Obama: From Idealism to Pragmatism

Barack Obama will remember these past two weeks as some of the most intense of his administration: it was the first anniversary of his presidential victory, Democratic candidates experienced electoral defeat in New Jersey and Virginia, and a tragic shooting at Fort Hood resulted in 13 deaths. However, the passage of his healthcare reform bill in the House of Representatives on November 7 by a margin of only five votes was indubitably the most important event.

Since his campaign, he has promised to make a change in the United States healthcare system with two key objectives: to achieve universal coverage of medical costs and to control the prices of the most expensive healthcare system in the world. Furthermore, he promised that he would work to achieve bipartisan support. With the Representatives’ approval, the Democrats are close to creating a national healthcare system that they have been promoting for 75 years. The debate over Obama’s proposal has been in the national spotlight for over 5 months and opinions on the issue have divided the political arena. Today, there are three versions of the proposal and none completely satisfy the Democrats. Regardless, the leaders have preferred to place a priority on pragmatism to pass a working draft than to risk losing another opportunity to make significant changes.

There are three key actors on this issue: Obama, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Their combined work has, until now, been enough to achieve that objective. Obama’s efforts include the delivery of numerous speeches to the American people and to Congress; he has made compromises such as not lowering Medicaid payouts in order to obtain the support of the medical industry and he has held informal meetings with members of both chambers to form coalitions and gain support.

The bill’s approval should be considered an achievement by Speaker Pelosi. Identified with the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, she showed flexibility by allowing the approved version to pass, which prohibited insurance companies’ use of public funds to pay for elective abortions. This amendment generated criticism from pro-choice groups and from the liberal wing of the party. However, it appeared to be the only way to allow the negotiations to succeed. Although Democrats hold a majority in the legislature, there are several new representatives from the party that are more centrist and are not willing to vote for a reform that might cost their reelection in 2010. With these restrictions, Pelosi was hardly able to gather the necessary votes.

The ball is now in the court of the moderate Democrats, although Harry Reid is even more pragmatic than Pelosi. His first job is to propose a joint version of the initiatives that came out of the Health and Finance Committees, and then to win the 60 votes necessary to that version to be put up for debate on the Senate floor. The votes of the 58 Democratic senators and 2 independents are not guaranteed, so Reid has begun to work for each vote. Last Tuesday, he invited Bill Clinton to the bench meeting so that he could persuade the Arkansas senator, Blanche Lincoln, to vote in favor of the reform. The other votes Reid is pursuing are those of the two senators from Maine, Olympia Snow and Susan Collins. Like Pelosi, he is willing to make compromises such as allowing states to reject a public health care option on an individual basis. Reid has promised that the bill will reach the Senate floor by Thanksgiving and hopes for a final vote by Christmas.

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid know that the battle is far from over. Senate rules allow any senator to propose amendments, which could delay progress. What’s more, if they can’t rely on the support of 60 senators, one single filibusterer could kill the initiative. Likewise, it is possible that new compromises will be made, now that Democrats are so willing to make concessions for the sake of any reform, however limited. Creating a national healthcare plan has been on the Democrats’ agenda for many years and the lessons of past battles have made them understand that it is not realistic to seek an ideal reform. Obama has placed this initiative at the center of his policies and knows that a failure in healthcare reform could mean a similar fate for other issues central to his administration. As Mexicans, we can’t forget the promise of immigration reform. Although the adoption of a new healthcare system would not guarantee the approval of other initiatives, it would demonstrate that Obama has the leadership to drive his programs forward and, perhaps, eventually consolidate them.