# Health care debate should be suspended until Brown is seated **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 20, 2010, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684 "2010-01-20T10:54:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/121 "2010-01-21T10:27:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Which of the two propositions was approved by the people? Even after civic minded corporations spent a hundred million educating the people about the horrors of socialized medicine. After all the shrieking and hair tearing about “death panels”, the advocates of which position were elected? No, no, no. The Democrats were elected after promising health care reform, yes… but in November 2008, there was a couple of pages were of position statements, not a 1,000 page bill. The electorate may well have supported the general idea of health care reform but rejected this specific atempt at it. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/122 "2010-01-21T11:41:28Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > As it happens, there are many many liberals who are very unhappy with the deal that was struck with Nelson and Lieberman, to the point that they will apparently not vote for the bill in this form, and that’s with the Senate at the minimum of 60 votes in favor. I’m a registered independent but, sadly at the moment, a **Nebraska** registered independent, so Nelson is one of mine and I cringed upon learning what he’d done. In the attempt to gain an advantage for his constituents he’s managed to become an embarassment and weaken support for the bill overall. And given the number of poor farm families in Nebraska, his state desperately needs real healthcare reform to work. It’s like he’s gone back to Lincoln and announced that he got everyone upgrades to First Class…on the Titanic. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/123 "2010-01-21T13:31:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, no, no. > > The Democrats were elected after promising health care reform, yes… but in November 2008, there was a couple of pages were of position statements, not a 1,000 page bill. The electorate may well have supported the general idea of health care reform but rejected this specific atempt at it. Wouldn’t the electorate have to have a halfway accurate idea of what’s _in_ the bill before they can reject it? I mean, they can make reject-y noises in it’s direction, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/124 "2010-01-21T14:16:17Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Why does it even make a difference whether the Senate waits or not? Even now before he’s seated, Brown has already effectively scuttled any chances of the Senate doing anything further on this bill. When Brown gets seated, the Senate will be 59-41 Democrat-Republican, which is less than 60%, so the Republicans can filibuster the bill. Before Brown gets seated, the Senate is 59-40 Democrat-Republican, which is still less than 60%, so the Republicans can still filibuster it. The critical event here was not actually Brown winning the election, but Coakley losing it. It’s moot now, but this is not true. Paul Kirk remains the Senator from Massachusetts up until the moment that Brown is sworn in. [cite](http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/seslaw09/sl090092.htm) > [@](#): > > Upon failure to choose a senator in congress or upon a vacancy in that office, the governor shall make a temporary appointment to fill the vacancy; provided, however, that the person so appointed shall serve until the election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy pursuant to subsection (a) or (c). I can’t find the article I read yesterday, but it said the “and qualification” part meant the temp remains in office until the Senator-elect is sworn in. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/125 "2010-01-21T14:16:47Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Wouldn’t the electorate have to have a halfway accurate idea of what’s _in_ the bill before they can reject it? > > I mean, they can make reject-y noises in it’s direction, I guess. Wouldn’t they have to have a halfway accurate idea of what’s in the bill before affirming it? And what the basis for the implicit assumption that they don’t? Why is it, if the electorate embraces Democrats, they do so out of enlightened analysis of the benefits for themselves and the nation, but if they embrace the Republicans, they do so because they are easily-led fools, victims of the Republicans’ lies and deceit? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/126 "2010-01-21T14:27:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why is it, if the electorate embraces Democrats, they do so out of enlightened analysis of the benefits for themselves and the nation, but if they embrace the Republicans, they do so because they are easily-led fools, victims of the Republicans’ lies and deceit? I’ve often wondered that myself. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/127 "2010-01-21T14:29:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > … > Why is it, if the electorate embraces Democrats, they do so out of enlightened analysis of the benefits for themselves and the nation, but if they embrace the Republicans, they do so because they are easily-led fools, victims of the Republicans’ lies and deceit? Reap and sow. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/128 "2010-01-21T14:29:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Democrat’s idea = Let’s make the following changes to the health care system > Republican’s idea = Let’s not > > The Democrat’s idea is weaker. I think you would have to expand on _why_ these “ideas” are being presented before you can call one or the other weaker. “Let’s not, because we’ll be damned if we let the Democrats have a win” is not exactly substantial. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/129 "2010-01-21T15:01:05Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > I think you would have to expand on _why_ these “ideas” are being presented before you can call one or the other weaker. > > “Let’s not, because we’ll be damned if we let the Democrats have a win” is not exactly substantial. But I don’t agree that that is their primary motivation (although I do acknolwedge that it’s floating around back there as an undeniable aspect of political reality). ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/130 "2010-01-21T15:32:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Wouldn’t they have to have a halfway accurate idea of what’s in the bill before affirming it? Of course. (Why would you think I would think otherwise?) > [@](#): > > And what the basis for the implicit assumption that they don’t? It’s an impression that’s formed in me based on overheard conversations, talk radio, discussion forum posts and editorials. The state seems to be one of confusion. > [@](#): > > Why is it, if the electorate embraces Democrats, they do so out of enlightened analysis of the benefits for themselves and the nation, but if they embrace the Republicans, they do so because they are easily-led fools, victims of the Republicans’ lies and deceit? I don’t understand the relevance of this comment. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/131 "2010-01-21T16:24:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, no, no. > > The Democrats were elected after promising health care reform, yes… but in November 2008, there was a couple of pages were of position statements, not a 1,000 page bill. The electorate may well have supported the general idea of health care reform but rejected this specific atempt at it. And your evidence that they have done so is what, exactly? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/132 "2010-01-21T16:27:52Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > …I don’t understand the relevance of this comment. “…and this song goes out to Bricker, its that golden oldie, _Oooooh, the Hypocrisy of the Left…_” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/133 "2010-01-21T16:33:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And your evidence that they have done so is what, exactly? I think he listened to Obama. [Obama urges pared-back health care bill](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34953876/ns/politics-health_care_reform/) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/134 "2010-01-21T16:44:29Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > She doesn’t say when these meetings were. I noted that she was involved early on. December 5, when she met with Obama, was one specific date she put out a press release about that I linked to. > [@](#): > > And “been in countless meetings” is not the same thing as having meaningful input, as I can tell you from involvement in countless meetings myself. Yeah, Obama just invited her over for courteous pleasantries. Was feeling lonely and wanted to chat. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/135 "2010-01-21T16:56:53Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And your evidence that they have done so is what, exactly? 1. Senator-Elect Brown. 2. A zillion polls. 3. Pelosi’s announcement this morning that she doesn’t have the votes in the House to pass the Senate version unchanged. (Ha!!) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/136 "2010-01-21T17:02:35Z")
[Polls:](http://www.politico.com/static/PPM136_091221_mellman_healthcare.html) > [@](#): > > public poll analyses often ignore the fact that a chunk of opposition to the current > plan comes from those who support reform, but would like to see Congress go further. A > late-November AP/Ipsos poll found nearly identical numbers in favor of the bill (34%) > and opposed (35%), without describing its content. A crucial 12% initially say they > oppose the plan, but told pollsters their **opposition was based on their belief that it did not > go far enough.** So what initially appears to be a 12-point margin against reform is actually > an even division. Bolding added. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/137 "2010-01-21T17:02:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No room whatsoever for the possibility that the Dems do, in fact, have the weaker ideas? That’s always possible, but that’s not really germane to my point. Which is that you’d like to believe that _the Congressional Dems_ believe their own ideas are stronger, because they’re the ones representing the rest of us Dems out here. If they don’t, then they really need to switch party ID, or find another line of work. If it was just this one issue, that would be one thing. But it’s across the board. They’re looking for excuses to avoid dealing with climate change - and regardless of how you feel about variants of cap and trade or carbon taxes, I hope you believe that something pretty substantial needs to be done, and soon. They’re talking about focusing on ‘jobs, jobs, jobs,’ but any cost-effective solution will involve spending, and spending means either higher deficits or increased taxes, and you know the ‘centrist’ Dems will balk at either one. At any rate, if we don’t deal with climate change pretty soon, we really ARE screwed, and that’s the big ‘we,’ not just people who would normally benefit from Democratic policies. And the GOP seems to be mostly in the denialist camp on this issue, so if the Dems don’t deal with it, there’s really nobody left. Which is why I’m all of a sudden feeling the way I felt after the 2004 election. I knew then that Bush’s win meant it would be at least four more years before we dealt with the increasingly urgent problem of climate change. 5+ years later, it looks as if the likelihood that the Dems will address it this year are barely above zero - and after this year, who knows how long it will be before we have as favorable a political moment to deal with it as we have right now? The world - literally the world - cannot wait that long. Like I said, we’re fucked. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/138 "2010-01-21T17:17:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > 1. Senator-Elect Brown… So, that means that OBama _didn’t_ win? All those elected Representatives and Senators…poof! Gone? Should Frenken call Coleman and concede, since Brown won in Masse…Massi…Boston? > [@](#): > > …2. A zillion polls… A zillion? Well, I won’t ask for a cite on that, you’d crush the servers! Really? A zillion? > [@](#): > > …3. Pelosi’s announcement this morning that she doesn’t have the votes in the House to pass the Senate version unchanged. (Ha!!)… Congratulations. Know anybody sick, without insurance? Gonna go tell them how happy you are? You know and I know that a big part of Pelosi’s problem is not opposition to health care reform, but opposition to _weak_ health care reform. You know this, but are willing to pretend that you don’t. Tsk. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/139 "2010-01-21T17:18:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Which of the two propositions was approved by the people? Even after civic minded corporations spent a hundred million educating the people about the horrors of socialized medicine. After all the shrieking and hair tearing about “death panels”, the advocates of which position were elected? > > Does the wisdom and will of the Republican Party outweisgh the judgement of the election? By what divine mandate are they so empowered?. If it isn’t our decision, by what arrogance is it theirs? Wasn’t the elction in 08 and the death panels remark in 09? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684/140 "2010-01-21T17:21:15Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > That’s always possible, but that’s not really germane to my point. Which is that you’d like to believe that _the Congressional Dems_ believe their own ideas are stronger, because they’re the ones representing the rest of us Dems out here. If they don’t, then they really need to switch party ID, or find another line of work. Sure. But in my cynical way, I suspect that some Congressional Dems adopted positions based on the necessity of their party membership, not out of actual conviction. (Of course, the Republicans don’t share that flaw; they are all committed to their ideology in toto.) (Ha! Ha! I slay myself.) This was brought anew to my attention reading the complaint memo from Coakley’s staff adviser to the national Democrats. It said things like: > [@](#): > > Coakley’s lead dropped significantly after the Senate passed health care reform shortly before Christmas and after the Christmas Eve “bombing” incident. Polling showed significant concerns with the actions of Senator Nelson to hold out for a better deal. Senator Nelson’s actions specifically hurt Coakley who was forced to backtrack on her opposition to the abortion restriction amendment. and: > [@](#): > > Democrats concerns with Obama’s Afghanistan plan forced Coakley to oppose the Afghan war in the primary, which hurt her in the general. So Coakley was “forced” to take positions. Nothing about what her views actualy were… just the views she adopted because she was a Democrat. I don’t believe Coakley is alone in this practice. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-care-debate-should-be-suspended-until-brown-is-seated/525684.md?page=8)