America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

[unofan]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

No it doesn't. It makes the case that our elected officials are out of touch with reality idiots.

Right, and the electorate that (in many states) approves by referendum spending projects but vetoes all ways to pay for said projects is completely innocent.

Let's not kid ourselves, the American public acts like a teenager with unfettered access to her parent's credit cards.

 

[moe24]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Right, and the electorate that (in many states) approves by referendum spending projects but vetoes all ways to pay for said projects is completely innocent.

Let's not kid ourselves, the American public acts like a teenager with unfettered access to her parent's credit cards.

WOW, talk about coming out of left field.

While what you say is obviously true, what on earth does it have to do with my post? Besides the broad generalities that both deal with government and both are true statements.

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Snowe drifts.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Snowe drifts.

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Meh, she got her pound of flesh. I guess they've given up on the perkier, dumber one (Collins).

They've got their 60 unless the DINOs screw them, and even then they've got Reconciliation if Reid has any yarbles.

So, it's simple. Democrats in Congress will have to go it alone, at least until the vote comes up for final passage. At that point, Sen. Snowe and a few others may cast a vote for the inevitable.

That's what happened in 1935 when Democrats pushed for Social Security and in 1965 when they introduced Medicare. There were almost no votes from Republicans in the committees where those bills were written.

But after it became clear that they couldn't kill those initiatives in committee, a small but significant number of Republicans got on board.

Maybe they will this time. Maybe not. But Democrats must be willing to make a hard choice. They have to be willing to pass it by reconciliation.

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Snowe drifts.

Most shocking revelation ever.

 

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Gotta love that bipartisan finance bill baby! Congrats to Sen. Snowe for casting a brave vote against the Neanderthal leadership of her party. If you're sick of people who look and act like Fred Flinstone from hassling you at party meetings, feel free to come over to the Dem side.

Oh, and Maine State Police, if you see some freakly looking guy armed to the teeth wearing a UNH 2002 National Champs hat and a T-shirt with the Old Man on the Mountain on the front asking for directions to Sen. Snowe's office, please slap the cuffs on him for his own good. Once he gets out of the puzzle house, dtp will thank you.

 

[walrus]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Gotta love that bipartisan finance bill baby! Congrats to Sen. Snowe for casting a brave vote against the Neanderthal leadership of her

She is already saying that she might not vote for the final bill, so don't think its over yet

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Isn't it kind of fitting that the GOP has a symbol to represent those of its members who are interested in more than symbolic politics?

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Isn't it kind of fitting that the GOP has a symbol to represent those of its members who are interested in more than symbolic politics?

Well, on the other side, we have this:

Couldn't resist.

 

[walrus]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Assuming this or some health reform bill is going to pass when is it going to go into effect?

 

[Bill]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Assuming this or some health reform bill is going to pass when is it going to go into effect?

I don't think most of it would go into effect until after the 2012 election.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Couldn't resist.

No offense taken. I'm not going to get dragged into policy debates. But the politics are interesting.

If all the rhetoric on the right is sincere - if it isn't just so much demagoguery - wouldn't it be job #1 to ensure nothing with a public option is passed?

Logic would seem to point that way.

If so, the GOP's best play is to stress the need to pass legislation w/o a public option. Disengagement is dangerous, because while there's no guarantee that the Dems will introduce a public option via reconciliation, there's no guarantee that they won't, either. The GOP should know - they did business with GW in exactly that way.

If the stakes are as high as the GOP claims, it's positively irresponsible to take that chance. It amounts to saying to the public: "We think this policy is horrific, and we'd rather blame the Dems for doing it than take positive steps to prevent it."

Seems to me like Snowe is providing a service to the GOP. By providing a facade of bipartisanship, it lets Baucus and other centrist Dems jump back on the 60-vote, no-reconciliation bandwagon. I don't have time to read comments @ Politico, but I'm sure if I did, there'd be no shortage of traitor - or even Hitler references.

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

She is already saying that she might not vote for the final bill, so don't think its over yet

True. We are a long way from a law yet, particularly since there are five different Senate committee versions, let alone conference to reconcile with the House bill.

Unless the changes Snowe insisted on are red-lined she'll probably vote for the final bill. Depends what the GOP wants to do, though. If the Dems keep their 60 commitment after conference, do the Republicans really want to be the party that was against social security and Medicare and health care, particularly if they can report back to their corporate overlords that at least they got the public option scotched?

When there's nothing left for it, take credit.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Dems have 59 and a big question mark in Byrd (health). They could ram it through using "reconciliation", but that could tick off Byrd who may join the GOP in a parlimentary objection.

When (probably) this thing passes there could be a possible strong backlash against the Dems in 2010. If so, what can be rolled back by the 112th Congress??? I'm thinking that we're stuck with this for the rest of our lives.

To quote the ref in Slapshot: "Too much, too soon."

 

[Kepler]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

To quote the ref in Slapshot: "Too much, too soon."

Too soon? 70 years later?

We can roll back or amend anything that loses support / doesn't work. Every program that lasts changes dramatically. The real "worry" is it will work and be popular.

There could be backlash against the Dems in 2010 -- midterm and all -- but it won't be for keeping a campaign promise. In pure political terms, they'd pay more for failing, since then their supporters don't get what they were promised and the rest of the country thinks they look inept.

 

[Rover]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Interesting....

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...-letting-states-opt-into-public-option-.html#

Undoing health care reform will be next to impossible as the Dems would filibuster any changes, much like they have to defeat a filibuster in order to enact the changes.

However, the notion that the GOP is returning to power on this is laughable. In case you haven't noticed, people don't like the GOP. The only reason why brainless pundits are even mentioning this is because of the higher interest on the right in an election over a year away. That's to be expected, but eventually during a campaign Republican candidates have to explain why 1) they've offered nothing but delay to this effort, 2) why residents of their own districts should continue in their view to not have insurance, and 3) why they oppose a deficit reducing bill when many of them supported an unfunded prescription drug benefit. These are questions that you don't have to answer now, but ones your opponent will be asking.

 

[Bill]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Interesting....

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...-letting-states-opt-into-public-option-.html#

Undoing health care reform will be next to impossible as the Dems would filibuster any changes, much like they have to defeat a filibuster in order to enact the changes.

However, the notion that the GOP is returning to power on this is laughable. In case you haven't noticed, people don't like the GOP. The only reason why brainless pundits are even mentioning this is because of the higher interest on the right in an election over a year away. That's to be expected, but eventually during a campaign Republican candidates have to explain why 1) they've offered nothing but delay to this effort, 2) why residents of their own districts should continue in their view to not have insurance, and 3) why they oppose a deficit reducing bill when many of them supported an unfunded prescription drug benefit. These are questions that you don't have to answer now, but ones your opponent will be asking.

You don't seriously think the health care reform bill will lower the deficit do you? I know that the CBO has projected it would do so (over the first 10 years), but we all know the history of government cost estimates.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Unless the changes Snowe insisted on are red-lined she'll probably vote for the final bill. Depends what the GOP wants to do, though. If the Dems keep their 60 commitment after conference, do the Republicans really want to be the party that was against social security and Medicare and health care, particularly if they can report back to their corporate overlords that at least they got the public option scotched?

It might not be the worst thing to be against two (and what will be three) programs that are bankrupt.

 

[joecct]

Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Part 2 - Deathers vs. Commies

Too soon? 70 years later?

We can roll back or amend anything that loses support / doesn't work. Every program that lasts changes dramatically. The real "worry" is it will work and be popular.

There could be backlash against the Dems in 2010 -- midterm and all -- but it won't be for keeping a campaign promise. In pure political terms, they'd pay more for failing, since then their supporters don't get what they were promised and the rest of the country thinks they look inept.

Too soon as they have, IMO, rushed this bill through committee without anybody who votes really taking a close look at it.

Person A: I want health reform!
Person B: OK, what type of reform?
A: This type (shows bill).
B: Can I look at this and let you know?
A: We need reform right now! Vote on it!
B: Wait a minute, this is over 1,000 pages. I need to read this.
A: Vote!
B: OK. I vote No.

Very simplified, but I hope you get the idea. The whole process has been one sided with very few alternatives considered. I am conviced Les could write a better bill than what is now before the Congress. Or, all of us on this thread.

I am under no illusions that something will pass. I don't like what I see right now and doubt that the leadership is going to modify it too much to fit my taste. But, elections do have consequences....

Now does this mean that Obama will get the Nobel Prize for Health in 2010???