Colorado Progressive

Democrats are disheartened now, and with good reason. Any time a Democratic president has to remind a Democratic majority that they are indeed the majority, things can’t be going well.

And back home in Colorado, our elected officials are playing safe on the topic of health care reform, all except for Jared Polis, who, alongside a splinter faction of liberal Democrats, sees an opportunity to bring back the public option. Hey, at least he’s showing some spine.

Betsy Markey doesn’t answer to me, since I vote in Denver County, but she’s hunkered down with the Blue Dogs in an effort to smash apart the existing House health care bill and pass smaller, more “bipartisan” pieces. No surprise there, really, since Markey voted against the bill in the first place.

Diana DeGette, however, does answer to my vote, and I’m frankly stunned to read this in today’s Denver Post: “Rep. Diana DeGette of Denver said she’s willing to start negotiating the bill again from scratch if Republicans show a good-faith willingness to engage in the process.”

That’s a head scratcher, frankly. As the elder stateswoman of Colorado politics, DeGette ought to know better by now than to kowtow to the appearance of a bipartisanship that has left the building. Even to make statements that validate the notion of bipartisanship coming from obstructionist Republicans is to feed the false premise that Republicans want to solve any of these issues. They don’t, because it’s clearly in their better interests to let Dems wallow in the morass they’ve made for themselves out of all these elitist ideas about social change. In fact, the only thing that could make the GOP any happier right now is to do it all over again!

Ed Perlmutter is at least on track not to lose sight of what’s at stake, but as the Post points out, Big Insurance makes it impossible to just pass what we like from the bill a piece at a time:

Complicating that further, one of the most popular stand-alone elements — doing away with pre-existing-condition exclusions — is probably untenable to pass on its own. Insurance companies say they can cover pre-existing conditions only if the pool of healthy Americans buying insurance also expands significantly, as it would only do under the comprehensive bills.

Right. Well, so much for pushing through even popular legislation. Don’t worry, though. John Salazar is still working for health care reform for his constituents out there somewhere: “U.S. Rep. John Salazar of Manassa, the final Democrat in the delegation, declined to be interviewed for this story.”

As for our senators, the Post has Bennet in a pinch:

“I think it’s impossible to pick it right now,” said Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., when quizzed on which of the ways forward now being discussed he preferred.

Uh, sure. Need we remind Senator Bennet that the Internet never forgets?  The freshman needs to show a little gumption and at least let us know how he plans to advance the health care reform agenda. He might as well come out fighting for it, because the president plans to campaign for Bennet and the right will hang the liberal Obama agenda around Bennet’s neck and watch him flounder.  So he might as well do something and earn progressive votes where he can.

Mark Udall has raised the clarion call on DADT repeal, asking not only for an inquiry but a roadmap to resolution–and soon–and he deserves praise for that. But Udall needs to step up as a leader on murkier issues that will matter to even more people. Colorado runs something like 18% uninsured, and in Denver it’s pushing 23%. With that many lives imperiled by the status quo, it’s not enough to answer a question with a question, even when couched in a beloved football metaphor.

Meanwhile, Democrats are getting reamed on the issue of a mandate, which they sort of deserve if they can’t come up with a viable nonprofit health insurance option to compete with big insurance. We need ideas and action, dammit, and legislators who aren’t afraid to do their jobs while they have them. And if Democratic lawmakers do play possum on real, important issues, they’re not just going to appear vulnerable to Republican challengers, they’re going to alienate progressives, the very voters who might keep them in office.