," and, "So long, Maria!" I'm not waiting any more, hat in hand, hoping for the best. I'm not a Mormon like Harry Reid. I'm not a nice guy. I'm a disgruntled curmudgeon.
If either or both of your senators are recalcitrant Democrats, call or write them and give them "what for" on this issue as I did. Make it clear that your support hinges solely on their willingness to actively support meaningful health care reform, preferably a single-payer, no-exclusion, no-limit, public health care system, like they have in Scandinavia, France, Great Britain or Canada. It's hardball from now on.