Brown victory is a brake on health care reform

Scott Brown (R-MA) beat Martha Coakley (D-MA) by a margin of five percentage points to take over the vacant Senate seat left by the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) last night. Coakley had led the battle for the so-called “Kennedy seat” in the Senate by as much as 30 points in early polling, but rage against health care, a failed economic stimulus and other administration policies narrowed the race in the final days.

Brown began his campaign with a message of reigning in spending in Washington, but he became the face of anger over health care reform with a promise that he would become the 41^st vote in the Senate against the bill. The Senate had passed its health care reform bill with a filibuster-proof 60 vote majority on Christmas Eve.

Does this mean that President Obama’s care is dead? Is Brown the needed brake in this hyper-steroid race to pass anything for the president to sign?

I hope so. Brown’s election ends the Democrats 60-vote stranglehold on the Senate, where bribery and deals kept all 58 Dems and 2 Independents on board with a bill that is filled with concessions to unions, insurance companies and abortion supporters.

Brown repeatedly said over the course of his campaign that he will demand health care reform be conducted in an open and transparent way, with no more backroom deals, no more taxes and no more trillions of dollars of debt.

“Health care is not being debated openly and fairly; it will raise taxes, hurt Medicaid, destroy jobs and run our nation deeper into debt. It is not in the interest of our state or county, and we can do better,” he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) remained defiant in the face of defeat, swearing that health care reform will be passed quickly and soon.

There are three options for Pelosi concerning the current bill: One, vote on the measure before Brown is seated, which could take up to two weeks for certification of Tuesday’s’ vote; two, have the House pass the bill without any changes to the Senate measure and send the bill to Obama’s desk; and three, develop a compromise bill, but pass it by reconciliation, or a simple House and Senate majority.

I think all three would raise the ire of voters, not just in Massachusetts, but across the nation. Democrats are facing the normal challenges in the upcoming 2010 elections, where the incumbent president’s party typically suffers losses, along with the recent spate of resignations and announced retirements by prominent Democrats. Both scenarios have opened the door to more electoral referendums on health care and the administration, similar to this week’s Massachusetts’s election.

In addition, recent poll numbers show that support for health care reform has remained at 33 percent since being proposed in April, while opposition to the plan has nearly doubled from 26 percent to 46 percent.

In his acceptance speech Tuesday evening, Brown said, “Anyone who thinks you’re on board with their agenda, let them look at what happened in Massachusetts. What happened here can happen all over America. We are witnesses that ideals, heart and hard work can overcome the political machine.”

Another blow to health care is the increasing number of House Democrats who are not ready to accept differences in the Senate bill. Among the differences tripping up Democrat representatives are the lack of a public option in the Senate version, pro-abortion provisions and cuts on the surtax of so-called “Cadillac insurance plans.”

With all the signs pointing against reform, Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid, President Obama and the Democratic leadership should take their fingers out of their ears and listen to the message that was sent from Massachusetts voters, others at town hall meetings and tea parties who have called for a brake on the reform juggernaut — “Slow down and get it right.”

Polling date was obtained from the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll conducted Jan. 10-14, and it has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points.