USA Politics

That is a good site ... it's way too early to tell what the environment will be in November 2012.  For the non-Presidential races, the best bet is to handicap who is running then factor in the turnout later and decide what that turnout means

HI is a good example, even though Obama will carry the state big time, Lingle is very well liked and obviously had democratic support to be elected there twice.  There could be a case of people splitting the ticket for 2 popular people or voting for the favorite son, but also making a protest vote against the party primarily in power.  I think the "who controls Washington" story line will take off as the election gets quicker. 

Will the narrative be the GOP is making changes that Obama and the Senate are blocking or will it be the Dem Sentate and Obama being a brake on the GOP.  Obviously the partisans will view that as they normally do, but which way the middle goes will be a major factor.
 
It's really shaping up to be an interesting year. I think Obama will have to move a little more centre than before, and that will, of course, help his re-election prospects. If he tackles spending and taxes in the State of the Union and basically says, we have to control spending as well as reform the tax code, then he could indeed become a very, very popular president.

In regards to the Tuscon shooting, it appears that Judge Roll was not a target (as some had suspected) but instead gave his life to shield someone else:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/us/19giffords.html
 
watching Obama's state of the union address broadcasting live on Youtube. Very laggy. Seems like he is focusing on jobs and education right now.
 
Obama should have focused on jobs and the economy since day one instead of jamming an unpopular healthcare reform that mandates free citizens to purchase a product or face government fines. Instead he waits two years. Hope and change my ass. And what happened to the transparency he promised? Obama and Bush are two sides of the same coin.
 
Nigel Tufnel said:
Obama should have focused on jobs and the economy since day one instead of jamming an unpopular healthcare reform that mandates free citizens to purchase a product or face government fines. Instead he waits two years. Hope and change my ass. And what happened to the transparency he promised? Obama and Bush are two sides of the same coin.
Click to expand...

There is PLENTY of transparency. There are websites DEDICATED to "What has Obama done" and similar titles. Just because he doesn't spout it from the roof tops doesn't mean the information is not readily available. '

That being said... Healthcare, latest polls show 40% of people didn't like it. Last time I check that is the MINORITY of folks, sure it's large, almost have, but 60% still carries more weight and math was never my strong suit.

THAT being said.... I agree with you. He should have given primary focus to jobs above all. He did a little bit, but it should have been a priority. But oh well... 
 
I think the Health Care bill was horrible and I wish it could be repealed ... but what was as bad if not worse for Obama and the Dems was how it was put together, they went in on hope and change and came out with bribes to Nebraska ... despite some of the largest majorities in Congress in a generation and a wave election, they came out looking corrupt and inept to the middle, which ticking off the left and right at the same time ... and spent so much time on it when it was never THE priority of the people.
 
Yeah, parading it around as being inclusive of Republicans for swallowing a prior bill didn't work out either. Meh.
 
Not including a public option was a mistake. Plus shoving it through and giving all the concessions to the unions is what burns my ass the most. Those of who have got and those who don't got the shaft. We definitely need healthecare reform and this bill is absolutely terrible. Worse possible thing they could have done was to push a bill like this through which really does'nt help anybody and is driving up premiums.
 
Here's the thing with the health care reform:

This is the bill that should have gone through in 1994. Obama was right - it isn't perfect, and it can be fixed. HCR needed doing, because the costs of healthcare in the US were HUGE compared to what they are in other countries. It hurts your competitiveness.
 
Yep, between that and the fact that every bill is inflated by over 25% to cover the cost of patients that doctors know won't pay... health care is insane.
 
Premiums on malpractice insurance is forcing alot of OBGYN and Orthopedic physicians to either relocate where to areas in the country where premiums are lower or other areas of medicine where the premiums are lower. Settlements and arbitration in cases that where a doctor did nothing wrong or someone's condition in of itself may not have the best possible outcome are dictated by the doctor's insurance provider. In other words, the insurance would rather pay a smaller settlement amount than risk getting socked for a huge award by a jury trial.

Wasted CLV said:
Yep, between that and the fact that every bill is inflated by over 25% to cover the cost of patients that doctors know won't pay... health care is insane.
Click to expand...
Yes, almost every bill is inflated to cover patients who don't have private insurance. There is also a crisis nationwide of patients using emergency rooms as walk in clinics for non emergency medical condtions because they don't have any other access to treatment. That also adds to the hosptals not getting paid for theses visits because if those patients don't have access to private physicians because they don't have insurance to begin with. Even if you have the financial means, most physicians wont accept you as a patient.
 
And that's why the health care bill will help - because the more people who have insurance, the lower everyone's costs go. It's not perfect, but hey, it's a start.

I'd love to see tort reform get pushed into HCR by the Republicans, to see them try to help the bill instead of just try to kill it. Tort reform probably would pass, especially since Obama would put his political might on it. And it would make a huge change to how your healthcare works, a positive change.
 
Nigel Tufnel said:
Yes, almost every bill is inflated to cover patients who don't have private insurance. There is also a crisis nationwide of patients using emergency rooms as walk in clinics for non emergency medical condtions because they don't have any other access to treatment. That also adds to the hosptals not getting paid for theses visits because if those patients don't have access to private physicians because they don't have insurance to begin with. Even if you have the financial means, most physicians wont accept you as a patient.
Click to expand...

Case in point, my mom. Good lord if only she listened to me. She's a major hypochondriac that turns the sniffles into pneumonia. On the off chance where I almost convince her not to go to the ER, she calls her PCP and the jackwagon has the balls to tell her he's too busy and to just go to the ER. Now, that's the doctor covering his ass, because if something DOES happen to my mom and I sue him, he just responds with, "Well, I TOLD her to go the the ER, she didn't listen to MY professional advice, not my problem."

So we go to the ER and what do we see? Is it full of gunshot victims? does somebody have a severed arm? No, a bunch of old people (including my mom) with aching bones, headaches and yes... the sniffles. What does the ER do to all these people? Pump them full of Ativan and send them home with the sage advice of going to their PCPs as soon as possible and a $2,000 dollar bill (or more). I HATE health care in the U.S.
 
I think reform as it passed, really misses a lot of key points.
1) It should encourage more people to get insurance versus mandate (which should be found unconstitutional), things like MSA plans for younger people make all the sense in the world, but this does nothing for that
2) Allowing Co-ops formed along the same lines as Credit unions would be a huge help to small businesses and self-employed
3) Tort reform, beyond the cost of malpractice insurance, the amount of needless tests done to avoid lawsuits drives up the cost of everything
4) Allow importation of drugs (I can see banning them from the 3rd world, but we should be able to import from Canada
5) As a country we are way over-medicated for things that can be handled by eating a bit better and taking more walks.  The recent announcement by Wal-Mart that they will be cutting sugar and salt in their products will probably do more to improve the overall health in the US than every government agency will every do, through tax credits, etc, we should encourage more of this.


... ran spell check, now the Earth can rotate around the sun again ....
 
You're pretty much exactly right in all of that, except for the first point (I think it'll be an interesting set of court battles, but I think the Commerce clause covers it). But most of that is stuff that can be added, and I would hope the GOP tries to add some of that stuff.

I also agree with importing drugs, and like already mentioned, tort reform is the biggest and best way to help. I haven't read much on the co-ops idea, but I am intrigued by it. Still, I think that regulating what insurance companies must do (Ie, making sure they do not refuse pre-existing conditions, etc) will help - but only if the overall pool of people with coverage increases.

Also, with 50 million Americans not having early health care, a lot of them don't get the doctor appointments that really tells them to get out and get healthy. Both my father and I have had moments where we saw our doctor and he told us to get out and do more stuff, change eating habits, etc, because we were on the wrong track. One in six Americans don't have that ability, and that is where a huge amount of later health care costs come in...

The current bill does move towards a lot of that, but I think it gets improved over the next generation by successive governments. But that's a good thing, I think.
 
bearfan said:
4) Allow importation of drugs (I can see banning them from I'M TOO FUCKING LAZY TO SPELLCHECK 3rd world, but we should
Click to expand...

I can't see the banning. I used to live in a "3rd world" country and our drugs were fine. They were CHEAP and they worked... don't see the problem.
 
I think the concern would be fakes/imports sold primarily over the internet to the US would be more rampant from some countries than others.

LooseCannon said:
You're pretty much exactly right in all of that, except for the first point (I think it'll be an interesting set of court battles, but I think the Commerce clause covers it). But most of that is stuff that can be added, and I would hope the GOP tries to add some of that stuff.
Click to expand...

I think forcing people into buying a policy does no long term good at all, telling a healthy 18-30 year old that he/she needs to spend hundreds a month on insurance makes no sense at all, they should be able to buy some minimal catastrophic coverage and put a portion of that money tax-free in an MSA for their later years ... that will ultimately reduce the cost of care when people need to purchase the care themselves.  Throwing more people into a bad system (same with Social Security) delays rather than fixes the problem
 
I can agree with that, but I still think that insurance now is going to be better than the previous system. And it's not a big jump to move to a more minimal system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top