Health care victory

[david petley]

Obama's approval rating was 47%-50% — the first time his disapproval rating has hit 50%.

An approval rating of 50% does not mean a disapproval rating of 50%.
It could just as easily mean that 50% of people polled approved, 5% disapproved, and 45% don't give a toss one way or t'other.

it will make their costs higher

Doing nothing will also see costs higher ...that is the nature of the beast. Costs generally get higher, unless technology is involved, where improving technologies might see reductions in costs, but not prices.

Americans are more inclined to blame Democratic political tactics

Using statistics, how does 49% equate to more inclined? doesn't that mean 51% are less inclined?

david

[FlashLackey]

An approval rating of 50% does not mean a disapproval rating of 50%.
It could just as easily mean that 50% of people polled approved, 5% disapproved, and 45% don't give a toss one way or t'other.

"the first time his disapproval rating has hit 50%" was a direct quote from their article. Are you saying that they are misrepresenting their own poll?

Doing nothing will also see costs higher ...that is the nature of the beast. Costs generally get higher, unless technology is involved, where improving technologies might see reductions in costs, but not prices.

There are many market factors that change prices besides innovation. For instance, in this case, lack of competition, excessive malpractice awards and government subsidies.

Given that the cost of health care in the US has increased at a far greater rate than inflation over the last several years, there is room for costs to go down without losing quality. The best way to accomplish that would be to simply re-establish the same types of market forces that spur innovation and keep prices at market levels for nearly every other industry.

Using statistics, how does 49% equate to more inclined? doesn't that mean 51% are less inclined?

The poll asked what people thought was "a major reason" for the vandalism and threats. More people (49%) marked "Democratic political tactics" than either "criticism by conservative commentators" (46%) or "criticism of Republican leaders" (43%). Thus, people polled were more inclined to blame Democratic political tactics than the rhetoric of their critics.

[gerbick]

It never amuses me how people that don't get their way would rather wish failure instead of trying to shape a positive way forward.

Your kind adds absolutely nothing.

[FlashLackey]

It never amuses me how people that don't get their way would rather wish failure instead of trying to shape a positive way forward.

Your kind adds absolutely nothing.

On the contrary, my "kind" would gladly shape a positive way forward, if given the opportunity to do so.

[jAQUAN]

What exactly would this opportunity look like?

[FlashLackey]

What exactly would this opportunity look like?

Drafting legislation that will be considered, either via majority or genuine bi-partisan work.

[Frets]

The healthcare reform act was a bipartisan effort in the drafting process. 136 amendments to it were drafted by republicans.

And yet with all the kowtow'ing they still didn't vote for it in significant numbers.
Michael Steele was right. The Dems should have gone it alone. Of course then they and they alone would be responsible for the bill. There are plenty of corporate sponsered congressional leaders on both sides of the isle.

[FlashLackey]

Didn't vote for it in significant numbers? All 178 Republicans, along with 34 Democrats voted against it in the House. All Republicans voted against it in the senate.

It wasn't a bi-partisan bill.

[gerbick]

Maybe Stalin had it right after all.

[Loyal Rogue]

It wasn't a bi-partisan bill.

The bill itself was bi-partisan.
The vote on it wasn't.

I believe it was actually 160 Republican amendments that were accepted into the bill... and not only did no Republicans end up voting for it afterwards, but at one point the Republicans actually tried to block their OWN amendments from being accepted by the Dems just to cause more obstruction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz5AmhI9g7o

This has been nothing but a bunch of games and sour grapes from the right side of the aisle.
It's sad that Republicans would choose to do everything in their power to make Obama and the Dems fail no matter what it does to America just so they can regain their power in Washington.

The Dems are far too willing to work with the Repubs, (R.I.P. Public Option) but the right has no interest in compromise.
It's either everyone plays by all of their rules alone or they're going to pop the ball so that nobody can play.

[FlashLackey]

The bill itself was bi-partisan.
The vote on it wasn't.

The idea that the bill could have bi-partisan support with votes from only one side is absurd.

The vote on the final legislation, after going through the meat grinder, is the bottom line indication of who is and who is not willing to represent the complete bill for their constituents.

I believe it was actually 160 Republican amendments that were accepted into the bill... and not only did no Republicans end up voting for it afterwards, but at one point the Republicans actually tried to block their OWN amendments from being accepted by the Dems just to cause more obstruction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz5AmhI9g7o

Just because an amendment by one or a group of legislators makes it to vote doesn't mean that they will support the final bill in whatever form the rest of it takes. It also doesn't mean that all Republicans agree with the amendments which was indicated in the video you posted. The amendments were not ready for vote because there was disagreement amongst Republicans about the amendments.

It's sad that Republicans would choose to do everything in their power to make Obama and the Dems fail no matter what it does to America just so they can regain their power in Washington.

When Democrats obstructed and protested everything Bush did, they defended their acts as being patriotic and their duty in representing their constituents. But, when the tables are turned, how quickly that sentiment is forgotten.

There's nothing sad about members of government recognizing the damage that the majority party is doing, against the popular will of the people and advocating a different approach. It's how our government is supposed to work.

The Dems are far too willing to work with the Repubs, (R.I.P. Public Option) but the right has no interest in compromise.
It's either everyone plays by all of their rules alone or they're going to pop the ball so that nobody can play.

In what way have the Democrats worked with Republicans at all?

[gerbick]

In what way have the Republicans worked with the Democrats? No blog links.

[FlashLackey]

I never claimed that they have. I accept that the parties generally disagree on many issues and that it's valid for both to pursue what they believe in. The spirit of Democracy. The Constitution. All of that out-of-fashion stuff.

[gerbick]

So who amongst you is protesting the census too?

[david petley]

I think the idea of opposition has somehow weirdly turned into obstruction in the minds of the losers in elections in democratic countries.

Bog legislation down in committees, sub-committes, inquiries ...with amendments until it no longer even vaguely looks like the original, and then cry out that those in power failed in their plans so they obviously don't deserve to be in power.

overall, politics of fear rule.

[gerbick]

Exactly. Now, if you oppose something, compromise is thrown out the window, filibuster and wishing bad intent on the other people is the "new thing". Don't like what's being said, stand in the way, stomp your feet, throw a tantrum.

Sad part... those type of people seem to think that's doing their job. Worse part, a 3 year old is very capable of doing all of that too.

It's disgusting to me.

[FlashLackey]

Got a letter this weekend explaining that my health care premiums are nearly doubling, our deductibles are doubling and our co-pay is going up.

Wow. Great job Obamacare supporters. Change we all hope for!

[david petley]

Sounds fishy to me. It will be interesting to hear if other FK members have the same experience. Could your health care provider be taking the opportunity to practice a bit of gouging?

You know ...'give them what they expect, they won't know the difference'. The sort of stuff that banks and insurance companies do with regularity. Who knows what their costs increases really are yet?

[Loyal Rogue]

Same thing happened to me a couple of months ago.
Neither my case nor FL's has anything to do with what's in the healthcare bill.
Nothing in the bill is affecting the insurance companies yet and all of the major provisions don't go into affect for years.

This just highlights why we needed healthcare reform in the first place.
Healthcare costs have been increasing 10% every year, and if FL thought he could keep avoiding that by putting his head in the sand then I guess it's his wake-up call.
The insurance companies are just as bad as the credit card companies.
See an opportunity to gouge, damn the torpedoes, and go for it.
Remember the credit bill?
Doesn't affect the credit card industry's profits one bit but since they saw the opportunity they decided to double everyone's rates and drop credit limits even on customers that have never been late, always pay more than the minimum, and have a credit score in the high 700's. (firsthand experience)

Just like looters in a riot, or Haliburton in Iraq, confusion is nothing but a cover for and an opportunity to steal as much as possible.

[silverx2]

Got a letter this weekend explaining that my health care premiums are nearly doubling, our deductibles are doubling and our co-pay is going up.

Wow. Great job Obamacare supporters. Change we all hope for!

I have not seen any raises in my healthcare costs as of yet beyond the normal inflation of a few dollars a week