E. J. Dionne Jr. challenges the House Republicans to expand their moral imaginations -- good luck with that

by Ken

Oh, that E. J. Dionne Jr.! He not only listens to what people say but challenges them to live up to it!

Today he's been led to wonder how the Republicans might direct the debate they insist on having ("House GOP to launch health-care repeal effort") aimed at repealing the health-care law so that it lives up to the inspiring words from the president's big speech:

Give the Republican leadership this: They have set up what may be the most challenging test possible of our determination "to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy." May this week's health-care debate do all those things.

And, perhaps suspecting that the Republican House leadership may not be in the forefront of the world's moral imaginers, or listeners, or empathizers, he has some concrete suggestions:

* "May I suggest in the warmest way possible that it would be an excellent start to a new era if opponents of the law would acknowledge that at no point did any version of the proposed reform include 'death panels'?"

The sensible idea on which this incendiary phrase was falsely based once had Republican as well as Democratic support and sought only to make it possible for those with life-threatening illnesses to get good information from their doctors -- if patients wanted it -- on the various treatment paths open to them. Really, nothing in the health-care debate was more destructive to honest discussion than the "death panels" charge. Can we at least put that behind us?

* "As The Post reported, the Republicans plan to argue 'that Obama's health-care promises -- including that the legislation would lower insurance costs and help spur job creation -- have not materialized.' Could they at least acknowledge that the law isn't even fully in effect yet?" And, he suggests,

perhaps they should explain why it's fair to hold the 10-month-old health-care law to this standard while they insist on continuing the Bush tax cuts, which, after a decade, still haven't produced the jobs they were supposed to create. Please note that I could have described the impact of the Bush tax cuts less charitably.

* Now it gets tougher. "It would also be hugely helpful if the Republicans began to detail what they would put in place of the existing law, and how their ideas would expand coverage, hold down costs and contain the long-term deficit. Constructive alternatives are essential to productive debate." And in the spirit of humility urged by the president, E.J. suggests: "In that spirit, the Republican leadership could graciously change its mind on the rules governing consideration of this bill and allow some amendments to be voted on."
E.J. has a thought too for "those who believe the new law is a large step in the right direction and that repealing it would be a terrible mistake": They "should freely acknowledge that it's not perfect and could use improvement. "

They should welcome bipartisan efforts to make it better. Many supporters of the law already think it should cover more people, could usefully include a public option and do more to control future health-care costs. The truth is that nobody has a monopoly on health-care wisdom and so, as the prophet Isaiah said, "Come, let us reason together."

Slyly played, E.J.! Still, this is another of those times when I wouldn't hold my breath. Remember who we're dealing with.
#