Truth Has Consequences

President Obama’s promises to do things differently and change the toxic culture of Washington won him much support and grass roots enthusiasm during the campaign. When news of Tom Daschle’s problems broke, on Friday afternoon, on Super Bowl weekend, it looked like all the forces of power and influence on the Democrats’ side of the aisle were falling in line to support their former colleague. The President, himself, pledged he would stand behind his friend.

Despite excellent reporting from The Washington Post, The New York Times, and ABC News, many missed the heart of the story. Rather than focusing on Daschle’s tax problems, the potential for conflicts of interest is equally disturbing.

As somebody who worked hard—on the local level--to help elect Barack Obama, I was particularly concerned about how the Washington establishment seemed to be getting in line to support one of its own despite many good reasons to step away. Now the Times, in Tuesday’s edition, has come out with a lead editorial asking Daschle to step down. He should do so immediately.

After a distinguished career of public service Daschle was defeated for reelection in 2004 and went for the big bucks. He made more than five million dollars during the three years after he left the Senate. Hundreds of thousands of dollars came from health related industries, including insurance companies. Daschle did nothing wrong—other than having to fix his six figure tax problem—but he made a choice. He went for the money, something I suspect many, if not most of us, would do, if we had the opportunity. But for the millions he was paid, he gave up the chance to jump right back in and set policy for the same industries that enriched him. Actions should have consequences, particularly if the boss is serious about what he says regarding the ways of Washington. True, there can be exceptions. But they should be used only for truly special cases. This is not one of those situations.

Health care is one of the most important public policy challenges facing the new president. Fixing the broken system will require clear vision. One of the major forces in the health care debate is the insurance industry. To really reform health care this important player may have to lose money, influence, and power. The person in charge should not be beholden to—or even appear to be influenced by—insurance companies. On this main point, Mr. Daschle ought to withdraw his name from consideration and spare the president and the country unnecessary strife during these challenging times.