Why are the democrats having difficulty passing health care reform?

I keep hearing how the people don't trust the goverment to run a healthcare program or any other business for that matter. But yet, they have no problem with our goverment running a war and spending billions on that. Medicare recipients have no problem with the healthcare they are getting. Same with our veterans. The seniors have no problems getting their Social Security checks every month on time.

Please people! How long will we let the special interests/corporations run our lives and dictate to us what is good and not good? When do we get to make our own decisions about the costs and the quality of our healthcare? The public option will do just that.

The problem is the Senate.

There are enough Democratic Senators to pass a bill. However, a few Democratic Senators (Blanche Lincoln, D-LA) aren't interested in serious reform. Republicans are universally against what President Obama has proposed.

Basically, it requires the Democrats to work in unison, and all work toward getting the same goal. The Republicans are pretty much a unified block. There are procedures, notably the filibuster, that allows a minority to prevent things from happening.

The House can have a bill passed very quickly. It's all majority rule there.

Two reasons related specifically to why their majority is not enough:

1) Fighting within their own party. An August 1 Washington Post article said "Democrats have large majorities in both chambers, but they have discovered the perils of being a party that yokes together Northern California liberals and Deep South good ol' boys."

2) Several Democrats are from districts that have many Republicans and independents. These Democrats will/might lose their jobs if they vote for reform that is too far to the left.

Another general answer:

They keep saying the bill is supposed to cut costs, but independent analysis shows that it will dramatically increase costs.

I'll stop now...

A lot of Democrats were voted into office this past cycle not because their districts were primarily Democrat, but rather the people were so dissatisfied with Bush, and by extension, Republicans, that they voted for the opposing party. But at their core, those voters are still conservative / Republican by and large, and if their representatives support a strong liberal agenda, they will lose re-election.

there is large confrontation over: how a lot of people desire coverage whether people presently uninsured desire finished assurance, purely assurance for important issues, or something in between whether or no longer there could desire to be a clean, government-run coverage decision (even interior the Democratic occasion some are for this, and a few are against) a thank you to pay for it - could desire to medical doctors make much less money? if so, which of them? could desire to taxes strengthen on basically "the wealthy"? if so, is that adequate to pay for this? Can Obama wreck his promise to no longer tax the middle classification? in case you decrease pay to medical doctors, what share will go away the profession? How do you're making greater people circulate into usual care to hide each and every of the newly insured people? in case you decrease pay to pharmaceutical companies, scientific gadget makers, and so on. will innovation in new cures be decreased? Will this result interior the shortcoming of lives that could have been saved? in spite of the reality that "preventive care" could decrease expenditures for a guy or woman in case you are able to % out something early, does "preventive care" in the process a inhabitants decrease expenditures, or strengthen it? what share assessments do you may desire to pay for to circumvent one ailment? and so on. that's no longer an uncomplicated problem they're attempting to unravel.

Because Americans instinctively rebelled against it because they do not think that government can run any business efficiently and effectively, least of all the nation's complex healthcare system; that with the government running up trillions of dollars in new debts, we cannot afford to add yet another huge spending entitlement program to its bills; and because of the certainty that a new federally regulated healthcare system will rob us of the freedom to make our own medical decisions without government interference and the often unintended consequences that invariably flows from the nanny state.

The WISE citizens Know this:

Govt. screws up everything they initiate;

Govt. changes things AFTER it's been approved

Govt. is not cost effective

Govt. wants to control everything

Govt. already has Medicaid for the needy

Govt. will extent services to not citizens at our expense

...and more

When the people control the Government,,,,you have freedom

When the Govt. controls the people....you have socialism

The difficulty is that most of the democratic legislators are not as liberal as the leadership and they represent people who are not as liberal as the legislators.

Maybe is because they are fighting against each other i mean they have diferences in their own party, hey gatito why do you care about this issue? do you live in usa? :-! see ya in Dallas!

Listening to saboteurs. Ignore them and do the job that he was elected to do is the best advice.

A right to free speech is not an obligation to listen.