Surprising no one, Congressman Gerry Connolly has “finally made up his mind” and will vote for the health insurance reform bill expected later today in the House.
.
What an amazing turn of events.
.
It was farcical for him to act as though he needed to read the bill (which took RPV 54 and a half hours with over 100 volunteers to read, nonstop) before he could decide whether he was going to vote for it. Gerry’s voting record with the Speaker is 97% – there was no way the president of the freshman class of Democrats wasn’t going to do whatever the leadership told him to do. He voted for the original health care bill, so his being “undecided” was clearly nothing more than political posturing.
.
In his statement to the Washington Post he said “For the past year, my constituents have told me they want health insurance reform, but only if it meets certain tests. Will it bring down premiums for families and small businesses? Will it reduce the deficit? Will it protect their choice of plan and doctor? Will it improve access to care? The answer to each of these questions is ‘Yes, it will.’”
.
What a crock. Only in the fantasy land of CBO estimates is there any way that this bill will reduce the deficit – in fact, the CBO itself admits that the only way this bill “saves” money is by reducing medicare payments to doctors. Restoring those cuts, which Democrats plan to do, will be part of a separate bill…because if it were part of the Senate bill, it would blow the score. They really think we’re all morons – they actually seem to think that a bill that extends coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans is not going to cost anything. No one with the common sense that God gave gravel thinks this bill is going to save America money. But that doesn’t stop Connolly from claiming otherwise. And, again, anyone who thinks that this bill will bring down premiums is not telling the truth. Don’t take my words for it - that’s what Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said on the floor of the Senate last week. And as we’ve noted elsewhere, as long as your health care is tied to your job (and this bill isn’t going to do anything to change that) there’s no way for any member of Congress to say that you’ll get to keep your doctor or health insurance plan – that decision is out of their hands, and it’s out of your hands. Only your boss can say for sure.
.
Connolly can’t even be honest with us and simply state that he’s voting on this bill because Pelosi told him to. That he would rather have his constituents arrested than actually listen to them. That he’d rather help the President salvage his failing presidency than represent his constituents (88% of whom have health insurance).
.
It’s time we send Gerry Connolly back to the private sector.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.tooconservative.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
Mar 21st by Brian S
He is absolutely loathesome – the picture of the toad and his Nanny is particularly frightening. Did anyone seriously entertain that he would vote against this bill?
i’m not sure about the whole ‘democrats are lying and trying to make it seem like a bill that costs money won’t inevitably raise the deficit’ thing. the bill raises $500 billion in taxes, fees, and penalties, that’s where the deficit reduction comes into play.
And Barrack said “not one dime” to either deficit or taxes. Yea right!!!
It’s all over but the shouting.
What we need to know is what he was promised in return for his vote. A job in the administration when he’s voted out? A bank favor like North Dakota? A $100 million hospital? Just a few of the pork promised by Obama. The first on the list is an outright bribe, no matter how you cut it.
Connolly doesn’t have a choice. Any freshman dem who rode in on Obama’s coattails and doesn’t vote for this bill is done. They might lose in November if they vote yes for the bill, whereas they’re guaranteed to lose if they vote no.
.
You can’t serve two masters.
So that must mean you’ll lobby the Republicans to vote in favor of the reconciliation sidecar that will strip out those special deals, right Lloyd?
No, RD, I wouldn’t. Both are wrong.
So you want to keep the special deals in the bill. So you don’t really care about the special deals, you want some partisan talking points for November instead. Got it.
I can’t wait for Republican candidates to explain why they voted against stripping the Cornhusker Kickback out of the bill.
“No one with the common sense that God gave gravel thinks this bill is going to save America money. But that doesn’t stop Connolly from claiming otherwise. And, again, anyone who thinks that this bill will bring down premiums is not telling the truth. ”
Brian, you have nailed it my friend. We have a president, many in congress and supporters of both who don’t have the common sense of gravel. How true.
maybe you can get some of these economic nitwits to explain to you how this masasive boot on the throat of our economy is going to make things better. Start with Eddie, get him to whip out his pie chart of how the third way works in defiance of logic, reason and sound economic practices. However, do be prepared to be called a member of the Haters Flat Earth Society for even poseing the question.Instead of any explanation as to the wonders of the “Third Way ” I suspect you will get some half assed reference to Sarah Palin, this seems to be a default response . You see when economic dunces don’t have a response their fall back position is to get you to chase another rabbitt. I wish you good luck.
The health care bill is now a done deal with the presidents executive order!!! This is not the bill we should have. But things like health care bankrupting people should not happen either as well as not being able to get insurance at a decent price because of pre existing conditions or children that do not have health coverage. My sister died of cancer last year at a fairly young age. She lived with my brother in houston and did not have anything so she did not need to worry about bankruptcy and lived near one of the largest and best medical centers in the world consisting of over forty hospitals in area and one of the best in the world for cancer. They kept my sister alive for years. But she just would not quit smoking which finally got her. My point is most of us medical care in a serious illness can bankrupt anyone of us. Much of the country does not live near a huge medical complex and depend on the local private hospital. Many many kids do not have health insurance. I blame both the Democrats and Republicans for this health bill that will now pass. The Republicans in the early stages over a year ago should of come up with their own totally finished health care bill instead of bits and pieces in a hodgepodge manner so they really gave the democrats free reign on this. The republicans tried to play hard ball to a extreme by wanting to start over after more then a year on this. Just like the local elections it will be for the republicans to lose just like this health care bill.
Id the republicans start to lose the local and national elections you can blame the far right in the republican party have far too much influence on the moderate republicans and the public will not vote for fanatics. I hope the next local elections does not come down to this. The republicans had some real goof balls running in the last election and got their butts handed to them especially Firetti or what ever his name was running for the at large bos position. Please republicans don’t do that again.
I knew Stupak couldn’t bring himself to vote against it in the end. This Executive Order just re-affirms existing law, just a way for Stupak to save face.
No Waterloo for you, Jim DeMint!
Connolly is toast. I saw his little speech on the flor this afternoon when he was introduced by that dim bulb Slaughter. He gave his “four point plan” on why this Bill was good for Americe. Unfortunately he lied on all four points.
So, none of you Republicans are going to vote for Gerry now? Damn, we were really counting on your vote.
Obama has just achieved the biggest victory of the Democrtic Party since Medicare.
Stupak made a nice speech, btw.
G, this marks the first time I’ve ever written the words “third way”.
.
Stop making shit up please.
.
Look, I know you’re hurting. You’re a smart guy and to be wrong so many times on just one blog must suck. To bet on the guys wearing the R jerseys right now must suck too. Many of them aren’t too bright and their leadership’s strategy seems to be November from November. So we have a Republican Party that couldn’t govern effectively while in power, and we have a Republican Party that can’t conduct an opposition.
.
This is the failing of ideology.
.
You can disagree with me and curl up with Jonah Golberg for solace, but Rs need smarter guys and smarter guys don’t see every problem as absolutes and zero sums.
.
The R’s gambled and lost: they traded pickups in seats this November for having a hand in POLICY. This theme is not new — and I think you’re smart enough to know it. What is at risk now is even the calculation on November could be wrong. Many things can happen by that election.
.
The R’s choose politics over policy here — another theme that is not new. The bill is not as good because of it. How many seats was that worth this November?
Bingo! edmundburkenator you are right on, “politics over policy”. It’s hard to do the Country’s business when your unable to do real work and only want to concentrate efforts on vindictive revenge and the hope for a victory in the next election. Somehow I think the R’s forgot there is work to be done between elections.
.
I also think the Rs need to find someone who doesn’t take direction from Fox news or Rush Limbaugh. Where is the backbone of the R elected representatives? It’s all seems to be nothing but a big media campaign, rather than real statesmanship. Boehner sounded like a Fox news commentator rather than an elected Congressman.
What a gift Gerry gave Pat Herrity this afternoon! Thanks Gerry!
*****
This bill is horrible, Congress knows it, but couldn’t bring themselves to vote against it because they supported Obama and he wanted it done. He convinced them that it would look terrible if the first Black President failed and not passing health care would mean that he had failed. Their liberal white guilt kicked in and lead them support a terrible bill for America. They will support Obama, no matter what he does. We will all see our taxes rise, our health insurance costs soar, and our health options decline. Thanks Democrats!
*****
Let’s take bets on how quickly Obama’s approval ratings with drop into the 30’s. Then we can guess how many seats republicans will pick up in the House and Senate in November. Let’s have some fun with this disaster!
Blackout,
You and your little liberal friends need some new lines since it’s quite obvious that people here think for themselves. You and your little friends need a new mantra, something other than screaming “Rush Limbaugh and Fox News”! Try a cogent argument, now and then. The squawking parrot thing is not an argument and it’s VERY old.
Eddie, Why don’t you defend this bill instead of picking old, tired fights full of old, tired rhetoris. This is your guy’s bill.
*
Funny that Local doesn’t see what all the fuss is about. Are we lucky to have him in out party?
Expect to see the liberal blogosphere, after they’ve stopped cheering the victory, to go after Glenn Nye and Rick Boucher like they’ve been going after Cuccinelli.
Brian, I don’t see a problem for Boucher in that regard. His support in his district is widespread and longstanding. I am more concerned with Nye. The first re-election is always the toughest. I hope we can do a better job reining in the more hot headed elements in the Democratic Party than the Republicans have managed with theirs. I suspect we will.
.
Of Course, doing a better job of that than the Republicans isn’t setting a terribly high standard. You all have been letting the crazies drive the bus for quite some time now. And it doesn’t look like any serious effort to wrest control of the wheel from them is forthcoming.
–LeeJ
What you’re saying is that people should not be responsible for themselves, but should be taken care of by the government no matter what stupid decisions they make, such as overeating, drinking, smoking, and not buying insurance.
If one’s own life is not worth going bankrupt for, why should we bankrupt the entire country?
LL, you can argue with Bob Dole and Howard Baker about the bill. I’ve heard they support it. They probably support it more strongly than I do.
.
What I want is a smart opposition party so there are better bills to vote on. Right now, it looks like the Globetrotters v the Generals.
.
If your team blows the November elections, I don’t like where this could go.
LL,
you ever heard the saying, if you dont have anything nice to say dont say anything at all? as i was reading down the comments i couldnt help but think how idiotic and uninformed the comments by richmond dem were. then you opened your mouth yet again and made me stop and roll my eyes. maybe if you spent less time attacking those that agreee with you 90% of the time and more time focusing on legitimate issues you’d actually get somewhere, and by proxy the gop would get somewhere. but you dont. i never said i supported healthcare, because i dont. but wasting anymore time addressing your foolish insults is useless. i want to talk about substance.
Local, if you want to talk about substance, that’s fine. Do you honestly believe that the $500 billion in tax hikes included in the law are going to fund the entire liabilities it will create? If so, you’re ignoring history – Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid all face the prospect of going bankrupt in the next twenty years. This new entitlement will be no different. It’s fundamental – when you have fewer people paying in to provide benefits to more people, the amount you’re taxing is simply not going to be sufficient to cover the liabilities. So that means we’ll either face even more tax increases, benefit cuts, or increased spending from the discretionary side of the budget. None of those options are good ones.
.
Like I said before, it is irrational for anyone to believe that this soon-to-be-law is going to be revenue neutral. In the end it will cost the country trillions more than was ever anticipated. And our children get to pay for it.
I am not an Obama fan. I hate the 99% of the bill (Except for the portion prohibiting the insurance companies from denying pre-existing problems). However, I must say that the Republicans (and many conservative Dems were outmanuevered) and Obama developed a backbone. The problem with the Republician party and most observers is that they underestimate Obama. Many scoffed when he decided to run for president (you’re too young and the country is not ready for a Black president), when he pursued the Dem nomination (Hillary is the clear choice), and when he said that he wanted to be a transformative president like Ronald Reagan(e.g. this Health care debacle- despite the Scott Brown victory). Unless the Republcans figure out how to counter quickly, I think we are witnessing one of the greatest political animals in history.
If your team blows the November elections, I don’t like where this could go.
edmundburkenator
on March 22nd, 2010
You helped drive the car towards the cliff and now you are concerned that the opposition not doing what is needed to correct the very cluster fox trot you helped empower. Are any of your who have been here for more than two weeks following this ?
“The R’s gambled and lost: they traded pickups in seats this November for having a hand in POLICY. This theme is not new — and I think you’re smart enough to know it. What is at risk now is even the calculation on November could be wrong. Many things can happen by that election.
.
The R’s choose politics over policy here — another theme that is not new. The bill is not as good because of it. How many seats was that worth this November?
edmundburkenator
on March 21st, 2010
I am amazed. The Dems own the White House, Both Houses of Congress, it takes them 14 months fighting among themselves in political hand to hand combat to pass a health care bill and somehow it is the Republicans fault the bill sucks. They were shut out of the process and you blame them. The possibility does exist that the direction the Dems were going ( and ultimately ended up )was in no way something any R ( and most D’s and Independents ) could or would stomach. This bill was a piece of shit and you are bitching that the R’s don’t have shit on their hands! Unreal.
Democrats were damn close to settling for a lesser bill at several points, including Rahm.
You know why that didn’t happen? Because the Republicans weren’t going to say “yes” to anything Obama supported, under any circumstances. Their insane “party of no” strategy may have pleased the idiot teabaggers, but it also led to the enactment of a more liberal bill.
LL, I love the way you play the race card, keep it up! Get Republicans to talk a lot about “white guilt” this fall. It would be like a several month long Macaca Moment for the entire GOP.
RD, this IS the lesser bill. There’s no single-payer plan. There’s no public option. The only things that were missing that could have mollified at least some Republicans would have been tort reform, and a repeal of McCarran-Ferguson to foster competition across state lines.
.
The super-libs didn’t get what they wanted, and they even had to watch as the House Democratic Leadership and the President bent over backwards to enshrine pro-life sentiments in the bill, much to the dismay of Planned Parenthood, NOW, Degette, Delauro and the other pro-abortion Democrats.
.
This bill was highly flawed, and it will still be highly flawed even after reconiciliation passes (if it passes at all). All of the blatant log-rolling, deal-making provisions are going to be enacted into law, even if temporarily. You guys can revel in your victory for a day or two, but when you have to start defending what you all did and said to get the bill passed at all, the tune is going to change.
.
I think Anonymous hit on something – it’s not every President who can convince members of their own party to throw themselves in front of a speeding train to save a Presidency. Johnson could do it and so could Clinton, but they are the last two in memory who could. Obama has pulled it off as well.
G. Stone, I don’t think Edmund (or David Frum for that matter) is saying that this bill is the “fault” of Republicans. Rather they both are trying to make the very valid point that the Republicans intentionally adopted a strategy on this bill that has proven to be an abject failure for them in terms of policy and that may well prove to be a political miscalculation for them as well.
.
Frum’s point was that Republicans had considerable leverage that they could have used early on to get a bill that would have been much more palatable to conservatives. And Obama would have gotten what he wanted this time last year which was a bill that had received a respectable number of Republican votes in both houses of Congress. As Frum rightly points out, they made a strategic decision to oppose anything and everything in order to make this Obama’s Waterloo. And in terms of policy it is a Waterloo for Republicans instead. You have a bill that you hate enacted into law.
.
It is equally a loser for Republicans politically. For the scorched earth policy to be a winner for you, you had to stop the bill. That way you could have run against the caricature of the bill you had painted. You could have run against all the crazy stuff Republicans have been saying was in the bill. Now you have to run against the actual bill. After the voters have seen that the bill did not bring on the apocalypse.
.
The point is that the Republicans effed this one up pretty good.
.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch.
“So we have a Republican Party that couldn’t govern effectively while in power, and we have a Republican Party that can’t conduct an opposition.”
Correct. They acted like Dems ( spending )and were tossed out. However, you then pivot suggesting they were foolish for not doing what it was that got them tossed. You wanted them to sign onto a brand new massive entitlement by being engaged enough to make the entitlement palatable. Are you following your own logic / argument here ?
They voted against this because it is a massive new entitlement program. Anyone who can do basic math knows this stacked atop SS, Medicare and medicaid will bankrupt the country in that they are already in the red and heading in the wrong direction. The only real debate is how long will it take. You chide the Republicans for not being involved. Why ? So they could influence the legislation so that economic collapse happens 8 or 10 years out instead of 6 ? Further, the stated goal by this President and many of his progressive colleagues is a single payer system. This is the goal, they know it will take many years, this was step number one. A big step I might add.
Brian, you are right that this IS the lesser bill. It is just rare to hear a Republican honest enough to admit that.
.
A nationalized system such as the UK has or single payer such as MediCare were NEVER part of the discussions in either the House or Senate. In fact, the earliest hearings in the Senate Finance Committee (way before things started to heat up over this issue) completely excluded any witnesses who wished to speak to these proposals. Their views were not even to be heard much less acted upon favorably. A fact which makes all the silly and overheated rhetoric on the right about “socialism” and “government takeovers” seem even more insane than it already does.
.
But certainly that is not the fault of Republicans. It was Democrats who adopted a more moderate initial position rather than more wisely keeping those things on the table to be negotiated away later. But in the event it didn’t matter anyway. Republicans had absolutely no intention of negotiating anything anyway. But it sure angered liberals who thought they had elected a liberal to the White House and discovered they had gotten a centrist.
.
In the final analysis the liberals were pragmatic and realized that half a loaf is always better than none in politics. And that compromise is not a dirty word.
.
I know that notion of pragmatic compromise is anathema to many right wingers. I hope they continue to be pigheaded in that regard. Then they can keep talking about creating Waterloos for others while they continue to fail as dramatically as they did on health care. Both in terms of policy AND politics.
Dan
With all respect to Frum. You, Dems and Eddie own this thing. The votes were cast. This is yours, enjoy it. However, many years down the road when this turns to be an economic shit sandwich do not look to share the consequences.
Eddie can try and you can follow suit in deluding yourself that this was solely about politics for me. That frankly, is a lazy take on the my position, but knock yourself out. I was, am and remain against this legislation because unlike some I can do basic math. This is a feel good disaster. For me is about economics, it is about relieving not adding to the pressure of the boot standing on the neck of American business. For those of you who support this specific bill or believe that some bastardized version sprinkled with targeted tax cuts or some other such pablum was the formula for HC reform are mistaken.
Brian,
in the of GHWB…..READ MY LIPS….I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS BILL.
G. Stone, so the sky is falling?
.
Steny Hoyer had a fun quiz on his website the other day. It gave Republican quotes about all the horrors that would ensue if Social Security, Medicare or the bill that has just passed were enacted. You had to guess whether the quotes were from the 1930s, the 1960s or today. It was not an easy quiz. You guys sound exactly the same today as you did 45 or 75 years ago.
.
Social Security has enjoyed broad support among the American people and they feel it has worked well for them these past 75 years despite the dire warnings from Republicans. Forty-five years out the same can be said of Medicare. Now that this bill has passed the American people will watch as, once again, the sky does not fall.
.
I certainly didn’t mean to imply that for you this was strictly about politics. I don’t believe I did. I understand you have deeply held views on the wisdom of the policy. But the Republicans in Congress certainly played this purely politically. And the result was, from a conservative point of view, a policy disaster. Whether any of them care to admit that they blundered or not, the result is the same.
.
The icing on the cake (karma if you will) is that while cynically playing it for political gain they screwed the pooch in that regard too.
Tort reform was in the bill. Still no Republican votes. A “lesser bill” would have been no mandate, no medicaid expansion, no subsidies, just some insurance regulations that everyone agrees on.
This bill establishes the principle that healthcare should be universal, and that it is not a privilege but should be something that every citizen has access to. This moves us towards a Public Option within a few years, especially if the insurance companies try any funny business with the regulations.
Oh, and something like 90% of self-described liberals supported this bill in a Gallup poll. The whole FDL and “the left hates the bill!” thing is coming from fringe idiots that have a bigger presence on the internet than they do in real life. They were never Democrats, anyway, they’re Nader and McKinney voters. They don’t care about making in real change, they just want to feel pure.
As to the process, voters won’t care about the messy process once they are able to get their children treated for pre-existing conditions, they won’t care once the other popular regulations go into effect. They especially won’t care when they get subsidies to make insurance affordable in 2014. Only inside the beltway people will care about the process anymore.
“The votes were cast. This is yours, enjoy it.”
.
You can depend on it. And history will note that not a single Republican vote in either house was cast for it.
.
What I am waiting to see is if the Senate Republicans are really going to try to block the Reconciliation bill that eliminates so many of the things they have been railing against for months now. Like the Cornhusker kickback. That should make for some great “he was against it before he was for it” political ads. I suspect that saner heads may prevail on this.
.
Campaigning on reinstating the doughnut hole and throwing recent college grads off their parents insurance doesn’t seem like a winning strategy to me either. But if McConnell and Boehner think it is they are welcome to it.
In 30 years, Republicans will be accusing Democrats of wanting to cut what they now call “Obamacare”. Just like with Medicaid.
Er, MediCARE. Though Medicaid, too.
26 is a recent college grad?
“As to the process, voters won’t care about the messy process once they are able to get their children treated for pre-existing conditions, they won’t care once the other popular regulations go into effect.”
.
RD, how many people (other than hopeless political junkies) can tell you a thing about the legislative run up to the enactment of SSI or MediCare? That would be none.
.
Running against the supposedly evil process by which this was enacted would be about as effective as the repeal strategy.
“26 is a recent college grad?”
….
They’re someone who very likely, especially in this crappy economy, can only get a low-paying job that doesn’t provide health insurance, if they get one at all. If they can get a good job, great, they don’t have to stay on.
Local, that’s not the point. You asked where the argument that the bill isn’t going to cost anything or reduce the deficit came from. You noted that the $500 billion in tax hikes goes to reduce the deficit. I explained why that’s not going to be true. It doesn’t matter whether you’re for it or against it, no one in their right mind should be arguing that this law is going to pay for itself. It won’t. Entitlements never do.
I’m curious, Brian, since you’re usually not a knee-jerk right winger if you think Republicans should vote to strip out the special deals through reconciliation? Even if you hate that the bill was passed, don’t you want to take out those stupid backroom deals anyway?
RD, that’s crap. I’m sorry, but even in this economy, if college graduates can’t get jobs with health insurance that’s not the fault of the system. That’s their own fault.
.
My wife and I both had jobs after college that provided health insurance – that was one of the reasons we went to college. Other folks I know have taken jobs they didn’t particularly care for because they needed the insurance.
.
I think it’s pathetic that one of the selling points of this plan was that it lets kids mooch off their parents longer than before. Where’s the personal responsibility?
RD, yes, the reconciliation bill needs to be passed. Regardless of the ample political ammo we’d get if we were successful in blocking it, we have to live with the fact that this package is going to be law, and we need to make sure that the most egregious abuses that led to its passage are removed.
“26 is a recent college grad?”
.
Have you been following how difficult it is for many kids to graduate in four years at many universities with cutbacks to higher education. Sometimes it is a near impossibility to schedule the classes needed. Particularly in certain fields of study. I’m not talking about Bluto Blutarski at the Animal House. I am talking about serious students. There are also those who go on to graduate programs directly after receiving their undergraduate degrees.
.
Combine that with a challenging economy and I imagine this provision is hugely popular. Lots of kids waiting tables while they hustle up their first real jobs. Some of them can get some type of coverage through their Alumni Associations, but not all. The additional premium on Mom and Dad’s policy is likely far less and the coverage better.
“RD, that’s crap. I’m sorry, but even in this economy, if college graduates can’t get jobs with health insurance that’s not the fault of the system. That’s their own fault.”.
.
You might want to check out the unemployment rate for recent college graduates. It’s atrocious. I don’t know what it was like when you graduated by it’s a whole lot worse now, I can assure you.
.
I graduated when the economy was “good” in 2007 and my first job did not have insurance, even though a college degree was required for the job, so it’s not like I was working at Wal-Mart. Employers have been cutting benefits to younger workers due to rising costs. It has changed since you graduated. And that was BEFORE the economy collapsed.
I’ll also point out that staying on until 26 enables more people to go to graduate school, especially people who have conditions that make losing health insurance unthinkable.
Well, that’s good. I hope at least some Republican Senators come on board.
I’m not sure it would be good politics for Republicans even if the special deals stayed in. Because Democrats could point out Republicans voted for them, too, when they voted to keep them in.
brian,
i was being sarcastic. none of us are qualified to get into the details of the exact financial state of the bill, even the cbo doesnt know for sure what’s going to happen. their estimates are just that, educated guesses.
Dan, sorry, but that’s BS. Yes, it may be difficult to get all the classes one wants to get when you only take classes that meet after 11:00 AM and never on Friday, but otherwise it’s not. No school is going to schedule courses that make it impossible for you to graduate on time, even when you’re in a highly specialized area. I should know – I’m a student in a highly specialized area of a highly specialized area. Yes, I may not get access to all the classes I want, but I do get access to all of the classes I need.
.
Students still in school generally have access to their own health insurance – each year I’m required to either opt-in or opt-out of the Aetna health care plan Catholic requires all students to purchase or I’m otherwise charged that amount on my bill (and student loans/aid can cover it). While I was at GW, we had a student health service that took pretty much anyone’s insurance and even if you didn’t have it, the care was cheap. I was going to student health at GW well into my mid twenties despite having health insurance and access to a PCP if I wanted one. It was convenient.
.
I graduated undergrad in 2001 and my master’s program in 2004. I was working full time during my last 2 years of undergrad and all of my time in grad school and I had a job with health insurance – and my job had nothing to do with my degree. I took it because it provided insurance and a steady paycheck.
.
While I don’t doubt that this market is tough on recent graduates, I’ve also noticed a significant trend of college age kids who don’t seem to think they have to work at a crap job that pays benefits while trying to find something they want to do. I think we our doing a poor job of teaching our kids that before they worry about a job that makes them happy or they think is cool, they need a job that pays the bills and ensures they can meet whatever personal obligations they have first. We teach our kids nowadays that money isn’t as important as personal fulfillment, and then we wonder why kids won’t take jobs that aren’t “fun” when they get out of school.
Brian, all of my kids got through college in four years and didn’t encounter that problem but I don’t doubt it is real in many colleges. In the University of California System it is apparently a growing problem. And I don’t think they are unique.
.
Also, the idea that recent college grads as well as others don’t have jobs in this economy because they don’t want them is not a winning argument politically. And it isn’t factual.
.
I’m glad you are doing well. Many folks aren’t. And it isn’t because they are lazy or want a job that is more fun or fulfilling and refuse to accept any other..
Dan, I’m not arguing that people don’t have jobs because they don’t want them. What I’m arguing is that we, as a society, are doing a disservice to our youngest generation by teaching them that they should value their own personal happiness above personal responsibility. That’s the result that I believe is causing so many students to leave college with a degree but no actual skills, making it impossible to get a job.
.
Here’s an anecdote. My wife had six interns working for her in a past job. Generally, her firm hired one or two of the interns on after their internship. One of the interns would have been offered a job, except she demanded a starting salary of $60k, when the average starting salary there was a little over half that. Why? Well, she went to X school, and that’s what her career advisor told her she should be making. So, instead of having a job that provided insurance and a steady salary, she got nothing because what was offered wasn’t good enough.
.
No matter how tough the job environment is, we shouldn’t be enabling the next generation of basement dwellers by giving them yet another reason to never leave home. The economy is bad and I can’t find my dream job – solution: don’t leave home. The housing market is bad and I can’t find my dream house – solution: don’t leave home. I can’t get health insurance because I don’t like any of the jobs that offer insurance: solution: don’t leave home.
.
This provision frustrates me because it treats young adults as if they are children – the world is too hard for you, so we’ll let you mooch off your parents a little longer. That’s ridiculous. That’s not the message we should be sending adults in their mid-twenties.
.
Yes, many folks aren’t doing well in this economy. I would prefer that we focus on fixing the economy so people can find jobs, not providing new benefits that help us train the next generation of Halo 3 experts.
The fact that this bill supports having quarter of a century + aged “children” still living off their parents hard work is very sad. It’s the reason why so many twenty-somethings are still living at home or in their parent’s basement. There is no personal responsibility. When my parents were 26 they had three children and my father had two jobs to pay his mortgage and earn a little extra money for his family. When I was 26 I had an education and a job I didn’t particularly love but it paid the bills and provided insurance. This bill, and Obama’s other initiatives, are celebrating mediocrity and creating a generation of folks who have their hands out waiting for their entitlements/freebies every chance they get. The vibrant, creative, hard-working America I know is fading away. And stay tuned, immigration reform is probably up next!
The parents created the problem you describe KPS. The bill reacts to it (and the 50 other possibilities that have 26 year-olds being on a parent policy).
.
Dan, Frum’s piece doesn’t go far enough. Once people see that grandma is NOT being killed off by a death panel, moderates again will begin to question the credibility of Rs. There has been movement on moderates on this bill since the summit.
.
I give up on G.
Edmund, I am perfectly content to have the Republicans follow their current path. They will pick up seats this Fall. Historically that is what happens in a midterm election during a president’s first term. And as Nate Silver pointed out today, it has been widely predicted long before this bill passed. But that won’t stop some from attributing any Republican gains to this bill.
.
Best of all possible worlds. A dubious Republican strategy and Republicans working off flawed assumptions. I am good with that.
.
I am hoping for the crazy to continue into 2012. The Democrats have a lot of territory to defend in the Senate that year due to having run the table in 2006. I wouldn’t want sanity to return to the Republicans in any large measure before then.
.
Maybe we should all send e-mails to Sen. DeMint encouraging him to keep up the good work.
One basic fact that Republicans don’t seem to grasp is the reason that 50-60% of Americans polled disapproved of the bill is because 12-15% of those polled felt it didn’t go far enough. Those people want a public option, actually most of them – the ultraliberals – want a 100% single-payer system with all health insurance companies put out of business.
Only about 40-45% – and all of my numbers here are the ranges from CNN to Fox to RealClearPolitics to Politico – are against health care reform. A large percentage of that is the philisophical 30% or so of the population that is hard Republican and would scream about anything that Democrats advocate. So, saying that a majority of the public is against it is not accurate.
I agree NJSM.
The polls showed a majority didn’t like the bill. But when asked the next question of “why” a sizable portion checked “not liberal enough”, “doesn’t go far enough” ect.
.
This is devastating for the GOP- Frum took his boys to the woodshed big time
.
“Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s……”
.
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
Brian–
You seem to equate health insurance (and therefore access to healthcare) with, say, having a nice car or a flat screen TV. I say it’s like having food on the table and a roof over your head. It’s a basic human need, not a luxury. And like food and housing, the government should play a role in providing it where the private sector cannot. We’re just on different wavelengths there. You think it’s a luxury, I say it’s a need.
.
And nobody, NOBODY past age 20 wants to live with their parents unless they have serious emotional problems, or if THEY are the ones that have to take care of their parents because they’re parents are sick. NOBODY. It’s obviously been a long time since you’ve been in your 20s!
And if it’s the fact that it’s their parents insurance that bugs you, I’d rather let them buy into Medicare, but you’d scream that that’s “socialism” and We Can’t Have THAT!”
“You seem to equate health insurance (and therefore access to healthcare) with, say, having a nice car or a flat screen TV. I say it’s like having food on the table and a roof over your head. It’s a basic human need, not a luxury.”
*
Interesting. So I take it you think that grocery stores and real estate should have price controls and be heavily regulated utilities?
Brian,
what your argument on the current generation of grads being lazy, or whatever, lacks is the connection between insurance and getting a job. On one hand you say that we have to separate healthcare from a job benefit. then you say just take any job for the benefits. that’s double talk. but, you haven’t shown that by kicking 24 year olds off insurance will make/encourage in any meaningful way to get a job.
******************************
additionally, don’t make the mistake of thinking that BA/BS means you get a job. between 1993 and 2003 the total number of grads increased over 40%, and has dont nothing but grow dramatically since 2003. the number of grads now with a BS/BA is a lot more than it was when you graduated, was more than it was when those who graduated before you graduated. A BS/BA is no longer a golden ticket it was 10-15 years ago, especially in this area. that being said, students are finding that a masters is something that they need to be competitive, and this is evident in the fact that masters programs are seeing an increase in applicants. getting a masters is very hard, you are fortunate to have a job with benefits while working on your JD in a local school. but you are a small portion of people in grad school. most academic advisors will tell you not to take more than 3-6 grad hours if working over 30 hours/week. also, some don’t have the luxury to work full time and take the necessary number of hours to qualify as full time students and thus be able to deer loan payments.
******************
it’s not as simple as you think and just because you, who worked for the federal government I believe and has an established history of solid work experience (something the average undergrad lacks), were able to does not mean that everyone is in that position.
*******************
further, let’s not forget that the higher the unemployment the more competitive job market. if you are a hiring manager would you hire an undergrad with no work experience aside from part time jobs over an unemployed person with significant work experience?
And nobody, NOBODY past age 20 wants to live with their parents unless they have serious emotional problems, or if THEY are the ones that have to take care of their parents because they’re parents are sick. NOBODY. It’s obviously been a long time since you’ve been in your 20s!
RichmondDem
on March 22nd, 2010
Having made this point isn’t it time you get out of your parents basement ?
“Social Security has enjoyed broad support among the American people….”
So then all that matters is that the American people like or enjoy the benefits of a program. When does the math trump popularity.
Is it your assertion that SS is in good fiscal shape ? Are you really making the case that the programs popularity is all that is needed for it to remain solvent ? Is it your contention that SS is and will continue to bring in enough money to cover outgoing payments ? Is it your contention that the SS lock box actually contains real assets ? Is it your contention that an IOU from congress after congress after congress has the full faith and credit of the American Gov’t ?
Put the BS and politics away for a bit. Set aside it’s popularity, this program is broke and on its way to continued red ink. It is not a left thing, it is not right thing, it is a math thing. Denying the existence of Trillions in red ink is the stuff of those who believe in tooth fairies, free ice cream and endless pools of money.
It isn’t a question of one’s political viewpoint. And it isn’t a question of what action should or should not be taken (as President Reagan acted) in order to insure the program’s continued viability. It is a matter of the consent of the governed.
.
Some of us think Social Security was, and is, a valuable program that should be continued. Others have opposed it from its inception and have never varied from their view that it should be killed. Republicans still want to kill it. I don’t expect that to change.
.
You don’t have to convince me that your position is correct. And you won’t likely succeed if you try. But you do have to convince a majority of the American people that Social Security should be scrapped. And if you can do that, good on you. But I doubt quite seriously that you will have much success with that. You can scoff at the popularity of the program and think the majority of the American people are stupid for supporting its continuation. But you still have to make a case that will change their minds. Good luck with that.
.
Thankfully, a subset of the minority political party doesn’t get to arbitrarily create public policy simply because they believe in those policies strongly. They first have to convince a majority of the American people. Ain’t democracy grand?
“Interesting. So I take it you think that grocery stores and real estate should have price controls and be heavily regulated utilities?”
.
Well, let’s see:
.
Grocery stores: Food stamps and WIC, agro subsidies, food safety regulations.
.
Real Estate: tax credits for home buyers, mortgage deductions, subsidies for low income/working poor renters, public housing for the extremely poor. Building codes, etc. The government does a lot in this country to make sure (1) as many people as possible have a roof over their heads, and (2) it doesn’t eat up a ridiculous amount of their income to do so. I bet every single homeowner on this thread that rants about “socialism” takes advantage of the mortgage deduction.
.
Stoner–
.
I haven’t lived with my parents (or any family) since high school, however I realize had I graduated one year later when the economy went down the toilet I might not have been so lucky.
“mortgage deduction”
*
Point taken, which incidentally is one of the reasons we find ourselves in our current economic predicament. The rest of it is mostly for the poor, and I don’t have any problem with programs for the legitimately poor which help them climb into the middle class.
*
I do, however, have a problem with entitlements for every swinging dick – people who make 86K shouldn’t get their shit subsidized.
Thankfully, a subset of the minority political party doesn’t get to arbitrarily create public policy simply because they believe in those policies strongly. They first have to convince a majority of the American people. Ain’t democracy grand?
Dan
on March 23rd, 2010
Jesus Christ you are thick as a brick. Did you even read my post ? did you actually comprehend the questions ? No, you go on some half assed rant about SS’s popularity. I was talking about its solvency !
The questions again were as follows , for Christs sake this time focus. Please !
When does the math trump popularity. ? Is it your assertion that SS is in good fiscal shape ? Are you really making the case that the programs popularity is all that is needed for it to remain solvent?Is it your contention that the SS lock box actually contains real assets ? If it will help focus pretend as if everyone in the room believes SS id the best thing sine sliced bread. Focus on the math ! It’s solvency Stupid !
Stone, I think it is your density that is the impediment to communication here. But I’ll try to penetrate that thick skull one more time.
.
“When does the math trump popularity. ?”
.
To deal with this question as posed we have to make the rather large assumption that what you call “the math” is actually “the math” and not your version of the math used to advance your political agenda. You have for instance said that the program is broke. It is not. It currently takes in more than it pays out in benefits and will continue to do so for several years to come. Must we take steps to insure its continued solvency as was done by Ronald Reagan? Of course. But there are a number of steps that can be taken other than throwing up our hands and scrapping the program as you suggest. But then you have little interest in taking those steps. Your political philosophy tells you the program should be scrapped. The program is viable if one has an interest in making the changes needed to keep it so. .
Which brings us to what you so flippantly call popularity. What is more properly called the will of the American people. I suspect that a substantial majority of the American people would choose making the changes (means testing, increasing the retirement age, higher payroll taxes or some combination or maybe something else) needed to the system rather than scrapping it as you would like to do.
.
And that is the point. The American people decide these things. Not G. Stone. The answer that your political philosophy calls for is one possible answer. But it is most definitely not the only possible answer. And the will of G.Stone does not trump the will of the American people.
.
You ask “Are you really making the case that the programs popularity is all that is needed for it to remain solvent?”
.
And you have the nerve to accuse others of misdirection and of misstating what you have said. Your picture must be next to the word chutzpah in the dictionary.
.
I most certainly never said that the strong public support of the program was all that was required to keep it solvent. But then you know that. You were being intentionally dishonest. I suspect it is a bit of that misdirection you so frequently engage in while at the same time falsely accusing others of doing it.
.
I guess that and calling others “thick” and “stupid” is how you react when someone else is right about something that you just can’t accept. I will repeat it for you.
.
It will be a cold day in Hell before you convince a majority of the American people that Social Security must be or should be scrapped. Too many of them remember Ronald Reagan. You remember him. He was president before the Republican Party went stark raving mad. He didn’t agree with you about Social Security either.