Obama on Health Care: Time for Compromise is Now

If Obama truly believes that now is the time for compromise (which I don’t believe) then he needs to compromise and START OVER. That is what the MAJORITY of Americans want! The truth is….Obama wants NO compromise….he wants to jamb this through, but he doesn’t want it to begin until 2014 and he doesn’t want the insurance tax to kick in until 2018, because he knows he would be toast if it started earlier. He wants a legacy…to He&& with the American people that will have to pay for it and use it.

MEMO
To: Obama and Congress
From: Unemployed in Florida
Subject: Its Jobs Stupid
RE: Advise doing Subject and RAM it. Healthcare low priority, Jobs High priority. Get it done now!

i love how “reconciliation” has now become some kind of rallying cry for the left.
______
Its been a rallying cry for quite some time against the special interests who also got to some centrist and conservative Dems with deep ties to the insurance industry.
I think fair is fair. If one team is going to use an unprecedented number of filibusters and scorch the earth in their efforts to derail, delay and make health care the President’s waterloo then the other team has every right to use a tactic that is right there in the rule book as fair and square, particularly if the other team is known for using it. Not that the hypocrisy embarasses them.
I started out thinking filibuster reform wasn’t a great idea, but after Bunning and Shelby admitting he doesn’t even know why he put holds on a bunch of nominations, he doesn’t know if the people are qualified, I think the GOP is on the verge of destroying progress an the ability of the Senate to do anything all together. I don’t know the answers– but I’m sick to death of the GOP.
But so far we’re not talking about changing the process or the nuclear option.
Pass it via reconcilation. Let’s get this done. Americans deserve an up down vote and affordable health care. We also deserve– demand– consumer protections.

If it is time for compromise the one shouting it the loudest should be the one to compromise. I think he has a lot of gall to presume that the public will agree with him. This type of action that will so seriously affect so many people should be put on a ballot for the public to vote on. Not give this tyrant the free hand to determine how our lives play out.

Wasn’t Obama the one who said if anyone has any ideas I would like to hear them! He is only listening to himself, like he said the other day- I AM THE PRESIDENT! I think we all know that he’s the president. I think the people who voted for him are made a huge mistake. He has so much to learn and he wants to go down in history!?

Oh ya- and we’re all going to go DOWN in history with him.

I hope Obama NEVER gives in to the corupt Republicans. The GOP would see every american giving over one half of there paychecks to the insurence companies that pay for there re-election campaines. They dont care one bit about the american people and lie right to your face. There proposals are a smoke screen that will do nothing to lower health care costs and they know it. As long as the health insurance companies enjoy federal anti-trust protection nothing the republicans are putting on the table will work and they know it. Which is why the democrats are trying to remove it and the republicans are trying at all costs to stop them. The republicans where not in fear for the deficit when bush was turning the 200 billion surplus he got from clinton into a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit. Deficits didnt matter when bush was in office the republicans and cheney SAID SO ON NATIONAL NEWS! But now that Obama is in charge republicans say they do matter FLIP FLOP. The republicans are the single largest threat to the american peoples prosparity. The sad part of all of this is that the american people half of them dont even know what the health care bill is all about. They are so lazy that they only listen to the republicans about how bad it is. The american people are to lazy to learn about it for themselves and therepublicans are beting on that ignorence. And as far as reconciliation. The republicans didnt mide bush using it all the time but now that the democrats want to use it NO WAY! The republican party wants one thing and one thing only to regain power in 2012 and they want NOTHING to get done under Obama they want the american people to be as misrible as possible under Obama so they can say look he couldnt get anything done and your lives still suck vote GOP next election. See they dont have to have a plan to fix anything all they have to do is make the other guy look bad.

The Republicans can’t just sit there saying we have the best healthcare system in the world, with their blinders on. There is a need for change. Obamas plan isn’t perfect either, but does have some important provision. The Republicans need to wipe the smug looks off their face(Mr. Boehner), and start doing their job, and maybe there can be some bipartisn change. As for the job situation; To say healthcare isn’t part of the economy, or job picture is stupid. No.1 There are a lot of unemployed people who can’t get health care. No.2 America is paying every extra dollar they have to oil cos. mortgage cos. credit card cos. and a very large portion to the health care system, with most of it lining the pockets of the wealthy. Until the middle class has a little more disposable income there aren’t going to be jobs. The middle class dollar is behind just about every low, middle, and upper income job out there, and health care is one very major part of it.

What a bunch of corrupt ideas presented by the democrats. A bill stuffed with sweetheart deals for the unions. Yes we should all sacrifice for your union supporters! Deals on the side for special state status.We are not all idiots out here!

There is a very simple solution here.
Republicans don’t want government run health care and are against all of this wasteful spending. The government should do what other employers are doing. Drop health care coverage for every Senator and Representative, including all of their staff.
As a Republican, you can’t be against this move. It saves the government money. And, it eliminates their current government run health care system. Go out and buy your health care on the open market.
Then, let’s all sit back for a year and see how it goes.
I guarantee you health care reform will be on the front burner next year.
Obama — call their bluff.

Rep. Ryan’s theory is completely contradicted by the Congressional Budget Office analysis. And, Rep. Ryan had no workable solution.
_____________________________
As Rep Ryan and others (including some dems) have indicated CBO’s analysis isn’t including the full 10 years they are only analyzing the beginning I think the first 5 years. Of course this bill is deficit neutral because you are charging people the full 10 years and only paying the last 6. It also doesn’t address the insolvency of medicare and social security and this bill’s impact on them – which at the summit the pres and all his pro this bill side also failed to respond to.
Also Ryan’s workable solution at his website referencing his roadmap for america would be a much better launching point for healthcare than this corrupt, overpriced, roadmap leading to empty promises and economic slavery. If you think what we have with healthcare companies now is bad given the examples of these same types of healthcare legislation in Tenn., Maine & Mass. it is going -IMHO- in the wrong direction and it is not a compromise when you can’t even get your own party to agree on it.

“CBO’s analysis isn’t including the full 10 years they are only analyzing the beginning I think the first 5 years.”
________________________________________
There is no room here for ‘thinking’ something might be true.
The Congressional Budget Office analysis is that the Democratic health care plans REDUCE the deficit. . . by billions of dollars.

The government takeover of health insurance, being rammed down the throats of Americans by unethical means, such as reconciliation, secret meetings and backroom Chicago style political deals has awaken the sleeping giant. Just look at Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts. How arrogant of Obama, to hold a “bipartisan”??? health care summit and already have reconciliation plans in the works. Americans are not stupid. Noboby wants this Socialistic Bill rammed down our throats. We don’t want it. Don’t they get it??? They are totally ignorant of the fact that this Bill only has a 39% approval rating. Americans want health care reform. We don’t want government run health care. Any Democratic Congressman who votes for this monstrosity of a Bill, will be commiting political suicide and walking the plank for Obama, Pelosi & Reid. What is happening in Washington right now, with plans of reconciliation, is against the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans and it is wrong. People in America need to stand up and voice their discontent and outrage against this left-wing extremist regime. What is happening here is so very wrong.

Pass it via reconcilation. Let’s get this done. Americans deserve an up down vote and affordable health care. We also deserve– demand– consumer protections.
Posted by: progressive mama | Feb 27, 2010 10:42:10 AM
————-
Couldn’t agree more. Let’s take some names! Stand up and be counted. It’s political suicide, of course, so I say let’s get on with it!

” What is happening is government is jamming something down everyones throat”
____________________________________
What’s with this repeated oral fascination? Some kind of repression emerging here?
If you really believe the government is all liars, then the government shouldn’t be doing anything at all – nothing!
Since that isn’t the case, let’s work on this deficit reduction and health care plan – reducing the deficit by over $100 billion dollars is worth SERIOUSLY looking at.

Yes Mr President now is the time to compromise. Yes you evil republicans you must compromise with whatever I say. That’s compromise Obama style!
And stop bringing up those “talking points”. I know you think they are your ideas, but all of them are just talking points to me, so I just wave them away.
Mr president, we are not all stupid moonbats out here!

Tierra, are you really the press secretary and not just an Obama fan? You have the administrations talking points down very nicely.
Posted by: Ruth | Feb 27, 2010 1:46:15 PM
____________________________________
All it takes is a little factual research.

Tierra, A rose by any other name is still a rose. Yes, they are “ramming this Bill down our throats”. Come on now, tell us all the truth. Please answer this question and don’t dodge it. Just a “Yes” or “No” answer.
Is your favorite news station MSNBC?
Yes or No.
???????

Ken,
You are conversing with an Obamatron. Anything and everything Obama does is perfect. For most of us, Obama has positive and negatives. Don’t waste your time.

“Obama will unveil his healthplan next week” Another attempt at the contemptible “educated class,” left wing of the democratic party to ram the “nanny state” down our independent throats. Obama is a disgrace to truly educated and hard working people in this great country. Hi is a marxist, delusional and only understands his own distorted perceptions of Americans. Having lived all his life in places like Hyde Park (chicago), this is not surprising. What is surprising is that he has made this into a personal vendetta against the (majority) American people (look at the polls and Scott Brown victory and the failed attempt at government medicine in Massachusetts). He is willing to incinerate all his idiot democratic followers along with his personal ambitions for a socialist future. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are already history – do I hear the rest of the democrats in the Senate and House of Reps? Go for it Hussein!!!!!

Tierra said, “Since that isn’t the case, let’s work on this deficit reduction and health care plan – reducing the deficit by over $100 billion dollars is worth SERIOUSLY looking at.”
Sure I agree. We can start by killing this health care bill now. Oh wait I forgot it will CREATE 4 million jobs. LOL…

There are no doubt some good GOP ideas that should be expanded into any bill– There are also many Dem. Ideas that are good– Dropping the Public Option was/is a bow to the Insurance industry— However — The sweetheart deals for Louisiana and Nebraska must be dropped — and probably a whole host of other ,slipped in, provisions!!! But the Insurance/Pharma. lobbies have infected both the GOP and the Dems– The GOP are a minority who act like a majority — The Dems are a Majority acting like a Minority— What I don’t like in the Partisan divide is the GOP marching in lockstep to their corporate sponsors– Placing ideology over Country — The Dems at least are not all in lockstep– In fact a third of them don’t usually tow the Party line— The Press give the GOP loudmouths way too much airtime and not enough investigative scrutiny—Obstruction is not governing!!!! Both parties waste money — But the GOP solution is kicking the very big can down the Road– They waste on war and Nation Building — elsewhere— the Dems on domestic Social Programs — Their both Spendocrats and both beholden to too many lobbyists!!! Perhaps a Coalition Govt. of 3-4 parties would produce better results — What I find disingenuous about the 19% GOP is their constant talking Points, apologists, and hypocritical positioning- Yet never accepting any blame for any problem!!! IE The Bush Doubling of Govt etc. — Deregulation is not an answer– We all need Laws and Rules ——BiGGGGGG Govt. is not the Problem — Its corrupt Govt , bought and paid for by ideological agendas, that is the problem !!!! To think that the GOP are the fiscally Responsible party — is a lie and the height of Folly!!!!! To be screaming about Govt. Spending — during Recession/ Depression is like debating whether to pay the water bill thats about to be shut off , while fighting a forest fire!!! Not good policy at all !!!! Long Term yes- But why did the GOP say no to earmark reform!!!

Perhaps I didn’t watch the correct meetings or OBAMA wasn;t at the same mneeting I watched? when is this guy going to lead? when is he going to realize the GOP wqants to see him fail? When is he going to get shots of testosterone? Mr PRESIDENT…The time is NOW-go for reconciliation..do something!!!

brian . ..
I agree with most of what you say (and derni too), but I disagree with the “The sweetheart deals for Louisiana and Nebraska must be dropped” . ..
Nebraska ‘yes’, but the adjustments made for Louisiana stem directly out of the difficult and unusual situation that resulted from Hurricane Katrina – very legitimate adjustments.
Unfortunately mis-characterized by poorly informed opponents of the bills.

Some people need to realize that always parroting what the Obama line is, becomes obvious to others. How can anyone take such a person seriously? Even Michelle can’t agree with everything Obama thinks. But some obamatrons sure can! Very pathetic that some can’t think for themselves.

Some people need to realize that always parroting what the Obama line is, becomes obvious to others. How can anyone take such a person seriously? Even Michelle can’t agree with everything Obama thinks. But some obamatrons sure can! Very pathetic that some can’t think for themselves.
Posted by: jonny | Feb 27, 2010 2:21:25 PM
____________________________________
Again, no researched discussion points from the Republican right – just put downs and insults.

From the President . . .
“Both sides agreed that the rising cost of health care is a serious problem that plagues families, small businesses, and our federal budget. Many on both sides agreed that we should give small businesses and individuals the ability to participate in a new insurance marketplace – which members of Congress would also use – that would allow them to pool their purchasing power and get a better deal from insurance companies. And I heard some ideas from our Republican friends that I believe are very worthy of consideration.”
The president went on to say that there were unresolved differences, and called for compromise.
“We disagreed over whether insurance companies should be held accountable when they deny people care or arbitrarily raise premiums. I believe they should. We disagreed over giving tax credits to small businesses and individuals that would make health care affordable for those who don’t have it. This would be the largest middle class tax cut for health care in history, and I believe we should do it. And while we agreed that Americans with pre-existing conditions should be able to get coverage, we disagreed on how to do that.”

Name calling, insults, fear and smear campaigns – the Republicans: Party First. Country Second.
this seems to by a prerecorded statement. Research past bills and watch the back rooms. It would appear that this is only one party. Both Dem.’s and Rep.’s make deals in the back room and point the finger at each other.
If you ever notice any program controlled by Congress (that includes when their buddies are put in charge) is destine to be over budget and failure.
We will start back with Nixon, Social Security was running fine and had a large fund sitting there. It was put in the general fund and guess what. Many times since checks were delayed while politics were played. This is not the only one, do the research and you will see the pattern, it does not make any difference which party is in the majority, they both degrade the programs until they have to make another program to replace something, that if run properly would work. There are already programs in place that could, if properly run, do what everyone is complaining about a lot cheaper. But until the government decides to run the country like a business instead of money pit because they just raise taxes to get the money, nothing will change.
Example: at end of year in any government agency what happens if they did not spend more than their budget? There is a spending frenzy.
Why are not supervisors who do not spend their budget rewarded? They can not raise taxes if everyone remained in budget and left over money’s put into a fund for future use.
This is basically what is going on now.
Name calling, insults, fear and smear campaigns – the Republicans: Party First. Country Second.
should read
Name calling, insults, fear and smear campaigns – the Republicans and Democrats: Party First. Country Second.

Two days after the summit, Rasmussen finds Obama’s approval at an all-time low of 43%. And 22% “strongly” approve, while 43% strongly disapprove.
One wonders who those 22% are.

Nothing in this world is a “right” if other people have to foot the bill for it.
—-
So, to heck with public education all together, in your humble opinion? And to heck with the services of police and fire departments, or to the benefits of a strong military? The heck with the post office, and public highways, and national parks. The heck with worrying about public health, safety and the common good. We should privatize it all, and pay for those services as one does consumer goods?
If something is made a public service, then those who pay taxes have a right to it. The real issue is whether health care is considered part of the public good, part of the social net, part of the responsibility of a government that has a role in ensuring the safety and well being of its citizens.
In our country, we have set up health care as a privilege, with the best care in the world attainable and affordable by the wealthy — but rather mediocre care, if any, attainable and affordable as you move down to the food chain. Its a benefit, not a right here, provided solely at the discretion of an employer, a government subsidized insurance plan for the elderly or a charitable gift provided based on the goodwill of others.
But it doesn’t have to be that way.
We declare that we are “endowed with unalienable rights, among them are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” — and there’s no question that health care contributes to all three.
The “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to require prisoners, as part of their humane treatment during detention, to be guaranteed the right to health care– so prisoners do have the right and we pay for it– but our citizens with pre-existing conditions? Nah.
Its interesting to remember that at the time of the framing of the Constitution, health care was generally available to all citizens. There was no major issue of lack of affordability or access. Our country and its health care system are radically different now than at the time of the Revolutionary War.
Flexibility and compassion are important virtues. Its time to move into the new millenium– granted, a decade late– and extend the benefits and advantages of health care that every other first world nation has found a way to provide.

Just look at this mortgage assistance program. Not enough for some, too much for others, loopholes, fraud, too slow, too big, too expensive, too complex,..now multiply the size of the project many times over, add sick people, remove the word temporary and voila..you have the Democratic healthcare program-but THIS will work out much better…PROMISE.

more nonsensical responses
“Again, no researched discussion points from the Republican right – just put downs and insults.”
No research is required to observe who is an obamatron.

Simple Math – The cost of health insurance for 30 million uninsured Americans
What is the average monthly cost per individual for health insurance?
I initiated several web searches to find this number and discovered several estimates.
The lowest cost I found was $250.00 per month, which included sizeable out of pocket deductions.
Under a government controlled “robust” health care system, there will be no required out of pocket deductions,
as the government would, in theory, fully cover the needs of all the 30 million Americans who currently do not have health care.
Therefore, one would have to assume that with no out of pocket deductions, the average monthly cost would be much higher
than $250.00 per month.
For the sake of argument, let’s just say that Obama somehow manages to sharpen his pencil and finds
a way to keep the average monthly cost of total comprehensive no deductible health insurance at a unrealistic
low cost of $250.00 per month.
O.K. then, $250.00 per month equates to a total cost of $3000.00 per year to provide health insurance to
each of the 30 million uninsured Americans.
Now, here’s the simple math:
$3000.00 x 30,000,000 uninsured Americans = $90,000,000,000.00.
That’s 90 billion dollars per year, based on an extremley low unrealistic average monthly cost.
90 billion dollars = 90,000 one-million dollar bills just for one year.
Realistically, you can likely double or triple each of the figures listed above, because it is virtually impossible
to provide total no deductible health insurance for only $250.00 per month.
Then multiply all the numbers by 5 and 10 years.
Do you get the simple math?

For now, I want one thing clarified. When they say this bill is budget neutral are they in fact counting 10 years revenue and 6 years expenditures? This should be a pretty clear yes or no type fact. Would any SUPPORTERS of the bill please respond.
Posted by: 4civitity | Feb 27, 2010 4:08:47 PM
You know what buddy. I dont know. What I do know is this. My health care insurence went from 300 to 700 dollars a month in ONE YEAR!!!!! So if I have to pay 100 or even 200 dollars extra a month in taxs to get my premiums lower back to 300 a month I just saved 200-300 dollars a month. Doesnt take a math major to figure out that one does it? This is just one of the FACTS that the insurence companies and the republicans that are in there pockets dont want you to know.

Mike,
If I’m hearing you right, you support the bill whether it’s budget neutral or not. Is there ANY cost for this bill at which you would say “we can’t affort it?”

Posted by: 4civility | Feb 27, 2010 4:22:10 PM
Yes if taxes went up so much that it didnt matter that my insurence went back to normal. In other words if it caused my taxs to go up over 400 a month cause thats how much my insurence went up in ONE YEAR!! Oh and by the way thats just for me and my wife no kids and I havent even went to the doctor once in 3 years.

Like I said before it doesnt matter people of this country are generally stupid and will allow whoever has the most money to influence how they think. Bottom line is if I have to pay a 100 dollars more a month in taxes to get my premiums lowered back to the amount I was paying last year a 400 dollar difference in other words then im for it. Thats simple math.

My response to: Ken is a true republican He belives that if you simply say the same distrotion of the truth over and over and over and over people will forget logic and just buy into your crap. Hey how about this if the Obama plan is so bad tell me why health insurence companies that stand to lose BILLIONS if reform happends are spending MILLIONS to tell you reform is bad for you. SHOULDNT BE TO HARD TO SEE THAT CONFLICT OF INTEREST IF ONLY MOIST AMERICANS WERENT MORONS!!!!!!
Nothing is free in this world. There isn’t a money tree on the back lawn of the White House. One way or another, you will pay. I don’t want to see the government managing health care. The government can’t even process my auto registration, without taking months to do so.
I want these health insurance companies to be regulagted, so they don’t rape us. I want to see us given the right to buy insurance across State lines, so it forces the insurance companies to become more competitive. I want the government to make certain that any uninsured “American” is not left to die, maybe by providing them with the means, by a voucher, to purchase low cost private insurance. I don’t want the government taking over and running our healthcare system.

Nothing is free in this world. There isn’t a money tree on the back lawn of the White House. One way or another, you will pay. I don’t want to see the government managing health care. The government can’t even process my auto registration, without taking months to do so.
I want these health insurance companies to be regulagted, so they don’t rape us. I want to see us given the right to buy insurance across State lines, so it forces the insurance companies to become more competitive. I want the government to make certain that any uninsured “American” is not left to die, maybe by providing them with the means, by a voucher, to purchase low cost private insurance. I don’t want the government taking over and running our healthcare system.
Posted by: ken | Feb 27, 2010 4:40:12 PM
NOW YOUR TALKIN KEN! I think your on the right track. I want that very same thing. Heres the problem with the republicans plan. The plan you just posted. It cant and will not work. Heres why. Insurence companies enjoy ferderal anti-trust protection. So opening up across state lines would do NOTHING because they all the companies can still get together and set prices and share information. Thats the bottom line and Im pretty sure the republicans know this. After all they are fighting the democrats tooth and nail becuase the democrats are trying to strip the anti-trust protection from the insuence companies and insurence companies and the republicans are trying to stop them from doing it.

I’d like to take a time out from the debate, to thank Jake Tapper, for writing articles that stimulate healthy debates.
We are all Americans and whether Liberal or Conservative, none of us want to see anyone left to die, for lack of health insurance. We just have different approaches as to how we can best help these people who are truly in need.
Conservatives = Fix the broken system.
Liberals = Government takeover of the system.
Thanks Jake for providing us witth this forum to express outselves and writing articles that inspire us to speak out.

Posted by: ken | Feb 27, 2010 4:56:20 PM
I would love to fix the broken system. To be honest I dont like the dems plan really cause its to complicated and we wont see real results for at least 2 years. However we will not be able to fix the system regulate or do anything if we dont strip the insurence companies federal anti-trust protection away from them. If we dont do that the only way to lower costs would be a public option. I belive that this is why the ensurence companies have spent nearly all of there lobbying money to defeat those to things.

I don’t trust the government to run anything.
They historically do a lousy job of anything they have run!
I’d much rather see the government give the insurance companies a good kick in the ass and keep them on the straight and narrow.
There are ways to provide assistance to people who truly cannot afford health insurance, without a government takeover.
The only thing that Congress does well, is ensuring that their own health insurance is top of the line and that their pensions are fat and intact.
Other than that, they do a lousy job at everything they lay their greedy little hands on, whether it be DEmocrats or Republicans in Office!

Liberals = Government takeover of the system.
Posted by: ken
I keep on hearing about it, but,
I’m still curious as to what exactly is being ‘taken over’

If this Obamacare is so darn good, you would think that they would be more than willing to give up their own current five star coverage and enroll in Obamacare, right?
Posted by: ken |
maybe you can provide some clarity and describe what ‘Obamacare’ really is

Posted by: 4civility | Feb 27, 2010 5:43:41 PM
CBO hasn’t scored the current “plan” but rather the two separate bills.
Budget neutral means “The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must project that the bill be at least deficit neutral over the 10-year budget window, and deficit reducing thereafter. Covering tens of millions of currently uninsured people will increase spending, but the draft health reform legislation contains offsetting savings sufficient to cover those costs and the seeds of further reforms that will lower the growth of spending. Deficit neutrality over the first decade means that, even during the start-up period, the legislation will not add to our deficits. After the first decade, the legislation should reduce deficits.” (NYT)
I’m not really sure I understand your question as the reforms start immediately, as do some benefits.
“Within six months, the Senate bill approved last week would allow dependent, unmarried children to remain on their parents’ policies until their 26th birthday; the House bill would allow an additional year of dependent coverage, until the 27th birthday. Right now it varies from state to state.
The Senate bill would also bar insurers from denying coverage to children under 19 years of age based on pre-existing medical conditions. And the House bill would require insurers to cover reconstructive surgery for children born with deformities.” (NYT)
Also funding for community health centers, short term expansion of state high risk pools, no annual or lifetime limits, closing the Medicare drug donut hole, barring recision, small business tax credits, COBRA extension through 2013, patient protections regarding emergency care,
This may be what you’re getting at:
New federal subsidies to help moderate-income Americans afford coverage would not begin until 2013 under the House bill, and 2014 under the Senate bill. A new requirement that nearly all Americans obtain insurance would take effect at the same time that the subsidies become available.
On the flip side, many of the new taxes and fees that will help pay for the legislation would take effect much sooner. For this reason, some Republicans have criticized the bill as akin to legislation on a layaway plan: pay now for benefits later.
The concept, however, is not unprecedented. In 1965, when Medicare was created, the payroll tax began six months before the insurance coverage began for Americans age 65 and over.

“Many on both sides agreed that we should give small businesses and individuals the ability to participate in a new insurance marketplace – which members of Congress would also use – that would allow them to pool their purchasing power and get a better deal from insurance companies.”

Tierra,
First off, members of the Congress & Senate think of themselves first and have conveniently excluded themselves from this “wonderful” plan.
As I stated, try to picture either Nancy Pelosi or John McCain as Obamacare recipients, sitting in a Doctors Office waiting room, patiently waiting their turn, with 6 patients ahead of them.
In your wildest dreams, this will never actually become reality.

As I stated, try to picture either Nancy Pelosi or John McCain as Obamacare recipients, sitting in a Doctors Office waiting room
___________________________________
The insurance company does not determine how long your Dr. makes you wait. If Pelosi or McCain are getting in ahead of others, it is the Dr. who lets them.

“which members of Congress would also use”
BTW, I ain’t buyin’ it. Agreeing about it and signing into law are way different.

Posted by: 4civility | Feb 27, 2010 5:43:41 PM
If they were to only spend the amount they are projecting then yes it would in fact be budget nutral over the next 10 years however this just wont be true. It like any other goverment or for that matter civilian contracting job WILL go over budget. Thats the nature of the beast. The question we need to ask is are we willing to spend the money in a taxed goverment program to lower our civilian free market premiums. Because I can garentee you that if we dont insurence companies will raise rates so high that we will be deciding weather to buy food or buy health insurence. My premiums have gone from 300 to 700 a month in the last year and there is about NOTHING I can do about it. The insurence companies enjoy federal anti-trust protection. So there is no such thing as compitition and there never will be in the free market health care insurence system.

As I stated, try to picture either Nancy Pelosi or John McCain as Obamacare recipients, sitting in a Doctors Office waiting room
___________________________________
The insurance company does not determine how long your Dr. makes you wait. If Pelosi or McCain are getting in ahead of others, it is the Dr. who lets them.

As I stated, try to picture either Nancy Pelosi or John McCain as Obamacare recipients, sitting in a Doctors Office waiting room
___________________________________
The insurance company does not determine how long your Dr. makes you wait. If Pelosi or McCain are getting in ahead of others, it is the Dr. who lets them.
Posted by: tierra | Feb 27, 2010 7:28:46 PM
As I said before they haev free health care compliments of you and I. Also as members of congress they are seen by the best doctors at john hopkins military hospital. All for free thanks to you and me the american tax payers.

” . . . we should give small businesses and individuals the ability to participate in a new insurance marketplace – which members of Congress would also use . . . ”
Tierra, I’m assuming this is an Obama quote you are putting forth?
Is this quote as credible as “Were gonna let the C-SPAN cameras come into the room, so everyone can see the negotiations.”
Well, when Pelosi & Reid were drafting the Bills in secret rooms, behind closed locked doors and there were certainly no C-SPAN cameras in the rooms. After the Bill was all said & done and Obama was critisized for weeks about the C-SPAN cameras, he had this recent dog & pony show on camera and at the same time was making plans for reconciliation of the Bills already put together in secret rooms.
The healthcare summit meeting was a farce.
He lied then and he is lying now.
Talk is cheap.

” . . . we should give small businesses and individuals the ability to participate in a new insurance marketplace – which members of Congress would also use . . . ”
Because many of you dont understand the system that members of congress (and 8 million other federal employees) have, this sounds to you like a new idea. It isn’t, its already in the insurance reform bills.

Wow, does this mean other people get to participate now…??? Nah, I didn’t think so. Obama is screwed either way. Pass it and lose the country or Kill it and lose his base, who is the only support he has, at all. Looks like a one term deal for O’bomba… Surely Cousin Cheney and Jimmy Carter can talk him through it.

After the Bill was all said & done and Obama was critisized for weeks about the C-SPAN cameras, he had this recent dog & pony show on camera and at the same time was making plans for reconciliation of the Bills already put together in secret rooms.
The healthcare summit meeting was a farce.
He lied then and he is lying now.
Talk is cheap.
Don’t be so niave.
Posted by: ken | Feb 27, 2010 7:54:24 PM
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
It has become abundantly clear that no matter what President Obama says or does there is a group of people who will always be negative. They will always doubt his sincerity. Will never, ever give him the benefit of the doubt. Will never, ever give him a chance.Will never give him credit. I wonder why that is?
Many Americans did not like George Bush’s policies. Many Americans felt his and the Republican policies would ruin our country. WE WERE RIGHT, but never, ever was George Bush treated this way. Now I realize that a lot of you will deny that but then I wouldn’t expect for you to agree. Bottom line, you people need to get over it. This Summit showed the American people that Republicans have no intentions of voting for health care reform. Reading the various post and blogs since this debate began, it is clear that there are a lot of very selfish negative people out there who seem to only care about themselves and what is best for them and the heck with anyone else who has not had the same luck and success and experiences as you. Good luck to you because by the grace of whoever you believe in you or your family could wake up one day and really need that government help.

Posted by: Flash Override | Feb 27, 2010 7:47:52 PM
You are right as I am right and you proved my point we pay for there health care. Tax money pays there saleries yes? So anything they buy to include goverment subsidesed healthcare is in fact payed for by the US taxpayers

“So then is the answer to let the liberal dems (not all the dems or it would have passed by now) fleece the country with bad legislation”
Of course you’re going to say it’s bad legislation, but regardless of how good you think Republican proposals are it doesn’t matter because they’re never going to pass them. The Republicans are totally wasting our time grandstanding and stalling. If the you think the reform legislation is going to fleece us just wait till you see how bad the insurance industry is going to fleece us if we don’t do anything about it.

Progressive Mama,
Thanks for your response. It’s the only one in a couple days of posting to directly address my question.
The end of your post does in fact address my worry:
federal subsidies to help lower income folks buy insurance begin in 2013/14; but tax and fee collection takes place much sooner. The observation that this is a “pay now for benefits later” sort of deal is not a Republican delusion, then, but a simple fact.
Maybe this sort of deal is just fine; and it’s interesting to note precedents. In my mind it puts an asterisk next to the “budget neutral in first decade” claim.

Ya know what Im tired of the debate. Im tired of getting riped off buy privit health care. Im going back into the military. Nation Guard. Then I will qualify for tri-care reserve. Its only 180 a month and its full coverage health care for me and my family. I accually wont be able to pay for health care any other way. So everybody get on the band wagon. Join the national gaurd or reserve. Its the only way you will be able to pay your bills and pay for health care too. Sad thing is I make 28 dollars an hour and I cant afford health care any other way except for going into the national gaurd.

The CBO said that fairly well off people in the non-group market will be paying 10-13% more, partly because insurance companies will be required to actually cover people (, and partially because (the CBO estimates that) people will buy more insurance because its a better deal than it was.
______________________________________
Right so someone who can’t really afford it is going to get such a great deal that now instead of not buying insurance they will spend 10-13% more than what they would have spent. Also what number defines “fairly well-off” because once the gov’t starts deciding it can slide that range any way it wants. Are you going by income- $75,000 is a LOT of money in Mississippi but what about New York or LA?? what if someone has high income and is caring for elderly parents or a family member with an illness?? high income but has a home based business so income and business are intertwined??? Such illogical approaches no wonder people on both sides of the aisle are not supporting. Are you going to have to file and itemize just to decide what kind of healthcare the gov’t thinks you ought to be entitled to.
Also who is going to decide the “great deals” that these people now will get because what they purchase is going to be mandated.
Also if you look at Mass. they said the same things about healthcare and their prices are SKYROCKETING. The state is overwhelmed and people, even with the mandate, are still not buying it.
Do you even buy your own insurance or is this whole thing completely theories and numbers on a page. Before you start shaming people maybe try understanding some legitimate concerns. Name a program any program that the federal government has run on budget, with mass efficiency that has fully done what it was promised/intended to do.
Would you put your healthcare in even more control of the hands of someone with the fed gov’t's track records on entitlement programs. Anyone who is putting all their hope in Obama- he can only be pres for 2 terms, then what.

“Name a program any program that the federal government has run on budget, with mass efficiency that has fully done what it was promised/intended to do”
Let’s start by asking all the Republicans on Medicare.

Let’s start by asking all the Republicans on Medicare.
________________________
Hey Skip let’s start by asking reps AND dems why social security has been a slush fund to raid since it’s inception and why medicare while continuing to be over budget for over 40 years has not been reformed but has more money just dumped into it from the general fund of the treasury.
PLEASE get a grip and look at the issues and not the d/r game it’s not only lame but irrelevant.

But issues are meaningless when one side is just using them for diversion.
Posted by: Skip | Feb 27, 2010 10:26:39 PM
________________________________________
Are you talking about the republicans or the dems because in 2009 according to basic math the dems were the one side that couldn’t agree on the healthcare issue. The repubs were irrelevant again according to basic math regardless of the diversions they used.

Posted by: wantingbalance | Feb 27, 2010 9:20:12 PM
Again you point to no Republican suggestions for bettering the health care bill – you just whine about the Democrats.
Posted by: tierra | Feb 27, 2010 9:42:39 PM
_____________________________________
The President’s addressed “compromise” wasn’t about the republicans ideas it’s about the Senate’s bill with a bigger price tag and a few tweaks.
Have you even looked into some of the other proposals by reps and dems or do you continue to buy the line that because the leadership says there weren’t any (that is any they let go to the floor) they didn’t exist. Why do you think people are “whining about the dems” it’s because they have done a terrible job enacting this reform. They’ve done it on process AND substance and now they are trying to force it through. Even the President, who is claiming a 2008 mandate, isn’t following the promises he campaigned on regarding healthcare. So if he had a mandate then why isn’t he pushing for what he campaigned on??
To say the republicans don’t have a plan that I see so we have to accept legislative garbage is selling the american people short and is not really good healthcare reform.
I say take it back and put together something better this is not good enough.

“I say take it back and put together something better this is not good enough”
Yeah right, stall until November comes, win a few more Republican seats, and kill healthcare reform for another 10 or 20 years…best health insurance industry scenario.

If the you think the reform legislation is going to fleece us just wait till you see how bad the insurance industry is going to fleece us if we don’t do anything about it.
______________________________________
You miss a fundamental and important difference- if the insurance companies fleece us we have the gov’t to check and balance them (which would indeed be good government policy) however if the fed gov’t fleeces us with this legislation who is going to check and balance them?? That is the problem when you blend economic heavywieghts and government heavyweights into one entity- no checks and balances.

“however if the fed gov’t fleeces us with this legislation who is going to check and balance them??”
We are….theoretically we’re supposed to do that at the ballot box.

Yeah right, stall until November comes, win a few more Republican seats, and kill healthcare reform for another 10 or 20 years…best health insurance industry scenario.
Posted by: Skip | Feb 27, 2010 11:21:52 PM
_______________________________________
The sad part is the Republicans couldn’t care less if they’re taking the country down with them. They proved that during the Bush administration with their ‘deficit spending is our right’ posture – and they prove it again now with their ‘we oppose everything’ agenda.
Despicable.
__________________________________
First if the reps do get back in in Nov they will be shortlived if they do ignore healthcare reform.
Second if taking the country down with deficit spending is our right then it is really sad because that unfortunately has not is not changed in this Bush third term on steroid spending we are in. Sorry but if you cringed at Bush’s deficit spending and are not cringing now then that is just intellectually dishonest.

“Sorry but if you cringed at Bush’s deficit spending and are not cringing now then that is just intellectually dishonest”
It’s also intellectually dishonest to intentionally fail to acknowledge the advice of a majority of economic experts who say you just can’t reduce spending during an economic crisis without a real risk of exacerbating it.

It’s also intellectually dishonest to intentionally fail to acknowledge the advice of a majority of economic experts who say you just can’t reduce spending during an economic crisis without a real risk of exacerbating it.
_______________________________________
How is pushing cap and trade related to this you think it’s going to help the crisis or exacerbate it?? Making people’s energy bills “necessarily skyrocket” during an economic crisis that’s not going to exacerbate it? What about pushing very quickly and early on for using any and all energy resources here in the US- oil, gas, yes wind, solar you think if the stimulus had been directed to grow the energy industry to the fullest extent one that could sustain itself without continuous subsidies. You know like the school districts that accepted money and EXPANDED their programs only to now need more infusion of cash to sustain their overspending. Do you think it could have helped and that wouldn’t have helped rather than exacerbated it. I understand our economy has gone from being based on producing to consuming so yeah they wanted to keep up the “consuming” that won’t fix it long term and tell me all economists agree on that- they don’t. Because in order to sustain the debt incurred by this spending those liabilities will outgrow our GDP. I haven’t heard anyone besides Paul Krugman advocating that. Who fixes overdrawing their checking account only by continuing to write bad checks at some point it will catch up with you.

“To make it seem like it’s all this one bill full of some real garbage or throw people to the wolves leave the status quo is the biggest straw man out there”
We’ll just have to see about that won’t we? My bet is there will not be a single Republican vote cast in favor of any healthcare reform bill regardless of what’s in it.

Let’s start by asking the Republicans on Medicare.
later.. “asking reps and dems why social security has been a slush fund to raid….why medicare while …over budget for over 40 years has not been reformed but has more money just dumped into it from the gereral fund…
obienone40 appears to be starting to understand something. One error s.s. had it fund dumped into the general fund during the Reagan administration and is therefore broke.
spending more money on a new healthcare will be just the same.
reform of both social security and medicare would result in less money spent and better care than proposed. both would have to be BY LAW set up to obey present laws governing the insurance industry in healthcare and retirement. their funds would no longer go into the general fund where everyone would spend them but have their own fund which can not be touched except by the fund.
HOW TO FUND THESE PUT ALL MONEY SPENT ON GOVERNMENT RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE INTO THESE FUNDS AND MAKE THE GOVERNMENT USE MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY FOR THEIR RETIREMENT AND HEALTHCARE.
IN Doing this there would be a savings on moneys spent by the other funds, less money spent trying to start up a plan and you would have healthcare available to everyone with existing regulation. Private healthcare may not like it but I thought the idea was to help the people of this country not private interests.
The Dem’s claim to be for the people (except for those taking paid vacations by big corps) the reps and Congress will be doing what they claim to have been trying to do “REPAIR MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY” …..OR HAVE THEY BEEN LAIRS ALL THIS TIME…tierra????
AM I DAYDREAMING OR WOULD THIS MEAN REFORM

How can obama do this????? He can barly find his way to the bathroom by himself!!! What an embarrassment he is to America!

There you go again LaMarr
On This Week’s show this morning you kept spreading the story that premiums would rise under the President’s plan.
Fact is CBO said they would rise ONLY FOR THE 10% OF AMERICANS WHO BUY THEIR POLICIES INVIDUALLY, BUT THEN the subsidies in the Plan would help these Americans SO THAT THERE WOULD BE NO RISE, maybe a reduction. [And did these Americans do any better with recent Corporate increases?]
CBO ALSO SAID that for 90% OF AMERICANS, premiums would fall or remain the same.

Posted by: droppem
—
The caps in your post were dropped just before the word ‘SUBSIDIES’ and picked up afterwards. Any reason for that? If voters are to believe the CBO (and they don’t), where do these subsidies come from? Federal Gov’t (taxes), maybe?
If ubama wants to come off as genuine he would speak in $figures$ rather than %percentages%. If his plan is so great he could talk of the BENEFITS rather than saying ‘similar’. If this farce ever passes it will set the bar for benefits offered by private insurers. Even if that insurance is paid for with other people’s tax money (subsidies) or not those benefits will be lower.
What will those benefits include?
How much will the unsubsidized policy cost?
How much will this subsidie pay, exactly?

I have to wonder about what is not being said on this Health Care deboggle….Is the common sense person expected to pay the price for people who make bad choices in their life. Carefully the dems have avoided the AID’s epidemic that is rampant in the free living segment of our society. With the “PUSH” to cover pre existing conditions, I want to know how much I will have to pay for segment of society who are so self indulgent they throw caution to the wind and end up with terminal ills. How much will it cost the tax payer for the drug addict? How much will it cost for the sex addicts? How much will these high risk patients cost the person who pays attention to health, weight, safe sex? How much will these “free spirits” cost the individual who takes the time to protect themselves from social ills?

I have to wonder about what is not being said on this Health Care deboggle….
Posted by: cjvwise1
—
Don’t wait for the Bleeders & Huggers here to attempt an answer to legitimate questions.

I imagine in a good bipartisan discussion each side can acknowledge a good point the other side is making–always focusing on facts and leaving out the insults. I’m generally opposed to the bill, not because I hope the Poor suffer while the Rich kick butt, but because I worry the Bill will bankrupt the country. I could be wrong.
I’ve got a point on the table I hope a bill supporter will acknowledge:
“Federal subsidies to help lower-income folks buy insurance would begin in 2013/14; tax and fee collection would take place right away. This is clearly a “pay now for benefits later” sort of deal which demands a big asterisk next to the “budget neutral in first decade” claim.”
Any bill supporters have a similar assertion they believe a rational person, even one opposed to the bill, should acknowledge? I’ll try to play fair.

Health savings account were not even mentioned. These handle the day to day healthcare costs. Catastrophic insurance covers the big ticket items. Catastrophes have a lower probability of occurrence and are cheaper to insure.
Thre have been proposals from Harvard Medical school for this. Totally disregarded. The people running the country are selling us out to insurance companies.

Obama’s idea of a compromise is “it’s my way or the highway”.
I still can’t get over how immature he sounded when he sniped at McCain. Obama, the permanently frozen campaigner, had the audacity and backyard bully tactic of using the forum to belittle McCain for the very thing Obama does everyday.

This health reform bill is just like global warming legislation: pass it, pass it now, pass it right now before anybody can study it long enough to understand it.
Posted by: EPU | Feb 28, 2010 2:11:30 PM
_______________________________________
Where have you been for the past year? There have been hundreds of bi-partisan committee meetings, hundreds of town halls, hundreds of amendments worked out, the bills have been posted on line . . . it goes on and on.
You’re not being truthful. Why is that so easy for the Republican right? Sleazy tactics.

Posted by: 4civility | Feb 28, 2010 1:31:34 PM
Interesting that you’re pretending it hasn’t been acknowledged, using sleight of hand to misdirect, and then asking everyone to play “fair.” LOL. It doesn’t put an asterik next to budget deficit neutral, its not unprecedented, and anyone who has ever started up a business should understand the concept fairly easily. Moreover, you have to limit the notion of “benefits” to federal subsidies and leave out coverage for pre-existing conditions, closing the Medicare drug donut hole, barring recision, small business tax credits, COBRA extension through 2013, patient protections regarding emergency care, funding for community health centers, and other provisions previously mentioned in my post at | Feb 27, 2010 6:23:52 PM
And then there are the pilot programs that get at the issue of cost, which we really must address as a nation.
Moreover, several good points have been made about doing nothing– points that relate to the uninsured, the growing number of uninsured, medical inflation trends, other first world nations, and so on. Republicans and lobbyists have been blocking movement on the issue for years and lack any credibility when it comes to a desire to do anything that tackes affordability AND access. Comparing and contrasting CBO reports clearly shows that Dems have taken a broad and long game approach to the problem– and their plans cover more people at lower cost. Under Republican plans, the poor and middle class will continue to get fewer benefits for more money– the people who need the most help, get the least and the people who need the least help get the most.

who is more likely to honestly care about and operate in the public’s best interests?
Posted by: Skip
—
If you guys wouldn’t get so darned carried away with everything you touch you’d be surprised at some of the support you’d get. At least, from me. Just be honest about it and don’t hide behind words like ‘deficit neutral’ and ‘subsidies’. Or ‘public option’. We’re talking about FORCING everyone in this country to spend a LOT of money or incur a fine/jail time if they don’t. Yet NO ONE will say how much we’re being FORCED to spend or what that money buys.
Stop the sob stories and put it into dollars and cents. To say that a ‘public option’(whatever that means)won’t have an effect on the benefits offered by private insurers is foolishness. Saying those who can’t fully or partially afford it will magically recieve a subsidy without acknowledging any subsidies have to come from somewhere is foolishness.
What EXACTLY is this public option?
How much is this subsidy?
Whose taxes will be increased to provide it?
Those are a few of the legitimate questions that deserve to be answered. There is nothing sinister about asking them. So pardon me, but ‘honestly caring about and operating in the public’s best interests’ is not an answer. Nor is it discourse. It is a dodge.

I don’t know that you’re referring to me but I have mentioned that earlier.
Posted by: smartlillena | Feb 28, 2010 10:33:52 AM
I wasn’t referring to you– you’re actually the only conservative/Republican that has been honest on that issue and not hypocritical (on that issue, lol). I’m sure they know who they are. Not expecting a response from the culprits, as its par for the course

Posted by: smartlillena | Feb 28, 2010 2:54:16 PM
If you are not going to bother to educate yourself, why should I?
It seems to me that you are happier to be ignorant, otherwise you would have read the available literature.
What public option are you talking about? Unfortunately, there is no ‘public option’ in either the Senate or House bill, nor is there one in the outlide presented by Obama.
Seems to me that either you are ignorant or willfully deceitful.

Progressive Mama,
Believe it or not, I’m just a regular middle aged guy trying to be a good citizen by a) trying to understand this stuff and b) encouraging people to debate civilly and learn from each other. I’ve stared at many pages of forums over the last weeks and I’ve seen lots of insults and bravado and almost zero posts in which anyone learned from anyone else or conceded a point. We’re alot like Congress in this regard, and I hope both groups can be better.
You seem like an intelligent, thoughtful person but even you, the best of the bunch, seem fairly eager to LOL and smash unhittable returns. You probably have a high IQ. Congratulations!
I’m going to ponder the info in your posts and see what I can learn from them.

“So pardon me, but ‘honestly caring about and operating in the public’s best interests’ is not an answer. Nor is it discourse. It is a dodge”
“the bill that is so worshipped by a minority of this country just MIGHT be faring a little better if voters trusted those presenting it”
If you’re going to frame the acceptance of a bill as a matter of trust then asking who we think will honestly serve the public better certainly IS relevant discourse.

I still can’t get over
Posted by: EPU
try harder, maybe it will help you also get over losing the election

Believe it or not, I’m just a regular middle aged guy trying to be a good citizen by a) trying to understand this stuff and b) encouraging people to debate civilly and learn from each other.
… You seem like an intelligent, thoughtful person but even you, the best of the bunch, seem fairly eager to LOL and smash unhittable returns
posted by: 4civility | Feb 28, 2010 4:09:54 PM
Well, first, thanks for the compliment. You also seem intelligent, which is why another intelligent person would question why you’d say, after my first post in response to your question:
“The observation that this is a “pay now for benefits later” sort of deal is not a Republican delusion, then, but a simple fact.”
Are you following my logic in that? I pointed out it wasn’t a “simple fact” without resorting to saying anyone was deluded– and my response was perfectly civil, and in that case not anti-GOP or particularly partisan. Calling it a simple fact after that is boiling down complexity into sound bites, and in politics that’s usually done for a reason, yes?
If you were truly for civility and not engaging in that same thing, you would’ve been, imho, less dismissive of the information I offered up in your boiling it down.
As someone who has watched Republicans engage in this for years, sometimes up close, I’m not interested in giving equal time to propaganda and “sound bites.” When people at CPAC, the Republican VP choice, and others on the Right side of the political spectrum declare war by naming me and people like me as their “enemy” — then I’m not particularly interested in dressing up their wish for the left to act like some sort of doormat as “civility.”
Last, a friendly FYI, forums aren’t the best place to get answers and learn much about the legislation or the issues. Better to watch C-SPAN, read a wide variety of partisan and non-partisan sources– primary sources as much as possible — and write your representatives. Good luck in your search for good information.

“The observation that this is a “pay now for benefits later” sort of deal is not a Republican delusion, then, but a simple fact.”
Are you following my logic in that? I pointed out it wasn’t a “simple fact” without resorting to saying anyone was deluded–
Posted by: progressive mama
There you go again, attempting to twist the simplest, plain as day, aspects of this legislation into something else then running from the actual question as fast as you can. Politics is being played on both sides, as well as places it should never be played. And it is a sorrier sight to see in the latter than in the former.
You are advocating this fiasco as the best thing since sliced bread. Stop dodging legitimate questions with double talk. I’ve been shocked, I’d convinced myself long ago that obamacare was inevitable. The fumbling and mishandling of this legislation has increased the public’s focus and rejection more everyday. Right now it appears you guys have reached concensus that answering the questions hurts more than avoiding the questions. That’s too bad for Democrats because a deciding portion of this country isn’t as rabidly partisan as you and I and might be convinced by some straight answers.

You are advocating this fiasco as the best thing since sliced bread.
—-
I don’t think its a fiasco or the best thing since sliced bread– I’m not even fond of sliced bread, particularly white flour bread–so there *YOU* go with the usual tactics.
Being precise in the messaging would help all sides. For example, you could say pay now, subsidies, exchanges and the mandate start later but in the mean time funding for community health care centers, temporary assistance in the form of extended COBRA benefits and high risk pools, and many insurance reforms kick-in so far PART of the benefits, its pay now, without receiving the full benefits of the legislation, which has precedent and makes sense if you think about financing a start up business. The Republicans are exaggerating as they usually do, given they are working with lobbies– oil, insurance, Wall Street- to kill bills and have made it clear their strategy until the midterms is to deny and derail AND make health care Obama’s Waterloo.
Moreover, if you look at the Republicans history on health care reform, it is not something they want done–and here I’m talking about the party rather than individual voters or independents who lean hard right– despite skyrocketing medical inflation and the growing number of uninsureds.
Finally, if you look through the threads since the debate on health care began several questions have been answered exhaustively. Google political punch for health care and read the blog posts and comments. In addition, there are several progressives who have blogs that go into detail helping others understand the legislation. Ezra Klein has chats at his and answers questions. You can also read health care blogs– and health economist blogs. Kaiser has a lot of information available, too.
I hardly RAN from the question, btw– I’m the one who answered it.
I think health care reform is a necessity, and I don’t apologize for that. I’m a small business owner who knows real, live people who own businesses and/or have pre-existing conditions and can see the writing the wall. I also saw the writing on the wall with the housing market and the economy early– back in 2006– and think it would be a huge mistake to repeat history, let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and continue to kick cans down the road, pretending they’ll disappear.
Lastly, imho, the “depending on the answers” says it all.Flash was right:
“If you are not going to bother to educate yourself, why should I?”
This has been going on for over a year, and detailed answers are available.

It seems obvious to me that the health care plan would solve a number of problems.
45,000 Americans dying every year because they lack affordable insurance is too heavy a burden for society and families. For those of you who only think in tax dollars, think about how many of those were breadwinners, paying taxes in, who once dead not only can’t pay into the system but their families might be now eligible for public assistance of some kind, including social security payments monthly for each dependent age child. And that isn’t counting the people who end up permanently damaged and unable to work and thus add to government aid costs through their need for monthly checks or worse case scenario, end up in a nursing home because they can’t care for themselves.
Also, by allowing older folks to buy into Medicare earlier, there will be many new retirees, opening up jobs for unemployed Americans. I personally know many people 55 thru 64 years of age who can afford to retire except there is no affordable insurance available for that age group. Letting them buy into Medicare, they won’t get it for free, will also help Medicare fund itself longer as the younger age group won’t use up as many dollars as those 65 and older.
The above are just three common sense reasons why health care reform is needed now.

Republicans continue to misunderstand that many Dems don’t like the bill because they don’t think it goes far enough. They want a true public option or even a Medicare for all.
Dems, even if you want a public option this bill will solve a lot of problems right now.
It will get most of the uninsured affordable insurance with the exchanges letting them join pools.
It will give really poor people insurance.
It will keep everyone else’s premiums from skyrocketing. With 45,000 Americans dying each year because they don’t have insurance, let’s focus on changing that a.s.a.p. Support the health reform bill and those who vote yes in the next election.

Adding on, last week Lamar Alexander said, “We don’t do comprehensive well.” That’s true for Republicans– they do not. There is a big gap between Democrats who think we need something approaching a solution and Republicans who would content themselves with much, much smaller interventions that do nothing about the uninsured and very, very little about cost.
Personally, I think the job of Congress is to address chronic problems, as much as the GOP would prefer not to.

Republicans continue to misunderstand that many Dems don’t like the bill because they don’t think it goes far enough.
Posted by: Lydia
—
This one does, and is thankful for it.(Why do you think I constantly remind y’all it’s the bill that’s unpopular?) That’s just another sector dems are scared of in November and another reason the bill hasn’t been passed already. They’re going to get hammered no matter which way they jump. And good enough for em. I REALLY think the democratic party REALLY needs to promote some public option/single payer rallies. That’ll get those independant voters back in line.
Of course that doesn’t say anything about obama’s phony COMPROMISE threat. The rest of your post/plea is probably too late in coming. As Juan Williams says, rahm emanuel couldn’t get em to eat the dog food!

This isn’t about my side. Nor is it about 30 years ago. This is about TODAY and a failed campaign(ineptness) for a health care bill this country does not want.
Why can’t I follow the numbers ?
#1)You’re trying to convince me.
#2)I asked for more than just numbers (poverty comparisons, benefits)
#3)I want a benchmark figure in DOLLARS & CENTS.
Reps don’t need dems’ vote, dems need reps’ and inds’ votes.
The burden is on democrats.

Mainstream conservatives = selfish idiots?
Posted by: Skip
—
No, selfish idiots are everywhere. That is why any kind of tort reform will be bogus.

“Could you please apply that same brilliant logic to medicare and how it has been way over budget since it was passed and then ask yourself why people would want a notional healthcare policy based on those very same structures”
————————————-
First I ask myself why the Republicans are falsely claiming that one of the reasons these reform proposals are bad is because they cut Medicare.
Posted by: Skip | Mar 1, 2010 2:07:08 PM
_________________________________
Good point Skip. The Republicans are not interested in consistency or solutions – they’re interested in scoring political points.

OBAMA, PELOSI AND REID HAVE TOLD ENOUGH LIES. THEY NEED TO START OVER. Obama simply cannot do his job. He can’t keep priorities straight: JOBS, LESS SPENDING, LOWER TAXES, HOMELAND SECURITY, ETC. He has plenty of “BRIBE” money left. I’m sure he, Pelosi and Reid will have their 51 votes soon, regardless of the fact that we don’t want government-run healthcare. They’re still having “back room meetings” and making deals at the cost of American taxpayers.

I urge conservatives not to let the Republicans hijack their party.
—
Oops, I meant “movement,” not party. Its intriguing that another independent movement has started up. In contrast to the Tea Party, the Coffee Party USA focuses on civility and solutions. I don’t know what I think about the Coffee Party yet, but I like that there’s a good possibility that the first one of these groups that figures out how to be INclusive instead of EXclusive might actually be able to displace one of the Big Two– or join them– in a way the Libertarian party or the Green Party never had a chance at doing, as they the latter aren’t big enough or inclusive enough, and maybe they don’t really keep the fruit loops and extremists under wraps enough. In that regard, when it comes to ideas and independent thinking, I am inclusive– former GOP-ers could certainly apply to my clup and I’d be tolerant and open-minded. But the GOP in my mind needs to be held accountable and go through a metamorphosis– and basically they’ve just put on a hat and are pretending they actually are conservative, and blah, blah, blah. In reality, its the same old same old.

Progressive Mama,
I was in the middle of writing you a long, thoughtful response. You saved me the trouble with your recent posts: “reaching across the aisle in this political environment is a huge waste of time;” and “I’m not trying to convince you of anything..it has nothing to do with you.”
Responsible Americans, led by President Obama, are concerned about partisan bickering and our lack of respect, give and take, and constructive dialogue. Apparently you are not in this group that cares.
You preach the Gospel with arrogance and pride. No one follows you to Jesus; and you don’t care. You’re just happy to sling your intelligent, hard sayings in the face of well-meaning people and leave ‘em in the dust.
Of course, you’ll have an edgy, smart response to this in which you see absolutely nothing wrong in anything you’ve ever done. It was all someone else’s fault, eh?

Apparently you are not in this group that cares.
You preach the Gospel with arrogance and pride. No one follows you to Jesus; and you don’t care. You’re just happy to sling your intelligent, hard sayings in the face of well-meaning people and leave ‘em in the dust.
—-
So all that condemnation and judgment is considered “constructive” where you’re from?
LOL.
You’re right. I’m not interested. If you actually have an idea– like fair tax or nuclear power or something– I’ve open to engaging. But the same b.s. is the same b.s. — and hypocritical self-righteousness is the same b.s.

I wanted to double check on this, but there are some areas where the bill/proposal that is likely to pass addresses cost. First, Atul Gawande writes about the pilot programs and cost in an article called Testing, Testing for the New Yorker. Then, also, the Health Care blog addresses Medicare fraud provisions, Comparative Effectiveness, and prevention. Further steps will need to be taken, but its a start. Some of the rhetoric suggests “cost” isn’t addressed at all– and it is.

“Testing for the New Yorker”
LOL, is that similar to a monthly emissions test?
“Some of the rhetoric suggests “cost” isn’t addressed at all– and it is.”
Surely you’re not talking about me. Cost certainly is addressed, to the tune of a TRILLION $$$. Tell us more.

The fraud actually grew in Tenn and in both cases the savings have not materialized and the costs have literally skyrocketed. We are looking for real cost saving not just soundbites to “sell it”.
Posted by: obieone40 | Mar 2, 2010 8:20:38 AM
If I’m not mistaken in Massachusetts the real cost push has just begun– and Ezra Klein has written some wonky responses to the difference between state and federal plans. One issue at the state level has to do with overall structure and balancing budgets. My claim isn’t that we’ve found the answer but all three issues (or goals or strategies) have merits– pilot programs, comparative effectiveness, eliminating fraud.

If I’m not mistaken in Massachusetts the real cost push has just begun– and Ezra Klein has written some wonky responses to the difference between state and federal plans. One issue at the state level has to do with overall structure and balancing budgets.
________________________________
If their cost push is just beginning why are they getting infusions of cash from the stimulus to offset the overbduget costs now. They aren’t paying that stimulus money back. I think the structure and balancing of budgets at the federal level are real disfunctional issues as well. I did actually read Klein’s article this am but some of his analogies omit key (especailly that house/roof analogy) details and even he points out that one needs to continues to assume the gov’t practice of double counting gov’t money (that Rep Ryan pointed out) in order to make the numbers in this bill work. Klein’s article was only limited to a critique of a few Ryan’s Summit comments but not a full assessment of the impact of this bill and the other entitlements. For example if you take money out of social security and medicare to pay for this bill yes this bill appears to be deficit neutral even saves money but then either you need to get the money from somewhere to replenish Medicare and SS or you don’t pay out those benefits where are you going to get it from it’s a gamble (borrow or produced from some new whatever). Klein never addresses where that will materialize from he just leaves it out there. Ryan was pointing it out in relation to this bill because this bill is taking money from there and it’s irresponsible to raid those funds (which have been for years and are in bad shape) for this bill and not address the impact it has on Medicare and SS. One last point in Klein’s article is the doc fix. While yes it was reform passed by Republicans in ’03 and punted down the road by both reps & dems it isn’t being included in the overall numbers for healthcare reform. Yes it needs to be addressed whether this bill passes or not but it is a serious part of the cost (both money and medical resources) of healthcare reform and it’s price tag/impact ought to be included.

So now the state is implementing a igh-level state commission to revamp the way public and private insurers reimburse physicians and hospitals.
______________________________________
Sounds like rationing is coming to Mass. per the NICE committee in England. Already gov’t underpays for services (this is currently happening with Medicare arbitrary fee setting to the detriment of care for people in those programs) again this seems to be trending in the same way Tenn did in the 90′s (as well as Canada and England where you have universal coverage but sub par care). This does NOT lower/address the cost of services it undercuts the reimbursement for them- square peg meet round hole. It doesn’t fix anything it drives docs and hospitals out of business and lowers quality of care. Coverage first then cost has not worked for medicare (it’s been well over budget since enacted in ’65. Do you buy a house you can’t afford hoping to one day get a job to afford it?? Why not give addressing costs then coverage a reasonable try for once.
*******************************
Regarding double counting Klein might say like most people think these days if one side did it before the other can do it now. If it’s fiscally harmful (which I think double counting is and has proven to be because look at where our economy has been and is heading with all this double counting nonsense) at some point the grown ups (whichever side they come from) need to step up and say enough. Also per Klein’s article in the paragraph before your quote:
“The money flowing into the trust funds is continually used to pay for other government priorities. And borrowing for other government priorities is not built into trust fund estimates, even though that borrowing also competes with the trust funds in the future (live by unified government accounting, die by unified government accounting).”
It is a gamble. You are gambling that you will have the money to pay back. It has been a gamble the fed has been doing for years and there is current legitimate concern about the solvency of those funds (they to date have not been paid back from all the raiding both parties have done over the years) and now the largest entitlement to come down the pike (one that has proven everywhere it’s policies have been done to exponentially exceed budget estimates) decides to use raiding those as a means for funding. Also the “borrower” (fed gov’t) has increased exponentially increased their deficits (ie maxing out their credit cards). At some point banks decide a borrower is not a good investment due to their poor use of money. In the US that bank is the US taxpayer and the gov’t is the borrower in the form of forced taxation and over spending.

Why not give addressing costs then coverage a reasonable try for once.
—
I agree that would be preferable! Not politically feasible but much, much, much preferable.

I basically agree with Warren Buffett:
“If it was a choice today between plan A, which is what we’ve got, or plan B, the Senate bill, I would vote for the Senate bill. But I would much rather see a plan C that really attacks costs.”

In regards to double counting, my position isn’t that its okay because the other side did it. My position is that you have to reform it for everything, not just one issue you’re not into– and it is hypocritical for Ryan to act like he’s always been concerned about it. Moreover, if you’re going to reform it for everything– then find the political back up for that, and lets go. Otherwise, you’re just showboating on one issue.
I actually don’t have a problem with the accounting. For me the issue is using trust fund money to do other things– sometimes the issues get conflated but not using the money to do other things isn’t the same as saying the accounting shouldn’t presume repayment.
______________________________________
I would be surprised- nay shocked- if that political backup isn’t coming in Nov. 2010.
The fact Ryan used it before with Medicare Part D and is railing against it now doesn’t make me disagree with him now (skeptical some) but not full blown disagree -you look at what people do. That would be the same for anyone now who was a big spender and changed their ways but actions need to match words. That’s how I approached it after 2008′s election. Regarding the Iraq vote I know the controversy over whether to go in or not it’s a whole other post. I will say the one thing I would bend rules on deficit spending for is national security. Most people killed on 911 had healthcare (85% of americans do) what they needed was security from wartime enemy lunatics flying their planes into our buildings. What enables those unusual (I think they ought to be by law) times of deficit spending to happen is keeping things in order otherwise. The double counting accounting is a tool used to justify exactly the thing you say you don’t condone think about it. What if you ran your business that way- I can borrow from my payroll to experiment in a new product this month great if it works out but what if it doesn’t how are you going to make your payroll. Or you use your health benefits payments to make payroll.What if that pattern happens again and again and again- it’s unsustainable at some point. My point is the gov’t run by both parties have pushed increased spending without making priorities and spending cuts. OK if healthcare coverage by the gov’t is so important what do we cut to offset that added expense? Also how do we set it up in the most sustainable way rather than have it die under the weight of itself in under 10 years (for universal- longer for other programs Medicare/Medicaid but still unsustainable) and further damage/hurt the very people it’s supposed to be helping. How can we best address first the costs that is HUGE and primary since it has hurt every attempt to help people in this area. Then what else are we spending on that while good things are not as important as this. The government really can’t fund everything. National Endowment for the arts? Infrastructure? Outlaw pork barrel spending? Cut federal grants in all variety of fields? All of the above, no we rob the trust funds of SS and medicare and there is a big deadline coming up with boomers hitting 65. Like I said I hope the political backbone for this is coming because it is about more than just theories and ideas it is really going to hit in a practical way.

Nope. And my conscience is good with that.
Posted by: progressive mama
—
I don’t question your(need for?;))committment or your conscience. I question your tactics. I feel obama would tell you the same thing I would tell the tea partiers- GET SOME PERSPECTIVE! Or, DON’T, that’s been playing out just fine AFAIC. But, you guys have dessimated this bill AND this presidency to the point that soon obama’s gonna hate every bleeding-heart, tree-hugger on this planet.

Obie and Mama,
Thanks for the great discussion you have provided over the last couple days. I’m many steps behind you but was able to learn alot from your clear, concise, collegial posts. I believe that if we all (including Congress) consistently talked to each other in this way, we’d pass plenty of great legislation.

Closing in on ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED (1600) responses. How about some great discussion?

I can’t believe you think all of those 1600 responses represent great discussion
Posted by: 4Civility
—
Of course not. They represent the ANGER of the american people about this issue. They represent the ANGER of the american people partly because of the arrogant manner they are being treated.
Articles may have 10 responses, or 30, occasionally 100, that one got SIXTEEN HUNDRED in less than 24 hours !!!
Does that tell you anything?