ObamaCare Keeps Falling in the Polls
A business ad campaign could turn the tide even in the House.

By JOHN FUND
WSJ

The Senate's compromise bill on health care was announced on Wednesday to much fanfare. But there's not much there for moderate Democrats to write home about. It waters down a provision creating a "public option," but it also expands (to include people over 55) Medicare, a program already expected to go bankrupt in 2017.

The Senate bill is so unwieldy that the health-care system it will create will almost certainly break apart and force us into Canadian-style care. As Rep. Anthony Weiner (D., N.Y.) said in a statement, the Medicare expansion "would perhaps get us on the path to a single payer model." That grim prospect means there's still a chance to defeat or reshape the health-reform effort.

Opponents of ObamaCare will be aided by polls showing that it is even less popular than HillaryCare was a year into the Clinton presidency. Back in December 1993, Gallup found that 47% of voters backed HillaryCare, with 32% opposed. Today, an average of health-care surveys at Pollster.com shows support for ObamaCare at 38.8%, with 51.4% against.

The difference is that in 1993 and 1994, ads pointing out the weaknesses of HillaryCare were ubiquitous on TV. This time the White House has bullied the health-care industry into silence or sullen support.

But the falling poll numbers tell us anyone who tries to force a full health-care debate that pushes a vote past the holidays will not suffer politically. One reason the Democrats are frantic for a vote before Christmas is that they fear what will happen if senators have to go home and talk with constituents before voting.

Even if the Senate passes something before Christmas, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) says the bill will likely have to go to a conference committee. There differences between The Senate version and the bill that has already passed the House must be reconciled.

Mrs. Pelosi says "we'd do almost anything" to finish the bill this year. But it is unlikely the House will be able to vote on a final bill until January. That delay gives opponents time to raise money for a campaign aimed at House members who were dragooned into voting for the Pelosi bill in November.

That legislation only passed 220 to 215. There will be new pressures on members for a second vote. Louisiana Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, the lone Republican to vote for the bill, may not be able to support it again without strong limits on funding abortions—and several Democrats might feel compelled to join him.

Meanwhile, the new Quinnipiac poll reports that 63% of Americans believe covering the uninsured will increase their own costs, and that includes 44% of Democrats. Voters by 48% to 46% believe extending coverage to the uninsured would decrease the quality of their own care—including a majority of independents and 26% of Democrats. A full 74% of people don't believe the president's claim that health reform won't add to the deficit, including 53% of Democrats.

There is also the issue of jobs. The unemployment rate is 10% and a new study by the National Federation of Independent Business estimates that mandating that employers provide health care will cost 1.6 million jobs by 2013.

These are all potent issues if TV ads and grass-roots activism can be directed into the districts of House Democrats vulnerable to defeat in 2010. Fourteen Blue Dog Democrats who voted to pass health-care reform last month represent districts rated as leaning Republican by the Cook Political Report. Another nine Democrats hail from districts that are only slightly Democratic. Pressure will be put on the 39 Democrats who voted no the first time to switch their vote, but they will be hard to budge. There are enough votes among the three groups to make it agonizingly difficult to pass health care a second time.

Speaker Pelosi has told her members that health-care reform is so important she is willing to lose 20 seats next year if that is what it takes to get it. Polls showing Republicans leading in the generic vote for Congress make some Democrats worry that she is seriously lowballing the risk. She may not mind if some members lose their seats, especially if they are moderates who are possible future votes against her in a leadership contest. The Blue Dogs who are the subject of her political science experiment may decide they'd rather not be her guinea pigs.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... lenews_wsj