Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Schumer: Opt-Out Public Option Gaining Steam

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
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:48 PM
Original message
Schumer: Opt-Out Public Option Gaining Steam
Source: TPM




Schumer: Opt-Out Public Option Gaining Steam
Brian Beutler | October 8, 2009, 10:58AM


We're chasing the ball on a new idea (is it a trial balloon? is it the magic answer?) to pass a health care bill with a public option that states--likely small, and conservative states--could choose not to participate in.

As I reported last night, the idea comes from Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), and is being pushed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)--a man with no shortage of clout on the Hill. Appearing on MSNBC a few moments ago, Schumer said the idea's gaining traction.

"That's one of the things being very seriously considered," Schumer said. "I'm not going to -- we have a range of things we're considering. Senator Carper and I met for quite a while last night and made progress and talked to a large number of members last night, yesterday. And I am optimistic that there will be some kind of public option in the bill the president signs. I'm very optimistic."


Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/schumer-opt-...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nate Silver at
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 04:07 PM by skipos
fivethirtyeight.com has some reasons why this compromise is one of the better ones. I am not sure we need to compromise though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Dems continue to compromise/water down cause they forget they WON.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aramchek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
51. if they pass the opt out, and red states actually opt out, there will be massive gop losses in 2010
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #51
79. Yeah, and how many people -- including DEMS -- will die as a result
This is a horrible horrible horrible idea.

Horrible.

I can't believe ANY Dem is encouraging it.




Tansy Gold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #79
92. GOP = Death
Dem = Life
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-13-09 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #79
143. why would people die as a result?
even without a public option, the bill requires insurance companies to insure everyone, even those with pre-existing conditions. Those who can't afford to pay will be subsidized.

The public option would force competition on the health insurers and (in theory) bring down the cost of insurance. States that reject it would pay more - but there would still be universal insurance.

You (and several others) have made this claim numerous times now - I would appreciate an explanation of your reasoning that an opt out would cost lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #51
91. I agree
This would turn a lot of people against the GOP in red states. Im all for it. Anything that hurts the GOP saves lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #91
111. This would also cause deaths in red states, though. Well, allow them to
continue, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #51
112. I don't think there will be many states that opt out--if any.
I guarantee you that governors will opt out at their own peril.

My only question is--if a governor opts out and gets beaten for reelection, does that mean the new governor can opt-in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. I agree. NO compromise. Medicare for all.
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 03:54 PM by BrklynLiberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inuca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Do you really think that
Medicare for all is going to pass within the say next six months? Do you think that if nothing passes within the next six months there is any chance of ANYTHING even half-way decent to pass in the foreseeable future?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. Well, if we can't pass it NOW, with the presidency and the majority in both houses
we are worthless and don't deserve to be reelected. Why is it the GOP can pass what they want but we can't? is it that we too are just as beholden to the corporations? Why is Obama kissing GOP ass? And why is unnecessary bipartisanship and un reciprocated bipartisanship more important than peoples lives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #18
28. Our majority isn't worth much when it contains the likes of Blanche Lincoln and Baucus. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #18
32. Well, we did elect a corporatist.
You reap what you sow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kermitt Gribble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
103. So you're willing to settle for anything?
A majority of the American people want Medicare for all. It is our duty to hound our elected reps relentlessly until they give us what we want, not to meekly accept whatever they decide to give us.

The idea of giving states the option to opt out of a public option is bullshit. Give each individual the option to opt in to Medicare, regardless of age.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #5
127. No Compromise == No Change
I guess you're happy with the status quo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is this the plan where the state in which I live gets to choose whether I have insurance or not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Yours and mine, too. You think Kyl is gonna "opt-in" so women
can get maternity care that he doesn't need?

:sarcasm: or whatever.



Goddess but I hate these stupid fuckers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Hey Tansy! A lot of folks on the board today think this is a good thing
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 04:17 PM by saracat
because we need to be "punished" in states like ours..Then we can be forced toa ccept the PO by death and bankruptcy!
I hate the stupid fuckers too!


Michael Jackson was right
"They Don't Care About Us"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. you're right - it's absolute BS to say the millions of taxpayers in these
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 04:23 PM by Divine Discontent
states couldn't get the public option just because a republican controlled state won't allow it! What do they want, mass migration to more progressive states? The small states would be decimated by that!

They already HAVE the option to not be included in the public option, that's why it's not Universal Healthcare - the dumbass bastards.....


:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #21
34. Thanks. I am too angry! Fixed it and you are correct Dumbass Bastards
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 04:22 PM by saracat
GOP Appeasers.

Michael Jackson Was Right
"They Don't Care About Us"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. AMEN! DUMBASS BASTARDS... seriously, I share your anger - what sick sick sick people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyLoochka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #34
76. This is the opposite of "appeasement"
It really puts the Repubs on the hot seat - for a change!

Let there be effects to all their mean, exaggerated rhetoric and lies. The Repubs don't really believe alot of what they say. They just want to stop any and all Democrats. because, with the exception of the blue dogs, Democrats have the policies the people want.

This isn't "punishment" - it's giving blue states what they want and red states what they "say" they want. It's entirely appropriate, given the 100 year long stubbornness of the Repubs that has resulted in blocking decent health care for everyone.

Let the blue states go first and join the public option - the red states will be clamoring to get in after awhile. If they don't they'll lose businesses and population.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #76
114. States are artificial entities. Individuals are human beings. You are saying it is all right
to jeopardize the health, lives and finances of people because a majority of their state legislature is Republican. That is a morally indefensible position, IMO.

122 people die every single day for lack of affordable health insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diane R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:11 PM
Original message
Sounds like you are in a red state. I have a question for you....
If your state 'opts out', do you think it would put pressure on voters in your state to reject their republican representatives and elect democrats? I'm wondering if this might not be a brilliant strategy by Dems to expose republicans to their constituents for who they really are, what they vote for, and pay a price at the polls? Would there be anger from your states residents if they don't have the opportunity to participate in the public option?

Your thoughts? I'm not convinced I'm right on this, so I would really appreciate the perspective of someone from a red state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
27. Hah! This is exactly the strategy our state party thinks is gonna work
in 20019.They say we should be "grateful" for our local losses that we could have won. Hell ,no this isn't gonna work in our state. This will inflame the GOP to work even harder against us.And it isn't reasonable to destroy people and cause them to die to make political points. This is one sick and ineffective strategy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudy23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
33. My red state would stand and applaud Jindal for opting out.
All the GOP pols have to do is beat the free market/gov't is bad drum, and they'll face no negative consequences from their constituents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #33
109. It is not apparent to me that Jindal would be the one to decide
I do think the original idea I saw expressed a preference for the opt out mechanism being a referendum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #109
115. How, under the Constitution, can the feds force states to hold a referendum?
Edited on Fri Oct-09-09 12:40 PM by No Elephants
At most, the feds can leave it to the legislature and the state legislature can either make the decision or order a referendum. (See the approach taken by the 17th Amendment.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #115
119. The states may well be able to make the decision themselves but
all states have some mechanism for citizens getting issues on the ballot. If you are in a state that decides to opt out by some other mechanism I suggest a little activism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #115
135. The word is "permit" not "force".

The Feds could certainly offer insurance to every person in the United States except to those in states where a referendum of the people decides Federal insurance should be banned.

The Feds are not forcing anyone to hold a referendum. They are just defining procedures a state can use to ban Federal insurance IF THE STATE WANTS TO.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
72. When you have people ON MEDICARE out protesting against government involvement in health care, you
cannot count on them being smart enough to know that it is the repukes fault that they will either die or go into bankruptcy for lack of health care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
73. This isn't a game. Our way of life (and sometimes our very lives) are lives at stake.
Progressives should move past the notion that electing more Democrats will solve anything. We have been there, and done that. The more of these worthless turds we elect, the further to the right they move. We could have 100% of the House, 100% of the Senate, AND the WH, and they'd still find a way serve the corps. So I could give a flying fuck whether the red states send a corporate whore "R", or a corporate whore "D", to Washington.

I just listened to Iowa's pathetic excuse for a Governor, Chet Culver (D), deliver an edict that he will impose an immediate 10% across-the-board cut on top of previous cuts, due to an 8.4% revenue projection reduction. He immediately ruled out any tax increases whatsoever. Funding priorities will be given to prison guards, health care for children (their parents can crawl off and die), and (get this) Workforce Development "to help people polish their resumes"... yeah, I shit you not - he actually said that. The worst governor in Iowa history (IMO) was Terry Branstad (a Republican), and as I was listening to Culver (a Democrat) I was struck by how much he sounded like Branstad. Branstad could have given that speech - there was zero difference.

The Democratic party is no longer what it once was, and relying on electing more of them won't solve a thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #73
82. Yeppers, except in very few cases,I suspect you are correct.
I think the GOP ate the DEms. It would appear so anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #73
122. Deleted dupe. Sorry.
Edited on Fri Oct-09-09 01:12 PM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #73
123. I write my elected representatives once a week saying
I will not vote Democratic again unless a strong public option passes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #73
137. +
The Democratic party is no longer what it once was, and relying on electing more of them won't solve a thing. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCoxwain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. It is 'accept' - not 'except'. They have very different meanings.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. Fixed it.Anger effects my spelling. I can't see straight.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #31
55. Hah. It gotcha again. "Affects," not "effects."
:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #55
63. Some days its like that.I am working on becoming illiterate!
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 06:24 PM by saracat
I want to fit in in my state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #63
81. Perfect.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
42. You think the businesses in your state will ALLOW the pols to opt out once they crunch the numbers
and see how opting out hurts their bottom line?

I can't think of ANY profit-conscious realty firm, homebuilder, mortgage company or local financial institution who will want their state to reject public option.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. You really don't know my state. All those institutions are against funding Public Education
though states with good education attract business. You are uninformed. They would oppose it. they also oppose creating "Green jobs"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. That is true at THIS date....but, the math will hit these folks soon enough.
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 05:00 PM by blm
And I am VERY informed, saracat, and disagree with you based an optimistic view of the greedy coming around on this to protect their own profts. And....being informed helps me make my points without insulting others or attacking them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #45
61. I apologize for insulting you blm. I am just very angy at the proposed gamble of
the health and livelihood of all of those in my state, including me. Folks supposing we can just move really infuritate me. With what money? this is the "let them eat cake" argument. Some of us have dedicated our lives to the Democratic Party and to say we should "suffer" and possibly lose all we own to make political points is really upsetting.The so called math has never made a differnce in the business outlook of this state.They don't have much business anyway.They don't care.they rely on tourism and much of it is from abroad.The major businesses left awhile ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. For how long though? Any business with an ounce of savvy for their profit margins will come down
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 06:25 PM by blm
like a hammer on any pol pushing to opt out.

It really sounds strange, but, for this issue, I'm COUNTING on the greed of many of these bastards to kick in when they take a stark look at what will happen should their legislators refuse PO for their state.

Remember the stimulus money and all the GOP asshats (Boehner, Palin, Jindal, Sanford) who grandstanded their rejection of those funds.....and then they heard from the businesses who NEEDED the work that would come from those stimulus funds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. I understand but this has been going on for at least 20 years and they don't get it.
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 06:33 PM by saracat
They still believe the recession is caused by not enough tax cuts and propose we increase them yet again refusing to believe that the last 10 years of tax cuts has contributed to the states fiscal woes. They are selling our State capital and State Senate bldg because we have no money because we have no income and they still don't get it.Trust me, it will NOT make a difference to them.
These are the folks that voted to allow guns in bars and want to abolish public education. These are the folks that overwhelmingly support the infamous Sheriff Joe, even when he doesn't bother to serve warrants or arrest murders because he is chasing illegals! No, they will opt out for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #67
78. I highly doubt it...I don't see them ABLE to pull that much wool nowadays...but...we'll see.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
107. I haven't read the plan as giving the US Senator from the state the power to decide
whether that state opts out or not. My preference, and that of many lawmakers, is to make the mechanism for opting out a referendum. Putting it in the hands of the voters is a good idea. Support for the public option is up among all voters: Democtats, Independents, and Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #107
120. Please see Reply #115.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #120
129. As I said in reply #119 all states have some mechanism whereby
citizens can get issues on the ballot. A little work, of course, but doable. I live in a fairly Republican state with a power hungry governor but I do believe we will have a say in it if the opt-out plan is implemented. Not a huge fan of this idea but it is a decided improvement over no public option or an opt-in plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
101. Exactly. Come on Dems! If now isn't the time to show some spine
when IS the time?

Hi BrklynLiberal! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
106. Yes. As opposed to the plan in which the state YOU live in gets to choose for me.
Edited on Fri Oct-09-09 12:07 PM by lumberjack_jeff
I dislike being held hostage. If your elected officials want to shoot you in the foot, I see no compelling moral need to place my foot atop yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #106
118. States are not choosing anything right now. It's the Senators. And, they are doing so
despite polls indicating that the voters in their states want a public option. This is insurance companies choosing for all of us. We MUST stop this in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
113. More likely, You will HAVE to have insurance, BUT your state will decide if you have a public option
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #113
116. what fekkin public option?
It looks like it's going to be another corporate give away to the health insurance industry. Since, it looks like the government will be contracting the industry for that so-called public option.

I'm just so tired of the American corporate greedfest. I'm just tired and sick of it all. It's just another fekkin giveaway and the citizens in this country get burned again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
4.  What a revolting bunch of pigs they all are.And people think
Schumer was one of the "good guys". Winning is everything, the people don't matter. Political strategy is everything and lives are just collateral damage.



Michael Jackson was right
"They Don't care About Us"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. The operative word in your post is "WAS". I would NEVER vote for Schumer again.
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 03:55 PM by BrklynLiberal
I did not vote for him when he ran the last time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Bingo! Winning IS everything for them ... doesn't matter what the bill looks like n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grytpype Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. What is wrong with you people?
If you don't get absolutely everything you want right now, everyone is a pig.

Get over yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
48. But "we " are gettingNOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
60. There's a big ass difference between "absolutely everything"
and "absolutely nothing."

I don't know what state you're in, but I'm in Arizona. We used to have a solidly Democratic governor who kept the effects of our wingnut legislature from turning us into another Kansas (apologies to my friend DW if she's reading this), but Obama tapped Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security and we got left with Her Nibs Jan Brewer.

Our public education system is being decimated by the worst of the corporate charter schools.

We have the likes of John McCain -- remember him? He's the one who thought Sarah Palin would make a great President if anything happened to him -- and Jon Kyl -- the one who doesn't think health insurance should offer maternity benefits since HE can't get pregnant -- representing us in the Senate. You know damn well those two would condemn the 7,000,000 or so people in Arizona to NO PUBLIC OPTION. You either get employer-provided insurance, private insurance, Medicare/Medicaid if you're eligible, or nothin'. 'Cause Kyl and McCain and their ilk don't give a rat's ass.

You may not care about the people in Montana or Wyoming, North or South Dakota, Louisiana or any other state whose governors and/or congressional delegations opt them out of a "public option." (which is hardly a "public" option if the public doesn't get the "option.") But I do.

I don't want a governor, any governor, to have the power to deny every citizen in her or his state the chance to obtain affordable health care. I guess you, however, don't have a problem with that.

Fuck you.


Tansy Gold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
70. I Love Ya Tansy.Right on again!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #60
74. Well said. Especially the "Fuck you" part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #74
75. Yeah, well, I thought it was the proper response to
"Get over yourself," which is what the poster I replied to said.


TG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #60
108. It is not a given that the state legislators or governors or any other elected
officials will have the opt out power. The original idea I read was for the decision to be by referendum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #108
121. Please see Reply #115. Feds may have the power to force states to hold a referendum, but
Edited on Fri Oct-09-09 01:08 PM by No Elephants
I don't know of one. I could be behind the times, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-13-09 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #60
141. Alabama here, and I'm not much happier than you.
It's kinda fun to see how rapidly your "allies" abandon you when it becomes convenient. So can one of the wankers that support opt out explain to some of us red staters why we should support democrats at the national level anymore, since we don't count? Especially since most of us gave just as much money and time as you did to helping elect the party that's willing to throw us under the bus. Getting death threats when we call to ask people if maybe they'd like to vote for the smart one for a change wasn't exactly a picnic.

Hell we won't have the money to support democrats at the national *or* local level anymore once we're required by federal law to buy insurance from a company that knows they not only have us over a barrel, but that our so called progressive so called allies helped set the barrel on fire to make sure we paid in.

I can't stress this enough: If you're in favor of opt out for states the only difference between you and a neo-con is the neo-con admits they don't care about other people and you lie to yourself about it. Which sorta makes you worse. I'd be horrified if it was proposed my state get health care and one of yours didn't. If you're not horrified at the reverse, you're not a decent human being. If you don't like the way that shoe fits, stop trying the damn thing on.

I Got Mine, Fuck You!: Not just for Republicans and Libertarians anymore. (Though technically this would be "I'm gonna get mine even if it fucks you." which is kinda a little scummier.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-13-09 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #141
142. JoeyT, this post exactly explains the sentiments of some of our Democratic...
brethren. Sad, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. I hear ya
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. Schumer was running the DSCC when he helped shoved Amy Klobuchar
down our throats in Minnesota rather than the truly progressive candidate who was also running for the DFL endorsement.

I haven't thought a lot of him since then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. What in the hell are we supposed to do in my state??? I guess...
since I live in a red state, we don't deserve hcr??? This is so unfair, and it really pisses me off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jtrockville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Load your state government with progressives?
Fat chance I suppose. It's a shame that the states with folks who need this most are the ones most likely to opt-out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. which is the exact reason why it cannot be allowed - we are the large majority party &
we run the White House - no watered down public option. I'm sure you agree it should be that way, and I hope those in the states where this could happen call their senators and their rep on this. Of course, being in FL, I guess I'm at a pretty strong likability that this could happen here!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jtrockville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #22
138. I much prefer SINGLE-PAYER to a "no watered-down public option"
A "no watered-down public option" shouldn't even be on the table, except as a last resort. Given our majority, I'm STILL angry that it was taken off the table from the beginning.

But as I've read from several posters here at DU, this is how Canada got their start. We could do much worse than to follow in their footsteps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. Well, that would be great if I had the power to do IT by myself. I have supported...
the Dems monetarily and time-wise just as much if not more than others from blue states, so I don't appreciate being crapped on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #23
62. Exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jtrockville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
139. I don't appreciate that the country is considering crapping on you either.
And it does seem that the folks who need this the most live in states that will likely opt-out.

BUT

Once states that opt-in show success, it will be MUCH harder for your state to opt-out.

I absolutely don't think it's fair. No one should have to wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #15
68. You're assuming the elections are honest. There aren't even paper trails in my state. n/t
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 06:34 PM by gkhouston
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
46. This is a great idea...
This allows for the bill's passage and when the public option lowers insurance rates in the states which opt-in, the residents of the states who chose to opt-out will force the politicians to opt-in as well.

It is a clever way of starting something that people would eventually want!!! Far far better than the "trigger" stupidity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #46
53. I understand the strategy, I just hope you're right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #46
125. It is a cowardly, morally bankrupt idea. Please see Reply # 114.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #46
126. It is a cowardly, morally bankrupt idea. Please see Reply # 114.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyLoochka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #9
49. I feel exactly the opposite
I want my red state to follow through on the fake "cowboy-libertarian" selfishness that so many here are entranced with and "opt-out."

It is the only way that the diehard 2/3 of the people in this red, red state will have a chance to be brought out of the fog of delusion they have been clinging to so tightly.

When the chips are down, and the state has opted us out and we have to sit here and watch the states that stayed in take care of their people and experience decreasing premiums and health costs and increasingly beneficial outcomes - these fake "cowboy-libertarians" will scream to get "opted-in."

This is a brilliant turning of the tables. I am tired of the entire country being so harmed by the people and Senators from the small population red states.

If they want to continue the harm - let them do it only to themselves. Remove the rest of the states from the effects of their mean, puny, stingy minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #49
54. and maybe it will make more Dems come out and vote...
I just wish I wasn't part of this psychological experiment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hay rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
69. Shoe on the other foot.
I live in a blue state. I'm supposed to accept too expensive private insurance because your state won't opt in on a public option?

Devil's advocate here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #69
128. Wrong framing. The only reason you would have to accept expensive
private insurance is if 60 Senators, Ried, Obama and the DNC don't do the jobs we've elected and supported them to do. They should not be leaving it to the states. That is cowardly and heinous, given that 122 people die each and every day for lack of affordable health care, not to mention the bankruptcies.

I can't believe Democrats are ready to throw people to the wolves just bc they live in a red state, rather than insist Demorats in D. C. FINALLY do their jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hay rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #128
140. Addressing the argument, not the issue.
Post said it was unfair for red state people not to have access to a public option available in blue states. My point was that it is equally unfair for blue state people to be denied a public option just because red states don't want it and universal coverage folks won't accept half a loaf. Two wrongs don't make a right.

On the issue: I favor a single-payer or strong nationwide public option. Private for-profit health insurance is nobody's friend.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
14. If they pass this,
they damn well better include a clause that allows states to develop their own single payer plans if they choose to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
66. Is the Kucinich bill for this still alive?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
16. F you Chuck!
I have no patience for dems like this. And don't go hiding behind that bi-partisan bullshit front either. You either represent the people or the corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
17. The reason this is a bad idea is not only that a great many would be left behind...
but also most states are almost bankrupt as it is, since the Bush years took all the money away from the states to pay for the war in Iraq....and Obama has kept a lot of those budget cuts, and added some of his own to cut the budget. States will have NO MONEY to put toward these options, and will likely opt out because they can't afford to do their part.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Huh? It'll be federally funded. And people who want it will move out of their
repressive states to ones with democracy OR they'll give their congress critters the boot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Really.What are you, a spolied child? With what money will they move?
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 04:22 PM by saracat
And what jobs would they be moving too? And what about those to ill? Let them die? What is this" Compassionate Conservatism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. That's right. Let's let EVERYONE die instead. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. Now .Everyone should LIVE. Not just blue states.And there is NO reason for this.
Unreciprocated bipartisanship isn't more important than life. Chuck Schumer said On Scarborogh(Sp) that the Senate would back the President on anything he wanted because they were a "team". If this is so, why don't Obama and the senate want healthcare for ALL? Why are they kissing elephant ass?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. You're asking me? I guess because they want to syphon off the money for war
and want to gobble up insurance company money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #26
124. Wtf? No one has to die if the Democrats in Washington, D.C. do their jobs.
This is NOT the fault of poor people, whether in red states or blue states, ffs. Congress should NOT leave this to the states!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #24
87. RE: The Jobs question
I suspect once these states have the Public Option that you're going to see jobs move away from Opt Out states to the Opt In states because their health coverage will be cheaper and it will cost less to hire and maintain employees. Currently companies have been going to places like Canada for the same type of reason. I also think once there is public healthcare jobs will significantly increase because there's less of a benefit to outsource them overseas. The healthcare factor of employee costs is a great deal of the reason so many companies aren't employing people in this country now.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
29. I'm all for states rights when it comes to guns, drugs, and education
but not health care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #29
38. Yeah, for that we should have no rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. our constitution does not give us that right unfortuately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #43
102. Yeah, too bad we can't pass amendments any more. The Constitution has those. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomm2thumbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
30. wondering how people will sneak around the rules - as they always do - have fake CA addresses, etc

just to get health care? what a sad state of affairs but we all know that Delaware and Nevada didn't become the locations where most folks incorporate because they are nice places to visit - it is because the tax laws favorite that sort of thing, and it created a boom in that industry.

Also wondering if people will be treated in other states without the health insurance option if they are from another state? Isn't that akin to buying across state lines - I mean a relative can have everyone pay for their insurance at their local address but folks all keep their insurance in their own state? Strange, strange, strange. I'm guessing the big population states will go for the health care option, perhaps they should even choose SINGLE PAYER - and it could end up being a good thing if this all happens within a few years as the initial plan for the health care phase-in was planned.

When glass breaks, the cracks move faster than 3,000 miles per hour. I think we just need to crack this SINGLE PAYER thing and it'll take off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CL455W4R Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #30
40. Excellent Idea!!!!
I really think this is a brilliant idea. Let the fat, racist, fascist southern conservative pigs die right out. This is awesome! Health-care companies will likely raise rates in the states that opt out to make up for the losses they are taking due to increased competition in the states that do opt in to the public option. Fewer and fewer folks in these backwater Jesus camps will be able to afford insurance.. more of them will die... the population of the confederacy will decrease and with it their number of representatives in the House... and maybe, just maybe in a few years time AMerica will be able to shake off the shackles of the fascist Right, and actually see some true progressive reforms across various topics.

I am delighted by this ... give the Red State Christofascists exactly what they want... but only in their own damn states :) Maybe they'll see the errors of their ways after a few years.

In short... Fuck the South... time to kill off the leeches
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
39. I think no state will opt out.
There are some big talkers, but when it gets down to it they'll STFU. No state currently opts out of Medicare, yet it is there for them to do it. Just like the stimulus money. They were against it, until they started to beg for their share of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #39
47. BINGO. And even the biggest corporate assholes will do the math and demand their state opt IN
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomm2thumbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #39
50. yup yup - like all the folks who were gonna 'opt out' of Federal funds earlier this year

they all rushed back in and took the money - all blowhards with nothing to back it up

their one little vote in the Senate will be quashed by the outrage back at home
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #39
56. Agreed. I think this is a good idea. Let the Republicans running the little tiny states just try to
opt out. They won't last long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
twitomy Donating Member (756 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
41. What kind of "public option" are we talking about?
The kind that everyone is FORCED to pay the insurance companies? If so, I sure hope my state can opt out as I dont want that piece of garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swede Atlanta Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
52. No, No, No.....
I live in Georgia and trust me Sonny "Chicken Man" Perdue and the nut cases in the Georgia General Assembly would opt Georgia out before the ink was dry on the paper.

I want to live in a nation where I am not discriminated against with respect to a public option simply because my employment has taken me to a state run by right wing fanatics. "Move" you may say. Well that might be a choice in good times but not now.

I'm all for states rights but when it comes to the basic needs for life such as healthcare we need a national plan, not a patchwork that depends on where you happen to live.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
57. I'm calling my Senator and telling him Public Option: or I will do everyting.....
I can to make sure that you, Chuck are not elected again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeycola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #57
100. I am putting a call in also today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
58. Schumer is the King of the Corporatist Senators. First Wall Street and now Big Insurance.
Screw him. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #58
134. These days, almost all of them seem to be, even once liberal Barney Frank. K Street
owns most of them, it seems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
59. Shouldn't it be up to the individual to opt out?
and isn't the public option an um... option? It right in the name. WTF? are these clowns up to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
65. Schumer and his DLC buddies will do ANYTHING to dilute....
..the collective power of a Public Option.

Do those of you who live in a Blue State really think this will help you?

Since NONE of the "Public Options" currently in Congress are REAL "government run" options ("like Medicare"), the ONLY REAL advantages the current "Public Options" can offer lies in a broad risk base, and the power to negotiate prices from Pharma (if Obama hasn't killed that) or Health Care providers (Doctors).

EVERY state that is "allowed to opt out" further weakens the "Public Option" for EVERY.FUCKING.BODY.

The "Public Option" is already so weak and restricted that it is doubtful it can succeed.
so LETS MAKE IT WEAKER !! YAY!

I can't believe there are people on DU who think this is a good thing.


One thing you can take to the bank:
If Schumer likes it, it is BAD for people who have to work for a living.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baysponge Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
71. Who looks out for Red Stare poor!?!
I hope that someone would stand up for the uninsured in red states as well as blue ones. The most recent proposal for a public option would allow states to opt out. Gov. Dean & Sen. Carper & Schumer has talked approvingly. So has Sen. Baucus.

The issue of the public option is ensuring competition. I would hope that someone who add the following limitation to the right to opt out: In order for a state to do so, the state must show that every major market in the state has at least two (2) different insurers that have a market share over a minimum leveI i.e. 25%. This requires some level of private competition to exist PRIOR to opting out.

What could the objection to this limitation be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varelse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
77. This is a very BAD idea
Have those fools seriously considered what will happen in the real world when people living in an "opt-out" state start migrating into states where they can get real health insurance coverage without paying a fucking arm and a leg for it?

Small business owners, the self employed, the educated, families with kids... all of them would benefit from a move OUT of such a state. Are they fucking nuts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #77
83. That would create unavoidable political pressure for those states to "opt in". No? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #83
132. No. They won't need to opt in. They would have to take action to get out of it
The difference here is the option will be available and states would be required to take action to get rid of it. I do believe it is politically more difficult to take something away than to put something in place. Point is they would not be able to just ignore it as would be the case with opt in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #77
89. If they don't like it, they can put an initative on the ballot
Otherwise- too bad. Their representatives screwed the rest of us for 8 long years- so pardon me if I'm all out of sympathy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #89
131. You lived in a red country for 8 years. What could you do about it? Would you
think it fair if someone decided it was okay for you to die and/or go bankrupt while others got affordable health care bc you lived in a red country?

This is a cowardly solution bc those in DC are not doing their jobs....again. Direct your anger there, not at people in red states who can no more change their state legislature than you could prevent Bushco from ruling for 8 years.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
80. That would be OK as long as states get to opt out of the individual mandate as well. n/t
:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #80
130. Why is it okay for people to keep dying and going bankrupt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spaten Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
84. the "political pressure" already exists
dems are punting.
and if pressure on democrats for a public option doesn't work, why would it work on scum republican governors?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SandWalker1984 Donating Member (533 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
85. Schumer's cop out, opt out!
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 09:10 PM by SandWalker1984
What don't you people understand? Schumer doesn't propose an opt out of the Baucus bill's private insurance mandate.

What he is trying to do is float a trial balloon on behalf of his insurance masters, the ones that give him lots of payola, like his Wall Street masters give him. They are concerned that we are building up momentum for a true, Medicare-type, not for profit public option. They are frantically trying to get a bill through Congress with the private insurance mandate intact but without a true public option.

The reason that the federal Congress is now debating health care reform is because since 1993 and the last disasterous health care debate, the states have not delivered on real health care reform. Have they?

Don't forget, California passed single payer through both chambers of their state legislature -- and where does the bill stand now? It's unsigned, laying on the desk of Gov Arnie. He refuses to sign it because he claims it costs too much. Never mind how much it would save over the profits of private health insurance.

This is a ploy by certain Democratic party senators to get the monkies off of their backs while still delivering a private mandate for insurance to serve their corporate masters.

Obama recently, before Congress and the American public, made his speech for health care reform and in it he said that HE WOULD NOT FUND A PUBLIC OPTION.


It is looking more and more as though what I've posted here previously is true -- that Obama, earlier this summer, sold us out on real health care reform by making secret deals with big pharma and big insurance.

It is no longer our D team against the R team, it is now us Americans that are enlightened against the corporate team. We don't need a 3rd party, we need a 2nd party.

Don't fall for this latest bait and switch scam being tossed about. It's another Trojan horse. If you know anything about history, you know how THAT worked out for the people.


Kill the Baucus bill before it kills us!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
86. Fair enough! Conservatives can have their private insurance if that is what they want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #86
136. How is that fair to people in red states who want a public option?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
turntxblue Donating Member (63 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
88. As a Texan,
I feel quite certain that I would be on the losing end of this. Remember our governor making national news by speaking of secession? I live in a very small town, and occasionally see pick-up trucks sporting SECEDE bumper stickers. So, I think it's fairly safe to assume that TX would opt out, which is quite upsetting to me. However; if faced with the choice of SOME states getting a public option vs. NO states getting a public option, I would rejoice for those who got one. Eventually, the sane Texans will surface, and vote in some Democrats. In the meantime, the insurance companies will see the writing on the wall. What remains to be seen is how they would interpret it. Would they make all they can, as fast as they can, while they can, or would they actually start running their business in a fair way that would be truly competitive with a public option? Regardless of what happens in my state, I would be grateful that citizens of other states had a choice. If there's one thing that Texans come together on, it's bragging rights. It would be very hard for my Republican fellow Texans to see that other states have a better health care system than Texas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodDamLiberal Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
90. Can we quarantine
Those states that opt-out as health risks to the states that opt-in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #90
94. Oh, that's such a helpful and "compassionate" solution.
thank you so much. Your thoughfulness will be remembered.


Tansy Gold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
93. Schumer attempts to sandbag Medicare for all. nt
Edited on Thu Oct-08-09 10:12 PM by bemildred
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
95. Stop watering it down... losers

Democrats won.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-08-09 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
96. We need the Option tied to Medicare rates or we won't get the siccess sooner or later. Really want
immediate Medicare to 55, also as a good faith to seniors that other cuts are necessary and will force GOP to vote against it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ingac70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
97. If that is the case, I'll just move.
I know the redneck dumbasses running my home state wouldn't opt in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 05:24 AM
Response to Original message
98. COP OUT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
99. Pathetic and I completly disagree with this...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kermitt Gribble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
104. Horrible idea.
Schumer is an idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
105. Excellent. Freed from the need to pander to the ignorant red states...
Edited on Fri Oct-09-09 12:10 PM by lumberjack_jeff
... the public option could be as strong as we want.

Tie it to medicare reimbursements and include the Wyden amendment which requires employers to offer a voucher for employees who wish to purchase coverage from the exchange instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
110. Bad,BAD idea. It is enough that a human being can opt in or out. Why
should the life and finances of someone be endangered against his or her will because a majority of his or her state legislature votes the wrong way?

NO government mandates without a strong public option. I don't care if it is the feds who deny the public option or a state that denies it. It's just as wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
117. Opt-In ??? Carper...
http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/veal-pen... /

"...How about Carper himself? Let's hear his passionate defense of his own proposal:

DHUE: Now there is another idea out there that would have the Federal government create the plans but let the states opt out of it. Is that a better offer?

CARPER: Or the state could opt in. And there is discussion along those lines. We'll see where those talks may lead..."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-09-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #117
133. Opt-in is just fucking stupid. Opt-out has potential.
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 Apr 19th 2014, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

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