This is my attempt to learn some hopefully non-partisan
lessons from the Obamacare fiasco. The
overarching lesson is of such long standing in our culture as to have become
almost a cliché, but it is true – that if something is worth doing, it is worth doing
right.
We all know that, and yet with Obamacare, political
expediency was allowed to trump any and all other concerns. To enact Obamacare, recent presidential
campaign promises of transparency, public comment periods, and televised
debates were slain in their cradles and replaced by secrecy, backroom deals,
and midnight votes. Zero buy in was
sought from the other side of the aisle, and none was given. The predictable product of this process was
an unworkable hash of legislation, public response ranging from ignorance to
outrage, and political opposition, especially when the inevitable difficulties
arose, ranging from schadenfreude to
scorched-earth warfare.
We will never know what might have come of Obamacare if
things had been done well. Would the
public have been more accepting? Would
the political opposition have been more willing to reform rather than insisting
on repeal? I’m sure Obamacare’s sponsors
console themselves with the belief that things would have been no different,
but we’ll never know because they, even while they held all the cards, chose
the quick way rather than the right way.
I do see a hopeful contrast in Marco Rubio’s approach to
immigration reform. If he wanted to, he might
be able to take a page from the President’s playbook and ram something through
Congress (with an assist from Democrats).
But he’s so far refusing to do that.
He’s smart. He knows that if his
reform proposal is to succeed in the long run, he will need bi-partisan buy
in. He not only is giving a respectful
hearing to the opposition, he is slowing things down and taking time to assure
that all concerns are addressed. He
firmly believes that our immigration system needs reform, but he knows that
bad, rushed reform is worse than no reform at all.
How much better off we all would be if we had that kind of
mature, reflective judgment, be it Democrat or Republican, in the White
House. I appeal to both parties to be
careful in your selection of candidates for 2016. Please pick someone who understands that
American public life is more than political power. Pick someone who understands that we all must
live together and that the political opposition is a brother with a different
point of view to be considered, not an obstacle to be hurdled or an enemy to be
vanquished. If two such candidates are
nominated for 2016, then come 2017, we’ll all be better off than we are right
now, no matter how the next election turns out.
