Mitch McConnell wants to start over, on top priorities for health reform: First, bipartisanship

[ProSense]

SEN. McCONNELL: Well, what we really need to do is start over. I mean, I--the message in Massachusetts was absolutely clear. The exit polls that I looked at said 48 percent of the people in Massachusetts said they voted for the new senator over health care. Only 5 percent mentioned any other issue. The American people had a victory in Massachusetts, and they were sending us the message "stop and start over."

The first thing we ought to do is go back to what the president said in 2007, let's have the C-SPAN cameras in the room. Number two, let's concentrate on cost, which is what the American people would like us to address. And a good place to start there is with junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals, which were not even a part of the proposal. Absolutely, it's time to start over and go step-by-step to address the issue that the American people thought we...

MR. GREGORY: So let me just be clear. There is not one Republican that would vote for any Democratic healthcare reform initiative that's out there now?

SEN. McCONNELL: Well, this comprehensive bill? Of course not. You know, the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to it.

MR. GREGORY: So it sounds like...

SEN. McCONNELL: What we need to do...

MR. GREGORY: ...the party of no charge is well deserved.

SEN. McCONNELL: No, no. What I said we need to do--I just said it. We need to, we need to stop and start over and go step-by-step...


<...>

MR. GREGORY: So tick off the top three points of the Republican plan for, for healthcare reform.

SEN. McCONNELL: First, you do have to do it on a bipartisan basis. You put the C-SPAN cameras in the room, as the president said. You start with junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals, interstate competition among insurance companies, and many of my members would be looking--would be willing to look at equalizing the tax code. Right no w if you're a corporation and you provide insurance for your employees, you get to deduct it on your corporate tax return. But if you're an individual on the individual market, you don't. Step-by-step to work on the cost problem. That's what Republicans are willing to do.

MR. GREGORY: Is universal coverage a priority?

SEN. McCONNELL: Expanding coverage is a good idea. But even under this $2.5 trillion monstrosity, they still didn't end up covering everybody. That is easier said than done. But if you equalize the tax code, you make it more possible for more people who are currently uninsured to, to purchase insurance. Right now they have no tax incentive to do it. And a lot of young people look at the situation, say, "Gee, I'm going to live forever, why should I buy it?"

MR. GREGORY: Is healthcare reform dead?

SEN. McCONNELL: This particular bill deserves to be stopped. What we need to do is start over and get it right.

more

[donco6]

1. So, if I can interpret from that gobbledygook -

Step one is eliminate malpractice lawsuits

Step two is allow insurance companies to become too big to fail by letting them become interstate

Step three is allow individuals to deduct the cost of health care premiums.

Yes, no?

edit: spelling

[hollowdweller]

5. Please explain? I watched that and don't get it.

OK in the last 20 years or so while the GOP was in control the whole malpractice reform thing has always been an issue. I know some stuff like that has been passed, especially at the state level but when it passed in my state rates did not appreciably go down so I was left wondering if they mean they just want to totally eliminate the right for people to sue?

I mean of the people that I know that have actually been the victims of malpractice, very few have sued and most let it pass as an honest mistake.

So if the GOP wanted this and felt it was an issue why didn't they pass it? And Frist was a doctore even.

What I got out of it was that the GOP doesn't want to give Obama any sort of legislative win.

The tragedy is the Democrats could very easily go back to the drawing board, come up with a bill that simply says:

No insurance company can deny a person for a preexisting condition

No insurance company can terminate coverage once it's started for any reason other than nonpayment of premiums.

Put a cap on premiums or a subsidy for low wage earners.

Allows reimportation of pharmaceuticals.

No yearly limit on coverage.

Most people would be for all those things. They could force the GOP to vote against them and win in 2010.

[donco6]

6. Yes, they did a study in TX on malpractice.

It found the effect of putting a cap on lawsuits would have neglible effect on health care costs. But they keep banging that drum on and on.

I like your ideas. I could even support that bill. The current one just guarantees a permanent revenue stream for health insurance corps, who are now PEOPLE by the way. They can buy any politician they want from now until forever.

[elifino]

14. I could vote for this.

Thanks

[JamesA1102]

13. You nailed it! nt

[napi21]

2. DAMN LIAR! Those committee conferences WERE on CSPAN!

I KNOW! I WATCHED THEM!!!! They also were bipartisan! No, not EVERY Pus idea was adopted, but neither was EVERY Dem idea!

[jwirr]

3. More stalling and obstructionism.

[flpoljunkie]

4. R's want HSA's sold across state lines and no malpractice lawsuits--Corporate America's 'wet dream.'

Remember what happened to credit cards when they did this?

Health Savings Accounts are already tax deductible, line 25 of 1040, and medical malpractice tort reform would have a negligible effect on healthcare costs--1.5% at the most.

[hollowdweller]

9. I hear you.

So why is it that Obama doesn't have anybody out there shooting down these ideas on every news show?

I mean in the run up to Iraq admin officials on every news show on 2 or 3 pages of the paper were appearing, giving speeches all dissing the opposition and repeating the same talking points.

Seems like Obama is much less adept at controlling the news cycle than the Clinton admin was.

[Jennicut]

12. Uh, Clinton was very, very poor at it for the first two years of his Presidency.

He brought in Dick Morris, the human slime, who did start to turn that around. Of course, Clinton had help from an over reaching Gingrich.

[Juche]

7. This pisses me off

In between this an Boehner the metaphor of politics between the dems and repubs being an abusive relationship is well deserved. Everything has to revolve around one party, and the other one is expected to bend over backwards whenever told to.




SEN. McCONNELL: First, you do have to do it on a bipartisan basis. You put the C-SPAN cameras in the room, as the president said. You start with junk lawsuits against doctors and hospitals, interstate competition among insurance companies, and many of my members would be looking--would be willing to look at equalizing the tax code. Right no w if you're a corporation and you provide insurance for your employees, you get to deduct it on your corporate tax return. But if you're an individual on the individual market, you don't. Step-by-step to work on the cost problem. That's what Republicans are willing to do.





Translation: Do everything we want. We want tax cuts and elimination of consumer protections.

Enraging. The dems compromised to hell and back and got nothing in exchange for it. The GOP compromises nothing and now wants 'bipartisanship' which is code for more dem compromises.

[pansypoo53219]

8. their view of bipartisanship is

the democrats to keep going right towards them.

GTFO with Republikkklan 'bipartisanship.'.

[hollowdweller]

10. You hit the nail on the head right there.

The dems need to pick one or two issues on health care, simple ones that make sense to the working folks but that the GOP will shoot down because of their corporate love. Put them up for a floor vote and then attack the GOP.

Obama thinks he has to kiss GOP ass to be bipartisan. I remember Reagan continually attacking liberals and congress and yet he compromised with congress. Obama needs to start attacking the conservative ideology and their proposals based on fact and maybe that would get their attention.

Problem is he has delayed doing so to the point that people may not listen to him.

[harun]

16. Only thing McConnell would be for is limiting lawsuits on rich doctors. If the bill had

anything in it besides that and maybe lowering taxes on the rich then every Puke would jump ship. Laughable.

[Lifelong Protester]

11. First off, I'd like them to quit waving the 'bloody shirt' of

bipartisanship everytime the GOP doesn't get its way.

Dems, we need to get a handle on getting the language right if we are to govern. Many folks and threads here have been devoted to the idea of re-framing.

Quit letting the GOP define the terms. Period.

[TwilightGardener]

15. "Starting over" = stalling until it dissolves and then GOPers can crow about the failure.

If any Dems, and Obama, take this bait, they're plenty stupid.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

21. Yep.

[johan helge]

17. That is a good sign

McConnell probably expects that the Dems will get something done, and he also expects that this will be considered a victory for the Dems, and that health reform will make the Dems more popular.

So he suddenly wants bipartisanship - to weaken health reform, and to take the victory from the Dems.

[zulchzulu]

18. K/R "What we need to do is start over and get it right."

He forget to say "right-wing".

:puke:

[Clio the Leo]

19. Ok then Mitch, call your buddies in the House and tell them to help us pass the Senate bill...

.... if you're being sincere.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

20. Starting over means no Healthcare Bill.

As much as I dislike the lack of a PO in the Senate Bill, I think we need to go ahead and pass it (not watered down any further).

Let's take that progress now and then work on it in the years to come.