Originally Posted By Sport Goofy Will the opt out strategy for the public option be the trick that gets this legislation passed? I wasn't surprised to see the Senate finally come to grips that a public health insurance program would be necessary for any serious health care legislation. It's the one tool in health care reform that truly drives costs down for all consumers and ultimately saves the government money. No one should be fooled an instant about government intentions for health care reform -- it's not about insuring the uninsured or other altruistic goals, this is purely about saving the government money and preventing the insolvency of Medicare in the next decade. Any legislation that does not promote sinlge payer or have some element of public health insurance doesn't save enough money in the long run to be worth all the effort. There's a question of whether the Senate has the 60 votes needed to get cloture on the issue. Personally, I don't think the GOP can survive a legitimate filibuster attempt on a bill of this magnitude. With the 24-hour news cycle, images of GOP senators reading from phone books and dictionaries just to stall health care reform doesn't seem like something that will play well on national TV. While filibusters have been used in recent years, none of them were on legislation of any great importance that would grab the attention of national news networks. A health care filibuster would get 24-hour coverage and nightly play in all the media. I don't see the party obstructing health care reform winning many points for the upcoming election cycle when a majority of voters is in favor of health care reform. It's all speculation, but at least bills are finally starting to get to the point where we can have a vote!
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> I don't see the party obstructing health care reform winning many points for the upcoming election cycle when a majority of voters is in favor of health care reform. << On the senate side at least, there's only two or maybe three republicans that are even in consideration. The GOP cast it's lot in opposing health care reform a long time ago. They have made a political calculation to put their own political interests ahead of the interests of the nation. It was a stupid decision, both politically and morally. They're on the wrong side of history - again. >> this is purely about saving the government money and preventing the insolvency of Medicare in the next decade. << I disagree. It's a "check and balance" against monopolistic practices of private insurance companies. If they follow through with their veiled threats of raising premiums over 100%, they'll be twice the price of the public option. Or - more likely - they'll have to forego their usual 30% profit margins. And republicans will scream about how unfair it all is. Again. >> Personally, I don't think the GOP can survive a legitimate filibuster attempt on a bill of this magnitude. << I do agree with this. I'd love nothing more than to see them try. Let them sit in front of the cameras and try to defend the indefensible.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << On the senate side at least, there's only two or maybe three republicans that are even in consideration. >> I think that any obstructionist behavior by one party in Congress could easily be used to favor the other party's candidates in all elections, not just ones for the Senate. This would be painting a broad brush, but I don't think it's too far fetched considering how most Americans probably can't tell the difference between the House and Senate anyway.
Originally Posted By ecdc Well I can kiss the public option in my state goodbye. Utahns won't tolerate this kind of socialist infringement on their right to get sick without insurance. With any luck, by the time the public option takes effect, I'll be long gone to another state.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Utah is one of the states with the least amount of competition. Here's an interesting link for you Utahns ... <a href="http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/statehealthreform/utah.html" target="_blank">http://www.healthreform.gov/re...tah.html</a> Some "fast facts" The number of uninsured in Utah has increased from 321,000 in 2001 to 364,000 in 2008. And this number only considers people who are uninsured for an entire year – it does not include people in Utah who have more recently lost coverage through the recession, or who had shorter gaps in their coverage. Approximately one in six workers in Utah lacked health insurance in 2008. The percentage of high-income people without insurance increased from 7.2% in 2001 to 9.7% in 2008. << I'm guessing the people in Utah opposed to a public option are not the one in six who currently have nothing. Although with Utah, it's hard to tell - they have a long history of voting as they're told.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***There's a question of whether the Senate has the 60 votes needed to get cloture on the issue.*** According to HuffPo, Liebermann will be joining the GOP in a filibuster. ***Personally, I don't think the GOP can survive a legitimate filibuster attempt on a bill of this magnitude. With the 24-hour news cycle, images of GOP senators reading from phone books and dictionaries just to stall health care reform doesn't seem like something that will play well on national TV.*** I think you've watched too much West Wing. I don't think that's how it works anymore. Still, you're right that it will get a TON of attention (not sure which side it will reflect worse on though, the Cons for doing it or the Liberals for being spineless/powerless enough to let it happen even though the entire GOP group doesn't have enough votes to do it by themselves).
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I think you've watched too much West Wing. I don't think that's how it works anymore. >> I've never seen the West Wing, so not sure how it works there. However, you are somewhat right. In recent years, the Senate has allowed the opposition to "filibuster" without actually taking to the Senate floor to speak. It is sort of a virtual filibuster. This has been a recent phenomenon and the Senate president has the power to force the opposition to maintain their 24-hour presence in the chamber if they choose to go that route. Personally, I'd like to see the GOP reading from phone books over the Thanksgiving holiday while I'm eating my turkey. I bet they'll be real happy about the prospects of doing that. I also still think that the bad PR from such a move will sink the GOP further into irrelevance for upcoming elections. No major filibuster has ever been successful on legislation of a significant impact to society. The most famous filibuster was the one put on against the Civil Rights Act back in the 60s. It went on for weeks and made Strom Thurmond famous for his 24 hour plus speaking role -- but ultimately it failed and the act passed.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Personally, I'd like to see the GOP reading from phone books over the Thanksgiving holiday while I'm eating my turkey.*** That'd be a hoot.
Originally Posted By Princessjenn5795 Plus the 60-something percent of the country that wants a public would get an up close look at exactly who is trying to stop them from getting it. I bet the footage would help some of the challengers in upcoming elections earn some points.
