Monday, November 9, 2009

this is our concern, dude.

Health Care Reform Legislation passed the House of Representatives! Hooray! Buuuut... I can't help but feel like... something like this has happened before. (By the way, despite the fact that that post was written more than four months ago, literally nothing has happened with the bill since then. It's been place on the Senate Calendar. But, I mean, really? We can't get a little action?)

To return to the math of the last post, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (AKA 3962) passed 220-215. There are 258 Democrats in the House, which means we had a defection rate of 15%. On the other hand, there are 177 Republicans in the House, one of whom voted for 3962, which means they had a defection rate of 0.5%. Half a percent. ONE of their party members voted the other way. THIRTY-NINE of ours did. Now, obviously, there's more room for dissension in our party (I mean, obviously, in general; Democrats are, after all, the party of acceptance) and in this case, we have a sizable majority, so there's more wiggle room to be expected.

BUT.

This is ridiculous.

Republicans are able to coalesce over an issue in a way that we can't even fathom. No one in the Democratic Party was willing to filibuster an illegal, immoral war (except maybe Kucinich?) but the Republicans have threatened such a move over a measure designed to save lives. People should be ashamed.

And speaking of shame, what's up with newly-elected New Mexican official Harry Teague not only voting no on the bill, but yes on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment? (If you don't know what this is, use Google, or stay tuned. I'm not sure if I'm going to devote a whole post to it, but damn!)

I'm just saying...the hard work is not done. We've got a lot more ground to cover. Let's take a moment to celebrate the historic passing of a bill that's intended to help people and save lives as opposed to the normal garbage we get from Washington, but let's make sure that we not let up this fight.

2 comments:

Brian said...

Michael wrote:
Now, obviously, there's more room for dissension in our party (I mean, obviously, in general; Democrats are, after all, the party of acceptance) and in this case, we have a sizable majority, so there's more wiggle room to be expected.

Obviously you don't know what the definition of 'obvious' is. It's a shame because you even used it twice.

I tend to think of liberals as the least accepting of others. Are you a black or other minority and conservative? You are a race traitor! Heaven forbid you stray form our groupThink(tm).

Ron Paul and Sarah Palin are both republicans yet they have vastly different views on many topics.

More than likely our perceptions taint the truth, which is that both liberals and conservatives have a fair amount of political diversity in their parties.

Michael said...

@ Brian - I'm pretty good with definitions. Your quibble, based on your writing, seems to be centered around my second usage, not the first, since that's kind of an indisputable fact. So, let's take it from there: Democrats as the party of acceptance.

Democrats pushed and passed civil rights legislation, not only in support of the afore-mentioned (by you) minorities, but also in support of women's rights.

Democrats do have a problem with minorities joining the other parties, but I'd venture to say not more so than they have a problem with anyone joining the other parties. Democrats had no problem celebrating Colin Powell, just as quickly as they refuted the lies that came out of Alan Keyes.

On the other hand, Ron Paul, despite running as a Republican in 2004, refused to endorse the Republican nominee in 2008. Sarah Palin felt (feels?) so restricted by the GOP that she named her book, "Going Rogue" - these are the people you list as example of inclusion in the party? Sure, they're all included under the banner of Republicanism, but I don't think either of them seems very happy about it.

Certainly, perceptions taint our visions, but you said to be ready to defend, so there's my counter-point.