The U. S. Senate presented the country with its version of the nation’s health care future in the early morning hours the day before Christmas. Most Americans were focused on the joys of a family oriented Holiday, but in D.C. the pillars of our political elite were hard at work.
No Holiday for them. The nation’s business intruded and Holidays could wait. The spirit of Christmas would not penetrate the somber corridors of power. Rather, Democrats and Republicans alike hurled insults and accusations at each other, and the anger of partisanship snuffed out the message of Christmas.
That message was not all that was sacrificed on this Eve of Christmas. The importance of process suffered grievous wounds and the triumph of the Democrats’ heath care package as the end justified for them the sordid means necessary to achieve it.
This was appalling to watch, and that it occurred on Christmas Eve was the ironic handmaiden to the uncommon exhibition of legislative debauchery.
In one sense it was nothing new. Just the same Washington political coarseness that has characterized our national politics since our grand experiment in self-government started.
And it is surely bipartisan. Both parties have been equal opportunity practitioners. It’s about the only example of bipartisanship left.
But one senses that this time it’s different. More flagrant. Higher stakes. Much greater consequences. Far, far more offensive.
The fact that support for the most far-reaching health care legislation in our history is bought with pork barrels on steroids is mind-boggling!!
Sixty United States Senators and one President bound together by victory at any price-literally-is so disheartening.
Think of it. One state-Nebraska-gets at least $100 million for its Medicaid program– paid for by the taxpayers from the other 49– to purchase the vote of the essential 60th Senator!! Have they no shame?
No, it’s not just a bridge to nowhere. It’s not just typical K Street, DC wheelin’ and dealin’. It’s not just another earmark or a special appropriation.
It’s a bribe for a vote for potentially the most consequential piece of legislation in the last fifty years. Unfortunately, it was not the only one - just the most visible.
Process matters and the end does not justify the means. Each must have standards of decency and integrity that stand the test of time.
We have hardened to what our national political life serves up to us. Cynicism reigns. We have lost the capacity to be offended, even saddened by what we see.
But, I am sad this Christmas. I worry that something so very valuable to our national life took a crippling shot to its vital parts when Ben Nelson said yes.
I hope I am wrong. But, what was done to achieve victory on Christmas Eve is unnerving.
Finally, I believe Jim Webb and Mark Warner are decent men and that they respect the values and institutions of this great nation.
So, I don’t understand their silence in the face of such blatant dishonesty and hypocrisy. We need someone to find the political courage to say, “My party asks too much of me. I cannot countenance this affront to the moral fabric of our democracy. My vote is not for sale and I will not aide the purchase of someone’s whose is. Whatever the personal consequences for my career this must stop. Here. Now.”
There have been men and women like this in our history. Where are they now?
Wyatt Durrette is a Director at DurretteBradshaw, PLC (www.durrettebradshaw.com) and co-founder of the XDL Group. He served three terms in the House of Delegates and was the Republican candidate for Governor in 1985.
Mr. Durrette:
Well written. However, I must disagree with your conclusion that Webb and Warner are decent men. Decent men would not play the endless games that these two have been playing. Warner has a long history of self-promotion and saying anything to get elected. Mark Warner is not an internet entrepreneur. He is a slippery lawyer who exploited loopholes in the federal government’s idiotic spectrum auctions in the 1980s. When he ran for governor he publicly said (13 times) that he would not raise taxes. Once elected, he did just that. He cannot be trusted and I am not at all surprised to see his recent behavior. Jim Webb is more of a disappointment to me. I always thought of him as a stand up guy. However, his recent maneuvers seem to tell a different story. He says he has problems with thealth care bill. Then he votes to end the debate (effectively passing the legislation). I imagine he will vote “no” on the actual vote. Then, he’ll say he opposed the bill. This, of course, is just deceit. However, he’ll hope nobody notices and the DNC spin doctors can pull him out of the ditch next election. I doubt they will be able to salvage him.
Finally, the sad show in Washington is just getting started. Energy will be the next disgusting partisan battleground and it will make health care look tame. After that, expect round 3 to be a massive tax increase required to (partially) pay for these catastrophic blunders.
Meanwhile, the sheeple will keep saying “baa, baa, baa” as they go to the polls and vote for the candidates of one or the other completely and totally corrupt political parties.
Groveton - I tend to agree with a lot of what you posted; especially your sentiments regarding Warner and Webb. I too find their position on the Christmas Eve vote quite troubling. I wonder aloud whether they are working for the people of Virginia OR the Democrat Services Corporation. There is no way they can justify their vote was based on integrity given the $100M payoff to Nelson; $300M payoff to Landreiu; millions to Sanders, and: $100M for Dodd.
To cap off this piece of crappola legislation is the nugget Reid inserted that it will take a super majority to repeal the aptly named “death panels”.
Btw, until 2008 I was a staunch Dem. Now, I’m wandering freely in the fresh air of Independence.
In my opinion, too few politicians were willing to take on this issue as a challenge to make good public policy. Too many saw it is a way to fight the partisan fight — beginning with the GOP who drew the political line in the sand and took it on only as a chance to “break” President Obama, not an opportunity whose time had come to address a problem with enormous moral and financial dimensions for all of us.
I am unhappy with some aspects of the bill, but I lay the shortcomings of it to the influence of lobbyists and corporations that want to drive the profit margins higher in an “industry” that is not compatible with the profit motive.
When a significant portion of the people’s representatives decided at the start to bail out of the process and sabotage it at every turn, and many others arrived at their decisions only by trying to divine what would get them re-elected in future votes or what would yield the best contributions from “the industry” rather than what would be good public policy, then yes, a few vote hustlers got to name their price at the end. Shame on them, but they are just a small part of the story. They will claim that the people can send them home if they don’t like the job they did.
So I am with you on that count. Let’s see if the voters can find some people who will not succumb to the money flowing from corporate America to buy votes at pennies on the dollar in terms of the tax dollars funneled back into corporate pockets via tax breaks, no-bid contracts, large mark-ups and legislative changes that legalize the continuing redistribution of wealth from taxpayers to the already-richest tip of the income pyramid. Then get ready for everything the entrenched special interests can throw at those candidates.