While spending time at the Missouri Capitol, working on this week's feature story, just about every Democratic lawmaker and staffer I spoke to in the House of Representatives emphasized that expanding health-care access had united the sometimes-fractious Democratic Party like no other issue.
| Rep. Ryan Silvey |
The 33-year-old lawmaker, who represents a portion of Clay County, says he didn't agree with his fellow Republicans' blanket opposition to health-care expansion this year. It's not entirely surprising; he's been out of step on the issue before. Last year, Silvey successfully fought to expand services for kids in the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
This year, when Republican House members immediately drop-kicked Gov. Jay Nixon's proposals to expand eligibility for Medicaid and reduce premiums for families in SCHIP, Silvey thought there might be room for compromise. "We had numerous discussions within the caucus about what direction we were going to head," Silvey says. "Obviously, I was in the minority on that."
In late March, Silvey drafted an amendment to the budget that would have lowered premiums for some families and added back to SCHIP about half the number of kids the governor recommended. But the two parties couldn't meet in the middle. "I was in talks with my leadership, with the minority leaders, and we all reached the conclusion that we had the votes to get the amendment, but we didn't have the votes to pass the bill," Silvey explains. So the amendment quietly died.
Going out even further on a limb, Silvey also supported the Medicaid expansion that would have allowed parents earning up to 50 percent of the federal poverty level to qualify for the program. Like his Republican colleagues, he had the same misgivings about expanding welfare, but Silvey saw a benefit to widening coverage if it didn't cost taxpayers any money and it helped people get through a tough economic period. He was one of just four Republicans who voted for the budget bill that contained the provision.
"The way I look at it, unemployment is unusually high at the moment," Silvey says. "If we were able to provide this, I think it would give us two to three years for the economy to turn around, for the employment situation to get back into smaller single digits. My hope would be that the expansion wouldn't balloon out of control, because people would be employed. That's why I supported it."
Unfortunately, there weren't enough legislators like Silvey, who were truly open to working with lawmakers in both parties to find something that everyone could swallow. "I'm very much a believer in taking incremental steps," he says. "If I don't get my way on something I don't take my ball and go home. I'll take what I can get. And I'll come back and argue a stronger position next year."
But, after health care reform went down in a blaze of angry rhetoric this session, how will the Democrats and Republicans broach the bloodied subject next year? At a legislative wrap-up luncheon hosted by the Partnership for Children this month, Silvey addressed a similar question.
"We need to work on compromise," he said. "We need to be educating members that it's OK to vote for something, even if you don't get everything you want."
Hopefully, more legislators will follow Silvey's lead.
Comments (0)