| Amherst Guy just made a good point in the comments of my post about the health care reform bill passing the House.
Here is his comment:
I challenge everyone to wait and see how they vote on the final bill, the one that comes out of conference, before they cast judgement.
It reminded me of what happened earlier this year when Congressman Eric Massa was one of 24 Democrats to oppose the housing bill. That bill, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, was seen as progressive legislation to address the housing crisis and assist families who were in danger of losing their home. Massa was criticized for his vote, but when the bill went to conference and came back for a vote in the House, he voted for the revised bill.
Could the same thing happen with health care? Definitely.
This was passed along to me as an explanation for Massa's vote coming from Massa himself.
"I believe this bill, for a laundry list of details that all stem from employer-based, unregulated, private, for-profit health insurance, will make our health care system worse. An impact on Medicare, objections to constitutionality, impacts on rural health care, a lack of true cost control, a tremendous expansion of federal overhead, a lack of a true public option, a lack of expansion of doctors, are all debatable points.
That said, my opposition does not come from Washington, D.C. political talking points, but rather from a decade of study and immersion in this subject. The constituents of this Congressional District did not hire me to pander to them or tell them what I think they want to hear. They hired me to fully understand - in detail - the legislation I am asked to consider and only support that which I think will help. That is what I have done. That is why I voted no on H.R. 3962."
No one's vote seems to be more scrutinized than Massa regarding this health care bill. His vote against this bill is disappointing. I respect his position and do understand his stance, but I would like to see him say that while it is not perfect, it is better than no reform at all. This bill is not a terrible bill. Could it be better? Yes. But considering all we had to go through to get to this point, it's a solid piece of legislation. It's a great starting point on an issue (health care reform) where we have had no starting point for a century.
That's the bad news for Massa. This was a historic vote and being on the wrong side of the vote isn't helping him, at least among the netroots and progressives. Only two members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus voted against the bill: Dennis Kucinich and Massa. Kucinich's vote, according to an e-mail he sent out today, was because of the bill's continued support of a private insurance industry and the lack of a single payer system. Massa gave other reasons, as listed in the statement above.
The good news for Massa is that this may not be the last vote on health care. If a conference bill comes to the House (getting a bill passed in the Senate will be a long-hard fight, but possible), Massa will have a second chance. And then that will be THE historic vote. If he votes for it, redemption is his and he will have voted for true reform. If he votes against it, the outrage many in the netroots have now won't go away. |
