Is the Senate positioned as our governmental saviour with bipartisan solutions? (1 Viewer)

[Koya]

The house vote on Obamacare got me thinking - we have an authoritarian in the White House whose essentially been co-opted by the far right (even though most of his life was as a Dem).  Plus the executive branch is in organizational shambles with a lack of understanding as to how governance works in addition to competing agendas.

The house, rooted in gerrymandered and safe districts is as polarised as ever - so much so they voted on a "plan" that seems terribly unpopular even in strong right leaning districts. Just no chance to work across party lines.

Then, we have the Senate. Bound by a need to win a popular vote in a straight representative democracy, there is a need to work together. The talk that the senate may all but start from scratch on a health care bill is indicative of that...

let's play this out - is the Senate the only adult in the room? Can they go back to pre contract with America days and legitimately hammer out a compromise? And, if so, and if they can have bipartisan support which is likely necessary there, what happens when their bilaterally supported bill goes to the house? You can't just blame the Dems in that case.

Could this be an opportunity for the legislature, through the Senate, to both take back some of the executive branch creep we've seen while also positioning themselves as the best embodiment of our nation's collective will? 

Woth a President who needs the optics of winning more than substantive success and a house mired in the prettiest of partisan politics, does health care provide a path for the Senate to propose a balanced and comprehensive solution which the Pres jumps on as a path to victory further empowering the Senate in similar dynamical situations in the future?

 

[Eephus]

If Mitch McConnell is the new savior, it explains why Jesus wore a beard

 

[timschochet]

- is the Senate the only adult in the room?

We really won't know until they are given a chance to be one. Here is their first real chance.

But don't forget if they change this bill too much it will go back to the House and fail. So they're going to be under tremendous pressure simply to go along. Let's see if they do. 

 

[Koya]

If Mitch McConnell is the new savior, it explains why Jesus wore a beard

I'm not sure Mitch can hold together the legitimately vulnerable Senators who would feel the backlash from this bill. 

 

[Koya]

We really won't know until they are given a chance to be one. Here is their first real chance.

But don't forget if they change this bill too much it will go back to the House and fail. So they're going to be under tremendous pressure simply to go along. Let's see if they do. 

That is part of my point - they DO change it drastically and it has support from both parties. The president does the calculus and latches on to a "bipartisan win" - now the house is going to jump in and be their usually beholden to the extreme partisan (right, since that's whose in power right now)... not a great position for them to be in if the senate shows a bipartisan solution IS possible.

 

[timschochet]

That is part of my point - they DO change it drastically and it has support from both parties. The president does the calculus and latches on to a "bipartisan win" - now the house is going to jump in and be their usually beholden to the extreme partisan (right, since that's whose in power right now)... not a great position for them to be in if the senate shows a bipartisan solution IS possible.

Ah. 

I'd actually love to see this. But I don't believe the Democratic Senators are going to do anything to help Republicans here. From a political standpoint, why should they? 

 

[Koya]

Ah. 

I'd actually love to see this. But I don't believe the Democratic Senators are going to do anything to help Republicans here. From a political standpoint, why should they? 

Because maybe, JUST MAYBE, this is that moment in time where the Dems and Reps in the Senate seize the chance to come up not with legislation but a solution - one that no one loves but everyone can live with... one that doesn't give each extreme faction their demands but rather serves the moderates in a more practical fashion.

maybe this is Ann opportunity to align pulling Back power from the exec branch, pulling it from trump himself, emboldening the Senate AND positioning individual senators for political gain in their own races. 

Nothing motivates better than enlightened self interest and this may provide an opportunity for just that. 

 

[Boston]

Maybe if the Obamacare at the start was bi-partisan we wouldn't have to worry about this...that being said it would be nice to see some grown-up behavior from both sides and come up with something legit...

 

[MaxThreshold]

Because maybe, JUST MAYBE, this is that moment in time where the Dems and Reps in the Senate seize the chance to come up not with legislation but a solution - one that no one loves but everyone can live with... one that doesn't give each extreme faction their demands but rather serves the moderates in a more practical fashion.

maybe this is Ann opportunity to align pulling Back power from the exec branch, pulling it from trump himself, emboldening the Senate AND positioning individual senators for political gain in their own races. 

I'm looking for something that will ultimately address COST of care, not some horse#### bill that simply pumps up talking point numbers ("more insured" - on insurance they can't use).

If what happened today makes that happen, I'm fully on board with that.

I also wish everyone was concerned about executive power the previous 8 years.  Seems a bit disingenuous talking about it now as if it's a problem.

 

[timschochet]

Because maybe, JUST MAYBE, this is that moment in time where the Dems and Reps in the Senate seize the chance to come up not with legislation but a solution - one that no one loves but everyone can live with... one that doesn't give each extreme faction their demands but rather serves the moderates in a more practical fashion.

maybe this is Ann opportunity to align pulling Back power from the exec branch, pulling it from trump himself, emboldening the Senate AND positioning individual senators for political gain in their own races. 

Nothing motivates better than enlightened self interest and this may provide an opportunity for just that. 

Now I just heard Hugh Hewitt, and he shares your idea, and he suggests that McConnell visits with Schumer and proposes a grand deal- healthcare, immigration reform, infrastructure spending. That sounds tremendous, doesn't it?

But I just have trouble seeing it happen. Too many selfish interests, on both sides, against working together on this stuff. 

 

[timschochet]

I'm looking for something that will ultimately address COST of care, not some horse#### bill that simply pumps up talking point numbers ("more insured" - on insurance they can't use).

If what happened today makes that happen, I'm fully on board with that.

I also wish everyone was concerned about executive power the previous 8 years.  Seems a bit disingenuous talking about it now as if it's a problem.

See Max, the reason I'm willing to respond to you and not to some other people around here who tend to always agree with you (like BeaverCleaver for example) is that once in a while you offer posts like this that make me believe that your heart is in the right place. But I wish you'd spend less time constantly trolling anyone who disagrees with you or who is genuinely concerned with the politics and competency of Donald Trump. 

 

[Polish Hammer]

See Max, the reason I'm willing to respond to you and not to some other people around here who tend to always agree with you (like BeaverCleaver for example) is that once in a while you offer posts like this that make me believe that your heart is in the right place. But I wish you'd spend less time constantly trolling anyone who disagrees with you or who is genuinely concerned with the politics and competency of Donald Trump. 

Tim, not sure if if you realize this, but you didn't actually respond to him.  You offered Max a fatherly little pat on the head letting him know he might be able to continue to win your approval if he keeps on the straight and narrow as you define it.  I follow some of the same threads as you and realize you're an intelligent fellow that is well read on many topics.  But sometimes I wonder if you know or care how you can be perceived.  I don't think you intended to be slightly condescending here, but it certainly could be read that way.  Just some food for thought.  

 

[jon_mx]

Tim, not sure if if you realize this, but you didn't actually respond to him.  You offered Max a fatherly little pat on the head letting him know he might be able to continue to win your approval if he keeps on the straight and narrow as you define it.  I follow some of the same threads as you and realize you're an intelligent fellow that is well read on many topics.  But sometimes I wonder if you know or care how you can be perceived.  I don't think you intended to be slightly condescending here, but it certainly could be read that way.  Just some food for thought.  

Slightly?  

 

[timschochet]

Tim, not sure if if you realize this, but you didn't actually respond to him.  You offered Max a fatherly little pat on the head letting him know he might be able to continue to win your approval if he keeps on the straight and narrow as you define it.  I follow some of the same threads as you and realize you're an intelligent fellow that is well read on many topics.  But sometimes I wonder if you know or care how you can be perceived.  I don't think you intended to be slightly condescending here, but it certainly could be read that way.  Just some food for thought.  

I didn't respond to him specifically because I agree with most of what he wrote. I have responded to him earlier today, was criticized for "feeding the troll", and my post was a response to that charge. 

I am condescending at times. I try not to be. 

 

[timschochet]

Slightly?  

I've never been condescending towards you, jon. Can you hear me down there? 

 

[jon_mx]

I've never been condescending towards you, jon. Can you hear me down there? 

You spoke to me!  

 

[Phil Elliott]

I think the Federal and Appeals courts are the counter to Trump. If the Senate ends up passing a version of health care and it becomes law, there will be the same parade to SCOTUS as when Obama originally passed ACA.

 

[Reg Lllama of Brixton]

If Mitch McConnell is the new savior, it explains why Jesus wore a beard

Mitch McConnell looks like a galapagos tortoise c0ck

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Yes, the same Senate that can't confirm a SCOTUS appointee without turning into a three ring circus is adult in the room. /s

 

[Sinn Fein]

No 

 

[jon_mx]

I think the Federal and Appeals courts are the counter to Trump. If the Senate ends up passing a version of health care and it becomes law, there will be the same parade to SCOTUS as when Obama originally passed ACA.

Based upon what?   Strictly speaking, the government mandate probably should have been ruled unconstitutional. 

 

[jon_mx]

Yes, the same Senate that can't confirm a SCOTUS appointee without turning into a three ring circus is adult in the room. /s

In a room filled with pre-schoolers, the 12 year old would be the adult. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

I looked at this cat a half dozen times before opening and only did so to announce that it may well be the stoopidest question i ever seen in print.

 

[MikeIke]

That is part of my point - they DO change it drastically and it has support from both parties. The president does the calculus and latches on to a "bipartisan win" - now the house is going to jump in and be their usually beholden to the extreme partisan (right, since that's whose in power right now)... not a great position for them to be in if the senate shows a bipartisan solution IS possible.

The chances of that happening are about the same as for this:

See Max, the reason I'm willing to respond to you and not to some other people around here who tend to always agree with you (like BeaverCleaver for example) is that once in a while you offer posts like this that make me believe that your heart is in the right place.  But I wish you'd spend less time constantly trolling anyone who disagrees with you or who is genuinely concerned with the politics and competency of Donald Trump.  

 

[jon_mx]

I looked at this cat a half dozen times before opening and only did so to announce that it may well be the stoopidest question i ever seen in print.

Hmmm.  This may merit its own thread.  Shirley there have been stoopider topics.  

 

[wikkidpissah]

Hmmm.  This may merit its own thread.  Shirley there have been stoopider topics.  

*hands on hips* ...and just who is Shirley in this scenario?!

 

[Higgs]

Couldn't just post this in the Trump thread or the Trumpcare thread?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Hmmm.  This may merit its own thread.  Shirley there have been stoopider topics.  

The one about whether Kate Upton is hot (started when she was in her prime) would be a good candidate.

 

[Koya]

I'm looking for something that will ultimately address COST of care, not some horse#### bill that simply pumps up talking point numbers ("more insured" - on insurance they can't use).

If what happened today makes that happen, I'm fully on board with that.

I also wish everyone was concerned about executive power the previous 8 years.  Seems a bit disingenuous talking about it now as if it's a problem.

Many of us were and continue to be very critical of the expanse of executive power for going well over 15 years, including some egregious overreach by Obama. Even if you agreed with how he used it (I generallt didn't), the shortsightedness to not know eventually at best a member of the "other party" would at some point get the mantle and, in this case, an extreme authoritarian was terribly self serving and harmful to the Republic.

Either way, I hope - though doubt - this opportunity to pull back some control is not wasted. 

I can dream.

 

[Koya]

Yes, the same Senate that can't confirm a SCOTUS appointee without turning into a three ring circus is adult in the room. /s

Welcome to America in 2017.

 

[Koya]

Couldn't just post this in the Trump thread or the Trumpcare thread?

Not about Trump directly. 

Don't like it don't freakin read and post in this thread.

 

[jon_mx]

The one about whether Kate Upton is hot (started when she was in her prime) would be a good candidate.

That was ridiculous.  So was MoP's thread on which pizza deal was better.  

 

[Dedfin]

Couldn't just post this in the Trump thread or the Trumpcare thread?

I agree with this.  Koya is the man, but I think this could go into one of the other political threads.  There are plenty of people here that don't like politics threads and we could at least save them a bit of grief by not populating the front page with more of them.

 

[Koya]

I agree with this.  Koya is the man, but I think this could go into one of the other political threads.  There are plenty of people here that don't like politics threads and we could at least save them a bit of grief by not populating the front page with more of them.

I was going to post it in that thread - would get lost in the back ad forth dribble and trolling. This is about a rare moment when we could see a legit shuffling of power among the key branches of govt. 

and im curious about that very scenario. Place it in the other thread I fear it would be lost in five pages of crap within minutes.

dont like this thread just don't click on it. This isn't rocket science 

 

[fantasycurse42]

What bipartisanship are you speaking of? Everything is Republican controlled.

 

[fightingillini]

Yes, the same Senate that can't confirm a SCOTUS appointee without turning into a three ring circus is adult in the room. /s

Or the same Senate Democrats who delayed confirmation hearings for much of Trump's cabinet.

You might get a couple of very vulnerable Senate Democrats to play ball, like Manchin or Heitkamp.  But good luck getting 60 votes for any major piece of legislation.

 

[baymen]

I was going to post it in that thread - would get lost in the back ad forth dribble and trolling. This is about a rare moment when we could see a legit shuffling of power among the key branches of govt. 

and im curious about that very scenario. Place it in the other thread I fear it would be lost in five pages of crap within minutes.

dont like this thread just don't click on it. This isn't rocket science 

I have not ventured back into either of the 2 train wreck threads about Trump in months.  How you guys do it on a daily basis boggles my mind.  So, I actually appreciate a separate thread on this topic.

 

[Koya]

What bipartisanship are you speaking of? Everything is Republican controlled.

The thin margin in the Senate combined with the very real threat of some Senators in swing or blue leanin states to lose their seat should they vote for anything close to the health bill, IMO, is a unique set of circumstances by which the Senate is by far the most beholden to some sense of bipartisanship (just through desire for self preservation) as compared with other governmental bodies. 

 

[skol asylum]

All these idiots are doing is guaranteeing a huge backlash from the public and the eventual inevitable demand for single payer. In the meantime lots of people are going to suffer. Sad.

 

[MikeIke]

Or the same Senate Democrats who delayed confirmation hearings for much of Trump's cabinet. 

You might get a couple of very vulnerable Senate Democrats to play ball, like Manchin or Heitkamp.  But good luck getting 60 votes for any major piece of legislation.

How many Executive Office positions has Trump not even bothered nominating?* The Democrats are not the reason the positions are not yet filled. 

*Rhetorical question. It's 465 of of 556 per the Washington Post. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/