Following the theme to destroy any Republican in office, Democrats are aflutter with the message that every Republican idea, national or local, is purely negative.
Near-daily statements from the three candidates opposing U.S. Rep. Steve Knight repeat the same storylines: the new health plan’s draft version is a disaster; Knight votes with Republicans; therefore the critics are not represented – a representative “should be for all of the people.”
How, exactly, does that work? With each person having different ideas on what ought to be, how does a representative meet everyone’s demands all of the time?
The critics who demand they be represented over others are ones who never voted for Knight in the first place, and never will.
Democrats originated “Elections have consequences.”
As for Knight “voting with Republicans,” how does each of the opposing candidates – all Democrats, of course – plan to vote should they win, with both Republicans and Democrats to represent in the district? We only have to look at our California Legislature to get that answer.
Candidate Katie Hill frequents the Signal pages.
She stated in March 2017 “I won’t ever sign off on campaign ads that are negative or derogatory.”
That didn’t last long.
Abandoning that promise, Hill told The Signal this week that Knight “…cares more about pleasing wealthy donors who will get massive tax cuts … and following the party line than he does about people in his district.”
Hill criticized the ACHA bill because voting Republicans didn’t read it, the CBO hadn’t scored it and “23million” would go uninsured.
“We have to pass the bill so that we can find out what is in it” was the Democrats’ theme to win approval of Obamacare in 2010. No one read, it let alone studied it, except Betsy McCaughey, PhD, a health-care expert.
As for the CBO, it scored Obamacare wrongly by 120 percent and said by this time Obamacare would be self-sufficient (Forbes 2017). In 2014 the CBO said Obamacare costs were decreasing.
Betsy McCaughey concluded the CBO’s number of 23 million uninsured by ACHA assumes no one will buy insurance if the mandate to have it is removed. In short, that sect would be willingly uninsured.