Good god! So if you don't BUY health insurance, you get FINED!!??? WTF!!!???

[Kablooie]

This is the plan that -- Democrats --- are pushing!

What the hell kind of insanity is this!???
This solves the health care issue!???


I'm dumbfounded.

My god I hope someone fights this idiocy!!

---

edited to add link

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/08/gop-senators-warn-obama-o_n_212834.html

[billyoc]

1. Oh, don't worry, the fines will be on a sliding scale, based on your ability to pay.

:rofl:

[Ms. Toad]

85. Actually, if you read Kennedy's draft bill they will be, n/t

[Matariki]

135. Right. And that sliding scale knows how much of that income is 'disposable'

And who has large financial obligations in spite of their income.

What a shitty idea - a wet dream being pushed by the insurance industry. I heard one of their spokesmen on NPR yesterday pushing this very thing, while tearing down the public option.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

98. whereas in other countries there is nationalized care, not nationalized insurance

we are being screwed and not enjoying it.

[CTyankee]

123. But in other countries the people pay TAXES to support their health care so

one way or the other you have to PAY for it!!

Good Lord, folks, countries with socialized medicine PAY. You think they get it for free?

You are required to pay your Medicare tax, hell,you are required to pay your car tax and local taxes to support local services such as police, fire and schools.

Where do people on this board get the idea that health care can come out of the ether and not cost a red cent?!!

:banghead:

[GreenArrow]

126. I have no problem paying extra taxes

to help ensure that everyone has affordable and equitable health care. I have a big problem with fattening the pockets of the profiteers in the insurance and pharmaceutical rackets. To mandate that I subsidize these swine is an insult of the first order.

[CTyankee]

130. I agree with you. But I got the impression with most, not all, posters on this thread

that were complaints about paying for health care, not health insurance companies, which is why I posted what I did. There were screeches about being FORCED to pay for their own health care insurance, not making the distinction that you, rightfully, did.

[Fool Count]

132. They don't get it for free, but they pay per capita on average just

a half of what US pays, yet that money buys them a measurably better health outcomes.
Nobody says that health care can come for free. But cutting half the cost wouldn't
be so bad, would it? And we know it is possible. And big insurance and pharma know
it is possible. But that would be the money out of their pockets, and out of lobbyists'
pockets, and out of US congressmen re-election campaigns pockets and into yours.
So, whether it's taxes or premiums, health care will continue to cost a US taxpayer
at least twice what it costs everybody else in the world, and there is not a damn
thing you can do about it.

[renate]

133. welcome to DU!

:hi:

[CTyankee]

134. "Nobody says that health care can come for free."

I got the distinct impression that many posters on this thread were complaining about being forced to pay for health care. My point wasn't that it would be perfect; I don't think it will. My point was that health care always costs SOMETHING.

[dkf]

152. They don't want free health care, they want someone rich to pay for them.

since they deserve it as a human right.

[ZombieHorde]

153. Classic straw man.

Straw man. This is the fallacy of refuting a caricatured or extreme version of somebody's argument, rather than the actual argument they've made. Often this fallacy involves putting words into somebody's mouth by saying they've made arguments they haven't actually made, in which case the straw man argument is a veiled version of argumentum ad logicam. One example of a straw man argument would be to say, "Mr. Jones thinks that capitalism is good because everybody earns whatever wealth they have, but this is clearly false because many people just inherit their fortunes," when in fact Mr. Jones had not made the "earnings" argument and had instead argued, say, that capitalism gives most people an incentive to work and save. The fact that some arguments made for a policy are wrong does not imply that the policy itself is wrong.

http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Straw%20man

[shadowknows69]

108. Will my jail sentence be lowered on scale based on how claustrophobic I am?

[Iris]

169. maybe in jail you could be treated for that.

[spoony]

182. Don't worry, debtors' prison is up to 14% nicer than regular prison

Or, at least, it will be made so under a provision in the new law :)

[shadowknows69]

194. Yay, double fucking plus good.

[Skittles]

2. it's CHANGE, baby!!

doesn't mean it's change for the better

[Teaser]

6. misinformation FAIL

.

[Bluebear]

12. She will KICK YOUR ASS.

[Skittles]

37. sucking insurance ass is not misinformation

[Deja Q]

161. Care to adumbrate something really pointless, like

WHY you think it's "misinformation FAIL"? (Pro or con, please, please, PLEASE put in some substance!!)

[Old Hob]

94. Yes We Can!!!

[AnOhioan]

3. Can't afford insurance, won't be able to afford fine

Can't get blood from a turnip

[Kablooie]

4. So you go to jail and get medical care there I guess.

There will be a hell of a lot of high blood pressure cases in prison.

[AnOhioan]

8. And 3 squares a day...at this rate, not a bad option.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

19. Nope. Read this Prison blues: States slimming down inmate meals ( no breakfast for ex.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5799533

[elehhhhna]

185. If you want a nicer jail experience,

Go to the Netherlands to commit your crime/s. By law they must feed you well (healthily...think fruits, veg & protein ) & give you a full dinner, including at least half a roasted chicken, every Sunday.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

196. lol! Recent article (5/28) Netherlands Prisons Closing For Lack Of Criminals.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/28/netherlands-prisons-closi_n_208561.html

BTW...of all the European countries my parents visited, The Netherlands was their favorite.

(I've only been to England, Switzerland, Italy and Lichtenstein)

[Greyhound]

30. And there we are. Can't pay the fine, go to jail, and we have people imprisoned for poverty.

Pretty clever, huh?

Fucking bastards.:grr:

[Kablooie]

44. We don't need to jail them. Just execute them and decrease the surplus population.

[SammyWinstonJack]

138. More cheap prison labor!

:woohoo: :sarcasm:

[Kablooie]

195. or Soylent Green.

[Kablooie]

45. But if the turnip hits you hard enough, it can get blood from you.

[Greyhound]

83. Don't give them any ideas. I can see it now, the latest in crowd control,

the turnip cannon.

I'm sure there's a multi-billion dollar DoD research grant in there somewhere.

[JVS]

166. What I heard from MA was that the fine was often cheaper than insurance so people paid the fine

and went uninsured. It's a stupid system

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. Sounds like the Massachusetts program.

I have no idea how that's working out, though.

[Political Heretic]

70. I was told, but do not have sources yet, that the Mass progam has been a big failure

But I will certainly be looking into that now...

[ProudDad]

100. The Mass system

is failing.

Since "Health Insurance" has become no more "affordable" there, lots of folks are opting to pay the fine -- it's cheaper than sub-standard "health insurance".

Time to recognize as the rest of the industrialized world has that "free market sick care" DOESN'T WORK!!!

[elehhhhna]

186. ..and the fines for haVING NO AUTO INSURANCE? How's that working out? LOL

oops sorry about the caps

[Ms. Toad]

89. It is at least some better than the Mass plan.

Subsidies go to 500% of poverty.

Insurance companies must take all applicants and cannot base their premiums on health (so they can't cherry pick the cheapest clients and leave the public option to carry the rest at a higher cost).

Profits are capped (although the cap is just a placeholder - no numbers inserted yet).

I don't think Mass is working well - this does fix some of the problems, though. Doesn't hold a candle to single payer, but it far exceeds Obama's and Dean's minimum criteria.

[KamaAina]

128. That would be Mitt Romney's pet Massachusetts program?

:eyes:

[TheCowsCameHome]

170. Yes, that very one.

[Chemisse]

7. I was afraid of this.

This mandatory insurance is what Mass. put in place and what Clinton backed in her primary run.

That is crazy!

[Adelante]

112. Yeah, both Clinton and Edwards nt

[DJ13]

9. None of the "allowed" "reform" plans are worth a damn

Every plan proposed is in one way or another nothing but a welfare program designed to inflate the insurance industry.

[elehhhhna]

187. Plus they got theirs w/ Medicare part D. They need to

back off the trough.

O is becoming quite the disappointment...and Congress is composed of the same old of crooks playing of "bad cop/worse cop".

[jwirr]

10. Buy health insurance? Okay how poor can you be before the government

buys it for you? Or are they going to keep Medicaid and Medicare besides the buy in plan? There are a lot of us on medical assistance already - what is the plan for the poor and what is the level at which the government would pay for you?

[sandnsea]

24. $16,500 for an individual; $33,000 for a family of four

and the funny thing, half the people bitching in this thread supported Hillary which is where this stupid idea came from in the first place.

[jwirr]

26. If this is what we are forced to take those figures should be much higher.

That is about where Medicaid and Medicare are today and that is why we have uninsured.

[sandnsea]

33. I wish. And medicare isn't income based

That's for free Medicaid. From there, you get a sliding scale subsidy, a family of four can get a subsidy earning $110,000 a year. Most likely much cheaper than taxes would be. I pay $100 a month for my husband and myself, it would be cheaper if I didn't have to have the state insurance pool because of my diabetes.

[Yo_Mama]

38. I didn't support Hillary, and this is one of the reasons

I didn't support Hillary, and this is one of the reasons

If they really believe most families of four living on 33K can afford to buy health insurance, they need to catch a clue. Most of them can't.

The other reason I didn't support Hillary was that I was worried about the Clinton's historic association with Wall Street and the big banks. I'm obviously not very bright when it comes to voting. I feel like crawling under my bed and not coming out until the world gets sane again.

We've got to be more realistic before we can make things better. We are going to have to raise income taxes quite a bit, and we are going to have to do it progressively. That's what I have told everyone I know, for years. There is no one they can elect that will be able to spare them higher taxes, so they'd better concentrate on electing people who are focused on doing it as fairly as possible. I also think we will have to broaden the tax basis by taxing some of the 401K/IRA/muni bonds. We can do it at a lower rate, and we can include a basic exemption for say 5-8K of income a year from them, but the reality is that some very rich people are paying very minimal taxes. We've just put too many tax exemptions in, and now we have to eliminate some of them.

[Political Heretic]

71. This is such bullshit. Mandates like this never accurately get "affordable" right.

[Matariki]

136. Great. And $33,000 in Iowa is a WHOLE LOT MORE money than $33k in San Francisco

Idiots.

[sandnsea]

163. They make those adjustments with food stamps etc.

They'll make the same adjustments with the FREE FREE FREE program. And they'll also make adjustments for those making over this amount for the SUBSIDIZED program. That's how SINGLE PAYER would work too.

Speaking of idiots.

[Matariki]

177. Will they make adjustments for people with large debt, housing costs

or myriad other things that might prevent a person from affording mandatory insurance? I doubt it.

This is just disgusting - forcing people to have mandatory insurance - it's NOT for the benefit of the end user. It's clearly for the benefit of insurance companies that are pushing it.

As far as your comment "speaking of idiots" - was that directed at me? Surely you're not that rude Sandnsea?

[sandnsea]

178. Will they for single payer?

:shrug:

What will they do about people with large debt and housing costs - and the taxes single payer would cost?

Of course I wasn't saying you're an idiot. I would never be so rude. I'm shocked that you would be so rude as to insinuate that.

[Matariki]

180. I get your point - it has to payed for somehow

However I sincerely think that a single payer system, paid for by taxes on both individuals and corporations - (which would easily be offset by not having to pay expensive health care benefits), would be far, far cheaper than private insurance. Especially private insurance that gets it's way and makes that insurance mandatory.

Just look at auto insurance - do you want mandatory health insurance tied to your credit score? Or go up every time you need to use it?

[elehhhhna]

188. If they're going to implement a confiscatory policy,

why not just jam us all for the (dramatically cheaper) DIRECT medical COSTS via taxation versus forcing us to buy an (always) inferior product that's designed to turn treatment dollars into obscene profits?

[Matariki]

191. I agree with you completely.

The whole thing is being driven by the profiteers.

[elehhhhna]

189. If they're going to implement a confiscatory policy,

why not just jam us all for the (dramatically cheaper) DIRECT medical COSTS via taxation versus forcing us to buy an (always) inferior product that's designed to turn treatment dollars into obscene profits?

[Raineyb]

145. $16,500 for an individual?

What do they expect single people to do live on the street? That's less than nothing and I'm sure people making twice that couldn't afford insurance and housing. Why have a government plan at all if the threshold is so bloody low?

[sandnsea]

162. lol, it's twice what it is now

You're just showing how completely out of touch you are with the bottom 30% of the country.

[Ms. Toad]

90. In the Kennedy plan

Some subsidies to 500% of poverty level. I don't know what level a complete subsidy level kicks in.

[bluestateguy]

11. Wow

The sources you provided contained some very revealing information.

Oh, wait a minute...

[Kablooie]

20. Oh yeah. I was so upset I forgot to add a link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/08/gop-senators-warn-obama-o_n_212834.html

[Cleita]

13. Every day the insult to working and sick people gets worse and worse. n/t

[JonLP24]

14. I believe you so far but please provide sources

Thank you :hi:

[Kablooie]

21. Here you go. I forgot because I was upset.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/08/gop-senators-warn-obama-o_n_212834.html

[kenny blankenship]

15. Can't afford mandated car insurance? Walk! Can't afford mandated health insurance? DIE!

No more leniency for the useless eaters.

[HughMoran]

31. Lol - what do people who don't work have for insurance now?

NONE!!

:rofl:

[kenny blankenship]

36. Duh. But they aren't criminalized for being indigent.

Laugh your ass off now, "Democrat".

[HughMoran]

42. Look, I didn't start this

What does it mean to call me a "Democrat"?

Is calling someone a Democrat a new form of insult?

[CTyankee]

124. Well, do you pay taxes? If not, to whom do you complain?

Do you just say you can't afford your taxes? Hmmm, wonder what result that would get you...

[MarjorieG]

16. Always difficult to sell economics of helping people, worse now in bad times.

Obama was against mandates but facing opposition and deicits.

[eridani]

49. All we have to do is to spend most of our current health care dollars on CARE

Forcing us to subsidize those shitstain insurance companies will NOT do that!

[Hannah Bell]

107. that's what bad times are for. to convince you the safety net is too expensive.

[madokie]

17. This sounds like bullshit that is put out there in the quest to not give us affortable healthcare

Thats what that all sounds to me like

[Individualist]

18. Gotta keep fattening up those insurance companies

It's the DLC way.

[dflprincess]

64. And keep the "contributions" (aka bribes) flowing into those campaigns (eom)

[handmade34]

22. I will gladly buy health insurance

if I pay my premiums to the U.S. Government run universal health care program. Gladly!

[diamidue]

52. Exactly.

In Canada I paid a small amount each month and in return I received all-inclusive health care. It was all so easy. None of the extraordinary amount of red tape, paperwork and sorting thru dozens of insurance plans with all their restrictions and requirements like we will be stuck with here. I was able to choose my own doctor. And I was able to see specialists as well.

We don't need the frikkin' insurance companies taking a cut of everything.

[nolabels]

91. You are dreaming of times when government actually had fiscal responsibility

Nowadays they shovel money out the back door to corporations faster than they can steal it from the rest of us through the front

[kirby]

23. I support it fully...

Insurance works by spreading the risk out over a large pool of people. The healthy people subsidize the sick people. The is the foundation of health insurance. Only by everyone having health insurance will there be an accurate sharing. If all the 'healthy people' decide to opt-out, you are left with an unbalanced system.

[sendero]

58. Finally...

... someone who get it. This is a TAX. A TAX to pay for medical services. There are other ways it could be done, as a direct income tax increase or whatever, but the net result is the same - everybody that gets services contributes to the pool.

[Kablooie]

73. If it's a tax then everyone needs to pay a flat amount and receive equivilent service.

When it's paid to insurance companies the cost and quality of service can be completely inequitable.

It's not a tax.

It's extortion.

[sendero]

109. Well...

... we don't yet know the details. The price will almost certainly be scaled by income with low income folks paying very little.

Like the income tax.

I would prefer a single-payer solution but that is not going to happen right now. In lieu of that, any plan will REQUIRE that the govt collect revenues to pay for it. Fact of life.

[SammyWinstonJack]

141. Including Congresscritters! As you stated, everyone needs to pay a flat amount

and receive equivalent service. Time for Congress/Fed employees free ride to end! :grr:

[mmonk]

72. Here's the rub. We're paying for profit middle men.

There's a ceiling on how cost efficient that will be. We'll still being paying more as a nation than others who don't have to run everything through CORPORATE RULERS through CORPORATE WHORE REPRESENTATIVES. Some are more equal than others.

[Ms. Toad]

92. I don't support it fully - but am willing to live with it

as long as it requires any entity providing insurance (private or government) accept all applicants, set premiums without regard to health, and subsidize individuals who cannot afford the premiums.

I'm also willing to support an income based tax to pay for health care under the same conditions.

[madmom]

140. But but that sounds like ...socialism!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sandnsea]

25. Thank Hillary, Krugman, Edwards, et al

They're the ones who pushed for mandates.

[dflprincess]

68. Because, God knows,

Obama would never have anything to do with a plan that funnels even more money into the pockets of the crooks that have been robbing us blind for years.

[SammyWinstonJack]

142. .

:evilgrin:

[Political Heretic]

74. Ewards also pushed for a full public plan availalbe to anyone who wanted it

If means-test "mandates" come with that, then I'll relectantly take em.

But I doubt they are going to.

So what we have instead is a mandate that we subsidize private insurance profit

[lumberjack_jeff]

27. Get a grip. What does "universal" mean to you?

Some people like being uninsured for the same reason that some people like having the neighbor's milk cow conveniently near their fence.

[Greyhound]

34. And don't forget about those Cadillac driving welfare queens and their relatives,

the "outdoor enthusiasts" that really prefer to live on the streets.
:eyes:

[WeDidIt]

28. It's The Healthcare CEO Pocket Lining Act of 2009

Plain and simple.

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. An outrage! It should be paid by taxes, which are, after all, optional. n/t

[HughMoran]

32. Heh

You have to admit, the outrage is kind of funny.

[dflprincess]

65. If a "health care" tax was based on taxable income off the 1040 form

then a family of 4 making $33,000 might catch a break. Because I'm betting the $33,000 limit that's now being proposed is referring to gross income, not what winds up as being taxable.

[and-justice-for-all]

35. Thats just plan evil..nt

[Maru Kitteh]

39. The only way healthcare can work for everyone is if eveyone is invested in the system

Single payer would be best. I don't think we'll be getting that right off the bat though. I am hoping to see it sometime in my lifetime.

[Telly Savalas]

47. But if it's going to be mandatory for everyone to be invested in the system

then the system needs to be modified.

Someone who has been diagnosed with a serious illness and who doesn't have coverage from their employer is not going to find an insurance company willing to write an individual policy for him. If health insurance is going to be mandatory, then it's pretty much essential for there to be a public option available.

[bat country]

174. But I make a profit of three and a quarter cents

an egg by selling them for four and a quarter cents an egg to the people in Malta I buy them from for seven cents an egg. Of course, I don't make the profit. The syndicate makes the profit. And everybody has a share.

[Tim01]

40. Wow, I was worried there for a second.

Then I remembered I already have health insurance. So I won't be affected by universal health care like those poor people will. I'm glad I'm well off enough that I won't get clobbered buy this. It's change I can believe in.

Just fine people for being poor. Why didn't somebody think of this a long time ago?

[kcass1954]

41. Okay, so we've solved the "not everyone has insurance" problem.

What the fuck are we going to do about the "not everyone has health care" problem.

Apparently, the idiots in Washington aren't aware of that problem.

[Kablooie]

43. That's true. Insurance companies often cancel the policy if the bills are too high.

The law allows them to do so in many instances.

(Probably if the bills become higher than your previously paid premiums.)

[FSogol]

46. This was a RW talking point during the election. It was a misrepresentation then

and its a misrepresentation now.

[lostnfound]

48. This is going to make a lot of people angry..people currently scraping by

who have been trained through years of propaganda to believe that 'government is the problem'.
People who don't want government intrusion in their lives, AND who hate insurance companies.

[SnoopDog]

50. Government forcing people to spend money?

Sounds unconstitutional to me. How can our government force us to buy anything?

[Kablooie]

75. And it's not like requiring auto insurance. Driving an auto is a privilege, not a right.

[CTyankee]

131. Your taxes force you to "buy" armed forces to protect the country, public schools, police

and fire protection services, garbage pickup, etc, etc.

That's the answer to your question.

Next?

[SnoopDog]

176. No - your analogy in not valid...

Yes I pay taxes and the government unfortunately decides what to do with that money.

To Order a citizen to buy health insurance is not right.

If they want to tax us and buy health care for us - that's just fine. Thats called a single payer not for profit health care system... that I want.

[CTyankee]

179. As a Medicare recipient I was "ordered" to pay $94 (deducted from my monthly SS check)

or be "fined" later with paying a higher rate when I had to go on Part B. I was exempt at the time because I had coverage under my spouse's job health insurance. Now he is retired so I got to go on to Part B at the lower rate. But had I not paid because I didn't want to or thought I could just get away with it, I would have received a penalty.

I don't really see the difference as long as there is a public option that no one can be turned away from because of pre-existing conditions and that is affordable. If it is not affordable, that's where expanded Medicaid kicks in and in some of the plans being considered that is in there.

We need to get a decent public option and everyone needs to be covered for this to work. The big hope all along was that the public option would be so popular that more and more people would sign up and the private plans would devolve into specialty categories that were nonessential (like private nurses in hospitals and elective surgeries).

This is the closest we have ever come to getting a public plan. Yes, we have to fight the regressive forces like hell. But nobody said it would be easy, back when we were all so thrilled with Edwards' plan or Hillary's plan or Obama's plan. We were ecstatic, remember?

Let's at least TRY.

[Fire1]

51. Yeah. You can't afford health insurance but you sure as hell

can afford to pay a fine. Gooood logic.:banghead:

[InvisibleTouch]

53. THIS is why I was never big on the whole "health care reform" nonsense.

Can't afford to buy health "insurance" (the very term is an oxymoron), no matter which way I twist and turn my finances. Even if I could afford it, I wouldn't buy it. Don't trust the service I'd be getting. I expect to have the right to take my chances, with full awareness of everything that might entail.

I hope this whole proposal is killed dead dead dead.

[olegramps]

111. You take your chances, but don't show up at the emergency room.

You would be the first in line demanding that a doctor sees you and I will have to pay for your care because you don't have any insurance.

[InvisibleTouch]

193. You don't know me nearly well enough to make that assertion.

In fact, I wouldn't be "the first in line." We all have to die sometime. I just prefer to do it on my own terms, if it comes to that.

[stray cat]

54. What do you expect from full coverage? Everybody plays so everybody pays.

[BlooInBloo]

55. "Waivers would be available for those who could not cover the cost of insurance."

I assume you skipped that part on purpose.

[dflprincess]

66. Yet they don't tell us who gets to decide you can't afford it

and deserve a waiver. I doubt they'll take the indivdual's word for it.

[femrap]

56. Excuse me...

but isn't that what HRC was saying?

[GreenArrow]

63. It's what John Edwards was saying

as well. In fact, I think he said it first...not a good plan, regardless.

[Kansas Wyatt]

57. Democrats shooting themselves in the foot AGAIN!

Dear Citizen,

You are delinquent in paying money to DEATH MERCHANTS, who don't give a shit about your health care and only want your money. Enclosed with this letter is a fine for not paying DEATH MERCHANTS, and you are ordered to immediately do business with a U.S. Government approved DEATH MERCHANT or you will be fined further and/or jailed.

Sincerely,

Your Democratic U.S. Government

For Christ's fucking sake, when did the Democrats get so far out of touch with average Working Americans? Oh that's right... They just use Working Americans to get elected and only concentrate on their personal favorite Chic Special Interests, while they offer average Working Americans crap like this.

[donco6]

59. It's a tax, no?

How is this different from FICA?

[Swede]

61. Sounds like a tax to me.

What's the biggie?

[donco6]

62. Got me.

??

[Kablooie]

77. No. A tax would insure equivilent coverage for all. Companies just cover what the want.

And charge what they want.

If there were strict standards for policy costs and coverage requirements it might be different but the insurance industry would have to be tightly regulated and that's not going to happen.

[Fumesucker]

95. Taxes are paid to the government..

In this case the organization collecting the "taxes" will be private, for profit corporations.

[donco6]

96. I see.

I honestly don't see that working at all.

[ZombieHorde]

155. No, what is being described is not a tax.

[jtrockville]

60. So we'll be forced to subsidize insurance company profits?

If health insurance were non-profit, I might think this is a good idea.

But forcing people to subsidize private industry PROFITS in order to get health care is ABSURD.

[dflprincess]

67. That's where the reform comes in

The insurance companies get to collect from everyone with no guarantee that there will be improved access to health care.

[sandnsea]

93. Actually that part isn't true

The plan does have requirements including addiction, mental health and prescription drugs, it has no annual or lifetime limits, no pre-existing, insurance companies will have a benefit percentage they will have to meet, there will be a national set of standards and states can add more. And if we fight against the trigger then we won't be forced to give money to the insurance companies either.

[CTyankee]

125. Thank you for your voice of sanity in this thread.

It is idiocy not to think that a public plan will require SOME payment. I would prefer it to be in taxes, like Medicare and services we receive at the local level. Spread out over a large demographic, it is cheaper than what we have now.

But some folks on this thread are whining about having to pay for what they get. I don't understand it. If they were in a socialized country they would have to pay for it in taxes!

And you are right about fighting the trigger to keep from out being forced to subsidize insurance companies. That whole idea is WRONG and needs to be defeated for the public plan to be equitable...

[dflprincess]

160. People are not whining about having to pay

we're are "whining" about settling for less and having to pay the same crooks who have been robbing us blind for years for it.

Adding items that are suppose to be covered doesn't mean the crooks won't find a way to block access or avoid paying - I'm sure their pals in Congress will toss in plenty of loop holes for them. You're also ignoring that the plan as written is not what will eventually be voted on. By the time the Republicans and DLC Democrats gut it, Kennedy probably won't even vote for it. It makes no sense to start bargaining by asking for less than what you want.

I imagine this is a sign of how badly battered the public has been by conservatives (both Republican & Democrats) for the last 30 years that there are so many are willing to settle for a "reform" bill that's more concerned with the health of insurance companies than with the health of the public.

[CTyankee]

171. Your analysis is very good and makes sense. I wasn't talking about you.

What I was largely reading on this thread was "I'm not gonna be forced buy insurance," not the nuanced explanation you made. And I was not the only one here who picked up on that.

I am as disgusted as you are about this sorry state of affairs. It is shocking that so many of our so called leaders are so deep in the well that they can't even hear our voices. With few exceptions, I'd like to throw them all out of office...

[Political Heretic]

69. People who can't afford to pay will have waivers - this is ALWAYS SUCH BULLSHIT

A bunch of fat, bullshit, politicians completely on the payroll of corporations are going to "decide" whether or not I can "afford" to fork over my money to the insurance industry....

My, my how far health care "reform" has fallen.

[Rex]

76. Sure why not!? You have to have insurance for your car now

the wealthy will crush us under their greedy thumb.

[Kablooie]

78. No. A driving a car is a privilege. You don't have to do it. Medical care is not a privilege.

[Rex]

81. Not really a privilege if you have to get to work with a car.

nt

[Kablooie]

82. It is, so you can lose your license as a punishment. The gov can't stop med care to punish.

[Rex]

88. What is to stop them from taking away your license if you have no

medical coverage when they find out after pulling you over as a punishment? Why not? Once you go down the slope of what is and isn't allowed with the general population, you can do anything.

[Selatius]

103. For a lot of people, driving to work is a necessity, simply because car companies junked the trolley

They started buying local transit companies up in the late 1930s going through the 1960s. These were the companies that ran the buses and the street trolleys you used to see in old movies. Then they cut service to force people off of mass transit and into cars. Eventually, except in major metro areas where mass transit was often publicly owned by the city, they did away with mass transit entirely.

The American mass transit infrastructure is worse than what you would see in Soviet Russia.

[Fumesucker]

79. Entirely too many Americans are skipping out on their patriotic duty

To support the vastly inflated salaries and massive bonuses of the health care insurance CEOs.

This reform is long overdue, there is a health care insurance executive out there who only has one piddly sixty foot yacht.

[Kablooie]

84. That's the spirit! That's the Ameriken way! Yeah!

[gulliver]

80. And I trust you more than the Democrats why?

[Kablooie]

86. You trust me? Why ... I'm flattered.

[kenny blankenship]

147. Given the choice between trusting a random stranger and an elected Democratic politician?

C'mon, that's the easiest choice in the world.

[Kablooie]

148. You've got a point there.

[spoony]

183. Because the OP has never sold you down the river...

and our party has been known to?

[Rex_Goodheart]

87. Sounds like even more incentive to lie about income on your returns

Those Washington pigs are supposed to be making our lives simpler, but they're only there to enrich themselves.

[Marr]

97. Wow- the worst of all possible plans. Amazing.

I guess we'll be looking at another Republican government sooner than we thought. These corporate, DLC Democrats are disgusting.

This does nothing to address the real problem. Our real problem is that insurance middlemen control healthcare in this country, and they twist everything-- degrading the quality of care immensely-- to maximize their profits. This plan exacerbates the problem rather than solving it. It'll empower the middlemen even more.

I mean, imagine what would happen to the price of a Ford automobile if we suddenly had a law that everyone must buy a Ford. Imagine what would happen to the quality of the automobiles being produced.

[ProudDad]

99. I don't like it

I'd prefer that anyone without a private plan that comes up to the standard for reasonable basic care is automatically enrolled in the new, viable Public Option with their premiums taken out of their paycheck if they're employed and have wages above a reasonable minimum...otherwise their premium would be taken care of by "We the People" (and taxes on "private" plans).


Since the USAmerican Congress is too fucking selfish, stupid and bought off to pass single payer, my program for Plan B would start with this:

1) A comprehensive public option made available to ALL persons who desire to join

2) Private health plans MANDATED to accept all who apply regardless of “pre-existing conditions”, health history, etc.

3) Minimum Basic Requirements for health care included in the public option and MANDATED to be included and paid for without question by all basic PRIVATE PLANS including drug coverage, all OB/GYN services, etc. In other words, a level playing field for claims coverage – private and public.

4) A health insurance coverage mandate for all persons with entry into the public plan automatic for those who have no other plan with the cost covered by payroll deduction – no FINES or penalties!

5) Automatic entry into the public plan and strong subsidies for lower income folks and the unemployed – replace Medicare, Medicaid, etc. with a strong public plan

6) Complete negotiating power over fees, services and drugs given to all public plans, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. folding these other plans into the new Public Option. Give the public plans immense negotiating power from the start!

7) A Universal Claim Form and software specifications that MUST be used by all basic private/public plans to cut down on administrative costs. Since the fee, service and drug price schedules will be uniform we can use a single-form

Along with these;

8) Decentralizing the system of primary health care delivery (A local clinic model)

9) More emphasis on prevention and health promotion

10) Significant financial aid for educating Health Care Professionals


On Edit: You've got to have everybody in and strict controls on profits, etc. or it ain't gonna work. That's what the civilized world has already found out. I prefer a mandate that results in each person having Health Care NOT in criminalizing those who don't.

[rachelle-laughlin]

106. Ha ha if this passes think I'll lose my job?

I work for ameriplanUSA (A discount medical service - not insurance-) we provide Americans discounts on medical stuff if they cant afford insurance or for some other reason cant get it or whatever...thats not really what I care to talk about (Check out www.mybenefitsplus.com/laughlin if you want to know more about that)...So if they DO pass this crazy law ( Hope not I get my benefits free from work so Id lose that for sure) Think I would lose my job? Or what?

[proud2BlibKansan]

119. It's not about your job, regardless of what you do.

It's about providing health care to those who currently don't have it.

[Kablooie]

149. You will just have to raise your prices to match the new govt. regulated standards.

[Strong Atheist]

173. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[olegramps]

114. 11. CEOs compensation limited to 250,000.

[CTyankee]

175. If I remember right, there are pieces of what you have listed already under

consideration in all of the back and forth work on the health care legislation.

I like your plan best!

But we're not going to get everything.

Let's fight like hell to get the best we can!

[JVS]

101. What a clusterfuck. Hopefully this plan will fail to pass. It's starting to make the status quo...

look acceptable

[eridani]

105. Comparatively, the status quo IS more acceptable

Right now, the useless shitstain insurance company intermediaries have the legal right to kill us and/or make us bankrupt and homeless to enhance their bottom lines. And we're supposed to line up and support a proposal that would force us to PAY them to continue doing it? NO FUCKING WAY!

[leftstreet]

102. Capitalism is great for delivering us Pet Rocks, but NOT Healthcare

It's not possible.

[democracy1st]

104. good its just like car insurance

[TexasObserver]

110. So, we're bringing back Debtor's Prison instead of having Universal Health Care.

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Between Big Pharm and the "Health Care" industry, we'll be lucky if they do anything positive.

[kenny blankenship]

144. Yep back to the 19th c. And all to avoid saying that healthcare is a right

Something the rest of the industrialized world declared in the middle of the last century.

[MadHound]

113. So, the Obama/Democratic plan is to mandate that everybody above a certain income bracket

Buys a health insurance plan from a corporate provider. Hmm, that's going to jack prices through the roof now isn't it. Obama is essentially handing a monopoly over to the insurance industry and punishing those who refuse to participate.

This is insanity! This is nothing more than Obama and the Democrats pimping for the insurance corporations. Does Obama want to be just a four year president? One has to wonder because the actions he's taken so far are pissing off a number of people, enough that it could cost him the election, especially if he continues in the direction he's currently heading.

More work of the two party/same corporate master system of government.

[proud2BlibKansan]

115. Something tells me the health insurance companies love this plan

Maybe they will knock on doors for Obama in 2012.

[MadHound]

117. Nah, they'll do the same thing that they did this year

Donate a couple of million dollars to Obama's campaign, thus making him indebted to them and compliant to do the insurance industry's bidding.

The Obama campaign is hoping that the left will forget/forgive his transgressions and come out and do the grunt work in 2012. It will be interesting to see if that happens. My prediction is that if Obama continues down this path, the left will either stay home or go Green.

[proud2BlibKansan]

118. He's already lost most of the far left

and the others are walking away daily.

His chances in 2012 will be poor if he keeps this up.

[merh]

139. The far left is not that powerful or that large

if they were, DK would be in office, not obama.

His chances in 2012 are good to excellent, unless some catastrophe occurs that he doesn't handle or unless he pulls a dumbass clinton stunt in the oval.

I wish the left was as powerful as you all want it to be, I wish it had the clout.

The clinton years and Obama's win prove otherwise.

[proud2BlibKansan]

158. But it's full of worker bees

:)

[Celeborn Skywalker]

172. That's true.

I don't think most would deny that most people calling and knocking on doors for Democratic politicians tend to be on the left end of the Democratic party.

[Dawgs]

168. Only if the "far left" is stupid.

What are they going to do, not vote or stay home so the republican wins? If they do, then they are as dumb as you claim.

[proud2BlibKansan]

184. In 2000 a lot of them voted for Nader

[ProudDad]

197. You do realize that when it comes to Korporate USAmerika

The Dems and pukes are just the two right-wings of the Big Business Party.

The only (marginal) advantage of having a Dem President is appointments to SCOTUS being marginally more socially progressive.

When it comes to big business -- ain't a dime's worth of difference between the two...

[SammyWinstonJack]

143. "Does Obama want to just be a four year president?" I think that was the plan all along.

:shrug:

[Ganja Ninja]

116. We're all becoming indentured servants to the corporations. n/t

[newportdadde]

120. Mandate, no public option, health savings accounts, perfect for all corporate overlords

Why am I worried about it? Because if we get a plan it will benefit corporations PERIOD.

One huge force out there is companies wanting to drop their healthcare expense even if it means 'socialized medicine'. Then you have the big insurance companies who obviously hate this idea. Then you have Wall Street who always needs more money. Single payer would only make one of those entities happy. We need a plan that makes all of them happy/rich.

So watch, we will get a mandate, no public option and probably health savings accounts. This is PERFECT for all the big players.

A mandate means employers can dump you.. ow they will give you some type of crappy salary increase to help you 'buy your own' that will not keep up with inflation and will be paid back to them by not giving you a raise for a few years.

Insurance companies will LOVE THIS, its a mandate baby you have to get it and now that your a lone soul out there in the free market all of your lovely preconditions/age etc will make it a nice fat premium.

Health Savings accounts (NOT Flex accounts) are great for Wall Street, you will get sold a bill of goods on the HSAs and how you can earn on your money while you save in them for your catastrophic deductible costs. All kinds of new schemes will come out to process this money.. then we will crash again and all the healthcare money will be stolen.

[blindpig]

121. The administration and the insurance industry

can go fuck themselves.

This is extortion.

If people accept this they will accept any degradation.

[raccoon]

122. K&R. nt

[cagesoulman]

127. This is bogus

Wrong, fuckers.

[bridgit]

129. Who did you think was going to pay for it?

[ecstatic]

137. All the plans will be full of problems

How can anyone expect a universal program that is not inconveniencing in some way?

[mainegreen]

146. So, force people to buy a plan that either they can't afford, or isn't accepted anywhere.

Brilliant.

What an epic fail. Totally fails to address any of the problems in our health care system.

So, will this optional government health plan be forced to comply with the various state insurance board regulations? If yes, then the plan will likely be unmanageable by the government. If no, then it will inevitably lead to weakening of consumer protection across all states except those with the weakest protection. Lovely.

Of course, somehow this will MAGICALLY reduce costs and streamline the healthcare system. And will magically increase choice in small states that have almost no competition in health plans. And truly, this will solve all the issues with coverage gaps from pre-existing conditions, and exclusions. Not to mention the troubling problem of Individual vs Small group vs Large group cost and benefit gaps.


He's not even trying is he?

Epic fail.

[SammyWinstonJack]

151. He's not even trying is he? But he sure gives great speeches!

:silly:

[Kablooie]

150. So the poorer neighborhoods will be filled with people with no insurance AND owe fines.

And the fines will help pay for the insurance that richer people have!


Welp.

Problem solved, let's move on.

[johnaries]

154. What part of "mandate" don't you understand?

They are including provisions for waivers. But, just like Social Security, the Public Option plan only works if everyone participates.

[Kablooie]

156. Man date is is a very controversial subject for some.

[ehrnst]

157. It's what we've been doing with auto insurance for years. (nt)

[dysfunctional press]

159. look for repugs to make BIG gains in the house/senate in 2010.

:grr:

[KansDem]

164. It's the same approach the industry/government took with uninsured car drivers...

Buy it or get a ticket...

And the fucking Republicans used to whine about "unfunded mandates."

[Kablooie]

165. But if you don't have a car, you don't get a fine. Not like this.

[KansDem]

167. Hey, you're right!

Just coincidentally last weekend I sold my car, a broken-down 1965 Chevy. It sat in my driveway since last December. The buyer wants to restore it.

For the first time in 38 years I don't own a car. And I don't have to pay insurance on it!

Too bad KC bus service is f*cked up...

I love change!

[CTyankee]

181. Well, you can analogize this to current Medicare law. You are REQUIRED to have $94

deducted from your SS monthly check for Medicare Part B (drs visits, non hospital which is Part A). You will be penalized ("fined") with paying a higher rate if/when you go on Part B eventually. You are only exempt if you are already covered for Part B services elsewhere, such as a spouse or your employer's benefits. But once that is moot, you go right onto Part B and the $$ is deducted from the check that goes into your account each month from SS.If you are low income and cannot afford the fee, then you have Medicaid.

I know this since I am recently on Part B and my destitute brother was in the Medicaid situation when he turned 65.

[OwnedByFerrets]

190. Its the kind their MASTERS want

[Thothmes]

192. Change you can believe in.