Why isn't Obama for single-payer health care? n/t

[brentspeak]

[Captain Hilts]

1. No good reason. The whole "voluntary participation"

thing is a real no-go.

[HughMoran]

2. n/t

[TheBigotBasher]

3. Can it win?

Obama looks to what is achievable. His manifesto is based on that and everything he has done in power has been about ensuring that he gets through what can be got passed. That does no mean he is not playing a battle, as both his main election opponents found out. It just means it is played differently.

(Of course this is my opinion which could be a load of rubbish, but I am no mind reader and I doubt he will reply).

[uponit7771]

4. High hanging fruit, will be harder to pass. Get the low hangin fruit entrenched and single payer...

...will be on it's way.

Can you imagine reThugs killing a voluntary system like the one Obama is presenting 5 years from now?

[nxylas]

10. Yep

The current congressional Republican party's attitude to any policy proposed by this administration is taken from the old Groucho Marx song "Whatever It Is, I'm Against It".

[karynnj]

43. Did you see the cartoon using that on the Roadblock Republicans site

with Mitch smacking down all the bills as they come out with a giant mallet - http://www.roadblockrepublicans.com/content/entry/whatever_it_is_mitchs_against_it/

[nxylas]

44. Ha, no I hadn't seen that

It works perfectly.

[karynnj]

48. That Kerry funded web site had some really great videos

Here's the link to the main page - http://www.roadblockrepublicans.com/

(this one against Sununu was hilarious. http://www.roadblockrepublicans.com/content/entry/su_no_no_no/ )

[quantass]

12. Exactly...I notice that unlike rest of the world America needs to move in baby steps for Health care

and so Obama is making the right move which ultimately will lead to what it should be in the future.

[Faryn Balyncd]

74. "Mandatory Insurance" will entrench the INSURANCE COMPANIES and make Single Payer more DIFFICULT.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4813564

[busymom]

5. Look at what a failure medicare is...

seriously...

We need universal health coverage, but single payer isn't it.

[Occam Bandage]

8. Out of curiosity, what makes you believe medicare is a failure?

While I think it can be confusing and contradictory, I think that it is fundamentally a good program, and would rank it with Social Security as one of the greatest achievements of 20th-century American government.

[Every Man A King]

11. Her husband is a doctor

and they get less money when Medicare is involved.

[busymom]

13. nope.

[Every Man A King]

17. Why then?

Do you think Hillary would agree with you?

[busymom]

28. Well.

My husband is a doctor. He works on salary though at a catholic hospital and it is neither here nor there to him if he sees someone with or without insurance or with our without medicare. That is my disclaimer...

The hospital does have a hiring freeze for doctors, they are letting go nurses, there are pay freezes across the board. They were building a new wing and they have stopped in the middle.

Is money important? yes. Should doctors be compensated? yes. Should they be able to pay their nurses? yes. Do you want new PET scanners or MRI machines? probably. It isn't free.

Cut more dollars and you'll also get what you pay for.

[PBS Poll-435]

61. Single Payer isn't the cause of your Husband's hospital's woes

nt

[busymom]

64. link? sources of knowledge?

you are partially right. First of all, they aren't my husband's woes. As I have said multiple times, he is on salary. The economy coupled with medicare and other issues are the problem though for many others...and it will eventually trickle to him too.

That being said, if everyone is insured by the govt that pays nothing, takes forever to do it, requires multiple submissions of the same bill etc...expect issues across the board....

He and I both support some form of universal health coverage...we are not the enemy.

To me though, it sounds like anyone who earns a halfway decent salary is the enemy...how DARE he go to 8 years of college and complete 8 years of residency training where he earned less than $5/hour worked. The gall of that asshole to become a doctor and then want to pay off his student loans and want to be able to pay for college for his 5 children. He's such a jerk, right...you know..driving his used car and seeing people at all times of the day without regard to their insurance status.

String him up by his toes for wanting to better his life...He grew up in a family that lost their home...and everything due to his dad's failed business. He worried about whether there would be food on the table and dreamed of a better life for his family...and he worked DAMNED hard to get there. Med school wasn't a cakewalk and neither was residency...I was there...

What an asshole though. Seriously..wanting to be able to pay off those loans and make a secure/stable life for his family and not have to worry so much about money.

Hell..string up every doctor...those greedy bastards....

[PBS Poll-435]

66. I didn't say you guys were the enemy

:hug:

The trick with single-payer is that the laws regarding the budget must mandate an inflation-based annual increase.

My thinking is this. If private insurance pays $150 for a visit, and you see 500 patients a year, and 1 out of every 6 patients doesn't have the ability to pay, that is roughly 83 patients that pay $0. You would only need a medicare/NHS payment of $125 for the financial situation to remain equal. A $130 payment for each patient would improve cash flow to the hospital/clinic by 4%. A $140 would yield an increase of 12%.

[busymom]

67. I know. I'm feeling sensitive...

I feel like the enemy, but I'm not...I promise. I just have had different experiences that I want to share. I feel like we have to make an informed decision....we have to consider everything and how to best manage things...and I don't think medicare is how we want to go.

Why am I feeling badly for my husband's success? We both came from working class families and worked hard, hard, hard to get where we are...lots of sacrifices and debt to live a dream...caring for sick people...is there money in being a doctor? Yes...but there is much more money in being in business or other things. My husband works a lot of hours...not because they are mandated now, but because he feels that patients want and deserve to see their doctor when they are sick...even if he is not on call he comes into admit a patient of his from the ER...he really values providing quality care to people....but a lot of people are angry with him because his salary is above average. I assure you that with student loan payments we aren't well off..but we do have job security and financial security which is more than a lot of people can say in this economy...but we don't feel anything but grateful....and he really is the kind of doc that would come and see you in the middle of the night regardless of your financial circumstances. He has fought with the administration here over bills for patients. He is on the side of the patient.

FYI though...Medicare doesn't pay $125...try about...$37...sometimes more...but that doesn't cover overhead...

[PBS Poll-435]

68. The Medicare model works, though

We just need to up the money that goes into it. The difference in the administrative cost percentage is astounding compared to a national insurer like HCSC or Aetna.



How about this? Let's say that you are insured. You are a healthy, working person with a young family. (Spouse and infant child.) Your spouse stays at home. Your salary is $3000.00 per pay-period, 24 in a year. Your middle-class family has an annual income of $72000.00

Your job offers health insurance provided that you pay a portion. Your cost for you and your family is $250.00 per pay period. ($500 a month, pre-tax. Pretty reasonable estimate.)

Therefore, your medicare tax per pay period is $43.50 and your health-care tax is more than FIVE TIMES what your medicare tax is.

I think if we revamp how we do single-payer (and how we fund it!) we could get that payment to the doctor up from $37.00.

[busymom]

71. I'm willing to listen....

I BELIEVE strongly that every hard-working American has the fundamental right to healthcare....I truly believe it with every fiber of who I am.

Private health insurers have screwed Americans for years and I hope some of the truly go under. When my chemo-buddy lost his health insurance mid-bone marrow transplant I couldn't believe it. There was a hard-working American...who did everything right and had no fault at all in the cancer that he got....being served with a letter while he was in the hospital. Thanks blue cross....asshats.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

22. Then why is your homepage dawkterswife.com?

That seems pretty clear.

[busymom]

59. let me restate

my husband is a physician...he is on salary...his income is not affected by the insurance status of someone. He chose to work for a catholic hospital because he believes everyone deserves health care...not just those with insurance.

[busymom]

18. Here are the issues that I see....

This might be solved by having younger people in the same system, but currently, medicare is for the elderly who generally speaking have multiple health care problems and don't pay a lot of money in taxes to contribute to the medicare fund. Oh, oops...no one wants to pay a lot of money in taxes for services ... me included...<forgive my sarcasm>. To do an adequate evaluation and follow-up of someone with multiple issues requires the expenditure of time to go over the chart and then time being examined by a doctor, np, or pa. Medicare is constantly cutting back on what it pays health care providers...this means that they can afford to see less people with medicare because medicare doesn't cover the cost of paying for the nurse, equipment, and overhead. A practice existing on medicare alone can not survive, unfortunately...if not for the private insurers and private pay patients, a practice wouldn't be able to continue.

My mother is a geriatric nurse practitioner who worked for 5 years with a geriatrician who saw medicare only. The practice is now closed because it was not possible to pay for the office space, NP, and nurses. The doctor went without a salary for 2 years before closing her doors. Now my mother does nursing home care....and she just took a pay cut...again.

Medicare is very slow to pay. Medicare reserves the right to deny any charge for any reason and make providers resubmit in the hopes that they will just give up altogether.

Medicare is a huge, bumbling bureaucracy that is confusing to patients who don't know what is and is not covered...and even providers continue to be confused. Medicare likes it that way. The prescription drug benefit is the biggest failure ever because drugs are now more expensive than they ever were...the govt. did not choose to allow agreemeents with pharmaceutical comapanies to be made over prices.

Do you really trust our government...the people who don't pay their taxes on their multi-million dollar salaries, who get money from insurance companies, pharm companies etc....to make good choices about how your health care is done?

Something has to change here...but convincing me that our government..that mismanages everything it gets its hands on...is the right one for the job...hard sell.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

24. Wow! you certainly internalized what the Republican line would have been if Daschle had been confirm

"Do you really trust our government...the people who don't pay their taxes on their multi-million dollar salaries, who get money from insurance companies, pharm companies etc....to make good choices about how your health care is done?"

Just saying. What is your alternative?

[busymom]

39. A government that can not accept money from lobbiests,

where change really does mean not nominating people who have earned millions of dollars from 'advising' the health care industry...where parties will stand up against corruption, unacceptable wars and abuses within the system.

I don't trust any politicians anymore...you're right. What is the alternative? Average Joe running for office across the country...not being able to get corporate sponsorships/money...fighting for the people....not the elite. It will never happen....

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

53. I think you're an odd one to mention "trust" when you were so

openly duplicitous in your posts.

A poster stated you were a doctor's wife and you responded "No". Then you were questioned and then you admitted that you were. Why not just admit your personal status? There's nothing wrong with being a doctor's wife and you would get additional credit for having a more upfront and personal view of things.

Reading your other posts, you are just posting assorted scare stories about single payers in assorted countries - you leave no stone unturned. You have a horse in this race, you just won't admit it.

Forgive me if I take future opinions of yours with a grain of salt.

[busymom]

57. No...what

I meant was that his income/lack of income is not the issue. Then I was open about the fact that yes my husband is a doctor and yes he works on salary and so in essence whether his patients have insurance/medicare or are uninsured doesn't come into play for his salary. The OP of that thread stated that I had this opinion because it would affect my husband's income...which it does not. He is on salary and earns a set amount regardless of medicare/no medicare.

In that sense, I don't have a horse in the race. I consider myself to be extremely lucky to have the experiences that I have and they have shaped my opinions. Also, my husband is German and believes that health care should be a basic right for everyone. That is my horse in this race. I just don't want to rush to have what they have in Canada or the UK.

There are also plenty of US scare stories I can come up with. While I was undergoing chemotherapy, my chemo buddy had his health insurance cancelled because he was so sick (and in the hospital) and had missed too many days of work.

Our system is broken...lets just come up with the right fix.

BTW...my ultimate dream is to go to medical school myself someday and treat the poor/uninsured/underinsured. I hope that because my husband provides our family with financial stability that this will be a reality for me someday....I wouldn't care how much/little I earned...I would consider it an honor.

[Occam Bandage]

30. Well, as for the first problem, you've hit upon

a problem with any non-universal health care system, being an uneven distribution of risk. Unless everyone is paying into it, the risk pool is distorted, and the system is not cost-efficient and runs into funding problems, which is met either with benefit cutbacks and higher taxes in a government-run program, or with higher fees and fewer covered patients in a privately-run program.

As for coverage denials and muddled paperwork, well, that's going to be a problem in any system that covers some things and denies others--meaning, of course, any realistic system whatsoever. Either a provider is told, "nope, you're fucked, sorry" in a government program, or a patient is told, "nope, you're fucked, sorry" in a private one. The solution to the first is legislative refinement; the solution to the next is the gentle hand of the free market. Neither are good solutions, but I think the former works at least marginally, while the latter has absolutely no bearing on a field rife with supplier monopolies and a captive consumer base.

I agree that Medicare is often confusing, and that Medicare Part D was horribly designed and implemented. There should indeed be better negotiations for drugs and cross-border drug sales, and I would hope that future reforms would include that.

As for "trusting our government?" Yes, many people do take money from the health-care industry. However, I don't really think that means that the government is less trustworthy than the health-care industry itself is. That's a bit like saying that since some peanut butter is tainted with salmonella, peanut butter isn't trustworthy and so you should instead crack open a petri dish and spread a nice, thick salmonella culture all over your toast.

[busymom]

38. This is why I was most for Hillary's plan

During the primaries, she said that she would mandate that everyone be covered.. Unless there is shared risk and those who are younger and healthier are not paying in, the system is not financially viable. You can't just start paying when you get sick...it's too late.

My personal feeling (and note that I am not president of the united states and never will be) is that there should be a highly regulated cooperation between govt. and private industry which mandates coverage for all basic, necessary and life-threatening conditions. No one should go without coverage for treatment for injuries, cancer and annual exams...No one should be "fucked" by the government or private industry.

This is not a black and white issue and I think that coming up with an adequate answer involves more than just jumping on to a single answer.

My husband worked as a physician in the UK and Germany before we came here. In the UK, where there is socialized medicine, he went to a code only to discover that there were no more of a certain drug. The patient died as a direct result and he called it "government induced population control". The money wasn't there...it became crap care for all. One of my best friends lives in the UK and her little girl has had health problems since birth due to bladder infections. The GP there didn't want to sent her to a specialist, order tests or take further action. She sought out 4 DIFFERENT doctors...with no different result. When she visited here, we got her in to see a friend who is a pediatric urologist and he wrote a letter...which she then took back with her.

She finally got in for a scan...and has bilateral damage to her kidneys from severe reflux disease. She is 6 years old and weighs only 29 pounds....something that has been blamed on the mom. Now she is getting a full investigation, but the damage is done. Yeah socialized medicine...and care thanks to a nasty letter from an American urologist. That sucks.

My husband treated a man recently with terrible pain and a growth on his neck...who came down here from Canada...because the waiting time was so long in Canada. The man required immediate surgery.

We have to take the time to look at all of the systems, what works and what doesn't work and then come up with a system where we can hold onto the US quality and health care ingenuity, but also cover everyone.

[Occam Bandage]

42. I agree that Hillary had the best health-care proposal of any of the viable candidates.

As for the Canadian, UK and German health-care systems, well, I'll just say that the statistics speak for themselves and leave it at that.

[busymom]

47. They do have good statistics, but...few Americans would accept

the downside...

I gave birth to my first child in Germany...and labored in a room with about 8 couples! I shared a room after delivery with 4 other women and we had no privacy screens or curtains. The nursing staff coverage was bare bones...and I mean bare, bare bones. My labor stalled and it took 6 hours to get someone in to do a c-section that turned out to have been emergent all along. In america, it would scream lawsuit. ;) And while we're at it...universal health care will mean an end to litigation..it will have to..

Who here in the US is willing to accept that grandpa with end-stage cancer doesn't get dialysis? A lot of people here demand that everything be done, no matter what the cost and how hopeless the situation. In europe, rationing of care is a fairly accepted phenomenon. Can we handle that here?

It will come either way....but...it's not going to be the champagne and roses that everyone thinks...

[Occam Bandage]

49. Universal or not, we're going to have to accept rationing of care sooner or later,

or our system is going to collapse. We keep finding newer and costlier ways to artificially prolong bedridden lives. If we continue to force the public--whether through insurance or through single-payer--to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of care simply to keep a terminally ill patient alive and suffering for an extra few weeks, we are going to bankrupt the nation. There's no reason to forbid persons from paying for such care out of pocket, of course, but there is a very good public health reason to put that money towards preventative care instead.

I don't want champagne and roses. I'll settle for being able to go to a doctor from time to time.

[busymom]

52. I agree that everyone should have access to care...

and...I don't necessarily have a problem with rationing...but I know a lot of people who do. You should be able to go to the doctor for annual check-ups and any time you are sick or injured...any American should and it is shameful that we haven't come farther with this.

[avaistheone1]

32. Most of our elderly would not have health care without Medicare.

So it is not such a failure. It's overhead is a small fraction of the private health insurance as well.

[busymom]

40. Just because it is the only system in place

does not mean it is working.

Medicare needs to be completely revamped.

[NorthCarolina]

41. A failure? I've always heard it was the best managed of all

Government programs. I can assure you that it works pretty well for my mom. She's on medicare and she received exceptional care since suffering a stroke 5 years ago. Based on my experiences with her and her Medicare coverage I would say to be skeptical of those throwing stones at Medicare as proof that single payer health care for all wouldn't work. If such a plan was implemented, and it worked as GOOD as Medicare does from the get-go, I'd be more than satisfied with the coverage.

[OwnedByFerrets]

56. Thom Hartmann says we should have single payer, read medicare....

I dont know you, but I can say with no problem that he is smarter in this area than you are. I will go with Thoms ideas, ty.

[busymom]

58. Well gee, if Thomas Hartmann say it, it must be golden...forget

the idea of gathering the facts yourself from both sides...the things you want to hear and the things you don't...and making your own informed decisions. Just go with what someone else says.

[OwnedByFerrets]

73. When it comes to some things, I KNOW that there are those

who know more than me. Thom is one of these people. You would do well to listen to the man.

[Cleita]

79. Not only Thom Hartmann, but Congressmen Dennis Kucinich and John

Conyers, Senator Bernie Sanders and the group of doctors from the Harvard Medical School who call themselves Physicians for a National Health Plan. Obviously, as a busymom you don't have time to read but get your husband to go through their website and see what he has to say. The link is on my signature.

[Cleita]

78. Medicare is not a failure. If you looked at facts and figures instead of

shooting your mouth off, you would know that. It's the one medical program we have that works like it's supposed to. In the last thirty years of Republican neglect and out and out malfeasance, it has been dealt a number of blows, privatization, lack of funding and other insults heaped on it yet it serves our seniors better than any insurance or government program does.

Ask yourself this question. If there were no Medicare are you able and willing to take on all the medical expenses of your elderly grandmother or grandfather? Because that would be the case as no health insurance nor HMOs want anything to do with the elderly and sick.

[Occam Bandage]

6. He presumably worries that such an enormous package would end up

becoming eternally bogged down in Congress, eventually not breaking filibuster, thus dooming health-care reform to another lost decade much as Clinton's proposal did.

He still seems to believe that the current health-care system can be fixed by expanding existing government programs and imposing/offering a battery of cost controls and safety nets to the private sector.

I disagree with both assessments, but there you go.

[Thrill]

7. Because Max Baucus isn't going to let it pass through the Senate

There is no point in trying

[SunsetDreams]

9. What's your arguement for it? n/t

[Blue Meany]

14. I think it's because he thinks it is politically impossible

to accomplish

[ellacott]

15. You guys paid no attention to him during this campaign

He's said he's in favor of universal health care but feels you have to transition into it. He feels that his plan is a good transition as we work our way towards universal coverage.

[ieoeja]

35. As ellacott said Obama *is* for single-payer healthcare eventually (see also post #27 by whistle) nt

[flpoljunkie]

16. Even Krugman says it's politically impossible to get single payer thru Congress now.

October 7, 2007
Why not single-payer?

A number of people, including Atrios (who happens to be a trained economist) and Matthew Yglesias have been wondering why, exactly, the Democratic plans for health care involve such complicated schemes. The generic Demoplan, which basically follows the template laid down by John Edwards, involves four moving pieces: community rating, requiring that insurance companies offer insurance to everyone at the same rate regardless of medical history; a mandate, requiring that everyone have insurance; subsidies to help lower-income people pay for insurance; and public-private competition, in which people have the option of buying into a plan run by the government.

The alternative would be single-payer, aka Medicare for all: a payroll tax on everyone, and a government insurance program for everyone. Wouldn’t that be simpler, easier to administer, and more efficient?

Yes, it would. I myself described the Schwarzenegger plan in California, which contains all these elements except the public-private competition, as a “Rube Goldberg device — a complicated, indirect way of achieving what a single-payer system would accomplish simply and directly. “

But there are very good political reasons for going with the Demoplan: basically, it looks like something that could actually happen early in the next administration, while enacting a single-payer plan like the Conyers plan or the PNHP plan, excellent though those plans are, might take a very long time.

The public-private competition in the Demoplan is crucial, by the way, because it means that the Demoplan isn’t locked into the inefficiency of the private insurance system – it could evolve into single-payer over time.

Of course, the insurance industry will understand this, and fight the plan tooth and nail; the political logic of the Demoplan does not rest on the idea that AHIP will be fooled. Instead, there are two crucial advantages.

First, because most health insurance costs will continue to be paid out of premiums, the Demoplan doesn’t require a big tax increase – in fact, it can be financed simply by letting the high-end Bush tax cuts expire. I know, I know, the taxes that would support single-payer aren’t a true cost, because they would simply replace premiums and in most cases be lower than those premiums. But we’re talking about legislation, not reality.

Second, the Demoplans offer choice – so that people won’t feel that they’re being forced into a government plan. Over time, I suspect, many people will choose the government plan or plans – but they’ll have the option of staying with those wonderful people from the private insurance industry.

In an ideal world, I’d be a single-payer guy. But I see the chance of getting universal care, imperfect but fixable, just a couple of years from now. And I want to grab that chance.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/why-not-single-payer/

[Dawgs]

19. What do you mean "even Krugman"?

Is he the expert on everything now?

[flpoljunkie]

23. Health care is an economic issue, so yeah, he's an expert.

[Dawgs]

25. Fail. You're implying he's an expert on something political.

Maybe you should actually read your original post.

[Occam Bandage]

31. Krugie seems to believe he is, nowadays. nt

[uponit7771]

37. yeap, I wish he was a part of the admin instead of lobbing a couple of grenades from the outside

[mmonk]

20. Republican voters the party wants to please.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

21. Centrism. Difference-splitting "Goldilocks effect" (Whatever's in the middle is 'just right')

The whole "I'm not a liberal" thing. The campaign season desire to be slightly to the right of Hillary on the issue.

Lots of reasons that are probably more political than policy.

[leftstreet]

26. Because the Predator Class wants to profit off our health issues n/t

[whistle]

27. I don't know I thought he was going to push for that if elected

...but I remebered wrong

<snip>
Fact Check: Obama Consistent in His Position on Single Payer Health Care
January 05, 2008

Rhetoric: "Today, he opposes single payer health care, and attacks Sen. Clinton for proposing a plan that covers everyone"

Reality: Obama Has Consistently Said That If We Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System, But Now We Need To Build On The System We Have

If Obama Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System. The New Yorker wrote, "'If you're starting from scratch,' he says, 'then a single-payer system'-a government-managed system like Canada's, which disconnects health insurance from employment-'would probably make sense. But we've got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that's not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they've known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside.'"

If Obama Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System. "At a roundtable with a handful of invited guests at Lindy's Diner in Keene, Obama said if he were starting from scratch, he would probably propose a single payer health care system, but because of existing infrastructure, he created a proposal to improve the current system."

If Obama Were Starting From Scratch, He Would Support A Single Payer System. Obama said, "Here's the bottom line. If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system...But we're not designing a system from scratch...And when we had a healthcare forum before I set up my healthcare plan here in Iowa there was a lot of resistance to a single-payer system. So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices....Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system. For now, I just want to make sure every American is covered...I don't want to wait for that perfect system...The one thing you should ask about the candidates though is who's gonna have the capacity to actually deliver on the change?...I believe I've got a better capacity to break the gridlock and attract both Independents and Republicans to work together." <http://iowa.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/Ames>

[Better Believe It]

29. Single-Payer can't pass until the Democrats win control of Congress & the White House

:)

[debbierlus]

33. Obama is a corporatist. Did you watch his endorsement of the bank bailout during the election?

Remember the theft of the American treasury with massive bank bailouts?

The ones with no meaningful oversight whatsoever? The ones that the ENTIRE country did not want?

Obama could have stood up and demanded real accountability and stood against it. There was NO political risk. Dems didn't want it. Repukes didn't want it. He would have received a standing ovation across the nation had he oppossed it. I am not saying no action needed to be taken, however, all the leading economists were stating the bailout was the wrong solution.

Obama stood with it. He didn't use his platform to fight it. He went right along. The banks took the money and bought up more assets, they didn't lend. They gave out HUGE bonuses with it. They partied with it.

Why would you expect a man who would go along with the raping of our childrens futures (yes, because it was all fucking borrowed)...why do you think he would do anything but put our health care into the hands of the health insurance thugs. Mandated health insurance...what a joke. Massachusetts has it, it will be financially collasped in two years because they don't stop the profiteering.

[SunsetDreams]

46. Dems didn't want it? Repukes didn't want it?

How did it pass then?

Your laying the blame on Obama is misplaced IMO He is one vote period. Something needed to be done, GWB and the Secretary screwed it up. There was not accountability that was promised.

"raping", why must people use that word? I find it offensive in the highest sense of the word.

[natrat]

54. sadly this seems to be the case-not so much hope in reality

[Lorien]

69. Yep. He would not have been permitted to be the nominee if that weren't

so. We'll never see a Dean or a Kucinich as a Presidential nominee because the corporations own our Nation-it really is that simple.

[Radical Activist]

76. You forgot to mention

that Obama successfully asked Bush to set aside money he could have spent, and it is now being used by Obama with more transparency and accountability. And Obama DID speak out for more accountability. You version of events is exaggerated.

[backscatter712]

34. Obama's a pragmatist. He knows there's no way he could get a single-payer system through Congress.

And due to the economy, unfortunately, it looks like health care is being backburnered.

I think he's more for things like re-regulating the insurance and health-care industries so they blocked from gouging people, and doing things like making the insurance available to .gov employees including Congresscritters available to all Americans willing to buy in - and forcing insurance companies to compete with them.

I hope that fixing Medicare (closing the donut hole, making Medicare payments to health care providers more sane), and expanding Medicaid is also on the agenda.

It'll be an ugly, imperfect solution, but hopefully, it would be one that gets health care for at least some of the uninsured.

[Better Believe It]

36. That's right. The Democrats have to win control of Congress before that can happen

:silly:

[natrat]

55. yea sure-just like there was no reason they had to get on their knees for bush

[eridani]

62. Pragmatic is defined by what you demand

The strategy of asking for $3000 for your used car is terminally stupid if that's what you want for it. You need to ask for $5000 minimum.

What is it with this horseshit about leading with your wussiest possible compromise?

[QC]

45. The corporate elite opposes it. n/t

[question everything]

50. Actually, corporations would love to get this responsibility out of their hands

it is most Americans who still have jobs and employer-provided health care who don't want any changes... until they lose their jobs or until they realize that their insurance is not there when they really need it.

[Thrill]

51. You can't pass it with Baucus in such a powerful position. Its not even worth trying

[leftofthedial]

60. $$$$$

[mvd]

63. Sometimes I wonder if Obama is really against it

I think he thinks it's the political middle ground to have REGULATED insurance companies in health care. But that's just a function of how right of center the debate has gotten. I don't see single payer as extreme - I see it as reasonable.

[busymom]

65. I hope we do get single payer..and soon...

I can't wait to hear the poutrage around here about how much it sucks and how everyone was for it before they were against it...just like with the bailout.

[ljm2002]

70. A couple of reasons, I think...

...one, he still believes in the hallowed Private Sector, as evidenced by the people he has chosen as advisors and for various Cabinet posts; two, he doesn't think it is doable politically.

However, he may come around. Here's hoping...

[Hippo_Tron]

72. It would cause massive job losses for people who work in the insurance industry

And there are a lot of people that work in the insurance industry. He's said himself, "I think single payer would be the best idea if we were building a system from scratch." Converting to single payer from what we have would require drastic adjustments in our economy and now might not be the best time for that.

[Fireweed247]

75. Either he gets contributions from Insurance companies or he doesn't quite get it

I don't care what system you use, getting the insurance companies out of the picture is the only way to provide real care.

When you have a middleman who takes all of the money for themselves and actively works to not provide help, we are not going to get anywhere.


Just look how inhuman these bastards are...
Humana: higher prices for elderly customers will help it meet its 2009 profit forecast
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4963273

[Cleita]

77. He read Tom Daschle's book and Tom Daschle loves single-payer health

care for Europe and Canada but not for us. He thinks we should make sure everyone gets insurance like Congress has, meaning you buy it yourself or your employer does and the insurance companies can't deny coverage. Everyone else might get tax credits or government subsidies. Believe me this is the worst plan ever. It will truly make universal health care expensive and unmanageable. Now I know why Tom Daschle protects the insurance health industry. He used to work for them. But why Obama? What does he owe them?