By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Using "reconciliation" for healthcare

Zucas said:
Kasz216 said:
Only the democrats could ruin the almost complete death of the opposing party by pushing through legislation most of the people in the US don't even want and won't even accomplish anything except rise the national debt.

Had they focused on the economy and stuff the public actually wanted done... they could of nearly dealt the republicans a death blow.

Oh I hope they don't do what the public wants.  If this country ever started listening to public opinion, we might as well sign our own death sentence.  As Mafoo stated, we need to do what the founders intended us to do... and they in know way whatsoever intended the elected politicians to give too much of a damn about what public opinion was.  They know, just like I do, public opinion can be easily swayed and manipulated and therefore not trustworthy.  I know I wouldn't trust the people I go to college with, or the people in my state or any group like that to make a decision to benefit the entire country.  Hell I hardly trust the people we have elected haha.

 

Personally, I wouldn't be stunned if they did actually do this, and well couldn't blame them.  They are playing politics and that is how it seems to go.  The problem seems to be, is this health care reform thing has become something similar to the abortion debate or gay marriage.  Factions on either side are trying to manipulate the issue into being a false dichotomy and its wrong.  Because of it, we aren't actually discussing health care but discussing things that may have nothing to do with it.  I'm not a big fan of the bill and think they should start over.  I would hope they don't just get rid of it and I would hope they just don't pass it... should learn from the stimulus and financial bailout that passing "incomplete" bills is a bad idea. 

All I know, is the health care system is extremely fucked up and to live in a country such as this, things like that shouldn't happen.  Shouldn't be constantly laughed at by the canadians or the Europeans.  I don't think socialized medicine is the right idea, but I also don't think CORPORATE monoply on medicine is good either.  These politicans need to stop playing king of the hill at Capital Hill and start discussing the real issues to find a solution to the problem that is an actual one.  Enough with the scapegoats and start doing their job.  And more so, Obama needs to seriously but out.  It's not the role of the President to intervene in that matter.  I know Republicans and Democrats have done it in that position well before, especially the last one, but it still isn't the role of the presdient.  He can propose what he wants done, but what actually gets done is up to the Congress.  His ratings would be higher if that happened (though the silly conservative pundits would then bash him for not doing anything but who cares what they think). 

Interesting fact... when it comes to real health measures... the US actually tops Candaians and most europeon countries.

Actual effectiveness isn't the problem... overall our effectiveness ranks up there with anybody in "non-spin" health numbers.

Cost is the only real issue.

We pay more then everyone else but our healthcare is actually DAMN good. Anyone who tells you otherwise is spinning. It's quite probably the best in the world... the real question is... is it worth spending 3-4X as much for healthcare thats 5-10% better.

Around the Network

My first reaction after hearing that president Obama and the Democrat leadership was taking this approach was "I think they’re counting their chickens before they hatched" ...

The biggest barrier to the passing of the initial healthcare bill was not Republicans, it was conservative Democrats. In general, in order for these conservative Democrats to support a bill like the current healthcare bill it has to be a popular measure which is passed through straight forward, honourable, and (typically) bi-partisan fashion because they require voters from both ends of the political spectrum to get re-elected. The optics of passing an unpopular bill through the use of reconciliation to avoid getting bi-partisan support are abysmal for these conservative Democrats; and I could easily see most/all of them visibly opposing this move to protect themselves.

At the same time, if Obama and the Democrat leadership can’t get a simple majority to pass this legislation while having such a dominant majority in both houses it could be their "Epic-Fail" moment; and I suspect that support from their base would soon disappear.



HappySqurriel said:

My first reaction after hearing that president Obama and the Democrat leadership was taking this approach was "I think they’re counting their chickens before they hatched" ...

The biggest barrier to the passing of the initial healthcare bill was not Republicans, it was conservative Democrats. In general, in order for these conservative Democrats to support a bill like the current healthcare bill it has to be a popular measure which is passed through straight forward, honourable, and (typically) bi-partisan fashion because they require voters from both ends of the political spectrum to get re-elected. The optics of passing an unpopular bill through the use of reconciliation to avoid getting bi-partisan support are abysmal for these conservative Democrats; and I could easily see most/all of them visibly opposing this move to protect themselves.

At the same time, if Obama and the Democrat leadership can’t get a simple majority to pass this legislation while having such a dominant majority in both houses it could be their "Epic-Fail" moment; and I suspect that support from their base would soon disappear.


They have a simple majority vote... probably. That's the real reason they're using reconciliation. Few people know this but they were threatening it BEFORE Brown won the special election to get conservative democrats in line who were threatening to go with the republicans because of how crappy the bill was. They didn't even want to bring it to the floor for debate.

Open the insurance industry to operate across state (and international) lines, separate health insurance from jobs, deregulate the industry, remove the ridiculous levels of malpractice costs and return the health industry back over to the free market and we won't need a government run health care.

Of course our government will never let that happen because they enjoy expanding their ownership over us much more so than giving us back and rights and freedoms.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Viper1 said:
Open the insurance industry to operate across state (and international) lines, separate health insurance from jobs, deregulate the industry, remove the ridiculous levels of malpractice costs and return the health industry back over to the free market and we won't need a government run health care.

Of course our government will never let that happen because they enjoy expanding their ownership over us much more so than giving us back and rights and freedoms.

I'd agree with all of that... except the deregulating of the industry.  I think there are some things that could stand to be deregulated, but also some regulations that should be put in that aren't.



Around the Network

Sure, in the current incarnation of the industry but if those other facets are implemented, those factors that need regulating would likely no longer even hold relevance and therefore not need regulating.



The rEVOLution is not being televised