Robert Reich: Health Care 2010 and 1994, and the Political Lessons of History

[mod mom]

Worth a full read:

Health Care 2010 and 1994, and the Political Lessons of History

By Robert Reich - March 16, 2010, 9:04AM

-snip

I was serving in the Clinton administration at the time. In the first months of 1993 it looked as if Clinton's health care proposal would sail through Congress. But the process dragged on and by 1994 it bogged down. We knew health care was imperiled but none of us knew that failure to pass health care would doom much of the rest of Clinton's agenda and wrest control of Congress out of the hands of the Democrats. In retrospect, it's clear Republicans did know.

On February 5, 1994, the National Association of Manufacturers passed a resolution declaring its opposition to the Clinton plan. Not long after that, Michigan Democrat John Dingell, who was managing the health care bill for the House, approached the senior House Republican on the bill to seek a compromise. According to Dingell, the response was: "There's no way you're going to get a single vote on this side of the aisle. You will not only not get a vote here, but we've been instructed that if we participate in that undertaking at all, those of us who do will lose our seniority and will not be ranking minority members within the Republican Party."

In early March, 1994, Senate Republicans invited Newt Gingrich, then House minority leader, to caucus with them about health care. Gingrich warned against compromise, a view echoed by Senator Phil Gramm. A few months later, at a Republican meeting in Boston, Bob Dole, then Senate minority leader, promised to "filibuster and kill" any health care bill with an employer mandate.

By then Gingrich had united House Republicans against passage of health reform and told the New York Times he wanted "to use the issue as a springboard to win Republican control of the House." Gingrich predicted Republicans would pick up thirty-four House seats in the November elections and half a dozen disaffected Democrats would switch parties to give Republicans control.

-snip

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/16/health_care_2010_and_1994_and_the_political_lesson/?ref=fpblg

[Spazito]

1. Good read...

Thanks for posting this, it is appreciated.

Recommended.

[Overseas]

2. K&R.

Explains why some of us have been so frustrated with the bipartisan approach.

Explains why I was so sad that the Bush Crash and Bush Bailouts weren't immediately followed by Democrats banding together to pass a "people's bailout" opening up Medicare to All.

Bipartisanship since the 90's to the GOP has only meant getting Dems to compromise their party platform to vote with Republicans or vote like Republicans.