feedback.pdxradio.com » Politics and other things

HOLY CRAP!!! DEMS GO IT ALONE ON HEALTH CARE!

(45 posts)
  • Started 11 months ago by missing_kskd
  • Latest reply from missing_kskd

  1. Well, Obama was playing us a bit. If somebody finds a good link on this, post it up! I was on Kos, when I saw the news and am still reading.

    He wanted to know if some of the moderate Republicans would lean in to support a tepid, watered down bill.

    The answer there, for better or worse, is a resounding party NO!

    So then, it's the Dems solo.

    Some good in this: Solid framing on Republicans not working for the people. They are working for the social regressives, and big-business, wealthy conservative authoritarian elites.

    No more worries about corporate Republicans. They won't crack right now anyway, so what's the point?

    Some bad: Now it's Blue-Cross Dems, -vs- moderate and progressives! A full on intra-party smackdown is coming our way!!

    Stakes are very, very high. No reform backfires on the Republican framing. They can walk it back a little and still pressure moderates, but it's largely lost.

    Good reform is a home run, clearly! Might stop the losses sure to come in the mid-terms. Might even hold a majority. Good for people too, as a real solid alternative to private insurers means better health care options and avaliability across the board. Small business might actually catch a break, and that would be awesome! Dare I say it? Medicare for all, or with a buy in option maybe? Who knows. The only downside is for those Republicans, who probably would jump in on something good like that, tied to the 23 percenters.

    Tepid reform is likely horrible for everybody. People get screwed, Dems get hammered, Republicans get hammered, some gains, some losses, just a freaking mess and Obama looking to just suck huge trying to recover.

    This just got a whole lot more interesting!!

    If you are not making your calls, you should be. This is sizing up to be like that last inning in a baseball game. Bases loaded, batter up, count full: only one thing is known for sure! Something is gonna happen!

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:17 PM #
  2. Teletype

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 240

    I'm really happy to hear this. If the Republicans don't want to cooperate then screw 'em. But you're right, the political stakes are very high. NY Times has a story online:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/health/policy/19repubs.html?hp

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:28 PM #
  3. Thanks for the link.

    Well, maybe Obama did learn something from the Stimulus deal. Here's to hoping.

    I think the number of people to call just got smaller, like Blue Cross Dems smaller

    --->and that bagger Wyden.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:34 PM #
  4. BTW: Not all the calls need to be negative. It's good to call and thank the Progressives for holding the line on must do things.

    I like to mix them up a little. Phone in a negative one, then do a postive one or two, then go dig in the trenches again...

    Three calls a day! Fit one into a break, two into lunch.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:38 PM #
  5. TALPDX

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 420

    For the Democrats, it boils down to holding the majority in the House – I really do believe that. I’ve heard that the newly elected Democratic members of the House and House moderates are very concerned about holding the House next year if the public option passes. It bothers me greatly to think that an issue I care about so deeply could undermine the Democrats hold in the House. I want the public option in the worst way possible. It makes so much logical sense. But I’m also VERY afraid of the GOP getting its hands back on the House in a majority capacity. The GOP’s leadership of the Congress was tragic to say the least. And to listen to the likes of John Boehner and Eric Cantor – two major league one trick ponies; one who would be speaker and the other majority leader in a GOP controlled Congress. They offer NOTHING except the old pabulum of the past – which was ingloriously conceived legislative manure and feeble leadership.

    I do take very strong issue with the Democratic leaderships poor salesmanship of the health care reform issue. They knew, using 1993-94 as a baseline, that passing MAJOR health care legislation was going to be a very real challenge. They should have been gearing up for this for months and they blew it. It took the White House days to respond to all the ballyhoo at the early town hall meetings. And I don't know where the hell Pelsoi and Reid have been? Conservative activists were working overtime to frame the debate – and they did one hell of a job doing it. The left needs to become much better at selling their agenda or the conservatives will continue to co-opt the message. Intellectual arguments are important – but creating a frame of reference “everyday” people can use as a means of fairly judging reform is hugely important. And that has not happened.

    The Democrats were all over the board coming into August. When you sell an idea this large, you need to bring some cohesion to the process. Yet in the case of the Democrats, this has not been the case. The GOP plays to emotion whereas the Democrats tend to focus on the intellectual rationale of an issue. But when you’re dealing with an issue like health care reform, you need to do both – and in tandem. Hit it strong.

    As for the Senate, I do think it is in the driver seat. The Senate will have a much easier job putting together modestly bi-partisan, watered down, consensus legislation that will do virtually nothing except sound reasonably attractive to moderates and independents. But in terms of shaping a lasting health care reform effort this year, I’m starting to doubt it will happen. Band-aid reform, yes; reform of consequence, no.

    If you’re going to sell something this large with myriad moving parts, you’ve got to bring your folks along – keep them WELL informed and explain what’s happening – even on the legislative committee level. It’s a very emotional issue for people and I think many Americans felt left out of the process. It has not be explained very well.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:55 PM #
  6. That can all change now, and change fairly rapidly.

    One other dynamic is with bi-partisan being off the table, the Blue-Cross Dems really are in the squeeze.

    Remember the cozy little game Wyden and Smith had going. Well, with Smith gone and Merkley basically coming out strong Progressive, Wyden retreated and stood behind his corporate bill, and when pressed said, "bi-partisanship is my top priority". That was the only good cop / bad cop game left in town where he could get the dollars, avoid real accountability, and keep his stature.

    Obama just took that off the table nicely.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 08:59 PM #
  7. Let me take this completely off the political and "details" debate, and bring it back to the masses. Major problems. The majority of Americans do not understand, (or care to understand), this debate. Unless there is some immediate clarity from those who lead, this is doomed. Doomed. Dead. However, if it is rammed through, the ramifications to Obama will most likely be clear as well.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:12 PM #
  8. I'm not sure that makes any sense.

    The people that matter right now are the ones that DO understand and who are doing the advocacy required to pressure a good bill into being.

    If it's a good bill, that actually delivers material relief and that does not just shift costs around, the "don't understands" will either get it and not be a future worry, or they won't, and things play out to our benefit in the end, just like other major programs have, or haven't.

    I suspect the clarity you ask for won't take all that long now.

    The corporate Dems don't have Republicans to game us with. That's kind of ugly for them now. That's going to speak to clarity, particularly if Obama now applies the bully pulpit.

    IMHO, this is a different way of getting stuff done. I'm not yet comfortable with it, but it is consistent. Obama likes to draw the tension out, learn stuff, then act.

    There is a good chance at public option, or Medicare buy in now, and either one of those not hobbled with poison pill, pro corporate holes in them, will present a significantly differentiated option to people.

    That's all it's going to take to get forward momentum we need.

    Confused people don't vote positive. With the Republicans and bi-partisan in the picture, there is an out for those legislators to clarify on their own terms, in their districts. Wiggle room.

    Now, that's out. So then, either the bill is good, or it's not.

    Those people that do understand the dynamics here need to speak up to make a good bill happen, or everybody goes down. There won't be that kind of framing out now.

    So, the incentive to do more of the right things is stronger than it was before.

    Sure, no risk, no reward. I don't think that has ever changed.

    I'll gladly take the risk, and do my foot work, because I sure want the reward.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:18 PM #
  9. TALPDX

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 420

    I don’t think the Senate will allow for much beyond what Kent Conrad or Max Baucus are touting. Conrad said Sunday that the Senate doesn’t have the votes to pass a public option – even among Democrats in the Senate. And Chris Dodd’s plan isn’t getting the sort of traction (or attention) it needs to win broad support. Dodd doesn’t have the kind of clout Kennedy has – and with Kennedy away, it’s been difficult to reach a broad consensus which is important in the Senate. The House operates in much the same way the British parliament works – one party rule. In the Senate, it’ll be virtually impossible to pass anything without nominal Republican support. And Collins and Snowe, both moderate GOP Senators from Maine, have not shown much enthusiasm for the public option. In fact Snowe is a member of the Finance Committees Health Care Reform Working Group.

    As for what Paul Walker wrote, he's right. The salesmanship on the part of the Democrats hasn't been good at all. The Democrats, especially those supporting the public option, have allowed the conservatives to completely co-opt the message, thus rendering the public option supporters in the position of playing defense this entire month.

    I’m growing tired of these grand ideas from progressive Democrats being co-opted because of their general ineptitude in the art of mass marketing these ideas. Frankly, the progressives suck at it (and I say that as a progressive). If the rules of the game require you to get down and play dirty, then do it. Politics is a zero sum game. But if you are unwilling to meet that challenge of it head on, your legislative goals will get shot down time and time again.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:26 PM #
  10. I'm not debating the issue, I am talking about how the populace is feeling about all this. CNN poll from today:

    Quick Vote
    Do you feel well informed about the health care plans being debated by Congress?
    Yes, I'm on top of it 26% 52926
    No, I'm confused 74% 148853
    Total Votes: 201779

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:27 PM #
  11. Totally!

    That's your risk reward right there. I wrote a piece or two about confused people and their lack of buy in. The risk just went way up.

    I don't disagree on the salesmen ship errors. IMHO, that could have gone much differently, but...

    Wouldn't the nay-sayers have just done their thing anyway? Half, if not more, of that crap is just because Obama is black, or because they have to oppose something.

    Those clowns are totally confused no matter what was said.

    The average Joe probably doesn't get it yet. If they got it sooner, what would have changed?

    IMHO, one positive change I can think of that would have resulted from a better sales job, would be the barganing from single payer instead of starting with public option, falling down to co-ops rather quickly.

    Of course now, something like Medicare for all, or Medicare buy in is back in the discussion, largely because the extreme "NO" position from the Republicans is no longer on the table.

    Maybe a ton of effort early on would not have yielded much.

    Don't know.

    What I do now is that right now, basically calling on the Democrats to own this legislation, means the window of discussion moved left, period. That's a net positive for us because the tepid sure to fail options are now far less likely.

    IMHO, we are talking Public Option as a minimum now, and that's a hell of a change compared to it being a maximum.

    So I guess the higher risk / reward ratio is good for us, not bad, right?

    Where is the gloom and doom worry then?

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:39 PM #
  12. As for the populace, they don't like change and the Republicans and corporate media put out a lot of noise.

    I'm not sure their confusion is avoidable, meaning we factor it out.

    I don't agree that "rammed through" spells doom. That framing assumes that a party can't act in a way that helps us, without the other party "helping". The Republicans don't help at all.

    So then, the only real path to solid reform is to ram it through? What choice do the clowns leave us?

    Do any of you feel that no reform is warranted?

    Or is it the worry that it will be bad reform? If so, I share that one, which is why advocacy now is very, very important.

    Frankly, I've been waiting for the "ram it through" moment of realization for a while now. That's what we fought to win the election for! Real, solid change isn't gonna happen with a Republican stamp of approval --ever.

    If anybody is upset, it should be those confused people being manupulated and held hostage by a party that flat out refuses to act for anybody but itself and big corporations. We've seen way too much of that.

    I'm stoked!!

    Health care sucks ass right now.

    If we water down reform, that will just suck differently, and likely cost more.

    If we actually do reform, that brings with it the chance to not suck.

    Let's say we've three outcomes. 33 percent each. One of those outcomes is improvement, so a third of that, or about 1 in 10 for a great reform to occur.

    Now, with Republicans out of the picture, the status quo is gone for sure. The known to suck bi-partisan position is gone now too!

    So then, we are down to 1 in 3 for something great.

    3 in 10 now. Totally good news.

    It's arguably higher too, because the minimum point of discussion will rapidly be public option. So then perhaps 50/50!

    This means it's our game to lose! All the reason in the world to make your calls, send your e-mails and express what would work for you. That's it. Easy.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:40 PM #
  13. Quick Vote
    Do you feel well informed about the health care plans being debated by Congress?
    Yes, I'm on top of it 26% 52926
    No, I'm confused 74% 148853
    Total Votes: 201779

    There is one way to end the confusion - public option = buy into Medicare. Simple. Revenue neutral. This also tells us seniors that the government is not doing away with Medicare.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:47 PM #
  14. Damn straight. If we hear that, the odds rise to 7 out of 10 positive for us!

    (using the simple KSKD decision tree method)

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:49 PM #
  15. TALPDX

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 420

    The problem is you can ram it though the House but cannot ram it through the Senate. The legislative process in the Senate doesn’t allow for that to happen. It’s not as simple as the majority leader calling for a vote on the pending legislation and presto, it’s passed. It’s much more complicated that. I would be very shocked to see the Senate pass anything remotely close to a public option. Too many moderate Democratic Senators will not vote to support it. They represent states where it is probably seen as an expensive liberal tax and spend program. And I say this as someone who believes deeply in the need for a public option. But I’m also aware of how the Senate works and it wouldn’t be possible to simply ram the legislation through. There are multiple hoops to jump through, even for the majority party. The rules that govern the body wouldn't allow ramming though legislation. And on this issue, you can bet that the GOP would filibuster the public option.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 09:56 PM #
  16. Andrew

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 947

    I absolutely agree that switching the insurance reform to "Medicare for all" would be almost politically bullet proof. Medicare as a program is untouchable. Republicans can't attack it. So if you propose extending Medicare to all, what will the Republicans attack line be? The government is going to take away your health care? BS! Everyone knows Medicare works fine.

    The only possible Republican line of attack is, "It's too expensive." And that's easy to counter: say it's "revenue neutral" (people under 65 pay the full cost of their premiums without the automatic subsidies over-65 seniors get).

    Better yet, say it's "revenue positive" - meaning, new people joining Medicare would pay a little more in to it, to make the program as a whole solvent in the future. Unfortunately, few Americans realize - because our politicians have tried to hide avoid the issue - that Medicare's future solvency is at risk without benefit cuts or premium increase. New injection of payees could sure up the system in the future.

    How can insurance companies oppose this without attacking Medicare? They can't. If they can provide cheaper premiums than Medicare to average Americans, then people will buy insurance from the insurance companies. If not...I guess they go out of business. Bummer! Survival of the fittest!!!

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 10:15 PM #
  17. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    I don't care too much what they do as long as the key word is OPTIONAL.

    If I want government run insurance, then I pay into it. If want to stay with my current provider, then that's what I get to do.

    As long as I'm not forced to take their socialized medicine AND my taxes don't go up to fund it, I'm OK with whatever.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 10:41 PM #
  18. Skybill:

    As long as I'm not forced to take their socialized medicine …

    So when you are eligible for Medicare, you don’t want to be forced to take it? By the way, you could become eligible for Medicare well before you are at retirement age.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 10:54 PM #
  19. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    "So when you are eligible for Medicare, you don’t want to be forced to take it?"

    I want it to be my choice, not some politician in Washington.

    When I'm eligible, if I have a private insurance company that I'm happy with and want to keep, great. If I want Medicare, then that would be my choice.

    "By the way, you could become eligible for Medicare well before you are at retirement age."

    Understand.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 11:22 PM #
  20. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 569

    Just like the postal service - optional, but available to everyone for a reasonable cost.

    Just like public school - optional, but available to everyone for a reasonable cost.

    The above 'socialist' systems have been around since our republic was formed, and our country has done pretty well. Skybill, I think you and other conservatives have little to worry about. Unless you hold stock in a health insurance company, of course.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 11:33 PM #
  21. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    Except that for the public schools, your property taxes go to them whether you have kids in school or not.

    I don't necessarily have too much problem with that, but that discussion is for another thread!

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 11:40 PM #
  22. Andrew

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 947

    Gee, I wish I had a choice as to whether my tax dollars had paid for the Iraq war I didn't want...

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 11:47 PM #
  23. Exactly.

    If it's a good deal, and it sees some progressive tax funding, most ordinary people will come out way ahead over their private policy.

    Think of that as the core, baseline nut of savings.

    From there, if you are not happy, that's what the private insurers are for. Take your savings and put it right back into the system with few worries.

    Posted on August 18, 2009 - 11:51 PM #
  24. Amus

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 538

    I somehow have a hard time believing that Insurance companies are going to offer comptetive health insurance options to seniors.

    But sure.
    If they can/will I'd say let them compete for the market.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 07:01 AM #
  25. Vitalogy

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,756

    My employer pays an average of $8000 per year for employee health insurance. I work for a private company with about 500 employees. That's $4 million per year my company shells out for insurance. What's to say that companies like mine wouldn't dump the private option in favor of the public option at a much cheaper price, if it became available? I'd be happy to take the public option and see more of that $8000 benefit go towards compensation. I certainly don't get anywhere near $8000 worth of care per year.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 09:48 AM #
  26. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 569

    Skybill:"Except that for the public schools, your property taxes go to them whether you have kids in school or not."

    This highlights a key facet of conservative thinking, which is that people should personally benefit directly for each tax dollar paid, and that people should not pay any tax that does not deliver a direct personal benefit. For example: only people that drive should be taxed for roads (though everyone benefits from the goods and services, and fire/police protections transported to us on those roads); only people that have kids in school should pay school tax (though a better-educated population raises the standard of living for all Americans); and, government subsidized health care takes away my freedom (though a healthier populace is more productive and more competitive in the world market, which would increase jobs and lower costs for all - and doesn't more income give you *more* freedom?)

    When thinking about health care reform, one must think outside one's own personal, self-contained box.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 10:37 AM #
  27. trixter

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,214

    As long as I'm not forced to take their socialized medicine.

    Sky..
    Give it to me and my wife! We'll gladly take yours in addtion to ours!

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 12:07 PM #
  28. IMO....

    The only way we can have a public option that Republicans and Democrats and Independents would be apt to go along with is to insure somehow that the public option would be limited to people and their families of a certain income status. Or a particular medical/disability/ or income status. Now, this would be getting creative with our " public health maintence program ". I have always said that Americans (Congress and the Whitehouse ) need to be real creative setting up this Nationalized Health Maintenance system, devised in such a way as to maintain the private sector health insurance and at the same time provide a public health option for those who QUALIFY and that qualification might take on other factors besides just income... All others who dont qualify would use private sector insurance.

    Now, as to exactly ' What ' this public option would be is up for discussion, as we have seen in this post already with the discussions of using Medicaid.

    We need to get very Creative here to sell this to all political persuations.

    Also, to go along with this , we need to change the oversight rules and regs governing Private Insuarnce companies ie: No more pre-existing conditions , funding caps and some other occasional abuses.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 01:53 PM #
  29. trixter

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 3,214

    I think we should let everyone BUT Republicans have whatever health care they want! And when it comes to Medicare if your Republican you can't have it period!
    Let's see how many of them piss and moan then...

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 03:04 PM #
  30. TALPDX

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 420

    “The only way we can have a public option that Republicans and Democrats and Independents would be apt to go along with is to insure somehow that the public option would be limited to people and their families of a certain income status”.

    The costs associated with purchasing coverage is so prohibitively expensive on the “open market” that using income as tool to weed out families or individuals doesn’t make much sense. If I go to a health insurance broker and try to buy coverage for a family of four, it’s going to cost at least $1,500 a month for decent coverage (perhaps a bit more). That’s easily the size of a mortgage payment. The total for this family of four per year: $18,000. I don’t think many families can easily pay the mortgage (of say $1,500 a month), buy their kids braces, put kids through college and still make a $1,500 a month payment for health insurance. If this family made $75,000 a year but received no health insurance from an employer, would they be precluded from a program? I don’t see the sense in restricting those who on paper may seem flush from a reform program but in reality would have a heck of a time buying private insurance. They deserve to be included – just like anyone else.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 05:44 PM #
  31. Yeah, forget preserving the private insurance.

    Truth is, they either need to add value, or we don't need them.

    I think there will be plenty of ways for them to add value on top of baseline coverage. I don't think they will add value along side said coverage, without having a captive market to sell to.

    I don't want to be in that market.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 06:08 PM #
  32. I still like the idea of co-op's. Here's a link where the one in Seattle, with 580,000 members strong can be a template.

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/08/19/health_co_ops_fans_like_cost_and_care/?page=2

    Those who are comfortable with insurance companies can have them. But those of us who simply don't trust them and want REAL and I mean REAL healthcare, would find Co-op's the better option.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 06:15 PM #
  33. Yep, Group Health in Seattle has been mostly successful for a number of decades.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 06:17 PM #
  34. What's a typical monthly premium for an individual and family?

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 09:01 PM #
  35. I don't know. Can't find it anywhere. Good question.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 09:52 PM #
  36. edselehr

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 569

    Chris, try this article:

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2009436261_regence09m0.html

    They mention GroupHealth offering HSA's of just under $6K per year.

    Posted on August 19, 2009 - 10:50 PM #
  37. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    "...And when it comes to Medicare if your Republican you can't have it period!"

    Works for me. I'll see an increase in my pay check. If I "can't have it period" I don't expect to pay into it. Period.

    Pssst: It's you're not your. Sorry, couldn't resist!

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 01:18 AM #
  38. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    Edselehr, I wasn't complaining and saying that since I don't have kids in the public schools (actually I still have 1) that I shouldn't have my property tax monies go to it.

    I was simply pointing out that people's property taxes go to the schools whether they have kids in it or not.

    I don't have a problem with it. Good schools = higher property values.

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 01:21 AM #
  39. Ed- Thanks for the article. Tho' it didn't give hard numbers on premiums, I'd be curious as to what that would look like with such a high deductible even before new members are hit with at 13 precent increase.

    Seattle might be one of those unique situations that may not work elsewhere. Or maybe they can extend it to Oregon or certainly to Portland area residence where then can draw from a larger population pool.

    Again I go back to a previous article. If you keep yourself healthy and do what your supposed to do, costs will come down. That has been my experience.

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 11:44 AM #
  40. Works for me. I'll see an increase in my pay check. If I "can't have it period" I don't expect to pay into it. Period.

    Uh huh. It works for you until you have a catastrophic illness with no insurance and THEN you'll have your hand out. That's why the debate is so hot right now, people don't have coverage. This is the only industrialized country where all people aren't covered AND where medicine is allowed to profit. Your side likes to bash laywers for profiting off people's pain, what about big medicine and pharma?

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 07:24 PM #
  41. Skybill9

    vacuum tube
    Posts: 1,597

    pdxliberal, I was just responding to Trixter's post.

    There is as much chance that I won't have to pay into Medicare as there is managing my own Socialist Insecurity account.

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 09:31 PM #
  42. Well, we do pay for it indirectly no matter what.

    Cost and risk have been pushed onto the middle class huge. This is why everybody is bitching about taxes. The real culprit is this cost and risk consuming all the liquid dollars.

    Right now, the average person making 50 to 70K, simply cannot live a modest life, save for retirement, put a kid through school, save for health care, and eat.

    We all want more of our paycheck because our buying power per hour worked has remained essentially flat, while cost and risk have been rising each year, along with availablity of good paying jobs being on the decline.

    If I were all of you, I would consider getting on the phones to push for some good reform.

    Right now, the mandate is locked in. Right now, there are some regulations on what insurers can do, but no cost caps, no real cost containment.

    It could be that you get forced to buy shitty coverage, and to pay for that same shitty coverage and high cost in the form of subsidies for lower income people.

    If we don't get Medicare for all, Strong Public Option --the middle class will see more cost and risk to bear, not less.

    This will basically pass. I don't see it not passing.

    Insurers, bolstered by corporate Republicans (basically the whole party), and corporate Democrats (Blue Dogs), have positioned the deal such that they give some consesions:

    1. No pre existing

    2. Some modest cost caps in terms of young to old ratio

    3. No dropping policies

    etc...

    These are things that people want. Why did we get them locked in so easy?

    Mandates! That's why. If they expand the pool of insured, and that's a captive market with subsidies that are keyed to their costs, not some government baseline, it's a feeding frenzy for them that will easily wipe away any reduction in revenue they would see from the regulation.

    This is not the right way to go. What will happen is our tax burden will go up and we all will be forced to pay for very expensive health care, getting the least services for the dollar, backed by a federal mandate.

    The insurers can't wait for this to occur.

    Whatever you think about this, know it will pass.

    Now you decide whether or not you want your tax dollars paying insurers to maintain a 30 percent margin on health care, while adding NO value, or whether or not you want a public non-profit plan to compete and reduce costs, or you want to extend something like medicare on a buy in option, or for everyone.

    By way of reference, the co-ops might save 20 percent on your annual cost, not impacting your out of pocket significantly, and would largely leave deductables intact

    the public option could cut costs by 30 40 percent and have coverage comparable to medicare

    extending medicare could be half or more of what your current premiums are.

    Medicare for all with a tax, might double your federal tax, which for a lot of people is less than half their current premium.

    This exchange being touted is an exchange that you will have to participate in. You will be forced, and without some meaningful competition, the choice of how you want to get fucked over is the change we can believe in.

    I am a progressive. I am completely in favor of sharply diminishing the role of greedy, for profit insurers so that more of my dollars go to care and not CEO's.

    My party is split on this. We have corporate Democrats perfectly willing to sell all of us out, get the photo op with REFORM written on it, then point fingers at election time, all while receiving huge contributions from the same insurers laughing all the way to the bank, seeing 1000 percent or more returns on their 1.4 million a day investment to prevent competition from cutting their profit, and our costs.

    Progressive Democrats are the only ones right now holding the line for every day Americans. Republicans are holding together as a party, knowing that they can only gain, if there is failure right now.

    This will screw you.

    Blue Cross Democrats will gladly play the good cop / bad cop game with anybody willing to give them the out.

    This will screw you.

    Obama can only sign the legislation that comes to him. The house is a lock. Public option at a minimum. This won't screw you.

    The Senate doesn't have the 60 necessary to lock the minimum legislation necessary; namely, public option. This will screw you.

    http://www.firedoglake.com

    Make the calls. Get on the mailing list. Donate, even if you have to hold your nose.

    As Americans, we all need to wake up and realize this is about regular and substantial amounts of our money being taken from us every year, for nothing. We all need to realize that if we actually want to see some benefit, we are going to have to fight for it, like we did civil rights and other key pieces of legislation.

    As Americans, we need to realize Democrats have taken us down this road. The deals have been made. Democrats own the legislation, and it's this ownership that we voted a strong majority for.

    Corporations are happy to see us squabble and lose out.

    Progressives right now, are not going to screw you. The rest of Washington is, and that's a fact.

    Call, write, donate, get the word out.

    If it were me, I would pull for extending medicare, and settle for the non-profit public plan, knowing you can choose to keep what you have got, and know you will have choices should things go bad for you.

    If you don't, you will become a mandated health care consumer, member of a captive market, and all of us know what that means.

    More of your dollars filling their pockets with nothing to show for it.

    This is not a party thing anymore. This is corporations and wealthy against ordinary people.

    Again, Progressives right now are the only ones in Washington towing the line for all of us to get a fair shake on this. Consider supporting them because it will cost you dearly not to, if for no other reason.

    Thanks for reading, KSKD.

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 10:28 PM #
  43. I spent this evening watching this Frontline presentation that made me do some thinking. If you have an hour and want to see how other countries are handling Healthcare it's worth the watch.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

    Posted on August 20, 2009 - 10:29 PM #
  44. Great link Chris! My Canadian friends had a good laugh at my expense in the early 90s when I was working at a hospital without insurance.

    Missing has thrown down a very worthy challenge. How about writing every single Democrat in the Senate? Perhaps investing in 60 stamps and 60 envelopes is too much for some, but 60 e-mails are easy enough. Sure, you can even send a form letter. How many form letters do they send out from Washington? Turnabout is fair play.

    It is also pretty easy to personalize a form letter if you are familiar with the nitty-gritty of local politics in a given region. For instance, I will let Ron Wyden know that I have been behind him his entire career. I will also point out that even though he had my support even before I could vote, I will be working for his primary challengers if he does not do the right thing.

    It really is easy enough to cook something up. Here is a rough draft of the simple note that I am sending out:

    Dear Senator,

    Thank you for your service and dedication to our great nation.

    Can you spare a moment for a fellow Democrat?

    Medical insurance must be made available to every citizen of the United States. The stakes are far too high for the usual nonsense. You have a clear mandate and a majority now. It must translate into results. The time has come for you all to set aside your differences, stand together for the people and make the public option a reality.

    Not long ago there was a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad President. He is gone. Now, we have a potentially great leader in charge. Unfortunately, President Obama has not enjoyed the same unified support that the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad President had from the Senate. Why is this happening at this defining moment in history?

    I did not cast my ballot last November for stasis, status quo or stalemate. I voted for change. I still expect you and your colleagues to deliver. President Obama is giving you all an opportunity to do the right thing and craft a lasting legacy. I simply need you to be a strong advocate for me, my neighbors and our country. Please support the public option.

    I appreciate your time.

    Sincerely,
    David

    Posted on August 22, 2009 - 06:21 PM #
  45. That's a great letter!

    Seriously, Progressives are the only thing standing between us totally getting screwed on the health care deal, and solid choices that are highly likely to bring innovation back into play, lowering costs and improving care.

    This is scary shit!

    Posted on August 23, 2009 - 12:06 AM #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.