Health care debate – contributions of opponents

The third comment in response to a Paul Krugman column:

Re: Cap and trade and other democrat dilemmas, David Brooks describes Krugman perfectly:

“The party is led by insular liberals from big cities and the coasts, who neither understand nor sympathize with moderates. They have their own cherry-picking pollsters, their own media and activist cocoon, their own plans to lavishly spend borrowed money to buy votes.”

Sounds pretty convincing, eh? Problem is, I’m really not convinced there’s any real equivalence between conservatives and liberals. After all, if conservatives were equal to liberals in policy smarts, why can’t they come up with an alternative health care plan of their own?

Republicans who had promised last month to offer a healthcare reform alternative are now suggesting no such bill will be introduced.

Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said, “Our bill is never going to get to the floor, so why confuse the focus? We clearly have principles; we could have language, but why start diverting attention from this really bad piece of work they’ve got to whatever we’re offering right now?”

In other words: “We got nuthin’. We looked at our cupboard of ideas and it’s bare.” The would-be “great compromiser” Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) is similarly bereft of ideas.

Senate Democrats are increasingly frustrated by the secrecy and duration of … Baucus’ … bipartisan talks on health care reform…

Democrats both on and off the Finance Committee said the briefings they get about the six negotiators’ progress are too vague. Plus, they say, without a bill in hand, they cannot defend or sell the package to a wary media and public.

Also, I’ve got a piece up responding to Governor Jindal’s health care proposal.

Comments are closed.