The health care vote: Winners and Losers
The Fix, of course, is knee-deep (heck, we might be waist-deep) in sorting through the winners and losers from the health care debate that was.
Our first cut at those who soared and those who stumbled is below. Who/what did we miss? The comments section awaits your suggestions.
WINNERS
Barack Obama: No, it wasn’t the way the President and his senior staff envisioned the health care debate playing out. But, at the end of the day, a win is a win. Obama, accused by many within the party of a listless commitment to the bill, transformed himself into a strong advocate for a comprehensive bill — in the face of opposition to such an approach even within his Administration. (The trigger for Obama appeared to be the election of Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown in mid-January.) And, Obama’s decision to hold a televised health care summit turned into a master stroke, casting him as a honest broker — an image entirely consistent with the image he wants to broadcast to voters when 2012 rolls around. He ran on doing big things and now will have health care to show for that pledge when he asks for re-election in November 2012.
Nancy Pelosi: Is there a more underrated Member of Congress than the Speaker? Say what you will about her public presence — guarded and suspicious — she showed (yet again) that she has an unique understanding of her caucus and an ability to deliver votes when she needs to. Pelosi, like Obama, was a behind-the-scenes advocate for a “go big or go home” approach to the bill in the wake of the Brown victory — an approach validated by the vote last night. Pelosi’s final floor speech fell somewhat flat but reinforced that she is someone who does her best work outside of the public glare. And her best work is remarkably good.
Nuns: Yes, nuns. Their strong statement in support of the health care bill — issued in the middle of last week — helped blunt the opposition by Catholic bishops to the legislation and gave pro-life Democrats cover to back it.
John Boehner/Mitch McConnell: The Republican leaders of the House and Senate, respectively, kept unanimity within their conferences — although we heard that Rep. Joseph Cao (R-La.), who had voted for the health care bill last November, was a possible “yes” up until the end. Preserving their unanimous opposition allows Republicans — at a national and a race-by-race level — to make the case that Democrats and Democrats alone pushed through a bill that, they will argue, the American people don’t want. One slight detractor for Boehner: his floor speech at the close of Sunday’s debate was WAY too hot. The issue clearly evokes passion but appearing angry in politics — particularly on the House floor — is unseemly.
Dennis Kucinich: Who would have thought that the one-time presidential candidate from Ohio would lead the charge of Democrats switching from “no” in November to “yes” on Sunday. In being the first person in the pool, Kucinich drew scads of (largely positive) press coverage and proved (yet again) the importance of going first in politics.
Bart Stupak: Stupak became the face of the principled opposition to the bill for Democrats and stuck to his guns until the very end when he could legitimately claim he extracted a promise — in the form of an executive order — from the Obama Administration. When he rose to speak in support of the legislation Sunday night, he received a sustained applause from his colleagues — testament to the critical role he had played in the bill’s passage. In taking the slings and arrows from the liberal left, Stupak provided significant cover for the likes of Reps. Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.) and Steve Driehaus (Ohio) to vote for the bill even though they are prime targets for Republicans in the fall.
C-SPAN: How often has the Fix’s favorite television network been able to go toe to toe with March Madness among political/sports-obsessed Washington denizens? (We, for one, found ourselves flipping back and forth between the two all night.) And, what did C-SPAN deliver? The same “just the facts, ma’am” approach that has made it indispensable for political junkies since its founding in 1979.
Paul Ryan/Anthony Weiner: Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, and Weiner, a New York Democrat, both emerged as national players during the long health care fight. Ryan, long talked about as a potential Senate or even presidential candidate, claimed space as the leading policy foil to President Obama while Weiner, a once (and future?) candidate for New York City mayor, became the leading voice of the liberal left in the House.
Republican Attorneys General: With the bill now passed, watch for a number of Republican attorneys general to challenge the constitutionality of the federal government mandating participation by individuals. Such a stance is a clear political winner for these pols among Republican primary voters who despise the bill. As a result, it’s no surprise that Ken Cuccinelli, the top cop in the Commonwealth of Virginia and a likely 2013 gubernatorial candidate, was one of the first AG’s in the country to announce a plan to challenge the law.
LOSERS
Flip-floppers: Thirteen Democrats changed their votes from where they stood in November. Eight members went from “no to yes”: Reps. Brian Baird (Wash.), John Boccieri (Ohio), Allen Boyd (Fla.), Bart Gordon (Tenn.), Suzanne Kosmas (Fla.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Betsy Markey (Colo.), and Scott Murphy (N.Y.). Five went from “yes to no”: Michael Arcuri (N.Y.), Marion Berry (Ark.), Daniel Lipinski (Ill.), Stephen Lynch (Mass.) and Zack Space (Ohio). Not everyone on that list is in trouble for their switch — Kucinich being a prime example — but most of the above Members have ensured either a serious primary or general election challenge. Changing positions in politics is never a good thing but doing so on such a high profile issue is a huge electoral risk. Doubt us? Remember the whole “he voted for it before he voted against it” problem for Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) on the Iraq war funding resolution during the 2004 presidential campaign?
“Deem and Pass”: House Democratic leaders spent the better part of a week defending this parliamentary procedure whereby no actual vote would take place on the Senate health care bill before deciding to scrap it over the weekend. We get why they did it — they weren’t sure they could find 216 votes for the Senate bill and needed to make sure they could move forward even without it — but it amounted to another BIG process story that got them nothing but bad press.
Pro-choice groups: To get a deal done, President Obama had to issue an executive order reaffirming that no federal funds in the health care bill could be used to subsidize abortions. The National Organization for Women and NARAL Pro-Choice America issued angry statements condemning the decision but the White House clearly made a political calculation that appeasing the pro-life Democrats standing against the bill was more critical than making pro-choice groups happy.
Bart Stupak: Yes, in the Fix’s world you can be both a winner and a loser. While Stupak made himself a prominent and influential player within the Congress during the health care debate, he also inflamed the liberal left nationally and drew a primary challenge in the form of former Charlevoix County Commissioner Connie Saltonstall. While Stupak eventually voted for the bill, Saltonstall insisted she would remain in the race , a decision that makes the nine-term Democratic incumbent’s life significantly more complicated in an election year.
Mitt Romney: As soon as the gavel came down on the House vote last night, the former Massachusetts governor’s 2012 presidential campaign got a bit more complicated. With the federal legislation already drawing comparisons to what Romney did on health care in Massachusetts as governor, he will be charged with constantly differentiating the two for conservatives who are up in arms over the Obama plan. Romney, a savvy pol, is already working to get out ahead of that storyline; he issued a strong condemnation of the bill, calling it an “unconscionable abuse of power” — a statement that was immediately linked to on the Drudge Report, an influential news aggregator.
Civil discourse: Watching the debate on the House floor Sunday night (and the protests going on outside the Capitol) reinforced the growing sense that the idea of disagreeing without being disagreeable no longer exists within the halls of Congress.
By Chris Cillizza | March 22, 2010; 12:04 PM ET
Click here to read the full story.