Democrats Have a Harry Reid Problem

If Demo­crats still hope to brand Re­pub­lic­ans in Con­gress as the stub­born cause of grid­lock, they must ad­dress a ma­jor head­ache. This prob­lem also threatens the party’s court­ship of anti-spe­cial-in­terest pop­u­lists. It un­der­mines their claim to be cham­pi­ons of the poor.

The Demo­crat­ic Party has a Harry Re­id prob­lem.

The Sen­ate minor­ity lead­er is threat­en­ing to block or oth­er­wise undo a bi­par­tis­an, long-term plan to fin­ance health care for older Amer­ic­ans, pay doc­tors who ac­cept Medi­care, and ex­tend vi­tal health care pro­grams for chil­dren and the poor.

(RE­LATED: 5 Ways to End Hil­lary Clin­ton’s War on the Me­dia)

Re­spec­ted con­gres­sion­al cor­res­pond­ent Dav­id Ro­gers of Politico called the plan “a ma­jor break­through,” and two top re­port­ers at The New York Times de­clared the pack­age “as polit­ic­ally re­mark­able as it is sub­stant­ive.”

What is re­mark­able is Re­id’s chutzpah. At a time when most voters are de­mand­ing bi­par­tis­an res­ults from a Con­gress with re­cord-low fa­vor­ab­il­ity, when Pres­id­ent Obama barely lets a day pass without rais­ing le­git­im­ate con­cerns over GOP ob­struc­tion, Re­id stands ready to kill a deal between House Speak­er John Boehner and House Minor­ity Lead­er Nancy Pelosi.

“It is a role in which Mr. Re­id is be­com­ing in­creas­ingly com­fort­able as he ex­ploits his lever­age in the minor­ity to thwart his polit­ic­al op­pon­ents, even if that means an un­usu­al split with Ms. Pelosi,” Jen­nifer Stein­hauer and Robert Pear wrote for The Times.

(RE­LATED: Hil­lary Clin­ton Still Doesn’t Get It) 

Re­id and some fel­low Sen­ate Demo­crats are do­ing the bid­ding of Planned Par­ent­hood, a power­ful source of dona­tions and lob­by­ing on the Left, now ar­guing that Pelosi should not have ac­cep­ted re­stric­tions on abor­tions as part of a two-year, $7.2 bil­lion ex­ten­sion of fed­er­al money for com­munity health cen­ters.

They worry that a pro­vi­sion in the bill co­di­fies abor­tion re­stric­tions bey­ond long-stand­ing lan­guage already em­bed­ded in many health care spend­ing laws. It is a le­git­im­ate con­cern, but one that brazenly ig­nores the broad­er pic­ture and polit­ic­al real­it­ies that Pelosi laud­ably re­cog­nized.

Pelosi, by the way, is an un­matched ad­voc­ate for wo­men’s rights.

(RE­LATED: Maybe Hil­lary Clin­ton Should Re­tire Her White House Dreams) 

Ro­gers makes a great case against the ob­struc­tion­ist Demo­crats:

If Sen­ate Demo­crats can’t see past the trees and make this dis­tinc­tion, crit­ics say it speaks volumes about their polit­ics.

In­deed, the tep­id sup­port from Sen­ate Demo­crats also gives lie to their oft-stated con­cerns about in­come in­equal­ity. If the pack­age fails in Con­gress, the very wealthy will es­cape hav­ing to pay more in Medi­care premi­ums. The biggest losers will be low-in­come seni­ors and work­ing-class house­holds down the eco­nom­ic lad­der.

Like a green shoot in a desert, this Boehner-Pelosi deal needs to be en­cour­aged and nour­ished—not crushed like a roach at Re­id’s Ritz-Carlton. Pres­id­ent Obama needs to show some lead­er­ship and tell his buddy in the Sen­ate to back off.

Stop ob­struct­ing. Stop be­ing such a pain.