HC Reform - how to go about it

[Bayou Bum]

Questions, why do Republicans suddenly presenting themselves as the defenders of a government health-care program that they have spent years attacking? Opposing just because they are the oppsition party? Do they really have people's interest in mind... ever? The GOP has no healthcare plan of its own, Is fear tactic all they know?

I know of at least 3 health care plans offered by the Republicans. Maybe you need to do a little more research.

[fencerchica]

Also, the dems should change some intraparty rules (I do not know which) so that internal disloyalty does not go without reaction. A parliamentary member over here who votes against the party in an important case will immediately lose all committee memberships, and will not be eligble for nomination in that party when the next election cycle comes around. Unless one starts a new party all by oneself, it is political suicide. Once Pelosi can be sure that the same percentage of DEM congressional members will vote for the party bill as the corresponding percentage for the GOP´s, then things will be far more predictable.

What a horrible vision you have. While the democratic congressmen who oppose "the party line" might just be stupid, they might also have valid concerns. To try to strong-arm them into submission would be undermining the integrity of our representative democracy.

I think that Peter's point of view is strongly colored by the fact that Sweden has dozens of significant political parties, versus the USA system where only two political parties are of any real significance (even if there are other minor parties in existence). This kind of party discipline Peter suggests could be more or less workable in a country where there are enough parties that a legislator subjected to such disciplinary action has the real option of jumping ship and joining a different party. In the USA this is only a realistic option for very rare (and very high profile) cases like Arlen Specter, so enforcing that kind of discipline would be a heavy blow to our system. Though I suppose that could be a good thing if it would encourage the development of healthy alternative parties.

[Hauptman]

I think that Peter's point of view is strongly colored by the fact that Sweden has dozens of significant political parties, versus the USA system where only two political parties are of any real significance (even if there are other minor parties in existence). This kind of party discipline Peter suggests could be more or less workable in a country where there are enough parties that a legislator subjected to such disciplinary action has the real option of jumping ship and joining a different party. In the USA this is only a realistic option for very rare (and very high profile) cases like Arlen Specter, so enforcing that kind of discipline would be a heavy blow to our system. Though I suppose that could be a good thing if it would encourage the development of healthy alternative parties.

This is because while technically a two party system, the U.S. might best be described as a two coalition system.

There are many interest groups within the two major parties that would probably exist as small, but independent parties in other countries. That's why whenever a third party does pop up in the U.S. it often gets absorbed into one of the two main parties.

It's also interesting to watch the interest groups shift between the two parties as circumstances change while other groups are virtually locked into a particular party permanently.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


FC has done a very good analysis. However, there is one minor quibble: Our parliament has currently 7 parties, and of those outside it only one (or two, but that calls for some really extreme things to happen) have any real chance to getting parliamentary seats.

I would assume that it is more likely that the GOP wins the electoral vote of Washington DC, than for the Swedish parliament to actually have at least 12 parties in the next election.

I think that Peter's point of view is strongly colored by the fact that Sweden has dozens of significant political parties, versus the USA system where only two political parties are of any real significance (even if there are other minor parties in existence). This kind of party discipline Peter suggests could be more or less workable in a country where there are enough parties that a legislator subjected to such disciplinary action has the real option of jumping ship and joining a different party. In the USA this is only a realistic option for very rare (and very high profile) cases like Arlen Specter, so enforcing that kind of discipline would be a heavy blow to our system. Though I suppose that could be a good thing if it would encourage the development of healthy alternative parties.

Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Hi!
The topic for this thread is:
How should a politician (or other policy-influencing person) go about to change the current US. health care system to something more akin to Canada/Europe?

The topic for this thread is NOT:
1. Whether a HC reform with the end result as outlined above is desirable. If you do not agree with that basic premise, you are more than welcome to start your own thread in which that nondesirability is a given.
2. To prove that a HC reform with the end result as outlined above is impossible, since the insurance companies are too powerful. For the sake of the argument, it is assumed that the current administration (or a following one!) has the guts to take one those companies, and actually manages to score a major breakthrough.

(Let us see how long all posters can stay on topic. I have my doubts in some cases)

Sounds like typical democrat party behavior to me!

I know of at least 3 health care plans offered by the Republicans. Maybe you need to do a little more research.

And my doubts are confirmed.

Start your own fricking thread, in which you can decide (whatever your head can come up with) what should be discussed! Are you congenitally unable to stay on topic, do you just prefer to be rude to all those who do not share your preferences, or what is it?

Wait - don´t answer. There is no thinkable answer which is becoming of you.

I just came home from a PTA meeting, and heard that some kids in my son´s class - age 12-13 - can or will not speak on topic. You are old enough to be married (per your own admission) and have still not gotten that mastered!


Peter Gustafsson<-

[Bayou Bum]

Hi!

And my doubts are confirmed.

Start your own fricking thread, in which you can decide (whatever your head can come up with) what should be discussed! Are you congenitally unable to stay on topic, do you just prefer to be rude to all those who do not share your preferences, or what is it?

Wait - don´t answer. There is no thinkable answer which is becoming of you.

I just came home from a PTA meeting, and heard that some kids in my son´s class - age 12-13 - can or will not speak on topic. You are old enough to be married (per your own admission) and have still not gotten that mastered!


Peter Gustafsson<-

What, no have a nice time?

I did answer your question with post #5. In case you haven't read all the posts, it went off topic long before I posted. Don't get pissed with me just because I answer a false claim by one of the off thread posters and you don't like my side of the issue. You should have stated this is thread is only for those deeply in love with Obama.

In answer to another thread post about when a debate is won. It is usually when the Liberals realize they can't debate on the facts and resort to insults and name calling.

And if you don't want anyone posting on YOUR thread, then I suggest you write it on a piece of paper you keep to yourself.

Have a nice time!

[Slim]

Hi!


And my doubts are confirmed.

Start your own fricking thread, in which you can decide (whatever your head can come up with) what should be discussed! Are you congenitally unable to stay on topic, do you just prefer to be rude to all those who do not share your preferences, or what is it?

Wait - don´t answer. There is no thinkable answer which is becoming of you.

I just came home from a PTA meeting, and heard that some kids in my son´s class - age 12-13 - can or will not speak on topic. You are old enough to be married (per your own admission) and have still not gotten that mastered!


Peter Gustafsson<-

Hi!

I'd like to take a moment to talk about genital herpes. I'd like to know if this is a big problem in Sweden or Switzerland or Austria or where ever you are from, and what your government is doing about it. I think this is important to know before we go any further in this thread.

Please, no more posts in this thread until this question is answered.


Have a nice time.

[PeterGustafsson]

I'd like to take a moment to talk about genital herpes. I'd like to know if this is a big problem in Sweden---

No, it is not for you.

If the newspaper articles covering the Stockholm Pride parade are anything to go by, the local gays have a far too discerning taste as to be interested in you.


PLONK!

Peter Gustafsson

[Slim]

No, it is not for you.

If the newspaper articles covering the Stockholm Pride parade are anything to go by, the local gays have a far too discerning taste as to be interested in you.


PLONK!

Peter Gustafsson

So herpes is a gay only thing? Wow. Silly me.

[Slim]

Wonderful. Empower the agency that can come and take all your belongings and property to be the enforcers of health care coverage.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/po...-56781377.html

Brilliant. F'ing brilliant.

[I_luv_saber]

(Sorry, Peter, I'll keep it to a minimum, and if it goes further than a few posts I'll make a separate thread for it. Promise! )

Actually, if that is true, Slim has a point. (I have no idea if it is, just piggybacking here)

To use an anecdote, I had a family member who owed the DMV money. There was dispute over whether this money was actually owed or not, so they did not pay. Now, in the past, the DMV would do something like hold back your registration until you payed, or turn you into a collection agency. Perfectly fine and within their jurisdiction.

However, now, rather than do something like this, they conscript the TAX BOARD (State level) to collect the money on your taxes! This seems fundamentally wrong to me. Those who collect taxes should, IMO, be able to collect nothing but taxes. It's a gross abuse of the tax system, and should not be allowed. It also leaves the door open for far worse abuses, IMHO.

[NGV]

Questions, why do Republicans suddenly presenting themselves as the defenders of a government health-care program that they have spent years attacking?

It's pretty simple really. In low turnout elections such as the typical US midterm, highly motivated partisans and senior citizens have a disproportionate impact on the result - because they are a lot more likely to turn out to vote than the average citizen.

So, the GOP's goals are A. to drive the teabaggers into incoherent hysteria about Obama's sinister communist conspiracy to destroy America and B. convince old people that Obama is going to take away their Medicare. And if the overall political debate turns nasty and unpleasant enough in the process, many voters will be alienated and stop paying attention, which further strengthens the electoral power of the hardcore partisans and the elderly.

I expect this to work pretty well, and won't be at all surprised if the Republicans take back the House next year. Of course, launching unhinged attacks at the idea of socialized medicine while simultaneously writing effusive love letters to socialized medicine makes your party look somewhat ridiculous to intelligent observers. Winning the vote of intelligent observers doesn't seem to be a particularly high priority for the GOP right now, though.

[jeff]

well said. And it looks as if they have the moron vote locked up.

[Bayou Bum]

So, the GOP's goals are A. to drive the teabaggers into incoherent hysteria about Obama's sinister communist conspiracy to destroy America and B. convince old people that Obama is going to take away their Medicare.

You forgot about the part of convincing people that Obama is going to pull the plug on Grandma! lol

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

So, the GOP's goals are A. to drive the teabaggers into incoherent hysteria about Obama's sinister communist conspiracy to destroy America and B. convince old people that Obama is going to take away their Medicare.

It surprises me that anyone would like to refer to themselves as "teabaggers", given the other uses for that word. Google at your own peril.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Bayou Bum]

Hi!




It surprises me that anyone would like to refer to themselves as "teabaggers", given the other uses for that word. Google at your own peril.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

And my doubts are confirmed.

Start your own fricking thread, in which you can decide (whatever your head can come up with) what should be discussed! Are you congenitally unable to stay on topic, do you just prefer to be rude to all those who do not share your preferences, or what is it?

Wait - don´t answer. There is no thinkable answer which is becoming of you.

I just came home from a PTA meeting, and heard that some kids in my son´s class - age 12-13 - can or will not speak on topic. You are old enough to be married (per your own admission) and have still not gotten that mastered!


Peter Gustafsson<-