Supposed Democrat Heath Shuler Votes NO on Healthcare for WNC

5  0

Has Shuler put out an official statement? Last I heard he was “leaning no,” but hadn’t declared.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Gordon Smith for Congress! Lets bounce the two bit QB for a freakin’ closer!

Rate this comment: 1  3

You guys could have taken him out in the primary this year. I was afraid that Patsy Keever was going to do it and has focused her attentions elsewhere.

I’m hoping that we’ll replace Shuler with a real Republican…one that caucuses with the new majority in January 2011, courtesy of ObamaCare.

Rate this comment: 1  5

And, of course, the Teabaggers were out in full force yesterday, spitting at members of Congress and calling them “niggers” and “faggots”. Jesse Helms would be proud.

Rate this comment: 4  0

@Tom:

If Obama had spent more time in the US Senate to actually learn how one does things, he could learned what LBJ knew. His Civil Rights bill was very short.

I, and millions of others, are very glad that his hubris is in full control. It looks like he’ll give us a Republican-controlled House, and maybe (just maybe) a Republican Senate, too.

Off Topic:

I was at the Jackson and Macon GOP Conventions this weekend. People were there in record numbers and looking for ways to get involved in local campaigns. One local candidate told me that they have more people than they know what to do with, and are starting canvassing and phone banking parties.

Concern about ObamaCare might be the foot in the door that allows us to do things we never thought possible at the local level.

The Free Market works. If we could get the government out of the way of health care, it would go a long way to solving the problem. Of course, I realize that most of the people visiting this website hate the Free Market and love the Meddlesome Bureaucrat instead.

Rate this comment: 0  1

I just got an e-mail from OFA (dated today, Sunday, 9 am) telling people to keep calling Shuler – (202) 225-6401 – maybe they know something we don’t. Or maybe we know something they don’t. I just called, though, and got voicemail and a full mailbox.

At any rate, it looks like Republicans will offer a motion to recommmit based on the Stupak language. I’m prepared to believe Shuler got a “pass” from leadership on this vote, but if he votes against the rule, or for the motion to recommit – well, it’s Sunday, and I don’t want to say how I’ll feel.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Tom Buckner got it exactly right IF serious intentions existed. I’ve been wondering all along why Obama and the Democrats found it necessary to re-invent the wheel and why these “reforms” won’t become effective until 4-5 years out. The half-hearted finance and banking reforms are equally pathetic. My disappointment is so thick it could be carried in a bucket.

Rate this comment: 1  0

5  0

Slightly off-topic rant:

I remember last summer seeing Shuler bristle at the suggestion that contributions could sway his vote on health care. It was that old, “You have received $XXXXX from health care…” question. The question annoyed me too, but because it is an oversimplification to suggest that you can explain any one politician’s health care vote by how much money they’ve received from health care (or any other industry). The WaPo has a whip-count chart up today with who’s voting how and how much money they’ve received (in aggregate over their time in Congress):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/votes/house/finalhealthcare/

Scanning down the list, it appears that party is a much better predictor than campaign money on this vote.

That’s not to say that money has no effect. Nate Silver has looked at that relationship last summer (with senators) and found a definite correlation:

if a mainline Democrat has received $60,000 from insurance PACs over the past six years, his likelihood of supporting the public option is cut roughly in half from 80 percent to 40 percent.

He cautioned:

It’s possible that we’re confusing cause and effect: perhaps senators receive a lot of money from the insurance industry because they hold conservative positions on health care, rather than the other way around.

Political ideology is a more powerful factor than money in how one approaches the issue right out of the gate in Silver’s analysis. Money even depresses the generic liberal Dem’s support (for the public option in this analysis), but it’s not a predictor of any one person’s vote. See the WaPo.

Rate this comment: 0  0

To be enforced with all the sensitivity of the IRS collectors…

Rate this comment: 2  0

“I recognize that there are strong views on both sides of the health care debate and it has spurred strong emotions throughout the nation. Tens of thousands of constituents have shared their opinions with me and I appreciate their views. My responsibility as Congressman is to filter through the emotion, misinformation and politics surrounding this issue and do what is best for Western North Carolina and our country.

There is no question that our current health care system is broken and that we need to make significant reforms to improve it in an equitable, fiscally responsible and sustainable manner. In my opinion the bill as written does not meet those criteria.”

It’s got to be excruciating to sit on a fence as narrow as that one.

Rate this comment: 1  0

Let me get this straight. Last week the Congressional Budget Office confirmed that the health care reform bill would be the largest deficit reducing legislation since 1993. Then, after voting NO, Shuler releases a statement saying that the CBO says the bill will not reduce the fed’s spending on health care “over the long term.”
Somebody is mistaken or using fuzzy math. Care to guess??

Rate this comment: 1  0

Et tu, David Frum?

I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours.

[h/t Digby]

Rate this comment: 2  0