Dems Running Out of Options
You know you’re having a good evening when you get to quote yourself in a previous FrumForum blogpost. As I wrote the day after the elections last November:
The health bill has now become a no-win conundrum. The public is clearly anxious (Note: make that worried to the point of fury) about the economic trajectory and the federal deficit and are quite skeptical (Note: you can say that again) that another trillion in federal spending on healthcare will result either in a better health system or in lower costs. The federal government’s old saw, “you gotta spend money to save money” is now so discredited it is met with grimness rather than a grin. Democratic claims to the contrary notwithstanding (“victory begets victory, ” says Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky in this morning’s Washington Post), the most likely response to a big health bill from the worried middle of the country is a sharp electoral rebuke. [Note: it doesn’t get much sharper than Massachusetts electing Scott Brown to the Senate.]
What to do with the rebuke? To paraphrase Woody Allen, the Democrats have reached a fork in the road. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. And they have put Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in charge of the map and compass. As they say in academia, let’s unpack that a bit. I return to myself:
The Blue Dog Democrats [Note: those who haven’t switched parties or retired yet] get this – they have been living it for six months now – and seem to be making a strenuous case for delaying and scaling back the Democratic approach on health [Note: strike “strenuous” and insert “panicky”]. What the Blue Dogs miss, of course, is what the liberals see clearly: a failure on universal coverage invites a downward spiral with the liberal blogosphere tearing the party to pieces and depressing the base for 2010. [Note: Rachel Maddow made a good case this evening that Democrats must pass the health bill or lose their base. Jim Webb, Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln and others are about to insist the opposite. The public seems to be with Webb, Bayh and Lincoln. Good luck with that.] From an electoral standpoint, you never want to have to choose between an energized base and the affection of independents. They are both ‘must-haves’ yet the debate over healthcare legislation could easily end up delivering neither. [Note: Too late.]