Colorado Progressive

There’s been a lot of attention paid to the following anti health care reform ad from the US Chamber of Commerce:

First off, I’d like to thank Betsy Markey (again), who was specifically targeted at the end of this ad in local markets, for not caving to the Chamber’s predictable, distorted, anti humanitarian efforts to defeat health care reform.

Second, I’d like to point out that not all Chambers of Commerce are in agreement with the US Chamber of Commerce. Consider this:

[A] delegation from the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other lawmakers to voice strong support for cap and trade legislation and the core principles of the Senate’s health care bill. The delegation included United Airlines, Pacific Gas & Electric, and several small businesses. “The San Francisco business community has a different perspective on some key issues that are currently being considered in Congress,” said San Francisco Chamber vice president Rob Black, explaining why he’d chosen to circumvent the US Chamber’s lobbyists. “We wanted to be able to communicate with [Pelosi] directly the San Francisco businesses community’s perspectives on both those issues.”

Along with the San Francisco Chamber–one of the ten largest Chamber affiliates—ever more businesses and trade groups are distancing themselves from the Chamber’s partisan tactics. Earlier this month, a Microsoft representative publicly repudiated the Chamber’s position on climate change, writing that the Chamber “has never spoken for nor done work on behalf of Microsoft regarding climate change legislation.” And business groups that together count more members than the US Chamber does–groups that include the US Womens Chamber of Commerce, the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce–have signed a pledge in support of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which the US Chamber opposes.

Prominent business groups aren’t the only ones divided by health care reform. Increasing factionalism is evident among Democrats, where uber-liberals like Jane Hamsher are determined in their attempts to derail reform for not being progressive enough.*

Also, consider this:

The National Catholic Reporter is joining American nuns and the Catholic Health Association in breaking with the Bishops and endorsing the health reform bill, offering the observation that “the bishops have to be clear that some of their talking points might lead honest observers to question their competence — or worse.”

If health care reform efforts have value in addition to improving health insurance coverage and health access for millions of Americans–and reducing the national deficit by $138 billion over the next 10 years–it’s that the issue appears to be forcing socially progressive announcements among groups that would probably rather not spar with their partner organizations if they didn’t have to. But the thing about sweeping legislation is that various members of various interest groups will speak up, and that’s clearly been the case within the Chamber and various offshoots of the Catholic Church. Looking ahead, these rifts may only widen as socially progressive, people-first legislation is introduced in America. The same goes for financial regulation, environmental policy, education reform, what have you.

*Hamsher is deeply concerned about abortion restrictions, and I think her position is defensible if one’s only consideration in weighing the bill’s merits has to do with access to abortion. Generally, however, I think it’s pretty indefensible to judge such a broad bill through such a narrow lens.