Today, the President signed the Senate health care reform bill into law. The reconciliation bill is still pending and will likely be completed by next week, bringing a long, tortuous and messy process to a close.

Just when the legislation appeared ready to fail at many points, some deft sausage-making kept things moving:

• Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t have had enough votes to pass the bill last fall if she hadn’t adopted the “Stupak Amendment” regarding federal funding of abortion.
• The “Cornhusker Kickback” and other special deals were necessary to get the sixty votes required to pass the Senate bill on Christmas Eve. No deals – no health care bill.
• If Senate Democrats didn’t have sixty-votes, it’s unlikely there would be comprehensive health care reform. Republicans tried to kill the bill as a matter of political strategy. Important regulatory and other changes couldn’t have been adopted via reconciliation.
• The election of Scott Brown was essential to uniting Democrats. There were never enough Democratic votes in the House or the Senate to adopt single payer, the public option or medicare buy-in, but the “progressive” base of the party kept pushing for it. The Brown election helped Democrats get realistic about what was possible, and that helped Democrats recognize that while the health care bill wasn’t perfect, it was a good foundation that also represented historic change.
• When the Brown election had demoralized Democrats declaring health care reform dead (oh ye little faith, Barney Frank!), Obama created a new intermediate distraction (the Summit) to buy some time to adjust to the new situation. He used the summit to make it clear to everyone that Republicans were simply trying to delay, and to make it clear that he was going to push forward.

Ultimately, there’s nothing like a good external (existential?) threat. Democratic legislators, faced with potentially catastrophic election prospects in November, finally figured out their best course of action was to finish the job.

Great legislation requires some core principles, a strategy, good people working hard to execute, great internal and external communications, etc. But it also requires an ability to improvise and to change as required. There’s always a risk of failure, but you make the decisions you have to make to keep things moving forward. And if you’re lucky, well:

Hi Walt!

Happy New Year!

This is a pretty spectacular weekend for all of us. In part because the times demand a major change. In part because we worked so hard last year and it’s great to see the culmination of all of those efforts. There’s hope for solving some of the major problems facing the nation and the world. And, of course, there’s the historical significance.

The thing that gets to me emotionally is thinking about all the people I knew growing up — my mother and father, grandmothers, aunts, uncles, teachers, etc. — who are no longer with us. I never expected to see a black president but at least considered it a possibility. Those folks had struggles I’ve never faced and I wish I could share tomorrow’s inauguration with them. It’s all pretty deep!

Hope you and your family are doing well!

Bill

Break Through by Rogaziano

Campaigns, politics and, governing are normally all about control:

• Control of the message
• Control of the image
• Control of time and money

• Control of everything!

The Obama campaign clearly mastered the “give up control to get control” concept. If you want to win, you have to give up a lot of control while still maintaining control. Interesting concept.

This approach wouldn’t have been successful without a compelling candidate, a compelling message, superb communications strategy, a disciplined team, and a whole lot of trust. That so many people could independently create designs that support, and rarely seem to conflict with, the campaign’s themes is an extraordinary achievement!

Hope you have a joyous holiday season and a prosperous 2009!

“So,” he [Obama] said. “What’s your theory on speechwriting?”

Awkward silence. Favreau, just graduated from Holy Cross, had talked his way onto Sen. John F. Kerry’s presidential campaign in 2003 and had become a press assistant, arriving at the office at 3 a.m. to clip newspapers. The speech he had given as class valedictorian circulated around the staff, and Favreau eventually got a shot at speechwriting. He wrote well and rose to the top of the department, but there was never any time to formulate theories. Now, Favreau looked at Obama and went with his gut.

“A speech can broaden the circle of people who care about this stuff,” Favreau said. “How do you say to the average person that’s been hurting: ‘I hear you. I’m there. Even though you’ve been so disappointed and cynical about politics in the past, and with good reason, we can move in the right direction. Just give me a chance.’ “

“I think this is going to work,” Obama said.

Worked very well indeed!

Update: Esquire’s brief profile of John Favreau (h/t kottke)