RALEIGH – There are so many compelling reasons to detest and oppose ObamaCare at this point that it has become a challenge to saying anything new about it.
The latest edition, emanating just before Christmas from the United States Senate, ostentatiously shed the so-called public option but maintained the core elements of the intended federal takeover of health care – the dictate that individuals and employers purchase federally approved health benefits on pain of fines and incarceration.
If Washington obtains such power, all health care decisions will inevitably become politicized and federalized. That’s what the proponents of ObamaCare want. They think that would be best. Obviously, I disagree – as do the majority of the American people.
The Democrats running Congress are willing to risk public disapproval, a political backlash, and even the loss of their majorities for the sake of nationalizing health care as a step towards their ultimate goal of remaking America as a European-style welfare state. But are North Carolina Democrats really intent on following these extremists over the cliff?
Consider Kay Hagan’s situation. As a freshman senator, she clearly doesn’t have nearly the clout of a Ben Nelson, a two- term senator and former governor of Nebraska. But her vote counts just as much as his does. Nelson famously withheld his vote, dithering publicly in his best Hamlet impersonation until Senate leader Harry Reid promised extra federal dollars to help Nebraska afford its share of the Medicaid expansion ordered in the Senate bill.
Complying with the federal Medicaid diktat would reportedly cost North Carolina $800 million after the temporary federal aid ends. Even in government terms, that’s real money. Not surprisingly, other Democratic senators are starting to complain that they weren’t offered a similar deal.
Strictly as a political matter, Hagan ought to cut to the front of the line and demand an $800 million federal bailout for North Carolina. One of two things would happen. Reid and the Obama administration might start ladling out “free” federal money to everyone, to keep their momentum going through the coming weeks of negotiation between House and Senate. That will make it impossible to maintain the fiction that ObamaCare will reduce the budget deficit.
Or, Reid and Obama might tell Hagan no – in which case, she’d have an excellent excuse to oppose the final bill, should a conference committee send one back to the Senate floor.
As for Beverly Perdue, she is badly in need of some major issue to change her fortunes. Right now, she’s the most unpopular governor in the modern history of North Carolina. Facing the very real prospect of another state budget hole in 2010, Perdue should consider grabbing hold of the Medicaid issue with both hands and not letting go until she gets either another massive federal check (bad policy, good politics) or someone to blame for the resulting fiscal mess, Democratic leaders in Washington, who are even less popular among North Carolinians than she is.
If you think it’s impossible to imagine North Carolina Democrats separating themselves from their national leadership, you have only to look at the choice that Reps. Heath Shuler and Larry Kissell made when ObamaCare passed the House. Representing districts with lots of conservative independents willing to swing their votes, Shuler and Kissell weren’t willing to sacrifice their political careers on the altar of government-run health care.
Now, all I said was that it’s not impossible to imagine Hagan and Perdue changing positions. It is, however, most unlikely. Shuler and Kissell probably got permission to vote no, knowing that the House version of ObamaCare would pass without them. If Hagan promised to withhold her support for any final bill until she got another bailout, and Perdue backed up her position, both would be hammered by their political friends and supporters for imperiling the passage of ObamaCare.
They’d attract new friends and supporters, however. I think Hagan and Perdue ought to consider it. But, admittedly, I’ve been accused of excessive optimism and an inordinate belief that reason can govern the passions.
I’ll hope for the best and plan for the worst.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation