» This Story:Read +|Watch +| Comments
Archive   |   Biography   |   RSS Feed   |   Opinions Home   |   Follow on Twitter

Yes, repeal health-care reform -- on one condition

Video
The White House is dismissing a vote by House Republicans to repeal the new health care law, saying it's not "a serious legislative effort."

Network News

X Profile
View More Activity
Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Fine. I'm willing to repeal Obamacare. On one condition.

This Story
View All Items in This Story
View Only Top Items in This Story

Republicans need to pass a law that the Congressional Budget Office certifies will cover the same number of uninsured as the Democratic health reform does - 30 million. And it has to do it at lower cost.

If I were President Obama, this is what I would be saying this week. And in the State of the Union address next week. And every time the question comes up.

The logic is simple. If Republicans are serious, they have to accept that it's a national priority to make sure that every American has basic health coverage. Thirty million isn't enough, of course, because the ranks of the uninsured still hover around 50 million. But since Democrats could only muster the will to cover 30 million, that's all we can expect the GOP to match as a measure of seriousness. (Though I'd be happy to see them shame Democrats with a plan to cover more).

The reason Obama should frame the debate this way is that there is no chance the Republican House will pass such a bill. That's because the GOP does not view the presence of 50 million uninsured in a wealthy nation as an issue that needs to be addressed.

Why not? Largely because, as the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan once told me (channeling the Republican mind on the uninsured): "Those folks never vote for us and we have our priorities for the money."

Or, as the GOP lobbyist and former Minnesota congressman Vin Weber once explained to me: "Do we care? Yeah. But politics trumps that conviction."

Right now the "debate" over Obamacare is a symbolic ruse. Republicans are blaming health reform for all manner of ills even though the thing doesn't even get off the ground until 2014. If the president said, "Okay, John Boehner, you bet, now that you're in power, as soon as you pass a version that covers the same number of people for less, I'll be happy to put my approach aside and cut a deal," he'd remind Americans about the discussion Republicans refuse to have.

And for no good reason. After all, Obama made Romneycare - adapted from the conservative Heritage Foundation's (sensible) ideas - the centerpiece of his reform. He stiff-armed the left by leaving single payer off the table. In case no one got the message, Obama tossed the public option overboard in health care's legislative endgame.

Any reasonable Martian would thus conclude that Obamacare - that is, Romneycare for the rest of us - is a centrist scheme.

But embracing conservative ideas wasn't enough. Obama also backed them with real money - as he had to, to fund the subsidies required to help lower-income folks buy private insurance.

So, just as they did in 1994, Republicans said "no." When Obama met with Republican leaders in that hours-long televised health-care gabfest - a model of civility, by the way, if not consensus - the outer limit of GOP ambition was a plan that would cover 3 million of the uninsured.


CONTINUED     1        >

» This Story:Read +|Watch +| Comments

More Washington Post Opinions

PostPartisan

Post Partisan

Quick takes from The Post's opinion writers.

Washington Sketch

Washington Sketch

Dana Milbank writes about political theater in the capital.

Tom Toles

Tom Toles

See his latest editorial cartoon.

© 2011 The Washington Post Company

Network News

X My Profile