Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"They lacked a super majority (two thirds) in the Senate, so lots of compromises still had to happen."

Sorry, that is simply not true. Obamacare was passed without a single amendment (or even a full debate), and without a single Republican vote.




That doesn't at all mean no compromises were made. It would be oversimplifying and naive to assume that the only compromises made in political dealings manifested as amendments.


Does getting Lieberman's vote by leaving out a public option count as a compromise?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Afforda...


No one seriously believes that Lieberman was ever anything but a Democrat, so no.


I'll have to re-read stuff on the ACA's passing through Congress.

But my statement about the supermajority is true. The Democrats (with Independents) had at most 60 members of the Senate (2009-2010), Republicans had from 39-42 (vacancies and other things going on).

Democrats did not have sufficient control of the Senate to guarantee they could get whatever they wanted.


See above. They could have used the nuclear option on day one (as they eventually did do).


Perhaps they were trying to stick to Obama's primary campaign promise of seeking bipartisan cooperation.


Their motivation doesn't enter into it. The argument is about whether they had the power. They clearly did, and they clearly did exercise that power at a later time.

I recall one of the Republicans predicting that at some future time the Democrats were going to regret having used the nuclear option. That time is probably about right now.

I'm afraid there's no way to put that big cloud back into that shiny metal ball.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: