The victory of Republican Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election on Tuesday is a game changer for the future of healthcare reform. The carefully crafted compromise among House and Senate Democrats is effectively moot; Brown’s presence in the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat destroys the fragile 60-seat super-majority they needed to avoid a filibuster. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, along with other prominent Democratic politicians, have dismissed the idea of attempting to either delay Brown’s swearing-in or rush a bill through before he is seated. Reform of the health insurance industry has been one of the party’s main priorities, but its prospects are in doubt. What will the Democrats do now?

One option available to the Democratic party is for the House of Representatives to accept the last health insurance bill passed in the Senate, without modifications. That way, interim Democratic Senator James T. Kirk’s vote in favor of the proposal would legally stand. The bill would then be sent to President Obama’s desk for his signature. However, it appears unlikely that the party will go that route. For one thing, Democrats across the political spectrum are unhappy with the current Senate bill and were hoping to change it in committee. Liberal members of the House, who managed to include a government-run public option for health insurance in their version of reform legislation, were seeking further regulation of health insurance companies and more protections for consumers. Some conservative Democrats, on the other hand, wanted stricter limitations on using federal subsidy money to buy health insurance plans that include abortion coverage.

Such political wrangling may also lead to yet another blow to Democratic prospects in the fall mid-term elections, and certain Democrats are realizing that the appearance of ignoring the public’s wishes on this issue is detrimental. Even if House Democrats were willing to forgo their wishes for healthcare reform in order to avoid facing an even more unfavorable bill–or worse yet, the possibility or reform slipping away altogether–party leaders are steering them against it. Senator Barney Frank, a staunch supporter of healthcare reform, is only one of several Democrats who has suggested that it would be best to pause debate on the health insurance issue until Scott Brown is seated. Moderates in the Senate, such as Jim Webb, agree. Even President Obama is showing signs of preferring that the effects of the electoral process take their course, indicating that he may not sign a bill that passes through such means.

For his part, Brown has proposed scrapping the existing healthcare reform bill altogether and starting fresh. Whether that statement was made in good faith, or if he will bend to the population of “tea party” supporters against any type of healthcare reform, is unknown. Democrats may not want to believe his pledge, but it is obvious that their political strategy needs to change. They will have to reach across the aisle and convince a handful of Republicans to join their side. The current bill may be too damaged in the public eye for that to happen, however.

Any new bill must be scaled back, limited to the most noncontroversial elements. Provisions that could avoid further accusations of overreaching include a ban on individual health insurance providers denying medical coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, along with the closing of the infamous prescription drug “donut hole” associated with Medicare coverage. These proposals are likely to decrease the population of uninsured Americans. Costs are predicted to eventually decrease as a result of people receiving more, cheaper preventative medical care. However, health insurance companies have hired lobbying groups to prevent the potential decrease in profits. The Obama administration has been forced to cooperate with them to gain fragile support. With at least some level of bipartisan approval, that Faustian bargain may no longer be necessary.

There will also be some Republican-led amendments that will probably need to be included to receive some of their support. Maine Senator Olympia Snowe initially supported healthcare reform without a public option, but months of partisan rancor led to her support disappearing–despite a Senate bill that no longer created new government health insurance. Crafting a new bill may reduce those hard feelings, winning back support from Snowe and fellow Maine Senator Susan Collins (who has expressed a willingness to negotiate). Further cost controls are a must, which may be unpalatable to progressives: however, reform failing entirely would be humiliating for the party. Another provision the minority party is likely to push for is medical malpractice reform; many doctors complain that the threat of potentially frivolous lawsuits force them to take out expensive insurance policies and order unnecessary medical tests to avoid liability, which increases the cost of health care. Trial lawyers are a strong Democratic constituency, but they have been relatively silent during this fight. The so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-cost health insurance plans showed that Democrats are willing to anger another part of their base, labor unions, in order to get a bill passed. If both parties are serious about working together for healthcare reform, the result may be more readily accepted by the American public.

Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., said he was “disappointed that Speaker Pelosi is going to seek the position of Minority Leader.”

North Carolina Rep. Larry Kissell’s office said he hopes Pelosi “will change her mind and step aside.”

Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma told Fox News that voters sent a message Tuesday that they want the Democratic Party to move in a new direction.

“They want someone to lead the party who is going to be bipartisan,” he said. “This is very disappointing for a lot of us in the center.”

They were among the many House Democrats whom Republicans criticized for their loyalty to the California liberal, who was a forceful though generally well-liked speaker.

But even some longtime supporters of Pelosi said she needed to step aside as the party leader.

“I voted for everything she asked me to vote for,” said Rep. Albio Sires, D-N.J. “You know, sometimes in this business it’s difficult to know when to move on.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/06/moderate-dems-line-opposition-pelosis-bid-minority-leader/?test=latestnews

Time to move on and be “progressive” Nancy, move back to San Fran where they “appreciate” your liberal lunacy.

Best answer:

Answer by Shades™
She smells like fish.

Give your answer to this question below!

www.moregoodyears.com – The right care at the right time; thats what the American people are looking for, Luntz says. Pollster Frank Luntz appeared on Fox and Friends today to discuss the one health care issue that resonates on both sides of the aisle: prevention. Luntz analyzed audience response to an advertisement featuring Christopher Fey, founder of US Preventive Medicine.

Tomorrow is Election Day in the United States. Every member of the House of Representatives is up for re-election, and one third of the United States Senate. It is difficult living in the greatest democracy in 12,000 years of civilization, and not after a while grow use to the freedoms that our ancestors gave their lives for.

The Constitution and Declaration of Independence could only have been created by a specific generation in the 18th century, the time known historically as the “Age of Reason”. These men, and they were men, knew more about the history of ancient Rome and Greece than we do. They had studied and read Plato, and Aristotle. They met in groups and talked and educated one another.

I dare say that today in a country of 300,000,000 Americans, we could not replicate the brilliance of the individuals, and their youth that met long ago and formed our government. It is truly one of the miracles of history, and this grand experiment has evolved and lasted for more than 200 years. It has survived the Civil War, a conflagration that consumed more lives than all other wars combined that the United States has been in since. We survived the Great Depression, thanks to the leadership of Franklin Roosevelt. Viet Nam and Watergate ripped the social fabric of this country apart, and we survived it.

Now tomorrow November 7, 2006 is our first opportunity to pass judgment as voters on the Republican’s handling of the Iraq war, and indirectly terrorism. President Bush is not up for election, and this means that people must vote indirectly on his policies. This vote will be communicated through the House of Representatives. I believe that people will not be voting for the Democrats tomorrow. I believe they will be voting AGAINST Republicans.

The momentum or perhaps anger against the President’s policies is so strong that the House of Representatives will switch hands, and with it will go the power to slow down the President’s momentum, and perhaps reverse many of his policies. Of course, we have the benefit of hindsight in looking at how our country has been guided over the last several years, but let’s revisit some of what has gone on, and decide the merits of the President’s actions.

IRAQWe know now that the basis for the war was without merit. The underlying assumptions that Saddam was manufacturing Weapons of Mass Destruction, and perhaps would have used them to create great calamity for others was FALSE. Nevertheless we must now deal with the aftermath of the invasion. Iraq can not turn out well for us at this point. Regardless of what happens from this day forward, it will not be a friendly end for our involvement, just as Viet Nam did not end well. When you open Pandora’s Box, you do not know what will come out. Politically Pandora’s box is the equivalent of the “Law of unintended consequences.” We are paying a price for opening the box, America with its treasure, and energy, and more importantly our soldiers with their lives, and limbs.

We did not arm our soldiers well, many pay for their own body armor, and are cannibalizing steel off of other vehicles to reinforce the steel of the vehicles they drive. This happens in a country as rich as ours. The President wages war but sought no sacrifice from the American people. Instead he expands the National Debt to finance the war, and puts the burden on our unborn children to pay for. Simultaneously he created tax cuts for the Rich, which I approve of, but not in a time of deficit. You don’t borrow money from Japan, China, and the Europeans, and then give it to the rich via tax cuts, once again leaving the burden to the young in this country. That’s just plain WRONG.

Eavesdropping and the Bill of Rights

The President chose to circumvent the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by having the National Security Agency (NSA) create a huge funnel whereby conversations of ordinary citizens in the United States were monitored in the name of Anti Terrorism. Thirty year employees of the NSA reeked in horror at the notion. Every bone in their bodies told them it was wrong. All the President had to do was appoint Federal Judges to the NSA to approve and monitor the program. There are similar judges who sit in the FBI offices full time for over a decade now who routinely approve Federal wiretap orders.

The President has put himself above the law in this case. He knew he was secure with a Republican majority in both houses of Congress who would protect him in ways that Richard Nixon was not protected. Nixon would never have been driven from office if he had posssessed a Republican majority.

What about Congress itself?

I have been a student of Congress since Lyndon Johnson was President in 1963. For many decades I actively worked to create a Republican majority in both branches of the Congress. My background includes being a Barry Goldwater Republican. I have seen the filthy, back room, money changing aspects of politics all my life, and it has been on both sides of the aisles. What I see now that is unique is in your face corruption. The waste use to amount to hundreds of millions of dollars.

The waste is now billions of dollars, even tens of billions of dollars. There was a time as they say when the MERE APPEARANCE of IMPROPRIETY would be enough to drive an elected official from office. Now the appearance doesn’t mean anything anymore. You have Senators and Congressmen on both sides flying around in private corporate aircraft. As a result they have debts to the owners of those planes that must be paid for with favorable votes on bills. These bills cost the American taxpayer billions of extra, and unnecessary dollars.

An example is the Drug Bill for Senior Citizens where by the law specifically states that the federal government can not enter into negotiations with the drug companies to demand, and FORCE lower prices. Wow, you talk about giving away to billion extra dollars per year. Frankly, I don’t think the Republican members of Congress got enough from these drug companies. The drug companies gave the Republicans million in contributions, and got back tens of billions in the laws that were passed. If you are going to be corrupt, you ought to get paid more than that.

I believe that Tuesday, Election Day there will be a momentum tide that will sweep out the Republican majority in the House, and come close to taking the Senate. With this act, the American people will put the Congress and the President on notice that these types of actions will not stand. We may go back to gridlock, but for this writer, gridlock is a pleasure compared to our experiences of the last few years.

Goodbye and Good Luck

Richard Stoyeck http://www.stocksatbottom.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/06/11/2010-06-11_alvin_greene_surprise_south_carolina_primary_winner_tells_olbermann_hes_not_a_re.html

Best answer:

Answer by Chewy Ivan 2
Maybe for the same reason you claim Democrats consistantly claim something the stopped claiming several days ago: politics. What’s true isn’t as important as what you can trick people into thinking is true.

Give your answer to this question below!

Best answer:

Answer by skipjack2012
I like the truth that they reveal by using only things Republican Senators, Representatives and Candidates have said in recorded speeches or published to their own websites (then trying to scrub those sites, forgetting that everything posted is cached somewhere else on the web).

What do you think? Answer below!