About 60 people attended a Community Discussion featuring Congressman Glenn Nye this morning. The purpose of the discussion was to give Nye’s constituents a chance to ask questions, and hear the answers directly from the congressman himself. This event was a first for Nye, who has not held any kind of public meeting for the purpose of answering questions from a large audience. While Nye has spoken about controversial topics, such as ACES and health care reform at various meetings throughout the 2nd district, many felt that he had not accessible enough without an open, public, meeting being held. Through the efforts of Andrew Jackson and James Cabiness, this morning’s Community Discussion was arranged with Nye’s staff and made possible.

The format was simple, but stifling. Attendees received a number index card on which to write their question on. Two questions was the max that could be submitted, one written on the front and one written on the back. The questions would be asked in the order of the cards, without any screening from Nye or his staff. While this allowed for questions to be asked and answered quickly, it also prevented attendees from asking any follow-ups or ensuring that one subject didn’t dominate the discussion. Unfortunately, 75% of the questions asked were directly about his vote on the House health care reform bill, and the other 25% were questions expressing disappointed relating to his votes, including the one on health care. The discussion was really 40 minutes of hearing the same explanation over and over again.

The room was packed with Democrats, and while there was some concern over an invasion of tea baggers (partially the reason for the tight format of the discussion), that fear never became reality. This may at face value sound like a good thing, it’s politically a sign that Glenn Nye is of little concern to our conservative radicals. That’s a problem in my view. When you haven’t done anything to spark the ire of the opposition party, and you draw a room full of Democrats disappointed in how you’re representing them as a Democrat, you’re on the straight and narrow path to slaughter while seeking reelection. The opposition isn’t going to vote for you anyway, and the Democrats won’t vote for you again. The opposition has been loud, and Nye has listened to them. Unfortunately, when Nye needs them, they’ll be looking the other way.

On health care reform, Nye said that he fully understands the need for reform and will support reform that changes the rules for insurance companies to ensure that people are treated justly and reform that will fix rising health care costs. He explained that he voted no on the House health care reform bill because it did little to bring down costs, which meant that insurance premiums couldn’t be kept affordable. He also expressed his concern about cuts to funding for children’s hospitals, such as CHKD. Nye reiterated that he was clear about the criteria that the bill had to meet in order to gain his support, and the work he did to prevent cuts to funding for children’s hospitals. Since the bill did not meet his criteria, and included the cuts, he voted no. Throughout the discussion, he stressed that the process for reform is not over, and that the Senate is working on their bill now, and that he was willing to work as long as it takes to come up with a bill that reforms health care and does it the right way. He seemed confident that Congress would be able to deliver a bill to President Obama, possibly by the end of the year.

His explanation of his health care reform vote, and his optimism about reform overall, combined with many conversation I’ve had since his vote leads me to believe that though Nye genuinely had issues with the House bill, he would have voted yes if he had needed to. His constant stressing that the process was ongoing, his optimism about that process, and his lack of disappointment over the passage of the House bill indicates that he understands that had that bill failed to pass, the process would have halted and health care reform may have become next to impossible to accomplish. I have to extend a little bit of faith in believing that there is an understanding about what Nye faces in the 2nd district that allows him leeway within the caucus to run to the right on big ticket items if, and only if, his vote is not critically needed for passage. This is the discussion every time Nye has broke with the caucus, and may be what Democrats have to accept in order to keep the seat from being captured by a Republican. After all, how often do Republican representatives break with their caucus in big votes? It’s extremely rare, making Nye still valuable to Democrats and to the progress of our nation.

Even understanding his precarious position as a freshman congressman in a historically conservative district, Nye has to build up support within his party by building his progressive resume. There are things that Nye could do, but hasn’t done, that could be used to make the argument that he is working for progressive, and an advocate for the CHANGE we voted for in 2008.

There are many angry former supporters who don’t believe he’s followed up on his promises made during his campaign. There are Democrats who are calling for a primary challenger to step forward. I think we need to be cautious when talking about a primary that may drain campaign accounts and leave the party divided heading into a GOP targeted election. The reality is that any candidate who steps up to the plate to challenge Nye in a Democratic primary needs to be a stronger candidate than Barack Obama was in 2008 in order for there to be any hope of Democratic success. If they’re not, a Republican rubber stamp, one of the six candidates lining up, will occupy our seat in the House once again. I think we all need to consider if our disappointment over some things is worth not being represented in all things.

Related posts:

1. Health Care Reform passes House of Representatives
2. Senate moves forward on health care reform debate
3. Rep. Glenn Nye to Participate in a Community Discussion
4. Obama is making a mistake in considering taxing benefits
5. Political Cowardice: Public Option Opt Out Option