Caution guides Titus on health care

By Michael Mishak

Sunday, Oct. 25, 2009 | 2 a.m.

The sign outside Rep. Dina Titus’ town hall last week said it all: No weapons, video recording equipment, signs, posters or props.

It was a startling reminder of a summer of national discontent, punctuated by a series of town-hall meetings where angry constituents, armed with copies of health care legislation and sometimes guns, pilloried their representatives for, as they often put it, setting out to destroy the republic.

The forums made for compelling theater, if not much constructive discussion.

Last week, at Temple Ner Tamid in Henderson, Titus did her best to learn from her colleagues’ mistakes — no roving microphone, questions via index cards and a pair of nonpartisan health care experts filled in the blanks between talking points.

None of it worked. Titus got hearty applause for showing up, but things went rapidly downhill. Over an hour, a significant number of people in the crowd booed or laughed at nearly all her answers. A pair of teenage girls, sitting with their mother, repeatedly shouted “liar” at the congresswoman.

Titus took it all in stride — in large part, because she must. If anyone in Nevada’s congressional delegation has a reason to be concerned about a rising tide against President Barack Obama and his policies, it’s Titus.

She’s a freshman Democrat saddled with record unemployment in the traditionally conservative 3rd Congressional District, which is also home to a strong bloc of independent voters. And she received 40,000 fewer votes in her district than Obama in last year’s election. Titus is the first Democrat to hold the seat, after ousting three-term Republican Jon Porter.

With the public split over health care reform, Titus has been careful about how she plays the issue.

In July, she voted against her party’s health care bill in committee, saying she opposed the proposed tax hikes on small businesses and upper-income households to pay the $1 trillion cost.

Last month, she co-sponsored the Medicare Premium Fairness Act, which protects some seniors increased Medicare premiums next year.

Then, this month, she opposed a Senate proposal that would tax insurers that provide so-called Cadillac health care plans, meaning policies that cost more than $8,000 a year for an individual or $21,000 for a family. The tax, she said, would hit middle-class families in her district, many of whom are union members who traded higher wages for employer-provided health plans as a result of collective bargaining.

To be sure, for all the hostility at the town hall last week, there was plenty of support.

Judy Staresinic, who’s 47 and works as a stagehand, pays $1,600 every three months for health insurance. Because of the recession she’s worked only 15 days in the past four months and is spending her savings to stay insured. She supports the public option, a government-run insurance program, like Medicare, that people could choose over private insurers.

She said her vote next year would depend on the outcome.

“If reform passes without the public option, I will work to help others get elected,” Staresinic said.

Indeed, Titus’ stoic performance might owe something to recent polling, which suggests that she has some breathing room to embrace a reform plan with a public option. Staresinic is hardly alone.

A Research 2000 poll conducted for the liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee showed a slim majority of Nevadans favors the public option. That figure jumps to nearly 60 percent in Clark County.

Although the survey focused on Sen. Harry Reid, it has implications for Titus. Nearly a third of Nevadans said they would be less likely to vote for Reid next year if he fails to pass “a strong public option.” Forty-six percent of Democrats and 35 percent of independents agreed.

Asked Friday about where she stands, Titus’ spokesman said, “Congresswoman Titus supports a public option in order to increase competition, make insurance companies more competitive and keep costs down.”