May 19, 2010 02:46 PM UTC

Leadership, Romanoff v. Bennet

•  
• by: oldbenkenobi

In his Governor’s race stump speech, Mayor Hickenlooper says he does not like negative campaigning.  He looks at campaigns as a job interview and thinks it’s his job to sell himself, not say bad things about the other guy.  Great approach for a candidate.  But in this metaphor, we the voters are the would-be employers.  It is the employer’s job to look at each prospective employee’s strengths and weaknesses and then pick the best person for the job.  So it is entirely appropriate for us as voters to look at each candidate’s strengths and weaknesses, especially when one of those candidates is a guy who has never been vetted by any voters in any election.  The idea that we cannot criticize a fellow Democrat is a relic of the days of blind partisanship that we are trying to put behind us.  The change we are trying to create in Washington — that President Obama ran on — is that we start to judge people objectively, not subjectively or emotionally based on their party.

Yes, I am offended that Ritter passed over several fine candidates like Hickenlooper, Romanoff, Kennedy and Perlmutter.  It’s amazing how deep a bench Democrats have in Colorado, and how shallow a bench Republicans have.  But it’s equally amazing that Ritter passed over our A-listers to pick Michael Bennet.  I think he still owes us some answers.  What’s done is done, but we voters still have a choice and that choice is between Andrew Romanoff and Michael Bennet.

So let’s take a look at leadership, Romanoff v. Bennet.  

We have witnessed and been the beneficiaries of Romanoff’s leadership for years.  Every politician says they are going to take on the tough issues.  We know that Andrew Romanoff is one of the few who do.  He took on TABOR and he took it on when others were saying, “It’s not the right time.” When is it not the right time to take on the biggest issue facing Colorado?  He also traveled the state and mounted a campaign to fix Colorado schools.  And he led the effort to help Democrats regain the driver’s seat in Colorado politics, something that was mentioned over and over at this year’s JJ Dinner by nearly every speaker including Secretary Salazar, though Romanoff’s name was conspicuously absent. Romanoff has a strong record of FIGHTING for the people of Colorado and for Democrats.  

Now let’s look at Michael Bennet’s leadership, specifically on the issue which got him so much press: the public option.  Health care may be the biggest issue facing the United States.  And the public option is arguably the most important element of health care reform.

Much has been made of the fact that Bennet has long-supported the public option.  The Bennet campaign put up a post here on Colorado Pols showing his past support of the public option.  Their video montage shows him supporting the public option from 7/11/09 to 8/28/09.  He took office on 1/21/09.  So where is the video for January through June 2009?  I don’t know.  Did he hear footsteps?  Apparently the first public reporting of Romanoff’s intent to run was on 8/29/09.  It was in the rumor mill before that, no doubt.

But the argument over how long he has supported the public option obscures the real question. And that is, who will be more than a mere supporter of the public option, who will FIGHT for the public option?

The Bennet campaign left an important part out of their tribute video.  From the 8/29/09 Denver Post article on the 8/28/09 Pueblo Town Hall meeting:

Bennet said that he favored a so-called public option, which would provide an alternative insurance source for those who can’t get private insurance. “But as I stand here today, I think it’s very unlikely that the public option part of this will pass.”

He conceded the fight before the battle had begun.  What kind of leadership is that?  Imagine Drew Brees in the locker room before the Super Bowl: “Guys, I really want to win this game but to be honest with you, I think we’re going to lose.  However, I promise to write a letter to the NFL a few months after the game.”  Bennet should have said, “It’s going to be a tough fight but I’m going to the wall for the public option.”  And he should have gone to the wall but he did not.

On 10/26/09, Senator Harry Reid said the Senate bill would include a public option.  From the 10/27/09 Denver Post:

Colorado Democratic Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet applauded Reid for including the public option and a state opt-out plan in the bill, emphasizing that they support a plan based on negotiated physician and hospital reimbursement rates rather than Medicare rates.

This is the moment when we needed Bennet to fight for the public option like a starving, cornered wolverine.  Yet it would be four months before he sent his much-praised letter to Majority Leader Reid, the letter that asks Senator Reid to include the public option in the reconciliation bill.  Which Reid had already included in his bill four months earlier!

Then Bennet made a big splash when he vowed he would vote for the health care bill even if it meant losing his seat.  From the 11/23/09 Denver Post:

The Colorado senator made the remark at the end of the opening segment of CNN’s Sunday morning program “State of the Union,” appearing to surprise host John King, who quipped, “All right. That tape will be held.”

Bennet faces a tough election next year in a state that polls suggest is increasingly unhappy with the Democrats’ expansive agenda.

King asked him, “If you get to the final point and you are a critical vote for health care reform, and every piece of evidence tells you, if you support that bill, you will lose your job, would you cast the vote and lose your job?”

Bennet replied simply, “Yes.”

The beauty of this bravado is that it is almost meaningless.  At the time, it seemed impossible the hypothetical would ever come to pass.  It is “taking a stand” with zero political cost.  It got him great press but it seemed unlikely he would ever have to pay the piper.  

Then Scott Brown won in the Massachusetts Senate race on 1/19/10.  

And Bennet did not wait long before wilting on health care reform.  The Denver Post Spot Blog headline on 1/20/10 was, “Bennet joins chorus urging Dems to slow down on health care.”  To be fair, they don’t have a quote that has him saying exactly that, though it seems to be his intent.  The article says:

“Last night the voters of Massachusetts’s didn’t just elect a Senator, they sent a message to Washington,” Bennet said in a statement Wednesday. “I will continue to fight against the backroom deals and special interest handouts and hope the rest of Washington will join me.”

I like that Bennet threw in his standard cliches about “backroom deals” and “special interest handouts.”  This is the guy who got appointed to his seat and the Democratic power structure from the President on down wanted us Democrats to give him a pass-through in the primary.  But he wants us to be against backroom deals and handouts.

And by the way, the incongruity between Bennet’s vow and the Brown election is not a secret.  The Republicans are well aware of it so I’m sure we’ll be hearing about it again.  See David Harsanyi’s opinion piece on the Denver Post’s The Spot, also on 1/20/10.

A few days later, according to the 2/3/10 Denver Post, Bennet had some words on health care reform that were not exactly stirring:

“I think it’s impossible to pick it right now,” said Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., when quizzed on which of the ways forward now being discussed he preferred.”

Hardly a profile in courage.  Jared Polis was not so stymied.  On the same day Bennet’s “impossible” was reported, Polis sent a letter to Reid signed by 120 Representatives urging Reid to include the public option in reconciliation.   It took Bennet two weeks to mimic the Polis strategy.  On 2/16/10, Bennet sent his now-famous letter to Senator Reid.  

About this time — I could not verify exactly when — GOP TV ads appeared saying Bennet was a supporter of the public option.  Perhaps those ads helped Bennet decide his public option stand was going to hurt him in the general so he may as well get the most out of it in the primary.  The polling mentioned in the above Polis article no doubt helped him along too.

Not surprisingly, the President’s final health care reconciliation plans did not include the public option.  How could it be otherwise?  Reconciliation alone was a difficult sell.  To add the public option was a pipe dream.  I think Bennet knew it would not be included in the reconciliation bill and the famous letter was nothing more than a Cover Your Ass effort and maybe that is why Udall, a supporter of the public option, did not sign on.

Bennet’s attempt with the letter much too little, much too late.  Bennet supporters continue to build him into somebody he is not because he has a ton of money.  He’s a genius!  He’s doing a fantastic job!  But think about most Bennet supporters’ reaction to his first debate with Romanoff.  Of Bennet, they said excitedly, “He wasn’t as bad as we thought he would be!”  

We can do better.  And we don’t have to look too far.  Colorado already has a great leader who is more than ready for prime time, he is a veteran of prime time.  We have known him for years and he has led Colorado Democrats for years.  He is Andrew Romanoff.  Let’s elect a Senator who does more than write letters, someone who FIGHTS for the causes he believes in.