Tell me, if this bill is so god awful and that it is going to just shovel money to the insurance

[WCGreen]

companies, then why are the Republicans so against it and the Chamber of Commerce running almost every fifteen minutes or so commercials yakking about how god awful this bill really is...

They know deep down in their cold little hearts that this is the first real and giant step on the way to a more consumer friendly system of providing Health Care to the regular people in this here country of ours...

I know I know it's not what you or me want, I have a personal stake in all this in that I have a giant pre-existing condition (waiting on a lung transplant in case you missed it), but it's going to be the best we can do at this time and under these conditions.

The GOP keeps throwing up road block after road block cause they know this is a mighty big step toward an overhaul of the very way of life for about a million people in the insurance industry.

Anyway, you wring your hands and go on about this being just a big hand out to the insurance companies.

But let me tell you something, kids are not going to be denied insurance because they have Asthma. Their parents are going to be able to switch jobs without having to worry about the kids not being covered because of the Asthma.

And they will also be able to insure their kids when they get out of college until they are 26 so they can look for a job instead of settling for a something just because it has insurance.

I can rest assured because the life time cap will be lifted so that I can go back and get the pain blocking shots for my blown out lower back. You see these shots are about 3,700 per visit. I need them about eight or ten times a year. That can eat up a whole lot of my lifetime cap so that when it comes time to get a new set of lungs, I might not be fully covered by the insurance company.

So go ahead. stand on your ground and yell at the top of your lungs that it's all or nothing baby. All or nothing.

But don't tell me I'm not progressive because I think it's a good idea to take what we can when we can.

Am I happy?

Not really. But I will get over it and in the end, it's going to be a little bit better than it is right now. And given the national condition what with so many people scared of the future and frightened by the present, it's time to get it done.

[Cleobulus]

They hate what few regulations are present in the bill. n/t

[polpilot]

41. Wait 'til you get the ins. cos. 'bill' for these 'new changes'.

(1) Eliminate 'pre-exiting' clause - $32 for every policy
(2) No limit to lifetime benefits - $9 per policy
(3) Increase to age 26 dependents -$11 per policy
(4) Administrative fees for federal compliance - $21 per policy
(5) Etc. fee - $42 per policy
(6)

[EFerrari]

1. Well, first off, the Republicans have to be against it even if it ensured the rapture

because that is what they do. That's not really a good measure.

[WCGreen]

2. I don't even know what to say to that...

They don't want Obama to get a big win and this is a big win for him.

[EFerrari]

9. They have to be against whatever he does.

And it's not clear that this will be a big win, considering the mandate, the economy and the right wing owned media.

[cherokeeprogressive]

22. So for you, is this about a "big win" for Obama?

I'd prefer that we all favored a big win for this country's future. Alas...

[WCGreen]

25. I believe it is a big step forward from the mess we have now...

And I don't think we can survive another clinton like retreat.

Clinton fell back into triangulation not because he wasn't progressive but because he was forced to be pragmatic.

Obama, if he gets this win, will be emboldened and more than likely back an ever increasing progressive agenda.

That's what I see as another plus for a win on this one.

[The Hope Mobile]

71. I'd like to think you're right but this is not a good bill. He will be bolder

but which agenda will he pursue? Seems fairly obvious it won't be progressive. He could SOOOOO easily have the public option right now but seriously doesn't want it.

[polpilot]

40. U.S. Healthcare Scoreboard: Insurance Companies/1 People/0

[The Hope Mobile]

46. and its not a good bill, they know it and later on when the insurance cos

are screwing us, they can say "we voted against it" even though its exactly what they want.

[LibDemAlways]

59. Yep. It will help them achieve big victories this November. The

mandates are something they are actually ecstatic about. But no need to bring that up now. Let the Dems pass and sign this turkey, and when the R's take over they'll gut all the parts of the bill that actually do people some good while continuing to allow insurance company crooks to pick middle class pockets. Sweet.

[troubledamerican]

65. Exactly.

[DJ13]

3. ......

[damonm]

4. K& BIG-TIME R!

[ShortnFiery]

5. Yes, because there are no TRUE cost controls for premiums.

It's a fucking TROJAN horse. :thumbsdown:

[WCGreen]

12. There are some....

This provision which forces insurers to spend 80 percent of all premium dollars on medical care (75 percent in the individual market). This will cap the money that can go toward administration, profits, etc.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201003090020

So being an accountant, I see that as a pretty good step toward oost control.

[Common Sense Party]

13. What's to keep the insurers from simply raising the premiums, then,

to make sure they're making the same profit as before?

That's all that will happen. Government will mandate something, insurers will say "okay," and then will happily raise premiums on all these new customers that the government brought them.

Will that contain costs?

[joeglow3]

47. Um, that would not work

If you INCREASES profits and pay the same amount towards claims, that would LOWER the percentage making them even more out of compliance, not increase it.

[Common Sense Party]

49. Um, yes it would. I didn't say increase the profits. I said increase the premiums.

[Beetwasher]

53. Premiums Increases Will Need Federal Approval

That's in the bill.

[Common Sense Party]

55. Can you show me where?

I couldn't find it by Googling.

[Beetwasher]

56. Sec. 1003

Sec. 1003. Ensuring that consumers get value for their dollars. For plan years beginning in 2010, the Secretary and States will establish a process for the annual review of increases in premiums for health insurance coverage. Requires States to make recommendations to their Exchanges about whether health insurance issuers should be excluded from participation in the Exchanges based on unjustified premium increases. Provides $250 million in funding to States from 2010 until 2014 to assist States in reviewing and, if appropriate under State law, approving premium increases for health insurance coverage and in providing information and recommendations to the Secretary.

http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill49.pdf

[Common Sense Party]

57. Sounds like an awful lot of wiggle room there.

:shrug:

[Beetwasher]

58. Well, Then Let's Do Nothing

Federal review is federal review.

[joeglow3]

67. Ummm, no it wouldn't

If you increase top line gross profits and keep expenses the same, not only does profit margin increase, you percentage of premiums being used to pay claims would DECREASE making the company even more out of compliance. We are talking simple division here.

[onpatrol98]

17. Cost Control

"This provision which forces insurers to spend 80 percent of all premium dollars on medical care (75 percent in the individual market). This will cap the money that can go toward administration, profits, etc."

Doesn't this just cap the percentage. I mean, if insurance companies want to make more money...can't they simply jack up the price to get a fatter 20% percent share towards administration, profits, etc.

[obxhead]

21. ding ding ding....

mandated means they can now up how much they will actually pay for services. They are allowed their 20% so once they have everyone on the books they will all gradually just increase the size and value of their 20% through whatever means they have available.

The oil companies figured it out, I'm sure the insurance companies will as well.

[WCGreen]

24. Don't forget the subsidies that the government will be giving to the

people who have to buy insurance on the open market.

Plus since the insurance will be sold on the open market and not just to human resource departments, competition will ultimately force the prices down. That's the way I see it.

I know many people see it another way. But I'm just tired of being so fucking cynical, I have been for 30 years now. I want to believe in something. I think, in my life at least, it is time to give someone the benefit of the doubt. On the plus side, it can't get any worse than it all ready is.

Remember, adding another 30 million or so people to the pool will, in theory, spread the risk around and cause prices to drop.

[onpatrol98]

39. Subsidies

But, not everyone will be eligible for subsidies. Insurance is already sold on the open market. It's just expensive as heck to buy. Even with pre-existing conditions, YOU CAN GET HEALTH INSURANCE. It's just at a FRIGHTFUL rate.

At this moment I have absolutely no reason to give republicans or even democrats the benefit of the doubt.

I believed Obama when he derided Clinton for wanting a mandate. I laughed with him. Now, I feel laughed at. I believed him when he said we were going to take on Big Pharma. Big Pharma was the first deal struck??? I believed him when he said costs would be contained. I don't see anything in this bill that truly contains costs. I do go to the doctor. I do use my insurance. What will be cheaper about my care tomorrow because of this bill today? Even democrats are now saying my premiums won't go down. I'm not crazy. They're not going to remain the same. That means they're going to rise. I don't qualify for a subsidy.

Supposedly, forcing more healthy people to buy insurance is going to reduce the cost. How? By what magic does this just not increase profits for insurance companies. There will be more money. Yes. That's true. How does more money, decrease the cost of the care? Will MRIs be cheaper? Will they stop charging $50 for an aspirin?

In theory, if two people share the costs of one hamburger...the cost is more than if three people share the costs of one hamburger. I get it. I'm not an accountant. But, I get it. We both save money.

But we're not regulating the "cost" of the hamburger. If I'm making the hamburger. Can't I just continue to increase the cost? My excuse continuing to be...well "my costs of preparing the burger" are going up.

The only difference is now....I can tell you, "Hey, you would be paying more for this hamburger, if there wasn't more cost sharing."

What part of this law keeps the price of the hamburger the same or decreases the cost?

Is there a law to keep lettuce (pharmaceuticals) prices down? No.

Is there a law to keep burger flipper (doctors) costs down? No.

Is there a law to keep stove prices and maintenance fees (equipment) down? No.

Is there a law that says burgers in every state have to cost the same? No

Is there a law that says buns (mammograms-insert your test of choice) can't cost more than a certain amount? No

Is there a law that says my restaurant can't add a sneaky handling fee to the cost of my burger to offset his liability insurance. Heck, No!

Initially, this bill was supposed to control costs.

Well, that's okay. Then the purpose became getting everyone insured (not even health care), just insurance. But, even with this bill not everyone is going to be insured.

And, we're forcing people to buy burgers...I mean insurance, at the risk of incurring fines and penalties compliments of the IRS.

I do realize using hamburgers is a poor analogy.

I should have said baloney sandwiches.

I was in trouble before this bill and I'll be in trouble afterward.

[The Hope Mobile]

48. Actually, it can get a lot worse . . . and its going to. nt

[Beetwasher]

54. Premium Increases Will Be Under Federal Review Now

So they can't just jack up their prices.

[onpatrol98]

68. Federal Review

The banks that crippled our economy...were under federal review.

[Egnever]

66. No

jack up the price of what?

if they increase premiums then spending has to increase as well. Or are you suggesting that they will offer higher payouts to doctors or other end care profesionals just to justify a larger cost?

[blueworld]

60. Will it if the costs of care keep rising?

Wellpoint owns Anthem. My Anthem policy requires me to buy my meds via mail order from Wellpoint Next RX. So if Wellpoint raises the cost of my meds, they'll be satisfying the 75% rule & still lining their pockets.

The limitation is on the premium amounts, not on their pharmaceutical or medical device divisions.

I understand what you mean, but I'm still trying to make the point (uselessly now, I admit) that there is no way even a sainted Congress can cover all the loopholes for these slimy bass turds. Only a Medicare buy-in or PO or robust competition can do that. They're like the Gordian Knot.

Sorry for repeating myself endlessly. Sigh.

[mzmolly]

43. 70% of Americans will see a reduction in premiums

according to the CBO.

[phleshdef]

6. Be prepared for some conspiratorial nonsense where ins. companies are really for it...

...and are only pretending to be against it as to fake everyone into thinking it must be a good bill.

[WCGreen]

7. Damn, you're right...

Those baatards, they killed hope...

[yowzayowzayowza]

10. LOL! n/t

[Cleobulus]

8. Projecting much?

[pampango]

29. Agreed. Repubs voting unanimously against HCR (and everything else) can just be cheap politics, but

HIC's and the Chamber pouring money into ads against HCR tells you what they really want. Interest groups are not known for spending their money to fake people out rather than to support or oppose what they think is consistent with their interests.

From a selfish perspective, it's hard to blame them. Since the last time they beat HCR they have enjoyed 15 years of immense profits even though people have suffered with declining health care. I'm sure they wouldn't mind history repeating itself. :)

[Ozymanithrax]

11. It is reverse psychology, you see...

If we though the Health Insurance companies liked HCR, we would be against it. So they spent 300 million + and counting as a reverse psychology ploy...

Same with Republicans...

They know that if progressives and liberals, (not an identical set) thought the GOP liked HCR because it was a massive give away to the Health Insurance Companies, we would be against it.

Reverse Psychology...

So, shhhh, it's working. Don't let Progressives and liberals know. There are rumors that they have now even fooled Kucinich.

The idea that the GOP, Health Insurance Companies, the Teaparty, and everyone on the right actually are scared shitless that a progressive bill will get passed is too far fetched. It is much simpler to think they are running a massive reverse psychology campaign.

[WCGreen]

14. Which is probably why the rec count on this thread is going up and down

faster that Warren Beaty's zipper...

I have to laugh about all that. At least I know I've hit a cord.

[Ozymanithrax]

16. I never unrec anything, but I rec'd your just to give Warren a thrill.

[depakid]

15. Republicans and their propaganda arm hate anything Democratic or proposed by Obama

Content is largely irrelevant- and takes a backseat to the short term political considerations.

[kestrel91316]

18. The RWers are against it because they know how many more

liberals and poor will be insured with it, and they can't have that. They want us all dead, and lack of medical care is part of their plan to ensure it.

[Odin2005]

19. Kabuki Theater. It's a show for votes.

[uponit7771]

20. yeap

[CaliforniaPeggy]

23. Clearly and perfectly said.

K&R

[boppers]

26. Shitty lungs, too? I know that one.

Hopefully we can find a better pain block, too.

When only the unfortunate have to pay for a heavy-duty pain-block shot, there's a lot less research reasons available to make it cheaper.

[WCGreen]

61. Having to maybe get divorced to make sure my Lung Transplant

is covered just flies in the face a so called compasionate and christian nation...

[rufus dog]

27. Once the door is opened

it is almost impossible to shut it. Social Security, Medicaid, Civil Rights and Woman's Rights are great examples. In each case greater measures were required than was originally passed. Conversely you could shelve HC for 15 Fucking years and start over. It appears to be a no brainer, but hey I am tall, sometimes the logic doesn't get to my level.

[eridani]

28. It's nothing but win/win for them

If it doesn't pass, they get to say neener neener, and if it does they get to campaaign against mandates and benefits taxes.

[dkf]

30. Oh for gods sakes they don't hate the pathetic regulations they hate the subsidies

[WCGreen]

51. And for christs sake...

I hate the alternative which, in all reality, is nothing.

[flpoljunkie]

31. WCGreen, You make a very compelling case. Congress: Pass. The. Damn. Bill!

[MadHound]

32. Two reasons,

First, because raising a ruckus has gotten the insurance industry virtually everything they wanted, so why not scream some more?

Second, appearances of actual opposition have to be maintained in this two party/same corporate master system of government. Can't be too obvious and give away the game to the rubes now, can we?

[WCGreen]

33. That is a very good point....

But now we are left with one hand to play.

The time to come together is now. That is why I wrote this now. If we lose, I am afraid that another chance like this will not come again in my life time and perhaps yours.

This process will give us the best we can get as of now.

Sometimes it is best to take what we can and walk away to fight another day.

[MadHound]

34. Sorry, but I can't go there with you. This bill is worse than doing nothing

It delivers the American public straight into the tender mercies of the insurance industry, who will proceed to destroy the middle and working class in this country, bleeding them dry as they are forced, by law, to pay more, more, more in higher premiums.

It is best that we walk away from this bill and start over again, pushing for real change, like a strong public option, or better yet, real single payer UHC.

Whether or not we get another chance would be up to the Dems, whether they have the spine to actually fight. But I simply cannot support a bill that is going to do more harm than good.

[WCGreen]

35. what you are wishing for is not going to happen...

Obama's presidency will effectively be over if this bill, on which he is staking almost all of his political capital on, then when pray tell, with the political will come from?

Think of president Clinton's second term. He settled for incremental change on the very fringe. He was left with pragmatism as his only hope for a place in History.

What will the republicans who will regain control of one or both houses if this does not pass think of your idea to revisit health care reform.

But the one question you should ask yourself is what will you say to the people who would have been helped by the provisions of this bill?

[MadHound]

36. The better question is what will you say to the even greater number of people harmed by this bill?

That is the whole point, on the balance the number of people who will be harmed by this bill is far greater than the number that will be helped. I cannot condone that. Nor can I support a bill that is going to hit me doubly hard.

Are you willing to sacrifice the many in exchange for helping the few?

As far as the Dem's and Obama's political future, you know, at this point they're DOA anyway. They've pissed off far too many of their base to stay in office.

[WCGreen]

37. Well, you are obviously entrenched as am I...

I guess we shall see in the next few days what will be...

[MadHound]

38. Oh, I'm sure that the bill is going to pass, one way or another

Then we'll get to see just how quickly the shit will hit the fan. We're going to be paying into this monstrosity for four years before anything kicks in. Hang onto your wallet as your premiums go up, up, up.

[Uncle Joe]

52. Obama isn't staking his Presidency on this bill, not in the true sense, if he were the mandates

would take effect before he runs for reelection.

These mandates will be extremely unpopular when they hit the fan and I believe only help insure a Republican successor.

[suzie]

72. Where are the votes for single payer?

[uponit7771]

42. ...and Obama shot Bambi. There are some who don't hate America's government

[WinkyDink]

44. They know the value of a sound-bite: "Pres. Obama Got Us Health-Care Reform."

[branders seine]

45. you confuse policy with politics. the two are apples and oranges.

the insurance companies already KNOW they've won this policy fight. They have an ironclad deal with Obama, and he has invested all his political capital in ensuring that the insurance corporations will win. No matter what, the POLICY has been set, will pass, and will enrich insurance companies. That has been a given from the start of Obama's "reform" masquerade in early 2009.

That leaves rapublicans and insurance companies with only a POLITICAL agenda to pursue. Their political agenda is to oppose the party with the "D" in it. As disgustingly awful as the party with the "D" in it has been at serving the public interest for the last generation, the insurance corporations (and oil corporations and coal corporations and bankster corporations) all still love them some rapublicans mo' bettah. The political agenda of the insurance companies is served by conflict and gridlock, not by the crafting of helpful policy (unless it enriches them, as they already know this bill will). That is why they publicly "oppose" this bill. They know it will pass anyway (they win on policy!); now they want to craft a political win from the situation as well.

Read Machiavilli.

[WCGreen]

50. I have read Nicky...

If you had really read what I wrote you would realize that I am not all that happy with the bill...

But I feel, and more and more people are coming to agree with me, that this is the best we can do in this political climate and this economic reality..

Look, if this bill doesn't pass, there isn't some other fix waiting somewhere under the skittle rainbow that will suddenly make the republicans and skeptical democrats join in and sing kumbaya.

You are obviously an all or nothing guy and I know Nicky wouldn't approve of that tactic.

[Better Believe It]

62. Better question: Why isn't the health insurance industry/ big Pharma spending big time to kill it?

Where's all the non-stop ads attacking this bill on commercial and cable TV networks?

Their silence is noted.

They have given hundreds of millions of dollars in funds to members of Congress who support this legislation.

[apocalypsehow]

63. You notice you haven't received a single reply on point refuting your OP - just rhetoric. Kick, Rec.

:thumbsup:

[ProSense]

64. A question for critics of the bill

here

[LatteLibertine]

69. We do need a starting point

and it's sad this bill doesn't do a thing to address denial based on "pre existing conditions" until 2014. I wonder if it's the same thing for recisions? Or that is you pay for decades then get kicked off as soon as you're seriously ill.

[WCGreen]

73. It does eliminate pre-existing conditions for children so that parents

don't have to worry when changing jobs...

[treestar]

70. Well I read a few threads on DU and learned

It is all a big part of the corporate conspiracy!

Now if we were that clever we could just claim that we were all in favor of leaving things as they are and fool the insurance companies into supporting single payer! We just aren't as clever as those crafty insurance companies, apparently.