« "New Leftist Consensus in South America" | Main | Medical Costs v. the Ownership Society »

March 01, 2005

Why No Primary Challenges for Bankruptcy "Dealers"

Much of the liberal blogosphere has been patting itself on the back for blunting Bush's assault on social security. Which they have the right to do, but isn't it horribly lowered expectations to celebrate too much that we've nobly defended the most popular program of the New Deal? Especially since business interests have been slamming through anti-worker bills through Congress as most progressives divert all their energy to talking about social security. You'd almost suspect a plot by Karl Rove.

Josh Marshall and others have suggested that Joe Lieberman should face a primary challenge if he even dares to discuss a deal on social security, even a progressive one such as lifting the cap on taxes subject to social security.

Yet the bankruptcy bill, just approved in Senate committee with the support of a number of Democrats, including Joseph R. Biden of Delaware, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin and Dianne Feinstein of California, would potentially destroy the lives of working families burdened with debt from medical bills, yet unable now to discharge those debts in bankrupty court. Why aren't we calling for primary challenges against these Senators?

As E.J. Dionne details in his column today, half of those facing bankruptcy are there because of medical bills, and of those three-quarters had health insurance coverage, so you can't even blame them for not trying to insure against catastrophe. Having failed to deliver on universal health care, for the Democrats to trap working families in medical debt prison is an obscenity.

Posted by Nathan at March 1, 2005 09:39 AM