An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Visions of Elections to Come

It seems that the GOP is setting its sights on some first and second term House Democrats who they see as being vulnerable. In particular, they’re looking at the new members in traditionally red districts who voted for the energy bill.

The National Republican Congressional Committee is planning to air TV and radio commercials and unleash robocalls against Democrats who hail from districts that could be adversely affected by the narrowly passed legislation, are GOP-leaning or both.

Those likely to find themselves with targets on their back after the 219-212 vote: freshman Reps. Harry Teague of New Mexico, Betsy Markey of Colorado, John Boccieri of Ohio, Thomas Perriello of Virginia and Alan Grayson of Florida and second-termer Zack Space of Ohio.

Given all the talk of funerals for the Republican Party, this may sound like a plan with limited prospects, but is it so far fetched? Taking a look at the latest Rasmussen Presidential tracking poll, Barack Obama seems to be doing pretty well at first glance. 54% of Americans at least somewhat approve of the job he’s doing so far. Under those numbers, though, is another interesting trend. Rasmussen also records the Presidential Approval Index, which now sits at negative two. This measurement takes the number of people who strongly approve of the President’s performance and subtracts from it the number who strongly disapprove. That number has been slowly but steadily sliding over the last month, finally dipping below zero. So there are now less people who are wildly enthusiastic about Obama than the ones who are really upset with his performance.

Then again, some softening of numbers is typical of any presidency after the initial honeymoon period. But how will this relate to the overall performance of the Democrats and their prospects for 2010? The newest Congressional Performance poll has somewhat more dire news for the party of the donkey. Only 18% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, shockingly down from the already dismal 23% approval rating they managed in May. Here are a few more choice statistics for you:

Only 21% of voters say that, during the past year, Congress has passed anything that will significantly improve life in America. Most (52%) say it has not.

Seventy-three percent (73%) now say members of Congress are more interested in helping their own careers than in helping people while 14% say the legislators rate helping people as the priority.

Voters are evenly divided on the question of whether most members of Congress are corrupt. Thirty-five percent (35%) believe they are, while 37% say they are not. But 29% aren’t sure.

In the last cycles, Congressional Democrats could put up some sort of damage control barrier to such numbers. They initially had only a very slim margin of control, and there was a Republican in the White House who could still veto any of their efforts. Now, however, the real game has begun. It seems inevitable that, sooner or later, Al Franken will take his seat and the Dems will reach the magic number of 60 in the Senate. They have one of their own in the White House ready to sign anything they send his way. If they can’t convince the American people that they are actively working to improve their lot this time, expect Democrats to get the same heave ho we gave the GOP during the last two rounds.

Sadly, Democrats may have a life preserver to grab for, even though it will eventually turn into an anchor. Nearly 3/4 of the voters seem to have decided they want a “public option” in pending health care reform legislation. It’s been one heck of a sales job by the Democrats and they’ve obviously gotten people on board. If they manage to somehow pass it, that measure may be exactly what they need to bolster their numbers a bit and help out in the 2010 election.

It should take some time to implement such a plan, and then, presumably, it will take even longer before the full effects to be felt. In that way, government run health care might carry Pelosi’s crew right past 2012. Then, of course, when such folly slowly begins to erode the quality of American health care to the levels of Canada, or perhaps Nairobi, the angry citizens will likely go back to playing ping pong with Congress and hand control back over to the GOP.

Unfortunately, once a government funded program like that is in place it’s harder to get rid of than herpes, so we should be in for decades more of the two parties trading the majority office back and forth. I only hope my health holds out long enough to munch some popcorn and watch it all happen.

  • pjmcg
    Hilarious! Eroding the quality of US heath care to the levels of Canada. Hahahahaha. Try ELEVATING the level of health care in the US to the level of Canada, or just elevating us past Costa Rica. The US presently ranks 37th among industrialized nations for quality of care right between Costa Rica and Slovenia and well below Canada at 30th. And while Canada spends only 52 percent per capita on health care of what we do here in the US - they cover ALL Canadian citizens - have SHORTER average wait times for elective surgeries than here in the US (and no wait times for emergency surgery) and have better overall health as a population. There are another 29 countries that do even better. Passing health care legislation that can move us toward a model like any of the other modern industrialized countries will not result in a "ping pong" hand switching of congress, it will result in a generation of dominance for the Democratic Party.
  • GeorgeSorwell
    Is it really a good idea to spend money in June 2009 on an election being held in November 2010?

    By the way, here's an article debunking some commonly-held myths about the Canadian health care system.

    And here's the sequel to that article.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    Comments about Canada when it comes to the health care debate generally ignorance on the issue. Is that really where you want to go, Jazz?
  • DaGoat
    Nice analysis, Jazz. The best hope for the GOP is that the Democrats are usually just as bad if not worse. The Democrats will overreach,screw something up and leave an opening. I agree the full impact of any health plan will not be felt for years and isn't likely to affect the 2010 elections much, although probably a new tax on health benefits would work in the GOP's favor.
  • DLS
    Voting for the energy bill alone should cost Dems their offices, but not all voters are up to stuff necessarily.

    * * *

    "Then, of course, when such folly slowly begins to erode the quality of American health care"

    This will take time, though. The Dems are rushing this health care proposal probably to exploit those who have yet to object to the fiscal misconduct by the Dems in Congress, or before many of them realize it, which they apparently haven't yet, or simply don't care (stereotypical Dim voters).

    When there _is_ later dissatisfaction (gee, public care is not magic forever-bliss like the smiling people told us) there will be talk of a "private option" out of or away from the public system under this or that circumstance (to choose one's provider, a right that will all but certainly vanish in the public system sooner or later, or to avoid waiting excessively for public care, which is predictable already), and this "private option" will be attacked savagely by defenders of the public system.

    Eventually people who should already know will discover that government _will_ be an intermediary, and substantially interventionist (or interfering).

    Right now, in addition to concern about the nonsense the Dems are doing now (while avoiding the crucial cost issue deliberately), the public does support expanded public care, but is concerned about paying for it (and support for it drops when the cost issue is brought to light -- out of deliberate Dem darkness).
  • DLS
    "The best hope for the GOP is that the Democrats are usually just as bad if not worse. The Democrats will overreach,screw something up and leave an opening."

    They already are worsh, and already are overreaching and all the rest, rushing to do it, in fact.

    But it'll take more of the same for sufficient numbers of others to recognize and respond to it.
  • What's the change we really need? Find plenty of examples at: http://obamaprayers.blogspot.com
  • norrishall
    I am 62 years old and self employed.
    My Blue Shield health insurance premiums for my wife and myself are $900 a month
    And that's for a plan with an $8000 deductible.
    If you like the American Health care system you are either
    1. Young and healthy with low premiums
    2. On a taxpayer subsidized plan (medicare, public employee, military, state or federal government, Medicaid)
    3. On a employee plan subsidized with tax free benefits

    If you are like me....older and self employed and paying all your own insurance premiums you are screwed!!!
  • DLS
    I'm younger than you are, but I pay for my own insurance, too, and have a decades-long pre-existing condition, which makes it difficult to get insurance or (in the past) it has come with riders that contain various exclusions (for anything conceivably related to my condition, naturally). I'm doing okay currently at $320 a month for an individual plan, though it's going to go up sometime soon -- what's sought is a 56% increase but the company is negotiating with the state government to settle for now for "only" a 40+ per cent increase. (This same company was in the news for bonuses and other substantial payments to executives recently.)

    I've been aware for years with problems with the existing system, but I am not so naive or childish (nor have I lacked the intelligence to know) that if we go from private to public health care (the desire here in the USA among advocates, though they cannot or will not admit or correctly express it, is to extend health care to more people, ideally everyone, provided or paid for and controlled by the federal government) we will exchange one set of problems for another, and there will still be interference by a middleman, so you who need to do it should discard your naivete and lack of realism and understand that before voting for us to "go forward" accordingly.
  • I think they will have a hard time making any progress against Teague. He owns an oil servicing company, so when he speaks about energy, his voice carries some authority. But I'm willing to see Republicans throw their money away trying to convince people that he doesn't know anything about a buisiness that made him a millionaire.
  • Don Quijote
    what's sought is a 56% increase but the company is negotiating with the state government to settle for now for "only" a 40+ per cent increase.


    You' re letting the government do the negotiating on your behalf, how unconservative!!! Don't you believe in the free market and your ability to negotiate face to face with insurance company and get a better deal than those know nothing government bureaucrats?
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC