Jim Marshall to Vote No on Democrats’ Health Care Legislation

He was just on Fox News being one of the few Democrats who won’t boycott the network and also one of the few Democrats to say he will vote no on the health care legislation.

49 comments

    • Game Fan says:

      Why would this mean anything unless you’ve already bought into the “conspiracy theory” that Democrats aren’t allowed off the plantation unless they already have the votes? Maybe just maybe he doesn’t like it, and maybe he’s a Blue Dog who doesn’t like being influenced by big corporations.

  1. jbf100 says:

    I’m not reading too much into his position. He’s a politician with a ton of conviction. He’s voted for a stimulus package that his constituents disagreed with and he was the only Democrat who voted against an S-CHIP. He votes his own way.

  2. Doug Deal says:

    Let’s all give Marshall credit before anything has happened. But, I can guarentee you that this thing is not going to fail 217-218 with Marshall voting “nay”.

    Marshall and convictions in the same sentence is hilarious, unless you mean his conviction to stay in the House as long as he can.

    Anyway, maybe Erick Erickson’s hard work at getting Democrats elected made his “defection” possible.

  3. Game Fan says:

    As far as “hope” and “change” I “hope” that ByteMe “changes” his mind about Obamacare and socialism in general. But then again, even if he’s a “techie” this says nothing about his knowledge of economics. (I’m only guessing here that he’s a techie from his handle.)

    • ByteMe says:

      From my view of the world, I think it’s very business-centric to take health care costs off the hands of businesses — large and small — and level the playing field with EVERY OTHER MAJOR COUNTRY and provide health care paid for by taxes.

      Feel free to go all “50’s” on us and start worrying about communism or some such nonsense. The rest of the world has already figured out what you’re stuck in denial over.

      • Game Fan says:

        I don’t know whether to call you “pinko” or “Sicko”. I should probably call you “pinko” since Michael Moore recently made a movie about health care called “Sicko”. What else do you think government should control? How about lumber production? Yeah. That’s the ticket.

          • seenbetrdayz says:

            The communism scare has been around a lot longer than the 50’s. The key to success was to institute socialist programs ever so gradually so as not to alarm the capitalists. Up until very recently, you guys had been doing a good job of that (I mean, disguising yourselves as capitalists for so long was brilliant, we never saw it coming), but it’s getting kind of reckless lately and you might want to slow up a bit before someone realizes what’s going on.

          • ByteMe says:

            Yep, your onto us. But our job is really simple, since all we need to do is distract you with your fear about gays, guns, or abortion. Easy enough to make an elephant appear on stage when you have a really good distraction.

          • Game Fan says:

            seenbetrdayz
            Yeah, I love it when those who would like to reign in government growth are considered extremists or irrational. And as more are realizing, giving a free ride to the large corporations takes us in the same general direction. No more competition or free enterprise. At least not officially. In the Soviet Union the free market was called the black market. It was merely an “inconvenient truth” to the central planners. But in reality the free market (black market) is the mechanism which corrected many of the mistakes of the politicians and the bureaucrats. It’s what filled the gaps, saved lives, fed the children, repaired the sh-tty cars, ect…

          • benevolus says:

            Germany has has national health care since before 1900 and they aren’t communist. Why don’t you think we can resist it? You seem to have very little faith in us Americans or our system.

      • Joshua Morris says:

        “and level the playing field with EVERY OTHER MAJOR COUNTRY”

        Well, shoot. There it is. If everyone else walks off a cliff, we should, too, bygolly.

        • ByteMe says:

          Or maybe if everyone else has already climbed the mountain and is enjoying the lovely view, maybe you might find out why the view is so much better up there instead of being pigheaded about liking it just fine in the valley.

          • ByteMe says:

            Yep, blah blah blah, we pay out the wazzoo for only adequate care and most docs I try to schedule require at least a month before I can see them with a non-emergency. Must seem nice there in that valley you’re stuck in.

      • Sleepy Tom says:

        So, Byte…after you take healthcare “costs” off the hands of businesses…exactly where do the “costs” go? Some magic money machine?

        Or, perhaps George Soros will be the Willy Wonka of healthcare costs, eh?

        • ByteMe says:

          I already said where they went. Taxes paid by the people. You didn’t read closely enough. And, yes, I do own several small businesses and pay for my own healthcare. Shifting coverage to a larger pool and paying it as part of payroll deduction would make it less of a business cost — making my businesses more competitive — and more of a personal cost and isn’t that a conservative enough position for you? 🙂

          • ByteMe says:

            I believe in the economics of providing healthcare for all at a cost lower than covering only about 84% of the people. Other countries do it and offer equivalent or better healthcare. Why do you think we’re too retarded to do that?

            And are you really going to go on record as being pro-birth and have Konop all over you for that?

  4. John Konop says:

    A race to the bottom with healthcare solutions from both sides!

    Rick Perry: Let Texas Guide Health Care Reform, Yet Over 25% Uninsured?

    WP-Texas’s Rick Perry and Mars’s Newt Gingrich have an op-ed in The Washington Post this morning presenting the Lone Star State as an example of all the whiz-bang health-care innovation being generated at the state level. “Texas,” they write, “has adopted approaches to controlling health-care costs while improving choice, advancing quality of care and expanding coverage.” Sounds awesome! The evidence is a tort reform bill that the state passed in 2003. And how’s that working out?

    Well, Texas currently leads the nation in the rate of uninsured, with more than 25 percent of the state’s residents lacking health-care coverage. If you limit the analysis to residents under age 65, which takes seniors covered by the national Medicare program out of the data, 28 percent of Texans are uninsured.

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/11/dont_listen_to_texas.html

  5. John Konop says:

    Is this how far off we have gotten from any real solutions?

    Palin rallies thousands of abortion opponents

    Sarah Palin rallied thousands of abortion opponents Friday night with a a stark warning that the same philosophy that allows abortion rights could soon be invoked to allow the government to cut off health care for the elderly or children with special needs.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29267.html

  6. Game Fan says:

    As far as “inconvenient truth” goes, there’s a definite credibility gap when people on both sides of the issue fail to address the elephant in the room. And that being the fact that we hardly have free markets or health freedom today. Specifically, I’m into the idea that innovation and alternatives deserve an equal footing with more conventional medicine. Why the special favors for big pharma from both Dems and Republicans? One glaring example would be the issue of vitamin b-17 and Laetrile. Why is it illegal and where’s the outrage?

  7. Goldwater Conservative says:

    The “inconvenient truth” in the healthcare debate is acknowledging, once again, that there are certain industries that are not handled appropriately with the introduction of market capitalism.

    There are really only two industries left in the US that are given free reign to rape the wallets of everyday Americans: Energy and Healthcare.

    Listen, the natural tendency for strong firms in any market is to collude with one another. This falls short of the philosophy espoused by classic economists…until Marx, but then again after the 1950s. That is really the 600 pound gorilla in the room. Nobody on the right is acknowledgin market collusion…in part because it is akin to admitting their economic philosophy is flawed in an inescapable way.

    Most importantly, market collusion is not necessarily bad and it works well in most industries until over-speculation begins. In what are essentially commodities, which healthcare is at this point, market collusion can easily be destructive. The market has been gamed for far too long and it is falling apart. There is literally no reason why profit margins should be hitting the 1200% marker.

    On top of all this, the package passed last night is the best thing for America…in the democratic theory sense of the word.

    Whats the deal with conservatives not liking Marshall. His job is to represent his district…not his beliefs. That is the republican principle. He did his job, nobody should care why.

    • I was going to with “You idiot”, but instead, I’ll just point out your ignorance:

      Nobody on the right is acknowledging market collusion…

      You seem to not realize that Corperate/Governmnt collusion is much worse. These BIG businesses want BIG Government health care so they can pass their cost on to the taxpayers. BIG Government wants it so they can have more power.

      There is literally no reason why profit margins should be hitting the 1200% marker.

      This is due to the BIG GOV/BIG BUS collusion that keeps out potential competition who would undercut current participants in any market with a 1200% profit margin.

      …admitting their economic philosophy is flawed in an inescapable way.

      It is not flawed, because the GOP and the DNC has constantly and continuously gotten involved in business where they have no business and right to do so. Our current healthcare system is not a free market system. And instead of moving it towards one, which would have done everything the current leaders claim they want, they went in the opposite direction to more of what was causing it to not work in the first place.

      I change my mind, the fact that you brought Marx into the conversation and that you think collusion ends when government gets involved shows you are “An Idiot.”

      • benevolus says:

        As I have asked before, with no answer yet- where is this “free market” solution we can use an an example? There are a hundred examples of regulated systems out there that we can use as examples (or lessons), but is there even one example of a more free market system for us to look at?

  8. benevolus says:

    “BIG Government wants it so they can have more power.”

    What does “more power” mean? Who wants it, and why? How does funneling health care costs through insurance companies instead of emergency rooms/direct taxes give them “more power”?

  9. Goldwater Conservative says:

    The big government big business relationship has been important since Washington was in office. Collusion between the two is not a big deal and is, in fact, very important if the US is to remain the global hegemony. Is it fine so long as it serves the People. The dominant train of thought since Reagan is that what is good for the wealthy is good for everybody else. This is the type of gov’t/market collusion that is destructive, but it is also widely believed, contrary to all evidence (literally, all evidence), that supply side economics is good and true. What if we never promoted merchantilism? We would most likely lost the War of 1812. It took federal involvement in the private market to ensure that business was big enough to build a Navy and Supply our forces.

    Competition is not going to edge out the profit margin. Furthermore, the capitalist race to the bottom is not the best thing to do with a good such as health insurance.

    I did not bring Marx into the conversation to discuss collusion ending with the entrance of the government, you are making that assumption. Marx was an economist, not a philosopher. He was only concerned with was is, not what should be (atleast in Das Capital). This is where ideology falls flat on its face…ideology is inherently normative. You do not need proof of any phenomenon…just faith amongst the masses that such a phenomenon should happen. “Should” is the operative word here. “Should” and “is, normative versus positive, are important distinctions.

    The federal governmet never overspeculated in the financial market. It never overspeculated in the housing market. It isn’t the force driving the costs of gasoline up and down. It isn’t the cause of unstable markets. The cause of all of the problems, economically, that we, as a Nation, have experienced are not the result of government action. They are the result of too much inaction. Where the line gets drawn is something that nobody really knows. Ideologies set various points, and none of those are correct. We can make reasoned speculations, but because of uncertainty we can never really know.

    There are things we do know. We know the healthcare system is decrepid…it has been gamed and juiced for as much profit as the few important investors can get. We know there is no collective incentive within the private markets to do anything about fixing it….to do so would require the various insurance companies to put up the $1trillion to fix everything themselves. A few may be willing to invest some, but all are not willing to invest enough in preserving the industry.

    This is a classic collective action problem. Nothing more.

    The only thing that is making it complicated is that no firm, at this point, has an incentive to do anything about it. If you want health insurance for the next 20-60 years, several high profit-margin concepts need to be made unlawful and several aspects of the industry as a whole need overhauled. I know for a fact that too few of the right-wing opinion leaders have actually read the bill, processed the information in the bill, weighed different options, ignored their philosophy and came to a conclusion. In fact, few outside of Congress take the time do so.

    This bill has been 60 years in the making. It is 2000 pages long because every other attempt to pass the thing failed and the private market never corrected its actions. 60 years! What if we never changed our way of thinking about defense for 60 years? Technology? Securities? Other than energy and education and health insurance (other than medicare), what other aspect of American life has not changed for the past 60 years?

    I will tell you one last dirty little secret, 99% of all Congressmen want this thing to pass. Like all things political, whether this is right or wrong is not really any concern for the GOP or the Democrats, what helps electoral aspects is all they are concerned about. I give the democratic party alot of credit for this. It is popular. A super majority of America wants this bill passed and it will fix the system…atleast for the next 20 years. The GOP is really taking a gamble…long term. They are already the party of No and the Party of the Weatlhy. They each know that this bill is good for the country. It is a very transparent issue though. Everybody has heard about it and that is the only reason why they are so against it. This is classic parliamentary behavior rearings it disgusting head in Congress.

  10. seenbetrdayz says:

    Well, you’re right about one thing: if you see a large swelling in libertarian numbers in the coming years, the republicans and democrats will definitely bear the blame. They’re the libertarian party’s best recruiters.

    • Sleepy Tom says:

      Too bad the libertarians are merely motivated by what others are not doing, and not motivated by anything within their own principles.

      • seenbetrdayz says:

        I don’t follow what you’re saying.

        I’m motivated to fight for freedom. I’m self-motivated for fund my own schooling. I’m motivated enough to speak out against the usurpation of our Constitution.

        I just realize what I’m up against. I’m out-numbered by people who want promises and handouts. That’s hard to compete with. Victories become easier though, when the people grow tired of broken promises and the handouts get taken back (nothing government ever ‘gives’ comes without a price).

  11. Game Fan says:

    All the ideolgy in the world has about as much value as a section of newspaper which has been at the bottom of a parrot cage for about a week when you ignore the criminal element in government and the big corporations and the offshore accounts, ect… If you’re not railing against the criminal element, then what we’re really talking about is political opportunists.

  12. Doug Deal says:

    Jim Marshall looks like he will have someone else from the GOP. Is this six for the eight?

    http://www.rollcall.com/features/Election-Preview_Nov-2009/election/40085-1.html?page=7

    She is an Albany healthcare attorney. Albany is outside the 8th. She is being recruited by Lynn Westmoreland, apparently, as according to the article as it mentions the NRCC. Although it is not a requirement for Federal office, it is ridiculous to run for a district you do not live in.

    But the NRCC has proven to be incapable of recruiting candidates and thus have become irrelevant nincompoops.

  13. Ken Stepp says:

    Its hard to believe that we are considering Universal Health Care right now. It doesn’t matter if your for or against it. We do not have the money. This is crazy. I’d rather see them put that money into small business loans at low rates to get some jobs happening. We can’t have a “real” recovery without jobs. And we can’t have jobs till the small businesses are healthy. No way around it.

    BUT;
    I’d really rather stop printing money ,go to a healthy fractional gold standard and have a sound dollar again. But that’s not likely to happen anytime soon.

Comments are closed.