On Leadership
Video | PostLeadership | FedCoach | | Books | About |
Exploring Leadership in the News with Steven Pearlstein and Raju Narisetti

Slade Gorton
Political leader

Slade Gorton

A former U.S. Senator and Washington State Attorney General, Slade Gorton served on the 9/11 Commission.

An easy answer

This week's health care summit presents Republican leaders with a difficult choice: (1) agree to support a plan that might be modestly changed to accommodate their ideas; or (2) oppose it on principle as too costly and intrusive and use the issue to try to gain political advantage in November. Which strategy offers them the best prospect of regaining power?

Given the fact that the president now wants the plan or plans that have already been so thoroughly rejected by the large majority of the public -- modified only by presidential add ons that will cost an additional $200 billion -- the answer is easy.

The Republicans should present their far-more-modest plan as a substitute, not an addition, and continue making the point that the president advocates a system that will cost most Americans more and give them less than they have now.

By Slade Gorton

 |  February 23, 2010; 6:19 AM ET
Category:  Congressional leadership Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: By merits, not partisanship | Next: Patriotic imperative


Please report offensive comments below.

This is the Health Care Plan from the Republican Party.


Being a Former U.S. Senator, you're not convincing at all.

Posted by: austininc4 | February 24, 2010 4:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I am so sick of all of the lies.

Social Security and Medicaid is tanked...and this EMERGENCY "health care" push is simply a way to wrest more tax dollars out of the hands of Americans to fund it - while giving a power-hungry president even more control.


You refuse to even admit, Obama, that Americans have been paying FREE MEDICAL CARE for illegal aliens for fifty years...and that LEGAL immigrants tanked the Massachusetts "health care reform." Washington CANNOT project figures AT ALL...because the target is moving and growing and not even in focus.

15-20 million illegal immigrants receive free medical care. We can't afford to cover them and Americans.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | February 23, 2010 11:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment


By all health care outcomes measures the US is ranked 37th (behind most of the industrialized world). Our inefficient health care system consumes 17% of the GDP, leaves 47 million uninsured and 1.5 million Americans unlucky enough to get sick go bankrupt.. The MOST expensive health care systems in Europe consume 11% of their GDP. They cover everyone and no one goes bankrupt because of illness.

The difference between 11% and 17% of the US GDP ($14.4 trillion, 2008) is over $850 billion. So theoretically, if the US switched to Single Payer (which for some unarticulated reason was taken "off the table"), our health improves, everyone is covered, and – IT PAYS FOR ITSELF!

Let’s have a reality check. Eight years of Republican leadership has left America choking on a $12 trillion national debt, a $787 billion taxpayer bailout of Wall Street, 10.2% unemployment and two wars of astronomical costs whose purposes are still unclear, with no end in sight. Middle America wants jobs, fiscal responsibility, affordable healthcare and quality public education for its children, none of which were delivered under a Republican administration and Republican Congress. Republicans had eight years to produce for America and they failed.

I've been a Republican for 32 years and voted for Obama and have no regrets.

There were numerous reasons which caused me to vote for Obama: (1) the need for Health Care Reform; (2) need to pay for new services with higher taxes on the rich; (3) misguided foreign policy on Iraq; and (4) the Republican bailouts of Free Market gurus on Wall St.

Republicans would have to progress a long way for me to vote Republican again.

This would involve admitting they were wrong on a lot of issues, something they have not yet been willing to do.

Posted by: shadowmagician | February 23, 2010 6:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Gorton

Unfortunately, I think you are wrong on this issue. The public likes the parts of this plan, they did not like the process.

Posted by: jjj141 | February 23, 2010 4:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I have question, Do you think for a moment that the Republicans would have Health care Reform as an issue if McCain was elected, No. Any Republican effort to most of the people I know is suspect at best, but if they have an idea present it. Not to unfair they have said something that will work but they do not care they really just want to stop at all costs. Iraq was the Blue-Ribbon issue and that is seemingly well on the way to resolution.

They are offering things that are seemingly slapped together out of desperation at the eleventh hour since they thought they would die like they did in Clinton's administration. They, when they saw that it was gaining steam, did not want to seem out of it and have had to come up with something, anything. The best thing that can happen is stop it, "so we can start fresh" to "get it right" which thank God Obama is not going to fall for.

The palatable fear of what is not being said is evident to most, If Obama passes any Health Care Reform, it will work and he will be re-elected and the Dems will probably have a successor they are grooming somewhere right now and the Republicans are out of their mind with the thought of 10 more years possibly at least out of any power and God help the Reps if Dems succeed at anything. They have underestimated someone gravely.

Thank you,

Posted by: katzedes | February 23, 2010 3:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment


You are wrong on the question the public are against it because there are other polls that contradicts your statement.
The Republicans have presented their plan and from what I seen from CBO and Factcheck.org: 1. the Boehner plan: it does covers only 3M while leaving 53M uninsured and allows the insurance companies to set the rate but it is highly unlikely that regulatory structure will be change to meet the cross state lines which the insurance companies can pick the state with the most lenient regulatory to set the rules like they did with the credit card by using SD as a place where the interest rate are uncapped.
2. Another proposal will undo employer based insurance plan by changes in the tax laws that make it worse rather than solve the problem.
Overall the Republican have offered plans that they have criticized the Democrats on.

Posted by: beeker25 | February 23, 2010 2:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company