Error: Unable to create directory /home/demockra/public_html/wp-content/uploads/2010/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server? What Daschle Means for Health Reform
by Kevin Van Dyke, Editor
November 19, 2008
Lost in the drama that always defines the Clintons, arguably the most important domestic appointment was leaked today and got relatively no attention outside of health care circles. What was the news? Former Majority Leader Tom Daschle has apparently been offered and accepted the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services. In addition, Daschle will be President-elect Obama’s point man on all issues related to health care policy.
Tom Daschle speaks at an Obama rally.
Make no mistake about it, this is a very important appointment. In fact, it is very hard to overstate its importance for anyone who cares about health care. Daschle will be no Tommy Thompson or Mike Leavitt, picked to head a HHS that wasn’t a top priority for their President. Daschle will also not be a Donna Shalala, who had no real power during the Hillarycare debacle. In his role as HHS Secretary, Dascle will be an all out Health Care Reform Czar for the Obama administration. In this role, Daschle will be charged to use his thirty-plus years of Washington experience and contacts to push comprehensive health care reform, including universal insurance, through the congress. And if successful, Daschle will be in charge of getting the new national health program (not to be mistaken with nationalized health care) off the ground running and through its first few years of existence. This may seem easier than the tasks awaiting the new Secretary of State or Treasury Secretary, but bear in mind that similar tasks to reform health care have failed many times over the past 60 years. I wrote more about this history last week.
With lessens from history as our guide, why does Daschle have a good chance to succeed where others, including Hillary Clinton and Harry Truman, failed?
- Daschle has the ability to get things done on the Hill. He served eight years in House and three terms in the Senate, including as Majority and Minority leader. In this capacity, he has the same core competencies that Lyndon Johnson, “the master of the Senate,” had when he ushered through such legislation as the Civil Rights Act and the expansion of the Social Security Act to include universal coverage for the elderly, disabled, and indigent (Medicare and Medicaid).
- Daschle, unlike Hillary Clinton, won’t be a divisive partisan crusader installed because of his or her last name. Daschle showed an ability to work well with Republicans during his time in Congress.
- Daschle by all indications has the full support of President Obama. Daschle was behind Obama early on in his Presidential race, and Senator Obama has returned the favor. Dashle was briefly rumored to be a potential vice president or chief of staff. However, I imagine Daschle would much prefer this new role. He is a smart man and realizes the potential impact and legacy of such a role, if successful.
- Key number: 58 or 59. With 58 or 59 seats in the Senate, his job will be much easier than Hillary’s was in 1993.
Any views expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of any organizations that the author is in any way affiliated with.
[...] Tom Daschle is a great selection for this post. I wrote a lot about this selection yesterday. [...]
let’s hope you’re right. my graduate funding is provided by a grant from the DHHS. funds have been seriously cut over the last 8 years, and we need to change that direction!
The key question is whether Clinton health plan failed because of her personality and inexperience in dealing with game changing initiatives or whether her plan itself was doomed. I would say the latter is the case. Dascle brings more of the same with more experience but that does not change anything. His plan is also doomed to fail.
I agree with you Kishore that those were two of the “general” reasons (there were more general and nuanced ones as well) as to why Hillarycare failed. However, you admit that Daschle is not inexperienced. In addition, he gets along well with those across the aisle, which Hillary obviously did not. How is Daschle a continuation for the Clinton group from 1992? I understand that he is a Washington insider, but he was not part of the Clinton administration and seems to be the polar opposite of the Clinton group in 1992 according to your criteria (combative and inexperienced). I think you need someone with Hill experience in order to get something through Congress. It remains to be seen whether he can do this or not, but he’s a better choice than most in my opinion. Who would you have preferred for this role?
Sure you need somebody experienced to get the job done. My point is that access to health care can only increase if costs are lowered. There are zillion opportunities to do this in the US health care system. At this point, it is as bloated as it can get. The system does not have an in-built mechanism to lower costs. Daschle type “reform” will only redistribute resources leaving everyone unhappy. As the choice of therapies keeps on expanding, some costs have to come down to expand access. Like lower rates of smoking, obesity, competitive bidding, national insurance, greater use of IT, etc. The list is endless. The Democratic program lacks intellectual horsepower to succeed. Worse, its a brain-dead program.
Yes, you need to lower costs. See my previous article on the type of reform needed to meet the 6 IOM goals (which includes more efficient, cost effective care):
http://demockracy.com/a-mandate-for-health-reform/
As I’ve argued before, this isn’t a Democratic program or a Republican program. Everyone must sacrifice something here. As you astutely point out, coverage is only half of the solution, if that. We need care that is more efficient, patient centered, etc. I do a lot of work in quality and patient safety, and to be honest, we get nothing for what we pay for.
Please read my other article on general health reform. After doing so, I’d be very interested in hearing your “non-democrat” solutions you have in mind. In other words, let’s go beyond saying what’s wrong and propose an alternative solution. What cost controls would you propose? More pay-for-performance? Negotiation with drug companies? More non-payment for never events? Limits on the medical arms race?
Thanks much for your continued commenting on the site. It is much appreciated.
[...] policy wonk, I found the developments with Tom Daschle the most disappointing developments to date. As I wrote here, I believed Tom Daschle would have been a perfect fit to get real health care reform… Granted, I write this before it is clear who Obama’s replacement choice may be, and this [...]