There is a reason that Congressman Grayson has remained a supporter of the current health bill

[ProSense]

If health care reform could be contained in a four-page bill, they would have passed it instead of SCHIP after the Clinton bill failed.

There is a reason Congressman Grayson supports the current bill.

What is going to control prescription drug costs that are going up under Medicare?

What about the age rating and other discriminatory practices built into the system?

The issues plaguing the system will not be addressed without comprehensive Reform.

Hacker...explained that Medicare was not designed “to provide health security to a younger than 65 population.” “There are a lot of holes in the Medicare program that should be fixed but which aren’t going to be fixed immediately. One of the important reasons to have a separate insurance plan is to make sure you’re providing the kind of good coverage that you know younger Americans need,” Hacker said.

link

Medicare has a 20 percent uncapped coinsurance while the Senate caps out of pocket expenses for indiduals at $5,950 and for families at $11,950.

What about dental coverage, which Medicare doesn't cover, but is usual offered in conjuction with private plans?

[NJmaverick]

1. Yes Grayson supports the bill because he is fighting for us, the American people

[ProSense]

2. It's strange that no one is calling on him to pull his support of the legislation.

Much of the opposition is built on grandstanding and simplistic thinking.

[Mithreal]

10. Actually doing some of that simplistic thinking yourself

When the final bill is said and done, my representative should do what is best for the majority of his or her constituents.

Until that time, we need to fight for the best final bill possible.

I would say more, but what's the point. I have tried to understand where all you folks that seem to be so infatuated with settling and selling us on better than nothing are coming from. If I felt like you all tried to respect the opinions of those you speak so casually of, half as much as I tried to understand your position I think I would see some evidence but I rarely do. Instead we get acronyms and pleas to sell out.

If you can't persuade people in your own party good luck persuading others. Someone is going to have to sell compromise.

[ProSense]

13. "When the final bill is said and done,

my representative should do what is best for the majority of his or her constituents...Until that time, we need to fight for the best final bill possible."


Does that including voting to kill the final bill?

[Mithreal]

16. That is where I part company with some

I have very mixed feelings about that. Will any of these and more be in the final: Sander's community clinics, mandates without a public option, reducing women's privacy and health related issues?

If you push folks on what they consider to be a bill-killer, you are going to find some disagreements, no?

I stand by my statement.

[slipslidingaway]

3. You know what Hacker and EPI unveiled in early 2007 is dramatically

different from what is currently being proposed.

Bait and switch: How the “public option” was sold

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/20/bait-and-switch-how-the-%E2%80%9Cpublic-option%E2%80%9D-was-sold/


"...Until last year, Hacker and his allies were not the least bit shy about highlighting the enormous size of Hacker’s proposed public program. For example, in his 2001 paper Hacker stated:

pproximately 50 to 70 percent of the non-elderly population would be enrolled in Medicare Plus…. Put more simply, the plan would be very large…. ritics will resurface whatever the size of the public plan. But this is an area where an intuitive and widely held notion – that displacement of employment-based coverage should be avoided at all costs – is fundamentally at odds with good public policy. A large public plan should be embraced, not avoided. It is, in fact, key to fulfilling the goals of this proposal. (page 17)

In his 2007 paper, Hacker stated:

For millions of Americans who are now uninsured or lack … affordable work place coverage, the Health Care for America Plan would be an extremely attractive option. Through it, roughly half of non-elderly Americans would have access to a good public insurance plan…. A single national insurance pool covering nearly half the population would create huge administrative efficiencies. (page 5)..."

[ProSense]

5. This is 2010, and Hacker supports reform n/t

[slipslidingaway]

4. knr nt

[ProSense]

6. Thanks. No comment about Grayson? n/t

[ProSense]

7. No comments? n/t

[harun]

8. The Senate bill is Health Insurance Reform.

[ProSense]

9. Thanks for your response. n/t

[Mithreal]

11. I think you are representing Grayson's position poorly.

[ProSense]

14. Something tells me that Grayson

supports the President's Proposal

[Mithreal]

18. I'll take nuanced Grayson any day over misrepresentation.

I am not saying you are lying, do you get that?

Are you capable of understanding nuance and complexity of his position? I know I sound offensive, but still.

[ProSense]

19. "Are you capable of understanding nuance and complexity of his position?" Are

you capable of understanding that I think kill the bill is a bullshit position?

Now, if you don't mind, I will continue to criticize anyone who advocates that.

Congressman Grayson is not.

[Mithreal]

20. Alright, but many of your posts lean toward sounding like something else.

[scheming daemons]

12. Grayson = good progressive, Kucinich = bad progressive

..

[Edweird]

15. So, being against Medicare is 'progressive', now? Really?

I love this: "to make sure you’re providing the kind of good coverage that you know younger Americans need".

That is fucked on so many levels.

[ProSense]

17. Who's against Medicare? n/t

[TomCADem]

21. K & R!

[Hekate]

22. KnR.

:kick: