Actually, honest-to-God, all joking previous posts aside, the Dems should just give up. Pelosi, Reid, and Obama should have a giant press conference and announce that they are withdrawing the health care bill.
They should follow that with a plea to Republicans to put forward their own reform bill.
I assume the 'Pubs won’t have the nuts to actually offer anything which can be used against them come mid-terms.
If they do have the balls to actually offer something forward, the Democrats should be exactly as honorable as the 'Pubs have been in tearing to tiny pieces before using their majority to replace it entirely with what they wanted in the first fucking place. Further, they should do it at the last second and not give Rush any time to bloviate his fat drug-addicted ass.
This is a good point. When you’re in a position to vote yourself raises, and are the beneficiary of a really good government funded healthcare plan (which is NOT the same one endorsed by the admin for the “little people”), it’s hardly surprising that some folks will balk at the hypocrisy.
It’s literally the same issue as having a draft for the military during a time of war and yet since you are a Congresscritter your precious offspring are somehow more valuable than everyone else’s and somehow exempt from the plight of the “common man”.
It’s bullshit. If the admin TRULY BELIEVED in their UHC plan, THEY should be the first ones to sign up for it. But they won’t. Why? Because they know it’s inferior to the plan they already have.
I didn’t think they were requiring people to give up their existing plans and sign up for the UHC plan. If not, then they are adhering to the standard they give everyone else - everyone will now have a plan of last resort, which they need not use. And like everyone else the Gov guys can choose not to use it.
I’m not sure the fact that the politicians will still be allowed to buy cake is a reason to be pissed when they offer to hand out dry bread for free. Sure it’d be more impressive if they switched to the bread, but still…
Maybe my assertion isn’t accurate. Maybe it’s more a case of “Well, it’ll never happen to US since there’s NO WAY we would lose our jobs/wealth and/or pensions, ergo, we’ll never need or use it, but it’s still OK for everyone else”.
I don’t know. I’m in favor of UHC in principle, but since the lobbyists, special interests, corporations, Fox News, etc, etc are all involved in this debate it’s difficult to make heads or tails of the reality of these bills and their costs and ripple effects.
Furthermore, apparently some politicians voting on it can’t be bothered to even read what’s in the legislation. That’s galling.
I suppose I am uninformed. There’s something going on here that’s skeevy, but I can’t put my finger on it. I guess it’s an inherent mistrust of government to not fuck things up.
Thing is, Fois, such a pledge to take the same health care plan would be meaningless, most of our Congresscritters are pretty well off, its not like they have anything to worry about. Their willingness or unwillingness to accept a minimal health insurance policy doesn’t matter, they can make up the difference out of their own pockets.
I realize that, but at the end of the day…it still seems like legislation that Congress is passing for everyone else but leaving themselves exempt. I suppose that exemption is based solely on personal wealth, but still…it’s bothersome.
The Democrats are in power. All that matters is what Democrats want. The “issue” broght up by the OP, I thought, was regarding whether Democrats had the spunk of their convictions. Their electorate has spoken. It is incumbent upon them to act.
Intrade has dropped the odds of passing a public option in 2009 to 14.1%. That said, like I said earlier, this talk of “co-ops” will probably wind up being the same thing, with the same subsidies.
Point being I don’t give a rat’s ass where the wealth comes from but rather the fact that there are copious numbers of millionaires all over evil-socialized-healthcare-Europe – despite what Starvin’s tripe would have some believe.
Again, don’t tell me It’s Starvin’ that’s confused.
Plesee check out Amendment XXVII to the Constitution. Otherwise a good point. (I’d say the President should have personal, dedicated care during his term(s) because he is expected to be on duty, available on call, at all times, as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief. But Congress? Put them on the same plan as other Federal employees.
Unfortunately I know of no system on earth where money doesn’t ultimately have the last word – and not just on health related issues. Yours is no different. But allow me to pose the following query: would you rather live in a system with no coverage at all for a large segment of your population as you have now, or a system where everyone has access to at the very least “minimal” health insurance regardless of their circumstances?
Mind you, the latter way is currently in effect, at lower overall expenditures than yours, in just about every First World nation on earth. Why it can’t be done in America, irrational Socialist-boogyman fears aside, is beyond me.
If they were advocating a single payer system where everyone is on the same tier, then it would make sense to say they should put up or shut up. But in this case they’re adding an additional public option for those who can’t get insurance they prefer from other sources. There’s no hypocrisy in keeping their own care in this case.
No good. Representatives and Senators do not always do what their constituents want. And as your Gallup poll shows, the vast majority of their constituents favor the President’s health care plan. Your implied modus tolens is this:
If Democrats wanted health care, their Representatives and Senators would pass health care in Congress. Their Rs and Ss in Congress have not passed health care; therefore, Democrats must not want health care.
When your conclusion flies in the face of facts, and your argument is constructed around a simple logical fallacy, then the intellectually honest thing to do is concede that one or more of your premises must be false.
That’s because they don’t know what the terms of the proposed legislation are. They have been trying to drum up support for a huge, completely unfinished bill very likely bears little resemblance to what the final product will be once it clears both houses of Congress. And they are trying to bum-rush it through just like they did the por…uh, stimulous package.
They want support for whatever they end up wanting to do rather than what they’re trying to do now, and it ain’t flyin’. Check out this link to a Q & A with Kathleen Sebelius and Arlen Specter. Note that the response to why, if Congressmen don’t feel qualified to read and understand the bill, they are qualified to create the bill in the first place.
And note the response when Specter tries to respond with how they have to make decisions “fast”.
They don’t know what’s in this bill. They don’t care that they don’t know what’s in it. And they know that whatever the finished product is, this ain’t it.
And in short, that’s why Obama, the media and Congressmen who are supporters of the bill aren’t doing more to explain the terms of it.