Insurance is completely unnecessary when health care is provided by the government, as it is in every other western country.
On top of that, how fucked up is it that people die because they can't afford to send cash to rich insurance companies, and you're applauding a financial giveaway to them as progress? lol I'm so glad you're not involved in my health care scenario.
There's no magic about it. These politicians are not inanimate objects with their "ayes" and "nays" programmed into them. Obama could have put enormous pressure on the Senate to pass just about anything he liked. He did not, because he did not *want* a public option, let alone single payer.
I can't believe people actually let these politicians off the hook so easily. "The votes weren't there" because he did not fight to get them, because he did not want them.
25. Really? What kind of pressure could Obama have put on Lieberman?
What kind of pressure could he have put on Nelson? Lieberman is owned by Aetna and probably doesn't plan on getting re-elected. Nelson doesn't require the votes of liberals to get elected at all. If their votes weren't programmed into them, they might as well have been branded. You would have needed both of their votes to get past the 40 Republican senator filibuster. You can blame Obama all you want, but those two and several others never would have sided with anything resembling the PO.
Sometimes people need to accept reality. Any fantasy scenarios people have about Obama ramming through the PO is wish thinking.
I never said he could get 100 votes. I said he could've applied immense pressure, and chose not to. That is the power of the presidency-- the bully pulpit-- and Obama made a point of not using it. He wanted to 'let the Congress come up with the plan'.
was compulsory private insurance with only the loosest controls on the insurance companies, a bill that was so "hated" by the ins. co's that their stock soared.
Basically, what we have now, only with coercion.
I'm mystified at the magical results that some of you expect from this bill.
Most of the good stuff (end of antitrust exemption, government ability to negotiate drug prices, expansion of Medicare, public option) has been taken out (except for Sanders' health clinics), and what little remains doesn't go into effect for four years.
If you or anyone else is looking for immediate relief, you're going to be waiting a long time, even if this bill passes.
I did some research. I'm in a lousy situation health care-wise, but this bill would actually make my situation WORSE because
1) The companies would be allowed (which they will interpret as encouragement) to price-gouge people over 50 (like me)
2) It is hard to afford insurance now, but I am on the borderline between subsidized and non-subsidized, and being self-employed, I cross back and forth.
3) I would not be allowed to drop my insurance if it became too expensive.
4) The bill preserves the greatest evil that insurance companies have ever perpetrated on the public--high deductibles. This is very real to me now, because I just injured my arm in a fall on the ice yesterday, and I had to think long and hard about whether to go to the doctor. Turns out I have a minor fracture, but I'm going to have to pay for doctor's appointments and possible physical therapy out of pocket at a time when business is slow. That's on top of my monthly premium.
NO OTHER WESTERN COUNTRY that I know of has deductibles. If I lived in Japan, I would pay about the same monthly premium as I do now, but I would have no deductible, only a small copay, and the government would cover catastrophic care completely. (Japan is not single-payer, by the way. It has parallel public and private systems, but they're similar.)
All you people who are jumping up and down and screaming that we have to have this bill NOW and that "it will be improved later" have drunk the DLC KoolAid.
Improve the bill later? Just like NAFTA, the bankruptcy bill, the Patriot Act, FISA, the Telecommunications Act, and every other shitty piece of legislation that the majority of Democrats have voted for (whether they originated them or not)?
I'm seriously trying to think of a bad bill that was "improved later" in the past twenty years.
...that a progressive, liberal Democrat could get elected in a rural district, like the one Heath Shuler represents (in Western North Carolina)?? The Blue Dogs are the best you can get in areas like those, and unfortunately, the Democrats cannot have a majority without having some reps from rural areas.
41. After the system collapses under its own weight (which is why the
insurance companies are insisting on compulsory coverage), people will be begging for real health care reform, especially if it's universal (which means that even the meanest right-wing Republican is eligible).
Health care reform was controversial in Canada, too, when it was first introduced. I remember traveling up there in the 1960s when Ontario was debating it. They had their hysterical protesters, maybe not as crazy as ours, but hysterical nevertheless.
Once the opponents have a medical emergency and realize that 1) They don't have to worry about paying for it, 2) They don't have to do mountains of paperwork, and 3) They will be able to get the follow-up care they need, they'll start talking about health care reform as if it was their own idea.
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.