Health care rush is risky

Polls say more than half of Americans do not trust the health care reforms passed by the Senate in December. Incredibly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is unmoved by those numbers. And it doesn't appear to matter that careful reviews of the proposals suggest that they would do nothing to reduce the escalating costs of health care.

As you read this commentary, the "reconciliation" freight train is barreling down the track. On Wednesday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, announced he would support the bill after previously opposing it. Some pundits say his support was important because House leaders need 216 votes to pass the bill. It represents progress for the White House, which has been on a full-court press to garner support before the vote later this week. Democrats had promised 72 hours for the bill to be scrutinized before a vote. As of press time, the details had not yet been revealed. If the House passes the Senate bill, it would immediately consider a package of changes intended to make the legislation more palatable to House Democrats.

What's the rush, aside from an artificial deadline imposed by the White House? This probably is the most important vote members of Congress will take in their legislative careers. This race to the finish line makes Americans uncomfortable, and with good cause. Every single American will be affected by these reforms, for good or for bad. They deserve better than a quick rolling out of the details and a hasty vote later in the week. Republicans plan to introduce a resolution to force an up-and-down vote on the Senate bill or at least require an hour of debate.

In many respects, the rush job is an extreme political gamble. Midterm elections are about 230 days away. That's relatively little time for Democrats to sell Americans on reforms polls have consistently said they don't like. Yet it's ample time for Republicans to remind voters of the political gamesmanship employed to achieve the House's passage of the health care bill approved by the Senate in December, then moving on to a package of changes.

The most maddening thing of all is that there is an appropriate role for Congress in reforming health care, such as giving states greater flexibility in administering existing programs largely funded by the federal government.

Instead, the White House is insisting on a vote before members of Congress (never mind mainstream Americans who will have to live with the good, bad and ugly of "reform") have a full understanding of what the near-trillion-dollar package contains.