Dean predicts demise of insurance mandate

[Raggz]

Source: MSNBC First Read

Carrie Dann writes: On MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown, former DNC Chairman Howard Dean told Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie that a key part of the federal health care bill – the requirement that almost all Americans must purchase insurance or pay a fine – is not essential to the overhaul.

He predicted that the so-called “individual mandate” – which has been called unconstitutional by a group of state Attorneys General who are challenging the new reform law – will be stripped out before the legislation goes into effect in 2014.

“By the time this thing goes into effect in 2014, the mandate will be gone, either through the courts, or because it’s unpopular,” he said. "You don't need it."

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/08/06/4832127-dean-predicts-demise-of-insurance-mandate

---

Exactly so.

Presently the government only controls the party of our pay check that we owe in taxes.

Under HCR, they can tell us what to do with the part that we don't owe for taxes.

[joeybee12]

1. Uh-oh, the WH responded quickly!

:evilgrin:

[ProSense]

2. Think Progress has a post up rebutting Dean

posted here with more information.

[Raggz]

3. Why should we let government control out take-home pay?

Government should ONLY control the tax money they collect!

Our take-home pay is our money.

[tritsofme]

4. I have heard of proposals where you agree to be locked out of the Exchanges

for a period of five years or so, if you choose to opt out of the mandate. That would leave you with the remnants of today's individual market, and the plans would still be able to discriminate on the basis of pre-existing conditions, ect.

I think something along these lines could be a fair and reasonable compromise, but I don't know how destructive this would be to costs in the Exchanges.

I agree with Dean that it is extremely unlikely the mandate in its current form will actually be enacted in in 2014.

[Raggz]

5. Gov mandates to control irresponsible spending

Once we agree that government can control some of our take-home pay, soon they will control it all.

Many Americans spend irresponsibly. A new Consumer Spending Administration Czar could end this by prohibiting all spending that is unwise. We just send our paychecks to the CSA and the agency spends it on what we need.

LOTS of advantages - for example illegal drug use would immediately end.

Government experts would do research and then select what is best for us.

[christx30]

6. So are we children?

How much of ourselves do we owe the government? Who's to say one thing is irresponsible and what is not? Are we going to have a government entity telling us how many trips to Starbucks is considered excessive from a financial standpoint? Who decides what is responsible and what is not? End the Mandates.

[ShockediSay]

7. What if the Ebntire federal law is pulled in those challenging states? nt

[Hawkowl]

8. Money is freedom of speech

At least it is if you are a corporation.

[Vinca]

9. The point of this entire exercise is to make medical care available

to everyone. The key word here is "available." In 2014, I guarantee you there will be millions of people who will not be able to afford the mandated premiums, even with the subsidies, and yet will be too well off for Medicaid. Whether the mandate stays or goes doesn't really matter because a large chunk of people are still going to be out in the cold. That's why we need single-payer. Every American should get a card in the mail that entitles them to decent medical care and it should be paid for by the common funds. But why am I wasting my breath? People don't matter anymore . . . unless they're corporations.

[Raggz]

10. If the point was to make medical care available, why didn't it?

[eridani]

13. Because it was written by insurance company lobbyists

Duh.

[Zavulon]

11. I hope Dean's right.

Being forced at gunpoint to enrich insurance companies pisses me off. Why the hell are we stuck with a Republican plan?

Previous comments in this thread about how government shouldn't be telling us what to do with after-tax pay are right on the mark. I couldn't be more against this shitty bill if McStain had signed it into law.

[No Elephants]

12. A Republican plan? Nixon's plan was more liberal than Obamacare (or Hillarycare).

Kennedy put the kibosh on Nixon's plan, supposedly because he (Kennedy) did not want Republicans to get credit for health care reform.

While that was a huge mistake, to Kennedy's great credit, he regretted his choice quickly; and tried to remedy it by working with Nixon However, by then, Nixon was, um, distracted by other things.

Kennedy never stopped regretting it. So much for seeing things in terms of Democrat v. Republican, to the point where you forget the needs of the American people, even temporarily. Also a lesson about windows of opportunity suddenly slamming shut, perhaps forever.

[savalez]

17. You are being a bit harsh, the bill has plenty of good points that

shouldn't be overshadowed by this one part. Focusing on it is exactly what the Republicans want you to do.

The Wall Street Journal has it all laid out here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704117304575137370275522704.html


Yes I know that a lot of folks on DU wanted something else but that was impossible this time around with this House and Senate. Reality bites.

[area51]

18. +1

Mandatory, for-profit, basically unregulated insurance that has been proven to be like a group of serial killers in terms of denying claims that are needed to keep people alive, is a tax on breathing.

[Vidar]

14. I hope he's right.

[BootinUp]

15. And I thought it was the repukes that didn't want reform. nt

[Raggz]

16. The republicans don't matter

The independents don't like THIS reform. Independents are two of five votes. Americans want reform, just not THIS reform.

It could have worked.

California has to find three billion dollars for this reform,. Do you have any idea of how many state employees need to be laid off to raise 3 billion?

[BootinUp]

19. California has problems yes,

they can't raise any revenue because the people in the state have made it virtually impossible to do so. It is not the fault of the ACA bill. California needs to fix their problem.

Public opinion has been turning around on the ACA bill (improving), or did you miss those reports?

[Raggz]

20. the people want real hcr