Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
So Wait, Ryan Doesn’t Have Any Responsibility Here?
So, I was reading Jonah Goldberg yesterday and he had this:
On Saturday morning, Trump placed the blame squarely on the House Freedom Caucus, the 30-odd members of Congress who reportedly kept changing their demands until it was clear they were never going to support the American Health Care Act. Nor is there a single quote from a member of Congress echoing this sentiment, even from the Freedom Caucus. The people in the room understand that Ryan, who clearly made some mistakes, nonetheless acted in good faith to move the president’s agenda. The Pirro crowd, however, can’t endorse the effort to blame the Freedom Caucus, because it’s the heir of True Conservatism. If Trump found himself in opposition to the group, it must be because he was tricked — by Ryan’s irresistible “swagger.”
The second point: Contrary to what Pirro says, she and the other members of Trump’s amen chorus did expect him to work miracles, or at least they said as much. Indeed, during the campaign, Trump said “it will be so easy” to get rid of Obamacare. Trump and his boosters insisted there was nothing he couldn’t do with his Jedi-like negotiating skills and gift for “winning.” So the only explanation that can rescue them from the agony of cognitive dissonance is to insist that Trump was betrayed. That’s why Hannity’s claim that Trump did “everything in his power” to get the bill passed is an accidental admission against interest. It concedes the falsity of the idea that Trump is a modern-day, omni-competent Cincinnatus who will lay down his golf bag to save the republic.
So my only two choices are to blame Trump or to blame Ryan, and if I am blaming Ryan I am avoiding the agony of cognitive dissonance? I feel rather set up here. Apparently, according to Mr. Goldberg, if I don’t put all the blame at the feet of Trump for the failure of this legislation, I am in thrall somehow to Trump.
I have to say that this is a fine example, a fine example, of what it is like to be spoken down too by my betters for supporting Trump. A caricature is built of a unreasonable person, a few people with extreme positions are picked to be spokespeople, and anyone supporting Trump, or feeling that the GOP in the House shares some blame is only avoiding the negative feelings that his savior is betraying him.
Well.
The GOP has had seven years to come up with a plan. Both houses passed a resolution from Tom Price in 2015 Obama vetoed. I cannot help but notice they did not even try to pass that. Trump did not write this legislation, it came from the House. To lay its failure at Trump’s feet, seems odd, indeed. I am not looking to scapegoat Ryan. I blame the entire GOP in Congress who has had seven years to come up with a solid repeal and replace plan. I blame the entire GOP in Congress for being unwilling to ignore Democrat appointed parlimentarians and make their own rules on reconcilliation. I blame the entire GOP in Congress for passing over a dozen resolutions to repeal Obamacare they knew would not be signed into law, but blanching the moment that progress might be made.
The GOP does not appear to want to rock the boat. They promised us, for (dare I say it) seven years, they would repeal it. “Vote for us to stop Obama! We will undo Obamacare!” Those promises were lies. John Podhoretz castigated anyone who believed them, saying “They all lie.” That was on a Ricochet podcast, where he was dismissing the anger and sense of betrayal loyal voters had at the GOP for “not doing anything.” Oh, one can argue they did “a lot” or “what they could” to block Obama. That was not what Mr. Podhoretz was saying, however. So the GOP got elected on the lie they wanted to repeal and replace Obamacare, as evidenced by the first chance they get, they have nothing ready to go, not even passing one of their old resolutions. And Mr. Goldberg says it is Trump’s fault. Let’s sequence that out:
- GOP has seven years to get something ready.
- They create something horrible that will not get the support of the Freedom Caucus no matter what.
- Trump supports the bill they create, and goes to work spending capital to get it passed.
- The House cannot pass it, delivering Trump a defeat.
- It is Trump’s fault for the failure.
- Blaming Ryan is just a way to avoid the truth about Trump.
- This proves Trump is not conservative
- If he ends up working with Democrats because the GOP refuses to work with him, that is the fault of the people who are in thrall to Trump, not the GOP who refuses to work with the President in their own party.
- We will have less conservative victories.
Here is my formulation, which is a bit different:
- GOP has seven years to get something ready.
- They create something horrible that will not get the support of the Freedom Caucus no matter what.
- Trump supports the bill they create, and goes to work spending capital to get it passed.
- The House cannot pass it, delivering Trump a defeat.
- The GOP in Congress is a fault because they did not create a bill they themselves could pass.
- Ryan is Speaker of the House, and therefore he gets the blame for pushing something the GOP won’t pass.
- This proves the GOP is not interested in advancing the conservative interests of the base.
- If Trump ends up working with Democrats, it will be the fault of the GOP in Congress for not working with the President of their own party.
- We will have less conservative victories.
For the record, I would have liked for Trump to have said “You bozos have had seven years to come up with something, and you send me this crap? Go back to the drawing board and send me something you might even be able to pass!” Maybe next time he will, after this loss.
Published in General
There seems to be agreement from all sides on that.
If we’re talking about the writing of the bill itself, then I agree with you.
But after the bill was written, Trump and the administration threw their full weight behind it, which makes it theirs as well. In meeting after meeting, they told the Freedom Caucus that this was the final bill and that they weren’t interested in negotiating.
It may well be that the Freedom Caucus was too recalcitrant and should have compromised or found a way to vote for the bill, but they were on one team and Trump and Ryan were on the other.
Posturing instead of making a difference.
Yep.
I guess, if you want to be extremely uncharitable. The way I see it, this has more to do with the schizoid nature of the American Electorate than anything particular congressman or President.
It would have, indeed. It appears, Goldberg attaches no blame at all to Ryan, because he spends all his time going after others.
It it not being uncharitable. If one only acts when you know there will be no change, you are seeking that change. You are engaged in Posturing as much as someone who brags about driving an electric car, powered by coal plants.
I call that politics.
I don’t necessarily disagree, but I think this process of: here is the bill now vote for it (which is not new to the House under Democrats or Republicans) helps create the situation.
The Freedom Caucus does not tend to hide their opinions. Take it or leave it will not sway them. Here is the open debate offer what ever amendments you want, would probably work better.
There is a difference between I tried to make it better but did not have the votes and I voted for what the Speaker told me to.
I agree. Posturing instead of making a difference is the heart of politics. And I think calling it posturing in much more charitable than what I could call it.
I’m not sure that assigning blame is that helpful. The important step to take is figuring out what happened, who was involved in what unfolded, what was missing that could have made them successful, what needs to be done to help ensure success the next time. We will still have the same players, so figuring out adjustments and different strategies would be the biggest help.
I see what you’re saying, but in the end is tends to be the Freedom Caucus that is intransigent on compromise. That may or may not be a good thing but right now its preventing any sort of real reform – and as bad as this bill was it did great things for Medicare and overall spending.
Wise.
Unless I missed something — been known to happen — that’s an inference that isn’t supported by the article. Goldberg opens:
As I read him, Goldberg was pushing back against the notion that Ryan is solely to blame and that President Trump is wholly innocent. If you think President Trump should bear at least some blame for what happened, then you’re not part of the phenomenon he was describing.
Did they need someone strong on Healthcare?
They had a majority in the House and Senate telling them for years that they would repeal Obamare. These same people ,(most of them were re-elected or not up, very few Republicans lost their primary bids) that passed a repeal bill in 2015 for Obama to veto, were sent back to DC by the voters.
So the voters are wrong for thinking that their elected representatives would put the same repeal bill in front of a Republican President that the Republican Congress put in front of a Democrat President, and assume that bill would be signed?
I understand. I take the position that we have people who vote Republican who do entertain the notion that they want government to do things. We have some Republicans who are elected running on that as a platform. Not much to do there, they are what they are. Then we have some who get strong, mixed messages as you say. I like those who campaign on an issue in a certain way and then go that way when it’s time to vote. That doesn’t preclude a changing of that vote when the wind blows a certain way, but that becomes an opportunity for horse-trading, so to speak. I don’t like those who campaign one way and vote another, IOW, elected under false pretenses. We had all of them for repeal when there was no risk. And these are times when we can separate the representatives of the people from the politicians. There may be a way to repeal just part of what is in place but no really crucial piece can go past this first effort. I think that might be what stopped the Freedom Caucus support.
Susan,
Blame is the name of the game, when there is a civil war. The wounds created after the primary was over are deep, lasting, any may yet destroy the party.
I am not on the “Trump can do no wrong” train. However, no one can deny, that, say with a President Rubio, there would be more support from the Right for the Whitehouse, even if this exact bill was rolled out and lost. Heck, Rubio received and receives all sorts of apologia for the Gang of 8, a most un-conservative act.
So, my guess is, the blame will continue, as the extremes in each camp look for every opportunity to tell the other side “I told you so!”
Yuck.
I completely agree. It’s just such a waste of time. I double your “yuck”!
I’m confused, you think the way to bridge the divide is to go around blaming people for failure?
Okay, Bryan, how much of the blame (a rough percentage is fine) do you think Trump deserves for this ACHA debacle?
I agree they all share blame, and that this effort was a false start. Indeed, likely to be a false start from the get-go, given the cast of characters involved. Which is why, though I blame all parties, I’m not mad at any (including not mad at Trump) for the false start.
Trump campaigned on being a political outsider. I was a little skeptical as to how much of an outsider he was, but so far, he’s proven himself less of an insider than I worried he’d be, which has been largely reassuring.
The purpose of electing an outsider is to change how the insiders do things. We presume outsiders and insiders speak different “languages” (else why even use the inside/outside dichotomy?). People voted Trump because they believed the “language” of DC was no longer the “language” of Americans. Given this, it would be some sort of miracle if there weren’t a spate of false starts the first several times the outsider and insider crowd had to work together.
Was this a particularly ill-chosen issue to have a major false start on? Yeah. On the upside, maybe this false start taught all involved some particularly important lessons about this very important issue.
Well, that’s right. Maybe it’s not blame to be placed as much as it is trying to understand why the leaders in this effort don’t spend time getting to know the players and their positions before talking about a vote on a bill. They failed to do that.
And having brought up the idea of different languages…
Bryan,
I don’t see how anybody but Ryan can really be blamed for what happened. Nobody had seen this 18 days before the vote. There wasn’t time for anyone outside the beltway to digest it and react to it. This is part of the standard operating procedure that is assumed to be smart. It could only work if the key groups within Congress had been properly addressed. Why compromise when the Dems & Republican Moderates won’t support it? You blow your base away and the people who you supposedly brought on board are sticking a knife in your back anyway. Why not go with your strength. The President, in fact, made the two most important points well before the vote. Point 1: Obamacare is imploding. Point 2: the Dems hate us so much they won’t vote for anything we propose. If you put the President’s two points together you get the strategy. Making it conservative enough so that it won’t implode is the first priority. Otherwise, you don’t really have anything to sell. Second, why worry about compromising when the Dems will stiff you no matter what you propose. Count them as a loss and put the best Bill you can do forward. Damn the compromise and full speed ahead. Make it clear that if they reject the conservative Bill then Obamacare will implode and they the Dems get the blame. Instead, Ryan provides the usual compromise which is going to implode anyway so what’s the difference.
Regards,
Jim
Yeah I get that. I just think that is the way any “take it or leave it” proposition would be.
If the bill were more to the liking of the Freedom Caucus and their friends, the Tuesday Group (moderate Republicans) would be in the same place the Freedom Caucus is now. Not accepting the bill or minor tweaks. What we need is less top down leadership and a more open legislative process.
I don’t know anything about North Dakota or its congress person. So I am using the State as an example. Assuming the Congressman from ND is a Republican and was not on an important committee, what impact did he/she have on the bill?
ND elected this person to represent their interests not to rubber stamp any bill Speaker Ryan supports. The traditional process would allow this Congressman to offer amendments, to represent his State’s interest. To publicly stake out a position, not in a backroom deal.
If what you say is true, the Freedom Caucus does not have blame, they have power.
With great power comes great responsibility.
No, this is actually episode 2. #1 being the immigration ban fiasco.
I am not sure that works right. Who was Trump negotiating with on the Immigration ban?
Sure the role out was bad and judges turned it over without referencing the authorizing statute, so it was not a win, but there was no other party to work out a “deal” with.