THE HILL
 

Reid’s bait-and-switch tactics

By Dick Morris - 10/27/09 05:38 PM ET

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had two problems. How would he get the healthcare bill out of the Senate Finance Committee without revealing the glaring potential fissures in his party over the public option on healthcare? And how could he lend a veneer of bipartisanship to a one-party bill?

He couldn’t allow a vote on final passage out of the committee with a public option in the bill because he knew that he would lose Democrats and would have no GOP support. But real compromise was always out of the question. He wanted his public option. So he evolved a strategy where the only bill that would be voted on in committee would be one that did not have a public option, all the while planning for the final product to have one.

So he used the bait of a bill with no public option to hook moderate Democrats like Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and the gullible Republican Olympia Snowe (Maine).

When the bill emerged from Finance, by a lopsided 15-9 vote, it restored to healthcare reform the momentum that had stalled due to the public outrage so evident during the August recess.

Then the dexterous Reid capitalized on that momentum to put the public option back into the bill, reversing the commitment to compromise that allowed the bill to clear the committee in the first place.

This tactic of bait-and-switch offers a foretaste of what Reid will attempt on the Senate floor. He obviously hopes to replicate these tactics in getting the bill through the Senate.

As he did in the Finance Committee, Reid has opened his gambit on the Senate floor by embracing a public option. He does this for two reasons: First, he wants to send a signal to the House and Senate militants that his heart is in the right place and that the final bill will probably have a public option. Second, he needs to have room to compromise so the final Senate version attracts the moderates he needs. First he veers left in order to then swing right.

His next move is predictable. As he awaits House action, he stands firm in backing the public option. And as he nears the point of a Senate floor vote, he will pretend to modify that option in order to attract moderates and perhaps a few stray Republicans. As he and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) did in committee, he will truncate or even abandon the public option to win unanimous Democratic support (and perhaps one or two Republicans).

Then, in conference with the House, he will pull the old bait-and-switch tactic again, jettisoning the Senate bill and embracing a full-throated public option in the final version that will return to the Senate.

At that point, he hopes to use the momentum of House passage and the imprimatur of the conference committee to try to persuade senators, and the public, that it is this bill or no bill and that only a proposal with a robust public option can pass.

The point of this strategy is never to ask moderates to vote for a public option until the final vote after the conference committee. Let them build a record of having opposed the public option to sell back home. Let Reid show that he tried to compromise. And only put the final test to the moderate senators at the very last minute, when all the momentum is on the side of final passage.

If he succeeds, Reid gets a bill with his public option. But even if he fails and has to delete the public option at the last minute to get Senate support, he will still have gotten the healthcare bill through.

By making such a fuss over the public option, with the connivance of the liberals, he keeps the spotlight away from the Medicare cuts, the end of Medicare Advantage, the inevitable rationing of healthcare, the taxes on the uninsured and the sick and the cuts in medical reimbursement. A bill with all these provisions — even without a public option — is pernicious enough!

And these tactics can still produce a bill with a public option.

Will this tactic work? It all depends on the political environment outside Washington. If the bill is only marginally unpopular (the current 40-55), it will probably pass.

But if public opinion moves another five or so points (to, say, 35-60 against), then the moderates will probably refuse to cave in.

Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage and Fleeced. To get all of his and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their new best-selling book, Catastrophe, go to dickmorris.com. In August, Morris became a strategist for the League of American Voters, which is running ads opposing the president’s healthcare reforms.

Source:
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/65063-reids-bait-and-switch-tactics

Comments (9)

Is Harry Reid , brain dead walking or just politically ignorant ?BY Howard Winter on 10/28/2009 at 10:49
Reid hasn't enough brains for that idea,although,h e may read this article.Hopefully he will be too busy poligripping his teeth to notice.BY rick on 10/28/2009 at 12:08
If we do indeed nationalize health care, it will be the end of the historically and uniquely free America that has persisted for 200 years. Our political leaders have been chipping away at our freedoms with ever-bigger government since the 1920s. We all know that bigger government means less freedom and higher taxes, but we have let it happen. Government creates no wealth, not value, and cannot help a single person without taking money from another person to do it. And then more is taken than is available to help. 65,000 bureaucrats run medicare. We tax wildly, pay the bureaucrats, then send what's left to pay the doctors and hospitals. How can that be a good thing? I'm aghast. We cannot pay for the entitlement programs we have now. Yet we are getting ready to enact the biggest entitlement program of all. How can we allow this insanity to happen?BY Roger Mercer on 10/28/2009 at 17:38
This summer I had high hopes that the "tea parties" were going to turn the tide against this power grab by the liberal Obama administration and the Congressional liberals. But, as of late, the tea parties seem to have lost steam, and we the people have lost our sense of outrage about this power grab. I have heard many times that we get the sort of government we deserves, I guess we don't deserve to exist as the nation we once were if any of this legislation happens.BY Jimmy Vickers on 10/28/2009 at 19:44
"Government creates no wealth, not value, and cannot help a single person without taking money from another person to do it"You're dumb. Government has a clear and important role, hence why it was conceived thousands of years ago as a social tool for creating and implementing rules upon the state-of-nature. Next time you're whining about government, go walk in a dark alley in a bad neighborhood. The service government provides is ordered and planned allocation of resources. Take a civics class, you dolt."We tax wildly," compared to what?" How can that be a good thing?"How can having an ultra-personal structure meant to help stabilize against greed and bad luck be a bad thing? People as individuals make selfish decisions meant to further their own well-being over that of others (which is why you're whining so much). Government is meant to alleviate that impulse by taking and distributing the reins.Concerning the actual article:The political duplicity involved here is nothing new, and if the senators in Congress aren't capable of figuring that out for themselves, then the people who elected them should be ashamed for voting for such stupid individuals. Trying to label this process as something that Reid came up with is both insulting to the process itself and to the reader; clearly this is just another attempt to smear a liberal congressman doing something that congressmen have been doing for a long time.BY Sean Allen on 10/29/2009 at 00:00
nationalize healthcare? public option does not = single payerEven with 65,000 buraucrats, the administrative costs are lower than any private insurer. What people who say "down with big government" never talk about is that "small government" = "big corporations." i trust people i can vote for any day over faceless executives in a board room. look what less government got us in finance. slowly, very very slowly it sometimes seems, our government is becoming more transparent. is it perfect? thats a dumb question. but we can constructively guide it. the tea parties where never going to turn the tide because they had more criticism and less ideas. As for the article. Nicely written. i had never considered another bait and switch after this one. here's hoping it works.Signed,A fellow american who lost his job 2 weeks before the company would have offered him health insurance and who would really appreciate his government helping him out to stay healthy instead of waiting until he is really sick and needs $100k just to stay alive a few more monthsBY kyle gh on 10/29/2009 at 00:19
The deluded responses that fawn over senator reid and big government are clearly those that like being led and decisions made for them. They have lost it and are clearly "blinded liberals". This Country was built for individual freedoms and personal choice and free will to live your own lives and make your own bed. Stand back from the issues at least one step. Question the validity of the government which presumes the public must accept government which creates endless new and layered bureaucracy which serves themselves not the public and demands the drain to the public's resources but without value to the Country. It the ultimate in oppression within our own Country with elected officials pursuing a relentless backroom Chicago-style political agenda little of which represents or resembles their constituents' wants or needs nor is in the best interests of the Country. It is the ultimate in oppression TO our Country when the public has to fight against a "badministration " which schemes in countless initiatives and policies which increasingly suck the life and freedoms from the Country, truly sabotage our way of life, trash-ignore-twist the Constitution for alien and special interests, and degrade our sovereignty to relinquish it to the rest of the world. This tragic situation and its consequences have never happended to our Country. It is tragic and frustrating that the public's only recourse may be to DIS-elect the radical liberal legislators via the voting booth and REPEAL all devastating radical legislation passed that will be the Country's misfortune to endure hopefully only temporarily without our Country's demise. The radical legislators are inciting a national revolt if they keep up their current diseased agenda…if they do not WAKE UP NOW.BY Robert F Hahn II on 10/29/2009 at 11:15
people say radical and liberal too much. lets not point fingers here. are you talking about the 'badministration ' that is currently in power and has been for 11 months that is trashing-ignoring-twisting the constitution, or the 'badministration ' of the previous 8 years? as for the 'country built on individual freedoms,' while this country has wonderful freedoms that are envied all over the world and i am grateful everyday to have been born an american, lets not forget that certain types of people wrote and talked about those freedoms originally while keeping certain other types of people in subjugation. this country was built on having the right to speak, write and demonstrate when your country is wrong, so feel free to speak, write and demonstrate all you want; but remember, constructive criticism works best. Good ideas are good ideas no matter who says them. And wanting government so small you can drown it in the bathtub will never happen. And if a revolt does happen, you can bet your bottom dollar it wont be the revolt you hope for.BY kyle gh on 10/29/2009 at 19:16
FYI. Badministration refers to its radical policies, the current administration…as opposed to the conservative values that our Country was founded on and our Country needs.For now, I am so glad that we still can get our conservative voices heard to some extent despite the suppression of the whole truth of what is going on behind the closed-door scenes these days. Revolt is in your mind. I hold to my oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is your excuse? The only revolt is the revolting prospects of seeing the current ministration going past four years from the beginning of an error on 20 Jan 2009. Good ideas from current ministration? Not a chance. Dollar? Hope it lasts despite current ministration subjugation to the World Bank.BY Robert F. Hahn II on 10/30/2009 at 11:40

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.