Don't Tread On Me

With so much talk of Congressional ‘reconciliation’ in America’s political dialogue, one would think that this legislative procedure is, in and of itself, the topic of debate. However, the reality is that this process is merely a last ditch effort by the Democrat leadership to pass a bill, before the November, 2010 midterm elections, that has become wildly unpopular among the American people. In the midst of an economic crisis, President Obama has spent the first third of his term in office desperately trying to nationalize America’s health insurance system while paying attention to little else. As someone who has closely scrutinized the President’s crusade from its inception, even I find myself occasionally lost in the melee of the moment, losing focus on the series of events which brought us to our current situation. The time between now and November will decide the fate of Obama-Care, and with it, the future of America. In order to fully comprehend where we are now, and what is in store for our nation, we must occasionally step back and reflect on how we got here.
During his 2008 election campaign, Senator Barack Obama won much popular support by making vague references to health insurance reform, using a sort of ‘no person left behind’ rhetoric in regard to America’s healthcare system. With sweeping promises of change and presenting himself as the Anti-Bush candidate, Obama handily won the election and was soon sworn in as America’s 44th President. Though President Obama showed some initial signs of focusing on foreign affairs with his new, apologetic, diplomatic approach, it soon became clear that creating a nationalized healthcare system would be the true focus of his first year in office. He led his party in creating “stimulus bills” which he promised would be used to create new jobs. These bills enabled Congress to borrow and print more money, doubling the size of our national debt. Furthermore, much of the money created from this legislation was used to create de facto slush-funds which the House and Senate leadership could use to offer sweetheart deals to disenfranchised Democrats. In the end, the President’s “stimulus” and “job creation” bills were used mainly to further propagate his dream of federally controlled healthcare.
As President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid worked together to create a healthcare bill, their focus was mainly on getting support from their fellow Democrats. Little regard was paid to Republicans or to the voice of the American people. This strategy appeared to be politically prudent, if nothing else, due to the fact that both houses of Congress were now under the control of the Democrats. In the House of Representatives, a simple majority vote is all that is necessary to pass healthcare legislation. The Senate rules for such sweeping proposals require a three fifths (60 vote) majority and fortunately for the President, this was the precise number of Senators under his control.
As details of the House and Senate proposals slowly permeated the national media, popular support for the bills waned accordingly. Americans, as they always do, pushed back against the threat of government over-intrusion and increased tax burdens. New grass roots movements sprang up and town hall meetings were held across the land. This, however, did not faze President Obama and his cohorts. The House and Senate respectively proceeded to pass separate healthcare legislation. Though the House and Senate bills contained many major differences which would later have to be negotiated, the dye was essentially cast and Obama-Care seemed inevitable. As with all legislation, the House and Senate would now meet together to work out a compromise: combine the two bills and vote respectively on the new, refined product. The President would then sign the bill and it would become law. Since they had almost two years before the next Congressional election, the administration decided to launch an all out public relations campaign to win back popular support for the President’s bill before it was passed. The House and Senate would simply sit back and let President Obama lead fate’s course before they made legislative history. But the Democrats were doomed to discover that fate often stubbornly insists on choosing its own path.
When Senator Ted Kennedy passed away in August 2009, it was a foregone conclusion that he would be replaced with another left leaning, Obama supporting Democrat. After all, Massachusetts was the most liberal state in the Union and Kennedy its standard-bearer for decades. Massachusetts, however, is also the land of the Boston Tea Party and the battles of Lexington and Concord, and has historically proven an outlet of American popular dissent. To the shock of most political pundits and all Democrat party leaders, Republican Scott Brown won the state’s special election for Kennedy’s seat on the promise of stopping Obama-Care and all its fiscal liberalism. With the Senate no longer having the 60 vote majority necessary to re-pass its legislation, and its bill at such odds with that of Congress, most Americans took a deep breath and mused at how close they came to having their popular will denied. Obama-Care was dead and the country could now move on. However, President Obama, who prides himself on audacity, was not willing to relent. After a series of backroom deals, using money from the economic stimulus slush-fund, the administration proved to have one more trick up its heart-worn sleeve…….reconciliation.
Reconciliation is a legislative process in which the Senate can pass sweeping laws with a three-fifths vote and then reconcile budgetary dilemmas with a simple majority. The resolution was created in 1974 and has been utilized thirteen times thenceforth. Mainly, the reconciliation process has been applied to laws in order to reduce taxes and decrease deficits, most notably in the tax cut initiatives of former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Though blatantly contrary to the will of the American people, President Obama is now pushing the House leadership to apply this process to fix his healthcare conundrum. Mr. Obama has instructed Speaker Pelosi to have Congress vote on the Senate’s bill, as is, and work out their differences later. Because the Senate has no chance of getting a 60 vote majority on a new, revised bill, this procedural trickery is the President’s last hope for winning his crusade.
For the House to pass the Senate bill, many a Congressman and Congresswoman will have to abandon their principles in the hope that, in the end, the Senate will justify their actions via reconciliation. Pro- life House Democrats will have to vote for a Senate bill which allows for public funding of abortions. Fiscally conservative “blue-dog” Democrats will need to vote for a bill which adds billions to the national deficit and many representatives from both bodies are uncomfortable with the President’s “individual mandate” in which all Americans are forced into buying federally controlled health insurance or risk severe fines and/or imprisonment. All this being said, Democrats have chosen to go the reconciliation route, leaving the American people with three options of recourse.
1. The bill is passed and the American people suddenly change their minds, rejoicing for their new taxes and Medicare cuts. They finally realize that the government knows best and that the citizens are mere peons with no capacity for political thought. All sing Kumbaya and go to bed.
2. The people organize resistance to the bill and the government intrusion it entails. In November, the Republicans take back the majority in both houses of Congress. The new Congress uses the reconciliation process to undo what was done and dares the President to veto their publically mandated repeal.
3. The President does indeed veto the new Congress’ repeal and seals his own fate for the 2012 Presidential election. Since the healthcare subsidies in the current bill don’t kick in until 2013, even though the taxes and Medicare cuts will begin immediately upon passage, it would still be possible for a new President and a new Congress to reverse the bill in its infancy.
“Don’t Tread On Me” is a long held motto and instinctive philosophy which reflects the American people’s view of big government. Federal invasion on individual liberty is as offensive to Americans today as it was in 1776. When the government over tightens its grip on the States’ and the People’s autonomy, Americans inevitably fight back. In the end, nationalized healthcare, as the President envisions it, will never take effect. All President Obama can gain by pushing his agenda, via reconciliation, is infamy. What he can lose, however, is far worse….. the future of his party, his Presidency and the respect of hundreds of millions of American citizens.
Jeremy PitcoffSmithtown Republican Committeeman