Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ...
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by Gestopft View Post
    Damaging to the cause of M4A. Having a landslide against would scare many representatives away from it for a long time- and give a TON of ammunition to the GOP/centrist Dems. Shit, when Bernie was winning the primary for a brief moment, older Dems were freaking about McGovern 2.0. People remember failures for a looonng time. Dems tried pushing single-payer back in the early 90's and it crashed and burned then- and almost 30 years later the party is just getting back to the point where a significant chunk of the Reps support the plan. Granted, there were other reasons the party turned away, too, but I'd rather not have the issue disappear for another 30 years, thank you very much.
    The issue isn't likely to disappear for 30 years because situation keeps going worse.

    Expectations that single vote defeat is going to jeopardize entire movement need stronger backing then "it was brought up before and failed". You could just as well keep bringing it up until it stops failing - be it through pressure on representatives or through their replacement. There is no clear indication that waiting until everything lines up for "single vote pass-through" is better approach, or that forcing the vote will suddenly change anyone's opinions about it for the worse.

    Lots of people have sensed a change in the winds and are impatient- which is perfectly normal. Support has been gaining. The battle of ideas is being won. Momentum will continue to grow, and yes, people should make it clear that they support it and will vote on it. Representatives should be pressured to support it. But forcing a vote is silly, unnecessary, and again, could be counterproductive.
    Not forcing the vote is also counterproductive though - as far as outside support for those defending M4A in a House is concerned. If progressives get defeated next time around due to voters being disillusioned with their actions M4A cause in Congress can suffer just as well.

    Accountability and representation of their voters is what "The Squad" was running on, after all; and now Jimmy uses AOC rhetoric and tweets against her as proof of betrayal.

    The status quo is happening right now regardless. Voting now won't change that, but as I said- it could scare the institution away from it for quite a while.
    Whom exactly, and how exactly?

    The US healthcare system will still be the same garbage it was before the pandemic. People will still be breaking their insulin in half, dying because they didn't have insurance, going bankrupt even if they had insurance, and watching prices for premiums and prescriptions increase year after year. The healthcare system won't get any better or cheaper, and that will continue to be a massive problem. The issue isn't going away, not by a long shot.
    So why do you think #ForceTheVote succeeding would suddenly turn people away from this topic for 30 years if pressure to "do something" would keep growing?

    As I explained above. Political parties remember failures. You don't think that Democratic Reps/Senators that might be on the fence about it aren't going to point to a recent crash and burn vote as a reason to hold off?
    There are plenty of ammunition against it as it is.

    You build momentum by winning seats or making credible primary threats. I don't think forcing a vote that clearly isn't going anywhere is going to be the kind of pressure campaign you think it is. It's simply trying to break down a castle wall when you have a hammer instead of a battering ram.
    The point, as far as i see, is to start building momentum and keep pressure up.

    Old representatives aren't going to budge en-masse; the only way of changing Congress position on those issues is to replace them.

    And to replace them you need to keep belief that M4A progressives will provide better representation alive. Going against #ForceTheVote directly undermines that.

    Just having that (potentially meaningless) vote as a symbol of "Fighting The Good Fight" and moving forward from it can be better then "we're doing things we cannot tell you about as backroom deals there, voting can disrupt that" from that perspective.

    1) Gay marriage was never passed by Congress. It was specific state legislatures that did, and then the SCOTUS ultimately legalized it in all states.
    2) It took years of local, on the ground action to build the legal frameworks and public support. Sort of the thing I'm suggesting M4A proponents continue to do now. Gay marriage advocates didn't blow their load early at the federal level.
    They did though; that's where all those "marriage is union between man and women" legislations come from - from existing pushes to legalization meeting opposition to it.

    That didn't stop it from eventually succeeding, and i see no reason why similar chain of events cannot follow even if current vote might have been doomed to fail.
    Last edited by Shalcker; 2021-01-06 at 02:41 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts