As sad as I am about the current bill, I must support it.

[cmd]

I do it in the name of Teddy Kennedy who repeatedly said that his biggest regret as a legislator was not
cutting a deal with Nixon on health care. I cannot let the Senator down. I will will support this bill even
though it does not do much of what needs to be done. It is a beginning. not an end.

[bluestateguy]

1. Ted would support it

He wouldn't like it, but he would support it.

We often forget that he created SCHIP, which is a program that relies heavily on private insurance. Did that program enrich the insurance companies? Well, yes it did. They like SCHIP because children are healthier and cheaper to insure. But we didn't let that stop us from creating a good program that insured millions.

[SIMPLYB1980]

6. True.

[walldude]

7. SCHIP is going out with the new bill...

Ted Kennedy would not be supporting this, he would be right up there with Dean. He supported reform not a gift to insurance companies. And frankly I find using him to try to convince others that it's a decent bill is in really bad taste.

http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/childrens-defense-fund-forcing-schip

[ProdigalJunkMail]

14. indeed n/t

[peacebird]

2. I respect your reason. I think if Teddy was there it could have been a much better bill.

I do not support the bill, but I respect your view.

[Eric J in MN]

3. Ted Kennedy didn't really say that.

I emailed the Washington Post writer who made that claim for an exact quote, and he replied that he didn't have one.

[MadHound]

4. Kennedy is proabably spinning in his grave right now

This bill is much worse than anything that Nixon proposed.

Do you honestly think that Teddy would acquiesce to handing the people over to the insurance industry's tender mercies via a mandated monopoly? Do you think that he would vote yes to having the average family spending 27% of their income on health insurance premiums?

I think not.

[coti]

5. It's not that the bill doesn't do enough- it's that it sends us backwards.

Giving insurance companies hundreds of billions of tax dollars- and mandating that people buy from them- is extremely regressive. It puts the system in a worse position than it was before. It's not even a "start"- it only further empowers the insurance companies.

It simply doesn't address any of the cost issues, at all. They're free to keep jacking up premiums and sucking our tax dollars while they do it.

This is a terrible, terrible bill and even those who desperately need health insurance should not support it. In the long run, it works against the patient.

[Raine]

8. In Teddy's name there is no way I can support this bill nt

[Kingofalldems]

9. Worried about the mandates--otherwise it's a start--

but requiring people to have insurance they can't afford seems ridiculous to me.

[liberalmuse]

10. I don't know what to do.

I need to stop being so pissed and think about this. It's a start, as lame as that is beginning to sound. I'm so disappointed in Congress, mainly the Senate, but it's got me seriously thinking I need to drop politics and get out there and volunteer more. Change the things I can, and fuck all the people who would throw the American people under the bus so the corporations they shill for can keep filling their pockets. Integrity used to mean something, but now only money talks in this country. Same 'ol, same 'ol.

[David Zephyr]

11. Don't tie Ted Kennedy's name to this shit.

.

[Fumesucker]

12. This bill is the beginning..

The beginning of the end of the Democratic party's flirt with power this go round.

Mandated private insurance will enrage a substantial portion of the populace, add in the IRS as the enforcer for the health care insurers and there is going to be a great many people who will never vote Democratic again.

[Laelth]

15. +1 n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[laughingliberal]

18. Yes, the beginning of the end of the Democratic party

Likely the final nail in the coffin of a once robust middle and working class in this country. There remains a thin thread of hope for a comeback. This'l take care of that.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. He would not support this bill. I reject that premise.

And I challenge you to cite a source of a direct quote for this thing you claim the late Senator said repeatedly. If he said it so often, that should be easy, no? If you can't, then take back your claim of speaking for the dead, alright?

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Hey, where is the cite for your made up 'quote' from the late

Senator. You claimed he said it repeatedly, but you can not even prove that he said it once. Why would you write that he said it repeatedly? What is the agenda on display with that?

[stray cat]

17. Why do you give a damn about covering the uninsured and prevent insurance co

from messing with people? :sarcasm: