Skip to main content

View Diary: It's "f-king stupid"? (243 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If McCain had won (0+ / 0-)

    but the Dems had the votes they have in the House and Senate, we'd be considering health care reform. The difference would be we'd have to worry about a presidential veto.

    This is Congress's responsibility. The Constitution gives it, not the President, the power and therefore the responsibility. The President's role is to be a catalyst.

    •  If McCain had won, we would have LOST seats (0+ / 0-)

      in the House and Senate  The senate was already at a 50/50 split, so we would likely not be in the majority there. And, even if we still held the House, it would be by a smaller margin.  The presidential winner always picks up seats  for his party.  Thus, if McCain had won, we likely would NOT be considering healthcare reform.  At most, we would be considering insurance reform coupled with a bunch of crazy-assed tax breaks for health insurance that doesn't really do anything to cover the exorbitant cost. And, probably none of it the kind that didn't give away the store to the insurance industry.

      •  Wrong (0+ / 0-)

        The Democrats lost seats in the House in 1992.

        In any case, it was a hypothetical to make a point, which is that we're considering healthcare reform because of the congressional results in 2008. If Obama had won but the Republicans still controlled either branch of Congress, we wouldn't be arguing about a public option; it would be completely off the table.

        You're right that Obama's victory helped increase our advantage in Congress, but presidential outcomes don't always determine the results in Congress. Congressional Democrats holding a filibuster-proof Senate and a large House majority would be pushing for health care reform with or without a Democratic president.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site