Democrat Mike Ross will win the governor's race if the state budget locks up over private option. Nothing short of a serious scandal would hurt Republican Tom Cotton's chances at the U.S. Senate more than a state budget deadlock, either.
The Republicans don't get a majority in the U.S. Senate if Tom Cotton loses. The fast-fading chances of neutering Obamacare drop to nil if that happens.
The issue of political risk to the GOP popped up at a recent, local forum of lawmakers. I've been a political reporter, pundit and semi-pro wiseguy for 15 years. Yet I cannot sum up the situation better than a rookie GOP House candidate did at that forum a week ago Saturday: If a minority faction of Republicans hangs up the state Medicaid budget, how can Republicans not be blamed for this?
The state Constitution requires a three-fourths vote in each chamber to pass a budget bill. Private option, a subsidized health insurance program, got that in the Senate. It also got as much as 72 of 100 House members's votes in three tries so far.
Sen. Bart Hester, R-Cave Springs, came closest to a good counterpoint at the forum. People in most states blamed Republicans when the federal government shut down over Obamacare, he said. Arkansas, as a whole, did not. So it's not automatic that private option opponents would suffer the most, he said.
Context is important here. Hester was not -- repeat, not -- saying conservatives could push the issue with impunity. He was warning people on the other side of this showdown that they face huge risks, too. Nobody's safety is guaranteed, which was a good point to make.
Here is the problem with Hester's argument, though: You can argue that Tom Cotton stood up for his state and his district against other states when he voted to strip Obamacare out of the federal budget. It's not even remotely possible, however, to argue that private option opponents are standing up for the majority view in Arkansas when they're out-voted 72 to 25 (with three absent) in the state House.
Private option opponents argue they're standing up for the people in their districts. Fair enough, but it's one thing to have enough like-minded district representatives to deny a majority vote in one chamber of Congress. It's another to defy the large-majority view of your neighbors within the state House by relying on a super-majority requirement. Compound that with the fact that a fed shutdown closed Yellowstone, for instance. The state budget keeps grandma's nursing home open.
"He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind," says Proverbs 11:29.
Sen. Jim Hendren, R-Gravette, also took a good stab at the blame question. He pointed out that other states in deep financial trouble have laws requiring a balanced budget. They all got around their restrictions and swam out in deep financial water. Arkansas' requirement for a three-quarters vote to pass a budget bill is the best, real, proven guarantee of our future solvency. It should not be abandoned lightly.
I agree with Hendren, for what that's worth. I just know -- and I bet he does, too -- that there are no free passes. There will be a price to pay if things go that far. You may think the price is worth it. Fine, as long as you figure that price before you pay it. Ringing up the likely costs is my job.
Here's the tally if the private option is blocked: Cotton suffers a severe setback. Meanwhile, the GOP would likely lose our 2nd and 4th Congressional District races. They'll almost certainly draw a serious challenger in the 1st, too.
If Democrats win this year's governor's race, the lieutenant governor's race, and two of the remaining five state constitutional officers' races, they keep control of every county election commission in Arkansas for the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton, the last Democratic presidential candidate who could possibly make Arkansas a swing state again, will probably run that year.
Other states have started down the private option route. We've blazed the trail already. Others will follow our trail even if Arkansas turns around and walks back. So there's little at stake outside our borders.
All those are on one side. Maybe some of them are unimportant. I won't argue about that. But look at the number of them. What have we got on the other side? (Film noir fans might recognize these lines, but the logic still applies.)
Perhaps things aren't as bad as I've described them. I wouldn't bet on it.
Commentary on 03/02/2014