General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe progressive liberal way or nothing, bipartisan health care is not health care "concern trolls"
However, without overwhelming partisan supermajorities, a degree of bipartisanship is simply necessary to govern. Obama understood it, ignored the naysayers, and faced up to the challenge.Our politics may be broken, with an electorate so polarized that there is little to be gained by constructively engaging the opposing party and forging difficult compromises. But the governing structure designed by our Founders is not. Obama proved time and time again that bipartisan policymaking is still feasible within the framework of the Constitution. He just could have used more members of Congress who were willing to admit it.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/01/16/obamas_unsung_bipartisan_legacy_132798.html
Most people her at DU and in US do think we need a health care system that provide medical assistance to everyone.
But new laws can’t be created in a revolution, based on lofty rhetoric, devisees about anyone that thinks different than you, and no specifics about funding.
Any new health law would require a bipartisan undertaking, and must be viewed in relationship with with a new tax code scheme
They way Sanders and left wingers of our party is behaving is utterly disgusting, because they do not recognize or give credit to democratic politicians, and some of the moderate republicans, who are fighting for a more just and fair health care system.
Despite knowing both houses are controlled by republicans, and we have a fucked up neo nazi as president, who want to create havoc, and desperately needs some wins..
A new tax code is coming up your “troll” way”, ant it will stop any universal, single payer health system, in its tracks.
This is not the way real politics is done, and its why congress and senate have a historic low approval rating.
We need to listen to each other, and find common ground where it is to be found.
And hopefully we will reach some sort of universal, single payer health care system on the way.
But it won’t be easy, and it wont be under the leadership of the political revolution of the Sanders wing or our party.
It will be a undertaking that require patience, humility, and corporation over the party lines.
Something that Sanders has never, and will never understand.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)2) The GOP shows no interest in any input from Democratic Members of Congress.
3) Since McConnell has been Senate Majority Leader, only GOP votes matter.
4) In the House, the Hastert Rule is followed which mandates that any Bill will only be considered if it can be passed with GOP votes only.
So any talk of bipartisan undertakings ignores recent history and the actual composition of Congress.
Given all of that, I disagree with the premises and the conclusion of your post.
Note: FDR was opposed vehemently by the GOP of his day as well. Sanders, like FDR, is trying to move the debate in this country from bi-partisan, center right, corporate solutions to solutions that actually solve problems.
factfinder_77
(841 posts)I cannot support a piece of legislation that takes insurance away from tens of millions of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Nevadans.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Rand Paul opposes the Bill because it does not cut Government spending enough. It is not brutal enough for Paul.
The Graham/Cassidy/Heller Bill would indeed take away healthcare from millions.
Only by moving from a profit centered system to a single payer system can the problems be truly fixed.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)His name is in the title of the current ACA repeal bill. He helped write it, and he's consistently voted to repeal the ACA.
It's weird to me that you're intimately familiar with the progressive bill you oppose, but apparently don't even know the name of the bill that so many of us -- everyone from Sanders to former President Obama to the neighbors down the street -- are opposing and fighting like hell against, the one that's poised to strip millions of their health care.
factfinder_77
(841 posts)The Recovery Act – the economic stimulus law that blunted the recession – only passed after Obama accepted the demand from three Senate Republicans to reduce the size of the package by about $100 billion, mostly by paring back spending proposals. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill also squeaked through the Senate with three Republican votes. Obama sealed the deal after making a key concession to newly elected Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown, scrapping an outright ban on commercial banks investing in high-risk funds in favor of allowing limited investments.
In his second term, Obama withstood the civil libertarian outcry that followed the Edward Snowden leaks and shaped a bipartisan surveillance reform law – supported by more than three out of every four House Republicans -- that made some small concessions to privacy advocates without hindering the National Security Agency’s core counter-terrorism work.
Obama had several other bipartisan successes in which he kept a low profile during the legislative process, allowing Republicans to cross the aisle without seeming like they were doing him a political favor. The Pentagon and a bipartisan duo of Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins took the lead on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” winning over eight Senate Republicans for the final vote in the lame-duck 2010 session. Around the same time, a major food safety bill, designed to give the Food & Drug Administration more power to recall tainted goods, cleared the Senate by voice votes and picked up 10 House Republicans.
Earlier in 2010, a bill to reduce the racially discriminatory disparity in mandatory prison sentences between crack and powder cocaine convictions, flew through both houses of Congress on voice votes. In 2015, Obama let the House Republican and Democratic leaders spearhead a revamp of how Medicare reimburses physicians, moving toward a system where payments are based on quality of care instead of quantity of procedures.
Finally, there are two particularly consequential acts of bipartisanship that are poorly understood. One is the 2010 tax cut deal.
Obama was accused of capitulation when, after the 2010 midterms in which Republicans claimed the House, he agreed to extend George W. Bush’s signature tax cut law, which was due to expire, for two more years. In exchange, Republicans accepted a temporary extension for long-term unemployment insurance and a one-year payroll tax cut. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman claimed it was a recipe to make the Bush tax cuts permanent: “if Democrats give in to the blackmailers now, they’ll just face more demands in the future.” Bernie Sanders famously seized the Senate floor for eight hours in a desperate attempt to derail the compromise. Then in his own presidential bid, he criticized Obama for trying to be “reasonable” with Republicans.
But Obama wisely played the long game. He didn’t have the votes to repeal the tax cuts in 2010, before or after the midterms (vulnerable Democrats on the ballot in 2010 were nervous about forcing the issue before Election Day). So he punted until the end of 2012 when, if he won re-election, he would regain the whip hand.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Do you recall the 400 filibusters?
The endless attempts to "repeal and replace"?
The GOP only co-operated, if that is the word to use, when Obama agreed to extend the GOP agenda.
PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)There's just one problem: What do you do if the other side is fundamentally opposed to your goals?
bitterross
(4,066 posts)I really wish people would stop debating Sanders and the last election and start working on getting our agenda implemented.
Doing that will take compromise and it will mean we have to elect people who are a step along the way and not the pure candidate we'd like. Litmus tests that must be passed 100% are absurd.
We need to be realists. Not complete idealists.
factfinder_77
(841 posts)bitterross
(4,066 posts)I notice what seems to be a tendency to bring up Sanders and stir the pot. I don't find this helpful - keeping up the bashing about Sanders so much.
15 Democrats have already co-sponsored the bill. There must be something decent about it. Is there a better one out there by a Democrat that should be pursued?
My point was also that the "My way or the highway" and 100% passing of a litmus test attitudes do not work. It seems from your post we agree on that point.
Using a bill by Bernie as a starting point and then molding it would seem to be in that spirit. Bashing him and then trying to work from nothing does not seem productive.
Demsrule86
(68,504 posts)I support Sen. Sanders in his senate role, and he caucuses with us thank God, but I am not a fan.
bitterross
(4,066 posts)We can capitalize on that or we can spurn it. You don't have to join hands and sing kum by yah with him and his followers. You just have to be realistic and look at the fact we have some common goals we can help each other accomplish.
I do not think the same thing could be said of Jill Stein and the Green Party.
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)about Democrats and rewrite history into only his image. That means reality must be subverted. Judging by the election results, most of us are too smart for that and remember what Republican opposition and attacks are.
It's a shame that Sanders doesn't build on and talk up the attempts Democrats have made to attain universal health care, such as what the Clintons did in the early 90's. Why he doesn't describe events in context instead of demonizing Democrats is disturbing, to say the least.
bitterross
(4,066 posts)Considering we lost the White house, didn't retake the Senate, and made no real gains in the House it is difficult to disagree with Sanders when he criticizes the Democratic Party.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)bitterross
(4,066 posts)The more time we spend in our own circular firing squad the better off the GOP is.
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)Attack Republicans and do not spread damaging disinformation about Democrats.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)it's cheap entertainment and a lot of republican/corporate hired trolls are paid by the post.
" We're job providers" 
sarah FAILIN
(2,857 posts)It happened to me before the election and I was labelled a concern troll for talking about something I thought we could do to help that we weren't doing. This is just a stupid way to avoid talking about whatever the topic is
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)social security, medicare, Medicaid! It take years to balance and improve Americans BENEFITS.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)He does have a history for finding common ground - deeply rooted in Vermont politics going back to when he was mayor of Burlington.
I was impressed with his town hall with Chris Hayes in West Virginia with an audience that intentionally included Trump voters. Sanders DID show patience, respect and he spoke quietly and led many to at least start to rethink their positions. His work on the VA bill was an effort that passed at a time where very few bills did and it was because he worked across the aisle.
It is stunning that people who blasted Sanders for appealing to people who were not in the Democratic fold -- and no, I am not speaking of people to the left! -- as unable to understand the other side. He is actually pretty good at listening to the other side - even if he keeps his position as is. You can't get an approval rating about 70 percent in Vermont without getting many Republicans to approve of what you do.
PS I hope you look at some of these facts. On the veteran's bill - http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/bernie-sanders-john-mccain-va-deal-107491 , http://www.vermontbiz.com/news/june/senate-passes-sanders-mccain-veterans-bill (Note it passed nearly unanimously.) From the WV town Hall -
I dare you to watch the WV clips. Do you still believe he can not talk to people on the other side?
hedda_foil
(16,371 posts)Still going after Bernie, eh. Aren't you getting tired. What time is it in Vladavostok?
