Results tagged “Politics” from All Things West Virginian

Let's see if I have this right.  Manchin at first could have appointed Bryd's successor but then the "rumble" was heard (I didn't hear it but those with better hearing than I presumably did) that the "people" by heck wanted to VOTE on Bryd's successor because by heck this is West Virginia, and by heck two years is way TOO LONG for an appointed person to serve and by heck the will of PEOPLE has to be followed.  So out comes McGraw's opinion that yes we must have an election.  So the Legislature says OK.  How much will this cost.  Not much.  Only about two to three million per special election.

Now, ten or was it twelve percent of the registered voters even showed up to vote !!

The PEOPLE has spoken.  Well, NINETY PERCENT of them didn't but what the heck, it only cost a couple of million.

Save us from ourselves and other things that go bump in the night!

 

As near as I can understand the Secretary of State's opinion, Governor Manchin will appoint Byrd's successor (I predict Gayle or Ann Barth) to serve TWO YEARS then in 2012 folks run in the Democratic primary for (a) the unexpired SIX WEEKS of Senator Byrd's existing term and (b) the full term of six years which starts in 2013.  Whew.  Can you believe the "oddness" of where we find ourselves?

Poor Governor Manchin.  He would make an excellent successor to Senator Byrd but two years is a long time.  If the Legislature can change the above rules, the problem is that some in the Legislature who plan to run for governor in 2012 don't want Joe to leave office early and give Earl Ray two years as governor prior to 2012. 

This is going to get interesting.

Those who wish to see President Obama re-elected should be very worried because of what may unfold as a result of the health care reform passed last month.  There seems to be general agreement that the addition of 30 million new insureds to the "rolls" will put great pressure on the health care system.  This could well cause "rationing" where non-emergency care is deferred until space and physicians are available.  This impact will unfold (if it does) in 2011 and more clearly in 2012 - the election year.  If this "squeeze" comes about then those running against the President both in the Democratic party and the Republican will point to these delays as "not what we were promised" when health care passed.  If this occurs where the patient is told the earliest date upon which the procedure can be performed as opposed to allowing the patient to schedule the event when convenient to the patient (the norm today) there will be a "hue and cry" that people are being "denied care" as a result of health care reform.  The other problem with the reform is that the "penalty" for not buying insurance is a small tax penalty.  This means the younger, healthy people who are needed in the insurance pool if premiums are going be stable or fall will not get insurance.  This means premiums are lilely to rise.

Think about it:  In 2012 the data will be in.  If waiting months for treatment becomes the norm and insurance premiums have gone up, well....the average independent voter will not support the incumbents.

The Democrats are going to pass the current version of health care through some shall we say non-traditional procedural methods.  That means there will be court challanges.  The "mess" will end up in front of the US Supreme Court where health care will be "gutted" or "saved" by a 5-4 vote.  Remember Bush vs. Gore?  What a mess.  All this uncertainty for political reasons alone.  Makes one want to vote against any incumbent no matter what the party affiliation.  Unbelivable really.