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

Reply #76: Please cite the PRECISE language defining Public Option eligibility in the bill. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-16-09 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. Please cite the PRECISE language defining Public Option eligibility in the bill.
Else your argument is similarly speculative. :hi:

"The bill is 1000 pages long, but I have a way of simplifying the issue. Search the text for 'means test'."

Again, discussions progress when people read and understand points that precede their own. No one can produce any language in the bill that defines Public Option eligibility, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -The current Healthcare Bill HAS BEEN created and approved by several of the Progressives berni_mccoy  Jul-16-09 09:54 AM   #0 
  - Don't bother. The "everything or nothing" crowd can't be talked to.  BlooInBloo   Jul-16-09 09:57 AM   #1 
  - I truly believe Obama will succeed where Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton failed  WI_DEM   Jul-16-09 10:00 AM   #2 
  - It is a terrible bill, supported mainly by a massive new tax on the uninsured.  Laelth   Jul-16-09 10:42 AM   #34 
     - It is supported by a massive new tax on the rich.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 11:47 AM   #49 
        - And the uninsured get hit with a whopping, new 12% of gross tax increase.  Laelth   Jul-16-09 11:53 AM   #51 
           - Can you help me understand what you're saying?  eomer   Jul-17-09 09:58 AM   #103 
              - Your correction is warranted. Mia culpa.  Laelth   Jul-17-09 01:30 PM   #111 
  - What about the "centrist" "Democrats" pledge to block a decent bill in committee?  villager   Jul-16-09 10:00 AM   #3 
  - That is a separate issue. I would like to correct anyone who believes this bill isn't progressive.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:02 AM   #5 
     - How is it separate?  villager   Jul-16-09 10:05 AM   #8 
  - But that doesn't make it "progressive" on its own  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:01 AM   #4 
  - As I stated in another response, you aren't going to jump directly to Single Payer...  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:04 AM   #6 
     - "without causing more problems than you solve"  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:08 AM   #9 
     - Why don't you ask the Progressives your silly question if you don't like hearing the answer from me.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:11 AM   #11 
        - Looking for the question....  Tuesday Afternoon   Jul-16-09 10:13 AM   #15 
        - Id love to hear the answer from you. By consolidating insurance entities to 1, why would that create  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:13 AM   #16 
        - I see a question...  Tuesday Afternoon   Jul-16-09 10:15 AM   #18 
        - There are both practical and political issues  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:36 AM   #29 
           - "there is a real infrastructure issue here that will take time to implement"  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:41 AM   #33 
              - Accounting, case-management, billing all will need to be handled. Medicare was not designed  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:48 AM   #36 
              - Now, you do realize why Canada has an administrative overhead of 1.3%? Right?  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:55 AM   #41 
                 - You do realize Canada has < 10% the population of the US  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 11:29 AM   #46 
                    - And divide that up further  Oregone   Jul-16-09 11:43 AM   #48 
              - The political problem is an insurmountable practical problem. n/t  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 11:56 AM   #53 
                 - I agree, yet the poster only spent 1 short sentence on that  Oregone   Jul-16-09 11:59 AM   #56 
                    - There is nothing else to say on the political issue. A Single Payer system will never pass.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 12:28 PM   #75 
                       - That's right. "won't happen". Full stop. n/t  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:30 PM   #77 
                          - That's just it with you Single Payer purists. Why do you think the Progressives are supportive  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 12:33 PM   #80 
                             - "It's because it is how we get to single payer"  Oregone   Jul-16-09 01:58 PM   #93 
                                - I never said "everyone would never vote to pass single-payer"...  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 02:14 PM   #94 
                                   - Yeah, but they will support something that will lead to it. Riiiiight.  Oregone   Jul-16-09 04:28 PM   #98 
        - I did. I called Representative Woolsey's office today.  Laelth   Jul-17-09 09:06 PM   #115 
     - Why not?  RaleighNCDUer   Jul-16-09 10:35 AM   #27 
        - Pretty much. I haven't heard a reason otherwise yet  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:35 AM   #28 
           - So, you've ignored every post that says it will never pass, or..  Dawgs   Jul-16-09 12:42 PM   #83 
              - If it can pass elsewhere, why not the US?  Oregone   Jul-16-09 01:44 PM   #90 
  - I want to know more about the 5,000 up to 10,000 out of pocket.. Here are Medicare figures  madfloridian   Jul-16-09 10:04 AM   #7 
  - It's a good question I don't have an answer for about Medicare  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:10 AM   #10 
  - Rahm's brother, Zeke, wants to phase out Medicare. He's got power  madfloridian   Jul-16-09 10:13 AM   #14 
  - You will pay 5 or 10k out of pocket for what is now being called "cost sharing"  dflprincess   Jul-17-09 10:04 PM   #116 
  - Yeah, these cost-sharings are sort of what has my head spinning  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:12 AM   #13 
  - Yes its a pretty good bill right now  liskddksil   Jul-16-09 10:11 AM   #12 
  - What about the up to 10,000 co pay and deductible?  madfloridian   Jul-16-09 10:14 AM   #17 
     - I agree that is way too high for many people to afford.  WI_DEM   Jul-16-09 10:17 AM   #19 
     - The poor won't pay anywhere close to 10k.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:17 AM   #20 
        - Why not extend Medicare? Why do away with it?  madfloridian   Jul-16-09 10:18 AM   #21 
           - It will cause more problems than it solves. Private industry does the job better than public  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:27 AM   #24 
              - Disagree. The public plan structure is already in place.  madfloridian   Jul-16-09 10:29 AM   #25 
                 - Well, Im only speaking out of my ass and repeating talking points  Oregone   Jul-16-09 10:36 AM   #30 
  - Mandatory, for--profit health insurance is NOT Progressive.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 10:20 AM   #22 
  - Good thing the bill doesn't make For-Profit Insurance mandatory!  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:25 AM   #23 
     - Since you imply that you have read the bill in its entirety, please answer my question:  Romulox   Jul-16-09 10:40 AM   #32 
        - Answers:  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:46 AM   #35 
           - Link, please? Citations are required when one appeals to Legal Code for authority.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 10:49 AM   #37 
           - You can read the summary that I posted yesterday.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:51 AM   #39 
              - A summary is merely your representation of the source material.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 10:56 AM   #42 
                 - As I said, I provided links yesterday. Go follow them.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 10:56 AM   #43 
                    - Just read "Subtitle BPublic Health 2 Insurance Option" of the actual bill  Romulox   Jul-16-09 11:06 AM   #44 
                       - Keep reading, it's a big bill. This may help you  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 11:08 AM   #45 
                          - You're either misunderstanding what you're reading, or purposefully misrepresenting it.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 11:40 AM   #47 
                             - Here.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 11:55 AM   #52 
                                - Right. So eligibility to participate in the Exchange is not equivalent to Public Option eligibility  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:01 PM   #57 
                                   - Is there really, really, small print between the lines that I cannot see?  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:09 PM   #63 
                                      - Don't bother with that person. They are not interested in the truth, but in saying what they want  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 12:22 PM   #68 
                                      - I spent a good hour reading the bill and discussing its text with you.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:24 PM   #71 
                                      - PS Still waiting for ANY quotation from the bill explaining eligbility for the Public Option.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:24 PM   #73 
                                      - If you want to join a subthread, please read the posts above your own.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:22 PM   #69 
                                         - The bill says what it says.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:27 PM   #74 
                                            - No offense, but that is not how either legal construction or politics work.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:33 PM   #79 
           - "to be fair to local market prices" - which will be set by the fucking INSURANCE COMPANIES.  kath   Jul-16-09 11:53 AM   #50 
           - At monopoly, captive market rates no less! nt  Romulox   Jul-16-09 11:57 AM   #54 
           - No, the premiums are set by the government-run exchange.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 11:59 AM   #55 
              - Based on WHAT exactly? Not supply and demand; everyone is compelled to purchase.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:04 PM   #60 
                 - Well, it sure looks like that's what they're planning.  kath   Jul-16-09 12:07 PM   #61 
                 - Precisely. Which is why supporters don't want to talk about (not for profit) Public Option  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:15 PM   #65 
                    - Yes, and "If" pigs fly, that compounds the confusion.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:24 PM   #72 
                       - Please cite the PRECISE language defining Public Option eligibility in the bill.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:29 PM   #76 
                          - It's not up to me to prove a negative.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:31 PM   #78 
                             - You are asserting the presence of a liberal eligibility for the Public Option  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:37 PM   #81 
                                - And you're claiming a means test for eligibility based on a absence of evidence.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:41 PM   #82 
                                   - It's been part of several earlier proposals. The present bill punts on the issue.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:59 PM   #86 
                                   - The bill doesn't punt, and it's not silent on the issue.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 02:16 PM   #95 
                                      - Please cite the PRECISE language defining Public Option eligibility in the bill.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 04:00 PM   #97 
                                         - teach your pony a new trick.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 04:33 PM   #99 
                                            - You're admitting that Public Option eligibility is limited in another thread. (Link provided)  Romulox   Jul-17-09 10:55 AM   #104 
                                            - Your belief is that the public option will be means tested,  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-17-09 12:44 PM   #106 
                                   - PS: I've noticed you didn't respond to the confusion about "cost" vs. "price".  Romulox   Jul-16-09 01:02 PM   #88 
                                      - Because there's no confusion.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 01:43 PM   #89 
                                         - Yes, there obviously is some confusion still.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 03:59 PM   #96 
                 - Based on regional cost.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:12 PM   #64 
                    - You mean cost + *some* percentage as profit, surely.  Romulox   Jul-16-09 12:17 PM   #67 
           - But the public option will not be open to all employers to offer immediately  dflprincess   Jul-16-09 12:52 PM   #85 
              - Those already insured through their employers are not those most suffering.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 01:00 PM   #87 
                 - Some employers - even large ones can have really crappy health insurance  dflprincess   Jul-16-09 01:48 PM   #91 
                    - "if your preventative test (i.e. routine pap, screening mammogram) comes back odd - then it's no  kath   Jul-16-09 10:09 PM   #102 
  - If knew more what were talking about  depakid   Jul-16-09 10:34 AM   #26 
  - you're doing it wrong.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:01 PM   #58 
  - If what you say is true, that is tragic.  Laelth   Jul-16-09 10:38 AM   #31 
  - As long as there is a public option, I will take it.  tekisui   Jul-16-09 10:50 AM   #38 
  - Absolutely correct. n/t  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:03 PM   #59 
     - The righties are shitting themselves.  tekisui   Jul-16-09 12:23 PM   #70 
        - I'm still amazed that people here can't see the forest for the trees on this.  berni_mccoy   Jul-16-09 12:47 PM   #84 
           - perhaps they live in mass.  ipaint   Jul-16-09 05:00 PM   #100 
              - Hear, hear! n/t  Laelth   Jul-16-09 05:10 PM   #101 
  - Ok wait a goddam minute...  Hutzpa   Jul-16-09 10:53 AM   #40 
  - "measures to prevent a future Republican President"...  cbdo2007   Jul-16-09 12:08 PM   #62 
     - Does anyone have any plans which preclude future governments from making changes? No?  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-16-09 12:15 PM   #66 
  - K & R It does look pretty good  hfojvt   Jul-16-09 01:55 PM   #92 
  - "'Public Option' Would Only Be Available To The Otherwise Uninsured"  Romulox   Jul-17-09 11:03 AM   #105 
  - It's bad form to hide your replies to me.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-17-09 12:53 PM   #107 
     - You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth (with links, quotes)  Romulox   Jul-17-09 01:11 PM   #108 
        - You simply have a reading challenge.  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-17-09 01:44 PM   #112 
           - "the public plan can't turn away customers for any reasons..."  Romulox   Jul-17-09 04:06 PM   #114 
  - It's amazing  Orwellian_Ghost   Jul-17-09 01:16 PM   #109 
  - Well, thanks for trying. (nt)  redqueen   Jul-17-09 01:18 PM   #110 
     - is it over?  hfojvt   Jul-17-09 02:20 PM   #113 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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