Healthcare reform

[jasonxctf]

Not certain how many Congressman and Senators you voted for, but for 99.99% of Americans they get one Congressman and one Senator per election. So there are a lot of Americans who do not want Democrats to do that. That would be everyone who voted GOP, where their candidate won or lost.

 

but they lost.

 

elections have consequences, remember.

[Texsox]

but they lost.

 

elections have consequences, remember.

 

No, many won in their districts. That is why there are still GOP leaders around. The Congress and Senate do not run nationally, they run locally. Those districts want their elected official to continue the platform that got that individual elected. If it was any other way then all those guys with ® in front of their names would have been replaced because the other party won. Instead there are checks and balances built into our system.

 

Perhaps you would want your representative to just do whatever the "in" party wants, but more people want their representative to continue to fioght for what got him/her elected in their district.

[Y2HH]

Perhaps you would want your representative to just do whatever the "in" party wants, but more people want their representative to continue to fioght for what got him/her elected in their district.

 

Holy hell, without a doubt -- removing the only party line we have would be catastrophic. If anything, we don't have ENOUGH checks and balances in this country since it runs on a 2 party system. If representatives did whatever the "in" party wanted all the time -- this would be communist Russia, circa 1982 -- not the USA.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Y2HH

[StrangeSox]

Wait what, a majority of Americans don't want to see healthcare reform? Were you taking a nap when Obama made half his campaign about wanting to reform healthcare and then he got elected in a landslide and his party got a supermajority?

 

The opposition has gotten louder but believe it or not, people's minds haven't really changed all that much from when this started. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/...changing-minds/

 

It really depends on how the question is asked:

 

"Do you want Obama's plan* for health care to pass?" and only a small number, somewhere in the 20-35% range, say 'yes.' Give a description of the plans actually going through Congress and the numbers shoot up to the 60% range.

 

*IObama hasn't actually proposed or endorsed a plan.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Who's Paying to Kill Heathcare Reform?

 

In a nod to the House Republicans who devised a chart supposedly showing the bureaucratic nightmare that would result from Democratic health care reforms, the Campaign for America's Future has devised a chart of its own, titled "Who's Paying to Kill Health Reform?"

 

It's a tangled web, with big lobbying firms, industry groups, and Astroturf organizers all linked to townhall meetings. Reflecting a widely-held view among progressives, the big kahuna behind it all is the health insurance industry, via trade group America's Health Insurance Plans.

 

[vandy125]

Who's Paying to Kill Heathcare Reform?

"They're playing a sophisticated game at the front of the pack," said Campaign for America's Future's Roger Hickey in an interview with the Huffington Post. "They're trying to pretend that they're in favor of reform and they're spending some money on advertising that looks like

it's pro-reform. And at the same time they're working pretty hard to make sure the public plan is not in the final version. They're primarily using their political contributions and their lobbying

efforts to do that."

Since when is healthcare reform synonomous with a public plan? You can be a big advocate of reform but not want the public plan included as part of that.

[southsider2k5]

Since when is healthcare reform synonomous with a public plan? You can be a big advocate of reform but not want the public plan included as part of that.

 

That's all a part of being a Healther. The government has to do it.

[NorthSideSox72]

That's all a part of being a Healther. The government has to do it.

Gawd I cannot wait until we stop creating one-word-er phrases.

 

[Texsox]

When was the last time America tackled a project as big as health care reforms?

[jasonxctf]

When was the last time America tackled a project as big as health care reforms?

 

who knows, but immigration is next on the to-do list.

[southsider2k5]

Gawd I cannot wait until we stop creating one-word-er phrases.

 

Yeah, me neither, which is why I am making the point of how absurd they are.

[kapkomet]

Who's Paying to Kill Heathcare Reform?

Huffington Post. Imagine that. It can't be that people are genuinely upset at these town halls. They're all politcal, paid hacks. And then people wonder why I have cynical post after cynical post.

[bmags]

When was the last time America tackled a project as big as health care reforms?

 

You'd seriously have a better idea than I would. Perhaps tax reform or whatever bill it was under GHWB that helped lead to budget surpluses but effectively ended his career.

[kapkomet]

You'd seriously have a better idea than I would. Perhaps tax reform or whatever bill it was under GHWB that helped lead to budget surpluses but effectively ended his career.

1964/5. Medicare.

[bmags]

1964/5. Medicare.

 

that's the last "major" reform?

 

What about the civil service reform under Carter or the SO2 cap and trade that was 20 years in the making

[kapkomet]

that's the last "major" reform?

 

What about the civil service reform under Carter or the SO2 cap and trade that was 20 years in the making

IMO, those are not as significant.

[bmags]

but significance is one. We've had fairly vanilla legislature, when was the last time there was intense heat with many special interests keenly involved. At the very least I'd have to say the SO2, because that was pretty heated with the coal states.

[Texsox]

I'm thinking Civil Rights or New Deal scale. This is a major shift in how we do business in this country.

[bmags]

perhaps our Congressman and Senators are just shocked they have to do a job again.

[kapkomet]

but significance is one. We've had fairly vanilla legislature, when was the last time there was intense heat with many special interests keenly involved. At the very least I'd have to say the SO2, because that was pretty heated with the coal states.

I kept looking at the SO2 and thought, what are you talking about? Ah, now I'm with you - the carbon tax legislation. That's pretty significant but not as significant as health care.

 

Civil Rights and Medicare were done at the same time, and those are IMO the last time we went through this, but the thing is, in terms of scale, nothing compares to what they are trying shove down this time in terms of power grab. If this passes, 20-30 years from now, there will be something bigger... and it will just keep cycling that way. That's how this works - erosion of private into government.

[Texsox]

I kept looking at the SO2 and thought, what are you talking about? Ah, now I'm with you - the carbon tax legislation. That's pretty significant but not as significant as health care.

 

Civil Rights and Medicare were done at the same time, and those are IMO the last time we went through this, but the thing is, in terms of scale, nothing compares to what they are trying shove down this time in terms of power grab. If this passes, 20-30 years from now, there will be something bigger... and it will just keep cycling that way. That's how this works - erosion of private into government.

 

Or it works from smaller to bigger as the society expands.

[kapkomet]

Or it works from smaller to bigger as the society expands.

It should only be to a small extent, and it's not.

[bmags]

I'm sure the growth of government from 1929 to 1940 was much larger than what would occur here.

 

The government size has steadily grown this century but has ebbed and flowed, privatized parts of itself, shed it's skin in many parts.

 

This is undoubtedly major reform and I think that scares anyone of failure. But this is going to come down to whether you view this as something our society should be setting up through our government. People have varying opinions.

 

But whether the Republicans and blue dogs succeed in killing 'Obamacare', that can't be the end of it, some form of health care reform absolutely needs to get passed. It can't be like 2005 with social security.

[kapkomet]

I'm sure the growth of government from 1929 to 1940 was much larger than what would occur here.

 

The government size has steadily grown this century but has ebbed and flowed, privatized parts of itself, shed it's skin in many parts.

 

This is undoubtedly major reform and I think that scares anyone of failure. But this is going to come down to whether you view this as something our society should be setting up through our government. People have varying opinions.

 

But whether the Republicans and blue dogs succeed in killing 'Obamacare', that can't be the end of it, some form of health care reform absolutely needs to get passed. It can't be like 2005 with social security.

I think we all agree with this.

 

[Rex Kickass]

I think we all agree with this.

 

Except the problem is that the GOP leadership doesn't. The political reality of this is anything passes that has "health care reform" attached to it will be a big victory for Obama. If Obama was really all about being a hack, he'd have well abandoned the public option - knowing that liberals won't stray in big enough numbers and 18 months won't be a long enough time to realize a real benefit or problem from any legislation for major reform.

 

The GOP leadership is full of hacks. They know that any reform is a bad thing for their chances in 2010 which, despite an incredibly steep road in the senate does historically signify a moderate gain in the house next year. Blocking health care reform makes Obama less effective. The GOP has to be the party of no in order to foment enough anger to win an election in the midterm or have a shot with the extremely shallow primary field that you see for 2012 at the moment. There's no Obamas, Clintons or even Edwards's there. Just Romney, Santorum and other people who haven't won anything at all recently.