You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #39: Your recollection is quite faulty [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #35
39. Your recollection is quite faulty
My complaints:

1) Single payer is cheaper, and provides better service in many ways.
2) See 1.
3) Long, drawn out process that completely stalled Obama's agenda because Rham was terrified of repeating what happened during Clinton's attempts at healthcare reform. This allowed the Republicans to regroup and mount an effective attack.
4) See 1.
5) The delusion that the stalling by Republicans would result in significant Republican support.
6) See 1.
7) The obsession with making the plan get a good CBO score means it's phased in slowly, greatly weakening support for the program since it's not all in place yet. In addition, it will be difficult for the public to remember that the good things coming later on came from the ACA, and not some new program.
8) See 1.
9) The tax on "Cadillac" plans - great way to punish unions so that you can get that good CBO score. The way it's written, more and more health plans will be considered "Cadillac" over time.
10) See 1.
11) With only private options, there's nothing to prevent collusion between health insurance companies resulting in higher premiums.
12) See 1.
13) Women's health care is not something to be used for showy political gain. The abortion rider crap is insulting and just plain wrong.
14) See 1.

Yes, there are some people with a hatred of the mandate, since that money must go to a private company. But single-payer is a mandate too, so I don't particularly object to mandates in general. Plus, I'm well aware that no-preexisting-conditions means a mandate is necessary for insurance to function at all. In fact, that is Krugman's position, not some "only go one way" thing.

Now, was it possible for my desire for single-payer to get implemented at this time? No. But a public option was well within reach, and could be used to eventually get de-facto single-payer. It was pre-compromised away. Plus the administration decided to kowtow to Lieberman and his desire to punish the evil hippies that almost dethroned him. My solution to that problem would be to take away his committee assignments and talk about cutting aid to Israel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC