GOP Pulls Nearly Even With Dems In Generic Matchup
Don’t look now, but Republicans have nearly pulled even with Dems in the generic Congressional ballot matchup, Gallup finds.
Asked which party they’d vote for if the Congressional elections were held today, 46% picked the Dems, and 44% picked the Republicans. In July, Dems led by 50%-44%.
What’s noteworthy is that while Republicans held steady since the summer, support for Dems dropped by six points. Gallup theorizes that the shift is driven largely by independents turning on Dems. In July, indys were evenly divided between the two parties; now indys prefer the GOP, 45% to 36%.
Ominously for Dems, the overall approval rating of Congress has dropped to levels comparable to 1994, suggesting a level of anti-incumbent fervor approaching the one that reigned when Republicans swept Dems out of power.
The big question, of course, will be whether continuing dislike of the GOP — an underreported factor, but a crucial one — is enough to offset the anti-incumbent mood, which could help stave off big Dem losses.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
G’morning Eric.
And Obama jumped 6 points in his approval ratings.
So it depends on who people are thinking about when they vote next year. And it depends on what happens with healthcare reform.
Tena, you know I take it as a compliment when you call me Eric, right?
I broke that kid in.
“I broke that kid in.”
LOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Sometimes I just wanted to break his little head.
Healthcare reform is elephant in the room. w/o it, we might see more elephants in the room.
If the Dems can get their s*** together and pass a good HCR, I’d be really surprised if their numbers don’t improve by the 2010 elections. Independents like results not mamby-pamby. We also don’t like to see the insurance industry drafting a democratic reform bill on the insurance industry.
I try to keep my frustration in check for the sake of getting a bill through, but if it doesn’t get a whole lot better in conference I believe the Dems will be shocked in 2010 at how bad they do. I DO NOT want the Repubs to move back to majority status, so keep pushing for a better bill.
Eh, like you pointed out…it’s all because of the drop in support for Dems. Why is it coming from Indies? Partially from those that are pissed at the Dems for not getting more done, and partially from ex-Republicans that are falling back into the fold from all the scare tactics. This was expected.
All this polling is meaningless while we’re still in the middle of the health care fight. Polling a bit after it passes (something will pass) will show what the lay of the land is.
Besides, Republican approval ratings are still in places that gutters won’t go without a police escort.
“I DO NOT want the Repubs to move back to majority status, so keep pushing for a better bi”
Word up.
I don’t know what I’ll do if we lose the majority but I think I’ll start ignoring the whole thing. The idea scares me silly.
What I find interesting is the National Party ID averages that shows an increase in self proclaimed indies at the expense of self proclaimed Republicans which tells me the Republican brand is still in the hole and crazy August didn’t help.
If you do look at the National Congressional averages, you can see things did tighten up for a bit there, but somewhere around mid-August during town hall crazy time, the momentum started to work against Republicans again.
“Besides, Republican approval ratings are still in places that gutters won’t go without a police escort.”
LOL! Brilliant!
“LOL! Brilliant!”
Yeah, I co-sign that.
You gotta love Pollster.
“I don’t know what I’ll do if we lose the majority but I think I’ll start ignoring the whole thing.”
I’ll probably go back to local politics full time and ignore national.
mike from A
With numbers like that I don’t think she’ll run, she doesn’t like to lose. But I’m sure we’ll see a lot of her out on the campaign trail, ugggh!
“I’ll probably go back to local politics full time and ignore national.”
That’s actually really smart. I have a Twitter account that I haven’t used, but I’m thinking about firing it up to go after Roger Williams, who is running for Fluffy Hutchison’s senate seat.
Tena – “G’morning Eric.”
lol. Another mindless poll and another meaningless analysis. These pollsters are just making noise to keep them alive in the public eye.
Gallup also has some numbers on Congressional approval:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123491/Approval-Congress-Falls-21-Driven-Democrats.aspx
Taking National Polls on local district contests is absurd. Furthermore, people know who their incumbents are, but they do not know who the opponents will be, so of course they will tend to lean toward the flawless unknown, over the current devils they know.
It is a complete exercise in futility, taking such national polls, before anyone knows who their choices to vote for, will be.
I don’t have to look at sbj’s poll to know it’a bad for Democrats or he wouldn’t have posted it.
Thing is, Congress at any given time is as popular as the bubonic plague.
lmsinca:
If the Dems can get their s*** together and pass a good HCR, I’d be really surprised if their numbers don’t improve by the 2010 elections.
There is certianly a long time between now and next fall, especially in political time, but I will go out on a limb and predict that if congress passes anything that you would consider a good HCR bill, they will get wiped out in the next election.
Tena, I’m pissed at Congress too that they haven’t passed health care legislation, passed a tough climate change bill, repealed DADT and a bunch of other stuff.
Being pissed at Congress doesn’t mean I’m pissed at my own party. I’m pissed at the individuals preventing progress.
“, but I will go out on a limb and predict that if congress passes anything that you would consider a good HCR bill, they will get wiped out in the next election.”
You went out on that limb and then proceeded to saw it off.
“Being pissed at Congress doesn’t mean I’m pissed at my own party. I’m pissed at the individuals preventing progress.”
I think most people feel that way about Congress most of the time.
That’s one reason Congress fights so hard to do nothing.
“I don’t have to look at sbj’s poll to know it’a bad for Democrats or he wouldn’t have posted it.”
Take a looksie. What it shows is that Democrats are dissatisfied with Congress. “It is possible that after watching Democratic lawmakers defend healthcare reform in town hall meetings through the summer, rank-and-file Democrats may be disappointed that Congress hasn’t followed through with more progress on that legislation this fall.”
Here’s a little quote from Galbraith in response to Grassley’s subversion of the “predator state”. Link below.
“The ‘predator state’ describes what happens when chicken coops are given over to foxes,” Mr. Galbraith continued. “When consumer protection, worker protection, environmental protection, and policing against fraud are handed over to lobbyists. And when health care is run for the benefit of private insurance companies, whose business model . . . is to target coverage on the healthy and delay payments to the sick.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574457392831216478.html
Tena:
You went out on that limb and then proceeded to saw it off.
Possibly. We’ll see.
sbj – I did look. I addressed it, indirectly. Congressional approval is always a touch and go situation.
“Possibly. We’ll see.”
Yes we will.
Healthcare reform is elephant in the room. w/o it, we might see more elephants in the room.
No fair! I wish I’d thought of that way of phrasing it!
“I wish I’d thought of that way of phrasing it! ”
Just do what I do – steal it.
“Don’t look now, but Republicans have nearly pulled even with Dems in the generic Congressional ballot matchup, Gallup finds.”
It’s not so much that the Republicans have “pulled even.” Rather, it’s that Democrats are underperforming.
According to the data points of the Gallup graph, Republicans have typically averaged a rating of about 42%. So, they are actually only performing 2% better than their average. And, while performing better than your average is good, 2% is nothing to write home about, especially when MOE (+/-4%) is taken into account — doing so erases the putative Republican “gains.”
Contrastingly, Democrats are underperforming at this point in the Gallup poll. They have typically averaged a rating of about 51%. So, they are currently about 5% below their average. Again, taking the MOE (+/-4%) into account, suggesting that Republicans are “gaining” is premature, if not a wholly unsound statement. The data does not indicate definitive Republican gains.
I think a more accurate interpretation of this data is that Republicans have NOT made any statistically significant (keyword) gains, despite the public’s apparent frustration with Democrats during the healthcare debate. Republicans are only performing slightly above average, but when the MOE is taken into account they are performing no better than average.
This all suggests a potentially resiliency of the Democratic rating. The decline in Democratic generic ratings and Congressional approval ratings seem to be correlated with dissatisfaction* during the healthcare debate. Most notably, the passage of healthcare bill will cause the Democratic rating to rebound in a statistically significant manner of approximately 5-10% — percentage lost since the beginning of the healthcare debate.
[Note: the dissatisfaction may be the time it has taken to pass the bill or the difficulty Democrats have had in securing the public option; Gallup notes that the greatest decline in ratings has come among Democrats.]
Bottom line: The media should be wary of these “Republicans are resurging” stories. The data, upon inspection, is more muddled or firmly contrary to that notion.
Scott C
How well I know your position on HCR. You’re right we’ll see. I don’t see too much support for your position.
Adjust the tax code and let people get health insurance that excludes their pre-existing conditions. Maybe it’ll catch on but I sort of doubt it.
I really think you’re on the wrong side of progress this time.
“I really think you’re on the wrong side of progress this time.”
The conservative movement – or what’s left of it – are on the wrong side of history on just about everything right now.
Good news out of DC – Same *** marriage looks inevitable there.
See what I mean about the curve of history? It’s just slower than things are online.
O for pity’s sake: same s*e*x marriage -
Isn’t making health care premiums tax deductible, just another way to divert federal tax dollars to the Private Insurance Companies. Once the net cost to the payers drops, through the tax code, then the Insurance Companies will feel free to raise their premium rates, and they will claim that people are not paying any more, out of pocket, than they were before.
And of course people will not be, but the Government will be, because of the many billions in tax revenues that were diverted to the Insurance Companies.
Beware of thieves selling security services.
I think the Democrats better pass something if only to make sure their own base gets out to vote. But the idea that passing h/c reform will motivate others to vote for Dems? I’m not so sure. I suppose it depends on what they eventually pass. If it’s the Baucus bill then I see don’t see much momentum for the Dems.
Consider this from an article in the NY Times:
Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia is upset that a health care bill poised for approval by the Finance Committee would turn nearly a half-trillion dollars over to insurance companies…[Ms. Snow]…worries that some middle-income families will find insurance unaffordable, even with federal subsidies….Mr. Wyden noted that the committee’s bill would not offer additional options to the overwhelming majority of Americans who already have insurance.
“Democrats from the president on talk about how the American people ought to have choices like a member of Congress,” Mr. Wyden said. “Now under consideration is an idea that millions and millions won’t get any choice at all, let alone what a member of Congress gets.”
“When you think about where this is headed,” he added, “you are still seeing additional patches added to the crazy quilt that is American health care.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/07/health/policy/07health.html?_r=1&ref=us
If after all of this we end up with patches to a crazy quilt – why would that motivate anyone to vote for Dems?
“If after all of this we end up with patches to a crazy quilt – why would that motivate anyone to vote for Dems?”
If people blame the GOP for obstructing real reform, then yes, it will.
Because the alternative of electing the Republicans who wrecked the economy, and screwed up two wars, would be even worse.
Nothing makes Democrats look more attractive, than what The Republican Confederacy of Incompetents have to offer.
This from the Democratic Strategist today regarding more prominent Repub supporting HCR.
In her article at Daily Kos, “Not All Republicans Are on the Train to Crazy Town,” McJoan adds former Republican Majority Leader Howard Baker and former GOP presidential nominee Bob Dole to the pro-reform list, wondering if,
“Maybe it’s their message to their folks on the Hill that, while there may be short term gain with keeping the base riled up for 2010, ending up on the wrong side of history on this debate could have really damaging long term consequences….There’s nothing radical about healthcare reform, and I’d take it a step further to say there’s nothing radical about a robust public option. We’ve already got one, in the form of Medicare. Hell, we’ve already got the most “radical” form of healtcare–single payer–in America in the form of the VA system. That “radical” policy position was rejected before the debate even began, and the robust public option has been the reasonable compromise from the get-go in this debate. Healthcare reform: the new mainstream.
Granted this is small ‘taters, considering that only Snowe has an actual vote to cast on health care reform legislation. But could it be that Republicans are starting to hear from their health care industry supporters, who are begining to think that a triggered public option may actually be their best hope for delaying the dreaded single payer system?”
It still makes me nervous that more and more prominent Repubs seem to be supporting HCR, especially if the “trigger” becomes the compromise. We’ll see where this external pressure leads.
>>>If after all of this we end up with patches to a crazy quilt – why would that motivate anyone to vote for Dems?<<<
Ummmmm. Because they passed health care reform — a key plank of their electoral platform and something universally acknowledged as being critically in need?
Once again, sbj, your framing belies your unabashed dislike for helping America become a more perfect union.
I’ll catch up on comments later, but let me be the first to declare that this month will be the low point in that generic ballot (provided health care passes). From November onwards people will get more comfortable with Obama and the economy will shape up even if it doesn’t recover. Mark it, and check back with me in a year to see who wins.
“If people blame the GOP for obstructing real reform, then yes, it will.”
But the people are smarter than that – it’s easy to understand that the Dems control both houses of congress and the Presidency. Folks will blame congress, and rightly so – that hurts the majority party. The only folks who’ll solely blame the Repubs are the ones who are going to vote for the Dems no matter what they do anyway – see Liam.
“But the people are smarter than that ”
You really think so?
“From November onwards people will get more comfortable with Obama and the economy will shape up even if it doesn’t recover. Mark it, and check back with me in a year to see who wins.”
I agree.
SBJ is delusional. He thinks that people are going to return those who destroyed their lives, back to power.
“Your framing belies your unabashed dislike for helping America become a more perfect union.”
Does that apply to that commie Wyden, as well?
You think folks will support Dems if they pass anything at all? Even if it doesn’t make a lick of difference to the average American? That’s Wyden’s point – you’re propping up a crappy system with changes that won’t even be felt by the majority.
“But the people are smarter than that ” You really think so? ”
So you are rooting for stupidity? So that your party wins?
lmsinca:
I don’t see too much support for your position.
I guess that depends which of my positions you mean. I think there is a great deal of support for avoiding the creation of another massive government spending program.
Adjust the tax code and let people get health insurance that excludes their pre-existing conditions.
I have not seen any polls on this question, but I would be astonished if most people opposed granting the same tax break to individually purchased insurance as we give employer provided insurance. But I was astonished that you opposed such an obviously beneficial idea, so who knows?
I really think you’re on the wrong side of progress this time.
Progressives always think that of people who disagree with them. That is precisely why they call themselves “progressives”.
Something is seriously wrong with any poll that says Dems approval of Congress has dropped 18% in one month.
You should look further into this Greg. Smells very fishy.
The Republicans are the Arsonists who set our homes ablaze.
The Democrats are the Fire Fighters, and Construction Workers who have responded to the 911 calls to put out the fires, and rebuild the structures.
SBJ is so delusional that he has convince himself that the people are going to dismiss the Fire Fighters and Construction Workers, in order to let the Republican Arsonists resume their activities.
Did I say that, sbj? No. Do not put words in my mouth. I asked a question –
People are still polling in the majority on the question of the Democrats working with the GOP on health care reform. However, they also poll in the majority on thinking the GOP has no intention of cooperating.
People seem to know that.
And people remember the last 8 years and people who aren’t online all day are more patient than those of us who are.
All together, I don’t think it’s as clearcut as you think it is.
edit:
he Republicans are the Arsonists who set our homes ablaze.
The Democrats are the Fire Fighters, and Construction Workers, who have responded to the 911 calls to put out the fires, and rebuild the structures.
SBJ is so delusional that he has convinced himself that the people are going to dismiss the Fire Fighters and Construction Workers, in order to let the Republican Arsonists resume their activities.
It’s all about JOBS. If the jobs picture improves then Dems will be fine. If it does NOT then they won’t be.
“Progressives always think that of people who disagree with them. That is precisely why they call themselves “progressives”.”
No, that’s not why we are called “progressive” – it’s because we are. It’s the opposite of “conservative”.
And if you aren’t on the wrong side of the curve of history then how come all that **** you fought over for 8 years is going our way? Things like – y’all wanted to amend the constitution to enshrine prejudice against homosexuals and y’all lost and continue to lose on that issue – it’s inevitable that same s*e*x marriage will be recognized as legitimate.
Y’all still don’t think global warming is real and are fighting attempts to deal with it – the public is aware that that is your belief and it’s wrong.
And on and on and on…
@scottC: “I would be astonished if most people opposed granting the same tax break to individually purchased insurance as we give employer provided insurance. But I was astonished that you opposed such an obviously beneficial idea, so who knows?”
Wondering if you can explain why we don’t grant the same tax break to individually purchased insurance? What’s the rationale?
You want to get rid of the constitutional prohibition on combining church and state – and that’s not popular, either.
Y’all wrecked the economy – and the public polls in large majorities that that is the fault of the GOP -
Nice of you to try to keep hope alive, but it’s on full life-support.
@sherrie: “It’s all about JOBS. If the jobs picture improves then Dems will be fine. If it does NOT then they won’t be.”
That is so true! It’s the economy, stupid. If h/c reform has only minimal impact (Baucus bill) on a minority then there’s no way it will somehow be an overriding factor in how we vote.
“You want to get rid of the constitutional prohibition on combining church and state – and that’s not popular, either.”
Speaking of that:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/10/court_hears_arguments_about_cross_on_public_land.php?ref=fpa
“The Obama administration is defending the presence of the cross…”
If it is all about jobs ,then the Democrats will be fine, because the Republicans are the ones who killed all the jobs, and that is their history. From Hoover to Bush 2. Republicans kill jobs, and those that they can not kill, they outsource to China, etc.
““The Obama administration is defending the presence of the cross…””
Fine – stuff like that is crumbs and it doesn’t bother me. Let the Religious Right have a handful of crumbs – if you think that means Obama doesn’t believe in the separation of church and state, you’re crazy.
Of course The Republican want to establish a Right Wing Theocracy, ruled by a cluster of Hillbilly Ayatollahs.
After the past eight years of Bush/Cheney, all most working class people have been left with is a Prayer.
Edit: my typing is terrible today.
Of course The Republicans want to establish a Right Wing Theocracy, ruled by a cluster of Hillbilly Ayatollahs.
After the past eight years of Bush/Cheney, all most working class people have been left with is a Prayer.
“After the past eight years of Bush/Cheney, all most working class people have been left with is a Prayer.”
Well said. LOL!
“If you think that means Obama doesn’t believe in the separation of church and state, you’re crazy.”
Geez, Tena – cool down! I was just bringing a link to attention – the other day you were interested in the court and Sotomayor…I wasn’t attacking anyone.
“Geez, Tena – cool down! ”
O dude – I’m perfectly calm. Would you please refrain from that sexist bullshit that guys use on women – wind us up and then say: “now calm down. don’t get emotional.”
I’m not. I just responded.
>>>Does that apply to that commie Wyden, as well?<<<
Ahem.
I REPEAT:
Once again, sbj, your framing belies your unabashed dislike for helping America become a more perfect union.
sexist bullshit?
@ether (because you must be inhaling): Do you understand that the “crazy quilt” framing is Wyden’s and not mine?
@Tena,
You could tell SBJ to stop being such “a flaming hypocrite” Maybe then he will learn to stop acting like a sexist pig.
Unintentional laugh of the day.
Facebook.
“Now is not the time for cold feet, second thoughts, or indecision – it is the time to act as commander-in-chief and approve the troops so clearly needed in Afghanistan,”
Quiter Palin.
Throwing the rocks from her head out of her glass igloo!
Scott C
“I have not seen any polls on this question, but I would be astonished if most people opposed granting the same tax break to individually purchased insurance as we give employer provided insurance. But I was astonished that you opposed such an obviously beneficial idea, so who knows?”
As you well know, I did not say I opposed a tax break for individuals to purchase health insurance. I argued that this proposal does nothing do lower the actual cost of insurance, only what an individual will pay for it. I also argued, as you well know, that this tax reform (not insurance reform) benefited the wealthy over the middle class.
I also argued that I see no evidence that this tax reform, while having some short term benefits will do anything to foster competition and break the monopolistic, greedy profit model the insurance industry has been following.
When an industry averages a 350% increase in profits over the last 10 years at the expense of their customers, I would argue that it is time to ditch that business model.
@stupid boring jerk (because you exhibit profound stupidity mixed with arrogance while saying nothing):
Do you understand that calling Wyden “that Commie” is indicative of your need for a lobotomy?
Republicans are Dyslexic Communists. They believe in redistribution from the Have Nots to the Robber Barons!
@eth: I can see that you didn’t get the joke. Since I used Wyden’s words, you were, in effect, accusing HIM of holding an “unabashed dislike for helping America become a more perfect union.” In other words, you called Wyden a commie.
Ethan | October 7th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
@stupid boring jerk
………………..
And he addressed his comment to “stupid boring jerk”, and you just admitted that is you.
eh – I’ve been called worse!
I am sure you have been, and with good reason, but you have confirmed that you are the:
“@stupid boring jerk”
sbj:
Wondering if you can explain why we don’t grant the same tax break to individually purchased insurance? What’s the rationale?
I think it is simply an historical anomoly that has yet to be rectified. It started during WW II, when, according to the (very interesting) link below:
“During World War II, wage and price controls prevented employers from using wages to compete for scarce labor. Under the 1942 Stabilization Act, Congress limited the wage increases that could be offered by firms, but permitted the adoption of employee insurance plans. In this way, health benefit packages offered one means of securing workers. In the 1940s, two major rulings also reinforced the foundation of the employer-provided health insurance system. First, in 1945 the War Labor Board ruled that employers could not modify or cancel group insurance plans during the contract period. Then, in 1949, the National Labor Relations Board ruled in a dispute between the Inland Steel Co. and the United Steelworkers Union that the term “wages” included pension and insurance benefits. Therefore, when negotiating for wages, the union was allowed to negotiate benefit packages on behalf of workers as well. This ruling, affirmed later by the U.S. Supreme Court, further reinforced the employment-based system.5
Perhaps the most influential aspect of government intervention that shaped the employer-based system of health insurance was the tax treatment of employer-provided contributions to employee health insurance plans. First, employers did not have to pay payroll tax on their contributions to employee health plans. Further, under certain circumstances, employees did not have to pay income tax on their employer’s contributions to their health insurance plans. The first such exclusion occurred under an administrative ruling handed down in 1943 which stated that payments made by the employer directly to commercial insurance companies for group medical and hospitalization premiums of employees were not taxable as employee income (Yale Law Journal, 1954, pp. 222-247). While this particular ruling was highly restrictive and limited in its applicability, it was codified and extended in 1954. Under the 1954 Internal Revenue Code (IRC), employer contributions to employee health plans were exempt from employee taxable income. As a result of this tax-advantaged form of compensation, the demand for health insurance further increased throughout the 1950s (Thomasson 2003).”
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/thomasson.insurance.health.us
Tena:
… it’s because we are. It’s the opposite of “conservative”.
See what I mean?
… y’all wanted to amend the constitution to enshrine prejudice against homosexuals…
I didn’t, and I don’t know too many others who did. The real battle was (is) over whether or not to redefine the concept of marriage from centuries of traditional understanding. On that score, progressives don’t seem to be fairing very well.
Y’all still don’t think global warming is real…
Again, your understanding of the debate seems limited. The real question was (is) a) whether or not and to what extent whatever global warming may be occurring is attributable to the activities of man; b) whether or not and to what extent man is capable of altering the climate; and c) whether or not the costs of attempting to alter the climate in specific ways is worth the presumed benefits. These issues are far from decided, although the progressive crowd does like to propagandize about it presuming that they have been.
You want to get rid of the constitutional prohibition on combining church and state…
I don’t, and I don’t know of too many people who do.
>>>I can see that you didn’t get the joke. Since I used Wyden’s words, you were, in effect, accusing HIM of holding an “unabashed dislike for helping America become a more perfect union.” In other words, you called Wyden a commie.<<<
You need help.
I don’t like the poll figures, either, but the attempt to link them to the 1994 numbers that contributed to the Democrats being swept out of office during the Gingrich insurgency isn’t wholly accurate, either. In 1994, the Democrats had been in power for 40 years, and had been a tired majority for several elections. The health care fiasco early in the Clinton years was the final nail in their coffin. Flash forward to 2009, and we have a Democratic majority still new, and freshly empowered after a decade of Republican hegemony in both the Presidency and the Legislature. That’s not a recipe for replacing the Democrats in power. What would they have us do, suffer massive, countrywide amnesia and forget what Bush and the Republicans did and let happen during their very recent time in power? Sure, sweep out the Democrats, and then what put those Republicans in power, or worse yet, the kind of Republicans who have been spouting off these past few months of the Obama administration? I don’t think so.
It’s the economy, stupid.
greedy profit model the insurance industry has been following
Interesting characterization. If that is too much, and too much is part of the rationale for change, what do you think is the maximum profit that should be allowed?
Is that the same limit as the “greedy” line?
Does this limit apply to the drug companies, direct health care providers, other non-health care related companies?
I’m curios as to what you think about it, and how one draws the line for “acceptable” and “too much = greedy”.
I don’t like the poll figures, either, but the attempt to link them to the 1994 numbers that contributed to the Democrats being swept out of office during the Gingrich insurgency isn’t wholly accurate, either.
Concur. IIRC, Gingrich managed to essentially nationalize the off-year elections under the Contract With America aegis. He’d been thinking, planning, and working on that for years.
Although the elections are still a year away, I don’t see an equivalent figure or effort on the Republican side. Most of the Republican leadership is not very impressive.
I think it will come down the the economy, specifically jobs. Again IIRC, its the economy 4-6 months prior to the elections that seems to matter most.
Its likely that unemployment will be above 10% before year end, and still very high next summer-fall. I think that is the indicator to watch.
Freehold
It is clear to me that the insurance industry is in conflict with anti-trust laws, which some in congress are working on (Leahy/Feinstein), and they are operating with little or no competition. When they can boast an increase in profits of at least 350% (I’ve seen higher figures) and salaries in the $3000-$8000 per hour range for their CEO’s not counting stock options, IMHO the business model is a failure. They are not making a good faith effort to supply the one service they are selling, access to health care.
I am a small business owner, very small. We have been a small fish in a big pond for over 30 years, getting smaller all the time as we head into retirement and start to slow down. We have followed a successful business model and prospered, in good times and bad, because of our consistency.
Foremost, we welcome the competition and recognize it pushes us to work harder for ourselves and our customers. We maintain excellent customer service and guarantee all of our products. To keep our prices competetive, we minimize our overhead, maximize our buying power, remain flexible with the demands of the market, welcome technology and innovation and waste very little time on products we have no hope of competing with. We maintain a steady cost/sales ratio and a constant net profit margin.
As far as I’m concerned the insurance industry adds nothing to health care other than access and they are failing at that.
lmsinca:
It is clear to me that the insurance industry is in conflict with anti-trust laws
That is because they are regulated by states. You can’t have state regulation which inhibits competition, and then penalize the companies for operating in an anti-competitive atmosphere.
…and they are operating with little or no competition.
How do you explain the existence of thousands of health insurance companies in the US if there is “little or no competition”? Seriously?
When they can boast an increase in profits of at least 350% (I’ve seen higher figures) and salaries in the $3000-$8000 per hour range for their CEO’s not counting stock options, IMHO the business model is a failure.
What a strange measure of business model success: the inability to make profits and pay employees. By this measure, bankrupt companies must have the most successful model.
They are not making a good faith effort to supply the one service they are selling, access to health care.
How very odd, then, that people – even you! – continue to voluntarily purchase their service.
As far as I’m concerned the insurance industry adds nothing to health care other than access and they are failing at that.
And yet you continue to buy their product. Hmmmm…..
If, as you postulate, the lack of “affordable” insurance is due primarily to the greed of nefarious insurance CEOs and their shareholders trying to cheat their customers, then I have to ask you…have you ever wondered why some wonderously rich and benevolent liberal (there are/were plenty…George Soros, Ted Kennedy, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet) hasn’t started a non-profit health insurance company that would pay the CEO a small token of a salary, offer really cheap insurance to all takers regardless of the condition of their health, and never deny a claim? I other words, if an insurance company could in fact operate in the manner that you seem to think all insurance companies should without going bankrupt, why do you suppose no one has ever done it? Is there simply no one out there as wise and benificent as you? Or is it more likely that your vision of how insurance should work is quite simply an economic impossibility?
Honestly, right now I don’t care that much that you idolize the insurance companies and commend them for making as much money as possible while making thousands of people miserable. If I ran my business in that manner I would choose another profession in order to be able to sleep at night.
lmsinca:
BTW, of course health insurance companies do not add anything to health care. Just as home insurance does not add anything to fire, flood, or burglary prevention. Car insurance does not add anything to driving safety. Life insurance does not add anything to life extension.
Insurance exists to manage the financial consequences of individually unpredictable risk events. It does not exist to mitigate those risks or prevent those events from taking place.
re the discussion up thread on jobs and elections, this is a very graphic comparison of the depth and duration of the current recession vs. others in the post WW2 period, in terms of % reduction from previous peak employment
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pMscxxELHEg/SsXzzDSUSqI/AAAAAAAAGfM/PWX-2daRZ0w/s1600-h/EmploymentJobLossesRecessions.jpg
lmsinca:
If I ran my business in that manner I would choose another profession in order to be able to sleep at night.
Yet again, you declare your moral superiority.
And you did not answer my question. Why is it that, out of the thousands of insurance companies in existence, none has managed to conduct its affairs in accord with your high moral standards? Do you honestly think that they are all run by malevolent, morally depraved people trying to screw their clients over? Or perhaps is it possible, just possible, that you are not so morally superior to them as you think, but that your vision of how insurance should work is simply not economically feasible?
Actually, I’m ready to claim my moral superiority and since it’s not economically feasible to sell medical insurance, I think it’s time they got out of the business.
BTW, I’m really done arguing with you.
Scott C.
It is truly unbelievable how you fight for CEO salaries while America is in a two-year economic crisis.
You are a pathetic disgusting piece of trash. ******* scum.
lmsinca:
…since it’s not economically feasible to sell medical insurance…
You are (perhaps deliberately?) misconstruing my point. It is obviously feasible to sell medical insurance, since it is done every day. What is not feasible is to do it in the way that you imagine it should be done, as evidenced by the fact that none of the thousands of insurance companies in existence have been able to do it.
Ethan:
It is truly unbelievable how you fight for CEO salaries…
You are confused. I am not “fighting” for CEO salaries. I am fighting against (among other things) the notion that lowering CEO salaries will do anything to make insurance costs lower.
@ScottC: Hilarious!
sbj:
And yet somehow I am now officially “hated” by lmsinca.
What are there – Maybe three or four of us who post sometimes conservative views? And they can barely tolerate even that.
sbj
I have tolerated and actually carried on conversations with both of you but I’m tired of Scott C. While he seems to believe I think of myself as Morally Superior, he seems to believe he is Intelectually Superior, and truthfully I’ve faced much tougher adversaries.
Personally, I’d prefer to take the moral high ground than rutting in the dirt with the insurance industry and I’m tired of him defending them and making fun of me. So I hate him and his smugness now, we can no longer carry on a decent conversation, just so you know, in case you’re personally interested. If you guys want to hide back here and have a self congratualatory party be my guest. See ya.
@lmsinca: I’m not hiding! Or congratulating myself.
Seems as if the hatred was on high today. Liam, Ethan, tena, yourself…I’ve never once written that I hate anyone at all here. Sure we all poke fun at one another – you do it, Scott does it, I do it. We can all handle that. I really hope you continue the conversation.
lmsinca:
While he seems to believe I think of myself as Morally Superior…
Don’t you? I mean, you spend half your time painting the people who run insurance companies as the personification of evil. You claim they deliberately cheat their customers, have no interest in providing a real service, that the rise in health care costs is primarily their fault for making a profit, and they don’t care. You refuse to even consider the possibility that most of them are people who, just like you, are trying their best to provide a honest service to people while making a decent profit in a very difficult business. They are, in your cartoonish view, simply bad people intent on doing bad things to other people. So, if that is not a declaration of your own moral superiority, I don’t know what woudl be.
..he seems to believe he is Intelectually Superior,and truthfully I’ve faced much tougher adversaries.
If I thought you were intellectually inferior, I wouldn’t bother having serious discussions with you. I would treat you as I treat certain other people here…with total contempt.
And I wonder, if you had to resort to declaring your hatred of me, how you managed to deal with those much tougher adversaries!
I’m tired of him defending them and making fun of me.
That is rather intolerant of you. And I am not quite sure how you think I have made fun of you. I have certainly made some sarcastic observations, but I have done so in an effort to get you to see how outlandish some of your views are.
So I hate him…
And here it is supposed to be us conservatives who are haters. It’s too bad you feel that way. I honestly cannot say that I actually hate anyone, and even if I did I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable publicly declaring it. You liberals are a strange breed indeed.
sbj:
What are there – Maybe three or four of us who post sometimes conservative views? And they can barely tolerate even that.
It is really quite astonishing. These are the self-declared tolerant and open-minded people. Go figure.
I am going to say this one time. One of the big insurance companies you admire so much for their business accumen and “honest service to people while making a decent profit in a very difficult business” killed my 30 year old niece. So no I don’t find their business practices admirable. They pulled the rug out from under her after she got sick and I hate them for it. She would be here today getting ready to celebrate her 32 birthday if they would have provided the service she paid for.
lot of comments noting it all depends on passage of a good healthcare plan. But what to do in the meantime? Dean has a solution.
Dean says open up Medicare to show tangible results by 2010…otherwise Dems will suffer.
He points out that if no results are evident until 2013, there will be problems for the Democratic party.
Public option must show tangible results by next year..Dean
Dean said he expects the more liberal House Democrats to “to pull the Senate back” by insisting on a public option of some form in the final bill. “We have to be able to choose between a public option and a private option,” he said, adding that no such option is in the Senate Finance Committee bill.
But he also warned that the public option may hurt Democrats politically next year. “If the Democrats want to hold on to their majority, you’re going to have a problem,” he said. That’s because the public option wouldn’t be up and running until 2013, long after the 2010 elections, meaning voters won’t really see any benefits until long after the election.
To address that problem, Dean said Democrats need to do something that will have tangible results by next summer. His proposal: opening up Medicare to people over the age of 50 so that a “certain mass” of people will already have benefited from health reform by the elections. “You need to have people sign up for this program by July 2010,” Dean said.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/politics/2009/10/07/dean-public-option-will-hurt-democrats-in-2010-elections.html
Here is a link for my above comment.