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

Mickey Edwards
Political leader

Mickey Edwards

Former U.S. Congressman, Mickey Edwards is vice president of the Aspen Institute, where he directs the Institute's Rodel Fellowships in Public Leadership.

By merits, not partisanship

So the question is whether it is better for Republicans (a) to support a plan that is for the most part contrary to what they believe to be in the best interests of country (with a few minor concessions thrown their way), or (b) oppose it on principle and try to gain politically from their opposition.

It happens that I believe opposing the Democrats' health care plan is the best position politically, but that's a side issue. It is always best to support or oppose a policy based on one's evaluation of the merits and one's beliefs as to whether the proposal is good or bad for America.

Anybody who opposes legislation for reasons of partisan advantage is guilty of not doing his or her duty as a member of Congress; anybody who supports the legislation, even though believing it to be harmful, is guilty of the same thing.

By Mickey Edwards

 |  February 23, 2010; 5:54 AM ET
Category:  Congressional leadership Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: A big price to pay | Next: An easy answer


Please report offensive comments below.

ANYONE voting a biased partisanship vote is not voting for the people and therefore SHOULD HAVE HIS/HER SALARY REVOKED.

Posted by: menassus | February 24, 2010 11:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The bills are immature, unrealistic, and cost prohibitive.

Although I am forced to purchase automobile insurance, it is my state that requires me to do so and I accept this as its constitutional right.

Forcing me to purchase insurance from an out-of-control (you said it, Obama) insurance company in lieu of a fine and jail time - violates my rights...as I understand them.

If perhaps there had been a discussion about the constitution and how mandated health care was constitutional...then I might have felt the regard of my president and elected officials. The lack of maturity in this president's and Democratic party's approach to health care is offensive and degrading.

No American deserves this kind of treatment.

Posted by: easttxisfreaky | February 23, 2010 11:59 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!

The Republican arguments against this are so odd. Government doesn't represent the people; private industry does? We're against debt but don't want to increase taxes to eliminate it? We want to amend the bill but under no circumstances will we vote for it? The worst is the argument that we are defending some convoluted notion of liberty - let's see how many people are asking for liberty when they get sick.

Posted by: shadowmagician | February 23, 2010 6:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I hope when anyone who had a chance to better their fellow man's lot as well as better their own lot especially their family's, but chose to save money instead then I hope when the time come for someone to help him but they felt that helping him cost too much, then I hope when he draws his last breath he understand.

If this was all about money then I would agree on principles, but it is not. How can it be. The only people who think money is the issue seem to be the one's who do not pay for their coverage or those who take their coverage for granted. God help them because those people should take ten minutes to call their pharmacy and ask what their prescriptions cost with a Insurance card.

I have more stories than I can tell as anyone without insurance or who has lost their insurance can tell you. The issue is not money and when it is boiled down to money is when I think this society being a capitalist society has pennies on its eyes.
Thank you,

Posted by: katzedes | February 23, 2010 3:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company