Before the House took up healthcare there were grumblings that the Congressional Progressive Caucus and their allies would "fold like a cheap suit" in the face of the Blue Dog, Conservadem and Republican opposition.
Surprisingly, the bill that came out of the House was progressive. It was not perfect. It was not Medicare for All. It did not cover all Americans. It was a start. Then the bill was sent to the Senate, you know, where "good legislation goes to die."
From the beginning of that process it was obvious the House Progressives were either going to have to fight or walk away. More below the fold....
All of my life (and it's only been 38 years), I have heard the meme that Progressives and Liberals will fold at the first sign of controversy. They simply don't have the "fight" that the Conservatives do. With HCR we saw the truth.
The CPC fought for a good bill (as good as it was goign to get), and were slammed for their compromises. They weren't fighting hard enough. They weren't doing enough for the Average American. It was simply disgusting to see how they weren't doing their job for their consituents (who were routinely assumed to be as Progressive as the Congressperson).
Then came the Senate's attempt at sausage making, and the House Bill didn't seem so bad. But every step seemed to bring the Senate Bill farther and farther into mediocrity and away from true HCR. After passing a bill that pretty much stank like a week old corpse, it was sent to the House with the admonishment "Change it, and we kill it."
Now was the true test. The CPC had marked their ground. They had staked their claims. They had fought to have a decent bill from their chamber. And the CW was that of course they would simply bail rather than try to improve it. And then we got to hear the other familiar meme about the Progressives, "You want Perfection! You won't accept compromises!"
So first we yell at them for compromising then we yell at them for not compromising. Which do you want? Either they can fight for what they believe their constiuents want (which is why they were elected to begin with, to speak for their constituents), or they can rubber stamp a bill they don't agree with and don't believe in because it is "politically expedient."
At this point HCR may be dead. I don't know. I do know that Speaker Pelosi was able to whip her chamber into providing a somewhat Progressive bill, largely in part to the CPC. If they HADN'T fought, the House Bill may very well be worse than the Senate Bill (though I'm not sure how that could be). Now we want them to surrender.
I don't know if passing the Senate Bill will improve Democratic chances for election and re-election in November. I don't know that killing the bill will do that either. No one does. We can look for patterns, but the future is unknowable (or who would have thought a Democratic AG who was well-known and seemingly well-liked in a blue State could lose a seat that had been held by a Democrat for an eon).
I do know that challenging someone to fight and then threatening to punish them for it (primarying a PROGRESSIVE democrat....with what, a Blue Dog???) probably isn't the best way to make things MORE Progressive. If we aren't careful, why would any Progressive try to make a difference? It was always a relatively thankless task, but why put yourself throught the insanity?