Obama health reform

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag

It was so strange to watch this whole scandal go down... my brother actually worked for Dede Scozzafava, the female representative who was supposed to run on the repug ticket instead of Doug Hoffman, but whom the party ran out on a rail because she's basically an evil socialist liberal who believes in gay marriage and abortion rights, etc etc. She's good friends with my grandfather, who was a local politican for years in upstate New York.

Anyway, my brother lives in Albany now and some of his friends work in the senate or congressional building. He said one friend in particular was there when the heads of the party from Washington told Dede she had to bow out, and then their camera people asked her really rude questions while she cried and they snapped photos of this. After all of this, they had the nerve to turn to Dede's staff and say, "well, the Hoffman campaign needs help, if you'd like to come back to Washington with us!"
!! !!

Really bizarre to see people you know make headlines in such a messy way.
 

polystyle

Well-known member
Agreed.
Albany and NYC politics always have oddball *hit going on.
Dede's story def one of them.
Bloomberg almost didn't make it in this (third ) time !
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
I think this won't affect practice as much as some people think it will.

I don't think it will either. the point is the many compromises health care reform advocates have been forced to make. Nancy Pelosi is about as firm as it gets w/r/t support for reproductive rights - I'm sure this really sticks in her craw, however big a smile she puts on in public. the larger point is that the people trying to push reform are not operating from a position of great strength, not strong enough to put a bill through w/o having to resort to making concessions and allowing in these kinds of odious amendments.

Do you really think the dems are going to lose in the midterms?

yes. it doesn't have anything, or at least not much, to do w/tea party nuts, FreedomWorks or Rush Limbaugh. the President's party nearly always loses seats in the midterms. that's what voters do - they turn whoever's in power out of power. further, the economy hasn't really improved since the Big O took office - it may have gotten worse (i.e., unemployment over 10%) and it doesn't like it will improve in any meaningful way in the next year. the question isn't whether the Democrats will lose seats in the midterms, but how many seats they will lose. I think it's likely they'll retain majorities in both houses, albeit much slimmer ones. the problem is that they're barely getting a bill through with the overwhelming majorities they have now. as well, the GOP is much more united in opposition than the Democrats are in support.
 

polystyle

Well-known member
It is indeed Vimothy.
The mad, unemployed and uncovered can and will blame whose in front of them ( in the Gov. ), or who on TV or their neighbor tells them to be mad at.
I doubt we want to see this 'rump' party thing happen in any city we live in !
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
the perfect is the enemy of the good.

who's talking about perfect? just something that isn't simultaneously neutered and filled with pandering amendments. we've already had funding for abstinence-only education, some nonsense about being able to carry guns into national parks (which I'm fine with - I'm not big on gun control - but it obv has nothing to do with health care), now this extra clampdown on abortion funding. the bill the House voted on isn't bad, tbf; it prohibits denial of coverage based on preexisting conditions & limits ways in which premiums can be varied, has both an individual & employer mandate (w/sliding scale tax penalties who don't get insurance), has a quasi-public option in the form of an insurance exchange (this is where "neutered" comes in), etc. it also does some other nice things, like increasing Medicaid payments to primary care physicians. OTOH, it's unclear whether the Senate bill will have all that stuff - esp. the public option and employer mandate, what the final bill will look like or, again, if we'll get a bill at all. or who/how such a bill will be paid for - O really screwed himself/us when he promised not to raise taxes, at all.

in re: right-wing paranoia consuming the GOP, that's not a new story. the more intellectual/pragmatic side of the GOP (i.e. McCain, David Brooks, Natl Review - Buckley must be spinning in his grave these days, etc.) has been trying to ride that tiger for 20+ years and it's finally turned around and bit them in the ass. they have only themselves to blame for Limbaugh, Beck, etc. all those unholy alliances with Ralph Reed & James Dobson & that ilk. it's domestic blowback.
 
Last edited:

scottdisco

rip this joint please
i wasn't addressing anyone on thread tbf, or implying anything specific about anyone, more a generic punt. tbh it would make more sense if i'd put it in another thread i bet :cool:
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
no, I think it's an absolutely valid point, in this specific situation & in general. but esp. in American politics. it's more just how exasperating the entire thing is/has been. mainly b/c I remain convinced that even after all this maneuvering the end product will be extremely disappointing. of course I hope to be happily surprised.

Voltaire is a great one for the aphorisms though, isn't he?
 

blackpixie

Well-known member
I don't think it will either. the point is the many compromises health care reform advocates have been forced to make. Nancy Pelosi is about as firm as it gets w/r/t support for reproductive rights - I'm sure this really sticks in her craw, however big a smile she puts on in public. the larger point is that the people trying to push reform are not operating from a position of great strength, not strong enough to put a bill through w/o having to resort to making concessions and allowing in these kinds of odious amendments.

I usually try very hard to avoid the politics thread as most of you might as well be speaking german.. but padraig you seem to know what you are talking about here and i am wondering if you can shed light on why, with the left being the majority in house and senate, why the left must make so many concessions to their proposed health reform. And it hasn't even gone through the senate yet...

Is it blue dog democrats? Is it private interests having massive influences in washington?
I read a post on smart politics which found that most of the democrats who voted No on the bill represent constituencies who voted for mccain in large majorities in 2008, obviously indicating that they represent a fair amount of conservatives. So could it be that this is just realpolitik and that these "democrats" are really only concerned about 2010?
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
why, with the left being the majority in house and senate, why the left must make so many concessions to their proposed health reform.

The US has a 'left' now?!

(OK, a slightly trite point - obviously it has plenty of politicians to the left of, say, Palin or Bolton - but it doesn't really have a significant bloc that would be recognised as 'left' in most other democracies, does it?)
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
i am wondering if you can shed light on why, with the left being the majority in house and senate, why the left must make so many concessions to their proposed health reform. And it hasn't even gone through the senate yet...

as Mr. Tea alludes to, there isn't really a "left" in mainstream American politics, at least not in the European social democratic sense; liberal is a better word to describe it. there is the Progressive Caucus, but that's only ~1/5th of the House (as far as "left" the Senate has Bernie Sanders and, well...). the biggest problem is that the Democrats are badly divided amongst themselves in a way the GOP really isn't. again, the concessions made to get the bill through the house were to moderate/conservative Dems, not to Republicans who were never, never going to vote for the bill anyway. Pelosi had to make the concessions b/c she simply didn't have the votes; even w/them it was obv. a very near-run thing.

the Senate is even worse. I'm not an expert, but the way I understand Pelosi as Speaker has a lot more control over what happens than Reid does as Senate Majority Leader. the Dems need a supermajority of 60 to avoid a filibuster. 60 is exactly the # they have (58 + 2 Independents, Sanders & the essentially Republican Joe Lieberman). since it's very unlikely that they'll get more than 1 or 2 GOP votes, if any, the more liberal Dems will be forced to make concessions to people like Ben Nelson. as to whether it's a real ideology issue or the eternal worry about re-election, I suspect a mixture of both but tending towards the latter. really I've no idea though. the real battles will be over what concessions are made, both in terms of what gets into the bill and what crazy amendments the liberals are forced to choke down.

on a general note, private interests have massive influence on pretty much everything in Washington. esp. if one is slightly expansive in the definition of "private interests".
 

blackpixie

Well-known member

i dont see anything about lobbyists or healthcare, just an ugly picture of that drummer from nirvana.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/health/policy/18senate.html?hp

FTA

Given what is riding on the vote, party leaders have been busy talking to holdouts, negotiating deals in an effort to get them on board as wavering lawmakers exert their leverage at a critical moment. In response to demands from Mr. Nelson, for instance, the leaders appear willing to drop plans to use the bill to strip health insurance companies of their antitrust exemption.

I doubt he will really get in the way, as there are ways around guys like this, but wow he argues that the public option will put private insurers out of business and then goes on to demand THAT?
 

polystyle

Well-known member
Lobbyists & words

Oops, sorry blackpixie -that was heath care for Vultures.
Here's the proper article for making sausage out of the bill -http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/us/politics/15health.html?scp=2&sq=Health%20care%20lobbyists%20words&st=Search
 
L

LoraHup

Guest
Obama health r

Well there were not so many good presidents in the USA... and with Obama, i have my doubts tbh... i mean whenever hes on the news its because he did a joke somewhere or bought something for his wife or gave a party in the white house.. i mean really.. what is he doing?
 

sufi

lala
sorry lora
i was vaguely intrigued by yr AI posting on topic non-sequiturs,
& i think you could probably pass the dissnsus turing test for that reason but that's enough byebye bot
 
Top