Democrats say elections won't stop health care
By DAVID ESPO
WASHINGTON (AP) - Far from chastened by off-year election
setbacks, congressional Democrats vowed no let-up in the drive to
pass controversial health care Wednesday, arguing that the way to
regain voter trust was to complete what they started in more
prosperous political times.
Any suggestion that ``we ought to run like scalded dogs from
trying to fix health care for this country is wrong. I believe the
judgment might be more punishing if we throw in the towel because
it's difficult,'' said North Dakota Rep. Earl Pomeroy, a political
moderate and supporter of the legislation.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi hopes to have legislation on the House
floor for a vote on Saturday. President Barack Obama, who has made
a health care overhaul the signature initiative of his first year
in office, planned to visit the Capitol on Friday, according to
congressional officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity
because the meetings have not been announced.
There is no timetable in the Senate, where the overhaul's
ultimate fate is in considerably more doubt, but supporters gave no
indication that the election results had complicated the challenge
facing Majority Leader Harry Reid.
While Democrats surrendered governorships in high-profile races
in Virginia and New Jersey on Tuesday, they also held a House seat
in California and gained one in New York that had been in
Republican hands for generations.
Depending on how quickly the newly elected lawmakers are sworn
in, it was possible the most immediate impact of the elections
would be to increase support for the legislation. ``From our
standpoint we picked up votes last night,'' said Pelosi, D-Calif.
Across the Capitol, there was evidence of incremental progress
toward passage of the bill atop Obama's domestic agenda when two
swing-vote Democrats sent signals they would vote to allow debate
to begin over Republican objections.
One of them, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, described Tuesday's
elections as a referendum on the economy rather than health care.
He said blocking debate on the bill would mean the end of efforts
to control health care costs.
``We're making progress on health reform,'' said Reid, D-Nev.,
who had set off alarms on Tuesday about the prospects for the
bill's passage this year. ``We're not going to be bound by any
timelines,'' he said then, although his office quickly sought to
soften the impact with a statement saying there was no reason the
bill couldn't be passed by year's end.
Democrats have said for months their success as a party in 2010
would hinge on their ability to implement Obama's legislative
agenda. At the same time, a president's party almost always loses
House seats in midterm elections, and often Senate seats as well. A
bad economy and high unemployment would make that even more likely.
Inevitably, that means some incumbents will lose their seats,
and forces some of them to make difficult choices in the months
leading up to the elections.
As for Tuesday's results, ``For people who have been undecided
it either keeps them undecided or moves them to no,'' said Rep.
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., who has yet to disclose her
position on the measure. ``The analysis of what happened with
independent voters is one where we have to step back and say what
can we do to regain their support,'' she said.
But there was at least anecdotal evidence to the opposite.
Rep. Tom Perriello, a Virginia freshman, said he had gone from
being opposed to the legislation to being undecided. ``I think it's
a stronger bill,'' he said, adding pointedly that the election in
his home state ``reminds us just how important it is to deliver
results.''
Republicans, celebrating their best election night in several
years, alternately taunted Democrats and sought to shake their
confidence on one of the most sweeping pieces of legislation in
recent memory.
``Let's throw his bill aside,'' Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said
of Reid in remarks on the Senate floor that referred to the
election results. He said he sensed hesitation among Democrats, and
noted Reid does not have 60 votes needed to pass the overhaul.
``You wouldn't vote for this bill if we offered it,'' he said to
the Democrats. ``You shouldn't vote for it just because your
leadership and your president want to see it happen.''
Corker didn't say so, but Reid needs 60 votes only because
Republicans, unanimously opposed to the measure, have threatened a
filibuster to block its passage. Absent their delaying tactics, a
simple majority would be sufficient.
One group, the conservative ``American Future Fund,'' readied a
print ad that warned Democrats they risked their majority if they
pursued the health care legislation. ``Blue Dogs: Vote with Pelosi
and prepare to color your district red next year,'' it said.
In the Senate, where Reid has struggled for months with health
care, it was unclear how the elections would affect a strategy that
has been sketched in private by Democratic officials.
The majority leader announced last week he would include a
government insurance option in legislation he would send to the
floor. That was widely seen as a gesture to liberals in his caucus
and union voters back home in Nevada, where he faces re-election
next year.
Within a few weeks, he will need the 60 votes for the proposal,
and if he is unable to get them will presumably fall back to a
weaker measure, perhaps one that holds the government option in
abeyance until it is shown that consumers don't have adequate
choices for affordable insurance.
According to this scenario, it would then be up to liberals,
generally in safe seats, to decide whether to yield to the
moderates who often struggle to survive - or risk collapse of one
of the most ambitious pieces of legislation in years.
Associated Press writers Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Charles
Babington, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Ben Evans, Andrew Taylor, Ken
Thomas and Erica Werner contributed to this story.
11/04/09 20:31
© Copyright The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.