GOP wins in Massachusetts!

[matthiasrat]

I am delighted by last night's victory of Scott Brown for the Senate seat in Massachusetts. Not only will this likely mean the death of the gargantuan monstrosity known as the Health Care bill, it also means that the Democrats will have to ask themselves what's really important to them, and perhaps, it will even lead some of them to actually try

Comments

[linnaeus]

I'm not sure I see the one-party rule. Not that the Democrats have necessarily been all sweetness and light, but if they really had been taking a "my way or the highway" approach, wouldn't they have rammed through a health care bill by now?

[matthiasrat]

Well, by that I mean that they tried to pass bills with only the support of their own members. On major initiatives, they've garnered almost zero GOP support, because they've never tried to obtain it. While they did try to get Olympia Snowe's vote on Health Care, it was so superficial even she saw through it and became an opponent. At that point, they had to bribe the moderate members of their own party to support the bill (Landrieu, Nelson).

That's how I've seen the events at least. Now they won't be able to do that because they will need at least one GOP vote to overcome any filibuster.

Dominus tecum

[jeffreycwells]

I don't know about this. Seems to me the reason the whole health care thing is the debacle that it is comes from an elaborate series of knee-cuts and bastardizations intended to make "health care for all" more palatable to the Right. If the Democrats had been trying to muscle Single Payor System through the legislature using the power of party-line majority, then, sure, I could see your point. But the bill as presented? Not so much.

For the sake of argument, what kind of "Let's Spend Tax Dollars To Give Medical Care To Those Who Can't Afford It" plan would garner anything other than party-line rejection from the G.O.P.? Is Sen. Brown actually committed to the concept of passing a "reasonable" health care bill? Have any specifics been mentioned, or is this just more election-night speech? Did I miss the part where the Republican party had a superior counterplan beyond saying "No" and shutting the book? (I do actually want to know the answer; I'm not the world's closest study of modern American politics.)

[linnaeus]

If one were to look at it in a crassly political way, it doesn't seem like there's any real benefit to the GOP to compromise with the Democrats at all. It's in their best interest politically for the Democrats to fail to make any headway on their agenda going into the midterm elections, or barring that to force them to push through a bill without any bipartisan support, giving lie to Democratic promises of bipartisanism and therefore strengthening the Republican hand going into this year's elections. I support the idea of fiscal responsibility, but considering the fact that the prescription drug benefits package passed by a Republican controlled congress and signed by a Republican president not long ago costs more than the bill currently under consideration, I'm not sure I believe that's really what they're objecting to...

[matthiasrat]

And Medicare Part D is something for which most conservatives still have not forgiven Bush and the establishment GOP for.

Dominus tecum

[matthiasrat]

Not so much more palatable to the right, as the right will never accept a plan which increases the size and reach of federal government, and certainly not one designed to take over 1/6 (or 1/7, I can't remember the exact number) of the US economy. The elaborate series of knee-cuts and deals were made to appeal to the moderate members of the Democratic caucus who felt they couldn't vote for a liberal bill

[viqsi]

What I'd like to see is HIPAA portability protection extended to individual coverage as well as employer, for those of us whose employee-provided healthcare does poorly (otherwise, last I checked you can be unceremoniously kicked off after your first individual term ends). It'd restore a little bit of competition to the marketplace, too

[matthiasrat]

*nods* I concur that HSAs aren't the answer for everyone, and they could probably stand some reform. But I think small reforms are going to have a better chance of success than anything else.

Little steps, perhaps even including those you suggest, are the way to get this done. And steps that encourage more competition and more control in the hands of people, not in the hands of beaurocrats, either government or insurance!

Dominus tecum