What are the political rammifications of healthcare reform?

[RobinFinderson]

Republicans are saying this will result in landslide victories for their team, yet this is undeniably a huge victory for Obama. What will be the long-term political ramifications of health insurance reform? Is repeal a realistic goal?

[Goatnapper'96]

Republicans are saying this will result in landslide victories for their team, yet this is undeniably a huge victory for Obama. What will be the long-term political ramifications of health insurance reform? Is repeal a realistic goal?

I think it will result in Republicans picking up plenty of seats in Congress. I doubt there is any repeal of much of this bill.

I think this is a Pyrric victory for the Democrats. It increases the number of people covered, but what exactly that provides in the way of health care improvement is pretty questionable IMO. So I doubt it will do the little commoner very much good. But it will be a perceived entitlement so I cannot forsee the Republicans doing much repealing.

The victory for Obama, IMO, comes if the Republicans can take majorities in Congress. Being able to publicly square off with meanie Republicans would be a huge boon for Obama. I think that is the key for his reelection. If Democrats maintain control of Congress, Obama is likely to lose in 2012.

I also think the tactics used and the emotional roller coaster/pride is likely to result in a huge gridlock in DC. That could improve if Republicans take Congress but I doubt this issue will be touched. It would be a tar baby for Republicans. I think parts could be improved but I doubt that happens.

[SoonerCoug]

The victory for Obama, IMO, comes if the Republicans can take majorities in Congress. Being able to publicly square off with meanie Republicans would be a huge boon for Obama. I think that is the key for his reelection. If Democrats maintain control of Congress, Obama is likely to lose in 2012.

Maybe I'm wrong, I think Obama would sincerely engage the Repubicans in productive discussions of tort reform and cost control measures. I actually want the Republicans to take back control of the house and senate for this very reason. It's a win-win. The Dems pass their civil rights legislation (and it is civil rights legislation for people with chronic diseases), and the Republicans pass tort reform. I'd like that.

[RobinFinderson]

I think it will result in Republicans picking up plenty of seats in Congress. I doubt there is any repeal of much of this bill.

I think this is a Pyrric victory for the Democrats. It increases the number of people covered, but what exactly that provides in the way of health care improvement is pretty questionable IMO. So I doubt it will do the little commoner very much good. But it will be a perceived entitlement so I cannot forsee the Republicans doing much repealing.

The victory for Obama, IMO, comes if the Republicans can take majorities in Congress. Being able to publicly square off with meanie Republicans would be a huge boon for Obama. I think that is the key for his reelection. If Democrats maintain control of Congress, Obama is likely to lose in 2012.

I also think the tactics used and the emotional roller coaster/pride is likely to result in a huge gridlock in DC. That could improve if Republicans take Congress but I doubt this issue will be touched. It would be a tar baby for Republicans. I think parts could be improved but I doubt that happens.

We've already heard a couple of CUF testimonials about how the ending of pre-existing conditions exclusions will be a life saver for those who have been denied affordable coverage because of problems like depression and Crohn's disease. Republicans have been saying that this is unpopular, and they are right, however I think that much of the unpopularity is the result of lack of understanding and disappointment in the process. Are people really going to vote for people who support the rights of insurance companies to go back to excluding coverage to families with members that suffer from depression and genetic disorders?

I totally understand that a majority of Americans are repulsed by the sausage making process, but maybe, when it comes to election season, we will like the taste of the sausage.

[statman]

Maybe I'm wrong, I think Obama would sincerely engage the Repubicans in productive discussions of tort reform and cost control measures. I actually want the Republicans to take back control of the house and senate for this very reason. It's a win-win. The Dems pass their civil rights legislation (and it is civil rights legislation for people with chronic diseases), and the Republicans pass tort reform. I'd like that.

Obama has never sincerely engaged ANYONE in an political discussion on any topic. He is part of the Chicago machine. The machine doesn't engage...

[Goatnapper'96]

We've already heard a couple of CUF testimonials about how the ending of pre-existing conditions exclusions will be a life saver for those who have been denied affordable coverage because of problems like depression and Crohn's disease. Republicans have been saying that this is unpopular, and they are right, however I think that much of the unpopularity is the result of lack of understanding and disappointment in the process. Are people really going to vote for people who support the rights of insurance companies to go back to excluding coverage to families with members that suffer from depression and genetic disorders?

I totally understand that a majority of Americans are repulsed by the sausage making process, but maybe, when it comes to election season, we will like the taste of the sausage.

I think it is unpopular due to the cost and the methods used to bring it to fruition. I don't think those who understand this issue have problems with the non-exclusion clause for those with pre-existing conditions. My issue is to put it in and then to not make the pool big enough that the cost of coverage for those is not disproportionately born by those with the responsibility to already have had insurance. The failure to not sufficiently punish those who are healthy and thus choose to go uninsured is a collosal mistake and is likely to cause some really high premiums or little coverage within the premium.

[Goatnapper'96]

Maybe I'm wrong, I think Obama would sincerely engage the Repubicans in productive discussions of tort reform and cost control measures. I actually want the Republicans to take back control of the house and senate for this very reason. It's a win-win. The Dems pass their civil rights legislation (and it is civil rights legislation for people with chronic diseases), and the Republicans pass tort reform. I'd like that.

He would only engage them if he had no choice. How much of that was included in this rendition and why could it not have been?