Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives and a rising mainstream voice within his own party, gave voice to a host of conservative concerns over Obama’s approach to health-care reform when he told those who assembled at last week’s health-care summit that, “We Republicans care just as much about health care as the Democrats in this room ... [but] there is a reason why we all voted no. And it does have to do with the philosophical difference that you point out.”

This has been a common sentiment expressed by Republican leadership. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s contention during the legislative debates last summer, that “Americans are increasingly frustrated with the U.S. health-care system as we know it — and they expect real reform, not just the promise of a reform that never comes, or the illusion of a reform that ends up destroying what’s good about the current system and replacing it with something worse,” would seem to suggest that the two parties are merely at odds over how to achieve reform, as opposed to whether reform is a worthy goal.

Reality differs. Republicans held a stranglehold over both houses of Congress and the presidency for all but a year between the year 2000 and the inauguration of the 109th Congress on Jan. 3, 2007. In 2003, Congress passed the Medicare Part D, the primary consequence of which was to create an unpaid entitlement benefit for prescription drugs. And after that — nothing.

Democrats are coming under fire — figurative now, but just barely so — for supposedly hijacking what should have, by all accounts, been a bipartisan attempt to reconfigure the rules that govern both who has access to health insurance as well as the cost of coverage.

Throughout the process, Republicans have touted tort reform — focusing on junk medical malpractice lawsuits — as a panacea to lowering costs, and conceded the need for a legislated end to the right of insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. The policy wonks among Republicans, despite Democratic jibes, have been thoroughly active throughout this process, offering suggestions ranging from strengthening Health Savings Accounts, allowing consumers to shop for coverage across state lines and permitting the health-care tax credit to apply to individual plans.

Why, then, weren’t these proposals — many of which, viewed independently, could surely garner widespread public support — suggested during the 107th, 108th or 109th Congresses?

Consider the litany of items Republicans had the time and political will to pass during the 109th Congress: Courthouses were renamed after Robert Matsui, Reynaldo Garza, Filemon Vela and Carroll Campbell Jr.; post offices were dedicated and re-dedicated in honor of , among others, Bob LaFollette, Ray Charles, Shirley Chisholm, T. Boone Pickens, Karl Malden and Curt Gowdy; regulations of illegal spam and spy ware were tightened. And did anyone mention that the national dam safety program was re-authorized?

All in all, the Republicans chose a funny way to show they “care just as much about health care as the Democrats.”

As much as Republicans may want to make process an issue now, there’s no way for them to explain away the short shrift they gave the issue when they were in power. Perhaps Eric Cantor cares deeply about easing restrictions to health coverage, but the facts of the matter make it impossible to say the same about his colleagues on his side of the aisle — most of whom only have ideas when no one is asking for them.

Editorials Editor Asher Smith is a College junior from Great Neck, N.Y.