Health Reform Will Be a Political Winner for Democrats

We shall see (0.00 / 0)

However, I don't think it will have any effect up or down.  The issue in November will be what it usually is "It's the Economy, Stupid."  A recent poll shows great concern:  http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

Most American voters believe it's possible the nation's economy could collapse, and majorities don't think elected officials in Washington have ideas for fixing it.

The latest Fox News poll finds that 79 percent of voters think it's possible the economy could collapse, including large majorities of Democrats (72 percent), Republicans (84 percent) and independents (80 percent).

Just 18 percent think the economy is "so big and strong it could never collapse."

Moreover, 78 percent of voters believe the federal government is "larger and more costly" than it has ever been before, and by nearly three-to-one more voters think the national debt (65 percent) is a greater potential threat to the country's future than terrorism (23 percent).

Reality has a way of upending wishful thinking.

---

by: Craig Moore @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 20:12:53 PM UTC

Oooohhh... A Fox poll! (0.00 / 0)

Put that right up there with Rasmussen as a nice independent polling outfit.

...roundfile...

---

by: JC @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 21:45:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Too bad JC that your party (0.00 / 0)

ideology clouds your mental processes.  Go to the link, read the article.  THEN look in the lower right at the Real Clear Politics snapshot.  Coincidence? Not much confidence there.

---

by: Craig Moore @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 22:21:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Party ideology? (0.00 / 0)

Which party would that be?

And, Oooohhh... A RCP poll snapshot. I'm scared.

crumple...toss...~roundfile~

---

by: JC @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 23:33:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well JC, you (0.00 / 0)

are certainly no David Brooks. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03...

For apostates like me, watching this bill go through the meat grinder was like watching an old family reunion. One glimpse and you got the whole panoply of what you loved and found annoying about these people...

Today, America's vigor is challenged on two fronts. First, the country is becoming geriatric. Other nations spend 10 percent or so of their G.D.P. on health care. We spend 17 percent and are predicted to soon spend 20 percent and then 25 percent. This legislation was supposed to end that asphyxiating growth, which will crowd out investments in innovation, education and everything else. It will not.

With the word security engraved on its heart, the Democratic Party is just not structured to cut spending that would enhance health and safety. The party nurtures; it does not say, "No more."

The second biggest threat to America's vibrancy is the exploding federal debt. Again, Democrats can utter the words of fiscal restraint, but they don't feel the passion. This bill is full of gimmicks designed to get a good score from the Congressional Budget Office but not to really balance the budget. Democrats did enough to solve their political problem (not looking fiscally reckless) but not enough to solve the genuine problem...

Again, "It's the economy, Stupid!" When the bow breaks, down will come baby cradle and all.

---

by: Craig Moore @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 23:43:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oooohhh... David Brooks (0.00 / 0)

I'm scared. He's so brilliant.

And it's the economy, stupid? Sure, that's what led to the downfall of republicanism in the '00's. As in the 2000's.

What makes you think people are ready to vote in the teabaggers to take over the economy, after watching Bush & Co. rob the public coffers and crash the economy? Dream on.

And the bow done broke about 9 years ago:

    All the king's horses and all the king's men
    Couldn't put Humpty together again.

Sayanora, suckas

---

by: JC @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 23:52:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We will see. eom. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Craig Moore @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 00:02:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whistling through the graveyard! (0.00 / 0)

So Matt, you're predicting big Democrat victories this fall?

Too funny -  

---

by: Eric Coobs @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 21:39:04 PM UTC

I agree, it will help Democrats (0.00 / 0)

Once the dust settles, it will become clear that this legislation will help millions. That may take a couple of months, but it will happen well in advance of the election. In the meantime, opponents of the law may do some crazy things (there is precedent: after Canada adopted its plan, physicians in Saskatchewan went on strike for 23 days in July, 1962).

But Democrats must be careful not to be too proud. Obamacare:

(1) Leaves 15 million without coverage;

(2) Sanctifies the role of the extortionist middlemen otherwise known as private health insurance companies;

(3) Fails to do enough to bring down drug prices (remember the backroom deal with Billy Tauzin?);

(4) Creates a system of brain numbing complexity. Instead going to a physician, handing him your electronic health care card, and getting on with the business of being healed, we remain condemned to dealing with insurance companies and  hospital, etc., billing departments.

You won't hear many Democrats talking these shortcomings. They're determined to look on the sunny side, and will regard criticism as disloyalty.

We did a lot, but we didn't do enough, and what we did do we did in the wrong way.

---

by: jrconner @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 22:39:43 PM UTC

jrconner (0.00 / 0)

Your #2 fits right in with the obsequious bow and oral gratification Dems are extending to insurance cos on finance reform:  http://www.property-casualty.c...

NU Online News Service, March 23, 1:15 p.m. EDT

WASHINGTON- Insurers have secured key changes in financial services reform legislation easing a proposed financial requirement for large firms and eliminating tighter regulation of financial product sales.

One revision to the bill reported out of the Senate Banking Committee yesterday means only one life and property and casualty insurer will be required to pay into a fund to finance a Resolution Authority for the liquidation or reorganization of huge financial services companies whose bankruptcy would pose a systemic risk to the economy.

The other change calls for a study of a proposal to establish a "standard of care" for the sale of investment products and create a financial planning oversight board.

Originally the proposal, by Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., chairman of the Senate Aging Committee, would have created the standard and board creation as part of the bill.

The life insurance industry, both underwriters and agents, strongly opposed such a provision, fearing that it was a back-door way to impose a uniform fiduciary standard on the sale of investment products.

The bill was passed by a party-line, 13-10 vote.  

13 Dems doing insurance cos bidding...Again!!!

---

by: Craig Moore @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 22:52:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No doubt dems will oversell (0.00 / 0)

this bill. It's the only thing they have going for them right now, or so they think.

The rest of us will get on with critiquing where we are and trying to move forward to deal with the issues you mention, and more.

---

by: JC @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 23:36:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is just the first step (0.00 / 0)

I'm not sure if I'll live to see it, but I hope we'll gradually grow into system with a strong government insurance option that will marginalize the private health insurance companies into supplemental insurers.

In other words, Medicare for all.

I hope the Republicans take strong positions in favor of rpealing the current bill.  Somebody, please, stick a videocamera in Rehberg's face and have him go on the record supporting repeal.

It'll cost him the election.

---

by: Turner @ Tue Mar 23, 2010 at 23:59:42 PM UTC

Doubt it (0.00 / 0)

Maybe in a decade or so it will help Dems. Unfortunately, much of the good stuff in the bill doesn't go into effect until 2014, so most Americans will not feel the benefits of this bill til then--too late for the mid-terms or 2012 Pres election. In the meantime, insurance companies will be purging sick people from their system and finding other creative ways to avoid responsibility under the bill. AND, R's have time to gut it BEFORE the American people are really invested in the program. (I would have written it to block pre-existing condition coverage denials for ALL Americans beginning on day 1.)
It will be the conservative compromises like this that were made to get this bill passed that will come back to kick Dems in the butt, electorally-speaking.  

---

by: Derek @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 00:50:51 AM UTC

Communist style health care (0.00 / 0)

There are some good things about this. It's like Joe Biden said, it's that three letter word JOBS. 16,500 more IRS agents will be hired. Plus there are 50 new federal programs and commissions. Somebody has to warm those chairs in Washington. Plus with the drag on our dynamic economy by the crushing new regulations and taxes we can expect 10% unemployment to be the new standard. No longer will illegal aliens flock to this country for jobs. No wait they will probably start putting out Spanish language public service announcements declaring that you don't need a job to get free health care. Plus think of all the drugs we can get. When you can't get in to see the doctor because of the waiting list they will probably just give you some pain killers to tide you over. Since the Amish and Muslims will be exempted because of religious convictions expect a lot more people to become religious.

---

by: larry @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 13:30:58 PM UTC

If this were Communist-style health care (0.00 / 0)

the government would have nationalized all of our private health care facilities, and handed everybody a card for entrance.

That didn't happen. What happened was the government subsidized private corporations to provide health care to some poorer and unhealthy people, and extended Medicaid to a few more of the poorest Americans.

That's about as far from USSR or Cuba-style health care as you can be.

You chicken littles don't have a clue about diddly as to what really happened.

---

by: JC @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 17:06:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You are right, it should be Fascist (0.00 / 0)

Like Jim Elliot said Otto von Bismarck's dream has come true. But your right this is just like the German and Italian Fascists did in the 20's and 30's as they tried to expand Bismarck's dream. So, since I don't know what really happened tell me why does the new health care law need 16,500 more gestapo, I mean IRS agents? Since medical is a large part of auto insurance, will that be excluded in the future? What about workers comp. will employers be relieved of this responsibility? How about a corporation's CGL and our homeowners policy? If an illegal immigrant hits my employee in the head with a hammer, steals my personal vehicle, rams into the Ferris wheel at my amusement park paralyzing seven of my customers am I still liable, or is Barry going to pay all my bills since health care is free?

---

by: larry @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 19:58:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're all over the map here (0.00 / 0)

First, yes it is more of a fascist solution--a collusion between big business and big government (facilitated by lobbyists an corporate donations), forcing people to buy a private product. I've said this all along that a mandate for purchase of private insurance to be a fascist movement. And that includes IRS involvement. So we're on the same page there.

As to auto medical and worker's comp and other insurance with health riders, I assume they'll stay the same because we don't have universal care or no fault.

But when you say "health care is free" it just isn't true. Even with subsidies, those forced by mandates to participate on the exchanges will have to pay premiums on a sliding scale, and pay out-of-pocket. Those on Medicaid get taxed in a bunch of ways, just like the rest of us. So there is no free lunch. It is a myth.

Furthermore, all of those tax-free health care benefits provided by employers, to the tune of 250 billion dollars per year, is as much of a free lunch as any other person on the exchange or on Medicaid will get. So don't get all down on subsidies, unless you are willing to give back your tax-payer provided subsidy on your employee health plan.

---

by: JC @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 20:15:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I saw where student loans (0.00 / 0)

costs are rising by up to $1800 over the loan life, according to Lindsay Graham.  Will students find this enticing to vote Dem because of the govt absorbing the student loan business? See:  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0...

---

by: Craig Moore @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 14:07:53 PM UTC

Or will students just ignore Lindsay Graham's disinformation? (0.00 / 0)

n/t

---

by: JC @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 16:58:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Win Some, Lose Some (0.00 / 0)

As everyone knows, we don't vote nationally on anything, and especially not on off-year congressional races.  There are 25 House races where polling on this issue can tell you something, maybe 30.

Without this issue, you'd expect the 10-15 most marginal Dems to lose in 2010, just because of the different national context.  Will the Affordable Care Act save 2 or 3 of those seats?  It just might.  Some of those guys probably voted no anyway.  So they get to say: 'It wasn't good enough, so I didn't support it.  But it's nothing like what the Republicans (including my opponent calling for repeal) said it was going to be.'

If our friends of the Tea persuasion keep breaking windows, this might look like an even more reasonable position to take.

Confirm thy soul in self control, thy liberty in law.

---

by: CharleyCarp @ Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 16:57:24 PM UTC