After reading the myriad of diaries both supporting and opposing the current Senate HCR bill, I paused to reflect on other controversial pieces of legislation that have been debated with such fervor and vehemence in my 56 years. The one piece of legislation that comes to my mind is the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964, contrary to current popular belief, was also seen as an "imperfect" piece of legislation by many civil rights activists at the time. The Civil Rights Act did NOT ensure voting rights for African-Americans, it did NOT enforce equal treatment in the workplace and did NOT provide African-Americans with the right to live wherever they chose. Many Civil Rights activist thought the bill did not go far enough, did not encompass everything that needed to be included, that it had been "compromised" too much in order to secure votes for its passage. Is this ringing any bells?
The bill did, however lay the groundwork for the passage of three additional pieces of legislation: The Voting rights Act of 1965, establishment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. All of those laws have been amended overtime. Age Discrimination in 1967, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Without that initial, "imperfect", compromised piece of legislation in 1964, enacting the basis for the equal opportunity most Americans now take for granted, would have been impossible.
So for everyone currently demanding that the current Senate HCR bill be scrapped and that we "start over", think about where we would be as a country if that advice had been heeded in 1964. Do you really think the Civil Rights Act would have passed after being voted down in 1964? Do you really think we will have another effort made to pass HCR in 2010, 0r 2011 or 2012?