Do our Democratic members of Congress ever read a newspaper? Or a magazine? Or a history book?
Or are they too busy watching cable news, staring at their poll numbers and quivering in their sweaty underpants at the thought that someone in their district or state might get mad at them if they have the temerity to cast a courageous vote?
Has no one ever told them that, as "leaders", it is their job in difficult times to lead?
Two stories from the Sunday New York Times highlight the small-mindedness and political cowardice that still pervades the Democratic caucus a full year after the push for health care reform began.
The first one is this:
Wary Centrists Posing Challenge in Health Care Vote
WASHINGTON — The future of President Obama’s health care overhaul now rests largely with two blocs of swing Democrats in the House of Representatives — abortion opponents and fiscal conservatives — whose indecision signals the difficulties Speaker Nancy Pelosi faces in securing the votes necessary to pass the bill.
The second:
The Cost of Doing Nothing on Health Care
...many argue that putting off the inevitable has an additional cost. The Commonwealth Fund estimates that the nation would be spending hundreds of billions of dollars less than it does today if any of the health care legislation proposed by previous administrations had been enacted, assuming that they reduced costs by about 1.5 percentage points. If President Nixon’s plan had passed, the United States might be spending a trillion dollars a year less than it does now, and President Clinton’s plan would have reduced spending by some $500 billion a year.
“It makes a huge difference over a long period of time,” said Ms. Davis of the Commonwealth Fund.
We must assume that the brave band of centrists are aware of the powerful economic imperatives for reforming our health care system. If so, we must also assume that they are willing to put the presumed safety of their own congressional seats ahead of the economic health of the country and the personal health of millions.
Sure, put it off for another 18 or 25 or 40 years. What's another trillion dollars among friends? As long as those friends are in the business of contributing oceans of money to your re-election campaign.
Nancy Pelosi is sounding more confident that she can somehow wrangle the votes in the House. On Sunday, she spoke words that were so surprising I had to read them twice.
"Why are we here? We’re not here just to self-perpetuate our service in Congress. We’re here to do the job for the American people, to get them results that give them not only health security, but economic security.”
Is she delusional or are there some stirrings of conscience and moral courage in the halls Congress? Have one or two people decided they might be better off making history and campaigning on that, than pandering to the folks back home who have been scared witless by the Republican propaganda machine?
Is it possible they have heard enough dire warnings about the long-term economic tsunami headed our way, that they might overcome their innate instinct for self-preservation?
No one knows for certain how much the Senate and House bills will cost or save or change our lives or not change our lives. But two things must be clear by now to these wavering "centrists."
Doing nothing will perpetuate the economic and social misery caused by our dangerous and unjust health care system - and won't guarantee their re-election.
Doing something, however imperfect, will start the country down a historic path it has never had the courage to try before, and might possibly rescue millions of people from unnecessary suffering - and that might be something a "wary centrist" can campaign on and win.
Meanwhile, in my home state of Minnesota, the great Tim Pawlenty - Evangelical Christian, man of the people, "bumpkin" - continues to attack the poor, the sick and the downtrodden, despite numerous Biblical injunctions to the contrary. He is getting plenty of help from his Republican allies in the state legislature, all of whom apparently share his dedication to caring for the least fortunate among us.
Amid prayers and passionate speeches, House override effort on GAMC fails on party-line vote
...Minnesota House Republicans, who last week overwhelmingly supported a bill that would have preserved the General Assistance Medical Care program, overwhelmingly supported their governor's veto of the program this afternoon. Not a single Republican supported the override effort...
Two weeks ago, the House supported the GAMC bill 125-9.
Why this remarkable switch on the medical program that has served Minnesota's poorest?
Why indeed.
For more from Bare Left, please visit: http://bareleft.blogspot.com