• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Democrats Fracturing Over Obamacare ?

maxparrish

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
2,262
Location
SF Bay Area
Basic Beliefs
Libertarian-Conservative, Agnostic.
The first crack started with Chuck Schumer, and the angry backlash against him by former Obama speechwriters. Then Warren throws her support to Schumer. Now Harkin, a co-author, adds to the mea culpa's of having screwed up:


Sen. Tom Harkin, one of the co-authors of the Affordable Care Act, now thinks Democrats may have been better off not passing it at all and holding out for a better bill.

The Iowa Democrat who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, laments the complexity of legislation the Senate passed five years ago.

He wonders in hindsight whether the law was made overly complicated to satisfy the political concerns of a few Democratic centrists who have since left Congress.
“We had the power to do it in a way that would have simplified healthcare, made it more efficient and made it less costly and we didn’t do it,” Harkin told The Hill. “So I look back and say we should have either done it the correct way or not done anything at all.

“What we did is we muddled through and we got a system that is complex, convoluted, needs probably some corrections and still rewards the insurance companies extensively,” he added...

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/225812-harkin-dems-better-off-without-obamacare


After more than a decade of party unity and 'tough love' party discipline by the likes of Rahm "Dead Fish" Emmanuel, it looks like the Republican landslide has got a few rethinking their iconic stances.
 
I think it will be easier for them to unite. Considering how many fewer of them there are.
 
I think it will be easier for them to unite. Considering how many fewer of them there are.

True. The 29 Democratic Senators that voted for this turkey four years ago are gone, and soon number 30 will soon join them.

But then again, wasn't Obamacare supposed to be popular given a few years of experience?
 
maybe the traitorous democrats will abandon obamacare for state run single payer system
 
I think it will be easier for them to unite. Considering how many fewer of them there are.

True. The 29 Democratic Senators that voted for this turkey four years ago are gone, and soon number 30 will soon join them.

But then again, wasn't Obamacare supposed to be popular given a few years of experience?

Just because we could have, and should have, gotten a better health care law, that does not mean that the current law is not growing in popularity. I have employer provided health insurance, and this year, for the first time ever, my premiums went down, and my coverage improved. This is thanks to the current law we have. The ACA health scare stories that were all the rage with conservatives a year or so ago have, for the most part, proven to be bogus, and we are not hearing that kind of bullshit any more. Yes, I would say the ACA is gaining in popularity, despite the fact that it would have been even more popular if done right.
 
Feel free to tell my friends who could not afford health care that they desperately needed but their employers wouldn't provide how you want to take their health care away from them.
 
But they couldn't get a better bill passed. Lieberman and Nelson wouldn't allow for it... and the forty Republicans were in steadfast opposition to whatever the Democrats proposed.
 
Feel free to tell my friends who could not afford health care that they desperately needed but their employers wouldn't provide how you want to take their health care away from them.
Feel free to tell it to people working people of modest incomes who did provide for their own health care and now have to pay rates 22 percent (or more) higher just to benefit your friends (and not their own).
 
True. The 29 Democratic Senators that voted for this turkey four years ago are gone, and soon number 30 will soon join them.

But then again, wasn't Obamacare supposed to be popular given a few years of experience?

Just because we could have, and should have, gotten a better health care law, that does not mean that the current law is not growing in popularity. I have employer provided health insurance, and this year, for the first time ever, my premiums went down, and my coverage improved. This is thanks to the current law we have. The ACA health scare stories that were all the rage with conservatives a year or so ago have, for the most part, proven to be bogus, and we are not hearing that kind of bullshit any more. Yes, I would say the ACA is gaining in popularity, despite the fact that it would have been even more popular if done right.

I have employer provided insurance as well, and my premiums went up "all because of ACA". This is thanks to the current law we have. Therefore all the pollyannish stories that were the rage with liberals a year ago have been proven to be bogus...yada yada.

See... glib and faulty reasoning works both ways.
 
Feel free to tell my friends who could not afford health care that they desperately needed but their employers wouldn't provide how you want to take their health care away from them.
Feel free to tell it to people working people of modest incomes who did provide for their own health care and now have to pay rates 22 percent (or more) higher just to benefit your friends (and not their own).

aria131111_cmyk.5dju7rz7k3k64gkckksc4wk4g.6uwurhykn3a1q8w88k040cs08.th.jpeg
 
Just because we could have, and should have, gotten a better health care law, that does not mean that the current law is not growing in popularity. I have employer provided health insurance, and this year, for the first time ever, my premiums went down, and my coverage improved. This is thanks to the current law we have. The ACA health scare stories that were all the rage with conservatives a year or so ago have, for the most part, proven to be bogus, and we are not hearing that kind of bullshit any more. Yes, I would say the ACA is gaining in popularity, despite the fact that it would have been even more popular if done right.

I have employer provided insurance as well, and my premiums went up "all because of ACA". This is thanks to the current law we have. Therefore all the pollyannish stories that were the rage with liberals a year ago have been proven to be bogus...yada yada.

See... glib and faulty reasoning works both ways.

Yeah, except mine is real, and yours is made up bullshit.
 
Feel free to tell my friends who could not afford health care that they desperately needed but their employers wouldn't provide how you want to take their health care away from them.
Feel free to tell it to people working people of modest incomes who did provide for their own health care and now have to pay rates 22 percent (or more) higher just to benefit your friends (and not their own).

Thank you. I will pass it along. And could you link to these numbers before I send your message to him?
And how much do you think he makes a year?
 
Feel free to tell it to people working people of modest incomes who did provide for their own health care and now have to pay rates 22 percent (or more) higher just to benefit your friends (and not their own).

Thank you. I will pass it along. And could you link to these numbers before I send your message to him?
And how much do you think he makes a year?
You may have missed it, this is the first year health care premiums have ever risen. OBAMA!!!!
 
Thank you. I will pass it along. And could you link to these numbers before I send your message to him?
And how much do you think he makes a year?
You may have missed it, this is the first year health care premiums have ever risen. OBAMA!!!!
Mine dropped by $100 per month mostly because my employer can't pocket the overages anymore.
 
A couple million lost their bogus coverage, and the vast majority of Americans got to keep their insurance.
Ah. There's that Gruber arrogance which cost the Dems the midterms. The tyranny of the do-gooders.
I suppose that is one way of arguing the exception disproves the rule. The vast majority of Americans kept their original insurance. Sorry if that fact somehow diminishes trying to exaggerate the impact of some people losing their rather anemic insurance coverage.
 
Feel free to tell my friends who could not afford health care that they desperately needed but their employers wouldn't provide how you want to take their health care away from them.
Feel free to tell it to people working people of modest incomes who did provide for their own health care and now have to pay rates 22 percent (or more) higher just to benefit your friends (and not their own).
You forgot "See... glib and faulty reasoning works both ways. "
 
Ah. There's that Gruber arrogance which cost the Dems the midterms. The tyranny of the do-gooders.
I suppose that is one way of arguing the exception disproves the rule. The vast majority of Americans kept their original insurance. Sorry if that fact somehow diminishes trying to exaggerate the impact of some people losing their rather anemic insurance coverage.

I was hoping this thread would focus on the political fracturing over Obamacare than seems to be growing, rather than another debate on the morality or efficacy of the legislation. To that end, I will start another thread on Obamacare's "value" and "efficacy", and attempt to expand this discussion into the cause of the fracturing.

Krauthammer had an interesting article yesterday, that diagnoses the broader issue of the Democratic fracturing and discord over MORE than just Obamacare.

The fireworks began even before Election Day with preemptive back-stabbing of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, by fellow Democrats. This was followed after the electoral debacle by bitter sniping between Obama and Harry Reid when Reid’s chief of staff immediately — and on the record — blamed the results on Obama. In turn, Obama got his revenge last week by sabotaging a $450 billion “tax extender” deal that Reid had painstakingly negotiated.

But the Democrats’ civil war goes far beyond the petty and the personal. It’s about fundamental strategy and ideology. The opening salvo was Sen. Chuck Schumer’s National Press Club speech, an anti-Obama manifesto delivered three weeks after Election Day openly denouncing Obamaism, its policies and priorities. In essence: Elected with a mandate to restore the economy and address the anxieties of a stagnating and squeezed middle class, Obama instead attacked, restructured, reorganized and destabilized a health-care system that was serving the middle class relatively well.

Eighty-five percent of Americans already had health insurance, argued Schumer. Yet millions have suffered dislocations for the sake of a minority constituency — the uninsured — barely 13 percent of whom vote.

This has alienated the Democrats’ traditional middle-class constituency. Indeed, in a 2013 poll cited by the New York Times’ Thomas Edsall, by a margin of 25 percent, people said Obamacare makes things better for the poor. But when the question was, does it make things better “for people like you,” Obamacare came out 16 points underwater. Moreover, for whites, whose support for Democrats hemorrhaged in 2014, 63 percent thought Obamacare made things worse for the middle class.

That’s how you lose elections, Schumer argued . And forfeit large chunks of the traditional Democratic coalition. Health care was not a crisis in 2009 (nor in 1993 when Hillarycare led to another Democratic electoral disaster); it was an ideological imperative for Barack Obama and the liberal elites in charge of Congress — their legacy contribution to the welfare state.

As are Obama’s current cherished causes — climate change and amnesty for illegal immigrants. These are hardly the top priorities of a working and middle class whose median income declined as much during the Obama recovery as during the Great Recession.

The underlying Schumer challenge is that catering to coastal elites and select minorities is how you end up losing 64 percent of the white working class — which, though shrinking, is almost 50 percent larger in size than the black and Hispanic electorates combined....

From opposite sides of the (Democratic) spectrum, Schumer and Warren are trying to remake and reorient the Democratic Party post-Obama. So while Republicans are debating the tactics of stopping presidential lawlessness — an inherently difficult congressional undertaking, particularly if you still control only a single house — Democrats are trying to figure out what they believe and whom they represent.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...0743f2-7c00-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html

There are two takeaways:

First, voters have a pretty realistic view of Obamacare. It helps poor, punishes the middleclass "like them".

Second, the middle class is no longer confident that the Democratic party represents their interests, especially the white working and middle classes. While Obama and Congressional Democrats have given a lot of lip service to helping the middle class, the focus of their efforts have been on low incomes - those in the bottom 20 or 30 percent. When it is not on low incomes, it is focused on helping millions of illegal immigrants and, and elite 'boutique' causes such as climate change and pipelines.

Interestingly, it was exactly this kind of backlash that got Reagan elected.
 
Back
Top Bottom