Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A Real Public Option does not exist in any of the bills currently written - Read this article....

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:11 PM
Original message
A Real Public Option does not exist in any of the bills currently written - Read this article....

A strong public option does NOT exist in any of the bill currently written. And, without, a true public option, health care reform will be nothing more then government mandated private insurance.

The public option has derailed energy that should have been focused on HR676 - Medicare for All. It is time to regroup and stop mindlessly chanting 'public option' when the term isn't even clearly defined and no current legislation even exists to produce a viable public option.

This is THE article you NEED to read, if you want to intelligently participate in the health care debate. It is from Physicians for National Health Care, a group of over 14,000 US physicians advocating for a single payer system.

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/20/bait-and-switch-how-the... /

If you don't want to read the whole history of the public option and how we came to this point, just scroll down & the article discusses the current plans in Congress.

This is a must read.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Must read:
Facts and more facts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Well that really stinks, my posts in your thread about the original
Hacker plans have now been deleted.

All that is left are Your facts.

:wtf:





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. This article is BS. It weaves a bunch of unrelated facts with spin
to portray Hackers 2001 paper as the origin of the Democrats' public option. In fact, Obama's plan is largely based on the plan Kerry ran on in 2004.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. If my links were still in your thread people could read and make up
their own minds.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. So your links just vanished?
how in the world did that happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. The entire sub-thread was deleted that contained the links, it was
not deleted right away because I am prety sure I posted in the link the next day and maybe even 2 days later.

So what happened???

The name given to the 2007 Hacker plan "Health Care for America."

SEIU, AFSCME endorse the plan (2007) letters are at the link below.

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/evolution-of-t...


In 2008 Health Care for America (Now) is formed with millions (40 million) of start up money.

HCAN becomes a dominant voice for health care reform including the current plans, which do not resemble the original plan.


HEALTH CARE FOR AMERICA WOULD SAVE BILLIONS

http://www.sharedprosperity.org/hcfa/news_release.pdf

"...Health Care for America, developed for the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) by Yale
political scientist Jacob S. Hacker, would achieve these goals and maximize consumers
health care choices without unraveling existing health security, forcing individual to
obtain coverage on their own, pressuring patients into health savings accounts or using
inadequate vouchers...

...Health Care for America, a centerpiece of EPIs Agenda for Shared Prosperity, has
become a template for the health care proposals offered by leading Democratic
candidates for president, built on a foundation of a large national insurance pool and an
employer mandate.

...Unlike the stale ideas of tax credits and health savings accounts that the Youre On
Your Own advocates always push, Health Care for America builds on the strengths we
already have in place through Medicare and our employer-provided system to expand
coverage, Mishel said. The plan leverages the power of numbers in a broad national
pool that allows us to reduce costs and expand coverage to virtually everyone in
America.

The 38 million Medicaid and State Childrens Health Insurance Program enrollees would
be folded into the new insurance pool, with current levels of coverage guaranteed..."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Deleted just for presenting another point of view?
:wtf: indeed......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Links to the former proposal, I'll try and connect the dots again
in this thread.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. The memory hole here must be really, really big. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. You are right. This is an excellent article. I have cited it a few times myself.
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 02:29 PM by man4allcats
And I agree, it is THE article everyone NEEDS to read. Thanks for posting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thanks for the post. I've already read it but I'm sure many DU'ers haven't.

I wouldn't be surprised to see low-level White House staffers (they would just be doing their job in monitoring DU discussions) or others who hate to see any articles that indicate even the mildest criticism of President Obama hit the unrecommend button and launch personal attacks against you and/or the author.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. Of course, the PNHP doesn't WANT a public option
they want Single Payer. While I don't disagree with their motives for pushing SP, I do believe they're biased against any PO, and need to understood from that perspective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Hacker's original public plan would have covered Millions more
but that got compromised into the current public plan, subsidies were not originally proposed to buy private insurance.

Read what Dr. McCanne said about the original Hacker proposal below...this was in early 2007.


http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/evolution-of-t...

"...But if the rules for public-private competition are poorly thought out, an inefficient private system will simply suck subsidies from the public sector, sullying the promise of universal coverage...


...Also, Dr. Don McCanne of Physicians for a National Health Program offers sincere praise, concluding: Jacob Hackers proposal is a very welcome addition at a time that all options should be on the table. It is such a compelling model that it may shove all others off of the table - except single payer - then we can get down to a serious discussion about reform that really works.


My links in the Prosense thread were deleted, why I have no idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. This article is NOT about not wanting single payer - it points out REAL public option does not exist
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 02:39 PM by debbierlus
It doesn't.

None of the bills meet the criteria for a true public option -

Read it and debate the points in it.

They want the best health care plan for the country, and that means pointing out the real problems with the legislation that is proposed. I don't consider truthful analysis 'bias'.

If you are for a 'public option', one would suppose you would be for legislation that would actually produce a viable public option and not some phony bill that uses the term to create a phony political gesture to appease the masses.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. We don't even have a comprehensive bill on the table
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 05:30 PM by demwing
So yes, lets debate what doesn't yet exist. Look, I get it that the ideal is single payer. But I don't believe we'll get SP in a single step EVER. However, the public option will do fine as a solid reform of it's own, and as an incremental step towards Single Payer.

Think of this - why are the Insurance Companies fighting a Public Option? It's because they know they cannot compete. They know they add nothing to the equation. And they know that the Public Option will show it to the whole damn country.

If you want Single Payer, get behind the Public Option. It will take us down thae path that leads to SP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. Who told you it doesn't exist? They lied. Here is the link on tomas.gov
Here the bill that's in the House that's come out of the 3 committees HR3200
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200 :

You can see for yourself what the problem is. Written right into the bill is the level playing field provision which means the public option that very few can access can't undersell the private insurance companies.

So why were you under the impression that this bill doesn't exist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. Too many blogs being take as truth...
That's the problem I'm seeing far too much of lately. Blogs are opinions, FCOL!

I thought the RW had a monopoly on this sort of thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Tomas.gov is a blog? What planet do you spend most of your time on?
You don't even know or care what a public option is, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. Uhh... Earth calling JQC...
Tomas.gov? That's not where that link directed me.

You assume far too much... you don't even care though, do you? As long as you can hit the snark button, what you assumes goes... whatever, dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #33
43. Well, that explains it...
You were talking about your own post... I referred to the OP. IOW... I was agreeing with you. But feel fucking free to snark away, pal.

Jesus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. You replied to post #33, which had the link to Tomas.gov with the lame public option that the
Congressional Budget Office, estimated would enroll no more than 10 million people by 2019, and that it wouldn't contain costs or even be accessible to anyone except a tiny minority of the country.

We were told that a public option would be big, like Medicare, and that anybody could buy in and save money instead of having to go to the scumbag private insurance companies.

Boy were we ever lied too, huh?

Sorry you thought you were replying to someone else, but I didn't know that you were confused. Didn't mean to be snarky. Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Ok, I will try again...
I was responding to your post, yes. My statement was about the OP's post, and the blog link therein. In your post you were correcting the OP... I was agreeing with you.

Ok, I make my living as a communications professional... one of us is tired, or something...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
16. The PNHP would actually welcome a REAL public option. But they are letting people know that what
all to many try to pass off as a public option is really a joke.

For instance, I have read everything that ProSense posts and links to, but none of what she posts or links to does any analysis what so ever on the public option as it exists in the house or Senate bill.

She puts up rah rah cheer leading bullet points but never any in depth discussion of what the bills actually say and what they actually do in terms of creating a public option.

I strongly suggest everyone read what ProSense links to. I also strongly suggest that everyone read the actual analysis that's provided by PNHP and make up your own mind.

Also if anyone has any other in depth analysis of the public option as it currently exists in the house or senate bill, please post it and please feel free to PM me about it because I haven't seen any.

I've read the CBO reports (congressional budgeting office) and what they say agrees with what PNHP says in their analysis. It disagrees with the rosy Press releases that I've seen ProSense link to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. As I said, the PNHP doesn't want a Public Option
Public Plan Option in a Market of Private Plans
By David Himmelstein, M.D. and Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H.:

The public plan option wont work to fix the health care system for two reasons.

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/03/26/himmelstein-and-woolhan... /


They're not talking about any particular bill, they're talking about the public option as a concept
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #16
44. +1. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
7. The PNHP opposes a public option.
They have attacked Dean for standing up for one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Dean has misrepresented the public option, saying it is just like SP
that is why they criticized Dean, but we have had this discussion before and you just continue ignoring the reason.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The Power of the Word Medicare -

When the word Medicare is used in the various polls, the number of people who favor the plan automatically jumps, it makes no difference if the question relates to the public option or a national insurance system such as single-payer...the word "Medicare" has a favorable connotation...






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Maybe it's Pnhp that is distorting the Democrats' plan, or
is Senator Sanders also "misrepresenting" it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
28. He said STRONG public option - there isn't a STRONG public option
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #28
42. You are in denial
Bernie Sanders supports the HELP bill.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #13
31. I haven't seen that
would you please post a link where Howard Dean says that the public option is just like single payer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. Link - Howard Dean on the Ed Show and more...
Edited on Mon Aug-24-09 11:24 AM by slipslidingaway
Posted in the thread below back in June, but some people continue to distort the views of PNHP.

Interview on the Ed Show was during the time that SP advocates were trying to get a seat at the Senate round tables - Baucus had excluded them from participating. Ed asked Dean what he thought about SP being off the table, Dean said SP is Not off the table. Dean knows what the physicians were advocating for when they talk about SP, Medicare for All.

Why would he confuse the issue and lead people to believe that the public option is the same as SP or just like SP???

In addition he keeps referring to the public option as being like Medicare, but Medicare does not have to compete for the basic coverage with private insurance plans and started with millions of people in the plan which could then bargain for lower prices.

:(

Why are people trying to discredit single-payer advocates? ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Begins at the 2:55 mark...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DitCTKPL-xI

"...What Obama's plan essentially does is give you the choice of whether you want to be in a single-payer or private insurance plan..."


http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/06/dean-wyden-the-public...

"Public option is like single payer. It gives consumers the choice..."


http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/17/gov_howard_dean_o...

"AMY GOODMAN: Explain what is the public option, as its been presented.

HOWARD DEAN: For the average American, they should best think of it as Medicare..."


You could also read what Dean told the insurance companies when he spoke at the AHIP convention.

http://healthplans.hcpro.com/content.cfm?content_id=234...

"What the president is proposing to do is say, if you like what you have, you can keep it. If you're comfortable with the private insurance market, you can keep it. Not only that, but we'll help you buy it. There will be a government subsidy based on your income, particularly helpful to small businesses, that you will receive to buy healthcare in the private market," Dean said. "But you will also have a choice of buying into a public plans such as Medicare or some other public plan. And I'm one of the few defenders of that in this room."

"Now I know people in this room, in this industry, are very, very fearful," he said. "This is the center of opposition."

He looked at the rows of representatives of Aetna, Blue Cross, and dozens of other companies assembled and said, "Your living is at stake here. But I don't think it's going to be as tough as you think it is."



Also read about the data exclusivity amendment that Dean argued for as part of his role as an adviser to McKenna, Long & Aldridge...

Biotech firms lobby for say on healthcare
$66m effort to protect drug-patent exclusivity


http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/07/21/b... /

"...The quest for influence is not always obvious.

Howard Dean, the former Democratic Party chairman, wrote an opinion piece this month in The Hill, an influential Capitol Hill newspaper, arguing that fewer than 12 years of monopoly rights for biotech companies products would prematurely rob innovators of their intellectual property and . . . destroy incentives to develop new cures.

Within hours Joe Trippi, a Democratic consultant who ran Deans 2004 presidential race, hyped Deans opinion piece in a blog post that he sent to The Huffington Post, a widely read website. Hes a doctor and lifelong advocate for health reform - he knows what hes talking about, Trippi wrote, urging readers to contact their lawmakers.

...Dean failed to note in his editorial that he is an adviser to McKenna, Long & Aldridge, a global law firm that is advising the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the influential trade group.

...But Dean said his editorial was part of McKennas rapid-fire response to an unexpected, eleventh-hour Senate health committee proposal (which biotech firms ultimately fought off).

It was a huge scramble, all hands on deck, Dean said..."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. PNHP was founded by physicians in the 1980's to advocate for
a not for profit, single-payer system similar to the Canadian model.

They have not compromised on their position.

In fact this is what Dr. McCanne of PNHP said about the original Hacker proposal back in 2007...


http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/evolution-of-t...

...Also, Dr. Don McCanne of Physicians for a National Health Program offers sincere praise, concluding:

Jacob Hackers proposal is a very welcome addition at a time that all options should be on the table. It is such a compelling model that it may shove all others off of the table - except single payer - then we can get down to a serious discussion about reform that really works.

The current proposals do not resemble the original plan, they would not have near the number of enrollees that were envisioned, Howard Dean even argued that only 5-10 million would be enrolled in the public plan by 2019.

And again they never attacked Dean for promoting the public plan, they attacked him for saying the public option was just like single-payer and also for saying the public plan would be like Medicare.

Medicare does not have to compete with private plans, Dean knows this and continues to misrepresent the proposals and confuse the issue.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Only on DU - unrecommending physicians who demand a real solution to the health care crisis

I see Dennis Kucinich and single payer advocates consistently voted to the top video spot & greatest threads.

Yet, tell DU to walk the walk along with him and you get rated DOWN.

There is no way we will win real health care reform with this 'take what you can get, even if you don't get anything' attitude.

Yes, we can cave to the insurance companies!

Yes, we can!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. These docs should support government subsidies to buy private insurance...
makes sense.

:sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolphindance Donating Member (283 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. Everyone knows about this article and has read it. Nice try. Unrecced (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
37. I did not know about it . Rec'd for providing
important information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last_texas_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
51. Bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. ---
Edited on Tue Aug-25-09 06:35 PM by Lerkfish
enlightening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
9. Excellent essay. Highly recommended. k&r n/t
:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quantass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
17. This is NO SURPRISE sadly...
I was expecting that no bill would contain a strong public option. I mean, you look at this fervor all over tv and around the country for something that should be widely accepted since in the end it is a good thing for society. Democrats being what they are, despite having majorities in both houses, ultimately NEED to cave to watering whatever it is they are doing. It never fails.

But the idea of ANY public option that can lay thefoundation for America moving in something that resembles a forward direction is better than nothing. Without that it will take many more years for a solid re-working from starting.

I hope i live to the day when democrats actually stand up for what they CLAIM is their party beliefs since it seems to me they say what people want to hear but when it comes down to it they are nothing but dreamers.

I will always respect republicsn for getting things done and nothing more. Democrats i respect their dreams and hopes and nothing more. Honestly i wish democrats were a true party of progressives with backbones...give me a bunch of Kucinch's or Weiners any day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
25. Kicking. n/t
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
27. K & R -and piss on all the people that unrecc'd this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Agreed!
There are too damned many centrist enablers running around these days and not nearly enough true progressives. It's no wonder we can't get single-payer. People who just roll over on their backs and play dead in the face of a fight don't need health care anyway. They need an undertaker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. They are afraid of something
I can imagine Glenn Beck's tea-baggers going to this kind of trouble trying to shout down information that might cause more people to support Single Payer, but then Glenn Beck's tea-baggers are too stupid to know they are working for the very people who will rip them off, and then deny them critical life-saving care should they ever need it.

Here, it's hard to imagine what kind of person would want to keep a thread like this from getting as many viewers as possible.

So, to counter the effect of their 'work' I have emailed the info to my email list and asked them to forward it to as many people as possible. Censorship only works if we allow it. I have also added the information that there are actually people on Democratic boards who are working to oppose Healthcare Reform.

Thank god for the internets, it makes the work of censors a little bit more difficult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #40
47. What they seem to fear the most is that people might demand a strong public option. They
seem intent on misleading people to believe that what is currently in HR3200 and the Senate HELP bill are "Robust" is the word they like to use.

Unfortunately what is in those bills is a joke.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
32. Kicking to educate people on the difference between public option in name or in substance! Don't let
the Public Option be tiny and weak like the public option at any cost folks seem to be doing demand that it's capable of doing what they say it's supposed to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
34. Kicking. n/t
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-24-09 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
36. kick nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
48. thank you for this thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 04:29 AM
Response to Original message
49. K&R again..as the "company cheerleaders" keep trying to silence this article!
now i know why the unrec was born..to silence truth!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pecwae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
50. knr. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
52. Rep Anthony Weiner, who's been very effective on the tube, has been promised a vote on single payer
I wonder if it will be H.R. 676 they will be voting on. Weiner is one of the 86 co-sponsors of the bill.

H.R.676

Title: To provide for comprehensive health insurance coverage for all United States residents, improved health care delivery, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. (introduced 1/26/2009) Cosponsors (86)

Latest Major Action: 1/26/2009 Referred to House committee.

Status: Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

COSPONSORS(86), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)

Rep Abercrombie, Neil - 2/11/2009
Rep Baldwin, Tammy - 1/26/2009
Rep Becerra, Xavier - 3/17/2009
Rep Berman, Howard L. - 1/26/2009
Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. - 2/23/2009
Rep Brady, Robert A. - 2/11/2009
Rep Brown, Corrine - 3/3/2009
Rep Capuano, Michael E. - 2/23/2009
Rep Christensen, Donna M. - 4/21/2009
Rep Chu, Judy - 7/31/2009
Rep Clarke, Yvette D. - 1/26/2009
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy - 1/26/2009
Rep Cleaver, Emanuel - 2/23/2009
Rep Cohen, Steve - 1/26/2009
Rep Costello, Jerry F. - 2/3/2009
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. - 2/23/2009
Rep Davis, Danny K. - 1/26/2009
Rep Delahunt, William D. - 1/26/2009
Rep Dicks, Norman D. - 6/15/2009
Rep Doyle, Michael F. - 1/26/2009
Rep Edwards, Donna F. - 1/26/2009
Rep Ellison, Keith - 1/26/2009
Rep Engel, Eliot L. - 1/26/2009
Rep Farr, Sam - 1/26/2009
Rep Fattah, Chaka - 2/11/2009
Rep Filner, Bob - 2/11/2009
Rep Frank, Barney - 1/28/2009
Rep Fudge, Marcia L. - 6/2/2009
Rep Green, Al - 2/23/2009
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. - 1/26/2009
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. - 1/26/2009
Rep Hare, Phil - 6/11/2009
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. - 2/23/2009
Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. - 1/26/2009
Rep Hirono, Mazie K. - 2/23/2009
Rep Holt, Rush D. - 6/12/2009
Rep Honda, Michael M. - 2/11/2009
Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. - 3/5/2009
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila - 1/26/2009
Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. - 2/3/2009
Rep Kaptur, Marcy - 1/26/2009
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. - 2/23/2009
Rep Kildee, Dale E. - 2/23/2009
Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. - 1/26/2009
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. - 1/26/2009
Rep Lee, Barbara - 1/26/2009
Rep Lewis, John - 3/17/2009
Rep Loebsack, David - 3/24/2009
Rep Lofgren, Zoe - 5/20/2009
Rep Lujan, Ben Ray - 3/24/2009
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. - 2/23/2009
Rep Markey, Edward J. - 6/12/2009
Rep Massa, Eric J. J. - 1/26/2009
Rep McDermott, Jim - 1/26/2009
Rep McGovern, James P. - 3/3/2009
Rep Meek, Kendrick B. - 3/24/2009
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. - 1/26/2009
Rep Miller, George - 3/19/2009
Rep Moore, Gwen - 2/11/2009
Rep Murtha, John P. - 7/9/2009
Rep Nadler, Jerrold - 1/26/2009
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. - 1/26/2009
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes - 5/20/2009
Rep Olver, John W. - 1/26/2009
Rep Pastor, Ed - 3/19/2009
Rep Payne, Donald M. - 3/3/2009
Rep Pingree, Chellie - 1/26/2009
Rep Polis, Jared - 1/28/2009
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille - 3/30/2009
Rep Rush, Bobby L. - 2/23/2009
Rep Ryan, Tim - 3/5/2009
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. - 2/23/2009
Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" - 2/23/2009
Rep Serrano, Jose E. - 6/9/2009
Rep Thompson, Bennie G. - 2/23/2009
Rep Tierney, John F. - 1/28/2009
Rep Tonko, Paul D. - 1/26/2009
Rep Towns, Edolphus - 3/31/2009
Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. - 2/23/2009
Rep Waters, Maxine - 3/19/2009
Rep Watson, Diane E. - 1/26/2009
Rep Weiner, Anthony D. - 7/9/2009
Rep Welch, Peter - 2/23/2009
Rep Wexler, Robert - 2/11/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. - 1/26/2009
Rep Yarmuth, John A. - 2/23/2009

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-25-09 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #52
53. My understanding is that there will be no vote on HR 676, Weiner
will introduce an amendment to HR 3200, similar to HR 676, which would substitute the amendment for the bill.

:shrug:

On Thursday Weiner's office said they have not sent anything over yet to be scored and I just hung up the phone with his office now - they cannot say whether or not anything has been sent to the CBO???

Another DU'er posted this yesterday...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

"I called Weiner's office last Friday and they ARE going to score it.
The paperwork has been submitted and they are waiting. The aide seemed to believe it would be done in a timely manner."








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Nov 01st 2014, 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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