Health Care Summit

On Thursday, President Obama held his anticipated "health care summit." Although Republicans initially suspected a subversive plot to embarrass them on national television, they did indeed show for the debate and most were well-mannered and polite.
The substance of the debate centered around Obama's health care bill that was announced at the beginning of the week, and focused on issues such as cost containment and coverage. The debate highlighted the main philosophical differences between the Republican plan and the one favored by the Administration, which is close to the bill that has already passed the Senate. Democrats favor comprehensive reform, meaning that they want to pass a complicated bill that will affect one-sixth of the United States economy. Republicans would rather work at the margins, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines and limiting damages for malpractice lawsuits, which is truly putting a band-aid on the Titanic. Also, the debate showed the distinctions between the parties when it comes to the role of government. While both sides agree on expanding competition, always valued in a capitalist society, they disagree on how those markets should be controlled. Basically, Republicans believe in the market as a form of self-regulation and want little or no government control. Democrats, on the other hand, want to set base line rules for the market and allow competition within those guidelines.
This was a fascinating piece of American political theatre, if not much else. Normally, with parliamentary procedures, ground rules in campaign debates, and the talking head culture, our elected officials can memorize talking points and biased think tank studies and never actually have to defend their statements or positions. What occurred here, however, was an honest political disagreement with little or no ground rules and a lot of uncomfortable looks.
This is what our democracy needs more of. With both sides locked in their partisan rhetoric, and with a scorched-earth battle for the independents, it is important that these representatives have to look each other in the eye and defend their inflammatory statements. Hopefully, President Obama, and perhaps other presidents, will use this type of forum to advance our discourse in the future.
So did we get anywhere? It's still hard to tell. There were many Republican ideas presented at the discussion that are perfectly legitimate, and should be incorporated into the Senate bill, but will the minority be happy to improve a bill that will be counted as a Democratic victory, or are they more interested in political posturing than progress?