Morning Jolt
. . . with Jim Geraghty
March 22, 2010
In This Issue . . .
1. It's Scalp-Hunting Time
2. Stupid Move, Stupak
3. The Trial Lawyer on Our Side
4. We Did It All for Him
5. Addenda
Welcome to your Monday morning Jolt!
Enjoy,
Jim
1. It's Scalp-Hunting Time
Folks, we did everything right: The grassroots rallies, the big crowds at the town halls, the wins in New Jersey and Virginia and Massachusetts, the multiple rallies on the Hill, the widespread bright spotlight on this legislative monstrosity's flaws, the phone calls, the e-mails, the ads, the polls in key districts. We turned the vote to create Obamacare into political suicide, not realizing how many members of the House the Democrats were willing to sacrifice to achieve their goal.
But the health-care bill passed, with 219 Democratic votes.
Those 34 Democrats who voted no shouldn't rest easy, since we're coming for them, too -- one of the key lessons of this is that Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Mike Castle, and Mark Kirk will come through for you when Bart Gordon won't.
You know how much we rail against RINOs? Take a look at all of those so-called pro-life, or conservative, or centrist Democrats. Not every last one of them, but a heck of a lot of them sold out: John Boccieri, Charlie Wilson, and Steve Driehaus of Ohio. Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth of Indiana. Bart Stupak (more on him in a bit) and Dale Kildee of Michigan. Suzanne Kosmas and Allen Boyd of Florida. Betsy Markey of Colorado. Tom Perriello of Virginia. Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, Dina Titus of Nevada. All of them touting how centrist they are, or how they have conservative values, or how, no matter how much they march in lockstep with Nancy Pelosi on other issues, they have deep and abiding respect for the unborn.
Horse$#@&.
"Centrist Democrat" is a synonym for a liberal who wants to get reelected in a conservative district.
(By the way, not that it's a surprise, but Captain Hook can count on his bad hand how many members of the House Progressive Caucus kept their threat to vote against any health-care bill that didn't include a public option.)
Brad Ellsworth doesn't really want to be a senator from Indiana, does he? Public Opinion Strategies found that in Ellsworth's district, nearly half of voters say they "strongly oppose" the bill. By more than a three-to-one margin voters "strongly oppose" the bill (12 percent strongly support, 47 percent strongly oppose). And this man wants to be senator?
The vote has Mark Steyn sounding like Derb: "If Barack Obama does nothing else in his term in office, this will make him one of the most consequential presidents in history. It's a huge transformative event in Americans' view of themselves and of the role of government. You can say, oh, well, the polls show most people opposed to it, but, if that mattered, the Dems wouldn't be doing what they're doing. Their bet is that it can't be undone, and that over time, as I've been saying for years now, governmentalized health care not only changes the relationship of the citizen to the state but the very character of the people. As I wrote in NR recently, there's plenty of evidence to support that from Britain, Canada, and elsewhere. More prosaically, it's also unaffordable. That's why one of the first things that middle-rank powers abandon once they go down this road is a global military capability. If you take the view that the U.S. is an imperialist aggressor, congratulations: You can cease worrying. But, if you think that America has been the ultimate guarantor of the post-war global order, it's less cheery. Five years from now, just as in Canada and Europe two generations ago, we'll be getting used to announcements of defense cuts to prop up the unsustainable costs of big government at home. And, as the superpower retrenches, America's enemies will be quick to scent opportunity."
I'm not quite so sure; I don't think that in any of those countries there was a relatively well-functioning health-care system that was replaced, and there certainly wasn't a vibrant, loud, energized majority working against the bill.
A. J. Strata warns we'll feel the changes pretty darn fast: "Right now I am going to sit back and watch the public reaction. If, as usual, the public was duped into a false sense of success (i.e., the doomed to fail, lethargic government funded stimulus plan) then the lack of positive, substantive change will begin to erode what little support there is for this mess.
"But more than that, we will soon learn if VA, NJ and MA were just coincidental flukes and not the center of the country being really pissed off about this attack on their health care by a bunch of dysfunctional bozos in DC. Did the liberals waken a sleeping giant? It will take weeks to find out. I do know as a small business owner that our health insurance will not be the same, as promised by the liars in DC. We will have to have adjustments for pre-existing conditions (premiums will go up) and covering children until 26 (premiums may go down). We will have to prepare for IRS audits of our plans, which will need to be adjusted (because I doubt any plan has all the requisite coverage). And we will decide whether we carry insurance or we all go into the health care pools. What I do know is our current situation will not survive the year. Clearly it cannot with all these new mandates."
Over at Reason, Peter Suderman argues that we'll see no progress on any of the problems this bill is meant to fix: "this bill is unlikely to achieve most of the objectives that have been set out for it. The retail argument in favor of the bill was basically twofold: It provides affordable insurance coverage for 30 million, and it reduces the deficit, thereby making it fiscally sensible. But CBO is clear: In conjunction with the upcoming doc fix -- which was split off from the original bill and will be passed later -- it doesn't lower the deficit. And if Medicare savings are used to extend the solvency of the program, as Democrats frequently claim will happen, then that eats up the deficit reduction. The coverage figure is the best argument for the bill; all indications are that it's likely to result in health coverage for 30 million or more individuals. But the evidence that it will do so in an affordable manner is thin. The CBO estimates that the average premium cost will rise 10-13 percent (with a little more than half of folks receiving subsidies). And despite claims that the bill will put a stop to big rate increases, the evidence of the Massachusetts plan, which is very similar to Obamacare, suggests otherwise: Since the start of its plan, that state has seen double digit rate hikes, and expects more to come. And its average premium price is the highest in the nation. How can anyone possibly define this as 'affordable'? In the end, then, we're left with a highly expensive, fiscally dangerous expansion of health insurance that locks even more people into a broken system. That's an achievement, all right, but not a particularly good one."
2. Stupid Move, Stupak
Meanwhile, Bart Stupak sold out on the issue upon which he defined his career in exchange for a toothless executive order, a pile of magic beans, and maybe a 10 percent-off coupon at Shoney's. Kathryn notes how little we've come to expect from Democrats for Life.
His allies, obviously, don't have the same faith in Obama's worth that Stupak does: "Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund President Marjorie Dannenfelser said the group was revoking its 'Defender of Life' award to Stupak, which was to be awarded at its Wednesday night gala. 'We were planning to honor Congressman Stupak for his efforts to keep abortion-funding out of health care reform. We will no longer be doing so,' Dannenfelser said. 'Let me be clear: any representative, including Rep. Stupak, who votes for this health care bill can no longer call themselves "pro-life."'"
3. The Trial Lawyer on Our Side
Virginia state attorney general Ken Cuccinelli confirms via Twitter what I reported last week: "Once the president signs it into law, we'll walk across the street and file suit b/c the ind mandate is unconstitutional."
4. We Did It All for Him
Glenn Reynolds predicts, "A brief poll bump for Obama based on positive news coverage of the bill passage. Then, more decline."
Starting today, if you have any complaints about your health care, send them to the system manager at:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
5. Addenda
A history-buff friend e-mails me: "Turns out the stimulus protest was really our Stamp Act. Now we'll see the Tea Parties really begin." I'm picturing thousands of tongue depressors being dumped into the Potomac. |
