Tom Harkin: The Senate's "Starter Home" Health Reform

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

Read the whole thing here.

"Last week, when Senate Democrats passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the right wing's quest to kill President Obama's No. 1 domestic priority ended. Santa has delivered a lump of coal to Senator Jim DeMint, who gleefully predicted that defeat of health reform "will be Waterloo; it will break him."

Progressives in the Senate have reached a momentous crossroads, just as our predecessors did in 1935, when they passed the Social Security Act, and in 1965, when they passed the Medicare Act. Both of those bills were giant steps forward for the health and economic security of the American people. Both were bitterly opposed by conservatives, who waged strident campaigns of fear and loathing, warning that the bills would lead to "socialism."

Make no mistake, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a profoundly progressive bill. As Ezra Klein wrote in the Washington Post, "The bill is the most important social policy achievement since the Great Society." It will usher in three truly historic reforms.

~snip~

By passing this legislation, we will achieve a progressive prize that has eluded Congresses and Presidents going back to Teddy Roosevelt. And we now know why those earlier efforts failed: Because the special interests defending the broken - but highly profitable - status quo are extraordinarily powerful. At long last, we are going to break their stranglehold.

To be sure, the path to securing 60 votes was paved with painful compromises. That's also the way our predecessors were able to get the votes to pass Social Security and Medicare, both of which had big gaps in coverage when they were first enacted. They passed bills that were less than a full loaf, and then they came back for more in later years.

[grantcart]

1. The whole article is very good

Senator Kerry also made a very good point in his speech.

He told the story how Senator Kennedy would fight and fight for an increase in the minimum wage and eventually made the Republicans compromise and pass one.

The next day he entered a new bill to increase it again, much to the chagrin of Republican legislators.

The day after this is passed we begin looking for the upmarket trade up.

[TheKentuckian]

2. A lean-to built on quicksand, I sez but your mileage may

A starter house? I don't think so, this isn't even a nice tent. Its got just a single wall, a partial roof, and a floor built without a foundation.

This turkey ain't even a used singlewide and it comes at the same cost as a McMansion in an upscale neighborhood.

Sorry Tom, I love you and appreciate you but you're putting on a brave face and selling yourself as much as your trying to sell us. I saw the look in that man's face when this compromised compromise came down and Sander's too. The disappointment and anger were palatable and now they've been put in a corner and are just scrambling to gather what few crumbs they can to provide the people a little lube for the fucking we have to take.

[chimpymustgo]

4. "A lean-to built on quicksand", where we're forced into sharecropping for the overlords.

KILL the BILL.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

16. Melodramatic Much?

Sharecropping for the overlords? Oh me, Oh my!

[chimpymustgo]

18. Stupid Much?

Wake up, cheerleaders!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

22. Oooo, such a comeback

Stupid much?! Wow, you're a real fucking Noel Coward, you are. Stupid Much? That's a real zinger.

Hey, Chimpymustgo, the Moron Factory just called that they want you back! Har Har Har!

Thank you. I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitresses.

[Hello_Kitty]

3. We're the wealthiest country in the world. We can do better than a starter home. eom

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

23. Sure we can...

But until we get 60 votes in the Senate, we're not going to get it.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. One of my Senators sent out an email this week

that claimed he was both celebrating the passing of the bill and mourning for the horrible aspects of the bill. Then he asked for money. All of his offices are closed, and the mail boxes are at capacity. Yet he asked for money. While on vacation. Most of this state had modest Christmas this year. 'I hate the bill, but voted for it, I'm on vacation with my family, please donate to me." Voice mail full.
So they are all writing like mad. Harkin sells it better than my guy that is for sure. But as Obama said during the campaign, you do not have to hard sell good things, people want them.

[burning rain]

6. I'm afraid the good senator is peddling the same old false comparisons.

To be sure, the path to securing 60 votes was paved with painful compromises. That's also the way our predecessors were able to get the votes to pass Social Security and Medicare, both of which had big gaps in coverage when they were first enacted.

Social Security and Medicare began with solid foundations from a progressive point of view, as public programs. The Senate health care bill by contrast has a rotten crony capitalist foundation, forcing Americans to buy private health insurance--as though Social Security had forced Americans to invest in the stock market, and Medicare had required old folks to buy private health insurance.

[freddie mertz]

7. And THAT is something they always manage NOT to address.

I feel sorry for Tom Harkin, a decent man and a longtime fighter, having to carry water for this POS bill.

[burning rain]

8. It's like they think we're so daft....

we'll say, "Ah yes! Social Security and Medicare are big deals, and health care reform's a big deal, so health care reform's like Social Security and Medicare!" and go off gibbering in blissful stupidity like Baby Huey.

[freddie mertz]

9. Except current HCR is a private mandate, not a public plan.

Maybe if the courts declare it unconstitutional, maybe THEN we can get the medicaid/medicare expansion that would make the most sense.

[SpartanDem]

14. So I take it that you believe that similar health care systems

like those in the Netherlands, Switzerland are immoral because they don't provide health care through public programs? As for the bill not having a progressive foundation I'd say a massive increase in government regulation and oversight of private industry is a progressive foundation

[burning rain]

15. I'd say our system will continue to be immoral under the Senate bill...

because other than for preventive care, which has to be covered without cost-sharing, many Americans won't be able to afford to use their coverage due to prohibitively high out-of-pocket expenses, and at the same time they'll be forced to keep insurance company execs in their hobbies of collecting Rolls Royces and vacation homes. If it regulated health insurance as harshly as water utilities, I'd be satisfied without a public option, but that's not the case. In any event, it's cheap and fatuous for Harkin to compare public programs administered with thrift, care, and reasonable--not extravagant--compensation for who those administer them, with profiteering private insurance.

Somewhat less immoral than the status quo, but still plenty immoral.

[SpartanDem]

25. The fact is this bill will help the vast majority of people

people like Paul Krugman, Ezra Klein and Nate Silver who have very good grasp of the numbers have backed this up constantly. Now could it better and help more people absolutely, but I think this is a much bigger step than the bills detractor realize.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/numerical-notes-on-health-care-reform/

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/health-insurance-and-family-budget.html

[burning rain]

27. It will be an unambiguous boon to poor people who get Medicaid...

and to middle class people with catastrophic illnesses who avoid bankruptcy thanks to caps on annual out-of-pocket costs and bans on annual and lifetime costs, but there will be a large chunk of middle-class folks with middling health care needs who just get gouged more. And of course the moneyed health care interests will make out like bandits.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

10. I trust Harkin, a starter home will do for now. We just have to do all we can to make a mansion.

[TheKentuckian]

11. Medicare and SS were improved more by expanding access than tons of structural changes

The structural adaptations are damn near as rare as new efforts and as likely to be jacked up (see Medicare part D) as to actually improve the program.

Our "house" isn't suitable or desirable for expansion. Its not just a simple add a public option sometime and it'll be peaches and cream deal here.

If this point is going to be pushed then it requires people to pitch what is good in HOW the bill works not WHAT it is supposed to do. It is a propaganda tactic to tell me about expanding something to make it desirable one day and then justifying it on the basis of what it supposed to do, folks. I could get out in front of supporting the House bill (minus Stupak) because it actually has structures to build off of. This Senate/Baucus mess will require wholesale changes in how it works as much as expansion and that makes it a pretty crummy effort.

So, come on, if we're going to go down this "starter house" path then people need to start finding things about this turkey that are well designed to address the massive problems in our health care system.

[Clio the Leo]

12. The GOP would not have stayed until Christmas to fight "crap"...

.... I am rather pleased.

[TheKentuckian]

13. Sure they would they've got absolutely nothing

All they do is lie and grandstand. Have we already forgotten the nonsense that was the gang of six. It is pretty conclusive that they can actually write a bill, slow walk it to death, lie their asses off about it, and then vote lockstep against it.

Just as an example, what is in this bill that Snowe can't stomach now? Fucking nothing, they are just full of shit. She'd be right back if Sanders or someone dropped off, which is why the left can be held. They know they will be cut off from the herd and politically murdered if they force that pass.

[Cha]

17. Well Senator Harkin

We're gonna see aren't we?

[Armstead]

19. I love Tom Harkin -- But on this I have to say "It's a house built on mud"

Not much of a foundation.

I think Tom Harkin -- who I really do respect and admire -- is in for a rude awakening on this one.

[yurbud]

21. privatizing government functions inevitably lead to overpriced service and corruption

In the case of health care, they are skipping the decent government program and going straight to the corruption machine.

[jgraz]

20. Too bad the Senate signed us up for an ARM.

Expect foreclosure sometime in 2010.

[natrat]

24. something's happening here , what it is aint exactly clear

By: Jon Walker Wednesday December 30, 2009 3:30 pm


Sen. Tom Harkin continues to refer to the Senate health reform bill as a “starter home” in a new entry on the Huffington Post.

Instead of that “partial loaf” analogy, I like to think of this bill as like a starter home. It is not the mansion of our dreams. But it has a solid foundation, giving every American access to quality, affordable coverage. It has an excellent, protective roof, which will shelter Americans from the worst abuses of health insurance companies. And this starter home has plenty of room for additions and improvements.

This bill has a terrible foundation. It is a starter home built with the equivalent of toxic drywall, lead paint, a poorly mixed cement foundation, and faulty electric wiring.

The bill is built on the extremely wasteful and inefficient private insurance system and contains one of the biggest rollbacks in decades of women’s reproductive rights. It, in effect, gives a permanent exclusivity to expensive biologics, and still denies Americans the ability to buy cheaper drugs from overseas. It has insufficient regulations and leaves the regulator enforcement purely up to the states, which have a poor track record enforcing the current regulations on their books. Regulation without enforcement is worthless. It throws good money after bad without fixing the underlying problems. The cost of the insurance will be too high and the quality of the insurance is too low. Funneling billions of dollars and forcing millions of Americans to buy a product that is frankly a terrible bargain is not a good foundation to build on. It is only a good foundation for the private insurance companies because it further enriches and entrenches them. Rewarding the failure of the private health insurance system with even more money and more customers is not how you want to build your “starter home.”

Harkin is definitely correct when he says, “a starter home has plenty of room for additions and improvements.” There are many, many, many problems with this bill that need to be corrected. Unfortunately, no one is going to want to put additions on a terribly built home, and no one is going to want to rehire the same contractor that so completely botched the construction of the home to build the addition. I would love it if this were a smaller home, but built with a sturdy foundation.

In reality, what we have is a massive corporate giveaway that will serve to discredit the “progressive” principles that Harkin falsely claims this thing is built on. Teddy Roosevelt was the progressive trust buster. It makes a mockery of the term “progressive” to claim a plan to force Americans to buy expensive, low-quality goods from insurance companies exempt form anti-trust laws (laws that Roosevelt championed) and subsidized with taxpayer money is in anyway “progressive.”


http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/30/dear-sen-harkin-these-are-terrible-materials-for-building-a-starter-home/

[Armstead]

26. Deserves its own thread

[LibDemAlways]

28. Excellent rebuttal. This is a "starter home" no one will want to be forced to pay

for. When people go house shopping they generally want the nicest home in the best location they can possibly afford. This is a mold-infested tear down in a crime-ridden neighborhood - the criminals being the ins. co. crooks in cahoots with the on-the-take congressional crooks out to rip off the public. They haven't even tried to do a cosmetic fix up to hide the flaws - and the purchase is mandatory. Harkin is delusional if he thinks the American public is going to willingly go along with this.

[natrat]

29. what is going to happen? they pass this, dems are voted out,thugs come back

like the rest of the junk from the last 10 years nothing gets reversed. Not to be overly pessimistic but if this passes americans have no choice but to willingly go along with it, just like they have with everything else these crooks have thrown at us.

[LibDemAlways]

30. I can see many people actually drawing a line in the sand with this one and

refusing to buy the coverage. When the public outcry becomes great enough the r's will step in and promise to repeal the thing - thereby assuring themselves a return to power. If a repuke President and Congress remove or significantly dismantle the mandate, the Dems will occupy the political wilderness for a long time to come. They are really shooting themselves in the foot. When the American people get wind of it, there will be political hell to pay.