Conservative Progress

I'm not altogether certain of the mood here; it could be sarcastic, smug, confident, hopeful or relieved. I'll leave it to the beholder.

After much delay and disagreement, a bill was finally passed through the cramped, torturous mechanisms of the national legislature and, like other, similarly processed substances, was not entirely what was expected; necessary, but by no means pleasant. Such is Congress's duty.

The short version is this; we went into the process intending to reform healthcare and wound up regulating health insurance. Make no mistakes, the insurance side of the house was in dire need of attention. It is understandable though, that so many people feel confused and even betrayed. There was more than enough hate directed at what finally emerged from both sides, right and left. The Conservative corporate lapdogs have been trying to sell the whole package as some sort of Orwellian nightmare scenario while the progressives rage about Obama and those I would call moderates "selling out". I have to admit it's tempting to agree with the cynics who claim that a "good compromise" means that nobody is happy. Its worth remembering though that while the Bill isn't a panacea, it does make several very good things happen and it does so in a gradual, phased in manner. Sudden shocks are rarely ever good for public policy.

As a purely political matter, I observed what I believe to have been one of Fearless Leader's "political jujitsu" techniques. In this case it was at the heart of the debate about "bipartisanship". To put it mildly, Obama approached the entire situation in a unique manner. He started more or less where he meant to end. He did not take a far left position or make demands for massive socialization; instead he offered to meet the right in the middle, and went directly to it instead of "negotiating down". The result being that the Republican opposition, which did start from the far right, was forced to either capitulate (thus making Obama look even better and losing the initiative) or completely Stonewall the operation, thus painting themselves as perfectly spoiled curmudgeons (which they obligingly did); in short, by not allowing the Republicans to look as though they were "defending the liberties of the American People" by negotiating with himself and the Democratic leadership, by taking the moderate position at the outset, he forced the Republicans into a choice between appearing malevolent and incompetent.

I said before that if this issue could be managed and sold properly that the Democrats would have a much easier time of it in November, and I maintain this...especially since they are trying to build momentum on the issue of Financial Regulatory reforms even as we speak. The Conference Committee has released dates and if this can be gotten through, followed up one more significant legislative item and continued improvement in job numbers, it might just be possible to make a case for taking national policies back away from the right leaning trends of the last few decades. Not that I'm advocating a sudden, lurching shift; vacillation between policy extremes will only serve to increase the resentment and paranoia in the two main camps.

It is quite possible and even necessary to make the procession back towards moderation a measured, even paced evolution...in fact, that may be the best of all possible ways to think of it; as being evolution, in the Darwinian sense. Slowly changing policies at the lowest level and observing the effects to sort between the malignant and the benign and the beneficial. Sudden, gross mutations can lead to spectacular failure and take the entire series with it.

On that note I'll close with this: I agree that reforms were necessary and I'll even agree that the Bill which came out was good...not as good as it might have been, but good. I'll go further in calling for Single Payer...but I am prepared to wait a bit, if need be, to observe the consequences and revise as seems appropriate.