The Wyden-Bennett Mirage

I like the Wyden-Bennett bill and sort of think that in a better world this is the kind of thing the Senate would be acting on. But I think the op-ed coauthored today by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Bob Bennett (R-UT) is pretty weird.

People sometimes ask, “why isn’t the Wyden-Bennett bill going anywhere?” After all, it seems like a bill with 12 co-sponsors, of whom five are Republicans, should really be moving. But the answer to the question is that the apparent level of bipartisan support for the bill is basically a mirage. As Ezra Klein has pointed out, there are people listed on the bill as cosponsors who oppose core provisions of the bill. If Wyden and Bennett really want their idea to play on the Hill, they don’t need to be writing op-eds urging the abandonment of the current path in favor of their approach. They need to be demonstrating that there actually is a core a group of Senators from both parties prepared to vote “yes” on a fairly specific piece of legislation. If you had that, then you’d really have something. But if you don’t have that then you really don’t have anything. When signing on as co-sponsor, Judd Gregg said he liked the bill except for his concerns about:

[T]he imposition of mandates; subsidies for higher income individuals; the impact on current market competition; the FDA labeling language regarding comparative effectiveness studies; and the issue of how to determine the appropriate level of coverage offered as part of a health care reform regime.

That’s like someone who lives pizza except for cheese and tomato sauce. Wyden’s done a lot of good work on health care, including some very useful and constructive contributions to the mainstream process moving through congress. Giving cover to Senators who want to claim to support reform without actually supporting anything meaningful is not, however, a helpful contribution.