Rants and musings on current events from an eco-humanist college professor in Minnesota.
15 August 2009
Ideological orientation: why we still have problems
In contrast to the party affiliation map posted below, this recent survey of ideological orientation shows why we can't seem to get anything done. Though the country has repudiated George W. Bush's brand of neo-con insanity it remains are heart very conservative.
This map also explains why people like me much prefer to live in the Pacific Northwest or New England-- and it ain't just the weather.
-Dr. DRL
Reality in a map: national party affiliation
Here's a recent map produced by Gallup from their polling data:
It's hard not to notice the very small bit of red there. The problem is, even the deep blue states are electing Democrats that aren't at all progressive, so the majorities in congress are meaningless. A 60 seat Senate majority isn't going to accomplish much at all if ten of them are conservatives who will vote with the minority on every important bill.
But still, one would hope this map reflects a long-term change that will lead to the marginalization of the neo-cons and their remaining few cultural conservative allies who actually hold power (vs. the blubberheads on TV and radio who exploit the rank-and-file dunderheads for profit).
-Dr.DRL
It's hard not to notice the very small bit of red there. The problem is, even the deep blue states are electing Democrats that aren't at all progressive, so the majorities in congress are meaningless. A 60 seat Senate majority isn't going to accomplish much at all if ten of them are conservatives who will vote with the minority on every important bill.
But still, one would hope this map reflects a long-term change that will lead to the marginalization of the neo-cons and their remaining few cultural conservative allies who actually hold power (vs. the blubberheads on TV and radio who exploit the rank-and-file dunderheads for profit).
-Dr.DRL
12 August 2009
Healthcare post-mortem: how the bastards won
It doesn't get much clearer than this statement from Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR), one of the Blue Dog leadership and a pawn of the insurance industry:
"We ensured that if there is a government option, it will be just that -- an option -- and it won't be mandated on anybody. If it had been based on Medicare rates, I can assure you that it would have eventually ended up resulting in a single payer-type system, because Medicare has really good rates, because they're negotiating for every senior in America. Private insurance companies could not have competed with that."
So the problem with a single-payer system is that it would be cheaper, perhaps as cheap as Medicare, so that's off the table because private for-profit companies couldn't compete. Instead of controlling costs by negotiating prices and encouraging economies of scale, my personal funds AND my tax dollars will continue to line the pockets of insurance industry execs and their stockholders who bring literally nothing to health care except their parasitic drain on the system.
All because people like Mike Ross think it's more important to keep the parasites afloat than to make health care accessible and affordable to all Americans.
Bastards.
-Dr. DRL
"We ensured that if there is a government option, it will be just that -- an option -- and it won't be mandated on anybody. If it had been based on Medicare rates, I can assure you that it would have eventually ended up resulting in a single payer-type system, because Medicare has really good rates, because they're negotiating for every senior in America. Private insurance companies could not have competed with that."
So the problem with a single-payer system is that it would be cheaper, perhaps as cheap as Medicare, so that's off the table because private for-profit companies couldn't compete. Instead of controlling costs by negotiating prices and encouraging economies of scale, my personal funds AND my tax dollars will continue to line the pockets of insurance industry execs and their stockholders who bring literally nothing to health care except their parasitic drain on the system.
All because people like Mike Ross think it's more important to keep the parasites afloat than to make health care accessible and affordable to all Americans.
Bastards.
-Dr. DRL
10 August 2009
Time to euthanize health care reform
It's time to pack it in folks. The Democrats have proven they don't have the political will to actually produce a reasonable bill this year, so I'd rather see health care reform defeated entirely. There's little value to passing a "reform" that fails in include a public option, fails to control prescription costs, and basically gives the store away to the insurance industry.
Blame Harry Reid for this; the Senate blew it from day one. If the Democrats had any balls (that goes for the few women in the Senate as well) they would have told the Republicans to screw themselves and simply passed a good bill for the president to sign. Instead, they have blown a once-in-a-generation chance at meaningful reform in favor of "bipartisanship" and pandering.
Obama hasn't helped. His willingness to cave on every important aspect of reform shows he was never really a progressive-- he's a Clinton centrist at heart --who wants a political victory more than a meaningful solution.
The really sad thing about this is that we had only one chance. The Democrats have pissed it away by pandering to the right, to the Blue Dogs, and to the Republicans because they are afraid of them. What we really need is another LBJ in the Senate, rather than candy-ass Harry Reid, and a president who is willing to expend some political capital to achieve what no others could do.
As people said last fall "elections have consequences." If nothing else, George Bush realized that and acted on it. But in this case, the major consequence for America is that we've lost what was probably the best chance we've ever had at joining the rest of the industrialized world in having a 20th century health care system (there was never any chance of having a 21st century system). It won't come again for a generation. Hopefully by then Reid will have been sent out to pasture and we'll have a president who really means what he says when he's talking to progressives.
-Dr.DRL
Blame Harry Reid for this; the Senate blew it from day one. If the Democrats had any balls (that goes for the few women in the Senate as well) they would have told the Republicans to screw themselves and simply passed a good bill for the president to sign. Instead, they have blown a once-in-a-generation chance at meaningful reform in favor of "bipartisanship" and pandering.
Obama hasn't helped. His willingness to cave on every important aspect of reform shows he was never really a progressive-- he's a Clinton centrist at heart --who wants a political victory more than a meaningful solution.
The really sad thing about this is that we had only one chance. The Democrats have pissed it away by pandering to the right, to the Blue Dogs, and to the Republicans because they are afraid of them. What we really need is another LBJ in the Senate, rather than candy-ass Harry Reid, and a president who is willing to expend some political capital to achieve what no others could do.
As people said last fall "elections have consequences." If nothing else, George Bush realized that and acted on it. But in this case, the major consequence for America is that we've lost what was probably the best chance we've ever had at joining the rest of the industrialized world in having a 20th century health care system (there was never any chance of having a 21st century system). It won't come again for a generation. Hopefully by then Reid will have been sent out to pasture and we'll have a president who really means what he says when he's talking to progressives.
-Dr.DRL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)