7 ms·

the ACA was passed during a supermajority. You just said that democrats couldn't interfere with the republicans during theirs, so how on earth did the democrat

the ACA was passed during a supermajority. You just said that democrats couldn't interfere with the republicans during theirs, so how on earth did the democrats pass a bill that they didn't like? Not a single republican voted for the bill. I think that probably removes any intelligent reference you could make to Romneycare, which was bipartisan and for a single state. It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. No small immediate relief for renters getting the boot with a 1 trillion price tag that they could immediately add to. Your own article said McConnell wanted relief. It was her 2.2 trillion or nothing and she chose nothing. She did it knowing it would hurt trump. If she cared she'd do what she could to help and pass the trillion no?

AlisdairO 6y ago
> the ACA was passed during a supermajority. Nope. Lieberman was an independent and broke with the democrats on many issues, including the ACA: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-barack-obama-us-healthcare https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-... . Funnily enough, this kind of makes my point for me. Even during a near-supermajority, the Dems could barely pass some conservative healthcare reform, because the republicans threatened to filibuster almost everything. Historical report here: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 . The filibuster has since been watered down to reduce that kind of abuse - and honestly I think the Democrats have learned that they need to play hardball, because Republicans sure as hell aren't interested in compromise. In fairness to you, I did under-consider the effects of the use of the filibuster during Trump's term - appears that while the power of the filibuster has in general been watered down, the Democrats have been using it aggressively to block Trump's nominations. I wonder if the republicans regret kicking off this trend. > Not a single republican voted for the bill Sadly, we've reached a world where politicians largely vote as a block, not on their personal beliefs. I'd take this as indications of precisely nothing other than strategy. If you look at the bill itself, it's conservative, and a clear compromise from what the majority of Democrats want. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. Patently untrue - she's already come down from an initial position of 3T. So unless Pelosi caves to the Republicans' exact demands it's all on her? Let's imagine McConnell says that he'll approve a relief bill containing a trillion for the rich and a buck or two for the poor, is Pelosi solely responsible for delaying relief? Pelosi is trying to get a level of relief that she views as appropriate. Of course the threat of walking away has to be there - otherwise the other side is free to offer something completely inadequate. If Pelosi and Trump of all people can get close to agreeing, it's worth considering pointing the blame at McConnell.
- arkis22 6y ago
  so here's the timeline of the bill. https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-act/history-timeline-affordable-care-act-aca https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-a... It didn't even matter that Lieberman was independent. he's literally not mentioned. and it looks like we're both wrong, apparently there was one republican who voted for it. lol, what is your point? her position is now my 2.2 or nothing. and she was super happy with nothing. her level of relief is apparently 0. but she can walk away morally and the republicans can't right? jeez. imagine being called amoral for asking for less lol
  - AlisdairO 6y ago
    Lieberman was a huge reason for the bill being as conservative as it was - for example: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletter-article/senate-democrats-drop-public-option-woo-lieberman-and-liberals-howl https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletter-art... . My point is, why is it that if Pelosi doesn't bend the knee, she bears sole responsibility for an agreement being reached? If she and the white house can agree, why can't McConnell be blamed? Your position seems to be that she should just take what she can get, but why shouldn't McConnell take what he can get? This is a negotiation. The idea that either side bears sole responsibility is crazy to me.
- koolba 6y ago
  If she actually cared about getting a deal for stimulus she’d scrap the unrelated nonsense like national elimination of voter ID: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/23/fact-check-houses-heroes-act-changes-state-voter-id-requirements/5203381002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/23/fac... That’s just one of the many impossible pills in that bill that make it a non-starter. Knowingly including garbage like that in what is framed as a COVID stimulus bill is deliberate sabotage.
  - AlisdairO 6y ago
    I agree that this sort of stuff is awful, and I don't support it one bit. But the reality is that provisions like this aren't going to make it into the final bill, and there's no indication that this is some kind of red line - just a negotiating position. Similarly the republicans are also setting their demands up in a way they know democrats will never accept: a low relief figure, excessive corporate protection from liability towards employees. I don't like it one bit (and I've always favored targeted bills), but there's also no real indication that this provision is what is holding things up - right now, all the talk is about the dollar amount. Senate republicans can't even pass the 1T amount for the HEALS act right now, and are facing severe internal division over the proposed amount.
joshuamorton 6y ago
> Not a single republican voted for the bill. I think that probably removes any intelligent reference you could make to Romneycare, which was bipartisan and for a single state. McConnell threatened to filibuster due to the inclusion of the individual mandate which was in Romneycare (and still exists today in the form of a tax[0]). This was part of McConnell's strategy to prevent any democrat from doing anything, even things that have republican or popular support, even among republicans. For example, while holding the majority, he prevents bills, which would pass on a floor vote, from getting that vote. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. IDK, it sounds like she found a deal with the President, and McConnell refused it. I'd also expect that, like I mentioned above, the relief bill the house passed would pass a floor vote in the senate, which is why McConnell would refuse to bring it to a vote. If anything, it sounds like he's the one saying its his bill or nothing. Notably, you ignore the important point that McConnell also doesn't want relief to take effect until next year. Yes McConnell claims to want relief, he also claims to want to repeal the ACA. He claims a lot of things for political reasons that he doesn't actually want. I've edited this post to address the (incorrect) response below. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v._Sebelius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Federation_of_Indepen...
- arkis22 6y ago
  the individual mandate has been ruled illegal btw. I'm sorry, but you're not denying that her point was my bill or nothing. you just seem to think that trumps desperation to pass a bill gives you legitimacy. which is, lets be clear, rich with irony. WOAH: "Notably, you ignore the important point that McConnell also doesn't want relief to take effect until next year." what is your source for that lol. why on earth would that ever make sense. and I mean that kind of loses effect if dems have refused to pass anything for the previous 3 months just so they could pass something when trump loses
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    He's stated as much. His goal was to start the new term by passing an aid bill. Pelosi wanted one sooner. > and I mean that kind of loses effect if dems have refused to pass anything for the previous 3 months just so they could pass something when trump loses Right, this is your invention and justification. We've moved into inappropriate for hn territory, so I'll stop now.

AlisdairO 6y ago

> the ACA was passed during a supermajority. Nope. Lieberman was an independent and broke with the democrats on many issues, including the ACA: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-barack-obama-us-healthcare https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/16/joe-lieberman-... . Funnily enough, this kind of makes my point for me. Even during a near-supermajority, the Dems could barely pass some conservative healthcare reform, because the republicans threatened to filibuster almost everything. Historical report here: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna35643530 . The filibuster has since been watered down to reduce that kind of abuse - and honestly I think the Democrats have learned that they need to play hardball, because Republicans sure as hell aren't interested in compromise. In fairness to you, I did under-consider the effects of the use of the filibuster during Trump's term - appears that while the power of the filibuster has in general been watered down, the Democrats have been using it aggressively to block Trump's nominations. I wonder if the republicans regret kicking off this trend. > Not a single republican voted for the bill Sadly, we've reached a world where politicians largely vote as a block, not on their personal beliefs. I'd take this as indications of precisely nothing other than strategy. If you look at the bill itself, it's conservative, and a clear compromise from what the majority of Democrats want. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. Patently untrue - she's already come down from an initial position of 3T. So unless Pelosi caves to the Republicans' exact demands it's all on her? Let's imagine McConnell says that he'll approve a relief bill containing a trillion for the rich and a buck or two for the poor, is Pelosi solely responsible for delaying relief? Pelosi is trying to get a level of relief that she views as appropriate. Of course the threat of walking away has to be there - otherwise the other side is free to offer something completely inadequate. If Pelosi and Trump of all people can get close to agreeing, it's worth considering pointing the blame at McConnell.

arkis22 6y ago
so here's the timeline of the bill. https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-act/history-timeline-affordable-care-act-aca https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/resources/affordable-care-a... It didn't even matter that Lieberman was independent. he's literally not mentioned. and it looks like we're both wrong, apparently there was one republican who voted for it. lol, what is your point? her position is now my 2.2 or nothing. and she was super happy with nothing. her level of relief is apparently 0. but she can walk away morally and the republicans can't right? jeez. imagine being called amoral for asking for less lol
- AlisdairO 6y ago
  Lieberman was a huge reason for the bill being as conservative as it was - for example: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletter-article/senate-democrats-drop-public-option-woo-lieberman-and-liberals-howl https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletter-art... . My point is, why is it that if Pelosi doesn't bend the knee, she bears sole responsibility for an agreement being reached? If she and the white house can agree, why can't McConnell be blamed? Your position seems to be that she should just take what she can get, but why shouldn't McConnell take what he can get? This is a negotiation. The idea that either side bears sole responsibility is crazy to me.
koolba 6y ago
If she actually cared about getting a deal for stimulus she’d scrap the unrelated nonsense like national elimination of voter ID: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/23/fact-check-houses-heroes-act-changes-state-voter-id-requirements/5203381002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/05/23/fac... That’s just one of the many impossible pills in that bill that make it a non-starter. Knowingly including garbage like that in what is framed as a COVID stimulus bill is deliberate sabotage.
- AlisdairO 6y ago
  I agree that this sort of stuff is awful, and I don't support it one bit. But the reality is that provisions like this aren't going to make it into the final bill, and there's no indication that this is some kind of red line - just a negotiating position. Similarly the republicans are also setting their demands up in a way they know democrats will never accept: a low relief figure, excessive corporate protection from liability towards employees. I don't like it one bit (and I've always favored targeted bills), but there's also no real indication that this provision is what is holding things up - right now, all the talk is about the dollar amount. Senate republicans can't even pass the 1T amount for the HEALS act right now, and are facing severe internal division over the proposed amount.

joshuamorton 6y ago

> Not a single republican voted for the bill. I think that probably removes any intelligent reference you could make to Romneycare, which was bipartisan and for a single state. McConnell threatened to filibuster due to the inclusion of the individual mandate which was in Romneycare (and still exists today in the form of a tax[0]). This was part of McConnell's strategy to prevent any democrat from doing anything, even things that have republican or popular support, even among republicans. For example, while holding the majority, he prevents bills, which would pass on a floor vote, from getting that vote. > It was Pelosi. Her position was my bill or nothing. IDK, it sounds like she found a deal with the President, and McConnell refused it. I'd also expect that, like I mentioned above, the relief bill the house passed would pass a floor vote in the senate, which is why McConnell would refuse to bring it to a vote. If anything, it sounds like he's the one saying its his bill or nothing. Notably, you ignore the important point that McConnell also doesn't want relief to take effect until next year. Yes McConnell claims to want relief, he also claims to want to repeal the ACA. He claims a lot of things for political reasons that he doesn't actually want. I've edited this post to address the (incorrect) response below. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v._Sebelius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Federation_of_Indepen...

arkis22 6y ago
the individual mandate has been ruled illegal btw. I'm sorry, but you're not denying that her point was my bill or nothing. you just seem to think that trumps desperation to pass a bill gives you legitimacy. which is, lets be clear, rich with irony. WOAH: "Notably, you ignore the important point that McConnell also doesn't want relief to take effect until next year." what is your source for that lol. why on earth would that ever make sense. and I mean that kind of loses effect if dems have refused to pass anything for the previous 3 months just so they could pass something when trump loses
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  He's stated as much. His goal was to start the new term by passing an aid bill. Pelosi wanted one sooner. > and I mean that kind of loses effect if dems have refused to pass anything for the previous 3 months just so they could pass something when trump loses Right, this is your invention and justification. We've moved into inappropriate for hn territory, so I'll stop now.