Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Monday, March 10, 2014

Opportunistic Political-Switch-Hitting Closet Case... Or America's Best Democrat?

Posted by on Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:30 AM

Andrew Sullivan:

Great to hear an actual defense of the ACA from Charlie Crist. Why, I wonder, do we almost never hear Democratic members of Congress say the same thing? Why the constant defensive crouch? Why do we not have an aggressive, active campaign to defend the ACA? I’ve never understood why Democrats seem so incapable of making the case for their policies. Part of me thought the Obama era could overcome that. But Democratic uselessness seems far too deeply ingrained for that.


Comments (51) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Pope Peabrain 1
Boy, do I ever agree with that statement. Please, Democrats, please have the courage of your convictions! Stand strong with the president. It will pay off!
Posted by Pope Peabrain on March 10, 2014 at 6:41 AM · Report this
I know you saw Bill Clinton's speech at the 2012 democratic convention. That was an excellent defense of the ACA and democratic polities in general. The only difference between democrats and republicans is that democrats aren't on TV aggressively repeating their talking points 24 hours a day. If Americans had a memory longer than 5 seconds (which sadly they don't), the whole complaint about dems "never" defending their views would be ridiculous.
Posted by Keenan C on March 10, 2014 at 6:45 AM · Report this
undead ayn rand 3
@2: Stating sincere beliefs with conviction is what we're looking for, not regurgitating soundbites.
Posted by undead ayn rand on March 10, 2014 at 7:01 AM · Report this
Reverse Polarity 4
Maybe democrats aren't louder about defending Obamacare because (1) it isn't all that great, and (2) because the botched initial rollout made them all look like morons.

I suspect most democrats would have preferred a single-payer system, more like Canada or most European countries. Obamacare is a weak settlement, the only thing we could manage to get through congress. It is far better than nothing (the republican plan), but difficult to get enthused over.

After the initial debacle of the launch of the site, a lot of politicians are afraid to touch it. Safer to wait to see if it works and is publicly accepted. Then it will be safer to publicly support it.
Posted by Reverse Polarity on March 10, 2014 at 7:03 AM · Report this
It kind of figures that an ex-Republican would make a good advocate. They're good at defending themselves and their policies--even when they and their policies are beyond defence. So you get a guy that's used to being on the attack and being strident about it, and suddenly he's on the side of the Democrats. He's totally going to be aggressive about it.
Posted by RealMonster on March 10, 2014 at 7:28 AM · Report this
treacle 6
I'm still waiting for Democracy to come to the USA.
Posted by treacle on March 10, 2014 at 8:50 AM · Report this
@ 6 Already here

@ 1 Sure there sare some who don't do defense well but plenty who do.

@4 I want that system too and we will get there we just have to move their intermittently. Also every new system has kinks when its rolled out, even in private orgs. Just not required to report them.
Posted by dkjndmsahksdhksal on March 10, 2014 at 8:58 AM · Report this
right on. spineless cowering is the key platform in the democratic party. they aren't voting on the min wage in seattle RIGHT NOW despite a poll showing 68% support! they aren't talking min wage at state level -- Farrell bill not even adopted by the house we control. see, vote on it and D's voting no then answer at polls you have to make your case you can't ifyou don't put it out there!
"The only difference between democrats and republicans is that democrats aren't on TV aggressively repeating their talking points 24 hours a day" why the HELL aren't they?
". If Americans had a memory longer than 5 seconds (which sadly they don't), the whole complaint about dems "never" defending their views would be ridiculous. " typical elitism, make disparaging remarks about how the dumb voters are dumb so we can't be bothered to lower our selves to do actual politics -- guess dems are just above it all. @5 is more apologies for dems sucking at message. as to single payer, HELLO! fact is dems voted for obamacare so HELLO they had reasons and should message them. and HELLO it's rather ez to get into single payer from obamacare why aren't they pushing NOW for that public option, the door to single payer, and for continued expansion of vet care medicare federal employee care all the govt. paid care we got all you have to do is keep expanding it. lower the age for medicare for starters. extend to unemployed people at age 55 WHATEVER. they don't do it because they continually choose winning elections based on "we're not as mean as the gop" instead of "we're for bringing up living standards of the majority." Obama? he gave a speech honoring teddy Roosevelt -- the dems don't even bother tohonor FD Roosevelt ...they still honor Jackson the native genocide president and Jefferson the slave holder and let the entire nation FORGET how we got out of the depression and how we had decades of growing middle class till about 1981.

think about it. min wage has 68% support. Seattle is "democratic." yet our democratic council members aren't even introducing a bill or voting on it, bowing down to What Business Wants again.
Posted by donkey kumbaya on March 10, 2014 at 9:10 AM · Report this
Ophian 9
Dyed-in-the-wool lefty here, and the ACA is garbage. It is a corporatist cluster-fuck pooped out by the Heritage Foundation.

I'm sure some will benefit from medicaid expansion and the like, but the ACA requires me to fork over 10% of my pretax income [after subsidies] to a for-profit corporation. For which I would get "health insurance" that is little more than catastrophic coverage.

Only if I am lucky enough to break several bones will I see a dime of healthcare.

And that is not to mention the mind-boggling incompetence with which it has been handled. Fuck the ACA.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 9:18 AM · Report this
@9 Fuck you, you're a piece of shit if you think things were better before than after.
Posted by Solk512 on March 10, 2014 at 9:24 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 11
Meanwhile in Seattle, all the "Democrats" who swear they support a $15/hr minimum wage are tripping over each other to negotiate it down to less than $15. Negotiating with... themselves. Of course.

This is not the kind of "negotiation" where you accept less of the thing you wanted in exchange for a concession from the other side. With Democrats serving you, you just accept less. And less. And less.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn on March 10, 2014 at 9:46 AM · Report this
Ophian 12
Wow, Solk @10, ad hominem much?

I think the US was in the dark ages WRT access to healthcare before, and is now grappling with a poorly executed sop to the insurance industry that leaves a significant minority of citizens worse off.

I have been an ardent advocate for healthcare reform--single payer like Canada's or multi-payer like Germany's--and that is why I think this current corporatist scheme is so disappointing.

Now, would you like to discuss the merits of the ACA and its implementation, or should I just call you an insipid troglodyte and bid you good day?
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 10:04 AM · Report this
@12: My girlfriend was diagnosed with stage 3 ovarian cancer the same day Obamacare became law. Although she has a great, supportive employer now, she's still looking at a life of having to deal with insurance coverage should that ever change. Before Obamacare, with the scarlet C on her health record she would have to live in fear of ever being able to get even basic health care without bankrupting herself. Now, she knows that she has a reasonable expectation of care regardless of her employment situation.

Try arguing that isn't a better situation for her and we'll laugh in your face.

ACA ain't the bee's knees, and it's not what we should have gotten. But step out of the lefty ivory tower for a moment and look that the practical reality. The ACA was a positive, practical, achievable step forward, hopefully followed by more steps forward in the years ahead. Rather than shitting on the progress that was made, consider accepting it as a start and working on the next steps.
Posted by mlb on March 10, 2014 at 10:37 AM · Report this
14 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Ophian 15
@13, "Try arguing that isn't a better situation for her and we'll laugh in your face."

Your anecdote is noted...and as irrelevant to my intersection with the ACA as my anecdote is to hers.

"...step out of the lefty ivory tower..."

Usually ivory towers are reserved for those not getting screwed. I don't begrudge your girlfriend--or anyone else--the benefits they receive from the ACA, but perhaps you could step out of your access-to-healthcare-having tower, and recognize that some of us are worse off.

As a single, uninsured male in my 30's, making $26k before taxes at a full time job, I cannot afford to siphon 10% of my income directly to a for profit company. I simply can't. It is almost irrelevant that the care I would receive kicks in only after thousands of dollars of deductibles.

"...consider accepting it as a start and working on the next steps"

Next steps? With the tons of political capital Obama burned on achieving this conservative plan, and the gross incompetence of the roll-out [Try arguing the roll-out wasn't grossly incompetent and I'll laugh in your face.] there won't likely be next steps in the foreseeable future.

Hey I may be wrong, and maybe this time next year we'll have a robust and equitable framework in place that enfranchises all Americans and defends their human right to healthcare. But I wouldn't put money on it, and I shouldn't be expected to applaud healthcare reform that leaves me out in the cold.

I've said it before: I can't afford the healthcare I won't be receiving from the Affordable Care Act.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 11:09 AM · Report this
keshmeshi 16

You still get preventive care (annual checkups) for no out-of-pocket cost, and the insurance company negotiates down the exorbitant fees that any doctor or hospital will try to charge you even for minor procedures. If you're otherwise healthy, a bronze plan is still better than nothing.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 10, 2014 at 11:10 AM · Report this
venomlash 17
@14: ???
He's complaining about paying 10% of his income APART from taxes. You bitches complain about paying taxes at all. Bite my liberal ass, you limp dick.
Posted by venomlash on March 10, 2014 at 11:13 AM · Report this
@15 I was mistaken. You're an *equivocating* piece of shit.

Yes, the ACA is totally the same thing at the Heritage Foundation plan. Except where it's not. Nice work complaining about the rollout when government contracting law is a giant clusterfuck and you have a bunch of states actively trying to run the ACA into the ground. By the way, political capital doesn't really exist.

You're the worst kind of leftist there is, the kind that loudly complains without offering any realistic solution and the kind that doesn't care about any success unless and until it's done on the terms you, specifically you dictate.
Posted by Solk512 on March 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM · Report this
Ophian 19
kesh @16, I don't believe so:

"What is the overall deductible? In-Network $5,000 Individual"

"You must pay all the costs up to the deductible amount before this plan begins to pay for covered
services you use."

And even after that I am still footing 40% of the bill up to the out-of-pocket cap.…
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 11:27 AM · Report this
Ophian 20
Oh, Solk @18, you little deary.

Firstly, look up equivocating before you try and use it again.

Secondly, "Nice work complaining about the rollout when government contracting law is a giant clusterfuck and you have a bunch of states actively trying to run the ACA into the ground"

I'm not sure if you are defending the roll-out or admitting that the implementation is a mess. Your words seem somewhat equivocal.

Thirdly, "You're the worst kind of leftist there is [&c.]" Interesting character appraisal, but I was trying to discuss the ACA.

FWIW I'd be happy to discuss the Canadian, British, or German [not single payer, but better services/cost ratio] systems, and/or why we have ended up with a very different one.

Look, I don't think this should be a partisan thing. I think we have a vastly inferior model and think people should be criticizing where criticism is due. I happen to be in a position where the shortcomings of the system impact me directly, and consider it my right and responsibility to give voice to my concerns.

But if you would rather stick to throwing poo, I understand.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 11:47 AM · Report this
I have a single mother friend who died, in her forties, just two years ago, leaving a 14 year old daughter.

It's as simple as this: she would have lived under the ACA and her daughter would still have a mother.

But she doesn't have a mother, her mother is dead of all the abuses the ACA now curbs: a pre-existing condition (cancer), a health insurance payout cap, and running through her life savings, etc. -- you know, the shit that can no longer happen since the ACA.

I was paying nearly $800 a month for insurance that didn't cover all the treatments I needed, and my life savings went to the rest of my medical care.

Until I could no longer afford insurance, at all, and went several years without, crossing my fingers.

Before the ACA: I'm now get free preventive care, my monthly insurance payment is negligible in comparison.

My brother had been without insurance for three years, before the ACA (and both of us are in our 60s, a scary time to be without.)

So fuck you all big time who refuse to recognize the lives saved.

Or that the ACA opens the door to single payer.

Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you.
Posted by judybrowni on March 10, 2014 at 12:11 PM · Report this
@20 That it was passed and is being implemented is one of the best features of the ACA, and it has several others, although I agree that the "buy insurance" model that underlies it is substandard to say the least and there are many other flaws to it as well.

Ultimately, I think your main complaint around the ACA is that it is horribly expensive to be poor, which is hardly unique to the ACA and frankly, something we've done a great job of reinforcing throughout the American economy.

So, if I may go all Todd Wilemon on you, I think you'd like the ACA a lot better if you'd just stop being poor.

...although just accepting that everything is out to shaft you while you persist in being poor might work if in the mean time.
Posted by Want A Pay Day Loan? on March 10, 2014 at 12:20 PM · Report this
Ophian 23
judy @21, I understand your anger and passion. I really do.

I understand it because I am stuck sitting in that same boat that you and your brother got out of, and your friend didn't. I see your side of things because that is my side still.

So I get to say that the ACAis not good enough. I get to say that with as much anger and passion as you.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 12:24 PM · Report this
Ophian 24
@22, you do have a point there. Best advice I've heard in awhile.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 12:32 PM · Report this
rob! 25
@ Ophian, I don't get it—when I go to WA Health Plan Finder, plug in a Cap. Hill zip, $26k, and assume age 42 (you're probably younger), the top recommended plan is a Silver with monthly premium of ~$140 after a $115 tax credit and a deductible of only $1750. To get into the near-$250 monthly premium (what you say you're paying) after tax credit, you're looking at a Blue Cross Gold plan with a deductible of only $1500. How did you come to pick the plan you have?
Posted by rob! on March 10, 2014 at 12:34 PM · Report this
rob! 26
...Did you just sign up with a packet they sent you in the mail? My brother, who is now safely ensconced in a state Medicaid-expansion plan, still regularly gets packets from Kaiser, his former carrier, beseeching him to come back with "special offers" in the >$600/mo range.
Posted by rob! on March 10, 2014 at 12:40 PM · Report this
Hi Ophian:
I am curious about your situation and have a few questions. Do you live in a state that worked toward implementing or obstructing the ACA? Did you qualify for any subsidies when trying to sign up?

My own view is that the ACA is a flawed, first step in the right direction, but I say that as someone who has had no real interaction with the law and its impacts. I currently have a decent plan through my employer, which I am thankful for, but I would really like us to join the rest of the industrialized world and have a single payer system.
Posted by Terpsichorean on March 10, 2014 at 1:13 PM · Report this
keshmeshi 28

And the insurance company is negotiating down the fees anywhere from 20 to 90 percent. That's the real difference between insureds and non-insureds: the non-insured are buggered by doctors and hospitals.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 10, 2014 at 1:25 PM · Report this
Ophian 29
rob! @25, at the moment I don't have a plan. I also live in Texas*, so WA numbers are going to be a bit different. The numbers I have were from last November when I did try to see how this HC reform was shaping up. I was very disappointed.

My plan at the moment is to wait and see. I'll look again in 6 months or so. Most likely this first year I'll pay the penalty, as I literally cannot afford a bronze plan even if it were good coverage.

The people I live with are in similar situations [one--who has pre-existing conditions--would benefit, if he could afford to]. Hell, the guy I work with [college educated, managerial experience, full time employed] is thinking about divorcing his wife on paper, because he will not get to keep the insurance he had--and liked--and will not qualify for adequate subsidies otherwise.

Anecdata aside, if in 2 or 3 years all the bugs are worked out and a significant percentage of Americans have achieved access to meaningful care [i.e. $/capita down, provision of services up], I'll admit it was worthwhile. But as it stands it does me no good, and I don't think there have yet been real outcomes to inspire optimism.

*I know I made the bad decision to be fucking poor in fucking Texas, but it should be precisely people like me that HC reform should reach.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 1:27 PM · Report this
@29 I'm really sorry your state swings Republican. My sister in TN is in the same boat. If she lived in WA she would be covered by Medicaid. Obama and the Dems in congress tried to help her, and her state leaders went all the way to SCOTUS to screw her.
Posted by wxPDX on March 10, 2014 at 1:48 PM · Report this
31 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
venomlash 32
What's that about liberals paying their fair share?
Posted by venomlash on March 10, 2014 at 2:26 PM · Report this
rob! 33
@ Ophian, I was somehow convinced you were in the Seattle area.

Anyway, your first comment above made it sound like you were currently enrolled. The deadline has been extended to March 31st; would you consider trying again at your leisure and seeing what your actual options would be? Even if you opted for the lowest-premium plan (maybe ~$70/mo?) with the highest deductible, your maximum out-of-pocket IS CAPPED at, I think, $6250. A lot of people forget that feature of ACA-qualified plans. Actually pretty cheap insurance for peace of mind and bankruptcy protection alone, plus you would get preventive treatment/screenings.…
Posted by rob! on March 10, 2014 at 2:40 PM · Report this

It's a seriously sick joke that ACA has the word "affordable" in the title. Who in hell can 'afford' $300 or $350 a month and UP, PLUS a $1500 or $2k or $2500 annual deductible? It's pure madness. And I don't see this taking us down the road to single payer, ever. Why would it? Please, someone point out to me the direct or indirect line from the enactment of ACA to a point in the future where private insurance carriers won't be at the table when our presidents - even supposedly liberal dems like Obama - rewrite healthcare policy.

I'm happy having health insurance has helped some people and even saved lives, as noted in this thread. The vast majority of the rest of us, however, can't afford to take advantage of it.

Posted by Velvetbabe on March 10, 2014 at 3:08 PM · Report this
rob! 35
@34, it is simply not right to imply that $300-350 is the floor for premiums under the ACA—far from it. To say that scares off people who might otherwise enroll at reasonable cost for them, and that damages the entire program.

"Low-income individuals and families whose incomes are between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level will receive federal subsidies on a sliding scale if they purchase insurance via an exchange. Those from 133% to 150% of the poverty level will be subsidized such that their premium costs will be 3% to 4% of income."—Wikipedia

A single person earning nearly $46,000/yr gets subsidized on the sliding scale. And if you're above that, in virtually everywhere but the most expensive urban areas of the country, I maintain that you can and should budget 10% or less of your very high income for insurance with bankruptcy protection. It's more important for your future than entertainment, a new car, expensive vacations, more house than you can afford, etc.
Posted by rob! on March 10, 2014 at 3:34 PM · Report this
The ACA strikes me as being Mr Obama's version of DADT. I can only shudder to think of how Mrs C will manage to outdo both her husband and Mr O - unless, of course, someone can convince her or at least the rest of the country how desperately tired she looks. (I'd quite like to see a woman elected President, but I'm sure there's a better woman available to win the honour.)
Posted by vennominon on March 10, 2014 at 3:46 PM · Report this


Holy crap, Rob, are you SERIOUSLY implying that people who make more than $46k a year are somehow rich? Are you fucking kidding me? My "very high income"? What planet are you from?? I'm absolutely blown away by your unbelievably presumptuous, pontificating attitude in telling me or anyone else that we 'can and should budget' for forking over 10% of our incomes for piss poor health insurance. And that my lack of being able to 'budget' is due to my splurging on a new car? I drive a 10 year old Toyota Corolla with 178k miles on it. I live in a 50 year old tiny 2 bedroom 1 bath house in Maine and almost literally starve all winter due to an inability to afford to sufficiently insulate the place enough to bring down my oil heat costs below the nearly $4k I have spent this winter - just since October. I was quoted $12k the other day to replace my aging oil furnace with 'cheaper' gas - can't even touch that. I had a roof leak this winter which wasn't discovered right away which has caused mold in my walls which is going to cost me thousands to remediate - not covered by my homeowner's insurance. The place needs a paint job which will be another few thousand. My car just had an $1800 emergency repair last week- money I basically don't have. I still owe nearly $90k on my mortgage, so can't sell, as house values are still too low.

And you know what my insanely 'high' salary is? Are you ready?


It's more important that I fork over $350 a month for an insurance policy with a $2k deductible than splurge on 'entertainment' or 'more house than I can afford'? Thank you SO MUCH for that.

Posted by Velvetbabe on March 10, 2014 at 4:01 PM · Report this
And the notion that a single post on Slog by me might 'scare people off' signing up for ACA and that "damages the entire program." Are you on acid? Have you looked into ACA? Because I have. And that was what I was quoted, and what friends and family members have been quoted, in the range of $300 - $350 a month with insanely high deductibles to meet.

Posted by Velvetbabe on March 10, 2014 at 4:03 PM · Report this
keshmeshi 39

$350/month is painful. Getting sick without health insurance is far worse. Think of all the problems you've run into the past several months times 100.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 10, 2014 at 4:11 PM · Report this
Ophian 40
Having re-done the footwork, the best I come up with is Blue Advantage Bronze. $170/mth premium, $5k deductible, 20% copay, $6250 OoP cap. I am eligible for a $83/mth tax-credit.

I could adjust my tax withholding and spend the very margin of my budget [that thin slice that makes sure I can cover a car break-down or similar needed expenditure] on a plan that gives no more than catastrophic coverage. But that is not a good deal. It would not give me access to preventative care, and it would not give me peace of mind.

Show me a healthcare system that does not divert thousands of my and federal tax dollars directly to private, for-profit corporations before any services are rendered whatsoever, and I'll get excited.

Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 4:25 PM · Report this
Ophian 41
Mr ven @36, "The ACA strikes me as being Mr Obama's version of DADT."

That is basically my take on it: a politically machinated, seemed-like-progress-at-the-time, bodge that, a decade or two from now, will be considered really crap.
Posted by Ophian on March 10, 2014 at 4:30 PM · Report this
If I was just out of college today, I would run to Canada so fast. Living in America has become so tiresome and soul crushing. For Christ's sakes, we've been dancing in the streets because they can't deny us sitting at the lunch counter, yet. And we argue among ourselves about who gets the least rancid scraps that fall to the floor within our reach. Will this get better, Dan?
Posted by kwodell on March 10, 2014 at 4:54 PM · Report this
43 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Dear God, If I start believing in You, will You give the troll raging incurable ass cancer?
Posted by kwodell on March 10, 2014 at 4:58 PM · Report this
45 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
Knat 46
I'm another of those people who is in the position that the ACA doesn't really benefit me much. I recognize that it's a really big deal, even a godsend, for some, but I'm not one of them (thankfully, I suppose). I keep meaning to check into the available benefits, but this stuff makes my eyes cross.

Based on some of the comments here (rob!), it might not be as big a bite in my finances as I had previously thought. I'll have to set aside some time this weekend to give it another look.
Posted by Knat on March 10, 2014 at 11:30 PM · Report this
rob! 47
@Velvetbabe, it would have looked odd for me to put a lot of exceptions and caveats and other "fine print" into my earlier comments, but you are someone who's currently having to deal with a blizzard of financial concerns and it's easy to understand why you can't see your way right now to getting healthcare insurance. I'm sorry for my insensitivity and poor word choice, and I hope things get better for you soon.

@Ophian, Knat, I appreciate your comments.
Posted by rob! on March 11, 2014 at 8:30 AM · Report this
I'm with Ophian on this- the ACA as it is now doesn't help me. Even if i managed to pay the $200-300 monthly premium for the cheapest plan after subsidation (I'm in NY and just above the maximum age to "be allowed" to choose the catastrophic plan), I'd have nothing left with which to pay the deductible, much less the 40% I would owe on each bill after that fact. I'm glad it has helped some people, but some of us are getting shafted, and we have an obligation to let that be known. 10% of one's income, unless you're in a DINK situation, is too high to pay for insurance, especially when that 10% is not the full extent of the price.
Posted by SfR on March 11, 2014 at 11:17 AM · Report this
Ophian, maybe you should place the blame where it belongs, in your case, with PRick Perry.

And for those who bemoan the fact that the ACA was not a single-payer system, have you been paying attention to the type of legislative help the Obama administration has been receiving from those on the farright in Congress? NONE! How the FUCK do you think he would have gotten a single-payer system through the House with the obstructionist clowns that are clogging Congress!? As it is, they still persist in calling this VERY center-right politician a socialist and even called this Heritage Foundation (and before that, Richard Nixon's) plan socialist, simply to strike fear into the hearts of the politically unsophisticated who form the Republican Party's base.
Fact is, without some form of payout to the insurance companies, with today's atmosphere of unlimited and limitless private capital involved in our politics and public policy making, there would have been ZERO chance of getting anything passed.
As it is, there IS a provision in the ACA that allows states to opt out and start a single-payer system. Vermont is already implimenting it, we in Washington should follow along soon, and folks like you in Texass, ophiam, need to campaign diligently for Wendy Davis so you and others like you in your state will be able to take advantage of the ACA, rather than the insurers taking advantage of you.
Or simply continue to bitch impotently on some out-of-state alternative newspapers forums. I'm certain THAT will prove effective.

"All but ignored in the multitude of media coverage about the ACA and its problems, Vermont has become the first state in the union to pass a single-payer universal health care law for its residents. It has a snappy slogan: Everybody in, nobody out.

The system will be fully operational by 2017, funded by Medicare, Medicaid, federal money for the ACA given to Vermont, and a slight increase in taxes. Everyone will be able to go to any doctor or hospital in the state free of charge. No plans to figure out, no insurance forms to sweat over, no gotchas."……

Posted by shaddapalready on March 11, 2014 at 12:10 PM · Report this
Ophian 50
Cheers rob! @47.

@49, yeah, it's a problem to be in a red state, but that is hardly the only issue. If we are going to have good governance and a functioning democracy in this country we will have to get past ALEC and K St. The ACA was made to be acceptable to corporate interests first.

"Show me a healthcare system that does not divert thousands of my and federal tax dollars directly to private, for-profit corporations before any services are rendered whatsoever, and I'll get excited."
Posted by Ophian on March 11, 2014 at 12:35 PM · Report this
@50: It's true that there are issues other than you living in a red state, but that's honestly the bulk of your problem. I don't know about Washington, but in California, some of the insurance companies are non-profit (in fact, the best insurance company by far is non-profit), so not all these dollars are getting funneled to for-profit corporations. And you just wouldn't be looking at the insanely high premiums for shitty coverage if you lived here. My boyfriend is around your income and probably a bit younger than you, but he's paying ~$130/month for a silver plan from Kaiser.

I'll be honest: I really wanted single-payer. But I wonder now if I might've been a little insane for wanting that, given how badly the rollout of the program has gone. I mean, when was the last time we really made a brand-new, giant government program? The logistics here were apparently too difficult for the government, and it's at least using a significant portion of the existing infrastructure. Can you imagine how complicated it would've been to set up a national system? I'm kind of thinking that this might've been a necessary step. Only time will tell, of course.
Posted by alguna_rubia on March 13, 2014 at 11:02 AM · Report this

Add a comment


Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy