Thursday, January 21, 2010

JMO - The truth as seen

The truth as seen from here anyway. The Massaschusett's election of a Republican over a Democrat was not a repudiation of President Obama and the Democrats healthcare reform legislation, nor of the President and his achievements to date. Nor of his goals and plans. It was simply a better selling job by the Republicans to elect a candidate who the voters think is better than Ms. Coakley, the Democratic candidate.

In truth, both of them have political baggage and if voters think Mr. Brown will be "their" man, they had better think again, because once in office he'll be another Republican owing his allegiance first to the party and second to the lobbyist, corporations and their big money who sponsored his campaign. They bought and paid for him, and they sold the voters a bill of goods.

That's not to say Ms. Coakley was squeeky clean either. She came with the Democrat's baggage, especially to help get the healthcare reform bill through the Senate as well as her big money backers. It didn't matter if Massachusetts already has a good healthcare program, it was campaign ads to convince voters they didn't want or need two, the federal one and the state one, and the Republican candidate would best send that message.

It wasn't that they didn't want healthcare reform for the country. Nor did they want to see they state plan integrated into the national plan. It was the government control the Republicans sold that to the voters and Mr. Brown would carry that message. Except he won't carry it for the people, but the corporate interests who are making money in Massaschusetts and have provided him with campaign money.

So to the Democrats, take a deep breath and simply learn to do a better job, which surprises me you keep having to do. You're either deaf or blind to the advise you're given or simply have chosen to ignore it thinking you know better. Well, obviously you didn't and still haven't learned from your mistake. You're seeing your own history repeated over and over again.

As for the healthcare reform effort, I will add that's I've not been an overwhelming support of the healthcare bill from either the House or the Senate, as I've noted here in post last fall and winter. I think the Democrats need to reconsider it and reduce it the basic necessities for an initial program.

This would include patients protections, such as the right to coverage with pre-existing conditions, the right to the coverage for severe or sudden problems without being denied coverage or facing increases in their premiums, and the right to an impartial review board for the timely redress of complaints when denied coverage.

This would include a public option (not tied to Medicare, Medicaid, FEHB or other existing programs) for the underinsured and uninsured with significant government support either in direct payments to companies, tax deductions, and other financial incentive. In short, make it really affordable than just the appearance of affordability when families can't and won't spend the money, even with a mandate and facing penalities for not having insurance.

This would include dropping the mandatory insurance, using the above incentives, to encourage getting insurance, and then finding ways to prevent people from simply using the public healthcare system and programs as many already do. That needs to be fixed where hospitals, clinics and physicians can ensure they don't lose money. They don't have to make a profit, just not lose money as many are currently doing.

And this would include fixing existing small problems, like drug prescription coverage, excessive premiums, health insurance and corporate descrimination against patients, consider making maximum premiums universal to prevent profitting by the sick or ill at the family or government's expense, and most of all provide better oversight to oversee and prevent fraud, rampant in some programs.

That's it. Focus on that and you'll be ok. And I won't consider adandoning the Democratic party in 2010 elections and beyond.


  1. While it probably isn't a repudiation of President Obama's presumed agenda (most Americans still want universal healthcare)I think it is to some degree a repudiation of the Democrat's do-nothing approach.

    The Republicans haven't had 60 votes in the senate since ...when? 1927 or something like that? And yet they get their way 90 percent of the time. The Democrats keep saying they don't have enough votes no matter how big their majority. People see that and they get pissed.

    So there's that - and then I also see this as proof yet again of the shallowness of the average voter; always going for the pretty boy and the know-nothing, because they can spout a few catch phrases ....if you smell what the Rock is cookin.

    Finally, the Democrats seem to take only one lesson from every loss; they weren't enough like the Republicans. Clinton became a defacto Republican to win re-election in 96. Obama turned into one after being elected, thinking he would win the other side over. It never works. They just hate you even MORE for trying to be like them. Anyway, it's just my opinion - as you have yours. :)

  2. You're right, the vast majority of Americans want universal healthcare, and more would if they really saw how well some of the European models work. They have issues with the details, but mostly, in my view, being stingy and wanting it cheap. In Massachusetts, the voters got conned and the Democrats and Ms. Coakley failed to get their message across.

    I liked what Jon Stewart asked, "Why does it take 50 Republicans to pass a bill but 60 Democrats?" Because the Republicans are arrogant assholes, who whine and use legal tricks when they're in the minority and whine and threaten when they're in power. The reality is that there is a large (~33%) of right wing, religious (or appearing religious) conservatives who mock and conjole the moderates into their view with fear about being anti- or un-American if they side with the Democrats who they brand all extreme liberals.

    The Democrats simply can't seem to hold the middle for fear of losing the liberals who criticize them if they move too far from center. The problem is the idea of liberal isn't the same as what is pushed by the Republicans and the Democrats haven't found a way to fight back. And if they don't learn by November 2010, they'll fuck themselves again when they're back to a 50/50 Senate.