Maybe the current HCR mess should be abandoned.

[MineralMan]

I'm beginning to think that this whole mess should be abandoned completely and a new start made next year. The "by Christmas" deadline seems to be producing nothing but gutting compromises that remove all utility from the bills.

Perhaps a fresh start in 2010, with the elections looming, might produce a better environment for all of us to influence our own Congress members to do something that makes sense or risk getting replaced later in the year.

What is currently proposed seems to me to be the least of the best and the most of the worst we could get. The problem is that if a major measure like this gets enacted, as full of garbage as it is, it will be very hard to fix when we discover just what a disaster it really is.

Maybe I'm way off track, but why don't we just toss this whole thing and start fresh in January? I can't see much of a downside, and I'd sure like to put some election year pressure on a few people. Nothing like an election year to get the pot boiling.

What do you think?

[Aramchek]

1. that would be stupid as Hell

were you alive in 1994?

[MineralMan]

2. I was, and there were sarcastic people around back then, too.

Given the apparent interest in a public option, according to the polls, perhaps we can pull a reverse of what happened in 1994. Perhaps you could expand a little on your opinion and explain why this would not work?

Or, perhaps you can pen another witty sarcasm.

[Aramchek]

4. letting this bill Fail would spell the end of Democratic Majorities

without them, there will be no further efforts at HCR

[MineralMan]

8. I disagree with that entirely. I think a poor HCR program that

relieves none of the burden on people is more likely to destroy the Democratic majority than a smaller, better bill introduced next year.

This thing is now completely incomprehensible and will grow worse in conference.

[Aramchek]

17. if this fails, nothing will be done next year, and Democrats will pay for that

Luckily, none of them are as unrealistic as you.
So that's not going to happen.
The Bill will pass and be signed into Law.

[amandabeech]

27. The Dem majorities are more likely to end if the economy doesn't recover soon, and I don't mean

a jobless recovery.

Polls have shown that the economy is #1 with voters. Not that I'm surprised.

Food, clothing and shelter ususally come before medical care in most people's heirarchy of deeds.

I think that Obama would have done better if he'd concentrated on jobs and the economy first and foremost, instead of trying to fulfill a pre-crash campaign promise.

Certainly health costs are a problem, and being uninsured is a problem (believe me I know about that), but first things first.

Obama's Job #1 is jobs for the rest of us.

[Aramchek]

28. did you notice that unemployment went down this month?

[MineralMan]

32. I did notice that. Did you notice the warnings about the big

pile of foreclosures about to happen?

[amandabeech]

33. Yes, but did you notice that the workforce shrunk?

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

If it looks like we're adding a very large number of jobs a month and the workforce is growing, I'll be the first to praise O.

[flyarm]

3. Harry Reid Slips Lifetime Limit Into Senate Bill

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/11/harry-reid-slips-lifetime-limit-into-senate-bill/

Harry Reid Slips Lifetime Limit Into Senate Bill
By: Jane Hamsher Friday December 11, 2009 8:34 am

When President Obama gave his speech on health care on September 10, he promised that there would be no limit on lifetime benefits under the health care bill:

They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick.

Harry Reid didn’t agree evidently. Reid, who is solely responsible for crafting the bill that he introduced in the Senate, decided that there should be a limit on lifetime benefits. So when people get sick and have huge bills for things like biologic drugs that cost $50,000 or $100,000 a year, whose bills could become “unreasonable” because Congress is granting drug manufacturers “indefinite monopolies” (per Henry Waxman) that prevent generics from coming to market to compete with them, Harry Reid thinks they should eventually be cut off:

A loophole in the Senate health care bill would let insurers place annual dollar limits on medical care for people struggling with costly illnesses such as cancer, prompting a rebuke from patient advocates.

The legislation that originally passed the Senate health committee last summer would have banned such limits, but a tweak to that provision weakened it in the bill now moving toward a Senate vote.

[Aramchek]

5. you've got your facts wrong. the loophole allows annual limits, but lifetime limits are disallowed

[MineralMan]

10. So, you die because the annual limit has been reached? How is

that an improvement? Tell me again how this current bill is going to help anyone, really?

[Aramchek]

20. millions will be able to get Healthcare for the first time.

millions will not be denied for pre-existing conditions.

[amandabeech]

29. No, but premiums for those without subsidies still will be too expensive,

particularly for older people who will pay 3X (roughly) what younger people will be asked to pay.

Too many people will be paying fines instead of getting care.

[MineralMan]

31. Yes. The ones who cannot afford insurance now will still

not be able to afford it. My current insurance costs me $720/mo. I'm keeping it by paying the premiums with a credit card until July, when I go on Medicare. At 64, I don't dare go six months uninsured.

[amandabeech]

34. I wish I were ten years older and in your place. n/t

[MineralMan]

39. Do not wish to be older. It is not worth the cost.

At 64, I'm ten years closer to the end of my time here. I'd take the ten back if I could. Of course, that's impossible, but...don't wish to be older.

[amandabeech]

40. Okay. You have a good point.

I sincerely wish that I could have the last ten years of my life back, too.

Let's just hope that I can afford some coverage or get a job that comes with group coverage between now and my 65th birthday.

[flyarm]

11. they are not my facts..i posted a link..read it damn it..it is all over the internet! eom

[Aramchek]

18. the loophole is about annual limits, not lifetime limits.

do some research and you will find that.

[MineralMan]

6. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.

Right now, we're getting all sorts of giveaways to the obstructive DINOS and the two others who might hold the key to the 60 votes. If we keep on, we may give away everything and have nothing but an ugly mess that does more harm than good for the public.

I'm certainly not encouraged by much of it right now, and I'm about to go on Medicare, so it doesn't really affect me at all.

I don't see the benefits here, and I doubt they'll come back in in conference. In reality, I think the thing will get worse in conference.

[Edweird]

30. We have already passed that milestone IMHO.

Kill the bill.

[Tippy]

7. Not a good idea.....at all....

This would be framed as a loss by Republicans...The HEALTH CARE debate would be over ...Republicans have done this time and time again...for 40 plus years..

[MineralMan]

9. Perhaps, but I think that attempt could be countered, if handled

properly and the Presidential bully pulpit used. I could be wrong, I'm sure, but I'm equally sure that the current proposal and what's likely to come out of conference may be worse than no HCR at all. I'm serious about that.

[seeinfweggos]

12. hen it will be another 15-20 years befor we have the discussion again

bad idea.

[MineralMan]

13. I'm not at all sure you are correct.

[seeinfweggos]

15. there is certainly no way there will be reform in an election year - when politicians

get even more cowardly than usual. so it won't happen next year

[Aramchek]

22. you don't understand Politics, then

[asjr]

14. I am of the persuasion that right now

we are being fed a pot of hogwash. They tell us one day what we are getting. Someone else tells us what we will not get regarding health care. Some people spread rumors; some deny the rumors. I don't know what to think. They are stringing it out until they HAVE TO put it off until next year. You know, they are just soo soo busy! Busy thinking up crap to tell us so they will not have to do a darn thing. I hope those blue dogs turn blue. That would be better than wearing a badge that says "asshole."

[MineralMan]

19. Replacing those blue dogs should be our #1 priority

in 2010. If we fail to do that, I believe we will lose our majorities in 2012. As many of them as possible need to go down in primaries. It's the only way we can send a message to the rest of them that things will not be allowed to go on as they have.

Sadly, I fear that fear will keep us from doing even that much. I'm going to try to do what I can, but I'm not even in an area where I can have much of an effect, since we don't have so many of them here.

I'm not optimistic, and I hate the current state of HCR. It's useless.

[asjr]

23. That is how I feel. I was so sure

after Obama was elected we would finally get something done. I failed to take into consideration the Senate and the House. Those bickering politicos seem to be constantly up to no good.

[rd_kent]

16. The current bill should be passed and then immediately amended to include full public option

[MineralMan]

21. If that's possible, that would be fine.

[LuvNewcastle]

24. Congress is afraid

that if they don't get something passed this year, then the teabaggers will come out over the Christmas break just like they did in the summer. We all know how much attention the media gave them then, and the bill lost some momentum as a result. Looks like we're stuck with what ever shitty bill Congress passes this year.

[mike_c]

25. I think you're right....

It's a cluster fuck. Unfortunately, the "win at any cost" crowd would rather gain a cluster fuck than "lose" a bad reform.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

26. I want it to go down in flames, now. BTW...this is coming from someone who has no

health insurance and hasn't seen a doctor in over 10 years...and 58 years old to boot.

[dysfunctional press]

35. maybe?

definitely.

[backscatter712]

36. FUCK NO!!!

You'll guarantee that we'll get a Republican majority in Congress in 2010, and that Obama will not be able to get a single slightly progressive thing done for his entire presidency.

Not to mention Congress won't touch health care for another 20 years.

[backscatter712]

37. If we get something passed now, it will actually be easier to legislate fixes later.

Once it becomes established that we can enact health care reform, even if it's weak and sucky, then Congress will be more inclined to look at incremental fixes a few years down the road.

If we stop now, kill the bill, it will guarantee that Congress will be so pissed of, frustrated, stuck, and politically damaged by the entire process that they'll refuse to touch health care for another generation.

[LiberalFighter]

38. All that would accomplish is creating a different mess albeit not that different.