HEALTH REFORM: Medi-Scare or Medi-Spite?
The Republican stance on Medicare has Paul Krugman tearing his hair out. Or maybe he wants to tear their hair out. In a column titled "The Politics of Spite," he writes:
At this point, the guiding principle of one of our nation's two great political parties is spite pure and simple. If Republicans think something might be good for the president, they're against it -- whether or not it's good for America.
Now, it's understandable that many Republicans oppose Democratic plans to extend insurance coverage -- just as most Democrats opposed President Bush's attempt to convert Social Security into a sort of giant 401(k). The two parties do, after all, have different philosophies about the appropriate role of government.
But he argues that when Democrats opposed President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security, they did it in an ideologically consistent way. Not so the Republican assault on health reform.
The main G.O.P. line of attack is the claim -- based mainly on lies about death panels and so on -- that reform will undermine Medicare. And this line of attack is utterly at odds both with the party's traditions and with what conservatives claim to believe. (We wrote about this history a few weeks ago and linked to Ron Brownstein's look back.)
Think about just how bizarre it is for Republicans to position themselves as the defenders of unrestricted Medicare spending. First of all, the modern G.O.P. considers itself the party of Ronald Reagan -- and Reagan was a fierce opponent of Medicare's creation, warning that it would destroy American freedom. (Honest.) In the 1990s, Newt Gingrich tried to force drastic cuts in Medicare financing. And in recent years, Republicans have repeatedly decried the growth in entitlement spending -- growth that is largely driven by rising health care costs.
But the Obama administration's plan to expand coverage relies in part on savings from Medicare. And since the G.O.P. opposes anything that might be good for Mr. Obama, it has become the passionate defender of ineffective medical procedures and overpayments to insurance companies.
How did one of our great political parties become so ruthless, so willing to embrace scorched-earth tactics even if so doing undermines the ability of any future administration to govern?


















Post new comment