Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, December 8, 2009
Health / Politics Re: Senate Dems Cave on Public Option
Posted by Anthony Hecht on Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Really, Jonathan? The worst imaginable outcome?
Of course, I completely agree that a public option is what we ultimately need, and that the plan to mandate insurance without it amounts to more support of a corrupt and inhumane private health insurance system. But the proposals now being debated establish a hell of a lot more oversight over that industry than currently exists, using the same agency that regulates the system that lawmakers themselves buy insurance through. They also expand coverage to millions of currently uninsured people, and will do away with many of the most inhumane and unfair practices of that industry (pre-existing condition restrictions, rescission, etc.).
I don't pretend to be an expert on this hugely complex issue, but I know that we need some kind of reform, and I know that the Democrats just don't have the votes to pass the bill that we would like. But they do have the votes to pass some kind of reform. It's a start. We have to learn to do what the GOP does—act. Even if it isn't perfect, do something. Start somewhere.
Progressive politics is, in my view, a movement, not a monument. We cannot achieve perfection in this life, and if that is our goal we will always be frustrated. The right has far more modest goals: At every turn, its members seek to advance their power and protect privilege. I've never seen the Republican right oppose a tax cut for the rich because it wasn't generous enough; I've never seen them oppose a set of loopholes for corporate lobbyists because one industry or another wasn't included. The left, on the other hand, too often prefers a glorious defeat to an incremental victory.
This is a key point. The Republicans don't torpedo their own policies because they don't go far enough. They get them passed, and expand them later.
He goes on to recount the never-talked-about history of one of progressives' favorite programs, Social Security:
No self-respecting liberal today would support Franklin Roosevelt's original Social Security Act. It excluded agricultural workers — a huge part of the economy in 1935, and one in which Latinos have traditionally worked. It excluded domestic workers, which included countless African Americans and immigrants. It did not cover the self-employed, or state and local government employees, or railroad employees, or federal employees or employees of nonprofits. It didn't even cover the clergy. FDR's Social Security Act did not have benefits for dependents or survivors. It did not have a cost-of-living increase. If you became disabled and couldn't work, you got nothing from Social Security.
So I understand the frustration, but personally I'm going to go with getting a start on health care reform being far better than the status quo. Once reform is in, we can build on it. We just need to not throw our entire platform out the window because we can't get it all at once.
thanks to @irons for the Begala article link
2
But it's not reform, it's another handout to big business, again courtesy your friends in Congress. Again, I find myself agreeing with Arthur Silber. It's the Fuck You Act.
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/200…
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/200…
3
Yeah. It's not that this is "all bad."
But it is remarkable that even after everything we went through last year - the Bush nightmare, the Obama rising tide - we still can't get even halfway sort-of a solution to only one of our many problems done.
It makes you think this country is soooo stuck in the past that we can't even do even the most blatantly obvious, publicly-supported thing that's totally the norm abroad at even a totally half-assed level. Cascadian revolution, anyone?
But it is remarkable that even after everything we went through last year - the Bush nightmare, the Obama rising tide - we still can't get even halfway sort-of a solution to only one of our many problems done.
It makes you think this country is soooo stuck in the past that we can't even do even the most blatantly obvious, publicly-supported thing that's totally the norm abroad at even a totally half-assed level. Cascadian revolution, anyone?
4
The thing is, the bill is going to create a situation where health care costs are absolutely guaranteed to skyrocket even more than they have been. This is the ammunition the right wing wants to then say "look, we just can't afford to insure these people, they're too damn expensive" and kill the whole thing. Which is their strategy now.
Because the American health care insurance industry is the most inefficient system ever devised by man. For twice the cost of any other country, we generate ten times the paperwork. It's not the doctors getting the money; it's their raft of billing agents, figuring out who pays for every penny on the bill. And there's a separate bill for every penny. Ever notice what's going on in your doctor's office? There are four clerical staff for every provider. Only in America.
This bill extends that clusterfuck to everyone. Every doctor's going to hire a fifth and sixth clerk, and your insurance is going to go up 150%.
Because the American health care insurance industry is the most inefficient system ever devised by man. For twice the cost of any other country, we generate ten times the paperwork. It's not the doctors getting the money; it's their raft of billing agents, figuring out who pays for every penny on the bill. And there's a separate bill for every penny. Ever notice what's going on in your doctor's office? There are four clerical staff for every provider. Only in America.
This bill extends that clusterfuck to everyone. Every doctor's going to hire a fifth and sixth clerk, and your insurance is going to go up 150%.
5
I won't feel that bad if something less than what we need passes. Mostly it needs to put Democrats in a good position to take some more seats and take another whack.
We should have pretty good chances. A lot of the moderate Republicans that we could pick off are too liberal for the strident new wingnut movement that dominates the right. They'll leave them swinging in the breeze because they aren't ideologically pure enough. Sarah Palin elected a lot of Democrats in 2008, but that was only the beginning.
We should have pretty good chances. A lot of the moderate Republicans that we could pick off are too liberal for the strident new wingnut movement that dominates the right. They'll leave them swinging in the breeze because they aren't ideologically pure enough. Sarah Palin elected a lot of Democrats in 2008, but that was only the beginning.
6
You guys are funny. Especially amusing is how the health care legislation is always framed in terms of "Democrat" or "GOP" suitability/palatability/whatever — almost never in terms of "citizen palatability".
In the land of "We the people . . . ", it is invariably less and less about the people and more about "We ourselves . . ."
Why is this?
In the land of "We the people . . . ", it is invariably less and less about the people and more about "We ourselves . . ."
Why is this?
7
Absolutely correct, @2. We should have elected McCain and Palin. Then we'd be in much better shape.
Seriously? No American President has ever succeeded in getting universal health care coverage. So big business makes money. Duh, this is America. We are not socialist, we are corporatist. If you wanted to end the "corporatist" system, then you needed to be throwing Molotov cocktails and blowing things up, not electing Obama.
(Besides, a lot of pink collar workers (like my sister-in-law) are employed at insurance and pharmaceutical companies.)
Plus, look what happened with Medicare. Same arguments (R against, D for) 40 years ago. Yet it became so popular that George freakin' W. Bush expanded it with a prescription drug benefit! The Republicans fell all over themselves expanding Medicare!
If Obama can get universal health care coverage, this is just a huge, huge victory. It's one-sixth of our economy. I'll be cracking open the champagne when a bill gets passed.
Then on to the little stuff (ending the wars, ending the recession, closing Gitmo, punishing the torturers, repealing DADT and DOMA).
Who knew that Obama and the Democrats could pull off what has never been done in the history of this country?
Seriously? No American President has ever succeeded in getting universal health care coverage. So big business makes money. Duh, this is America. We are not socialist, we are corporatist. If you wanted to end the "corporatist" system, then you needed to be throwing Molotov cocktails and blowing things up, not electing Obama.
(Besides, a lot of pink collar workers (like my sister-in-law) are employed at insurance and pharmaceutical companies.)
Plus, look what happened with Medicare. Same arguments (R against, D for) 40 years ago. Yet it became so popular that George freakin' W. Bush expanded it with a prescription drug benefit! The Republicans fell all over themselves expanding Medicare!
If Obama can get universal health care coverage, this is just a huge, huge victory. It's one-sixth of our economy. I'll be cracking open the champagne when a bill gets passed.
Then on to the little stuff (ending the wars, ending the recession, closing Gitmo, punishing the torturers, repealing DADT and DOMA).
Who knew that Obama and the Democrats could pull off what has never been done in the history of this country?
8
Anyone who jams the phrase "We the people" into their rhetoric every time they speak, apropos of nothing, is trying to sell their own halfassed opinions as if the national hive mind thought the same thoughts.
There is no hive mind. There's only legislative math and if your side loses seats, that's your answer.
There is no hive mind. There's only legislative math and if your side loses seats, that's your answer.
9
@6: Please, go fuck yourself. We are the people. We've been called to make a substantial sacrifice in investing in this reform so that we can pass on to our children a better world than was left to us.
And constantly, we are told by the Baby Boom, "Waaa! No it's too hard!" as they sit out on teabagger asses complaining about the fact they might have to, for the first time since they all got lazy in 1968, actually get off their asses and do something.
We're here to stand up and say that yes, we can do something better if we try. And we're sick of jackasses like yourself trying to come up with better and better reasons to justify the fact you've been passing on all your responsibilities to the next generation: national debt, stupid wars, rising health costs, whatever.
And constantly, we are told by the Baby Boom, "Waaa! No it's too hard!" as they sit out on teabagger asses complaining about the fact they might have to, for the first time since they all got lazy in 1968, actually get off their asses and do something.
We're here to stand up and say that yes, we can do something better if we try. And we're sick of jackasses like yourself trying to come up with better and better reasons to justify the fact you've been passing on all your responsibilities to the next generation: national debt, stupid wars, rising health costs, whatever.
11
@4 - Yes, the insurance industry is 100% fucked, but I just don't agree that this is guaranteed to continue that. Having a public option isn't the only thing that can change the way the insurance industry works. Regulation can also change it, and every version of the bills currently being debated contains tons of new regulations to reduce exactly the kind of waste and inefficiency you're describing.
If all they did was mandate coverage in the existing system and provide no public option, then sure, we'd have an unbelievable clusterfuck. But that's not all they're proposing to do.
If all they did was mandate coverage in the existing system and provide no public option, then sure, we'd have an unbelievable clusterfuck. But that's not all they're proposing to do.
12
@10: Yeah, but Group Health is a non-profit plan. Their trigger is essentially, therefore, fulfilled in this state.
But Group Health still can't secure the savings that we would if its pool (membership) was the entire state, or if its pool was the entire nation. We need a single-payer Group Health to do that.
But Group Health still can't secure the savings that we would if its pool (membership) was the entire state, or if its pool was the entire nation. We need a single-payer Group Health to do that.
13
Also, Group Health isn't full coverage, and hasn't removed even from Washington the horribly perverse incentives of a for-profit healthcare industry. It's just... not there yet.
14
Well, if Paul Begala said that, then that settles it. I remember he used to be on my teevee cohosting a show with Ollie North, so the dude must know his shit.
Next, can the Slog check in again with Desiree Jennings and her wisdom on immunology?
Next, can the Slog check in again with Desiree Jennings and her wisdom on immunology?
15
@9: OK. Thanks for letting me make a quickie. All hail Hitachi.
Incidentally, you big winnar, I straddle Gen X/Y. And I'm even with you on one bit: the boomers irreparably took, took, and then gave back to themselves to where the rest of us must clean up until death. I'm just unsure whether it'll be our death or theirs. For nearly my entire life, it was always about them who came of age in the '60s and the '70s. They still want it to be about them, and they will largely succeed for the time being, if and only because of sheer head count over the Gen X and early Y folk — combined.
But this civic sacrifice, as you're putting it, is looking less like civic altruism and more like a shuffling of deck chairs (political? social? does it matter?) on the RMS Lusitania (no, not the Titanic). Eventually, that torpedo will come — be it a mass-pandemic, a cratering of economy even further or, well, use your imagination. My understanding of raising universal health care — not coverage — early in Obama's government was to completely write a new draft of health policy and press it into legislative statute so that a clean departure from everything malformed about the existing health care system could be begun. More importantly, it was also supposed to be a forward-thinking insurance policy for the United States against future maladies that could wipe it from the political and economic map. Maybe this was never the case.
What's there now looks like a tug-of-war not between citizens, but between two elected factions — neither angelic — and countless, non-elected clans called "lobbyists". I have health care, but I had to leave America to obtain it despite being without health care access my entire adult life prior thereto. My U.S. taxes still have to be paid, so there's inevitably a stake I have in this even when I won't be there to use whatever service this bill metes. That problem in itself is an artifact of the very ship that needs to sink itself somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic and not be found ever again. Deck chair plans are still being drafted as we speak, though — perhaps to let people move fore and aft a bit quicker. Or something.
Build a new ship, and there won't be a reason to have to go elsewhere as a prerequisite to get (relatively) affordable health care overseas.
Should I go back to my fuck toys, or do we have a discussion here?
More...
Incidentally, you big winnar, I straddle Gen X/Y. And I'm even with you on one bit: the boomers irreparably took, took, and then gave back to themselves to where the rest of us must clean up until death. I'm just unsure whether it'll be our death or theirs. For nearly my entire life, it was always about them who came of age in the '60s and the '70s. They still want it to be about them, and they will largely succeed for the time being, if and only because of sheer head count over the Gen X and early Y folk — combined.
But this civic sacrifice, as you're putting it, is looking less like civic altruism and more like a shuffling of deck chairs (political? social? does it matter?) on the RMS Lusitania (no, not the Titanic). Eventually, that torpedo will come — be it a mass-pandemic, a cratering of economy even further or, well, use your imagination. My understanding of raising universal health care — not coverage — early in Obama's government was to completely write a new draft of health policy and press it into legislative statute so that a clean departure from everything malformed about the existing health care system could be begun. More importantly, it was also supposed to be a forward-thinking insurance policy for the United States against future maladies that could wipe it from the political and economic map. Maybe this was never the case.
What's there now looks like a tug-of-war not between citizens, but between two elected factions — neither angelic — and countless, non-elected clans called "lobbyists". I have health care, but I had to leave America to obtain it despite being without health care access my entire adult life prior thereto. My U.S. taxes still have to be paid, so there's inevitably a stake I have in this even when I won't be there to use whatever service this bill metes. That problem in itself is an artifact of the very ship that needs to sink itself somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic and not be found ever again. Deck chair plans are still being drafted as we speak, though — perhaps to let people move fore and aft a bit quicker. Or something.
Build a new ship, and there won't be a reason to have to go elsewhere as a prerequisite to get (relatively) affordable health care overseas.
Should I go back to my fuck toys, or do we have a discussion here?
16
Want to stop this?
PHONE (not just email) your US Senators right now.
Then PHONE the DNC and tell them they will never get ANY money from you if the Public Option - with abortion covered - is not passed. Period.
Don't accept anything less.
PHONE (not just email) your US Senators right now.
Then PHONE the DNC and tell them they will never get ANY money from you if the Public Option - with abortion covered - is not passed. Period.
Don't accept anything less.
17
Democrats tend to look to the future, republicans tend to dwell in the past. This country has plenty of people who are absolutely terrified of the future; thus, you get things like this happening.
18
@16 - This is exactly what I'm talking about. Scorched earth politics. "If I don't get everything I want, right now, I'm going to hand victory to your (and MY OWN) opponents."
Of course you should make your voice heard, but threatening to abandon the entire party/platform/policy/whatever because it isn't perfect is crazy.
I can't imagine how frustrating it is to be a lawmaker in the real world and have to deal with this kind of shit.
Of course you should make your voice heard, but threatening to abandon the entire party/platform/policy/whatever because it isn't perfect is crazy.
I can't imagine how frustrating it is to be a lawmaker in the real world and have to deal with this kind of shit.
20
@ 7: This is not universal health care. I purposely blamed Congress, not just those members with a D or an R behind their name. I consider both parties cheap corporate whores. And nowhere do I or the link I posted posit that things would be better with McCain/Palin in the Whitehouse.
Obama and the Democrats have not pulled of universal health care. This is not universal health care. It is corporate welfare.
I don't believe healthcare belongs in the hands of for-profit corporations. That's a political/social belief of mine, so yes, it follows that I'd love to get rid of the corporatist health care system.
I'm not about to throw Molotov Cocktails or blow things up. I don't recommend anyone else do it either. Nor did I vote for Obama. Stop attacking me based on invalid assumptions.
The wildly-popular Medicare prescription drug benefit you tout was much more in the spirit of "universal health care" than the plan currently before Congress.
If Obama managed to pass universal health care, I'd crack open the champagne with you.
This isn't universal health care. It's not even close. To give you an example, if this were "universal health care," then sending more troops to Afghanistan would be "ending the war." Re-incarcerating prisoners elsewhere would be "closing Gitmo." Ignoring the gay electorate that fought so hard to elect you would be "repealing DADT and DOMA."
This isn't universal health care, but then again, political apologists have a different definition for everything.
Obama and the Democrats have not pulled of universal health care. This is not universal health care. It is corporate welfare.
I don't believe healthcare belongs in the hands of for-profit corporations. That's a political/social belief of mine, so yes, it follows that I'd love to get rid of the corporatist health care system.
I'm not about to throw Molotov Cocktails or blow things up. I don't recommend anyone else do it either. Nor did I vote for Obama. Stop attacking me based on invalid assumptions.
The wildly-popular Medicare prescription drug benefit you tout was much more in the spirit of "universal health care" than the plan currently before Congress.
If Obama managed to pass universal health care, I'd crack open the champagne with you.
This isn't universal health care. It's not even close. To give you an example, if this were "universal health care," then sending more troops to Afghanistan would be "ending the war." Re-incarcerating prisoners elsewhere would be "closing Gitmo." Ignoring the gay electorate that fought so hard to elect you would be "repealing DADT and DOMA."
This isn't universal health care, but then again, political apologists have a different definition for everything.
21
Yes, it's not what we want. Everybody who's not invested in our corrupt insurance industry to the point where he or she can afford to pay out of pocket when his or her insurer fucks him or her sideways with a boar-spear wants a single-payer Canada-style public health care system. Or they've been brainwashed by the very few very evil people who genuinely profit from the current system.
But, any reform is reform. Any progress is progress.
Anything that gets through is going to look good for the Dems. Anything that looks good for the Dems makes me happy.
But, any reform is reform. Any progress is progress.
Anything that gets through is going to look good for the Dems. Anything that looks good for the Dems makes me happy.
22
@18: We're not talking about a partial public option here, we're talking about it's complete abandonment in favor of a bill that does everything to hurt those the Democrats promised to help.
The Democratic party abandoned it's platform long ago. Why shouldn't the electorate abandon them?
And I'm sure being a Congressmen, with their Congressional Public Health Insurance, is nowhere near as frustrating and having to deal with the disappointing regularity Congress ignores the electorate in favor of kowtowing to big business.
The Democratic party abandoned it's platform long ago. Why shouldn't the electorate abandon them?
And I'm sure being a Congressmen, with their Congressional Public Health Insurance, is nowhere near as frustrating and having to deal with the disappointing regularity Congress ignores the electorate in favor of kowtowing to big business.
23
@22 - How, exactly, does it do "everything to hurt those the Democrats promised to help"? I'd honestly like to understand what you see in these bills that will do this.
The Democratic party may have abandoned your platform, but what they're debating now doesn't abandon their platform. Hopefully (none of this is remotely settled yet) it begins implementing their platform. Emphasis on begins.
The Democratic party may have abandoned your platform, but what they're debating now doesn't abandon their platform. Hopefully (none of this is remotely settled yet) it begins implementing their platform. Emphasis on begins.
24
Let's see:
Two unwinnable wars that are being fought NOT against al-Qaeda that we can't afford ...
CHECK.
One health care plan that does NOTHING to include legal abortion services or cut costs ...
CHECK.
Shut it down.
Shut it all down.
Two unwinnable wars that are being fought NOT against al-Qaeda that we can't afford ...
CHECK.
One health care plan that does NOTHING to include legal abortion services or cut costs ...
CHECK.
Shut it down.
Shut it all down.
25
Anthony, Will is working for the Republicans. I think that's pretty clear by now. Actually, Will's rhetorical style (which single-handedly won the election for McGinn, remember) reminds me of either Lyndon LaRouche or possibly Curtis LeMay.
"Shut it all down" indeed. You're a stain, Will, a bad smell in the room.
"Shut it all down" indeed. You're a stain, Will, a bad smell in the room.
26
The Republican Plan is to give everyone a $5000 tax credit and let them buy the lowest cost state health plan -- of any state, even if they don't live in it.
If McCain were President, we'd all have health insurance.
The Republican Plan is to give everyone a $5000 tax credit and let them buy the lowest cost state health plan -- of any state, even if they don't live in it.
If McCain were President, we'd all have health insurance.
28
As one who will be directly affected by the proposed reform, feel it is important to pass the bill. The public option had been so watered down it would have only been available to those on the individual market and would have been just as expensive as private plans.
This will help a lot of people and as a liberal, I cannot in good conscience find this bill unacceptable.
This will help a lot of people and as a liberal, I cannot in good conscience find this bill unacceptable.
29
@9: Haha, I'm not going to argue with you, because I think you're right. And I'll tell ya, building a new ship sounds pretty DAMN good right now. (Cascadian revolution? Anyone?)
That being said, I want to make clear I do think this IS progress. But it just seems absurd we'd fight so long - we'd wait so long, 80 years by some counts, and get this little by way of achievement.
And on top of that, the way this "compromise" is built so far (hard to ascertain: we don't yet have any details), it mostly rings of lifeboats for the Baby Boomers off the huge ship of state that they themselves sunk.
And that's what the Obama campaign was, I think for many of us, meant to be about. Taking the ship's helm from our irresponsible and selfish parents in the name of a generation rising to power, clinging to the last vestiges of hope that America may one day again be a world leader; that we, with through the strength of our character and depth of our sacrifice, may rise to the caliber of greatness that so many generations of Americans before us embodied.
So yes, it may be reform. History, it definitely is not.
That being said, I want to make clear I do think this IS progress. But it just seems absurd we'd fight so long - we'd wait so long, 80 years by some counts, and get this little by way of achievement.
And on top of that, the way this "compromise" is built so far (hard to ascertain: we don't yet have any details), it mostly rings of lifeboats for the Baby Boomers off the huge ship of state that they themselves sunk.
And that's what the Obama campaign was, I think for many of us, meant to be about. Taking the ship's helm from our irresponsible and selfish parents in the name of a generation rising to power, clinging to the last vestiges of hope that America may one day again be a world leader; that we, with through the strength of our character and depth of our sacrifice, may rise to the caliber of greatness that so many generations of Americans before us embodied.
So yes, it may be reform. History, it definitely is not.
30
By the way, I'm calling Cantwell and Murray: not necessarily to sink the proposal. But it's important they know from their constituents that this is not nearly good enough.
31
Um, hey guyz, nothing is stopping Washington State from having its own universal public option or even single payer health care. We'd just have to start an income tax like a bajillion other states. Who cares if Arkansas doesn't want a public option?
32
This is not health care reform. Nor is it Universal Healthcare. This bill is so watered down now that it is little more than tinkering with a few of the insurance regulations and requiring everyone to buy private insurance.
This is a gift to private insurance companies. Don't believe me? If this passes without a public option, watch what happens to insurance company stock prices. They'll skyrocket. If insurance company stock prices spike, there is only one reason for it: they expect to make a fortune off this "reform".
I consider myself a realist and a pragmatist. I'd love to see single-payer health coverage here (like every other civilized country on earth). But I know that isn't going to happen. We don't have anything close to the votes for it. I know compromises must be made, and we have to start somewhere. But at some point the compromises are so great that the bill is worse than doing nothing. I think we are close to that point now.
This is a gift to private insurance companies. Don't believe me? If this passes without a public option, watch what happens to insurance company stock prices. They'll skyrocket. If insurance company stock prices spike, there is only one reason for it: they expect to make a fortune off this "reform".
I consider myself a realist and a pragmatist. I'd love to see single-payer health coverage here (like every other civilized country on earth). But I know that isn't going to happen. We don't have anything close to the votes for it. I know compromises must be made, and we have to start somewhere. But at some point the compromises are so great that the bill is worse than doing nothing. I think we are close to that point now.
33
Let me ask an honest question- sure this bill still outlaws the practice of preexisting conditions, but what keeps insurers from jacking up rates so high that customers with expensive conditions are forced to look elsewhere anyway? Does this bill somehow level off insurance premiums for everyone of a certain age group or something?
I was always under the assumption that the insurance companies (much like credit card companies before them) would simply raise the rates to keep themselves in the black- and that was the genius of the public option; Either insurance companies would suck it up and actually help people, or every greedy insurance company would eventually alienate every person they deem to be a liability- thus pushing everyone onto the government plan and effectively creating back door universal healthcare.
So, I'm asking honestly- how will this bill prevent them from jacking up rates?
I was always under the assumption that the insurance companies (much like credit card companies before them) would simply raise the rates to keep themselves in the black- and that was the genius of the public option; Either insurance companies would suck it up and actually help people, or every greedy insurance company would eventually alienate every person they deem to be a liability- thus pushing everyone onto the government plan and effectively creating back door universal healthcare.
So, I'm asking honestly- how will this bill prevent them from jacking up rates?
34
I'm with you Anthony - this all or nothing attitude just keeps screwing us from making even modestly positive changes.
36
24: You're going to shut down jackshit. You live in a fantasy world where there's a progressive majority that the Democrats represent. There is not progressive majority. The Democrats are not on the left. Stop acting like you're owed something, and learn how the game is played.
38
34: The left in this country has the same ten-point purity test the Republicans have. Given the fact that no American president has ever been on the left (even FDR--the real left of his time were communists and socialists), you'd think they'd understand that the Democrats have to play to the center to win, but they insist on believing in a progressive majority that does't exist and demanding that Democrats adhere to its non-existent principles.
What the left needs to be doing is keeping the far right out of the federal government while working on shifting national opinion to the left. But no, they'd rather kill daddy in some Oedipal pscyhodrama.
What the left needs to be doing is keeping the far right out of the federal government while working on shifting national opinion to the left. But no, they'd rather kill daddy in some Oedipal pscyhodrama.
39
Krugman on his NYT blog Conscience of a Liberal this morning:
The health care compromise
Here’s what’s being reported. No public option, but a trigger which is unlikely to be pulled. But some good stuff in exchange: nonprofit plans available through the exchanges, plus Medicare buy-ins for the 55-65 set (me! me! me!).
If this is the final plan, it’s better than most of us were expecting — and definitely good enough to go with.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12…
The health care compromise
Here’s what’s being reported. No public option, but a trigger which is unlikely to be pulled. But some good stuff in exchange: nonprofit plans available through the exchanges, plus Medicare buy-ins for the 55-65 set (me! me! me!).
If this is the final plan, it’s better than most of us were expecting — and definitely good enough to go with.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12…
40
Krugman: "Medicare buy-ins for the 55-65 set (me! me! me!)."
There ya go, @29. See? We both got it right. This really has been about the boomers — spoken from the mouth of a boomer who won a Nobel. Fail mark for Paul Krugman for his "(me! me! me!)" comment.
Paul, send back the Nobel.
There ya go, @29. See? We both got it right. This really has been about the boomers — spoken from the mouth of a boomer who won a Nobel. Fail mark for Paul Krugman for his "(me! me! me!)" comment.
Paul, send back the Nobel.
41
It's not that people are trying to destroy HCR, it's just outrage over the perpetual backsliding of a supposed congressional majority. The GOP's permanent majority was supposed to be broken by now, but they're still in power. Progressive measures only pass by what seems to be luck and fairydust right now, and we're stuck with what seems to be a GOP mandate to basically stop or stall any measure proposed by someone with a D by their name.
Don't believe me? Look at how the GOP trots out Olympia Snowe to basically beat off any Dem who wants to put the Public Option back on. She even beat off Harry Reid, who has been about as effective as a bucket with a hole in it lately.
Don't believe me? Look at how the GOP trots out Olympia Snowe to basically beat off any Dem who wants to put the Public Option back on. She even beat off Harry Reid, who has been about as effective as a bucket with a hole in it lately.
42
You passive pussies in the Democratic Party are so pathetic and inept and put up so little fight that beating your asses and then ass raping you doesn't really cut it anymore.
We're going to have to find something a little kinkier before our next session...
We're going to have to find something a little kinkier before our next session...
43
Baconcat, Olympia won't even vote for the compromise, so who cares what she or the rest of the America-hating Talibangelists think?
They won't be voting for it, no matter what it looks like.
They won't be voting for it, no matter what it looks like.
44
The bill needs to die, and Dems must be held to account. Up until now, it was optional to pay out the ass to get shitty coverage through the Blues, Aetna, and the others. But now it will be mandatory, and there's nothing to restrict premiums. On the upside, even more people will experience what bliss it is to fight Regence to pay for a $15 fucking flu shot that they promised would be covered, let alone anything major.
45
@44 - Another good example of what I'm talking about. Nobody knows the details of this bill, and yet so many "progressives" are fuming and ranting and declaring war on the Democratic party. Again, nobody knows the details.
"No public option" does not automatically amount to these nightmare scenarios. There is a lot of room for real reform with real impact.
The progressive agenda isn't being killed by the lawmakers, it's being killed by the all-or-nothings.
"No public option" does not automatically amount to these nightmare scenarios. There is a lot of room for real reform with real impact.
The progressive agenda isn't being killed by the lawmakers, it's being killed by the all-or-nothings.
46
For people who believe in health care reform as a way to achieve a politically progressive society, this bill indeed represents progress. For others, like me, who believe in political progressivity as a way to achieve effective health care, this bill fails.
An example of "All-or-nothing" would be McDermott's single-payer idea, which no realistic progressive expects to happen.
An example of "All-or-nothing" would be McDermott's single-payer idea, which no realistic progressive expects to happen.
47
Anthony, Joe M raised the same issue I did- what keeps insurance companies from jacking up rates? It's not that I'm all-or-nothing, I'm just intensely against the mandatory insurance provisions- and without the public option to protect us, it's a deal breaker. plain and simple.
48
@47 - I don't know (details of this compromise have not been made public), but a couple things I've heard mentioned could prevent it. One would be a serious public option trigger. Another would be provisions in the bill that specifically prevent that kind of abuse.
Call me naive, but I honestly don't find it credible that the Democrats will pass and the president will sign a bill that would cause the outcome you describe. It's exactly contrary to all of their stated goals and would be political suicide.
Call me naive, but I honestly don't find it credible that the Democrats will pass and the president will sign a bill that would cause the outcome you describe. It's exactly contrary to all of their stated goals and would be political suicide.
49
This fake discussion is why health care insurance and pharma stocks are up sharply today, and why you can tell it means ZERO reform.
Public Option or DEATH.
Public Option or DEATH.
50
@2, @3, @4, @9 and practically everyone who knows we got screwed for the win. America for the Epic Fail.
51
@49 - Aetna up $0.11 (0.36%), Cigna down $0.24 (0.71%), UNH down $0.06 (0.21%), WellPoint down $0.71 (1.27%), Humana up $0.27 (0.67%), Pfizer up $0.27 (1.53%), Merck up $0.21 (0.58%).
Some up, some down, none "sharply."
Some up, some down, none "sharply."
52
I agree with pretty much everything Anthony has said in the post and the comments.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: do not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: do not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
53
yeah, i agree it's a start. i was really disappointed when i heard the public option was getting pushed out, but this reminds me it's not totally bad. it's just politics, and at least it's addressing SOME cracks in the system.
54
Though I favor a public option, I will be glad if any reform passes. Here in Massachusetts we have universal health care as a grand experiment. It was costly at first because so many people rushed to the doctor after putting it off for so long, but as time goes by, and the people get healthier, I expect costs will go down and productivity will go up. What happens here in MA will show the country what can happen.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (54) RSS