NY-26: It's Over - Hochul Wins, Boehner, Ryan, Rove Lose

I Have To Say (4.00 / 3)

This was a fantastic win and the work of Senator Gillibrand (who's good friends with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz) was great. I do hope this win will wake up Steve Israel, Nancy Pelosi et al and the DCCC that there is NO RACE that we can't win (especially with the Ryan budget to end Medicare and Medicaid).  

---

by: ROSALIE907 @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 03:34:06 AM UTC

i'll add to that: (4.00 / 1)

this should represent a warning to the ben nelsons of the world that you can lose by trying to be republican in a republican state - and hopefully some of the most conservative ds will see how being actually democratic, even in nebraska, can work, big-time.

"The Pilgrims Were Not Illegal Aliens"- Bart Simpson writing on the chalkboard.

---

by: fake consultant @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 09:04:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

For how long? (0.00 / 0)

One of the dramatic aspects of "The West Wing" was that no matter how "good" the news at the end of an episode there was always something worrisome. With that in mind, I wonder what will happen to this district when the lines are redrawn.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 05:32:19 AM UTC

so what's the citizen's united connection? (0.00 / 0)

unlimited money doesn't seem to represent unlimited success - in fact, it may actually fail you, even among your "base" voters.

"The Pilgrims Were Not Illegal Aliens"- Bart Simpson writing on the chalkboard.

---

by: fake consultant @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 09:02:06 AM UTC

Ryan unraveling (4.00 / 3)

On Meet the Press yesterday and on Morning Joe this a.m, Paul Ryan seemed manic, defensive, and vexed. His frustration, anger, and paranoia was palpable. Those hypnotic blue eyes are now puffy and red from exhaustion. Dare I say that Ryan's  beginning to look disheveled? He couldn't stay on message while he continued to drone on about the GOP's "premium support" Medicare plan, but he now sounds like a hostage reading his own ransom demand.

Ryan's primary achievement had been in confusing the public mind, but it is now clear that a substantial majority of Americans have seen through his charade.  You are seeing one of the greatest political meltdowns since Joe McCarthy was called out by Joseph Nye Welch during his communist witch hunt.

If the Democratic Party is smart, they'll stay on message right until November 2012.

---

by: cliffweathers @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 14:27:48 PM UTC

watch his "vocal speed": (0.00 / 0)

under stress, ryan talks faster - and he seems to be under a lot of stress right about now.

"The Pilgrims Were Not Illegal Aliens"- Bart Simpson writing on the chalkboard.

---

by: fake consultant @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 15:25:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's your problem: Ryan is right. (0.00 / 0)

The Medicare Part A is in DEEP kimche, a lot worse than it was in '83 when they changed UCR and Hospitals billing everything and went to DRGs and case rates.  Major reform is needed.  

I like the idea of setting a cut off age for the transition (the number probly diriven by the crest of the Babby Boom, people born in 1957, who are now 54 and would probably break the back of the system).

While I agree with the diagnosis, I don't like the rest of teh prescription.  This solves the government's cost problem without creating a mechanism to reduce costs to the patients.  The only "exchange" model that MIGHT do this is Part D, however, Commonwealth Connector and FEHBP DON'T, which is why I oppose PPACA.  

---

by: John Minehan @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 20:33:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How deep? (0.00 / 0)

Back when Ryan was touting his plan, he and his cohort claimed that "Medicare" (meaning what, exactly, they never said) would "go broke" in nine years. The stupidity of this argument finally dawned on someone, because now they're saying it'll take twice as long.

Why was it stupid? Because if you're going to save something that will be destroyed in nine years, your fix had better start working in less than nine years -- and the Ryan plan wouldn't even begin to kick in for ten years.

That's problem #1. Problem #2 is that, unlike PPACA, which merely doesn't do enough, the Ryan plan won't do ANYTHING to lower the cost of providing anyone with healthcare.

Problem #3 is well understood -- there isn't a private insurance plan that can compete with Medicare; it either doesn't cover as much, or it costs a
lot more. (So much for private enterprise doing better than government.) The result will be that many older Americans will die for lack of healthcare coverage, and many others will be forced back into poverty just in order to stay alive.

Problem #4 is that the Ryan plan does nothing to lower the cost of prescription drugs. You want something that really cuts costs? One simple solution is to reverse the insipid, corrupt rule that prohibits Medicare from negotiating lower drug prices.

BTW, the reason that the Ryan plan had a built-in 10 year delay is that he knew that the largest Republican base isn't so much senior citizens (65+), but near-seniors (55-65), and he figured he could count on that base being selfish and stupid. Not a good bet.

The problems with PPACA are that it didn't go nearly far enough in stopping the medical "arms race" that raises hospital costs for no good reason, it does almost nothing to lower prescription drug costs (although the Obama administration is working to put together real comparisons of various drugs' effectiveness and costs, and that it doesn't force private insurers to compete with Medicare.  

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Thu May 26, 2011 at 02:49:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, let's see . . . . (0.00 / 0)

The 2011 Trustees' Report indicates that Part A willbe  insolvant by  2024, FIVE YEARS SOONER than predicted in last years report.  If you think that isn't hopeful at best, you don't understand large organizations.

Since all of your pay has been exposed to the Medicare payroll tax that pays for Part A since 1994, the only way to shore that up is to increse Federal Taxes or (as has been proposed, take "payroll taxes" on inverstment income). If you think there is either enough popular support or politcal will to do either, you aren't paying attention.

Ryan's plan puts this out 10 years to allow people to adjust to the new system (and because by that time, if we do nothing else, the old system will be in Chayne-Stokes and change will have the palitability of inevitability.  Where Ryan's plan  makes up the money is by holding increases in premium support to the CPI, not the higher rate of medical inflation, hopefully breaking the back of medical inflation as Volker broke the Great Inflation in '79-82.

The problem is that Medicare is no longer competitive.  Back in the 1990s and right after the turn of the century, docs parred with Medicare because, while the rates were low, they paid net 45 days and provided cash flow while their office did the Prompt Payment Law dance with the Third Party Payors.  Medicare is now MUCH slower and MUCH more of a hassel and fewer docs want to par at all, much less take more Medicare patients.  If it can't compete, since it is a government program, it CAN compel, but that is yet another can of worms no one wants to sample.        

The problem for patients is that payors will try to pass on their increased costs to patients for a few years, until they see there is no blood in that stone.  Exchanges (at least FEHBP and Commonwealth Connector) don't do much to control costs at the partient end.  That is the key flaw in Ryan's plan.

As for Prescription Drugs, the fastest way of killing Pharm (and with it, most of the improvement in health status in the last 25 years), is to take away the chance to make a big profit with something cool and groundbreaking.  It is the best way to get better, well, anything, software, telecom gear, anything.  If you like heat, light and cooked food, root for Prometheus and NOT the Eagle (or, here, the Vulture might be a more appropriate bird).  

---

by: John Minehan @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 00:49:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

So Tell Us (0.00 / 0)

I'm in the over 55 and would supposingly have nothing to worry about but what about someone 53 who has been working and paying into Medicare for 30 plus years, what happens to them and the money they've put into Medicare.  We must fight against the Ryan bill not only for ourselves but for those who have been paying into Medicare only to be told that they've been exterminated by Ryan's bill and the Republicons.

---

by: ROSALIE907 @ Thu May 26, 2011 at 16:11:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

They have 12 years to adjust to the new system. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: John Minehan @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 00:50:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Partly Medicare, Partly Davis, Partly Corwin (0.00 / 0)

Ryan's Medicare Reform Plan has problems.  The premium support idea is capped at the level of CPI growth.  Good (NECESSARY) for cost control for the Federal Government, but probably creates a gap for seniors.  The Exchange model in his plan is too much like PPACA (and FEHBP and Commonwealth Connector) and none of them control cost to the patient.  I'm not amazed it concerned people.

(There are some good aspects. It has to be done or the US becomes Greece, and keeping current or soon-to-be beneficiaries untouched is sound as politics and economics [much harder to react to these changes if you are already retired].)

However, don't overreach, Davis took votes away from both Corwin and Hochul and Corwin seems like a good, decent, public-minded woman, but this is Jack Kemp's old district and I'm not sure "junior league" types play well in the rust belt.      

---

by: John Minehan @ Wed May 25, 2011 at 20:26:55 PM UTC

Really? (0.00 / 0)

You were not on the ground so you do not have a clue.  All of the data indicates that Davis was only taking slightly more Corwin voters than Hochul, if you take Davis' 9 points and give 6 of them to Corwin and 4 of them to Cathy, it still is a 52-48 win for Hochul.

I was there, I saw it happen.  Many Davis voters were manufacturing era Democrats who liked his position on trade.

---

by: faithandfreedom @ Thu May 26, 2011 at 04:15:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

*Kathy (0.00 / 0)

---

by: faithandfreedom @ Thu May 26, 2011 at 04:15:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Factor in a Republican Candiate whose affect is more (0.00 / 0)

Junior League than Rust Belt, and Medicare was not that big an issue.  But please assume that and run on it in 2012.  

---

by: John Minehan @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 00:52:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Beg to differ - local Dems definitely have *it* together... (0.00 / 0)

Rural Democrats have learned (see the recent series of special election wins!)  that the PROCESS of selecting a candidate who can win across a diverse Congressional District should be deliberate and thorough. Seven County Chairs worked with seven county committees, they collected suggestions and nominations.  They deliberated. They conferred. They developed a set of criteria and asked the candidates to respond to a list of questions and issues.  They conducted interviews and ultimately chose (once again!) a WINNING candidate.  The process works.
Sometimes, when a job is well done, observers think it looks easy.   As a Constituent of NY26, my hat's off to the local Democrats who worked so hard to win this election!

---

by: janed @ Thu May 26, 2011 at 13:41:45 PM UTC

The Republicans appear to have had the same (0.00 / 0)

problem they had with Tedisco in the Murphy Special in '09.  However, they came up with a good candidate and he won handily in 2010.

---

by: John Minehan @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 00:54:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

My respect to Jane Corwin. (0.00 / 0)

This absolutely wouldn't have been possible without her acting like a moron.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 05:01:35 AM UTC

I wouldn't go that far, but a real mismatch of candidate, (0.00 / 0)

candidate's affect (Junior League/Country Club, although she grew up working in a family business) and District (Rust Belt, elected a former Bills QB).  Hochul at least still talks like she comes from the area, even having left the state to go to law school and having worked for some fairly big Dem players.

---

by: John Minehan @ Fri May 27, 2011 at 21:07:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're mixing up your districts. (0.00 / 0)

It was Higgins' district, NY-27, that used to be Jack Quinn's.

That said, saying that someone "talks like they come from the area" doesn't mean much, since the way someone from the Buffalo area talks--or more accurately, the culture they're acclimated to--is considerably different from what you might find in Batavia or Warsaw.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Sat May 28, 2011 at 08:25:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

NY 26 is Jack Kemp's old District (former NY 31), according to most (0.00 / 0)

sources.  Wikipedia says that it is now NY 29.

---

by: John Minehan @ Tue May 31, 2011 at 21:12:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Technically Quinn's territory overlapped all three. (0.00 / 0)

Stretching as far out as Ontario County. However, the "meat" of his district and most of the population was the Buffalo southtowns and Cattaraugus County, which are now Higgins' territory.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Fri Jun 03, 2011 at 22:41:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]