Editorial: Move beyond rancor on health care
In his opinion for the Supreme Court majority upholding the basic foundations of the national health care law, Chief Justice John Roberts may have said nothing more important than this: “The court does not express any opinion on the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act. Under the Constitution, that judgment is reserved to the people.”
Through their elected representatives, the people spoke in the spring of 2010. Their unanimity was not resounding, to be sure, as evidenced by the election results later that year and the harsh, lingering controversy that led to the case in which the court had to rule. But it was decisive, and now, the highest court in the land has said, it must be respected.
When oral arguments were completed in this case in April, we wistfully hoped that statesmanship would prevail over political partisanship regardless of the outcome. Believe it or not, despite the emotionally charged atmosphere in the aftermath of today's ruling, there are signs of that possibility.
U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert, a Hinsdale Republican, left no secret about the aspects of so-called Obamacare she finds objectionable, but pointedly emphasized aspects she does not and added that on the provisions that remain controversial, “it's up to Republicans and Democrats alike to work across the aisle on solutions.”
Even strident Democratic U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Evanston acknowledged that now, Congress must “get back to work” to shape the policy so it meets its goal of universal “access to affordable, comprehensive and high quality health care.”
Unfortunately, the immediate reaction of House leadership was not so sanguine. Speaker John Boehner promised a repeal of the legislation in the House within weeks even while acknowledging such an action could have no practical value because a repeal has no hope of success in the Senate. And his chief deputy whip, Wheaton Congressman Peter Roskam, quickly concurred, though he at least offered the promise that, someday, Republicans would develop and pass something “better.”
That kind of rhetoric ignores political reality. The fact is that the Affordable Care Act is in place. It has a substantial, if not overwhelming, foundation of support and, now, the approval, if not the blessing, of the highest court in the land. The time has passed for partisan rancor about the broad nature of the legislation. The time has come for roll-up-your-sleeves engagement to fix specific weaknesses that everyone, supporters included, acknowledges — to make sure the plan is properly paid for, for example, and that fears and concerns of small businesses are addressed, among others.
If nothing else, the Supreme Court ruling offers a welcome measure of stability. Individuals, businesses and local and state governments can begin to plan. Plan they should. And our federal representatives should assume the responsibility of helping them, both in terms of modifying the legislation and assisting as we all begin to navigate it.
It is worthwhile to note that, at its core, the Supreme Court's ruling was more a statement about government than about health care. True to his separation-of-powers principles, Roberts emphasized that the justices “possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments” and perhaps ominously, he stated that the individuals who are given that responsibility “can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them.”
Perhaps we will come to see this fall to what degree “the people” will punish or reward politicians with whom they disagree on the matter of national health care policy, but that is where the court's ruling leaves us. And from that vantage point, no rational assessment of the political landscape can deny that we have a policy in place that can and will reshape our nation's commitment to the reliability, affordability and accessibility of basic health care for each of its citizens.
Now, let the statesmen — and, yes, Reps. Biggert and Schakowsky, stateswomen — enter the picture. Let's put aside the struggles for political leverage and embark together on the search for practical solutions.
That's our view. We encourage you to add your voice and your reaction by clicking on the Comments widget and providing your response to this editorial. Let's have, here as we hope for in Congress and around the country, a provocative discussion but one that also abides by general rules of respect and civility.