How does 'starting over' with a HC bill produce anything better? Or even different?

[Richardo]

Same House, same Senate, same leadership, same President, same staff, same lobbyists, same media, same pundits, same stakeholders, same current system.

The only thing different is the time frame. And that works AGAINST anything better. Major spending bill in an election year? Wouldn't count on it.

So tell me, all you 'Kill Bills' - what does starting over get us?

[edhopper]

1. Start over by

beginning with Single Payer, and compromise from there.

[Raineyb]

18. Exactly! n/t

[jgraz]

19. Start with full, nationalized healthcare and compromise on Single Payer.

[grytpype]

2. Maybe in 20 years we could get another shot at it.

Maybe.

[UTUSN]

3. K&R #1 for totally agree!1 As for starting with Single Payer & compromising from there, uh

Everybody's positions are already hashed and re-hashed. Talk about fatigue, the country would revolt.

[natrat]

4. doesn't reconcilliation require 51 instead of 60 votes?

beyond that the current bill with a mandate and no cost control seems immoral and possibly unconstitutional, so if this is just some dlc bs op trolling go fuck yourself, if not apologies

[Richardo]

6. There has to something to reconcile first, right?

Kill the Senate bill, and presto, no reconciliation.

Oh and this isn't dlc bs op trolling so go fuck YOURself.

[natrat]

11. thanks :)

[Umbral]

5. There's certainly no guarantees. It would turn next years election into a referendum on the issue

It's better to put it to the people than endure a Democratic blood bath over mandates.

[freddie mertz]

7. That is what Dr. Dean recommends.

It makes sense to me to submit the legislation in parts, using reconciliation for what we can, the more standard 60-vote mode for the more consensus-y stuff.

Main thing is to try and de-fang the obstructionists, and maybe, finally, get some leadership from the president.

[Laelth]

8. The current system is unsustainable, and everyone knows it.

Change will come, eventually, UNLESS we pass this disastrous bill.

California will probably pass single-payer on its own in 2011. All they need is a Democratic Governor. The legislature has already passed the bill. Schwarzenegger vetoed it. Once California has single-payer, most (if not all) states will follow suit.

It's likely that if we pass a new law now, the new law will preempt single-payer, i.e. the Federal law will preempt state law and prevent states from enacting a single-payer system.

THIS is what the health insurance companies fear. THIS is what brought them to the bargaining table. THIS is why they are not fighting Obama's tepid reforms, and THIS is why it is extremely important that we do not pass any health insurance reform bill this year.

Let's not settle for a bail-out of the health insurance industry. Let's insist on the eradication of it. In all likelihood, California will lead the way in 2011 ... if we can just give them time.

That's how. Canada got its single-payer system one province at a time. That seems to be the way it will have to happen in the U.S.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Richardo]

9. Best answer I've heard yet.

:patriot:

Although it would take a number of pain- and suffering-filled years for those without coverage to finally be covered by their state's single payer system.

[Laelth]

14. It would take time, yes.

But that's better than passing a bill that will prevent any state from enacting a single-payer system.

:toast:

:dem:

-Laelth

[TwilightGardener]

10. It won't get us anywhere. Even if we START from single-payer and

try to work out a public option, the results will be the same, because all of these Senators are now on record as to what they will and won't support. They've already shown their cards, so where do we go from there?

[harun]

12. No one is saying start over, they are just saying the Senate bill is crap.

House bill is fine.

[Richardo]

13. LOTS of people are saying start over.

And the Stupak Amendment in the House Bill caused much wailing and gnashing of teeth, and for good reason.

[Orsino]

15. Starting over would mean accepting Congress' right-wing framing...

...in which single-payer is a pipe dream, and any "public option" an unnecessary hood ornament to be given up.

And the bill that would result would be even more of a corporate, for-profit, non-solution.

[natrat]

16. perhaps but the current bill is unacceptable,period.

[PassingFair]

17. More informed populace. More people demanding REAL reform.

THAT'S how.