Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actions by the "tea party people" and other Americans that are hurting the GOP are angering even some Republicans. What about when they get asked the tough questions in public like " What do you think of Republicans (constituents) using violence as a means to an end?
Do you guys seriously think all Republicans like what's going on in public in States across America????
Yah it's going to cost them.
I for one am disgusted at what's going on in the streets. And we call ourselves America a role model for other nations HA don't make me laugh. We are called "ugly Americans" for many reasons and what's happening right now is just an other example of how horrific and ignorant people can be.
Actually, if you read and understand the poll properly, you will see most want "parts of the bill"
That's not what we got. That's why most want to fight the bill. The dramatic shift among Independents signals the demise of the Dems in in 2010, 2012, and most likely way beyond.
But, hey... keep gloating... you're all just fanning the flames of discontent, ensuring the fact that you won't be able to win the Independents back. And you can't win without 'em. Dems lose. Game over.
And yet I didn't hear a single positive thing about it from the opposition. Did you? Just misinformation, lies and exaggerations. In fact, so much so that most of the naysayers still see the bill that way (without actually knowing what is in it). I was debating with a guy this afternoon on another forum who still believed this bill has resulted in a universal health care system like that in Canada or England.
I did hear one Republican congressman say that 250 pages of the bill were good. I can't remember his name though and I have heard some minor agreements on at least something from most.
With that said, Everyone either likes to focus on the negatives or the positives depending what side they are on and that is really sad. This isn't the way Washington is supposed to work, both sides turned the entire process into a joke.
I am a little concerned about the threats to legislators and their families that seem to be escalating. Stupak has had to refer no less than 50 threatening voicemail messages to the Capitol Police for investigation and that is just one of many examples.
That's what happens when their side thinks nothing of using rhetoric like their icon, Sara Failin', who's "targeting" "Blue Dog" Democrats and using rifle crosshairs to indicate their location on a map of the U.S. on her PAC website.
I did hear one Republican congressman say that 250 pages of the bill were good. I can't remember his name though and I have heard some minor agreements on at least something from most.
With that said, Everyone either likes to focus on the negatives or the positives depending what side they are on and that is really sad. This isn't the way Washington is supposed to work, both sides turned the entire process into a joke.
True. If both sides worked to improve the quality of health care access for the people, we will have something most, if not all could be proud of. But, that doesn't help politicians score political points and prepare for elections. The fact that many of the republican ideas made it to the bill is a testament that it is possible. Yet, I dare you find a republican who has anything good to say about the bill right now. Not ONE voted for it, obviously didn't see anything good about it that would be good for the people.
They should know, this bill was proposed by democratic congress and administration, and in now way only republican ideas would have been included. I would have expected the same if republicans actually did something about health care insurance when they were in power.
That's not what we got. That's why most want to fight the bill. The dramatic shift among Independents signals the demise of the Dems in in 2010, 2012, and most likely way beyond.
But, hey... keep gloating... you're all just fanning the flames of discontent, ensuring the fact that you won't be able to win the Independents back. And you can't win without 'em. Dems lose. Game over.
Ultimately, it is all about elections, isn't it? What exactly didn't you get? And did you get ANYTHING out of it? No?
This is definitely going to hurt the Republicans for 2 reasons:
1. Historically, both in this country and in other developed democracies, welfare legislation tends to be less popular before passage than after. This is because the debate around welfare legislation tends to be especially contentious, there is a ton of negative advertising and the legislation is constantly in flux as things are being added and taken out. Additionally, before passage the benefits of the bill are merely theoretical. Psychological research shows that people are risk-averse, they tend to fear changes but accept them once it comes to pass. NOW that the legislation has passed, however, the negative advertising will die down and the bill is no longer changing--this means that the focus now turns to what the bill actually means for people. People generally support the big aspects of this legislation (no denying coverage b/c of pre-existing conditions, increasing prescription coverage in Medicare, no cancelling coverage, no life-term limits on coverage, reduced premiums, subsidies for buying insurance, etc.) and now that they have it, they aren't going to want to give it up. It was the same with Social Security and Medicare; there was a lot of opposition before they passed. Within a few months of passage, however, these programs started to become much more popular. Today, no sane politician would call for their repeal. The same will be said of this healthcare bill. Republicans are going to be cast as trying to allow insurance companies to deny coverage b/c of preexisting conditions, they are going to be accused of trying to increase the cost of prescriptions for those on Medicare, etc.
2. The threats of violence and overall insanity of the extreme radical right-wing fringe groups is really bad for the Republicans. I recognize that this is a very small subset of the population, that they don't represent most Republicans. However, they are highly visible and they are making death threats against Democratic Congressmen as well as their families. This is not something the majority of Americans have any patience for; this is really quickly going to start hurting Republicans, especially considering that they have been slow to denounce it and several have appeared to be supporting it.
This is a partial transcript of Richard Nixon's (R) address on healthcare in 1974;
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Nixon, Special Message to the Congress Proposing a Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan, 1974
Without adequate health care, no one can make full use of his or her talents and opportunities. It is thus just as important that economic, racial and social barriers not stand in the way of good health care as it is to eliminate those barriers to a good education and a good job.
This next part is interesting;
Quote:
Today the need is even more pressing because of the higher costs of medical care. Efforts to control medical costs under the New Economic Policy have been Inept with encouraging success, sharply reducing the rate of inflation for health care. Nevertheless, the overall cost of health care has still risen by more than 20 percent in the last two and one-half years, so that more and more Americans face staggering bills when they receive medical help today:
--Across the Nation, the average cost of a day of hospital care now exceeds $110.
--The average cost of delivering a baby and providing postnatal care approaches $1,000.
--The average cost of health care for terminal cancer now exceeds $20,000
Does this next part sound familiar?
Quote:
First, even though more Americans carry health insurance than ever before, the 25 million Americans who remain uninsured often need it the most and are most unlikely to obtain it. They include many who work in seasonal or transient occupations, high-risk cases, and those who are ineligible for Medicaid despite low incomes.
Second, those Americans who do carry health insurance often lack coverage which is balanced, comprehensive and fully protective:
--Forty percent of those who are insured are not covered for visits to physicians on an out-patient basis, a gap that creates powerful incentives toward high cost care in hospitals;
--Few people have the option of selecting care through prepaid arrangements offered by Health Maintenance Organizations so the system at large does not benefit from the free choice and creative competition this would offer;
--Very few private policies cover preventive services;
--Most health plans do not contain built-in incentives to reduce waste and inefficiency. The extra costs of wasteful practices are passed on, of course, to consumers; and
--Fewer than half of our citizens under 65--and almost none over 65--have major medical coverage which pays for the cost of catastrophic illness.
Quote:
Early last year, I directed the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to prepare a new and improved plan for comprehensive health insurance. That plan, as I indicated in my State of the Union message, has been developed and I am presenting it to the Congress today. I urge its enactment as soon as possible.
The plan is organized around seven principles:
First, it offers every American an opportunity to obtain a balanced, comprehensive range of health insurance benefits;
Second, it will cost no American more than he can afford to pay;
Third, it builds on the strength and diversity of our existing public and private systems of health financing and harmonizes them into an overall system;
Fourth, it uses public funds only where needed and requires no new Federal taxes;
Fifth, it would maintain freedom of choice by patients and ensure that doctors work for their patient, not for the Federal Government.
Sixth, it encourages more effective use of our health care resources;
And finally, it is organized so that all parties would have a direct stake in making the system work--consumer, provider, insurer, State governments and the Federal Government.
Nixon proposed a program called CHIP, Comprehensive Health Insurance Program, not to be confused with the other CHIP (formerly SCHIP).
Quote:
Upon adoption of appropriate Federal and State legislation, the Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan would offer to every American the same broad and balanced health protection through one of three major programs:
--Employee Health Insurance, covering most Americans and offered at their place of employment, with the cost to be shared by the employer and employee on a basis which would prevent excessive burdens on either;
--Assisted Health Insurance, covering low-income persons, and persons who would be ineligible for the other two programs, with Federal and State government paying those costs beyond the means of the individual who is insured; and,
--An improved Medicare Plan, covering those 65 and over and offered through a Medicare system that is modified to include additional, needed benefits.
One of these three plans would be available to every American, but for everyone, participation in the program would be voluntary.
The benefits offered by the three plans would be identical for all Americans, regardless of age or income. Benefits would be provided for:
--hospital care;
--physicians' care in and out of the hospital;
--prescription and life-saving drugs;
--laboratory tests and X-rays;
--medical devices;
--ambulance services; and,
--other ancillary health care.
Anyways, if you really want to you can read the rest of the plan here:
"In retrospect, 1974 was the closest we have ever come to enacting national health insurance, and Democrats made a great mistake by not eagerly embracing [President Richard] Nixon's proposal," said Paul Starr, a health care policy expert and professor at Princeton University. "The distance between Kennedy and Nixon then was so small by comparison with the distance that exists now between Democrats and Republicans."
Here is the late Ted Kennedy's own words on Nixons CHIP:
Quote:
Kennedy had different ideas. "The president's program," he declared at the time it was revealed, "is really a partnership program that will provide billions of dollars to the health insurance companies. It is really a partnership between the administration and the insurance companies."
And next time you wonder how the US went so long without single payer health insurance, you can blame Ted Kennedy and the labor unions that lobbied hard to kill it in 1974. Because of that failure, we were 36 years late to the punch.
This is definitely going to hurt the Republicans for 2 reasons:
1. Historically, both in this country and in other developed democracies, welfare legislation tends to be less popular before passage than after. This is because the debate around welfare legislation tends to be especially contentious, there is a ton of negative advertising and the legislation is constantly in flux as things are being added and taken out. Additionally, before passage the benefits of the bill are merely theoretical. Psychological research shows that people are risk-averse, they tend to fear changes but accept them once it comes to pass. NOW that the legislation has passed, however, the negative advertising will die down and the bill is no longer changing--this means that the focus now turns to what the bill actually means for people. People generally support the big aspects of this legislation (no denying coverage b/c of pre-existing conditions, increasing prescription coverage in Medicare, no cancelling coverage, no life-term limits on coverage, reduced premiums, subsidies for buying insurance, etc.) and now that they have it, they aren't going to want to give it up. It was the same with Social Security and Medicare; there was a lot of opposition before they passed. Within a few months of passage, however, these programs started to become much more popular. Today, no sane politician would call for their repeal. The same will be said of this healthcare bill. Republicans are going to be cast as trying to allow insurance companies to deny coverage b/c of preexisting conditions, they are going to be accused of trying to increase the cost of prescriptions for those on Medicare, etc.
2. The threats of violence and overall insanity of the extreme radical right-wing fringe groups is really bad for the Republicans. I recognize that this is a very small subset of the population, that they don't represent most Republicans. However, they are highly visible and they are making death threats against Democratic Congressmen as well as their families. This is not something the majority of Americans have any patience for; this is really quickly going to start hurting Republicans, especially considering that they have been slow to denounce it and several have appeared to be supporting it.
Well thought out; very rational.
Republicans running on a platform of REVOKING health benefits, "tolerance" for extremists threatening violence.....the hole is getting pretty deep.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
