Senator McCaskill shoots down single payer.

[avaistheone1]

Run time: 01:53 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfRACEEJjYk   Posted on YouTube: August 11, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 13, 2009 By DU Member: avaistheone1 Views on DU: 1051

 
Her last remark on this clip is that she will not vote for a health care bill unless it is deficit neutral. In that case she should get on the single payer bandwagon. It is the most cost effective approach to reform.

[Sherman A1]

1. I know

I am afraid Claire is a bit of a disappointment. I have emailed my thoughts on issue after issue and Claire somehow seems to land on the other side. I want single payer as well, but have resigned myself to this healthcare bill as being little more than window dressing if we are "lucky" enough to get that.

[knixphan]

2. agreed on the disappointment side. :(

[Sherman A1]

3. Yup,

makes one feel pretty irrelavant. I email and email and it makes no real difference. I ask her to stop funding the war, to support EFCA, to not bail out the banks, to support single payer and on and on. Sometimes I get nice emails back (from a staffer, I am sure) but, you have to ask yourself what's the point? I expect this from Bond, but you think just once in awhile you might get a Democratic Senator to agree with what I believe to be a Democratic position.

But, hey I guess I am asking too much.

Pretty bummed out by the whole thing. :shrug:

[ro1942]

4. mccaskill

what a coward, appeasing the ignorance

[TankLV]

5. McCaskill is part of the PROBLEM! She doesn't know which way she's gonna think

unless she has her finger in the air...

she's as useless as Tom Daschell or Dicky "I can't apologize fast enough" Durbin...

a complete waste of air...

[jamesatemple]

6. It appears to me that McCaskill is a realist.

I want single-payer, national insurance for all. Perhaps somewhere in the near future that plan will be placed into effect. But, at this very moment folks around the Country need immediate help with health insurance: Lower premiums; no pre-existing conditions exclusions; no insurance coverage loss with loss of job; subsidized premiums for the very poor; no caps on curative procedures, etc. If my favorite senator, Dennis Kucinich, were able to garner sufficient support for single-payer today, the program would take far too much precious time to provide the help we need now.

And, those of us who support Kucinich's single-payer plan realize that the Public Option choice would give us current, desperately needed coverage for millions of uninsured folks while buying time for those who choose to remain in their private plans to observe how Public Option works. If it works as well as we hope, private plan insureds may move to public option by virtue of its merit. Too, Public Option will give single-payer advocates the time required to develop feasible transition options for the near future.

But, back to reality: There are not enough Representative or Senators that currently support single-payer options to enact such a plan into law. McCaskill stated such. I've done all that I can afford to do to see that single-payer is a viable option. But, it is a "dead horse" and I shall not continue to beat it. My hope is that the issue is not dead at all; that Public Option is the very thing that will prove its efficacy and we shall move, as a Country, toward single-payer national healthcare in the near future.

It is my humble opinion that we could better serve the debate by supporting Public Option at this point in history.

[debbierlus]

7. I disagree with you because there is NO strong public option

I will support a public option as long as it is a REAL public option, not just a meaningless political gesture with no real teeth.

The House bill basically diluted the public option to meaningless with heavy restrictions on available enrollment, refusing rates being tied to Medicare, and not allowing people to sign up from day 1.

The public option is a ruse at this point and we need to stop being enablers and call out the democrats on this point.

[jamesatemple]

9. Patience, friend. There is no strong public option...yet!

In fact, there is no healthcare bill yet. Perhaps you meant to say that you would disagree with a weak Public Option in any healthcare bill. So would I. It remains to be seen how weak or how strong or whether there is a Public Option portion of any healthcare bill...if and when one is ever completed.

Those weaknesses of the Public Option that you point out are certainly not codified. If we have any input through our telephone calls, e-mails, letters and town hall meetings, maybe we should concentrate our suggestions on overcoming those weaknesses rather than merely suggesting scuttling the concept altogether and "vent our spleens" over the lack of a single-payer provision.

"The public option is a ruse at this point..." I'm glad you included the clause "...at this point..." since the option is in the formative stage. And even the suggestion that the option "as is stands is merely a ruse" is your personal opinion. My opinion differs in that those weakness that you point out may be overcome completely or ever slightly before the final bill is brought to a vote.

"...and we need to stop being enablers..." And, how are we being enablers by suggesting that a Public Option should be a part of whatever healthcare reform bill is passed? Do you honestly feel that any one of us would support just any Public Option provision, no matter how weak or misconstrued that it was? Are you advocating that if we can't have single-payer healthcare, we should then continue with the status quo?

"...and call out the democrats on this point". ???
Do you mean that we should correspond with our representatives in any manner possible and urge them to eliminate any consideration for a Public Option in a healthcare reform bill? Merely because there are weakness in the current proposal? Do you seriously think that single-payer healthcare reform, which I support strongly, will result immediately from the forceful demands of the few of us in the face of opposition by the Administration, the Congress, and the Insurance/Pharma coalition?

It is my opinion that we progressives should communicate to our representatives our support for a strong Public Option to be a part of any healthcare reform bill offered for a vote. Even a weak Public Option might be better than insisting on a form of healthcare that can't muster sufficient support or be implemented within the near future, leaving us with the mess we have now.

[dhpgetsit]

8. The damn corporations ARE calling all the shots in Washington.

We can't expect our Washington reps to effect any meaningful change.

We'll see what they end up doing and if it isn't what we are looking for there will be hell to pay.