Scott Brown’s victory in the Massachusetts Senate race vastly complicates the House-Senate discussions on the healthcare bill. I don’t think Pelosi or Reid will get the message (yes, they are completely politically deaf), so I expect they will keep driving left, but I am not sure all the so-called moderate Democrats will stay with them. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) said on television that he “feared the Democrats’ policy plans had gone too far to the left.” Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) said it “would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on healthcare legislation until Brown is seated.” That is just the beginning and it will irritate Pelosi and Reid no end.
There will be a lot of political arm twisting and there will be a lot of fear. The message is — if this can happen in Massachusetts, it can happen anywhere no matter how liked, loved or well funded a Member is. So I think some Democratic members will become even more nervous and will make the job of compromising to attain 218 and 60 votes respectively that much harder. That is especially true because Scott Brown’s victory is a victory for “independent” Republicans. He ran on a Republican platform, even life issues, which tells Republicans they can win with that message if they will actually follow through on it.
This of course will impact the leadership of both houses and their ability to get a health bill passed before Jan 27 when the President is due to give his State of the Union speech. And here I would like to make a point: in the Senate, the Republicans have a “conference” — the Leader of the Conference, Sen. McConnell, does have the power to persuade, to cajole, to bargain — but he does not have the unilateral power to assign committee seats, to distribute money to Senators or to Committees. All decisions of that nature are made by the Conference as a whole and are voted on by the Conference. On the other hand, the Democrats have a “caucus”—the leader of the caucus is Sen. Reid who does in fact have the power to assign people to committees, to distribute funds, to discipline his team. He has an enormous amount of power to make members accede to his demands. So Democrat members of either the House or the Senate will have some very unpleasant discussions in the not-too-distant future.
The White House and Democrat leadership are in a box—a self made box. They have said and they seem to believe that they must pass the healthcare bill no matter what. But the election in Massachusetts and what the members heard on their Christmas recess back home means that if the Democrats continue on the healthcare drive they will lose—and lose big. But to drop healthcare now means they will have nothing to show for all this effort—and will start the 2010 campaigns with nothing to show but a terrible economy, unimaginable debt and a war fought half-heartedly. It will be interesting to watch who retires soon and who steps up to run for Senate in Indiana, Wisconsin and Oregon, seats which until now hadn’t been thought to be competitive.
I am told that the House Dems will not let the Senate bill pass — and not just because of the abortion language but because of the broader bill. The leadership may try to ram it through, but it won’t work. So the Dems are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.
Here are some possibilities:
1. House passes Senate bill and it goes straight to the President for signature.
2. Finish the conference before Brown is seated (which may not be possible)
3. House doesn’t pass Senate bill, and it’s dead.
4. Attach something to budget and use reconciliation but the backlash will be brutal.
5. House tries to change Senate bill and sends back to Senate (highly unlikely)
But there is another issue that Scott Brown’s strategist Eric Fernstom highlighted in an interview with Robert Costa on NRO. Fernstrom said that their own internal polling showed that
‘the more potent issue here in Massachusetts was terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants.’ … ‘Health care’, he says, ‘was helpful in fundraising, but it was the campaign’s focus on national security in the final week that he believes helped to give voters another issue to associate with Brown.’
And tonight in his victory speech, Brown got a huge ovation for saying that we ought to spend money buying weapons to kill terrorists, not hiring lawyers to defend them. That practical insight warms the heart of independents, moderate democrats and Republicans. And that wins.
Che-Guevaras_Bullet_Hole // Jan 20, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Did the Dems Get the Message?
Haha – Did Frum??
Mandos // Jan 20, 2010 at 5:37 pm
They may in fact learn the message you want to impart to them—Democratic leaders never need any encouragement to head for the right—but it would be the wrong message. If they had included a public option in the bill—a real one—it would have made their plan more robust than RomneyCare, and it would have really brought out the Obama voters, who by all accounts tended to stay home, if they didn’t vote for Brown to thumb their noses at Reid et al.
You may be very happy to hear that a lot of the American progressive left, at least as represented on the blogosphere, is ready to abandon Obama and government in general, because it has been shown that Democratic politicians are too corrupt and owned by corporate interests to make the reforms necessary to undo the damage of the last 30 years. And thereby allow you take America down with you. Because the Democrats are very eager to hear your message.
balconesfault // Jan 20, 2010 at 6:01 pm
If they had included a public option in the bill—a real one—it would have made their plan more robust than RomneyCare, and it would have really brought out the Obama voters, who by all accounts tended to stay home, if they didn’t vote for Brown to thumb their noses at Reid et al.
Polling backed this up –
HEALTH CARE BILL OPPONENTS THINK IT “DOESN’T GO FAR ENOUGH”
by 3 to 2 among Obama voters who voted for Brown
by 6 to 1 among Obama voters who stayed home
It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can craft an aggressive financial regulatory bill … and if the Republicans would actually filibuster it.
jabbermule // Jan 20, 2010 at 6:05 pm
Mandos // Jan 20, 2010 at 5:37 pm:
“You may be very happy to hear that a lot of the American progressive left, at least as represented on the blogosphere, is ready to abandon Obama and government in general.”
Really? Thanks for the great news! This means we’ll see a lot fewer control-freak socialist statists in government and we can re-ignite the Reagan revolution, thus working towards having a free market, capitalist, limited government society again.
Mandos // Jan 20, 2010 at 6:40 pm
In other words, collapse, and a Mad Maxian future. Some people feel it will take that to purge the USA of Reaganism.
sinz54 // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:20 pm
It’s got little to do with health care.
It’s still “the economy, stupid.”
Obama and the Dems promised the American people that the stimulus package would greatly reduce unemployment. So far, that has not happened.
If that’s the case by mid-2010, the Dems should do relatively well in the November elections–and Obama will have political capital to spend on other initiatives.
If that’s not the case by mid-2010, the Dems won’t win in November, and they won’t deserve to win.
One thing you can say about both Reagan and Clinton: Each of them made reviving the economy his top priority.
Obama did not do that.
Obama, pushed by his liberal supporters, wanted to make restructuring American society along more “humane” (read: Social Democrat) lines his top priority.
And that’s why the Dems are in hot water now.
Kevin B // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Hopefully the Dems will get A message. And hopefully they can stay on it.
And hopefully it’s a positive message, as opposed to the message of “NO” that the republicans got when they lost so badly in 2008.
How about it? Should the Democrats use the Republicans of the past year as a model for getting the message?
Mandos // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:31 pm
sinz:
The two are linked. There isn’t a means of attenuating the effects of serial bubbles on employment, etc without shifting the American economy and society onto more socially just grounds. That means a more just basis for distributing health care, and that involves some amount of increase of social democracy.
Anything else, well, that’s just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
The stimulus, anyway, was too small. The money put into banker bailouts should have gone into the stimulus. The REAL root cause of the Obama malaise is the TARP (universally reviled by both the populist right AND left) and the whole bailout structure around that, and the REAL root cause of that is neoliberal trade orthodoxy and the refusal to protect American jobs from labour arbitrage.
wsnw // Jan 20, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Reverse this article’s premise. I wonder if the Republicans are getting the message? This is it:
For most of this last year, when legislation fails, it has been the Democrats’ fault. From here on out, it will be the Republicans’ fault, and the American public will very shortly tire of Republicans simply refusing to let anything pass.
I don’t think they’re prepared for that, and this may ultimately be a gift to the Democrats.
All Republican pundits and leaders seem to ignore the most important fact in all the polling of the last six months — the only thing the American people dislike more than a Democrat is a Republican, and by a large margin.
Additionally, if you want to be intellectually honest in your analysis, you have to include the uncomfortable fact that many of the disapproving constituents think Obama isn’t liberal enough.
The actual number of people that believe the country needs to execute a more conservative agenda is minimal.
Ignore these facts to your political peril.
Kevin B // Jan 20, 2010 at 8:00 pm
#6:
Will the Republicans in congress support legislation to increase jobs this Spring, or will they calculate that their odds of picking up seats in November get better if they can prolong Americans’ misery a bit longer?
sparty // Jan 20, 2010 at 9:45 pm
Jabbermule:
“This means we’ll see a lot fewer control-freak socialist statists in government and we can re-ignite the Reagan revolution, thus working towards having a free market, capitalist, limited government society again.”
I agree – amnesty is right around the corner.
communists-basher // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:03 pm
Hey Progressive Fascists … Since when the US is a Socialist country?
Barack Mugabe // Jan 20, 2010 at 10:21 pm
“In other words, collapse, and a Mad Maxian future. Some people feel it will take that to purge the USA of Reaganism.”
No, back to the constitutional principles this rogue government took an oath to uphold.
Kanzeon // Jan 21, 2010 at 12:19 am
Whether this is about healthcare or not, the voters haven’t sent a message or taught anyone a lesson. Because of the lock step opposition of the Republicans, they have ensured more gridlock, if that were possible. They have completely crippled the majority party in a time of multiple crises. That isn’t a message – it is a sentence.
Now, it is possible that this was the result the voters of Mass intended: that they are siding with the far right in believing that every major Democratic proposal should be defeated. If that was the point, then fine – although it is tragic that one state determines that for the rest of the country.
How can the Democrats “get” this supposed message? There will be no bi-partisan cooperation. They can’t govern, unless they start to use reconciliation or other tactics that have been perceived to be hardknuckle. If they don’t govern, they definitely lose. Mass has deprived the Democrats of all options. They have no choice but to learn to behave as Republicans have for the last twenty years. It will be ugly.
communists-basher // Jan 21, 2010 at 12:56 am
Oh, my God!
This is what Progressive Liberal Jew-Hater Ralph Emanuel said about the 1st Amendment: “It’s overrated”, he answered when asked by a journalist….
Why is this guy still in the White House? Where is FBI?
This isn’t going to fly with American People. Enough is enough. The Mass. election is only the beginning…
Mandos // Jan 21, 2010 at 2:12 am
Har har. You think the end game of crippling the Democrats is a return to an abstract dream of “constitutional principles”? No, you will be killing other people for gasoline, if they don’t get you first (more likely).
Mandos // Jan 21, 2010 at 2:14 am
If they learn that lesson—to behave as Republicans have in political machination—it will finally be a blessing, but I won’t count on it. They seem so far (it’s only been a day out) most likely to stop governing.