Dean favors scaled-back healthcare reform

[janx]

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean on Friday threw his support behind passing a series of scaled-back healthcare measures instead of one comprehensive bill.

Dean embraced the approach now favored by some House Democrats in an appearance on CBS' "Early Show" Friday morning.

"We can't get the whole thing but I think we can get some good stuff done before the election," he said. "I would go back and do that though and run it through the reconciliation program."

Democrats in Congress have been scrambling to find a new way to pass healthcare reform legislation because Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass.) will break the Democrats' filibuster-proof majority in the Senate once he is sworn in.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/77503-dean-favors-scaled-back-healthcare-reform

_________________

I heard Dean talking about this on Thursday, and the article sums up well what he said.

[defendandprotect]

1. Haven't actually read the thread . . . but did notice some others in Congress

seemingly suggesting this approach?

HOWEVER, I don't think we're hearing anything at all until we hear SINGLE PAYER,

MEDICARE FOR ALL -- AND AT LEAST PUBLIC OPTION --

[janx]

2. You haven't read what thread?

?

[defendandprotect]

3. The thread/article you've just posted here . . . !!!

???????????????????

[Capn Sunshine]

4. Howard is a pragmatist

he knows sometimes incrementalism is advisable. If you recall, he was practically lynched by the progressives inhis own state when he signed the Vt health care reform bill. It did a lot, but was NOT single payer, and all the other stuff that people wanted in a perfect bill.

The irony of the renactment of this on a national scale is not lost on Howard.

Because sadly, there just isn't a majority of us inside the Democratic party yet. But we've made real strides. I wish Howard was back at the DNC chair. Like he said, "when I was running things, we never lost a special election."

[janx]

6. Well yes, incrementalism is advisable.

But Bwhaaa---it isn't often accepted.

[No Elephants]

5. It all depends upon what is in the "pared down" bill, doesn't it? Without

specifics, how can anyone possibly say s/he is for or against it?

The headline is very ambiguous, though. It could sound as though a pared down bill is Dean's first choice--favored over maybe comprehensive reform--when the truth is, he wanted comprehensivve reform, but will settle for a pared down version as better than zero.

But again, a pared down bill is better than zero only if the pared down version is a good bill and we have no way of knowing that yet.

I'd prefer the one element at a time approach some of the House members supposedly want. but I very much doubt that will ever happen.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/77459-house-dems-warming-to-scaled-back-healthcare-reform

[janx]

7. Yep. But I heard him say, publicly, that he's convinced

that's the way to go:pared down, then reconciliation.

[No Elephants]

10. I understood from your first post that you heard him say it. Your hearing it, though,

has anything to do with the point of my post. My issue is not whether he said it or not.

[TheKentuckian]

8. I could even accept tepid and rational purely market based reform

because at least it would be an actual effort to fix the problems rather than a hodgepodge of mostly smoke and mirrors regulation along with a heaping helping of cost shifting, lack of affodability, lack of competition, and reduced benefits over time.

Hell, I could take the "starter house"/single wide of even the House bill, even without the sliver of a public option it would be moving the needle a hair but even with my standards lower than I could have guessed arriving at, the bill is a complete fiasco in my eyes.

I'm for going with trying to pass little bites and making the Confederates take some tough votes. Reid has failed to even attempt to box them in.

[Capn Sunshine]

9. a-FUCKING MEN TO THAT!

That's it in a nutshell. This is an opportunity to reveal the true colors of the republicans. Make them own their shilling for the corporations.