For the millionth time, THERE IS NO PUBLIC OPTION

I am reading through threads on DU, and people are STILL asserting that there will be a public option in the health care reform.

No, there is NOT.

If you want to support this corporate wet dream bill, be my guest. But, STOP parroting propaganda talking points that have ZERO basis in reality.

The entire point of a public option was to provide competition against insurance companies to drive down costs and provide an alternative choice to citizens. A REAL public option would have been open to all Americans, it would have rates tied to Medicare, and it would be implemented in a relatively short period of time after the bill becomes law. The legislation contains none of these mandates

The current reform labeled as a public option:

- only covers 2% of the population
- will LIKELY be administrated by the private insurance companies
- is estimated to be priced HIGHER then private insurance plans

The public option as now become an ORWELLIAN TERM.

It does not drive down costs. The rates are not tied to medicare. It is open to a very small percentage of the population.

That is NOT a public option. It is a SCAM. They needed to put something in the bill that they could LABEL a public option to appease the masses who want a real alternative to private health insurance parasites, but don't pay close enough attention to understand the political game.

If you want to support this bill, that is your choice.

A REAL PUBLIC OPTION DOES NOT EXIST.

(And, if you want links, read my journal, they are ALL in there. Link after link after link after link after link)

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

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-treatment/yes-the-public-pl...

The House Public Plan: Yes, It's Worth It

Jacob S. Hacker is the Stanley B. Resor Professor of Political Science at Yale University, author of The Great Risk Shift: The New Economic Insecurity and the Decline of the American Dream, and an occasional contributor to The Treatment.

Diane Archer is the director of the Health Care Project at the Institute for America's Future and the founder and past president of the Medicare Rights Center.



How short memories are in Washington. A few weeks ago, when it looked possible that Nancy Pelosi could marshal enough Democratic support to create a “robust” public insurance option with rates tied to Medicare’s, everyone was talking about the big savings and reduced premiums that a series of estimates by the CBO showed this option could create. Then, the concern was that the public insurance plan would put private insurers out of business by using the government’s bargaining power to drive too hard a bargain with providers, creating an “un-level” playing field.

Now, however, the punditocracy is abuzz about the latest CBO estimates that show that the public plan eventually embraced by Pelosi--one that would negotiate rates with providers, rather than base them on Medicare’s--might actually charge higher premiums than the average private plan. No matter that the CBO estimates clearly state that the higher projected premiums reflect its expectation that the public plan will disproportionately enroll less healthy Americans--which might be seen as a virtue, since these are folks private insurance tends to serve most poorly. And no matter that a subsequent CBO letter to the House stated that even a public plan with negotiated rates would still place “downward pressure on the premiums of private plans.” Suddenly, in the commentariat, the public plan isn’t a fearsome predator. It’s a complacent kitten. Initially not worth having because it would be too strong, it’s now, according to critics, not worth having because it would be too weak.

In truth, both the initial fears and current dismissals are overblown. The CBO’s declining estimates of savings certainly make a strong case for having the public plan use modified Medicare rates, as we have long argued. It’s a shame the House will not be considering a bill that shows how substantially a public plan can contribute to freeing up federal dollars to help Americans afford coverage. But we should keep in mind that the prime argument for the public plan has never been about a particular payment formula. It has been that a public insurance plan is vital as an institutional check on private plans, its role evolving to reflect the emerging weaknesses (or strengths) of regulated private competition. Put simply, health reform is much more likely to succeed with a public health insurance option, even one with negotiated rates, than if private insurers are left to run the show.

Let us start with the obvious: No one knows for sure the exact role that the public option will play. CBO may be correct that the public plan will attract a less healthy pool of enrollees, and that risk-adjustment (paying plans with higher-cost patients more) will not fully compensate for this. And it is surely correct that the public plan will have lower administrative costs than private plans. (It should be emphasized that if the public plan has higher premiums primarily because it’s attracting less healthy enrollees, then it is still reducing average premiums and hence federal subsidies for premiums. That’s because average premiums would be even higher if the people enrolled in the public plan enrolled in private plans. That’s what the CBO’s more recent letter discussing “downward pressure” on private premiums implies.) But while the CBO estimates are rightly the authoritative source for Congress, they are by no means infallible. CBO has made clear that an unusually high level of uncertainty attaches to its analysis of the public plan.

snip//

The public plan is also critical to reform as a cost and quality benchmark, one that is particularly crucial if private premiums accelerate upwards. The insurance industry has threatened that premiums will skyrocket if an individual mandate is not tough enough. It may be an idle threat, but if a final reform bill ends up looking more like the Senate Finance bill than the House bill, it might not be. In most local markets, competition is likely to be anemic, and regulation of insurers inadequate. There will be little to prevent insurers from raising rates as they have threatened.

Having a public plan in place should also help keep down the rate of growth of health insurance premiums over time. Over the past twenty years, the public Medicare plan has had a substantially slower rate of growth than private insurance. The CBO report on the House bill states that private insurers are better at controlling utilization than a public plan would be. But, to date private insurers have failed to prove their value at cost control and demonstrated they have strong incentives to delay and deny needed care rather than drive efficiencies in the system.

snip//

In short, it’s no time to be despondent about the fate of the public insurance option. For sure, pegging rates to Medicare and obligating Medicare providers to accept these rates would be far preferable, and a public plan with negotiated rates may do less to keep the insurers honest and drive down costs. But it’s still immensely valuable to give Americans an out--another choice--to let the insurers feel the heat of not being the only game in town. The fierce and continuing opposition of the insurance industry suggests that they think that a public option will prove a serious counterweight in an increasingly consolidated private market. The overwrought pessimism of the pundit class should not aid them in their cause of protecting themselves from a public-spirited competitor.

the poor and homeless while doing nothing about the problems in the economy. Sure, we could get some people a roof over their head, which is needed, but we just move the problem underground where people still suffer; but by not dealing with the real problems what will things look like in 10 years?

I am getting ready to get the hell out of this country. It is apparent in so many ways that we did not "win", we are just getting another "respite" while the same whoring goes on in the back rooms.

and after the democrats screw things up bad enough to get the electorate pissed enough at them, it gives the repugs a good chance to retake the house, the senate, and then the presidency in 2012.

and then the REAL screwing over can proceed.

i'm trying to figure a way out of this sinking ship of a nation myself- but i don't seem to have a lot of options...i'm 48, disabled, and not wealthy.

I tend to agree that this step reform is the unfortunate norm of most modern progressive legislation. Sweeping simple reform like the ERA amendment and past comprehensive health care reform have not been successful. Nor are they this time for the simple reason we have NO such popular representation in government as of yet to unseat a corporate rule more deeply entrenched(and corpulently stupid and arrogant) than ever. we have multiple frustrations that are never seen as a whole or in context when we face the central absurdities of particular policies.

The question rightly posed, is this step- as Medicare was at its timely but equally difficult inception the real deal even as a step? Then one must remember the purpose- forever banned from American consciousness- was that a successful Medicare logically, inevitably would lead to Medicare for all and not the sickest portion of the pool. To that extent Medicare has STILL failed to instill the logical evolutionary step in reform. Yet the very fight for the NEXT step- which is what this one really is under the forest of absurd health industry dodges has breached the wall of dude and dumb stupidity and the Medicare for all cat is out of the bag.

One can step back and see the frustration of the blindness about Medicare, even Social Security, under constant and thankfully unimaginative assault by Know Nothing Republicanism is ending with a truncation of a great step forward denied by the brute force of simple corruption.

The simplest most impossible reform of all has always been to re-cut(as has been done before for a time) the big money ties to government representation. Forcing such crooks to enact anything but dishonest, backsliding, dishonest and incremental, totally resisted curbs on private profit for the progressive sake of civic interest just about sums up what we have here today- barring some miracle of
humane conversion or political populist wisdom changing the beasts we have let rule in Foggy Bottom into tame pets.

Take the step, expand the public anger and hunger. Claw our way ahead again. The slower it goes the more the populist pressure still seems to grow and BS shift to costlier more ineffective lies. Then, the minimal is that it will grow and entrench like Medicare. The danger- fully planned- is that the deadly cost in time and lives will be added to the constant wall of MSM distraction and silence. None of this elephantine, murderous progress will be enough in a more conscious age. This reform must threaten and be the lever to enact the basic reforms over democratic elections and societal access to information and discussion to stop "America" being as most its muted citizens are not- a nation of greedy, ignorant and incompetent clowns bent on murder and suicide for private profit inducing myths.

Awareness at our relatively powerless state is growing the cause. Brute power still exists to be defeated and it is overly entrenched still in all levels of top American society and government. That was seen as inevitable in 2006, 2008 and at least is no surprise now, as pants down exposed and ugly as the situation is. More than just universal health care it is a major battle for democracy where one can lie but not hide.

Now is not the time to accept or be satisfied or think to be silenced when the skinny turkey is stuffed with private insurance premiums and passed. But if there is something to be gained push like the other side, to shape it the best we can, take it and keep clawing forward as was not sufficiently done with Medicare in the first place.

That was annoying.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

My one rec doesn't help much through all the unrecs. Who are the DUers doing this anyway?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

She is for real health care reform and so am I.

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

care program that exists already and should be extended to cover everyone, since everyone who has an income pays into it.

and improved.

Same apparently with medicare.

The insurance companies will never let that happen any more than they have right now. I do believe what Wendell Potter predicted, that this health care reform will prove to be so costly and yet ineffective, that years down the line Congress will be forced to go back to the drawing board and do it right like they should have the first time, but it won't happen because this plan can be improved upon.

equated medicare to communism. And yet now Republicans defend medicare.

Secretly they are working to privatize it all, not just the Medicare advantage programs, which is what this bill is without the competitive public option connected to Medicare.

were just a way to privatize Medicare, and they are abysmal.

Attractive rates up front to hook people, and then rate increases (arranged by separating the Part D premiums) and decreases in services, higher co-pays. Just awful, awful plans.

This subsidy, rather handout, is criminal.

premium that (usually) comes out of a retiree's Social Security check goes directly to the private insurer's plan which the retiree has selected.

When I was being solicited to take one of these plans, I called my doctor's office to see what they thought of it. I found that different rules applied, and many people who had the "Advantage" plans were going back to traditional Medicare because of the differences. When I tried to talk with the insurance agent about the differences between the "Advantage" plan and Medicare, he said, "Forget everything you know about Medicare." That was enough to keep me from going there. I like Medicare, and I don't want to "forget everything" I know about it.

and $10,000 out of pocket to save his life. Medicare paid nothing because he had signed away his rights. Also, no doctors in my area will accept them any more because of their rejection of claims and poor reimbursement rate, not to mention slow payments, so they are for all intents and purposes useless for actual health care.

...........idiot, they have to defend it NOW. If they didn't there would be a lot less Republicans in the House & Senate than there are now. Everyfuckingbody loves Medicare. Just like in ALL other countries that have some type of "government" healthcare. You take away the peoples medical programs and you'd have a fucking revolt.

Workers weren't forced to fund 401K plans in 1933.

Gee I've been using Medicare for my health needs for five years now. I never knew it was a fantasy. Thanks for the information. Does that mean I really am blind and only imagined I had cataract surgery?

I've tried to remain objective reading all these posts. While it's fine to disagree with someone you really take it to a new level. Congratulations.

This bill is a half measure. It is weak compared to what could have been and what is really needed for citizens struggling with rising costs and unemployment. If you want to trumpet it as a success fine. But it isn't seen that way by all democrats and progressives. You must recognize that. By creating a bill that appears to benefit insurance companies it weakens democrats position in the upcoming elections by creating an opening for those to say it isn't 'real reform.' Plus, by putting down those that make those points you silence those who wish to expand it. How is that helpful?

A much better response to the OP would have been to acknowledge her concerns and tell her that it is an opening to continued reform that we can all fight for. Much less contentious and better for overall unity.

Your approach is like a parent yelling at and scolding a crying kid expecting that to solve the problem. It just makes them cry more and you look like an asshole.

capacity to debate issues based on merit, and all too often resort to name calling, expletives, and deflection. It's a poor reflection on themselves, and also the public education system in this country.

You are WAY out of line.

WAY WAY WAY out of line.

It is FAR more democratic to speak truth and fight for real reform then blindly support unethical, undemocratic policies.

I support democrats who act like democrats.

People who are fighting AGAINST the DEMOCRATIC HCR bill will be called out by me.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/debbierlus/28...

(note the original article from yahoo is expired but I cut and pasted the story into the post)....

Here is the specific comment relevant to your claim from a health industry insider....

"There is a way out of it — a bipartisan compromise_ but so far the liberals have found that to be anathema," said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry consultant.

Laszewski is pessimistic about the prospects for overhaul legislation this year. But he thinks insurers in particular look like they're in a win-win situation.

"The health insurance industry is in a fantastic position," he said. Democratic liberals overreached and can't move a bill over the objections of their moderate and conservative colleagues.

"Democrats can't blame the industry if this goes down," Laszewski added. "So the health insurance industry is happy to let this thing take its course."

Get it? Passes they win with millions upon millions of MANDATED target consumers. Lose they keep the status quo.

The insurance companies WROTE this legislation. Of course they want MORE, they are parasites. It doesn't mean that they won't make out like bandits with their newly implemented legislation.

bargaining; They did not just fall off the back of a turnip truck; They do not throw their biggest bargaining chip away at the start and then bargain down from half a loaf; They want the whole loaf and everybody elses loaf...they want it all. Giving them the farm is not enough, they always demand more and the suckers just give it to them if they squeal long enough and hold their breath in a temper tantrums and then it is handed to them for just a few farthings in backroom deals and bribes.

Exactly!

It's the same RW play book.... attack the poster, rather than argue the ideas.

you are right - but there is a clique (from DU, or perhaps DLC-type trolls) who don't want to hear the truth. sigh

I don't like it even though I'm in the class that would be eligible for the public option. I think the bill has been all but completely emasculated. The public option should be a) an option and b) for the entire public. It is not. But I want it to pass, if only as a foot in the door. And I perish the thought of the Republicans winning on this.

Debbie has been against Democratic HCR since day one.

Long live democracy, eh?

All I said was I will unrec people who are fighting against the Democratic bill on Democratic Underground.

Unrec is NOT censorship.

What you are doing is just as ugly as the RW which you supposedly decry.

Stop it, and start acting like you are in the same party as those of us you want to attack.

NOW.

And, yes, you KNOW damned well that your unrecs ARE censorship... you admit as such in your first post.

You have a personal vendetta against the OP, and that is against the rules. Apologize to her for your behavior, and learn how to act in a democratic way.

But it has nothing to do with vendettas, it's about her constant pessimism and defeatism against Democrats on Democratic Underground.

I'm not going to stop posting my opinions. Ever.

It is a VENDETTA, against a certain person whose views you refuse to tolerate.

TOLERATION is a foundation of democracy.

Our whole system is built on the right of ANY person to express an opinion which YOU don't like.

That doesn't give you any right to attack them OR attack their views, or censor them.

THOSE are the methods of the RW.

This is a forum for Democrats, and I'm expressing my opinion. Sorry it doesn't jibe with yours.

That's not democratic at all.

That's the MAJORITY view on DU and in the general public.

either Medicare for All or a strong public insurance option, neither of which are in this bill?

A little honesty now and less political spin please.

Is that why the OP's against this bill have received arguably the highest number of rec's ever??? and that means with all the potential unrecs??? (K&R by the way)

.

Honestly, Why exactly did I vote for Obama in the primaries? He and Hillary Clinton are practically the same person. Except maybe she has bigger balls. I don't think things would look any different.

Hmm, we are still in Iraq, there are prisoners still in Guantanomo, none of the Bush Government Stasi spy on the American citizens shit has been rolled back. Habeas Corpus? Hell, we are still paying Blackwater/Xe

So now I could be mandated to pay a third of my income to health insurance companies? Fuck. It wasn't enough my grandchildren will be paying down TARP; now they get to be saddled with gargantuan college debt and unaffordable insurance. I wanted a Health Care Reform Bill, not a Health insurance Company Handout Bill.
Seems like the leadership of the US is still firmly in the watch pocket of the corporations.

Change?

And exactly how will mandating people to pay their remaining disposable income and then some on insurance help the economy?
I predict this will have the same effect on healthcare as subsidies did on college tuition. So long as there is profit to be made, big business will find a tighter vise in which to express it. I'm already short of breath.

Soon we will all be looking for some spare change.

From here.

It's clear you don't believe that, but that is the FACT.

So, are you going to campaign to shut up Ed Schultz, Thom Hartmann, and many others?????

Are you wearing your censorship crown?

It's called "free speech" -- maybe you've heard of it?

It'll be too late to matter before any meaningful improvements are made. And it'll just get watered-down even more in the Senate.

It's never worth getting less than half of what matters.

You are all over these threads, lobbing personal attacks and defending the status quo like you have an investment in it.

Let me know when there is one.

To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.



I will not be silent........

stop slandering people already, it's disgusting.

This is more than a personal attack.. it's a personal vendetta.

There is no room for this kind of behavior in a party which proclaims democracy.

Your behavior is attrocious.

And using the unrec to censor views differing from yours IS censorship.

There have now been several posters who have pointed out your behavior, in this thread and previous ones.

she's against it because it's a piece of shit.

"she's against it because it's a piece of shit."



Amen and amen!

Tridem has been doing this in every single thread that dares to question the current direction of the legislation. Complete with no substance and lots of profanity. I've been amazed at how much they're getting away with, frankly, but damn it's getting boring. Reminds me of a toddler's temper tantrum.

We will keep getting what we tolerate.

This behavior is attrocious and very sad.

Unrecing a post is not against the DU rules.

My guess is that many of the naysayers can be found over at GDP.

Get a law out there and build on it.

They speak for me.

But I added Weiner to the list, maybe that's what my problem was, LOL.

Why not our previous heroes?

throwing money some lives will be saved. But don't think for a moment in private they are not seriously concerned how this will turn out. It's a HUGE gamble and I am not sure we have taken a good look at the odds on the table.

where the consensus was that this bill should not be passed.

The guest (whose name I never caught) was saying that the reason the bill delays some provisions until 2013 is because they all do know how bad it is and part of the concern was to get past the 2012 election though apparently there is concern about what will happen in 2014 and 2016.

He's only able to repeat the same prepared, lazy talking points every time and he protects corporatist Blue Dogs.

to shallow.

While you're at it, why don't you blast Ted Kennedy as a "corporate tool?"

It's one thing to argue the merits and strength (or weakness) of the bill but how can anyone who supports Health care reform call either of these guys, who have been fighting hard and on the right side, tools?

If you really think Dean is on the dark side you are on the wrong team.

this is a positive step.

Finally some sanity here.

Expect the UN's to be merciless.

1. Do nothing.

2. Wait another decade plus and try again.

3. Go with the GOP bill.

4. Don't get sick.

Which of those do you think is best for the people who need health care NOW? Some don't have that much time to wait.

No, this bill is not the best.

Yes, it has stipulations that I find objectionable.

It will have to be worked on going forward to make it better. They need to get rid of the mandate and penalties. They need to expand the public option. But it's better than nothing, and if it doesn't happen now, when?

improving, but get the bill out now for those that can't wait. Agreeing with this poster would be like going with the repub plan, and I adamantly believe that it would only serve to completely fail to deliver any form of health care reform to our country.

It boggles the mind.

This is actually really interesting. All I did in the original post was point out that there was no real public option.

And, there isn't. In fact, I didn't even tell people NOT to support it. Just stop pretending there is a public option. For months and months and months and months on DU, everyone was united that we didn't want any legislation that did not provide real reform. A real public option was supposedly the threshhold for support.

If this is the legislation you want to support, go for it. Just don't pretend it is something that it is not.

proposed legislation that is the closest thing this country has ever had to "real reform?"

.... accept whatever shit sandwich they throw at you and say it is caviar.

Yep.

The emperor is STILL nekkid.

It's way past time to join the rest of the civilized world on this.

we keep hearing about how there aren't the votes for it, but I think those people really under estimate the American public. I think we are ready for it. The politicians would have the fight of their (and our) lives at hand but if we supported them, it could work.

the longer term. By failing to be what it was "promised" to be.

They should act smarter. Go out big and change the name. Stop calling it Health care reform, call it "Expansion of coverage" to those who need it or something else. They really should make it clear what this really is, otherwise it is likely to come back and bite them when the system again fails in 5 years. And how difficult will it be to re-open in the future for seriously needed reform?

as it stands it looks like the only "reform" we'll see is the forced transfer of our money to the insurance companies.

The "system" as it currently exists will collapse if something isn't done and if it collapsed, Congress might have had to step in by extending Medicare. Instead, they chose to go with another corporate bail out.

This bill allows for high deductibles so, while you're being "mandated" to pay premiums to the insurance companies, you'll also be looking at out of pocket expenses that are so high you still won't be able to access care.

When you are in a hole, you stop digging!

and keep fighting until it is done right. Forced health care insurance is not reform. It will not keep prices down. I can barley afford my company's health care plan now..............and certainly not the $1600 deductible it will cost before it kicks in. And now I have to accept it. I don't have the "option" of choosing the government "option". No thanks

So, it may not be for everybody, but those of us working in small companies see this as a gift from god.

But let's have nothing instead, and then claim a moral victory while people are dying on a daily basis.

Just more Obama hate, and therefore hate for this bill from the OP.


I'll trust Dr. Dean and Paul Krugman over some anonymous poster with an agenda.

But the outrage by just a few (VERY LOUD!!!!) DUers because this bill (that we've been fighting for for 60 years) isn't "everything to everybody" is very stressful to me. I'll be in the poor house if this doesn't pass

they are only fighting at this point so that a real option does not end back on the table. They are (mostly) happy. Don't fool yourselves.

...bitching and moaning about the Republican congress and administration. 'Cause, that's what we'll have soon enough, if the "purer-than-thou" brigade gets their way.

They might have decent healthcare and a social net /sarcasm

over some anonymous poster with an agenda."

Like Dean and Krugman don't have agendas.

I go with that.

She'd rather fight against HCR for some reason.

She's a bit of a rageaholic - it's not good for my BP reading these screeds

I knew this when she went on a pout about my Seinfeld post in the lounge.

I think it's time to bring out the ignore feature.