Bipartisanship?

Here’s a real news flash: There is not now, nor has there been, any effort by Congressional Republicans to be bipartisan in their approach to health care.

Bipartisanship is as dead in the Senate as it is in the House of Representatives.

Their Way or The Highway

Yes, there are exceptions, notably Senators John McCain and Olympia Snow. And they are very good examples of bipartisanship.

Most of the rest, however, have no intention of working with their Democrat colleagues or with the President on this, or any other, issue. What they want is not “no bill,” although they could use the failure to come up with a bill in their propaganda.

Republicans want a defeated bill to defeat the President and the Democrats.

What is best for citizens does not matter. What is best for the nation does not matter. The only thing that matters, to Congressional Republicans, is that the Democrats are defeated. Here’s what Iowa Senator Charles Grassley said recently on this subject:

There's a feeling that the only way to get a bipartisan agreement is to defeat a Democratic proposal on the first hand, and then the Democrats will come to Republican leadership, and then, at that point, they'll know the only way they're going to get health-care reform is bipartisan…

What a shock. And, what a crock of…stuff.

When approached about compromises with some issues, they make issues out of other issues. For instance…

Abortion

The health care reform bills in Congress (for example, HR 3200 in the House) do not mention abortion. Why? Because the legislation proposed does not affect or change the Hyde Amendment that prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions by Medicaid participants. Now, Senators Enzi (Wyoming) and Grassley (Iowa) want legislation being considered in the Senate Finance Committee to prohibit women who receive federal subsidies to purchase health insurance from using their insurance for abortion. Those who obtain insurance but who do not receive any federal support in doing so would not be prevented from obtaining an abortion, if their insurance plan included coverage for it.

A Conscience Clause

Senators Grassley and Enzi also want a “conscience clause” included in federal health care reform legislation. This would allow those in the health care field to refuse to perform a service or act that they claim is against their moral and religious beliefs. If you’re opposed to abortion, then this sounds reasonable. But, what if the service provider is against blood transfusions, artificial respiration, or antibiotics?

Illegal Immigrants

South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson famously (infamously) claims that President Obama lies when he claims the legislation proposed in the House of Representatives prevents illegal immigrants from participation. This is a lie in itself: HR 3200 clearly prohibits participation by illegal immigrants.

However, Senators Grassley and Enzi aren’t against just illegal immigrants. They now propose that health care reform legislation include a five-year waiting period before legal immigrants can participate. There’s no explanation why they want this; it’s just another roadblock.

Controlling Taxpayer Costs

A favorite Republican theme is that the health care legislation favored by the Obama administration will cripple the nation through its cost. Yet the Senate Republican Caucus would greatly expand these costs if new demands by Senators Enzi and Grassley are met. Senator Enzi, for instance, says that the federal government should pay all costs added to the Medicaid program by any health care reform legislation. Both Enzi and Grassley object to fees proposed that would be levied on insurance companies, laboratories, and medical device manufacturers.

What Would Republicans Support?

Again, Senator Grassley claims these are among Republican demands:

• No rationing of health care
  Let’s ignore the fact that insurance companies ration health care every minute, not the federal government. Further, let’s forget the fact that legislation such as HR 3200 actually expands health care coverage instead of rationing it. In fact, let’s forget the truth in favor of the absurd.
• No government-run public option to compete with private insurance
  Instead, let’s allow private insurance to artificially set prices much like a cartel. Let’s acknowledge that private insurance is too fragile to withstand or cope with competition. Let’s cry “wolf” (and “socialism”) to hide the fact that the private option is patterned on Medicare, a system trusted by its participants. In fact, let’s scream and shout so much that Medicare participants forget that Medicare is run by the government.
• No requirement that employers provide health coverage
  Of course not. It would be repugnant to have large employers help pay for the coverage of their employees. Instead, let’s keep it as it is, where more and more employers are forced to cut back or eliminate health insurance for their employees. Let’s force those people to buy insurance as individuals or individual families in a much narrower insurance pool, thereby raising the cost of their insurance, instead. That’ll work.
• Curbs against malpractice lawsuits
  Yeah, let’s blame the lawyers for the high cost of health care insurance.

President Barack Obama began the effort to reform our dysfunctional health care (non-)system with the hope that the House of Representatives and the Senate would develop and pass similar bills, bills with provisions that corresponded with the broad goals he had discussed and that would attract bipartisan support. apparently, he believed that Republicans and Democrats would heed the hard data and the needs of constituents.

Republicans do not care about their constituents. Instead, they just want to “break” Obama and his administration. Doesn’t matter that they lost the election and that over 69 million US citizens voted for Obama.

It should be important to remember that many of their constituents have no health care insurance coverage today. But, to Congressional Republicans, it’s not.