I assume you've all read this NYT article about Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and her record in Kansas. If not, this diary extracts some points that all progressives should know, if we want to achieve affordable, quality health care for all Americans within the next four years.
I hope for the best, of course. I'm sure we will achieve some measure of 'reform.' I very much doubt it will be the best that could have been achieved, in this once-in-a-lifetime juncture. I will continue to work to achieve real health care reform, and if this requires helping to give President Obama a policy space in which he can work, by being sharply critical of his Administration's proposals, tactics and the performance of his nominated HHS Secretary and Health Czar, then so be it.
Read on, for what the NYT's Kevin Sack (with Robert Pear and Jeff Zeleny) has to say about Gov. Sebelius' track record on health care. (Note: they are hardly Donahue or Brody):
Let's begin at the top:
[O]n matters of health policy, Ms. Sebelius’s efforts to forge bipartisan consensus have rarely succeeded.
Whoa, whoa, whoa; say 'wha?! Wasn't this supposedly the very basis on which she was being chosen as HHS Secretary? And it wasn't true?! Alarm bells are going off.
Ms. DeParle has extensive experience in the business world that has prompted questions from some liberals and from some of the people who vet appointments for Mr. Obama. Ms DeParle is now or has been a director of huge health care companies including Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy benefit manager; Cerner, a supplier of health information technology; Boston Scientific, a medical device company; DaVita, which runs kidney dialysis centers; and Triad Hospitals.
Great, so our new Health Czar is deeply infused with years of seeing the world through the lens of huge health care companies, from whom she received millions of dollars, thereby inherently shaping her perceptions (whether or not she is aware of it).
The governor [Sebelius] is a Roman Catholic who supports abortion rights, and her vetoes of anti-abortion measures have drawn derision from social conservatives, including a request by the archbishop of Kansas City that she not take communion.
Not, of course, that this will be exploited by Republicans. (Is it shameful that they do so? Yes. Is it predictable? Yes. Is it the kind of polarization that we need right now, in order to achieve comprehensive health care reform? No. Gee, it's too bad Sebelius is such a polarizing figure. Will Sebelius polarize the health-care debate? Why did Rahm promote such a controversial polarizer like Sebelius? It doesn't seem to have been on pragmatic, track-record, knowledge, political savvy, nor policy grounds; I wonder what else it might explain it? And why is Rahm's brother, Ezekiel J. Emanuel, playing an advisory role?)
Ms. Sebelius [...] has failed to make significant improvements in health coverage or costs during her two terms as governor. [T]he proportion of Kansans who are uninsured [...] has grown seven times as fast in the state than in the nation during her tenure, according to census figures.
Wtf? Excuse me?! This is the record of our new HHS Secretary???
Health insurance premiums in Kansas rank just below the national average and have increased at about the same rate as the nation’s, according to figures compiled by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The same was true during the previous eight years, when Ms. Sebelius served as state insurance commissioner.
So the uninsured rate in Kansas has increased seven times as fast as the national average, and costs have been rising just as fast. And that record holds not only for Sebelius' term as Governor, but also for her eight years as insurance commissioner (which is what supposedly qualifies her for HHS). What a track record!
"Both her proposals and her accomplishments have been limited to some extent by the political realities of the state that she governs," said Dr. Robert F. St. Peter, president of the Kansas Health Institute, a research foundation.
So why reach out to that state, to lead the country?
In 2004, her second year in office, Ms. Sebelius proposed expanding the state’s low Medicaid thresholds to cover 70,000 of the state’s 300,000 or so uninsured, and to pay for it by raising tobacco taxes. The measure died.
In her 2007 State of the State address, Ms. Sebelius urged lawmakers to "commit ourselves to universal coverage." Though she said little about how to achieve that, Republicans tarred her as an advocate of "socialized medicine" — or "Hillarycare," as Melvin Neufeld, who was House speaker at the time, put it.
Bipartisan consensus-builder? Maybe not so much.
Ms. Sebelius, a former state representative, called on the Legislature to begin by covering all children up to age 5. Again, she made little headway, though in 2008, an election year, the Republicans expanded eligibility for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program without appropriating any money to do so.
Is this what "legislative success in a red state" is defined as?
Contrast that to Howard Dean's success in Vermont -- 96% of all children under 18 are covered thanks to Gov. Dean.
She had also failed to win approval of a statewide indoor smoking ban.
Let's step back for a minute. Sebelius failed to win an indoor smoking ban. Just how regressive is that? Look at it this way: of the 50 states in the US, only 15 do NOT have an indoor smoking ban, and Sebelius' Kansas is one of those 15. See the map:
The states in white have the strongest smoking bans. The states in grey have NO smoking ban. Do you recognize any geographic pattern, any commonality among those states and other political trends? And yet Sebelius is supposed to lead national health care reform?
Legislative leaders say Ms. Sebelius presses her case in occasional meetings and news conferences, but rarely cajoles or twists arms.
God forbid our national champion of health care reform will have to cajole or twist arms to achieve affordable, quality health care for all. It's not like FDR or LBJ or JFK or WJC or any other great President had to cajole, twist arms, or *gasp* use partisanship to achieve major policy goals... </snark>
"I see her in the hall and say hello, and that’s it," said State Representative Brenda K. Landwehr, a conservative Republican who heads the Health and Human Services Committee. "She’s never asked me to visit with her. I think she’s a very strong individual, that things are either done her way or the highway, with little room for compromise."
Again, so much for bipartisanship. But it's worse than that: if the relatively dismal Kansas policies reflect "her way," then what does this portend for the nation?
The daughter of an Ohio governor, John Gilligan, and daughter-in-law of a Kansas congressman, Ms. Sebelius
So, it's not like she got in on anyone's coattails, and that this -- rather than some alleged, pragmatic, bipartisan skills she has -- explains how she got elected in Kansas. Good, glad that's squared away. (As if 'bipartisanship' has in fact been pragmatic -- it has not.)
Because the possibilities for change here [in Kansas] have been so narrow, there is little sense of Ms. Sebelius’s views on broad questions like whether Americans should be required to have health insurance...
So Gov. Sebelius in fact has such a limited track record, given the constraints in Kansas, that we don't even know where she stands on fundamental health reform issues, let alone how she might achieve them. Great, just great. Note to Rahm Emanuel: lick my ass.
-------
Update: OK, I've changed the title, as requested in comments. Somehow, my guess is this was not in fact the deeper issue that some critics have. But let's stay focused on the big picture.