They have got us by the balls. Pardon my language.

[Horse with no Name]

Everyone NEEDS healthcare.
Not everyone has health insurance which is needed to procure healthcare.
That needs to change.
As someone who is NOT entrenched middle class--but simply hanging on by a thread--I WANT everyone to have healthcare.
Even if I have to continue to pay the bloated rates that I pay now.
However, since my health plan is considered "cadillac", I will be taxed to help pay for those with less than I do.
I don't mind that, however, at what point do I become someone that someone else has to pay for because I couldn't keep my toehold on the middle class?
Do the lawmakers NOT see the fragility of this scheme?
I know I am not the only one in the "middle class" who is barely hanging on.

[pnwmom]

1. You're not, Horse. That's why the next step, after this thing is passed,

is to start working on cost-reducing, deficit reducing bills that can be passed with only 51 votes through the reconciliation process. But the regulatory structure needs 60 votes to pass, and time's running out.

[Horse with no Name]

3. the cost reducing is what I am afraid of

I don't want to pay these bloated rates for less coverage.
I already have to fight to see specialists and to take medications that aren't deemed necessary by the insurance company but that my doctor finds necessary for my health.
I say get it right FIRST and then thrust it upon us.
This process will kill as many people as the current process already does.

[pnwmom]

9. For example, approving drug reimportation through Canada,

or other similar measures.

Or expanding Medicare to younger age groups.

Or adding a public option.

All of these things could still be done through the reconciliation process, as long as they could be done in the context of deficit reduction.

The regulatory parts of the health care reform bill (such as banning preexisting conditions, etc.) have to be done in the usual way, and that means they would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

[shawcomm]

8. Yep

That's what some people don't understand. With all the rightwingtards in Congress, and all the special interests floating around, a perfect health care bill probably couldn't happen. The best we can hope for is to get our foot in the door, then tweak the shit out of it. So at first we get a health insurance bill, and morph it into something useful. It will never be perfect, but if we can push our Congressmen to adjust it once it's in place, we can make it better.

[pnwmom]

10. And once the issue is down to MONEY only, and how to reduce costs,

(as opposed to things like abortion, and illegal immigrants, and all the other hot button items that are involved in the current bill) it will be harder for Rethugs to vote against cost-saving measures.

[natrat]

16. given the horrid nature of politicians , you honestly think they would improve anything? i don't

[TheKentuckian]

18. Problem is all of that is crap too. Loose regs with no enforcement

are pretty worthless. I'll play along if we can at least get national exchanges, be rid of this benefit killing "Tax", and the anti-trust removed. That might be a start but the Senate bill is worse than the status quo. Giving people insurance with a heavy bill that they can't afford to use is unholy dangerous for risk of backlash and making a bad situation worse.

This ain't SS or medicare as it is structurally a complete mess that is built completely off of the current failed system. Fix means reform not just budgetary fixes and expansion in this case. You can't throw some sticks on a pit of quicksand and call it a starter house, not if you're going to have to live in it for a while, which we are no matter how many Pollyanna's pretend we'll get this up to workable anytime soon and by soon I'm talking 20 years or more.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. if they taxed the insurance companies

a windfall tax on insurance companies and tax the top 2% (the filthy rich) then we can start funding our new health system.

[clear eye]

4. Yes, but even if they just allowed the states to create their own public programs

we could be hopeful.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. yes state healthcare systems would be great

we are not going to let it rest

[clear eye]

12. I hope everyone who feels as we do are calling their House representatives.

After the bill is passed it won't be revisited until at least 2015 when the problems w/ the program passed become evident in real life.

I guess I'm less optimistic than you about getting a chance to tweak or overhaul a program once passed. I've heard that song before, and the WH wants the Senate version period, for reasons that escape me. If passed, in 5 years it will sink the Democratic Party. The out-of-control costs will be laid at the feet of Democratic "big gov't" tendencies, not the corporate influence where it really came from. Public plans will be framed as worsening the problem.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

17. it would appear that Democrats have adopted McCain's policy

[clear eye]

5. This lack of controls over premiums and the disincentive on good plans

is one of the major reasons people are asking their House representatives to stand firm in negotiations for the House version on cost control and funding.

[omega minimo]

6. Now cough

:evilgrin::hi:

[Horse with no Name]

7. LOL

[cutlassmama]

15. Yep. They've got all the money in the world for bullshit wars, but not healthcare

[dysfunctional press]

13. an organized mob of millions of people surrounding the capitol would get their attention.

but- that isn't likely to happen.

although it would certainly make for an interesting state of the union speech.
too bad they still don't have a date set- wouldn't want to give people time to plan and execute a protest march.

[ddeclue]

14. Horse with No Health Insurance?

:shrug: