Rockefeller: GOP Leadership Is “Bringing The Hammer” Down On Snowe
There’s a very revealing moment in an interview that public option hero Jay Rockefeller gave to Ezra Klein. Rockefeller suggests he has first-hand knowledge of the tremendous pressure GOP leaders are putting on Olympia Snowe to not join Dems on health care reform:
I think the world of Olympia Snowe. She’s got incredible courage, and the Republican leadership is brutal in the way they apply pressure. Much more so than the Democrats…
They bring the hammer down on her, and I’m not going to say how. She’s very strong, and she represents a very rural state that has gone blue. So I don’t know what she’s going to do, and I’ll respect her whatever she does.
This has long been an untold part of the story: How hard, and in what ways, are Republican leaders exerting behind the scenes pressure on individual GOP Senators such as Snowe to not to get on board with Dems, no matter what the final bill looks like?
GOP aides I’ve spoken to have denied that this is going on. But Rockefeller is clearly hinting that he and Snowe have had private conversations about the “hammer” GOP leaders are bringing down on her to get her to block reform. If we knew more about this, it would help settle beyond any doubt the nature of GOP intentions and would fill in an important part of the story about the GOP’s conduct throughout this affair.
Rockefeller’s language is pretty suggestive. Worth digging into further.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Talk about brownshirts. And these MF’ers are branding the President as hitler, nazi, facsist and what not. Hope snowe pulls a specter.
Snowe (D-Mass)
Doh! I mean Maine!
Jay Rockefeller on Charlie Rose, last night.
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10616
He is standing tall on making many changes to the Baucus bill proposal. He is not happy about the gang of six approach, which shut out all the rest of the committee, and ended up being just the gang of three.
Take a look and listen to him. Very impressive.
Greg, ask Snowe if the WH has approached her yet to switch parties and ask the WH the same.
I think it would be a great story for the Sunday shows to display how brutal, rigid and uncompromising the GOP have become and how Democrats are willing to bring in others, even if they don’t agree on everything, to make a better America that works for Americans.
I bet they made pictures of her with a Hitler mustache.
Actually scratch that, she could come up with some answer that would turn into a side show heh. 8^]
It’s too bad we don’t have a few more R’s like her who at least seem willing to bargain and have an honest dialogue. This, “beat the President at all costs” is getting tiresome at best and destructive to the country at worst. It’s political gamesmanship to them and at stake are their constituents. Hopefully, they’ll get lashed at the voting booths.
LOL that evil GOP
FireDogLake, which has been WHIPPING Dems to support the public option, has been aggressively targeting Rahm Emanuel as the leading proponent within the White House of trading away core liberal priorities to win over centrist Dems.
MoveOn Threatens Blue Dogs Who Might Block Health Reform
Democrat Stark: Blue Dogs “Brain Dead” On Health Care Reform …
Here’s a pretty good bio and an old shot of Snowe.
http://tatasview36.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/women-in-politics-1-sen-olympia-snowe-r-maine/
She’s pretty much a Dem except in party from what I can see from what she supports. It looks like the Republicans have shifted right over the last couple decades and the sensible moderates have been left to dry.
The people of Maine are a fairly independent lot. I would settle for her doing what Senator Jim Jeffers of Vermont did, when he switched from Republican, to Independent, caucusing with the Democrats.
great suggestion Mike, thanks much, will do
@Liam: I note that in the Ezra interview Rockefeller does not explicitly commit to voting against the Baucus bill eventually if it does not contain the public option. I am wondering if he made such an explicit promise in the Rose interview?
It would help if Jay Rock provided some details. This hint/nudge stuff is not enough. Of course, he may have committed to keeping details of his chats with Sen Snowe confidential. But the sort of tricks used by McConnell should see the light of day. Or, she should just move across the aisle. Her record is a reasonable one and I don’t think being Independent will be a hurdle. I wouldn’t want her to stay on O’Connell’s barn nowadays atke all that ****..
This has long been an untold part of the story
Uh, not really. Unless memories are much shorter than I thought.
Before he was Tom “The Really Bad Dancer” DeLay, he was known of as Tom “The Hammer” DeLay for exactly this reason.
I just talked to a representative today who said that Republicans on the Hill are getting tremendous pressure from leadership not to step out of line.
It’s gotten to the point where it’s hard for those who may actually want to represent their constituents–that’s their job, after all–to do so. While there may be reasons for opposing one policy or another on the merits, the opposition party seems driven these days by ideology over practicality, and the hope that just saying no may return them to power.
It may or may not be an effective strategy. But it’s definitely not good for democracy.
Oh, and, regarding your post on yesterday’s round-up, I noted that Obama wasn’t scrapping the missile program, but rather updating it with a different system that scan directionally rather than at 360 degrees. TP touched on this issue since all the neo-cons have come out with their misinformation campaign to attack Obama on foreign policy now.
With Maine trending blue, I would think that the possibility of Snowe switching parties, or least becoming an independent is more likely than it was just months ago. If Arlan Spector can bolt the Republican fold, so can others. If the Republicans push Snowe so hard as to push her right out of the party, they are even more stupid than I suspected.
With any luck, Snowe has been keeping very good records on GOP arm twisting and will be willing to tell all. That would put GOP knickers in a twist.
Hope snowe pulls a specter
That would be the continuation of the demise of what once defined the Republican Party. In the late 1960’s through the mid 1970’s (forget exactly when he retired at present) Hugh Scott, a moderate Republican from Pennsylvania, was the Minority Leader! Now someone like him wouldn’t have a ghost of a chance of winning one of Pennsylvania’s Senate seats because that candidate would never win the primary.
Whomever casts a vote for health care reform, (in which lies more competition in the insurance industry, more Americans covered and less financial woes to American citizens as a result), will be a hero in generations to come – especially if they come from the Republican party! -Kevo
lmsinca:
It’s too bad we don’t have a few more R’s like her who at least seem willing to bargain and have an honest dialogue. This, “beat the President at all costs” is getting tiresome at best and destructive to the country at worst.
Why do you assume that R’s are opposing this out of a cynical “destroy Obama” motivation rather than sincere opposition to the type of reforms being proposed?
In 1968 most of the Northeast (plus a few other states elsewhere, such as Michigan and Texas) voted for Hubert Humphrey, and most of the rest of the country voted for Richard Nixon, but the states of the Deep South (& Arkansas) voted for George Wallace.
More and more nowadays the GOP and the Deep South that voted for Wallace seem to be the same thing.
Your old “Cognitive Dissonance” Detector is still on the fritz, I see!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/Health_reform_foes_plan_Obamas_Waterloo.html
“Health reform foes plan Obama’s ‘Waterloo’
Conservative leaders will push delay any vote on health care reform until after the August recess to capitalize on what they say is a growing tide of opposition to reform measures, they said on a conference call with “tea party” participants today.
“I can almost guarantee you this thing won’t pass before August, and if we can hold it back until we go home for a month’s break in August,” members of Congress will hear from “outraged” constituents, South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint said on the call, which was organized by the group Conservatives for Patients Rights.
“Senators and Congressmen will come back in September afraid to vote against the American people,” DeMint predicted, adding that “this health care issue Is D-Day for freedom in America.”
“If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,” he said”
Why do you assume that R’s are opposing this out of a cynical “destroy Obama” motivation rather than sincere opposition to the type of reforms being proposed?
Well, since it’s clear Snowe is not wholly opposed to reform, provided it fits her own sense of what health care reform ought to be like, isn’t it obvious that the GOP leadership isn’t interested in any reform at all? If they are interested in reform, where are the leaders? Why are they all about opposition, but not about offering an alternative in negotiation?
Like it or not the GOP in the Congress really does look like “The Party of NO”.
Scott C, is your post a joke? I ask sincerely.
I sincerely hope that you and yours are dumb enough to believe this poll.
Liam:
Thre is nothing in what you quote to suggest that Republican opposition to these reform proposals is not sincere. They may indeed welcome the weakening of Obama, but that does not mean they would otherwise welcome the proposed reforms.
BTW, what do you mean when you say “cognitive dissonance”?
special for liam:
“The irony thus far seems to have been lost on the left, however, which has mostly voiced either disbelief or derision that the conservatives would be so shameless — or so clueless. In Democratic Underground’s discussion forum, a photo of a marcher holding a “Keep Your Laws of My Body” sign was captioned “OK, the cognitive dissonance hasn’t hit them yet.” And of the 9/12-ers’ logo, one poster on Stephen Colbert’s site asks, “Did these guys grow a sense of humor overnight, or did they just skip history class?”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27285_Page2.html#ixzz0RTxkktRk
Whoops, that should be in the cap and trade poll. I got dizzy with all the spinning.
It is now the GOP Politburo.
Pretty soon now, they will start sending their dissident members, to psychiatric wards!
Hey look. Someone started a support Snowe for Democrat Facebook group.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1482866363&ref=profile#/group.php?gid=166532444687
For several weeks, all Scott the Parrot has done is squawk, Cognitive Dissonance, Cognitive Dissonance, Cognitive Disonance. He is such a clever parrot that he even learned to squawk, ” the amount of cognitive dissonance on here is staggering”, and then flew of to get his cracker reward.
My mistake for expecting a parrot to comprehend the following:
“If we’re able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,”
Senator Jim DeMint (As in demented)
“the Republican leadership is brutal in the way they apply pressure. Much more so than the Democrats…”
Maybe if the f***ing spineless Democrats would start using some of the same tactics to keep their caucus in line on important votes, we wouldn’t have such a difficult time passing something like health care reform.
oddjob:
Well, since it’s clear Snowe is not wholly opposed to reform, provided it fits her own sense of what health care reform ought to be like, isn’t it obvious that the GOP leadership isn’t interested in any reform at all?
No. It suggests that the GOP leadership is not interested in the same kind of reforms as Snowe.
If they are interested in reform, where are the leaders? Why are they all about opposition, but not about offering an alternative in negotiation?
The other day sbj provided a whole laundry list of alternatives that the R’s have proposed. The Dems want no part of them. Does that mean that the Dems are opposed to reform?
Ethan:
Scott C, is your post a joke?
No.
How can one tell if the Republican Congressional Leadership wants to kill Health Care Reform?
Answer; because during the previous Administration, when the Republicans had complete control, they never tried to solve the health care crisis.
Is that clear enough proof folks.
Liam:
For several weeks, all Scott the Parrot has done is squawk, Cognitive Dissonance, Cognitive Dissonance, Cognitive Disonance.
I think that is one too many. If I am not mistaken, I used the phrase twice.
“Why do you assume that R’s are opposing this out of a cynical ‘destroy Obama’ motivation rather than sincere opposition to the type of reforms being proposed?”
Oh, their opposition is quite sincere. They sincerely oppose the type of reforms being proposed because if the reforms are enacted, they’re sincerely sure they’ll work and their party will be the wilderness for a generation. Well-Known Political Genius Bill Kristol exorted them to kill reform in the 1990s for exactly that reason.
The difference is that at the rate the Republican Party is wasting away now, they also know there’s a good chance their party will wither away entirely over the course of that generation.
No. It suggests that the GOP leadership is not interested in the same kind of reforms as Snowe.
In the face of weeks of GOP leadership silence when it comes to any reform proposals at all I find your reply risible.
You squawked it many times, over several days, put I do not expect Jim DeMint’s pet parrot to be able to count.
Come on Squawky; Let us hear you say: Waterloo Waterloo Waterloo. Jim DeMint has a nice tasty cracker waiting for you.
edit;
You squawked it many times, over several days, but I do not expect Jim DeMint’s pet parrot to be able to count.
Come on Squawky; Let us hear you say: Waterloo Waterloo Waterloo. Jim DeMint has a nice tasty cracker waiting for you.
Rocky better smack Reid around!
Harry Reid: Health care bill won’t work for Nevada
“Let me be very clear, I will not bring a health insurance reform bill to the Senate floor that is not good for Nevada.”
lasvegassun.com/news/2009/sep/16/harry-reid-health-care-bill-wont-work-nevada/
Slightly OT, but worth the read:
@Ethan
“Scott C, is your post a joke?”
No, Ethan…Scott C. is the joke.
waterloo waterloo
Democrat Want Bush to Fail
10. Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you
want President Bush to succeed or not?
SCALE: 1. Yes, want him to succeed 2. No, do not want him to succeed
3. (Don’t know)
Yes No (Don’t know)
8-9 Aug 06 63% 32 5
Democrats 40% 51 9
Republicans 90% 7 2
Independents 63% 34 3
oddjob-
sounds good to me.
steve:
They sincerely oppose the type of reforms being proposed because if the reforms are enacted, they’re sincerely sure they’ll work…
What, precisely, do you mean by “work”? It is virtually impossible for them to do everything that has been promised…insure more people, insure them against more events and for more care, lower net national health care costs, not add a dime to the deficit.
These goals are quite simply impossible to achieve at the same time. So what do you mean by “work”?
A word of advice to all Democrats, regarding Senator Olympia Snowe.
Do not pester her to switch parties. Leave that good, and decent woman alone. She has enough to put up, from all the pressure being applied by the members of her own party, without we making her life even more disrupted.
Let her decide for herself. If we Democrats start tugging on her, to come on over, that will have the opposite effect, and convince her that we are just as big a pain in the Arse as her current party.
Use your heads, just stay out of it, and let the Republicans continue to be the control freaks. Give her some space, please.
Scott C
Looks like quite a few here answered your question to me. Thanks everyone.
Here’s a few more points
Compromises in the Baucus Bill which most R’s seem to favor
1. No Public Option
2. Policies open across state lines to enlarge the insurance pool in states dominated by only one insurance co.
3. High Risk Pools for younger healthy americans with high deductibles
4. Verification of citizenship
5. No public funds for abortions
6. Obama is willing to throw in tort reform
7. Deficit neutral, with actual reduction of deficit over 10 years and cost reductions according to CBO
Boehner’s response-No R support, too much government intervention and too costly. I guess the only thing missing is vouchers. It’s quite clear to me at least the R’s are playing games, especially when Snowe says it doesn’t go far enough in providing affordable coverage to low and middle income Americans.
@oddjob
Correct we currently have socialized medicine in place and it’s in the red, full of fraud, rations, denies more claims then private insurance companies and NONE on either side of the isle has tried to fix it for years!
Smart people learn from their mistake stupid people don’t!
Smart people fix problems stupid people ignore the problems and invent another way throw borrowed money down the drain leaving the same issue’s and adding many more. In the case of the government destory is the only word needed.
Medicare more likely to deny claims than commerical health insurers
healthcare-economist.com/2008/06/30/medicare-more-likely-to-deny-claims-than-commerical-health-insurers/
July 30, 2009 at 3:48 pm · Filed under Economics, Health Care, Policy ·Tagged Health Care, health care reform, medicare, medicare reform, medicare solvency, unfunded liabilities, us healthcare
Think rationing is impossible in the US? Medicare will soon be bankrupt, and the government will have to spend its healthcare funds in a limited, rationed way.
Medicare’s annual spending exceeded revenue brought in from taxes in 2008, forcing Medicare to begin spending its reserve funds. According to the Medicare Trustees, Medicare’s reserve will be empty by 2017, and Medicare will have to cut benefits or payment rates by 19% to balance its budget [1]. Since the projected date of Medicare’s bankruptcy has been brought forward many times [2], it’s likely that the actual date of bankruptcy may be as early as 2015.
http://truecostblog.com/2009/07/30/medicare-bankrupt-in-6-8-years-without-rationing/
The current health care reform plans have introduced a variety of cuts in Medicare, which may reduce costs in the short term. But none of the plans under consideration address Medicare’s root problem: Medicare is not allowed to say NO. Rationing health care is not part of the current health care discussion, but it happens covertly today, and it will become the norm. If Medicare is to avoid insolvency, the government will have to decide when some procedures just aren’t worth doing. Seniors should be allowed to pay extra for those procedures, but Medicare will have to limit its responsibility. If you don’t believe me, look at California, where they finally learned that when the money’s gone, it’s gone.
[1] The Medicare Trustees’ Report Summary can be found at: http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
I hope Olympia Snowe follows Arlen Specter. Ms. Snowe is far too intelligent and balanced to be a member of such an extremist party. Go Democratic Olympia!
Our members of Congress are often so weak it sickens me. What is the worst that can be done against Sen Snowe? They can not fund her next campaign and run a strong Repug against her. Wow, she has an opportunity to do something amazing for the American people and we are talking about how rough the GOP is on her.
By the way I feel just as strongly about the Blue Dogs complaining about being able to “sell this bill back home”. I’m sorry there are small votes that aren’t worth taking a stand that you no is right regardless of the impact on your career; this is not one of those small votes.
This is a defining moment in our society and any member of our Congress who doesn’t have the guts to do what is right for fear of the effects on their own political career has no business serving our great nation.
@liam why don’t you be honest and admit that some dems don’t even support the nightmare bill in the senate or house?
Dumbos are the majority and they can’t even get it together in their own house but yet it’s the repugs fault?
do you sit in the middle of the train tracks while a train is coming and tell yourself it’s not a train?
Before giving up on a public option, how about allowing states the option to choose a public option?
The federal legislation could allow states to opt for, or decline, participation in a government-run public health insurance option that would still be among private insurance options available through an exchange. If more than, say, 15 states opt for the public option, then the federal government would establish the plan and make it available to people in those 15 states, and in other states as they opt in.
It would allow a choice depending on different public leanings/attitudes in different regions of the country. It might satisfy liberal Democrats, would free conservative Democrats from making a decision on a public option, and align Republicans with supporting state rights. States could decide through referendums or legislative action.
The Democrats are the ones putting too much pressure to Sen Snowe. The democrats are arrogantly trying very hard to get her on board to further Obama’s radical agenda.
Dear Senator Snowe. The Democratic Party would be happy to welcome you to their party as the 62nd Democratic Senator from the great state of Maine.
You have not left the republican party. They have left you and gone to Crazytown. Time to join a party that lives in the reality based universe. You can do much good there.
Hello, this is John Tanner. I want to talk with you again for just a moment about the current state of the health care reform debate taking place in Tennessee and across the country.
The Blue Dogs, which I helped found, were instrumental in getting Congressional leaders to hold off a vote on any of the health care reform bills currently pending before the House. We wanted to ensure Members of Congress would have the August break in the legislative calendar to talk with our constituents.
I think this approach has been constructive.
Health care is a highly personal and emotional issue, because we all have health issues. Therefore, I have spent the past few weeks visiting the 19 counties that make up our Congressional district.
I have talked with providers, patients, health care administrators, seniors, veterans, small business owners, civic leaders and other families – those with health coverage and those without – about how our health care system works today.
Through face-to-face meetings with groups and individuals, plus a series of Telephone Town Hall Meetings, including one hosted by AARP, I have talked with more than 15,000 8th District residents during the August District Work Period. We are also hearing from thousands of Middle and West Tennesseans taking a moment to return surveys published in newspapers throughout our district.
Many people have ideas – sometimes similar, sometimes different – about how we can address these issues. Most of us agree that the goals in addressing health care are: 1) keep what works in our current system; and 2) fix what is broken.
Too often, people in Washington think we live in an either/or world. Those on the far left and those on the far right seem to think that every play has to be an 80-yard Hail Mary touchdown pass. Many of us who find ourselves somewhere in the middle prefer a series of first downs – in this case, incremental changes to fix what is broken within the system without harming patient care.
So as the House goes back into session, I will work with the Blue Dogs and other colleagues to address these principles with regard to health care reform:
1. Cost savings. Medical care and health insurance costs are skyrocketing for individuals, families, veterans, employers, medical providers and government. We must look for savings without harming patient care.
2. Solving inefficiencies. Oftentimes, there is duplication in medical exams, prescriptions and consultations. Investing in electronic medical records, better coordination among providers and addressing the practice of defensive medicine will help save money and improve quality.
3. Ensuring that people with pre-existing conditions can get health care coverage. I talked with a small business owner from Weakley County who has had colon cancer. Fortunately, he is in remission, but no one will insure him, and he worries that if he gets sick again, he will lose his business, and his employees will lose their jobs. Individuals should be able to get affordable, private health insurance, even with pre-existing conditions.
4. Keep our employer-based health care system.
I did not feel these principles were adequately met in the version of health care reform legislation that came before the Ways and Means Committee in July, so I voted against that version of the legislation.
Health care is a very complicated issue that affects us all, and this dialogue is just getting under way. There is no final health care bill in the House or the Senate.
Because accurate information is crucial in the discussion of any issue this complicated and important, I hope all Tennesseans will carefully follow the debate and seek informed answers to the questions they have about any proposals in Congress and around the country.
I want to thank all those 8th District residents who took the time to talk with me in the past few weeks. I also appreciate your interest in this dialogue about how we can keep what works in our system and fix what is broken.
As the legislative process moves forward, we will continue to stay in touch.
Again, thank you.
Sabagan | September 18th, 2009 at 03:03 pm
The Democrats are the ones putting too much pressure to Sen Snowe. The democrats are arrogantly trying very hard to get her on board to further Obama’s radical agenda.
–
bingo!
The democrats are arrogantly trying very hard to get her on board to further Obama’s radical agenda.
Given that health care reform has been something voters have wanted Washington to take up for many years now, and given that Obama specifically and explicitly campaigned on a promise of delivering health care reform, and given that he won the election by a solid majority, and given that the votes in the Senate are such that having a willing Republican on board is a wise move, I find this depiction of yours rather weird.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=166532444687
Scott C:
Republicans have supported many of the exact proposals in this health care bill in the past. For example, the end of life counseling provisions have been drafted by Republicans in the past. Yet, now these very same measures are considered “death panels” by Grassley, Issacson et al. I could provide more examples, but I am skeptical that you are really open minded to facts, rather than ideology.
Ms. Snowe,
Thank you for your commitment to the American system of government and your unwavering dedication to the people of Maine and all Americans. Please find the strength and courage of your convictions and don’t allow the bully boys of the far right to keep this Nation on the road to disaster. You have the opportunity to be the voice and the hand of the American conscience in the Republican Party. Please support the option for all Americans to have adequate and affordable health care.
Respectfully,
A former and disgrundled Republican.
PS don’t give in to the pressure. They will be gone from office when this is all over. We are all watching.
I am sure they are the reason why Specter quit them and why Martinez and others are leaving.
Time to Learn from Spechter
I’ve lived in Maine for over 50 years. and I can’t for the life of me imagine what the Republican party has to threaten Olympia with short of bodily harm-she could run as a member of the Communist party, and still be re-elected. She’s been on the ballot in one way or another my entire adult life, over 35 years.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again. I’d be gobsmacked if Olympia switches parties. She may want to wring her leadership’s necks, but she will not switch parties. It’s not about her relationships in DC, it’s about her relationships here. Her husband is a former governor. A Republican. Her first husband, killed in a car accident, was a state Republican legislator. These people all go way back. I truly cannot imagine her saying see ya to them.
And as goatboyslim says, the people of Maine have her back. I’ve never voted for her, I probably never will, but I respect the hell out of her.
Olympia Snowe may be the only Republican that I would vote for as president. She’s what we need in our leaders.
Are there any Republicans left who are able or willing to stand up to the most reactionary, racist and Confederate elements in their party? If not, they aren’t going to do very well in 2010 or 2012 except in those places they already have in the bag.
I really appreciate Ezra’s comments. Instead of yelling at the people in Congress it helps to understand a bit of where they are coming from. I don’t mean the main Republicans. I mean people like Snowe and the Blue Dogs. It’s crazy to yell constantly that we should have more liberal people in their jobs when they don’t necessarily represent liberal constituencies.
And the pressure is intense on the moderate Republicans.
In the end the most we might accomplish is losing the Democratic majority and yes that matters. A lot. If we think things are bogged down now…
I think the Republicans are threatening to not support her bills for her state if she votes for reform. If she’s really gutsy Snowe could switch parties.
# Michael C. McHugh | September 18th, 2009 at 03:56 pm
Are there any Republicans left who are able or willing to stand up to the most reactionary, racist and Confederate elements in their party? If not, they aren’t going to do very well in 2010 or 2012 except in those places they already have in the bag.
—
Laughable! Acorn anyone!
20 states investigating right now, what the DNC has know for years. RICO
Tena, you have been beating that drum and you are right on. Sometimes I want to smack Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad, Mary Landrieu and Blanche Lincoln. Oh, and Max Baucus, duh. But I’d rather have a Democratic majority!
I don’t want the Blue Dogs calling the shots. But we do have to give them the time of day.
I am sure they are the reason why Specter quit them and why Martinez and others are leaving.
Actually, I doubt they are the reason Specter left. I think for that reason you have to look at the changed complexion of the Pennsylvania Republican Party. Arlen Specter’s core support always has come from the fiscally conservative, socially moderate people who lived in the Pittsburgh (& even more so) Philadelphia suburbs. By the end of GW Bush’s second term in office those people were leaving the Pennsylvania GOP in droves.
In Pennsylvania the primaries are closed. In Pennsylvania you can’t vote for candidates in a party’s primary election unless you are already a registered member of that party, and most Pennsylvania residents are slow to switch parties. When they switch they don’t switch back until some new political development years later prompts them to think about changing parties again.
So, now in 2010 Arlen will again run for re-election, but his core voters won’t be Republicans anymore, and the remaining Republicans are hard core conservatives, often with strongly held very conservative religious beliefs. Those are the Republicans who never wanted Arlen Specter to be a federal senator from Pennsylvania in the first place.
They weren’t going to vote for him. They were going to vote for whomever the more conservative opponent to Specter was (Toomey, as it turns out).
Specter knew all of this very well. When he said that the party had left him, this was what he was referring to.
He switched because otherwise he had no chance of ever being re-elected.
He may still not be re-elected, but his core voters had switched and become Democrats. All he did was follow them when circumstances in DC forced the matter.
Scott C:
What, precisely, do you mean by “work”? It is virtually impossible for them to do everything that has been promised…insure more people, insure them against more events and for more care, lower net national health care costs, not add a dime to the deficit.
These goals are quite simply impossible to achieve at the same time. So what do you mean by “work”?
The solution is not impossible, it’s not even technically difficult. It is politically very difficult because of special interest bribes/campaign donations. We can cut health care costs by a third instantly by removing the insurance companies along with their $125 million executive compensation packages and 30% profit margins.
TODAY’S REPUBLICANS ARE AMERICA’S ENEMY WITHIN
Republicans ARE practicing seditious DEMAGOGUERY and purposefully counterproductive OBSTRUCTIONISM intended to destabilize our economy for purposes of political exploitation.
Republicans AREN’T making a sincere effort to STOP the bleeding THEIR incompetent leadership and failed policies created. Instead, they’re using inflammatory lies and accusations as a smokescreen to conceal their subversive agenda, which is to cause President Obama and America to fail so they can blame Democrats for the consequences of THEIR calamitous mismanagement.
Republicans ARE preposterously professing that THEIR disgraceful political WHORING had nothing to do with the banking, real estate, stock market and employment catastrophes that resulted.
Republicans ARE trying to hamstring Democrats to prevent them from repairing the damage caused during a Republican presidency.
Republicans ARE offering ridiculous arguments meant solely to disrupt and prevent progressive change. They’d rather divide America and create political gridlock than endure the political consequences of effective Democratic governance.
Republicans AREN’T the LOYAL OPPOSITION; they ARE the ENEMY WITHIN whose mercenary personal priorities have eroded their moral and ethical standards to the point that duplicity and betrayal are their preferred modus operandi.
It’s one thing to advocate their conservative beliefs; it’s another thing entirely to willfully sabotage America’s government because a successful Democratic presidency would not be vulnerable to the greed, fears and hatreds that have produced and sustained the radical Republican corporatism and anti-Christian racist social divisions that are poisoning and crippling America.
Yippie…get your facts straight please…Socialized Medicine in our country…THE VA HOSPITALS AND DOCS
Single Payer- Medicare
The rest..getting raped by the private insurance industry or uninsured..a situation that gives them a 40% higher risk of mortality
VA popularity with consumers..the highest among the 3 aforementioned models…REPUBLICAN Senator Mitch McConnell chose Bethesda Naval Hospital for his bypass surgery several years ago despite being wealthy and having great private insurance paid for by us..a form of single payer. That’s right Yippie…McConnell elected to used SOCIALIZED medicine. It works whether you want to admit it or not you Limbaugh/Beck brainwashed hack
Medicare scores 83% satisfaction rate while privately insured people provide an 55% satisfaction rate.
How disingenuous and thoughtless people like you are yippie when they gripe about the red ink of Medicare..let’s see…take all the people who are most in need of expensive health care..(I forget the exact figure but over 75% of health care dollars are for the final two years of life) seniors 65 and older (plz read this Maria “The Dolt” Bartiromo)
and dump that all on the government…let the private insurance companies cherry pic the HEALTHIEST young people amongst us…ration mercilessly (do you understand recision and preexisting condition yippie) and then try to compare the outcome. Brilliant!!!
As long as hospitals treat anyone, regardless of means, when they show up in the emergency room and don’t toss them on the streets we already have socialized medicine.
We just have a really, really, expensive, stupid version of it.
Please, Greg — dig! DIG! Let’s expose just what kind of people the Republican so-called “leadership *really* are. “Freedom”? Not so much. Totalitarian dictatorship? Now you’re talkin.’ You betcha.
It isn’t just the VA and Medicare. The whole freakin’ thing is socialized medicine. It’s just disguised by a vast, expensive charade.
Don’t feel too sorry for Snowe- She won reelection with a 70% margin- She is untouchable in Maine- She knows her constituents desperately need a health care plan and she should have the courage to vote for them. Instead, she coyly pretends to care then when to time to act comes she retreats. She has done this for years- makes compassionate headlines then votes with the Reps.Disgusting.Collins is even worse – so much for the moderate Senators from Maine — an illusion contrived to get good press headlines.
The “hammer” is re-election support. They do it all the time. That’s why even the moderates in the GOP are saying no to everything. The Schutzstaffel of the GOP will make sure all Republicans tow the line.
Are Republicans sincere in their opposition? Some of them. But Boenner was on the PBS Newshour last night and repeated the claim that we have “the best health care system in the world” despite study after study that shows we don’t, on average. (And even if we were at the same level as other countries, we spend far more than they do, meaning they’re far more efficient than we are.) And they keep making claims that have been disproved by the systems in other countries–such as private plans won’t be able to compete with a public option. The fact that many countries have a mix of public and private plans don’t prevent them from making the claim anyway, because their economic theories say that it shouldn’t happen.
They may be sincere, but it’s sincerity based on ideology divorced from the real world. It’s an obsession with markets for markets’ sake regardless of whether “the market” really gets us the results we want in every situation (it probably does most times, but not every time, and it sure seems like health care is one of the latter).
And again, the problem isn’t necessarily one of sincerity. It’s that the ideologues have a lock on the party’s power structure, and they’re willing to punish those who step out of line for simply disagreeing with them. If Obama succeeds, then their ideology will be shown to be false. But if ideology supercedes all else, then they’re in a position where the strategies of affirming their ideology and causing Obama to fail are essentially equivalent.
Re your point Ken A…this health care debate has crytalized for me the need for publicly funded elections.
Baucus and others have engaged in legal bribery..taking money from the insurance companies for their reelection…although the way some of the pols have utilized this money makes one wonder if all the bribery is legal…see especially Alaska and Louisiana..
While the looney tunes are worried about Government takeovers…perhaps they should look at the corporatists who have taken over the government.
Republican leadership are closet-fascists. The believe in power to the few, screw the rest, nad use any tactic necessary to win at all costs. If Americans really want to know what Republican control of the White House and both chambers of Congress cost this country just look and the collapse of our financial markets, the whopping deficit and the 5000 lives lost in the Liar’s War – Iraq.
Olympia Snowe is a hero. She exhibits the character, steadfast honesty of conviction that we wish every politian could show, ever once in a while. And by her actions she sould be a sample to the GOP as to what they are so badly missing today.
Fred- an ex-Republican.— come back to America GOP
My (former?) best friend, a very smart individual, has drifted from a tolerant mainstream republican to the kind of a wack who now represents what is left of that party. He’s become a very conservative christian who pushes creationism, and other far right blather. He and I grew up in the same upstate New York small town, left town moderate Republicans. Nixon moved me left, and I’ve not found reason to move back. He now claims today’s republican party is the same as it was in Ike’s day, and that his views are mainstream. He won’t discuss facts, merely replys to anything I say as ‘leftwing nonsense’. His family denies evolution, I can’t get him to comment if the world was created in the last 10,000 years. I saw a comment a few days ago that consisely sums up this country: Last in health care, first in ignorance’. You can see evidence of this ignorance in some of the preceding comments.
This friend formerly was a military pilot with 20 years in. He has government insurance very much like that enjoyed by Congress people. I’ve asked him that if he deplores people having insurance like he does, why doesn’t he get out of it? He won’t answer, except to imply he’s special because of the time he spent in the military. I asked him what about a farmer who woke every morning before daybreak to feed the people of this country and the world, doesn’t that farmer deserve the same insurance? He won’t answer. I ask him, what about me? I spent time in the military, don’t I deserve it? No answer. I ask him as a Christian shouldn’t you be concerned that 18,000 people a year (now 45,000) die from lack of insurance? No answer.
The only basis for his political position is that his father was a republican, and he will never change. He doesn’t have the depth of character necessary to ignore his petty political biases enough to educate himself.
Two comments.
First, I, too, appreciate and admire Snowe’s independence and I hope she will wind up supporting the public option (the only “issue” here, folks).If she were, actually, to switch parties, that would be even better.
Second, I do not believe that republicans are against the public option on any philosophical grounds. After all, they have no philosophy. They say they’re the party of fiscal restraint. But they supported Bush, the most fiscally irresponsible President in modern history. They say they are the party of individual liberty, but are against personal choice in matters like drugs and abortion and supported wiretapping of private citizens. They say they are for law and order, but have allowed Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blackwater, and others to go unpunished for their crimes. They claim to be a party of “Christian and family values” but their ranks are filled with adulterers. Rates of abortion, divorce, and other such unfortunate social problems are higher in “red” states than in “blue” states. The republicans are a party of no political philosophy whatsoever.
The “public option” gets offered to every child in the country with regard to school. Republicans are not complaining about this. If they were against government spending on social welfare they’d be opposed to public education. But they’re not.
What they’re opposed to is the democrats and, to some extent, a black man in the White House. That’s not a political philosophy. It’s just a nervous tick.
The republican party of the 20th century is already dead.
Scott C. | September 18th, 2009 at 01:49 pm
lmsinca:
It’s too bad we don’t have a few more R’s like her who at least seem willing to bargain and have an honest dialogue. This, “beat the President at all costs” is getting tiresome at best and destructive to the country at worst.
Why do you assume that R’s are opposing this out of a cynical “destroy Obama” motivation rather than sincere opposition to the type of reforms being proposed?
_____________________________________________________
Ask Jim DeMented
The thing is, Olympia Snowe’s more a Republican than the Neo-Republicans who are married with corporate America and who are holding the US Taxpayer hostage. She has said several times that she has not left her party, it’s her party that has left her, and she is 100% correct. For the “GOP” (whatever that is these days) to “come down on her” should be enough proof to her, as it was to Arlen Specter, another traditional northeast Republican (formerly at least), to prove that she has no party any more. I sincerely hope she does switch to the Dems, as a longtime Maine resident and progressive liberal who’s nonetheless voted for Snowe on two different occasions, I would support her 200% and believe, whatever she decides, that she is a woman of character and is deserving of the respect she has earned for sticking to her principles. It’s not her fault that her party has abandoned those principles in the name of corporate greed.
this is not surprising, given what the Rethug Party has devoled into, but is extremely telling re the idea of collaboration and responsible discourse ~ which is how things are SUPPOSED to get done. Disappointing proof of what we could already foresee. Here’s hoping the ever-classy Ms Snowe beats them at their own game!
My mother used a word in my native tongue that has no truly aligned English translation. “Brutaal” she would comment about a person who had no morality. My mother if alive today would say that about the Republican dynamic.
You know, it’s possible that Snowe is a woman of character, but the idea that Specter switched parties because of principles is just hilarious.
I don’t buy this at all. Snowe (and Collins) could easily buck their parties and still get reelected from Maine. In fact, they stand a better chance of getting reelected if they did vote for healthcare reform. And, yet, we hear this ho hum nonsense from Snowe and outright antagonism from Collins. Plus, lets not delude ourselves into thinking that Snowe and Collins are budget deficit hawks. They’re not. They both voted for the 2003 Prescription Drug Benefit bill that has added nearly $1 trillion to the budget deficit.
CANCER CELLS in the body of Congress are those republican conservatives who can do only to disable the normal operation of the congress. They want to be and called themselves the RIGHT WING TERRORISTS in American democratic system. The kind of Terrorists have the freedom to shout at president in a meeting, to teach small student to sing “Kill the president” song, to support Ben Laden’s goal “Wishing President Obama to fail”, to fabricate accusations and spreading propaganda to counter reforms, the correction to restore the country from the damages created by republicans in the last 8 years. If health care reform can not carry out those CANCER CELLS will be there for ever.Health care reform must be done, Those CANCER CELLS must be eliminated for the sake of American future.
the idea that Specter switched parties because of principles is just hilarious
Agreed. He did it because it was the only way he had any chance of being re-elected. Specter is not a principled senator.
*sigh* Ask a bluedog democrat their -honest- thoughts on the liberal hammer. Pot, kettle, and of course all of it flies over your heads and settles in your blind-spot that justifies any craven actions your side takes while demonizing anyone who disagrees.
/banallparties
The nature of the republican party favors “authoritarian” ideology. They place the party before country and self. You walk the line or go**amn it you will pay and we will make it hurt. Dow down or your not a true conservative.
whether or not ms. snowe eventually decides one way or another as to the healthcare insurance legislation at hand, I for one am curious as to how the GOP punishes, excuse me, “bring pressure to bear” on those that they view as voting in opposition to the GOP. I respect ms. snowe for her articulated views and her pragmatic approach to these very difficult problems. i think though that she, and probably a handful of Republicans, to some degree, need to be protected from their own party. And I also believe that we as Americans finally need to know exactly “how the sausage is made.” please continue your work, mr. sargent, this coverage is important. i wish more of the media took a look at this.
I used to be tolerant. Now,not so much. To dismiss these nutjobs is dangerous. They are openly calling for insurrection, secession, coup d’etat, and presidential assassination. I hope Obama unleashes upon them a whole lot of whoopazz under the full powers vested in him by the Patriot Act. Thanks Bush.
good, let her go. after we get rid of all these namby-pamby girly republicans we can start to rebuild the republican party into what goldwater and reagan wanted it to be. enjoy it now democrats, it won’t last long before the pendulum swings back[and it will].
Goldwater would not recognize the dung heap the GOP has become, so don’t tarnish his memory in trying to justify the party.
As for Sen. Snowe, the GOP would only have itself to blame if she left.
All Americans need to get their heads out of their rears and realize that the two parties are controlled by the same people and they don’t have yours or my best interests in mind. This country is failing because the populace is so dumbed down that they can’t see that there is no difference at all. The wealthy elite win and the country loses no matter which side is in power. They all ignore The Constitution, they all lie , and they are all traitors. The only thing we as a people should be concentrating on is the trials of all the traitors. Then we can truly begin to heal this broken down nation. If you think there is a difference between them, you don’t have a clue. SHUT UP AND START LEARNING!
Livingstone: “*sigh* Ask a bluedog democrat their -honest- thoughts on the liberal hammer.”
*sigh* Eleven House Democrats voted against the stimulus, no Republicans voted yes (and Specter was essentially hounded from his party for voting for it in the Senate). Only eight House Republicans voted for the energy bill; a couple of them are not up for reelection (Castle, McHugh), and some of the others are getting a lot of heat. Forty-four Democrats voted no on the energy bill.
Yes, there’s pressure on both sides. But I think the point is that the pressure on Republicans who would like to dissent is far, far higher than usual.
As for the blue dog Democrats, they seem to have been pretty successful in getting their way so far, no? When the final bill comes to a vote, the will have some pressure put on them–but it’s not like they’re going to have to vote for anything like a single-payer system, even if it’s what a majority of Democrats might want. Even a public option may not make it to the final bill. So though they may object to some aspects of the legislation, they’ve already had influence over it far out of proportion to their numbers, which would hardly reflect the “hammer” technique. Some would say they’re the ones who have been hammering away.
Don’t how she (or Collins for that matter) will cast her vote but right now the lady senator doesn’t look like much of a profile in courage. Just another corporate hack who couldn’t give two damns about the people she represents. Now the insurance companies … that’s another story. Pathetic.
My monthly healthcare premium covers me, not a family, and costs $1,100 per month. My plan is an HMO that is one step above a plan that provides for basic hospitalization. I can’t buy insurance as part of a group because I’m self employed. There are millions like me. Needless to say the premium costs are crushing. What will the millions of employees who get their insurance from their employers do as employers scale back and eliminate health insurance benefits? Employers can do that unless a labor contract prevents them from doing it. We need a serious dialogue about options. The people yelling about taking their country back are just contributing a lot of noise. We need solutions.
after we get rid of all these namby-pamby girly republicans we can start to rebuild the republican party into what goldwater and reagan wanted it to be.
Goldwater would have spit upon what you want to build the GOP into. Goldwater was firmly in favor of gay rights. Goldwater was a libertarian.
…
In characteristically blunt fashion Goldwater announced his opposition to the military ban by writing in a Washington Post article, “You don’t have to be straight to shoot straight.” And in an interview with The Advocate, Goldwater elaborated on his views: “The Constitution says that all men are created equal, and it doesn’t say that all men are created equal except for ****. Just like everyone else who is born in this country, **** are endowed by their creator, God, with inalienable rights, and among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. At birth, whether your are born in Russia, Cuba, South America, or New York
, you are born equal. The difference is that our [American] babies grow up to live free.”
The asterisks block out the word g*a*y*s.
Needless to say the premium costs are crushing. What will the millions of employees who get their insurance from their employers do as employers scale back and eliminate health insurance benefits?
EXACTLY.
…Sooner or later, however, it will become obvious that we already have a system of socialized medicine. We might as well admit that fact, and set up the system so that health care is no longer a burden on businesses and so that people are protected when they need it most.
There is nothing wrong with the Republican party that a few
new more open leaders couldn’t fix. Ousting current default leaders like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and a few pathetic
senators and govenors might do the job and return the GOP to the great party it once was, but hasn’t been for too long. Bad choices, and unfortunately now, bad party.
I also have friends that I am estranged from due to this incredibly dumb idea; “I don’t believe in the government taking over health care” from people who have medicare, son and family on state insurance, granddaughter on healthy kids. Their daughter is not able to get health insurance at all and they worry about this but still scream about the government.
Olympia Snowe is impervious to any “hammer” from her Party. The people of Maine are independent, informed, and opinionated people. They have repeatedly sent her back to the Senate and they will continue to do so because she serves on their behalf. She believes, fiercely, in those basic Republican principles, which she enumerates every time she is asked: fiscal responsibility, personal freedoms, and I forgot the last one. However, they no longer exist. The Republican Party she embraces does not exist anymore, she said so in the interview. She pretty much is the last hold over. Her constituents do not care what party she is in; they vote for her. It will end up being whether or not she can stand to be associated with what the Party is today. She cannot change them. I do not believe she will ever be able to be a liberal; the best to hope for is a “blue dog” or conservative Democrat, if she switches, or an Independent who tends toward old fashioned Republicanism. I admire her integrity if I am sometimes impatient with her strict conservatism, meant in the nice, old fashioned connotation, not the crazy one of today.
Saw an interview where someone asked Ms. Snowe what she thought of the Republican party. Her response was that she is the same as before but the party has moved considerably to the right. She listed the things that she stood for and the Republican party used to stand for, limited government, individual rights, and several others. There was a strong implication that she could pull a Jeffers.
Also, the Democrats have been asking her to cross over for some time now.
I am sometimes impatient with her strict conservatism, meant in the nice, old fashioned connotation, not the crazy one of today.
Living in New England (although I grant that I live in Massachusetts), I recognize what you are referring to. It’s the famous New England tendency to avoid certain sorts of changes unless there are truly compelling arguments to change course. That temperament is more associated with the three northern New England states than with the three southern ones. Snowe is a good example of that. If I understand correctly, so also was Senator Jeffords until the Bush administration shenanigans became more than he could stomach.
Scott,
Hello, hello, hello?
I wish more folks in Congress were like Olympia Snowe, simply always do what you think is correct each and every day. Have real principles that don’t change regardless of who is the President and from which party. What’s right is right, regardless of who proposes or opposes it. I’ll trade the opportunist Jon Kyl for her any day of the week.
hope obama keep his hammer in his pocket atleast! He would look out of place at Teddy’s funeral using his hammer oPatrick!
what kind of proposal to pave the way? doesn’t the MA legislators vote on this not Obama? Does Obama now enact state laws?
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick said on Friday that he and President Barack Obama discussed a proposal that would pave the way for him to appoint an interim successor for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy and that White House aides have been in frequent contact with the governor about the matter.
In his first public comments about the push to change the state’s succession law in nearly three weeks, Patrick, a Democrat, said that the conversation with Obama took place at Kennedy’s funeral in Boston last month.
http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=1&subcatid=1&threadid=3045461
a matter btw the dems created themselves 4 years ago when they changed the law to benefit the DNC’s agenda and it’s biting them in the rump so like good little corrupt mafia bosses they have to reverse the law they put in place.
what a swamp!
yeah, i know about goldwater’s views, and i agree with them. if **** want to serve in the military, fine with me. they want to get married, fine with me. i want less government, so did goldwater. i’m against the constant bickering by both parties, i disliked bush, i dislike obama. clinton wasn’t bad, as a matter of fact i would like to party with him. i want the republican party to be the party that it was when goldwater started the reformation.if that has turned into libertarian, so be it. call it what you want. old barry was the best man ever to lose a presidential election.so, the dems can have snowe, specter and any others that are girly-men. just get me less government, and i don’t care if **** marry or serve in the military.its not my business.remember what JFK said, ‘ask not what your country can do for, ask what you can do for your country’. too many takers in america today, not enough givers. eventually, that will destroy us. i did my bit, served for 5 years and paid my taxes for 40 years, retired now. by the way, most of my care is from medicare, and let me tell you, it ain’t the answer. better find something else, ah hell, its all coming apart anyway and i don’t have long to go, so i won’t see the end. but you young ones will, because you are takers, the whole lot of you. now, get off my lawn.
Rockerfeller lies and the left believes. Enough said.
I respect Snowe in some ways (I am originally from Maine), but I sincerely hope she (1) stays with the R-team, and (2) votes against any health care reform legislation. I agree with Robert Reich about the worse than futile contortions Baucus went through to try to get Snowe on board so that he can drop a pinch of “bipartisanship” into his crappy bill and give the Democrats some “political cover” and “legitimacy.” We need to scrap bipartisanship, pull up our FDR socks, and move reform as far to the left as it will go and still pass, which would be a significant distance if Obama would team up with the progressives in the House and kick the Blue Dogs in their lobby-fat butts. The Democrats need to feel the heat from their base, and to know that they will lose their pants in the next elections if they don’t deliver real reform. If all Americans are forced to pony up even more dough into the pockets of the private health insurance companies, without at least a robust public option, the revolt from the left is going to make the Tea Baggers look decaffeinated.
If insurance companies are allowed to sell beyond state lines then they will all move to Arizona where the laws are lax and our premiums will triple. It’s a republican trick to avoid states with health care protections. Sort of like moving industry to the third world to avoid child labor laws. Republicans are such nice people huh
We need to stop this bill. Obama is not stupid, he went to Yale, so he must be crooked.
Remember folks the republicans are worse. So we need to hit the primaries and find 3rd party candidates we can support
Olympia Snowe should stay a Republican. While I have never voted for her because of her Party, I respect her greatly and she is a wonderful person. Even the choice of her husband (former Congressman and Governor Jock McKernan) shows her moderation. I am hopeful that a future Republican Party will find her example the one they wish for their party and both parties can find middle ground with healthy liberal and conservative wings that are civil and willing to talk. I love MAINE and believe something about how we all share in that phrase”the way life should be” means something and Senator Snowe is able to find a way to elicit it for the Nation.
Her idea of a trigger for the public option is very interesting. I hope she realizes that she will soon need to pull her own trigger and fire a shot we all need to hear!
“They bring the hammer down on her, and I’m not going to say how.”
Why Not? Voters want to know.
Democrats should embrace the “Triggered Option Plan” by Republican Snowe and end the debate. IMO here is how it would work.
White House should negotiate with the Insurance companies, just like it did with other stakeholders -Pharma and Hospitals. Insure all, no denial of coverage and permit portability. Immediate 30% reduction in premiums and another 20% reduction over next two years. Half the savings to come from Insurance and the other half from the delivery of care. This will reduce healthcare cost from 17% GDP to 11%; making American business competitive in the world. With such a deal, all sides should be on board to sign off on a bill. If the insurance companies do not deliver, the Public Option will deliver by 2012.
For insurance companies, the immediate reduction in premiums will be offset by the new 47 million getting insured with govt / taxpayer help. The reduction in premium costs will help American business and reduce govt subsidies to those who need help. The immediate benefit to working Americans will be a bird-in-hand, if the insurance companies renege on bringing down healthcare costs.
The 47 million presently uninsured are already covered by those with insurance who pay an effective 17% surcharge on their insurance. The important issue to be alert is that the insurance companies with the blessing (payback) from politicians do not keep the 17% charge for “uncompensated care” while we, the tax payers again pay to subsidize the new beneficiaries.
it benefits the dems and the public option if she does not join them. Baucus has been shown as the health care industry shill he is. Without Snowe his ridiculous plan fails. the repubs are doing the dems a favor.
I admire Olympia Snowe, I wish she was a Democrat, I doubt she will allow the GOP to scare her off, she does vote the way she wants to vote on any bills, not the way her party wants her to vote, she needs to tell them to kick her backside and stop trying to tell her what to do, she is her own person and her own boss.
Ms.Snowe, come over to our side where you are very much respected and liked by many people by both parties, don’t let your party tell you how to vote on ANY BILL, no matter how much they threaten you for any re-election in your State of Maine I don’t think their threats will hurt you one bit in Maine.
You’ll be welcomed as a Democrat with open arms, come over to our side.
God Bless
Oops……….I meant to say to Ms. Snowe to tell her party to “Kiss her backside, not kick her backside, sorry about that error, I need to turn on a light so I can see what I’m typing, lol
yeah olympia, go on over, because the dems are so reasonable. look what they did to specter, lost all his seniority and will not win re-election. bwahahahahaha.
What Republican “leadership”!
Note to self: If Snowe votes for reform and suffers GOP wrath, send donation for her next campaign.
jim: “i want less government…”
I’m always befuddled by that statement. Why do some people want “less government”? For the sake of having…less government? I want whatever works. Usually it will be the market. Usually it will be less government. But always?
I think there’s ample evidence that “less government” doesn’t work with health care. We’ve tried it. It doesn’t hold down costs. It doesn’t cover everyone. It doesn’t even lead to better health outcomes than our peer nations. And we spend a lot more than they do to do no better than they do. So why would we want a system that has those characteristics?
Other counties have tried variations of “more government” with health care, whether it be by regulation (forcing insurers to be non-profits), or having a government public option, or having single-payer (Canada), or true nationalization (Britain). Those systems have their problems, but so does ours, and we pay far, far more than they do. So why in the world would we continue doing what we’re doing when what they do seems to work a lot better? Just because of some ideological commitment to “less government”?
I’m basically a free market person. It works in most circumstances. But I’m not going to ignore what I think is pretty clear evidence that in some instances other systems work better. Health care seems to be one of those instances. And I’m willing to go with what works best, regardless of the label.
dsimon, where does it stop? what makes you think it will cost less if the goverment gets more involved? outside of collecting taxes what does the government do well? you think that canada’s system works then why do so many wealthy canadians come here for serious operations? i lived in england for 2 years and most of the people are unhappy with their level of care.5 year survival rates there for prostate cancer is 71%, here 95%. you think adding between 30,000,000 and 45,000,000 million will reduce our costs? how do we get rid of the goverment health care if we find it doesn’t work? what government department has been eliminated when it was found to be useless? right now the poor pay nothing in our country for medicaid, we take care of illegal immigrants already, some young people choose not to have healthcare and you think they should be forced to have it? open up the system i say, let the 1200 insurance companies sell across state lines. once a government forces its citizens to do things it is bound to fail.i’m on medicare, i’m retired, and there is plenty it doesn’t cover. don’t tell me it works. obama says he will pay for it by cutting out fraud and abuse and waste. i say cut fraud, abuse and waste now, then talk to me. as for those that do not have healthcare go out and work, like i did for 40 years, and pay for it. healthcare is not a right, you must earn it. oh i think any goverment should take care of those who can’t take care of themselves, i just don’t think it should take of those who won’t.
“dsimon, where does it stop?”
It stops when evidence shows it’s not working. As I wrote, I’m willing to go with whatever seems to work best.
“what makes you think it will cost less if the goverment gets more involved?”
Evidence from the rest of the developed world. They spend far less than we do, and they cover everybody. We’re the only ones who do it the way we do.
“outside of collecting taxes what does the government do well?”
Building roads, sewers, parks, educating people who could not afford it on their own, providing defense…there are just not markets for these things, or markets don’t work very well for many of them. (By the way “the government” doesn’t collect taxes. Government is the means by which we tax ourselves for the programs and services we say we want, like schools, defense, a justice system. It’s “us,” not “them.”)
“you think that canada’s system works then why do so many wealthy canadians come here for serious operations?”
Because they’re wealthy and can afford it. We have great care for people with lots of money. But that doesn’t mean that we’re providing better care overall to our people. All the statistics I’ve seen show that we don’t.
“i lived in england for 2 years and most of the people are unhappy with their level of care.5 year survival rates there for prostate cancer is 71%, here 95%.”
First of all, we spend nearly twice as much as Britain; couldn’t that account for much of the disparity? Second, one should be wary of picking a single illness for comparison. The US survival rate for kidney transplants is worse that Britain (and Canada, New Zeland, and Australia), and nearly identical to Britain for childhood leukemia, despite our drastically higher spending. If you had colorectal cancer, you’d statistically be better off in Canada (and Australia and New Zeland). So we don’t seem to do better than many of our peer countries. You can check this chart for some comparisons: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/06/17/business/17leonhardt.graf01.ready.html.
“how do we get rid of the goverment health care if we find it doesn’t work?”
Public pressure from people who don’t want their tax money wasted if it’s not working. The Netherlands had a public option, and they got rid of it in 2006 because the private (non-profit) insurers seemed to compete pretty well with it.
“what government department has been eliminated when it was found to be useless?”
We had pretty big welfare reform pretty recently, you might recall.
“right now the poor pay nothing in our country for medicaid, we take care of illegal immigrants already, some young people choose not to have healthcare and you think they should be forced to have it?”
What’s the alternative? Forcing the poor to pay, or letting people die in the street? Should illegal immigrants with H1N1 should be denied care? (They get such treatment because it’s a public health issue.) And yes, I support an individual mandate because it spreads the risk; the young will benefit from the system when they’re older. But these are policy decisions, they’re not necessarily a “less” or “more” government issues. If a mandate helps, great. If not, fine. But such questions should be addressed on their merits, not out of a “government is inherently bad (or good)” philosophy.
“let the 1200 insurance companies sell across state lines.”
The problem is that states regulate insurance. If you allow companies to sell across state lines, who will regulate them? The feds, in whom you seem to have no trust? If you leave it to the states, then the companies will relocate to the one with the least regulation, leading to a race to the bottom.
“healthcare is not a right, you must earn it.”
Why doesn’t that apply to education? Or does it? Why do you draw the line there?
Anyway, my post was aimed more at the “less government is always better” claim. Doesn’t the evidence from other countries pretty much disprove that with regard to health care? If it could be shown that “more” government than what we have would really provide more services and do better at holding down costs, would that justify it? Or is it just no-government for no-government’s sake?
Another example is the student loan bill. If there were an affordable market for loans for low-income students for higher education, one would have been created already. But whatever market there was left a lot of people out who could benefit from going to college. So the federal government, in addition to providing loans directly, subsidized banks to do so.
The problem is that the subsidy is essentially a giveaway to the banks. The government can provide loans more cheaply and to more people by doing it directly. The House has passed a bill to end the subsidies and put the money into the direct loan program. Senator Lamar Alexander decries it as a “takeover” of the student loan industry. But if we want to make college more affordable, why would we pay private enterprise to do it when the government can offer lower rates to more people and still get its money back?
Again, I’ll go for whatever works best. Again, most of the time, markets work pretty well. But if there’s evidence that markets don’t work well and government can do it better, I don’t see why one would take the worse deal just out of ideological concerns.
Whether that’s the case for health care is open to debate. But I think it should be resolved by evidence, not by pro- or anti-government ideology.
so what you’re really saying is you will go with whatever works best as long as the government is involved? i could argue wiyj you about every single counter-point you made, my arguement would be that the government does all those things, but none of them well, including defense. [remember pearl harbor, 9-11]. HUD is bigger then ever, schools in poor areas suck,[no vouchers, remember where obama sent his little snowflakes......private school]you are no free-market guy, you just a guy who loves all things that the government is involved in who says hes a free-market guy and then qualifies it by saying you are for what works best and then has then has the nerve to try to give me a list of what the government does, not what the government does well. by the way, so you know, the government can open up the insurance to all 50 states and regulate it through the interstate commerce laws, which is in our constitution.see, the difference between you and me are you see the federal government and their ‘war on poverty [declared in 1964 by LBJ]as something good, i see it as a program that has kept millions in poverty. let the government take care of those who can not take care of themselves, not those who won’t.you sound reasonable, lets talk in 5 years, when your taxes are as high as those in england and you are getting less for your money. less and less we americans can choose to have the government out of our lives, and we are raising new generations to totally depend on the government. look at new orleans, why would anyone stay in a city that is below sea level when a hurricane is coming? because the government told them they would take of them. a person from my generationi’m 67, would have left, would have known not to stay in harms way. but since most who stayed behind were poor and actually believed the mayor,governor and president they stayed behind. they effed up, they believed the govenment.
jim: so what you’re really saying is you will go with whatever works best as long as the government is involved?”
I don’t think you read what I wrote. If markets work best, fine. And I think that will be the case most of the time. If markets with government regulation work best, that’s fine too. But if government can best provide services itself, why shouldn’t that also be fine?
“by the way, so you know, the government can open up the insurance to all 50 states and regulate it through the interstate commerce laws, which is in our constitution.”
Yes, I never wrote that it couldn’t. I just thought you were skeptical of “more government” and so not amenable to federal regulation. If that’s OK with you, fine.
By the way, satisfaction with Medicare and the VA health service is extremely high–higher than private insurance, I believe–so I don’t know why there is such a sense that government can’t do anything right. Yes, Medicare costs are rising, but not as fast as with private insurance.
“the difference between you and me are you see the federal government and their ‘war on poverty [declared in 1964 by LBJ]as something good, i see it as a program that has kept millions in poverty.”
Why do you assume what I think? In any case, we did have welfare reform. Heck, even most liberals thought it needed reforming, if not in the way it was actually done.
As for New Orleans, let’s just say that the Bush administration, and FEMA under Bush, was not the model of competence. There are plenty of examples of effective emergency responses on the part of the government. As with health care, I think it’s a mistake to cherry-pick the data.
Regarding health care, I come back to the evidence. We’re not operating in an information vacuum. Many other systems have been tried in other countries. We have their data.
So I’ll ask again: if other countries do as well as we do, but we’re spending a lot more than they do, why shouldn’t we do what they do, regardless of whether it’s more government or less government? You bring up taxes, but if we’re spending more right now with taxes and private spending on health care, then we should get a net savings overall (the increased taxes should more than offset private expenditures).
Here’s some info on what the Swiss do, with links to France, Germany, and Canada. For comparative purposes, we spend 15.2% of GDP on health care and average US life expectancy is 78. http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/health-care-abroad-switzerland/?scp=1-b&sq=health+switzerland&st=nyt
Again, if they really do get better results for less, and if their systems involve “more government,” would you still reject their systems just out of opposition to “government”? If so, why knowingly spend more for worse outcomes?
I don’t want government setting the price of televisions. Heck, I don’t want government involvement in most things. But if there’s evidence that the market just doesn’t seem to put the incentives for good health outcomes in the right places, why shouldn’t we recognize
it?
just so you know i am in the VA healhcare system,as well as medicare, the VA sucks, unless like me you have the time to wait, and wait, and wait……….and wait. a 15 minute appointment takes 3-4 hours. don’t make things up or just look at one survey. go to a VA hospital, see for yourself. medicare, well, i just don’t have the time to tell you what it doesn’t cover. medicaid covers much more.
jim:
I’d like an answer to my other questions, when you have the opportunity.
At least the VA system covers everyone in it. For people who don’t have coverage, their “wait time” is infinite (or at least until they have to get more expensive treatment in the ER). I think those people never get into the US statistics because they’re not “waiting” to get a procedure.
As for Medicare coverage, there’s plenty that some private insurance doesn’t cover too. The question isn’t what’s perfect. No system is. The question is what’s better. Many of those on Medicare are better off than they would be without it, and those who want more coverage can buy more privately.
We don’t like markets just because they’re markets. We like markets because of the results they usually get: driving up quality and driving down price. But it doesn’t do that every time; there are exceptions. Higher education is one because competing for the same faculty means higher salaries and expensive labs, and competing for the same students means building better dorms, athletic services, and better food–though probably no better educational outcomes.
There’s no inherent reason why health care isn’t another exception. One hospital gets an expensive new scanning machine, the others have to do so too in order to compete, whether or not that many are needed. For-profit insurance gives companies the incentives to insure only the healthy and deny coverage whenever they think they can get away with it. The incentives just don’t seem to be in the right place for better health outcomes.
Again, if there are two systems with equivalent outcomes but one costs a lot more than the other, why would we pick the more expensive one? If the money-saver is the market, great. But if it’s something else, why not go with it?
you blame bush for new orleans? it was the democratic mayor and governor that let their citizens down first. bush couldn’t do anything until the governor asked for him to help, then he let them down. a 3 way clustersuck.you must be a democrat to not mention that 1st the local then the state screwed the pooch before bush did. medicare covers less then my healthcare plan before i retired, deductables are high and many,many things are not covered. plus,we retired people still have to pay for it by deductions in our social security. if you want you buy a supplemental plan, again expensive.if you tell me again about england costing less i will scream!!!!!!!!everything there is more expensive, including gasoline at $8.00 per gallon and a 10% VAT on most things you buy [value added tax] the average citizen takes home less then half of what he makes and then has to pay and pay and pay even more taxes on things that they buy.the wealthy leave and have their accounts overseas [even the 'beatles' had to do this]. the paradise has only managed to make everyone miserable, especially the poor.[its called the 'law of unitended consequences'].you try to do some good and it makes everything worse. now, a free market or capitalist economy is pretty brutal, but its better then the alternative. we will never agree on this matter. you will find out for yourself when it happens to you, when the government is involved in every facet of your life i want you to remember this conversation.me, i’m old, i’ll check out before it happens totally, but boy am i pissed that the greatest country in the world will be just like mexico in a few more years. nice chatting with you, we come from different times, i was born in 1942, self-reliance was a virture, now the country is full of people who look for the government to help them, even to buy a car. you think cash for clunkers was good, i look at it as my taxes helping others to buy their new car, you see the government didn’t give them $4500, you and i did. we bankrupted our childrens and grandchildrens future, and will continue to do so. until everyone is miserable. see ya.good luck, you will need it.ps, when i was born, there was no state income tax, no state sales tax, now there is, where did the money go? the city i grew up in is 10 times worse today then when i grew up there[newark nj] go there sometime, see your future……. everyone is miserable, no chance to better yourself, living on the ‘dole’ as they say in england. goverment control of everything. why our government want to start adding more taxes on soft drinks and ‘unhealthy’ snacks like twinkies.good luck, you can have it.
jim: “you blame bush for new orleans?”
I blame Bush for FEMA’s response. I do not excuse the responses of the mayor or governor, but I believe that the failures of FEMA are well documented. Furthermore, there are plenty of examples of effective government responses to disasters, so again it’s incorrect to point to New Orleans and say “government can’t do anything right,” regardless of party.
As for Medicare: would you be better off without it? Do you think seniors generally would be? If so, why are they so adamant about preserving it?
As for England: surely you know that gas is expensive because they tax the hell out of it to provide the right incentives to conserve. If we had done that years ago, we wouldn’t be so dependent on foreign oil today, and we’d all be in more fuel efficient cars too.
“when the government is involved in every facet of your life i want you to remember this conversation”
How is the government involved in “ever facet” of my life? I rarely feel the impact of government. I pay my taxes (and I pay quite a lot), but that’s for the services most of us seem to think we want.
“we bankrupted our childrens and grandchildrens future, and will continue to do so.”
I’m perfectly happy to live up to my responsibility to pay more in taxes so the next generation won’t have to. Unfortunately, both parties have burdened the next generation. The Bush tax cuts make up more of the debt over the next 10 years than anything proposed by the present administration. And that’s not including two wars and the Medicare prescription drug benefit. We were ask to pay nothing for these things, nor to give up any programs.
In any case, these issues don’t really go to the “I believe in less government” issue because you still have not answered my essential question. If two systems provided equivalent services, and one cost a lot less than the other, would you go with the one that cost a lot less even if it meant “more government”?
One could claim the question is a non-starter because the situation is impossible, that government can never do anything better than the private sector. But again, what about the evidence regarding how other countries do health care? The provide a mix of private (though non-profit), public, and private-public hybrid systems. We have their data. They all (1) provide at least some substantial coverage for everyone, (2) at substantially less cost than in the US, with (3) comparable health outcomes. Do you dispute that evidence? If the evidence is correct, doesn’t that show that the market, while it works well in most situations, does not necessarily always get us the cost-effective outcomes we want? And if that’s true, wouldn’t some degree of government intervention be justified–especially if it seems to have worked elsewhere?
jim: Two more points (again not related to the “less government for the sake of…less government” issue).
I don’t know your personal situation, but many of those on Medicare would be otherwise completely uninsurable. Medicare may not be perfect, but insurance companies are loath to accept anyone who might have high expenses, and the older you are the higher the risk. So unless people have health care through their company after they retire–and fewer and fewer companies offer it–then most older people are far better off with Medicare than without it, because most of them probably could not afford what insurance companies would offer. Indeed, this is probably why Medicare was created to begin with: there was just no affordable market for health insurance for the elderly.
Now, one could argue for a law to prevent insurance companies from offering higher rates based on age, akin to proposals to prohibit them from doing so with preexisting conditions. But that alone would increase their costs, hence everyone’s premiums, making the system more expensive for everyone. The solution is either subsidies, or getting more healthy people into the system–which is the individual mandate. That’s why a lot of people, including the insurance companies, think such non-discrimination policies have to be linked with an individual mandate. And the younger people benefit from the set-up when they’re older and more likely to need benefits, so for them it can be a long-term economic wash.
As for the gas tax, the issue is a pet peeve of mine. If a tax makes gas 50% more expensive, no one has to pay a penny more to drive around just as they do now if their next car is 50% more efficient. And that’s essentially what most Europeans do. They don’t seem to be suffering for it.
I think American opposition to a heftier gas tax shows we’re not really serious on a whole host of issues. If we were serious about freeing ourselves from imported oil from countries that don’t like us, if we were serious about freeing up our foreign policy, if we were serious about really “supporting the troops” and reducing the need to protect oil supplies and supply routes, if we were serious about reducing pollution and protecting the environment, we wouldn’t be against a higher gas tax; we’d be demanding one to provide everyone with an economic incentive to reduce consumption and make other technologies more competitive.
A gas tax can be tremendously regressive, but the revenues from the tax can be used to offset the cost to those who have no choice but to drive the cars they have for a while, and for subsidies for lower and middle income earners for purchase of more efficient vehicles.
But as long as we insist on having cheap gas, I’m going to find it hard to believe that we’re serious about the other issues I listed. Seriousness means being willing to do something about it, not just talk about it.
go to newark, see your future
jim: “go to newark, see your future”
Jim, there are plenty of high-tax, high-service communities that do just fine. There are many states that rank high in education, per capita income, etc. that don’t have low tax rates. If you support low taxes and low services, I could just as easily say “Go to Mississippi, see your future.”
And the Newark quip is your “answer”? Why no substantial response to my questions?
I’ll try one last time, otherwise I’ll just assume that ideology matters more than facts.
Do you object to using the system that best gets the results we want, regardless of whether it involves “more” or “less” government? (If it’s “the market” every time, then we’d use “the market” every time.) If so, why?
Do you reject the evidence that other countries are more effective at delivering health care than we are? If you reject it, why?
And by the way, if you really think “more government” is always wrong, shouldn’t we abolish Medicare? If so, where will the elderly find affordable insurance? If we shouldn’t abolish Medicare, why not if government can’t do anything right?
As a Democrat and a Mainer, I have no intention of pushing Sen. Snowe to change parties. I like her, and vote for her, regardless of the party she represents because she’s a whole lot better at representing Maine than she is representing Republicans.
I think we need to hold these mf senators that purport to be democrats accountable. Who would ever have imagined with a 60 vote majority, they would be voting and siding with the republicans to kill this public option.Bring it to the floor and use your majority, this is not your decision to make and play God with. This deserves a full vote, why is this process playing out as if the republicans are controlling this committee? Something right out of the bizzaro world. I can’t believe this bs.You need to loose your next election for lack of loyalty to your party and what 65% of the American people want!!!
God help us we have no representation once again.
It appears that you have placed a lot of effort into your article and I require more of these on the net these days. I sincerely got a kick out of your post. I don’t really have much to say in response, I only wanted to comment to reply wonderful work.
Interesting reading. Wasn’t sure the government had some money left to dole out.
Did you hear about the latest in cheats? There’s some stupid book going around that’s that promises free cheats “working” or something. I’m not sure it even works, but… you can find it here: http://ultimatemafiawarscheats.blogspot.com Tell me if it does work though.
Forget slaving away completing jobs on mafia wars for cash. With my mafia wars money cheats, all that becomes childs play. Literally, in 5 minutes, you can have as much cash as you want.