Time to synergize

I blogged yesterday about Steven Pearlstein's column on the inability of the two parties to come together to offer constructive, synergistic solutions on a range of issues facing the country.

The Economist opines about how Kathy Hochul's victory in upstate New York will only just exacerbate the problem, comparing solutions to Medicare's finances to a used car dealer selling a lemon. Dana Milbank of The Washington Post goes further by explaining how Paul Ryan was a victim of his own scare tactics, which illustrates the problem but doesn't help solve it.

Lastly, Matt Miller writes a column about acknowledging that the entire RyanCare plan is not a disaster and it does have some good ideas to build around.

Getting back to the Economist piece, a very good point is made that represents a very sad reality:

"Both parties have, somewhere inside them, a serious proposal to reform Medicare. If they thought they could be elected by offering such a plan, they would do so."

What both parties miss in all of this is they've inadvertently synergized already. The "Premium Support" (aka Vouchers) in RyanCare were a Democratic idea. The individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act were a Republican idea. And the fact that each is being ripped apart after being embraced by the other side is the saddest part of all.

In case you missed it the first eight times, she said "We need a cop on the beat"

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank writes about Elizabeth Warren appearing before a House committee yesterday stressing the importance of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He seemed to be particularly amused by her use of the 'cop on the beat' metaphor:

"If [Warren is] the cop, then banks are the robbers, and members of the Republican majority on the committee sounded like lawyers for the accused."

In case you were wondering, I'm guessing this was planned well in advance since the CFPB's web site has an image of a police shield with the letters 'CFPB' inscribed in bold block letters.

Déjà vu all over again

Why am I not surprised that the process for selecting candidates for this election is nearly identical to the process for selecting candidates in this election?

In both cases “candidates must believe in the principles of the [political party or country] and have a prominent political and religious background.”