If you don't have serious misgivings about this bill, you're not being honest.

[rucky]

If you don't see any redeeming value of this bill, you're not being honest.

If you're struggling to weigh the net benefits versus the harm of this bill, you have my respect - no matter what conclusions you've drawn.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I DO have misgivings about this bill...

But I also see good things in it.

I'm watching and waiting to see what becomes of it as it moves among the groups that will vote on it.

I think it has a good chance of eventually becoming something really good for all of us.

I hope...

[Hekate]

18. +1. I have serious reservations, yet am waiting until it's done to make my judgment.

There's still a ways to go.

Hekate

[treestar]

2. Not agreeing with you is "dishonest."

Got it.

[ZombieHorde]

16. I don't think that is a fair assessment of the OP.

Can you really not think of a single likable quality concerning the HCR bill?

Raising income level for medicaid is likable. How many DUers are against that?

Removing the annual benefit cap is likable. How many DUers are against that?

[cliffordu]

3. If you haven't read the bill,

you have no business telling the rest of us what to believe.


What part - And please cite the parts exactly, that you find so odious.

Not the fucking talking heads talking points, not the rumor and innuendo, not the "well it says this......whatever...paraphrase.


Just give me the goods and I'll support you.

[rucky]

12. I've read several versions. Is this a test?

There's the subsidies & that's good. There's the cap on out-of-pocket, cap on premiums, the clinics & no copay for preventive care, can't be denied or dropped for being sick.

There's the mandate without public option or cost controls - not so good. There's no floor - only a ceiling. There are no assurances that allow us to test and see if our premiums will go up or not or by how much. It's largely a leap of faith that because we're all mandated to buy in, an asprin won't cost $100 bucks anymore. I don't think you can just leave that stuff to the "free market".

On balance, I say pass it and really really fix it - really because the needs to the sick and destitute will be addressed better than the status quo. That's really the only thing that slightly tips the scales for me.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. This is the most significant piece of progressive legislation since Johnson...

And, yes, it is as deeply flawed as any other piece of legislation was at its birth.

The discussion should be about how to make it better, about what the next battle should be.

[Cleita]

5. I have serious misgivings about this bill,

but I sometimes see the future, not an ability that I want, but I have it usually about things I don't want to know.

Flame away!

[rocktivity]

6. This bill does next to nothing to address the reasons why reform was needed in the first place.

With no public option to act as a check and balance against for-profit healthcare gone wild, the bill accomplishes nothing in the long run.


rocktivity

[Skittles]

8. and that is not even a "misgiving"

it's a serious, deep flaw :thumbsdown:

[glitch]

17. +you both

Some say misgiving, we say serious, deep flaw. Indeed, fatal.

[grantcart]

7. Agreed 100% my friend you have it exactly right

and let me add this:

If you condemn supporters of the bill automatically you have become cynical and boring.

If you condemn critics of the bill automatically you are patronizing and unsufferable.


I am proud to say that over the last few days I have had drawn out battles with both.

[WeDidIt]

9. I think if Progressives took al the anger they have been expressing over this bill

and directed it towards getting more Progressives in Congress, especially the Senate, that the framework of this bill could be dramatically enhanced in 2011, then in 2013 after Obama gets re-elected.

[lapfog_1]

10. Of course...

there are a number of good things in the bill. I currently have no health insurance, and a pre-existing condition that makes purchasing health insurance for me impossible.

I would be one of the few that might benefit from this bill. I say might because I suspect, the way things are worded, that I STILL won't be able to afford insurance, even after 2014, even with the subsidies.

So I should be all for it, even if I think that it's only a small chance that it will help me.

But I also see the bad in it, the enormous cost, the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the insurance companies, for what might be minimal improvements, the complexity that makes even discussing the aspects of this bill difficult, even for reasonably intelligent people, and, finally, the political cost of having to give in to assholes like Lieberman and Nelson, and the very real possibility that Democratic support in the mid-terms will be less than in 2008. I fear a republican return to power... whereas only a short 6 months ago, some pundits were calling the Republicans a regional party and a permanent minority.
I don't hear that kind of language anymore, what I hear now is "will the Dems retain the majority in the House?" and "how will anything else get done without 60 votes in the Senate starting in 2011."

So yeah, it's difficult. But I believe the bad outweighs the good.

[walldude]

11. My two big problems are this:

A Medicare buy in for all is the perfect solution yet it's not even an option.

And two, the bill is not finished yet. They aren't done gutting. And while people seem to be betting that the bill will improve when combined with the house bill I have the feeling that the bill will continue on the same downward spiral it has. Nothing any Democrat has done is convincing me otherwise.

[alfredo]

13. It's rare that a good bill goes into the Senate without it

turning to shit. Still, some good thing came out of it, and it is up to us to exert pressure to make it better as time goes on.

If you get all pissed that we didn't get everything we wanted, get over it and get back to work pushing the Dems to expand protections and coverage.

Never watch the Senate in action, it will drive you crazy. I wasn't always a grizzled arthritic old man. At one time I was young, strong and pretty, but that was before CSPAN. My degradation in body spirit and mind must have been caused by watching the Senate in action. It just sucked the life out of me.


You have been warned.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

14. It's possible to have misgivings about the bill and still support it.

No, it isn't great, but throwing it out the window is just going to set this back another decade. I'd rather work from an imperfect foundation than no foundation at all.

[liberalmuse]

15. Oh I do.

But there are some things I like in the bill. Insurance companies profits will be regulated to ensure 85% is put back into use for patient care, getting rid of lifetime caps, not discriminating against those with pre-existing conditions (children will be covered right away), and according to Franken, 31 million more people will be covered who do not have coverage now. I like that insurance companies will be required to provide preventative exams for free. I don't like that adults have to wait until 2014 until they are eligible with a pre-existing condition. I don't like anything that uses women as pawns to get the conservo-Dems on board - women should have full coverage for abortion, elective or not. Anyway, I'm sure I got some of the things mixed up, but I'm close. And I'm honest enough to not bury my head and admit there are good things about this bill. All or nothing usually gets you nothing.

[EFerrari]

19. Further enshrining insurance companies is a move in the wrong direction.

Allowing abortion access to be a bargaining chip is another move in the wrong direction.

Since this thing is going to become law, I hope it does some good for somebody besides insurance CEOs and Big Pharma.

That's about as well as I can do right now. :(

[phasma ex machina]

20. Only cognitive dissonance yields net benefits. nt