Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Overdue bipartisanship

November 15, 2013

Undoubtedly those students of national politics who support either party and preach reaching across the aisle need to look at the election results for New Jerse....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(19)

JohnHilfirty

Nov-17-13 4:25 AM

Boomer1, you are so, so right!

This part of Pa. was heavily Republican back in the earlier days, because the area was home to many folks enjoying great financial success and wealth from lumbering.

That's understandable!

But generations and years later, average income is down and jobs are scarce.

I've talked to many younger people who have tried hard, but are still living in poverty. Most are still registered Republican, because "their parents and grandparents were."

^ ^ <<< cont.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnHilfirty

Nov-17-13 4:25 AM

cont >>> V V

Many of these people are receiving some form of government assistance.

We'll discuss the differences between Dems and Repubs, and which party is for helping them and which party is trying to cut their benefits, they tell me they thought it was just the opposite! They've been voting straight Republican!!

They mostly say they will change their registration, and never vote Republican again.

That is common in this area !

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Boomer1

Nov-15-13 2:08 PM

Not sure where leaning right is headed. Forget bipartisanship and call it teamwork, which is totally absent because your party and voters will punish you for breaking ranks.Also, for those who refer to "you need to vote" I just love those who will always be Democrat or Republican or whatever because they have tunnel vision. Try to vote for the best person rather than a straight ticket. This is a vote that means something.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

leaningright

Nov-15-13 10:36 AM

Is bipartisan "not gonna happen" or "Dead on arrival" or "We will not negotiate" or "they are economic terrorists" Is that what it is? Just checking.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Nov-15-13 9:59 AM

This LTE does a good job of promoting bipartisanship which is important but a bigger issue is that politicians want the perpetual job and being re-elected so they can enjoy the money, power, and fame that goes with the office. Because of this their thinking process is jaded; many times don't make the right decision.

One of the priorities is that government needs to be more effective and efficient with the programs that they currently administer. Each entitlement program (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA) should be self-funded and stand on their own. The withdrawals should not exceed what is put into them, including admin costs. This means reducing SS payouts or eligibility ages.

In addition, they should stay out of some areas that private businesses should perform, ie like R&D, building housing, and bank bailouts. Federal government needs to stop matching funds programs that should be exclusively managed at the state or local levels. In summary, they need focus.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Nov-15-13 9:13 AM

"Do you think the 47 to 50% of people on the gov't bank roll are going to vote against the hand that feeds them?"--leaningright

++

Remember that many of those people are as conservative in their financial principles as you and are not part of the problem. Many of these are drawing SS after contributing to the care of those more elderly than them for many years. Many are drawing welfare because of the decline in the economy but are entitled to it.

I am more concerned about those that have taken more from the system and continue to do so as compared to what they have contributed.

With this stated, I still believe there needs to be additional reforms to SS. Maybe more on that later but don't belittle those that have put into the system for years.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Nov-15-13 9:04 AM

Spike, maybe I'm not current with exactly what the president is legally allowed to do when it comes to laws that have been established by Congress, but how does he have the authority to pick and choose what parts of the law will be followed and who is required to follow it? First he arbitrarily gives out extensions and exemptions and now he comes out and tells insurance companies that they don't have to follow the law for another year if they don't want to. And he's doing this because of the upcoming election. People aren't stupid and if I was a democrat coming up for election I would fall on my sword and admit to the American people that I made a mistake by supporting the President and this law in general. There are problems with the law that have been known all along and it needs to go through the process again and either be amended or abolished.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Nov-15-13 8:54 AM

Obstructionist- Republicans-"Mr. president, can you look at our proposals to make this bill better?" President- "I will not negotiate."

As you can clearly see, the Republicans are doing their best to defeat the Presidents' bill.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Nov-15-13 8:53 AM

"But the bottom line is we have no one to blame but ourselves and our votes."- Cap

Cap- it is going to be very hard to change the Vote when everybody votes for the Dems because they give the bank away. Do you think the 47 to 50% of people on the gov't bank roll are going to vote against the hand that feeds them? -leaningright

Actually I made that statement with a touch of sarcasm because every time I bring up term limits, those against it continue to use the reasoning that our vote sets term limits. Well how has that been working out for us? Nothing against the American voters and their intelligence, but we*****at setting term limits with our votes.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Nov-15-13 8:24 AM

First you are comparing state with national. Governor Christie was crafty by holding the Senate race a few weeks before the state election. Giving Christie the whole spotlight in the election. There was no way Corey Booker was going to still his thunder. Secondly a Republican governor is dealing with a solidly Democratic legislative body. He is going to have to compromise if he is going to get things done in his state. Even though he still preaches the party line while doing so. So in essence you a Democratic control legislative body compromising with a republican governor and a minority republican legislative not trying to block every piece of legislation.

It takes two to make a compromise and along the way that definition gets lost on the way to DC. The president might not be leading as stated but the legislative body in DC is not going to be lead anywheres either. Both parties are deeply entrenched and both complained that have given too much already.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

Nov-15-13 8:19 AM

'Do you think the 47 to 50% of people on the gov't bank roll are going to vote against the hand that feeds them?'

Exactly, and that's why the President doesn't care as to how his policies affect anyone. He knows that a solid 1/2 of the electorate is stupid.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Nov-15-13 8:17 AM

Spike:

You are correct. He did not order the insurance companies to do this, he said he wouldn't prosecute them for violating the law.

That is the real issue here.

No law enforcement officer should be allowed to pick and choose which laws are enforced.

That is why I have said we are a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

Lastly, the ONLY reason this delay was offered is to protect Democrats who might lose their elections next fall.

That is callous political pandering that will put the people hurting right now back in the same position 12 months from now.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

leaningright

Nov-15-13 8:08 AM

"But the bottom line is we have no one to blame but ourselves and our votes."- Cap

Cap- it is going to be very hard to change the Vote when everybody votes for the Dems because they give the bank away. Do you think the 47 to 50% of people on the gov't bank roll are going to vote against the hand that feeds them?

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

leaningright

Nov-15-13 8:04 AM

Wow, you get to keep your policy for a year! Thats not going to change anything. Who says the insurance companies will even allow it.The President is flying by the seat of his pants and he knows it. Another thing, ask your self this question, Had millions of people not cried foul over the ACA and losing their plans, do you really think Obama would have tried to change any of it? No, because i believe that this is exactly what he intended, he didn't make any mistakes, he knew all along, he is only doing this to try to save the 2014 elections because he is being chastized by his own party. Politics as usual. 1 year will change nothing. Another thing, who is anyone to call a policy that somebody has Sub-Standard? This President is the Sub-Standard item i see here.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Nov-15-13 7:36 AM

First, I am not defending the roll-out in any way. However,no, he did not order them to comply. They are allowed to sell sub-standard policies for another year without bringing them into minimum compliance standards. Those carrying these policies can continue to purchase them for another year. These companies are to inform policyholders of limitations of the policy, such as not providing coverage for various medical situations and prescriptions.

6 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Nov-15-13 7:23 AM

The President just ordered insurance companies to violate the law as written, based on his word alone.

How is that not laughed at? -Erik

A better question is how is that even legal? I heard so many liberals spouting ACA is the law of the land and it must be followed. So what gives a president the authority to pick and choose who has to comply with that law and when? And don't kid yourselves, a looming election had nothing to do with these decisions right? Doesn't it take the law to be amended by Congress to accomplish all these changes Obama is just arbitrarily making? In the end Americans were still hoodwinked by this administration. Now you will not only see millions of individual policies cancelled in a year, but millions of employer provided policies dropped too. What a freaking goat rope.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Nov-15-13 6:34 AM

Cap is correct.

We have strayed so far from constitutional governance that it might be too late.

We are not a nation of laws anymore. We are a nation ruled by whomever is in power.

The President just ordered insurance companies to violate the law as written, based on his word alone.

How is that not laughed at?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Nov-15-13 5:18 AM

Good letter.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Nov-15-13 3:19 AM

Excellent letter Frank. Unfortunately in this day of mass media, what adds to the problem is the talking heads that cheerlead on both sides and convince so many people that their ranting is gospel and the other "side" is evil and should be destroyed. I don't think reasoning or wanting our government to abide by the constitution even comes into play anymore. It's about who is offering me more. And then those freshmen that are able to get in office are soon corrupted by the lifetime hardliners who are able to stay in office because their constituents are convinced it's never their guy. But the bottom line is we have no one to blame but ourselves and our votes.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 19 of 19 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web