Reply #33: Sure

[notesdev]

You can see the supporters anywhere you find a significant concentration of Democrats, e.g. this site.

It's hard to offer specific discrepancies when the bill - and the widespread disinterest in actually reading it - makes it into a policy Rorscharch test; people inclined to support 'reform' read into it what they want it to be (and of course the length and style of its text is deliberately designed to encourage this, by making it difficult to understand exactly what most of it means). And on the other side, you have the same thing, people inclined not to support reform see in it their own fears, not the actual contents. So it's hard to respond to specific assertions by either supporters or dissenters, since in both cases the arguments change according to the desires of the speaker.

Neither side is correct. The correct understanding of this bill is that it is yet another huge giveaway to large, politically influential groups and corporations. Any change in the quality of actual health care received will be purely coincidental.

There are two things guaranteed by this bill. One is that pharma profits will increase. The other is that, despite the rhetoric from both sides that points to lowering costs as the primary goal of reform, overall health care costs will increase. Not guaranteed is any improvement in care.