Skidmore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:17 PM
Original message |
True reform, I repeat, will not occur until healthcare is removed from |
|
Edited on Mon Dec-21-09 02:19 PM by Skidmore
the employer based system, taken from the unions to use as a bargaining chip, made to be nonprofit, and is single payer.
With whatever ends up as law, this is the place to steer it to in the future.
|
Greyhound
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:19 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Yep, and most of us will be dead before that is allowed. n/t |
BrklynLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:19 PM
Response to Original message |
2. No, true reform will not occur until the filibuster is removed /nt |
el_bryanto
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. you realize the filibuster works both ways, right? |
|
I mean we used it and the threat of it back when the Republicans controlled the White House and Senate - some people felt like we didn't use it enough.
Bryant
|
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Get rid of it. It is unDemocratic /nt |
el_bryanto
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Well it is certainly a brake on democracy, that's for sure |
|
But consider some of judges who would be sitting right now without it. And other problems.
Bryant
|
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. and yes, I know it cuts both ways /nt |
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. Only in the strict sense |
|
It is undemocratic in the sense of "mob rule". But you don't want "pure" democracy. The Representative form of government we have is preferable. The filibuster needs some modification, probably towards something similar to the reconciliation rule they now have. But elimination isn't the answer. (Also, we have a problem in the senate with the fact that each state has two senators. Worked great when there were 13 colonies. With 50 states it's a problem) I do wonder if a filibuster should be required to have some geographical support, i.e. 2 states from each "federal region". There are 10 if I recall correctly.
|
TheBigotBasher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
11. They threaten to use it on everything. |
|
The Democratic Party used it against some Supreme Courrt appointments and backed down on worse choices.
It is undemocratic and it gives power to a single Senator to work against the programme that he or she was elected on.
|
defendandprotect
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message |
8. After Dems/Obama cement corporations in this HC Deform ... we'll get them out???? |
Skidmore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. I'd say take their monopoly status away from them and make them |
|
all nonprofits. Take the profit motive away.
|
xchrom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. More like the Swiss model or regulated public utlities. |
|
Not sure I detect any will to get even there.
Opting in this real time for extreme complexity rather than real reform doesn't bode well -- even for the laughable incrementalists.
|
amborin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Dec-21-09 04:46 PM
Response to Original message |
OneBlueSky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Dec-22-09 10:54 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 06:22 AM
Response to Original message |