Congratulations!

[Ganbare Gincun]

I'd like to thank the people of Massachusetts for electing a Republican to the Senate and effectively dooming any chance at health care reform in the United States during this administration. Good job, guys! I for one can't wait to go into bankruptcy or have my coverage dropped as soon as I come down with a major illness, and I'm sure you'll all be equally thrilled once you acquire an equally life-threatening condition.

[Juton]

I hate to say it but you weren't going to get healthcare regardless. You couldn't even get all the democrats you had (I'm Canadian BTW) to vote for anything meaningful. What got shit out of the senate was so watered down it didn't have the public option. If Obama had conviction he'd insist on the public option and let the Republicans filibuster all the way until November or they buckle.

What really pisses me off about American politics is that both parties are incompetent at legislating to their proclaimed values. With Democrats it's because they're nutless and a bit corrupt, with Republicans their real ideals aren't always what they proclaim them to be. Even though I'm a Canuck I care about American politics because our countries are so interlinked. You guys need a voting reform or something, because the two party system you have is just shit.

[Crissa]

There are four parties in the Senate.

Democratic-Socialists. Blue Dogs (who pretend to be Democrats). And Conservatives (who pretend to be Republicans). Oh, right, there aren't any Republicans. And there's one Socialist, who always votes left of the Democrats.

MA voted in a guy who says he's a Republican, but will never, ever vote differently than the Conservative Party.

If Democrats were so corrupt... I really hate that acclaim. What elected Democrat has a corruption charge on them today? Or had one that proved positive in the past? How many Republicans have had corruption charges proved positive in the past?

Republicans > Democrats in the corruption department. Although, I'll give you that many Blue Dogs line their pockets and don't help one bit.

It's not like Evan Bayh would have supported HCR (Health Care Reform) had Croakley won. It's just an excuse he has now.

Of course, history tells us that those who don't pass legislation, lose their positions in the Senate.

-Crissa

[virgil]

As a friend pointed out to me, the Democrats still have a larger majority than Bush ever did, and he got to do whatever the hell he wanted. And even before this MA election, the Dems have been catering to the Republican's feelings.

[Nihlin]

We voted for Martha Coakley. Not that I was exactly thrilled by it, since her campaign platform was essentially "i r generic democrat" and she never bothered to try to tell me anything more. But Juton is right: it's a non-issue, since the previous majority existed on paper only.

But, here's another bit: Brown campaigned against healthcare reform, true, and some of his ammunition came from the fact that Massachusetts already has healthcare reform on a state level. So, Ganbare Gincun, you could always move to MA and get a state-subsidized plan.

[Juton]

There are four parties in the Senate.

Democratic-Socialists. Blue Dogs (who pretend to be Democrats). And Conservatives (who pretend to be Republicans). Oh, right, there aren't any Republicans. And there's one Socialist, who always votes left of the Democrats.

I'm interested in how you divide Conservative from Republican. I understand the gap between Neo-con and Paleo-con.

If Democrats were so corrupt... I really hate that acclaim. What elected Democrat has a corruption charge on them today?
...
Although, I'll give you that many Blue Dogs line their pockets and don't help one bit.

When I made that claim I was specifically thinking of Lieberman. How much money do you think is spent per year by lobbyists in DC? How does it affect your representatives? You're right, I don't have a lot of evidence of any sitting Democrats, for instance Blagoya-whatever got impeached. Maybe it's my imagination but don't you think Max Bauchus receiving more money from insurance companies will affect, hell even corrupt how he approaches healthcare reform?

Of course, history tells us that those who don't pass legislation, lose their positions in the Senate.

I think it's likely that Democrats lose their majority in at least one of the houses. While the Democrats aren't great, their better than neo-cons, does anyone think their is a piece of legislation that they can pass that can prevent big loses in November?

[tzor]

Anyone who calls called Curt Schilling a "another Yankee fan" deserves to have her head handed to her on a silver platter. (That and not standing outside Fenway Park, it's like Boston's sacred ground.)

But my favorite of all ... "He's going to say 'no' to that child with asthma. He's going to say 'no' to that cancer patient--'sorry, no treatment for you.' He's going to say 'no' to that senior worried about the doughnut hole--'sorry, we can't fill your doughnut hole." --Vicki Kennedy, Ted Kennedy's widow, on what will happen if Scott Brown... is elected.

No really, I don't want my doughnut hole filled.
I want the doughnut hole filled. I think there is a difference.

[Crissa]

Standing outside Fenway while the park is closed for the season?

They were set-ups to let the carpetbagger seem genuine. Like I said, he'll never vote the positions he claimed when elected.

-Crissa

[tzor]

Standing outside Fenway while the park is closed for the season?

Strike 3 for Coakley? Published: January 13, 2010 - 6:32 PM

What amazes me here is the lack of awareness by Coakley and her staff. Baseball holds a special level of importance in Boston and in Massachusetts. Fenway Park isn't just some place that some silly local team plays. It is Fenway. Home of the beloved Red Sox. If you spend any time out and among the people of Boston you will hear and be invited to join conversations about the the Red Sox. It is part of the fabric of the city. To dismiss Fenway and the cold (and the people that it represents) as being beneath you is a staggeringly dumb thing to say in Boston. As expected, it is not playing well.

Coakley's slap shot at Fenway fans was the talk of the popular local Howie Carr radio show in Boston today. Carr is a Brown supporter, and Coakley's refusal to greet the fans outside Fenway was a focus of the show.

Maybe Coakley forgot how near and dear Fenway was to Ted Kennedy, who threw out the first pitch last season in what everyone knew would be his last opening day. Or the Tribute to Kennedy in August at Fenway.

Insulting Fenway fans. Now that's a plan.

[Crissa]

So... You don't have shit but made up rumors about Coakley and Fenway?

WTF, man, you could have at least referenced what she actually said, which was bad enough.

-Crissa

[Ganbare Gincun]

Anyone who calls called Curt Schilling a "another Yankee fan" deserves to have her head handed to her on a silver platter. (That and not standing outside Fenway Park, it's like Boston's sacred ground.).

Yeah. Voting for candidates because of their familiarity with sports or because of a lack of ability to deliver jokes about a sports team is a GREAT voting strategy. Especially when national health care reform hangs in the balance. Good job, guys!

[MGuy]

As was mentioned before Health Care Reform is already dead. Not because a single seat changed but because our government is filled by a majority of people who absolutely suck. As a side note I agree with Juton's analysis of our government and I have made very similar claims to friends in the past. I also heard the same thing as vir but I heard it from The Daily Show.

[mean_liar]

Coakley ran a shit campaign and th elocal state Democrats thought they had it in the bag and phoned it in.

What the fuck do I care? I married a Canadian.

[violence in the media]

As a friend pointed out to me, the Democrats still have a larger majority than Bush ever did, and he got to do whatever the hell he wanted. And even before this MA election, the Dems have been catering to the Republican's feelings.

Yeah, but the Republicans are more willing and likely to move in obstinate lock-step with each other than the Democrats are. 60 Democratic seats was supposed to thwart that sort of cohesion and actually get major legislation passed.

[tzor]

Yeah, but the Republicans are more willing and likely to move in obstinate lock-step with each other than the Democrats are.

You forgot to mention they have a tendency to be more Bi-Partisian in their legislative approaches. The Democrats didn't even bother to win long term RINO support for the health bill and were constantly threatening to push the whole thing under reconciliation if their members didn't go into lockstep.

You also forget that Bush rarely pushed a grand unified all or nothing approach on anything. It is easy to put your foot in the door, it's hard to get the to open the door initially so that you can drive a mac truck through it.

[mean_liar]

That's total bullshit, tzor. The Republican leadership would pull the funding rug out from anyone voting for any form of socialized medicine. They beat on Specter and they'd do the same to anyone else willing to compromise.

[Juton]

That's total bullshit, tzor. The Republican leadership would pull the funding rug out from anyone voting for any form of socialized medicine. They beat on Specter and they'd do the same to anyone else willing to compromise.

Here's a big difference between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans enforce party unity, so when you vote Republican you get Republican. The Democrats don't do this, so you get people that are 'Blue Dog Democrats' that don't really act like Democrats.

If Obama or Pelosi really want to get meaningful health care reform passed they could have cracked the whip back in the summer. But they didn't and now their party's fortune will be laid bare because they couldn't rein in some of their more obstinate members.

[violence in the media]

Tzor, could you give me some examples of what the Republican Party might accept in return for supporting (or allowing to pass) something like socialized medicine or an end to federal bans on abortion funding?

[tzor]

Tzor, could you give me some examples of what the Republican Party might accept in return for supporting (or allowing to pass) something like socialized medicine or an end to federal bans on abortion funding?

Taking two extreme examples doesn’t make for a good way to look for compromise. In the case of federal bans on abortion funding there are simply more Democrats against than there are possible Republicans for; that’s why it didn’t get into the House version where the Democrats have an even better majority control than in the Senate.

As for “socialized medicine” that is not an end, it’s a means. I think the best way to get coverage for more people is two ways, both of which would be hard for a Republican to resist. The first is the “free market” – we need to open up the health insurance system to more competition, not less, through the ability of insurance companies to cross state lines and some method to encourage other players (such as non profits) to enter the market. The second way is to make insurance personal and not corporate; or to put it in another way, once you buy a plan it’s yours to keep. If you combine this with a concept similar to how they compute life insurance (the younger you take the plan the cheaper it is because you are paying the same price over the remainder of your life) then there is a major encouragement for young people to get covered.

And thinking progressive for a moment; one idea where the Federal Government could help … Unemployment Insurance; or insurance on your insurance so that if you get unemployed (as per the current laws of the land) the government would pick up your insurance costs (because you have a right to keep your previous policy, not that crap COBRA nonsense) while you qualify for regular unemployment insurance payments.

[CatharzGodfoot]

The first is the “free market” – we need to open up the health insurance system to more competition, not less, through the ability of insurance companies to cross state lines...

Like cell phone companies?

...and some method to encourage other players (such as non profits) to enter the market.

BCBS was nonprofit before 2002. What do you think convinced them to switch?

The second way is to make insurance personal and not corporate; or to put it in another way, once you buy a plan it’s yours to keep. If you combine this with a concept similar to how they compute life insurance (the younger you take the plan the cheaper it is because you are paying the same price over the remainder of your life) then there is a major encouragement for young people to get covered.

True, more government regulation can often help.

And thinking progressive for a moment; one idea where the Federal Government could help … Unemployment Insurance; or insurance on your insurance so that if you get unemployed (as per the current laws of the land) the government would pick up your insurance costs (because you have a right to keep your previous policy, not that crap COBRA nonsense) while you qualify for regular unemployment insurance payments.

But that would allow people to 'game' the system. As soon as you think you might loose your job, you should upgrade to the best possible insurance plans you can. Sure, being unemployed still sucks, but at least you'll be very covered. However, something like that would bankrupt the government very quickly.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Tzor, could you give me some examples of what the Republican Party might accept in return for supporting (or allowing to pass) something like socialized medicine or an end to federal bans on abortion funding?

This question has been asked already, and the answer is exactly nothing.

[Crissa]

I loved the quote from Senator Snowe (R-ME) "What I'm hearing from my providers is that they don't like it."

Yes, when asked, she was basing her support for HCR (Health Care Reform) bill upon what the insurance providers were telling her. Not her constituents.

What RINOs? You mean Spector, Lieberman?

-Crissa

PS: Nearly all of tzor's suggestions are in the HCR bills. Community Rating puts everyone at the same rate, so you can pick and choose based upon services, not upon whether you'll get insurance at all.

[violence in the media]

That's kind of my point, which is why I feel that the entire notion of bipartisan compromise is bullshit in the current political environment and am annoyed that the Democrats wasted the time even making the attempt.

[Crissa]

Also PS:

I'm defining 'American Conservative Party' by the Tea-Baggers, Roger Ailes, and the election in NY-23 in 2009, where a Conservative Party candidate beat the Republican candidate.

-Crissa

[tzor]

The first is the “free market” – we need to open up the health insurance system to more competition, not less, through the ability of insurance companies to cross state lines...

Like cell phone companies?

Actually I was thinking more like auto insurance - you know that gecco fellow?

But if you want to talk about cell phone companies, I'm sure that there's a map for that.

...and some method to encourage other players (such as non profits) to enter the market.

BCBS was nonprofit before 2002. What do you think convinced them to switch?

Let me guess? Profits. On the other hand, the Knights of Columbus was more along the lines of what I was thinking of in terms of non profits.

The second way is to make insurance personal and not corporate; or to put it in another way, once you buy a plan it’s yours to keep. If you combine this with a concept similar to how they compute life insurance (the younger you take the plan the cheaper it is because you are paying the same price over the remainder of your life) then there is a major encouragement for young people to get covered.

True, more government regulation can often help.

If it is the right regulation, yes it can.

And thinking progressive for a moment; one idea where the Federal Government could help … Unemployment Insurance; or insurance on your insurance so that if you get unemployed (as per the current laws of the land) the government would pick up your insurance costs (because you have a right to keep your previous policy, not that crap COBRA nonsense) while you qualify for regular unemployment insurance payments.

But that would allow people to 'game' the system. As soon as you think you might loose your job, you should upgrade to the best possible insurance plans you can. Sure, being unemployed still sucks, but at least you'll be very covered. However, something like that would bankrupt the government very quickly.

I'm not sure that this would be a good way to game the system (especially if all my other ideas were implemented) if we assume that insurance is personal and based on continual coverage. You could also put in requirements that you take the policy as being the lowest state from a certain period prior to the start of the unemployment period.

And I think certain levels simply would not be covered; orthodontics and stuff like that; just the basic stuff so you don't get a second mortgage because you had to visit the emergency room and wound up with a stay with surgery.