News

No, the problem here is with the Senate, and it's arcane traditions where unanimous consent is required to get anything substantial done, and if the outsize power it gives the Majority Leader and the committee chairs to set the agends, who are only selected by the majority members. With the normal rules it takes 60 votes to get anything done. But if the Majority Leader or the relevant committee chair doesn't like a thing, they get a pocket veto to derail it.

Our current situation at the Supreme Court has everything to do with Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham deciding that the Senate's "advise and consent" role includes being able to perpetually ignore the President by failing to schedule a vote. When RBG died, Republicans made clear that they would have voted down a progressive replacement. I think it was Graham that literally challenged Obama to name a more centrist judge, and gave Garland as an example by name. Then, when Obama nominated Garland, Graham pivoted and said that now that Obama nominated that centrist, the Senate still wouldn't consider the nomination until after the election.

Make no mistake about it, the reason why Graham and McConnell never scheduled a vote is that they knew it would pass. So two Senators essentially vetoed Obama's pick, which is in flagrant opposition to the Constitution, which says the whole Senate has to vote on it. (Then , of course, when the tables were turned 4 years later Mitch and Lindsay came to different conclusions).

Even if Clinton won in 2020, there is no guarantee these Senate Republicans would have played fair and lived up to their commitments. They would have found new and novel ways to screw the country.

Im in school in Louisiana where there is a big push to improve the state healthcare ranking from 49/50 to 40 in the next 10 or so years.

Nation wide, over 50% of doctors stay in the same state they did their residency training in. So if you get the resident, chances are you get a doctor in the long term. You want residents to do their training in your state.

But with the new laws, so many of my classmates are not even considering doing their residency training in Louisiana. I sure as hell dont want to. So this law is making more people seek training outside of the state and less will likely return after. Its going to end up draining even more doctors out of the already horribly health deprived state. Absolute lunacy.

We ain't getting to 40 like this.

If they only would have let Obama appoint his justice! Then RBG could have retired instead of dying on the bench trying to hang on until a dem president. That whole shit was so underhanded, and then the GOP called it BS when dems tried to keep out a literal rapist.

This is part of the GOP strategy.

Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri has openly acknowledged that the GOP strategy is to make it so miserable for Democrats in red and purple states that they will move to blue states. That would, in turn, cement Republican power in the White House, Senate and thereby the Supreme Court.

There was a thread yesterday saying the usual "Democrats should pick a better candidate than Biden".

Clinton failed. Should have run a better campaign.

They'd rather shoot themselves and their children in the foot than just leave others with different lifestyles alone.

See also: places with no OB/GYNs because Republicans have made it literally impossible for them to do their jobs legally.

This will inevitably create even higher healthcare costs. More and more procedures and specialists require someone to fly to a blue city or state.

For anyone wanting more context, OPs article re-reports and links to https://www.wdsu.com/article/louisiana-heart-doctor-says-he-is-leaving-state-due-to-discriminatory-anti-lgbtq-law/44706683# , which has more quotes from the doctor.

Good. Conservatives do not deserve nice things like healthcare. Let them suffer and die as they insist.