If the healthcare bill is a piece of shit

[smoogatz]

and it certainly LOOKS like it's going to be a piece of shit, Obama should veto it. Mandated private health insurance with no public option and very little in the way of effective regulation? Complete piece of shit. Veto it, and send the weasels back to the drawing board. And this time, Mr. President, do your job: lead.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[emulatorloo]

2. I'll beleive it is "complete shit' on the day the healthcare industry stops trying to kill it

So far they keep spending the big bucks to stop it. They really don't like this medicare buy-in deal. VERY VERY SCARY FOR THEM. They don't like Rockefeller provision requiring that 90 percent of each health insurance premium dollar go toward health care services either. ALSO VERY VERY SCARY FOR THEM.

[JVS]

3. That will also be known as the day they allow their politicians to pass it.

[Better Believe It]

4. Well, since the insurance industry and big Pharma are not trying to kill it, so the bill must stink!

Thanks for your logic. Now I understand.

:)

[emulatorloo]

16. Take a look at last nights Rachel Maddow show. They are still at it, with some pretty sneaky ass

moves.

That is just a drop in the bucket. 1.4 million dollars a day. . .

[CrispyQ]

7. Here's a different take on the Medicare buy in:

'Medicare Buy-in' Is Really a Subsidy to Private Insurers
By Physicians for a National Health Program
December 12, 2009

http://pdamerica.org/articles/alliances/2009-12-12-10-58-06-alliances.php

snip...

The Senate proposal to allow uninsured people over age 55 an opportunity to buy into Medicare constitutes yet another government subsidy to the private health insurance industry, a leading health policy analyst and single-payer advocate says.

Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Program and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, told a radio host Wednesday morning, “One of the better provisions of the reform legislation was that it prohibited charging older people more than twice (or thrice in the some versions) as much as you charge younger people in the individual market. But by saying everyone over 55 in the individual market can be picked up by Medicare, you’ve really let the insurance industry off the hook.”

Woolhandler continued: “That is, the highest-cost patients in the individual market will be taken off their hands and paid for by the taxpayers; and private insurance will remain the only option for people under the age of 55 and for anyone who gets their insurance through their employer. Another way of saying that is: if you now have private health insurance and you don’t like it, you’re forced to keep it.

“The buy-in to Medicare is only for those 55 to 64 and it’s only for people who are not offered private health insurance through an employer. So it turns into just a subsidy to private health insurance: the taxpayers will pay for the high-cost patients and the health insurance industry can take the lower-cost patients.”

more at link

I think the health insurance industry is playing a part. They continue to show resistance so as to make Americans think that they don't really want 'reform' but in reality, they are salivating over the mandate to force Americans to buy their shitty product. Oh, and the big bucks they're spending? Those are your premiums. They will simply increase their denial of coverage so they can direct those funds to advertising. As for the 90% rule - as one DUer pointed out, suddenly everyone in the health insurance industry will be classified as some type of 'health care professional.' Count on it.

[emulatorloo]

15. That's a pretty expensive "headfake" at 1.4 million dollars a day

Woolhandler is entitled to her opinion. However there are other voices I trust. For example both Dennis Kuncinich and Anthony Weiner have expressed support for the Medicare Buy-in.

[CrispyQ]

17. Hey, I totally support the medicare buy in - it should be for everyone!

The point is, by limiting it to the 55+ crowd, they have effectively put the higher risk/more expensive customers on the government tab. The insurance industry has got to be happy about that.

[Hippo_Tron]

25. Yes they are happy but this is a case where that isn't inherently bad for consumers

John Kerry proposed having national catastrophic coverage in 2004 which is something that would benefit both insurers and consumers. It would mitigate the risk that the insurance companies have to take on and in the process it would make premiums lower because there is much less risk in insuring people.

The entirety of this process isn't a zero sum game between consumers and insurers and there are places where mutual gains can be made. There are, however, many subgames that are zero sum.

[emulatorloo]

31. Agreed on everyone. The insurance co's charge the 55+ crowd TONS of money

High premiums, high deductibles.

In the end it is going to save people lots of money.

I think the insur co's are also thinking that this is a "slippery slope" to medicare for everybody. I kind of think it is too. If this works, it is going to be popular, and more and more people are going to want it.

[Armstead]

9. REad B'rer Rabbit sometime....Please don;t throw me into that briar patch"

The insurance has hardly been actively opposing it.

Instead they have been working the angles with the Democrats to make the "reforms" conform to their own wishes.

[TheWraith]

5. Howard Dean doesn't agree.

And vetoing healthcare reform torpedoes all other agenda items from now until at least 2011.

[smoogatz]

22. Except for climate change, there is no agenda item that matters more.

A bad healthcare bill will be much,much worse for Democrats than no healthcare bill.

[spin]

6. I hate to say it, but I believe insurance will be far more expensive...

and deliver less care in the future.

The For Profit Bloodsucking Medical Insurance Companies have managed once again to buy off the politicians.

The Main Stream Media never did any serious reporting on just how bad our healthcare system is, compared to other nations.

The sad part is once Democrats gain control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency, they can't help the little people who put them there.

[Better Believe It]

8. Please don't write about "the little people". Are we fairies or leprechauns? It's degrading.

"they can't help the little people who put them there."

I know a lot of well intentioned people use that term.

I think we understand who you mean .... working people or working class people.

So I think people should avoid using the term "little people". That term is degrading and makes us appear so helpless.

[spin]

29. But we do appear helpless...

we sure as hell are ignored by the people we elect. If they felt we were important, we might have an actual heathcare system similar to England or Canada.

But with the help of the useless media, we are once again being bulldozed by the big corporations.

How do the little people once again gain influence and power? We vote the Republicans out and we get Democrats who appear to be owned by the big corporations. The big boys get bailed out for their mistakes because they are "too big to fail".

We need a stronger voice. We need someone like a Rush Limbaugh or a Glen Beck to stand on our side. We need a movement like the Tea Party.

We need to someone with charisma to show voters graphs like this which compare our medical costs to other countries.









http://montclairsoci.blogspot.com/2009/11/top-of-charts.html

Strangely, the only talking head I've watched who ever compared our medical costs to other countries was Lou Dobbs. For example this report on German heathcare.(Note: I should watch more MSNBC but it's not in hi-def on Direct TV. The only liberal voice doesn't even get to broadcast in hi-def. That's just not fair!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV9JDYErujg

The media promotes the idea that Universal Heathcare is a bad thing. We let them get away with it.

I admit that I'm frustrated. I use the term "little people" to describe myself and others like me. Our country is slipping away from us and we are fast becoming lackeys of the big corporations.

Basically we need a "hero" to express our cause. That's why I voted for Obama. I wish he would step up to the plate and show the leadership necessary to convince Americans that Universal Healthcare is the correct path to follow. He needs to use his powerful voice to lead change and fight for the average American.

Heathcare should never be a profit based system in which the rich get the best care and the lower classes get screwed.

Why isn't this the position of our party?

* Conclusion: For profit, managed care can not solve the US health care problems because health care is not a commodity that people shop for, and quality of care must always be compromised when the motivating factor for corporations is to save money through denial of care and decreasing provider costs. In addition managed care has introduced problems of patient confidentiality and disrupted the continuity of care through having limited provider networks.

8. Overall Answer to the questions Why doesn’t the US have single payer universal health care when single payer universal health care is the most efficient, most democratic and most equitable means to deliver health care? Why does the United States remain wedded to an inefficient, autocratic and immoral system that makes health care accessible to the wealthy and not the poor when a vast majority of citizens want it to be a right of citizenship?

Conclusion: Corporations are able to buy politicians through our campaign finance system and control the media to convince people that corporate health care is democratic, represents freedom, and is the most efficient system for delivering health care emphasis added
http://cthealth.server101.com/the_case_for_universal_health_care_in_the_united_states.htm

No, I am not a member of the Green Party nor do I ever plan to become one. I just want the Democratic Party to fight to insure that my daughter and my grandchildren get good healthcare without having to be rich or work for a big corporation.

All citizens deserve quality healthcare. In other countries it costs one half as much and is as good as or better then ours.

Sorry for rambling in this post. I just feel helpless and deserted. My daughter often tells me just to stop watching the news and worrying about the future. She points out that it makes little difference who we vote for, the result is always the same. We get screwed. The rich get richer and more powerful. The United States is of and for the big corporations and there is little or nothing the average person can do to limit their power. We are basically turning into a modern feudal society where we are all merely wage slaves.

Unfortunately, she is probably right. If so, the grand experiment that was America is over. It's all down hill from here. The rich rule and everybody else kiss their ass.

[Armstead]

10. You summed it up perfectly in a few words

[Zynx]

11. You obviously are not a policy analyst, so I won't treat you with the respect I would if you

were. You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows.

[smoogatz]

19. Brilliant counter argument.

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[ZombieHorde]

23. What was your motivation for posting this personal attack?

What were you hoping to accomplish?

[smoogatz]

27. Good question.

DU is practically unbearable these days. Trolls coming out of the woodwork--basically no chance of having a reasonable discussion.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ZombieHorde]

24. What was your motivation for posting this personal attack?

What were you trying to accomplish?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[smoogatz]

20. Another ingenious response.

That all you got, bub?

[LiberalAndProud]

14. Lead -- and make it all about him.

There isn't a way to go about doing this right. Healthcare reform shouldn't be about the man or the party. Unfortunately, Republicans have made it so, even though Obama has tried to make Congress own the process. And now they have made it about abortion. It's no accident that one of the most divisive issues of our age has been thrown into the mix. I really don't think lack of leadership is the problem. The problem is that Obama's political enemies have identified this as his potential Waterloo. Partisan politics trumps good legislation almost every time. So we may get no legislation, or we'll get flawed legislation that maybe, we hope, possibly can be improved over time. Reality. Sucks.

[smoogatz]

21. I think he has not clearly stated his bottom line.

I don't think he's clearly articulated his minimum expectations, and I don't think he's sufficiently used his bully pulpit and political arm-twisting skills to help shape an acceptable bill. As president, he should be out front on this issue; he should be playing some hardball and using the veto threat (and his power as leader of the Dem party) to get an acceptable bill. I don't see him doing that.

[LiberalAndProud]

28. How would threat of veto serve his purposes?

I thought he did a rather excellent job of defining his bottom line when he addressed congress. I understand if you think he should have been more specific about the mechanisms by which he would achieve his goals.

Although his strategy may prove to be flawed, I thought that the less he could make it about him, the greater the chances of achieving meaningful reform. As it turns out, maybe your way would have been better. However, Lieberman and Nelson seem to enjoy proving that they are quite immune to any arm-twisting.

[smoogatz]

30. It would provide cover for Dems in purple districts.

It would provide a rallying point for progressives, and force the fence-sitters to shit or get off the pot. It would take the media focus off the self-serving grandstanders and keep it on Obama. It would make him look strong and resolute, because he would BE strong and resolute.