March 7th, 2010
11:24 AM ET
3 years ago

Retiring Dem: GOP doesn't want to dance on health care

Retiring Rep. Brian Baird said Sunday that Republicans see health care reform as 'a potent political weapon.'
Retiring Rep. Brian Baird said Sunday that Republicans see health care reform as 'a potent political weapon.'

Washington (CNN) – A retiring House Democrat who is himself unsure whether he will back his own party’s health care reform bill criticized congressional Republicans Sunday for their lack of bipartisanship on the issue of health care.

“Tom DeLay was on ‘Dancing with the Stars,’” Rep. Brian Baird, D-Washington, said on CNN’s State of the Union, referring to the Republican former House Majority leader, who was also a guest on the show.

Later: DeLay explains turn on DWTS

“We don’t have a dance partner,” Baird said. “We don’t have someone on the other side who is seriously willing to say, ‘If you do these things, you will have our support.’ And the reason is they see it as such a potent political weapon.”

Assuming - as many in his party have recently – that the final health care reform legislation will get no Republican support, Baird defended use of a Senate procedural measure called reconciliation which allows certain budgetary bills in the Senate to be passed with just 51 votes.

“The choice you’re left with is a majority vote which I think most people think is how we ought to do things anyway,” Baird told CNN Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowley. “And, secondly, the Republicans used reconciliation on multiple times including for the mother of all deficit increases, the Bush tax cuts.”

Baird previously voted against the health care reform bill that passed in the House. Now the Washington Democrat is trying to determine whether he will support a final bill based largely on the version passed by the Senate but modified slightly to address some issues of particular concern to the White House and House Democrats.

Related video: Dem unsure on health care

Baird, who was a practicing neuropsychologist before being elected to Congress, told Crowley he supports the idea of overhauling the health care system. “We have to do something and I actually applaud President Obama and the Democratic Party for taking this difficult challenge on,” he said.

“The question is: Is this the best way we can do reform?,” Baird said of his reservations. “It is very complicated. It will be expensive.” Baird quickly noted that both the House and the Senate bill would be largely paid for and have both been projected to reduce the deficit over time.

Baird said he would have approached crafting a bill “a good bit differently.”

“I would like to see us start and say ‘What are the things we can agree on?’”

The Democrat told Crowley he thought most Americans agree that “you should not discriminate against pre-existing conditions. I think it makes a lot of sense to be able to buy policies across state lines so you have competition and you can carry your policy with you if you move or lose your job.

“The complexity, I think, worries a lot of people,” Baird added.

Baird also said Sunday that he is not swayed by the notion of voting in favor the bill because his impending retirement means he will face no political consequences for supporting an unpopular piece of legislation.

“My personal struggle is, quite frankly, could we not do this in a much more simple, elegant, direct, straightforward way? I think we could. I doubt I’m going to get a chance to do that, so the difficult choice for some of us is to say: ‘This is not the bill I would write, by a darn sight, but it is certainly better than the status quo. What would we do if we don’t have this option?’”

Asked by Crowley whether he would vote against a final bill after determining it did not met his personal criteria even if that vote meant that one of the president’s top domestic agenda items would not pass, Baird did not hesitate: “Yes.”

But Baird quickly sought to clarify. The retiring Democrat said it would be “a tragedy” if some type of health care reform was not enacted. “And so that’s the choice. I don’t think this bill is what I would like to see us do if I ran the universe, as it were, but I don’t get to do that so the status quo is unsustainable.”

After a year of legislative work on health care reform on Capitol Hill, the White House has recently stepped in to try to move the process forward. Right now congressional Democrats are waiting for the administration to release final legislative language for a bill that would be put to a vote in both chambers through the reconciliation procedure. The bill crafted by the White House would contain a number of tweaks to the health care reform bill passed by the Senate late last year. In order to harmonize the provisions of the two separate bills passed by the House and Senate last year, the House will be asked to pass the Senate bill unchanged and then both chambers would be asked to vote on the White House bill.

Senate Democrats have had to fall back on the reconciliation process after losing the critical 60th vote in their caucus when Republican Scott Brown won a recent special election to occupy the seat held for decades by the late Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Follow Martina Stewart on Twitter: @MMStewartCNN


Filed under: Democrats • Health care • House • Popular Posts • State of the Union
soundoff (130 Responses)
  1. Steve-Illinois

    If this bill gets passed, the Democrats will own it! Then in the words of the great Obama, they will find out exactly "what elections are for!"

    March 7, 2010 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  2. Mike, formerly from Syracuse

    @If I was crazy, I'd be a conservative too The 'major issue' of the GOP is the astronomical cost. Stealing $500 million form Medicare, already ean entitlement going broke, to pay for another entitlement is like opening a new credit card to make payments on an existing one. What part of fiscal responsibility is so hard to understand? WE'RE BROKE, GET IT, BROKE!

    March 7, 2010 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  3. Mike, formerly from Syracuse

    I have nothing against everyone having health care. They can just pay for it like I do. What part of the Constitution says that I have to fund giveaways to those too lazy or stupid to earn their own way through life?

    March 7, 2010 03:26 pm at 3:26 pm |
  4. Martin Blonstein

    Grayson had it right...the Republicans have given a lot of thought
    to their health care agenda. Here it is ! IF YOU GET SICK,
    JUST DIE QUICKLY !!

    March 7, 2010 03:31 pm at 3:31 pm |
  5. kim, salem

    Jules Sand-Perkins: Right now, whenever an unisured person visits an emergency room because they don't have insurance, the cost is born by you and I . Isn't a portion of health care coverage that employers provide for their employees a tax write off for corporations? You and I are "paying" for that, too, in a roundabout way.

    March 7, 2010 03:40 pm at 3:40 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6