Why Democrats are Eager to Tout Reform’s “Immediate Benefits”

The sad part of this story, left unspoken, is the fact that one of the nation’s two major political parties so vehemently opposes legislation designed to help the people they are sworn to represent. One can legitimately argue about the merits of individual provisions of the proposed bills — as Bob Herbert does in today’s Times — but the Republicans’ blanket opposition to the reform is unconscionable.

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

Kate, what do you think about this article?
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/policy/29health.html?ref=todayspaper
.
Double-counting? Is it true?

Of course there would be significantly less pressure on Republicans to repeal the entire bill, if they had had the forsight to help shape it to their liking.

It would seem that their current strategy involves hoping Americans end up worse off. Not execatly what I would think of as a Patriotic attitude……

Kate Pickert wont tell you, but health care reform has always been popular with the public.

Yes, the bill that is likely to be produced has high negatives…in large part because a significant number of Democrats don’t think it goes far enough. These Democrats don’t want the bill repealed. They want it fixed. In reality, neither will happen.

Obviously the GOP doesn’t want to promise repeal. They don’t have the votes to repeal it and, frankly, they have no interest in repealing a bill that is basically a handout to K Street lobbyists. The GOP already won. They got the bill they want for the insurance companies and can still lie to the teabaggers that they oppose “big government” Ha!

The GOP will, smartly, avoid making “repeal” a national issue. In the South and other areas with high moran factors, they will play the teabaggery card for all it is worth. In more purple districts, the GOP will want to retain the semblance of sanity and focus on the “constitutional issues” and the lack of cost-controls in the current bill (not that the GOP wants cost controls, but it will be politically useful to whine about it).

“It’s becoming clear…”
.
Really? Frankly, I think it’s been clear to the Swampland Commentors since at least 05Nov08.
.
If it’s becoming clear to you just now, well, then welcome to the party. Better late…

It is more of a dissatisfaction of the bill than an opposition to it.
.
Running to repeal it is not a smart thing to do; running to improve it would be better.

“Which strategy prevails could all come down to timing.”
.
Katie-Another thing that will decide which stratergy prevails is press coverage. Some where in between the cheerleading and demagoguery there is the truth. That’s what we need the press for to explain how the bill will help, hurt or have no effect. So please don’t run to Sarah Palin’s facebook page or to a Dick Armey, Howard Dean or Newt Gringrich press conference and steno what they have to say.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you here. The history of all socially progressive legislation has always begun with an imperfect bill as a foundation that was improved over time. It happened with, social security, medicare, civil rights etc. So [lease don’t paint Democrats with the same do nothing brush that Republicans since Nixon have rightly earned.

I’m with Gunny on this one. I hope the GOP runs on a platform of repealing the bill and I think to placate the tea party crowd they may have to, at least in primary races if not in the general. However, regardless of whether the media decides to tell the truth about the bill, the GOP will still get exactly what they deserve. The public is very much in favor of health care reform, but thanks to a media that has pretty much just played the role of megaphone to the GOP disinformation campaign, few know what the bill entails. Yes, there are those who oppose the current bill because it lacks the public option, but more oppose the bill because they think it will force their premium to rise and services to decline. Fortunately for the Dems, the enrollment period for health insurance was Oct-Nov, so any increases for the next year will have already taken place before the bill takes affect and any increases next year will not go into affect until after the election. If the voters don’t see these skyrocketing prices that the GOP predicted but simultaneously see their ability to keep their children on their policy, freedom from pre-existing conditions and high-risk pools for people like me then the GOP will finally be seen as the shameless liars they are. Voters might even start to remember that the GOP first damaged their brand because of lies about Iraq and Katrina (thought bubble — “Hmm so its not just Bush, all of you are liars”).

[...] is the original post: Democrats Push the ‘Immediate Benefit’ of Health Reform (Time Magazine)   « Classic Rock » Blog Archive » Kerry Livgren: My Health Nightmare | [...]

And the reality is that no bill is going to be perfect. There will always be loop holes and trap doors that will have to be fixed once identified as enough of a problem to warrant fixing. I am one that is sorely disappointed there is no public option right the gate, but this has to start some where. With the polarization going on right now between the parties it is crucial the press does its job and calls out even their colleagues when they make mistakes.

Sorry, Dee, but you are wrong.
.
In particular, FDR fought tooth and nail to ensure that Social Security would cover virtually all Americans from the get-go. Has it been improved upon over the years? Yes, but the “foundation” was a strong one.
.
In contrast, there is no significant “foundation” for cost-containment in the Senate’s bill. None.
.
An imperfect bill would be a bill that allowed some Medicare buy-in or some public option. Both of those could serve as mechanisms to hold down premiums and both could be expanded to more Americans over time.
.
Not only is the bill deeply flawed, but it is not likely to be improved upon for the foreseeable future. First, there is going to be no motivation on the part of the Dems to “fix” anything in the bill for years. At a minimum, Dems will say “wait until 2014 when all the provisions kick in before you ask us to change anything. There is an old saying in politics: “when the legislative train leaves the station, make sure you are on it.” That means that Congress tends to address issues and then drop them for years. If you want public option or medicare buy-in, the time to do it is now.
.
Second, even if there was any genuine political will on the part of the Democrats to “fix” the bill, the insurance and pharmaceutical industries will make it impossible.
.
Unlike now, where we have real carrots to bring the insurance companies to the bargaining table (i.e. the individual mandate, extensions of patents and the threat of drug re-importation), once those carrots are given away in this legislation you will NEVER get those industries to come back to the negotiating table.
.
The problem isn’t that the legislation is less than perfect. The problem is that we have given away all of our negotiating leverage and it will never be improved upon. Enjoy the rising premiums!

You bet gunny, and while it wasn’t on the subject of health care I did get a big kick out of the decisive blow delivered to politico’s Mike Allen by straight shooter Richard Engel on morning joe. When Mike Allen tried to push the meme that Obama was slow to speak to the press about the xmas bombmiss Engel’s response was (paraphrasing here) “yeah and if he had spoken to the press right away the media would have complained he was overexposed.” The truth is after eight years of letting Bush get away with everything, the media has over corrected to the point that no matter what Obama does they ask why he has done something else, even in spite of evidence that Obama might have done the right thing. Like the so called pattern politico is pushing that Obama tends to drag his feet before responding to the media, when in reality he is waiting to find out the facts. Of course, considering how much misinformation is swirling about, you would think the media might want to think about doing that as well.

Come on Dee, the reality is that the Obama Administration had hoped that Napolitano could deal with the issue. She screwed it up, failed at damage control (I mean, really, you have the apotheosis of MSM, KT, questioning whether she should keep her job.), and then Obama waddled in. Ascribing some Kevin Baconesque “all is well” to this botch just shows you to be a clown.
.
Face it–the Obama message team dropped the ball. I mean, really, why was Gibbs saying that the system worked? Answer that one, genius.

Sorry to disappoint, but I live in Massachusetts which already has this so called reform. Insurance is given to those poor enough to get subsidies or free health care, but is unafforable for the working class. Most working lower middle class residents would have to pay in excess of 20% of their gross pay for health insurance. In fact, in 2008 more than 104,000 working lower middle class residents of Massachusetts earned to much to qualify for a subsidy but not enough to actual afford health insurance. A Massachusetts resident can simply go online to the government website: ww.mahealthconnector.org and fill out the calculator and if it calculates that you can’t afford health insurance premiums, the state will simply exempt you from the law and you go without health insurance. The state has deemed this acceptable as long as the unemployed are covered so they can toot their horn. The working lower middle class don’t tug on the heartstrings. That’s how it works. Health insurance is very high in Massachusetts because of all the mandates. For example, every man, woman and child regardless of age has to be covered for not only maternity but for infertility treatments including invitro fertilization, as well. There are currently 22 mandates in Massachusetts including invitro, prescription drugs, substance abuse treatments, eating disorders, limited deductibles of $2,000, etc., etc., etc. Additionally, there are another 70 mandates pending in the Massachusetts legislature including expanding invitro fertilization coverage. Rates in Massachusetts, because of the every increasing mandates typically rise about 15% to 20% and more per year. So it can be concluded that year after year, more and more of the working lower middle class will be the one group without insurance. In 2007, there were 62,000 of us, in 2008, there were 104,000. How many in 2008, 200,000? The question is how many is too many? How many before it becomes a story? Unfortunately, the working lower middle class have become expendable, and no one seems to care about the working class.

I did answer you spob, but in the appropriate thread, that would be the previous one. Don’t you ever get tired of exposing your ineptitude whenever you try to assert that I have a mental deficiency?

Try to stay on topic, trolls.

“earned too much” not “to much”. Sorry forgot an “o”!

Sorry to disillusion you, but some people do care about the working class and they are called Democrats. A Republican set up the Massachusetts system so if you’re having a problem take it to Romney in 2012. As for Obama’s plan, he was originally opposed to mandates for this very reason, but he compromised once he was assured of much higher subsidies and lower rates to qualify for exemption. But I’m guessing that’s not something being discussed in Republican circles.

Mitt Romney did set up a system with a democratic legislature; but the mandates and increased costs are purely democratic. I voted for President Obama and Governor Patrick and have always voted democratic because of the belief that democrats cared about the working class; but not any longer. The 22 mandates were created by democrats and the 70 pending are all democratic bills. There are very, very few republicans in the state legislature in Massachusetts and every time they even try to discuss the issue that health care is unaffordable to the working class, they are critized by the democrats as wanting to take away from the poor, those that need it the most. (How we determined that poor people poeple having coverage for invitro-fertilization is more important than others having basic coverage is beyond me) And the federal plan is copied from this plan. So by Obama compromising because he is assured of higher subsidies; that just means the non-workers and lower income will pay a lot less or get health insurance for free; but that the working class who straddle that subsidy line will be priced out of health care coverage. And why iss “lower rates to qualify for an exemption” a good thing. All that means is that our government has confirmed that it is acceptable for the working lower middle class to go without health insurance as long as non-workers are insured, just as Massachusetts does. You agree with working class people going without health care so non-workers can have it?

Sorry, but I’m not buying the poor people are to blame scenario. Poor people didn’t need the health insurance, they had medicaid. Now I get that the subsidies aren’t enough and yes the lack of money to be able to fund subsidies might have something to do with the GOP. I’m sure right now during this economic downturn adding money to subsidies is impossible, but to say Democrats don’t care about working people, that’s a bit much. Who are we supposed to believe cares about the working class Republicans? They’ve been busy transferring the nation’s wealth through tax cuts to the wealthy for the last thirty years but Democrats are the ones who don’t care about working people?

Most everyone knows that hundreds of millions of dollars is being poured into GOP coffers by the HCIC lobby, and, after witnessing the GOP conduct at town halls and other institutions, I guess that what you think is that business as usual is the way to go. The line is, as far as I know, 400% of poverty, which is actually quite high. If I have to pay more taxes, I will.
.
At least I know that if misfortune befalls me, there is insurance to be had instead of facing the choice of bankruptcy or health. Your comment at the end about having to do “without” is patently ridiculous, as employees, provided they don’t have a Cadillac plan won’t get touched, and those that don’t have insurance can avail themselves of an exchange.
.
Who do you define as the “working man”? I don’t include the highest income bracket in it, and I myself don’t agree with the mandate requriing the purchase of health insurance.
.
On thing is that Washington State’s Basic Health plan seems to be a good working model for the consumer side, so the idea of being “unaffordable” may not be true.
.
Despite every criticism that gets leveled at Obama for every conceivable offense, real or imagined (I have some real criticisms), I do not, and nave never seen anything that indicates that the GOP is interested an any reform whatsoever.
.
It is clear they want a Waterloo, not a plan.
.
So perhaps we should wait and see what comes out of the reconciliation process. Then is the time to really say this or that about it.
.
Repeal would be a deadly potion for the GOP if the reconciled plan, in whatever form, works to any degree.
.
In summary, I see a lot of slickly hidden GOP talking points buried in your comments. Are you a ringer?
.
I’m begnning to think so…

This kind of post is what is so wrong with the MSM. Lay out a scenario, add a couple of “if… phrases..clauses. and then quote all those bloviators who have such easy access to “professional” journalists; repeat their most outrageous statements and exercise no editorial discretion, no analytical ability and you end up with this.

Franky, Ms Pickert, too much of the debate is regurgitation. The public will take time to react once they get to see what the final bill is all about. I don’t think Social Security would have got off the ground had there been a poll every six hours making all sorts of claims.

I’m waiting, now that the economy is showing signs of improvement, for the Tea Baggers to come out in favor of repealing all of Obama’s bills pertaining to that, too.
.
The are better ways to commit political suicide…

I have to add, as one who has been in the “lower middle class” that your comments on their position in relation to this bill is absolutely ridiculous!

Thank erniehaigs for your engaging commentary about how the current Federal Health Insurance Reform Plan, is no different than the failed Massachusetts plan already in place.
.
Dee asks:
.

“but to say Democrats don’t care about working people, that’s a bit much. Who are we supposed to believe cares about the working class Republicans? They’ve been busy transferring the nation’s wealth through tax cuts to the wealthy for the last thirty years but Democrats are the ones who don’t care about working people?”

.
Would you like to cite any sources that you have Dee, which backs up your allegations? How about defining your claims that Democrats are really out to save the middle class worker, got any specifics on that Dee?
.
Democrats only care about their two base supports; Welfare Moms and Big Unions, both represented by the most corrupt organization on the face of the earth, ACORN.
.
To ernie:
.
Obama promised in the election that he would “spread the wealth”, when he talked with Joe the Plummer. Remember?
.
Obama was very point of fact when he told Joe that in order to create equality, financial equality that is, in the US of A, he has to make sure that wealth is redistributed. The only thing is that he has so far distributed our tax dollars to bail out failed insurance companies, car manufacturers (which are really auto labor union subsidies), and banks.
.
Our country is essentially bankrupt. Despite the Democrat nay-sayers who seem to believe there is an endless money stream out of the treasury to fund every little whim they have; such as “Save the Whales”, “It’s Global Warming”, “Create Green Jobs” or any other bogus money wasting scheme they concoct in the future.
.
In 2010, there will be a major push from Republicans to show the voters how this Administration is no different than any that has come before in the past with the exception it has out-spent every Administration combined before it. This administration is full of tax cheats, socialists and far left lunatics who want to destroy this great country.
.
It is so obvious. When will America wake up? That is the real question.

Oh no, I don’t think Republicans care about the working class any more than democrats. I didn’t mean to imply that. And I am definitely not a Republican. That’s the problem with this debate, is every one sees it as a (R) or a (D) issue. It’s definitely time for a new party. Anyway, this health care issue is not about either party but about the outcome. I don’t care if it’s republicans or democrats pushing it; I just know what has happened in Massachusetss. It’s a fact that working lower middle class taxpayers cannot afford health insurance while others like the non-employed are getting it for free or getting subsidies and the cost are outrageous because of all the mandates. Those are facts. So no matter how you slice it, no matter if it’s a (D) or and (R), the working lower middle class are being sacrificed. And I do not think we should just scrap the plan and go with the status quo, I just want someone, anyone, a (R) or a (D) or anything in between, to talk about providing affordable health care to everyone. I would actually prefer a public option. But someone needs to tell me: Why should the lower middle class be sacrificed. Why should they go without. Why should they be exempt from the law instead of someone trying to find a way to get them health insurance? Why can’t they be a part of the picture? Let EVERYONE have the opportunity to have health care. If you support hard-working class people having to go without health insurance so all non-workers can be given it for free, that is your opinion and your right to it. I just disagree that this is a good path to go down. If you don’t work, you get more, is a bad example to set.

Dee, are you insane? Just askin’. You bring up Obama’s response to the botched plane bombing, and I am the one who, by answering your comment, is inept.
.
Is there any remedy for Dee’s keyboard diarrhea?

We, the People
On This Fourth Day of Kwanzaa

“We absolutely intend to make Republicans look voters in the eye next November and make it clear they want to take affordable health care reform away from them,” Schultz continues

.
Would you expand upon this Kate? Exactly how is the current reform, “affordable” for working class people? Now I won’t argue with the Democrat plan to provide subsidies for those under 133% of poverty or those who currently enjoy free health care by qualifying for Medicaid, those folks are the winners and I am sure will continue to vote for their favorite Democrat candidate.
.
But, what exactly in the plan makes it more affordable than health care insurance is now? Or any of the other Democrat / liberal commenters here. Dee? IQ53? square1?
.
I am sure all of the health care cost containment provisions within this bill are also making health care more affordable, right? Like passing legislation that cuts drug costs? Provides for more competition not only with insurance costs, but also overall health care costs in general, right? Could you expand on these cost containing measures that the Democrats have put into the bill, Kate, which will be “winning” ads in the 2010 elections?
.
Oh that’s right, there are no cost containment measures in this bill. Health care costs will continue to outpace the growth in GDP. Health care insurance costs for our premiums will also continue to rise because now we will put on regulations that require more beneifts such as ending the practice of denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions.
.
Now if you are below the 133% of poverty threshhold, you may come out ahead. Maybe. But, that is after you fork over upwards of 8% to 10% of your income to the Government towards paying for your new health care insurance plan that you don’t have or better yet, may not even need.
.
Or, if you are above 133% of poverty, you can count on Obama, Pelosi and Reid to tax your currently non-taxed health care benefit plan, just like your other income. Isn’t that great!! Perhaps you have a plan that is worth about 8K. Now you get to pay taxes on that 8K at whatever your tax rate happens to be. 25% tax bracket? 28%? 35%? And, you are lucky enough to pay that tax now, but any benefits you MIGHT get don’t start until at least 2013.
.
My God, the Democrats sure do know how to protect and defend the average Joe in the US of A.

“But, what exactly in the plan makes it more affordable than health care insurance is now?”
.
Unfortunately, that’s not what it is designed to do. The point of the current reform is to: 1) expand access to primary care for the middle-class and working poor, 2) stop the most egregious insurance industry practices (like rescission) and 3) make health care more affordable than it otherwise would be in the future if we left the for-profit health care industry to it’s own devices.
.
If that’s not good enough for you then blame “conservatives” of both parties. If not for their traitorous service to their corporatist masters, we’d have much better reform than what they are currently willing to let us have. The only thing that would make health care more affordable than it is now is if we killed the private-for-profit-insurance-industry-run system that is currently killing us.

In Massachusetts which has health care reform in 2007, it was calculated that 62,000 tax filers earned too much to qualify for a subsidy but not enough to actually afford the premiums. In 2008, this figure rose to 104,000. One can only guess what that figure will be in 2009. Especially since health care premiums rise 15% to 20% annually and are actually expected to rise more than that this year because of additional mandates. The state’s response was to exempt these 104,000 people from the law so the good news it that they don’t have to pay the fine. The bad news is that they go without health insurance. Currently, depending on wages and family size, many lower middle class people have insurance premiums between 15% and 25% of their gross income. For many of these people, their premiums are more than their housing costs or rent. This is where the federal plan is headed. But look on the bright side, if you have insurance here in Massachusetts you are covered for invitro fertilization if you decide to have another tax deduction.

Wish I was well enough to respond to this essentially true recitation of the facts.

Piece from earlier this month offering a pretty good compare/contrast of Obama/FDR:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/12/03/obama_fdr/index.html

OT but Shep I had to kudos-you for linking to that delightful excoriation of David Brooks on the last thread. Made my day! Wonder if Joe read/recognized…
.
And, SZ, as often as you’re sick, buddy, you better hope Joe Lieberman has your back!
.
Happy New Year folks–the country’s going into vacation lockdown starting today.

One of the thing that I (almost) admire about Republicans is their willingness to do anything to win an argument, even if it makes them look like idiots. Case in point is their pathological inability to properly state the name of the opposition party: D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C.
.
That aside, Rusty, why don’t you try actually reading one of my comments? Have I ever said that this bill contains costs? Have I ever said that it is a good deal for the average middle class worker? No. Unless a middle-class worker has a pre-existing condition (that doesn’t kill him or her before 2014), this is not a good deal. I have never said anything differently.
.
The difference between you and me is that I have no problem criticizing the politicians that I vote for when they screw up. You seem to be under some delusion that the GOP cares about holding down insurance premiums and making drugs more affordable. You are living in fantasy land.
.
The GOP made no effort to push for drug importation in this bill. Plus, when they controlled Congress and passed Medicare drug legislation, they expressly prohibited the Medicare from negotiating lower drug prices. Both parties are in the pockets of drug lobbyists. Only you insist on seeing this issue through the lens of partisanship. Enjoy!

Kwaanza? What’s that?

“Running to improve it would be better”
.
That would mean working with a democratic congress and a democratic president. Their entire strategy is opposing everything Obama is working for. They won’t risk improvements if the improvements make Obama look good. They’ll continue to oppose the bill and hope more people agree with them. Once you’ve painted yourself into a corner it’s hard to find a way out without messing up the paint job.

“One of the thing that I (almost) admire about Republicans is their willingness to do anything to win an argument, even if it makes them look like idiots. Case in point is their pathological inability to properly state the name of the opposition party: D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C.”
.
I think it’s more correct to say that Republicans spend a lot of time mocking Democrats in lieu of winning an argument. Though, if I ever see a Republican actually win an argument, I might be willing to reconsider your characterization.
.
Glad me and Taibbi could brighten your day, jcapan.
.
Feel better, SZ.

Dee: “but more oppose the bill because they think it will force their premium to rise and services to decline”

Bob Herbert claims that’s exactly what it will do: http://www.nytimes.com/2009 /12/29/opinion/29herbert.html

At this point, I don’t know what to believe. But most of the backers of the bill seem to be defending a hypothetical bill that will exist, once the current bill is fixed.

What exactly will change to make this happen? Progressive Dems will take control of the Senate? Lieberman and Snowe will suddently come on board? The GOP will run on a platform of improving people’s lives? The insurance lobby will stop paying attention?

I don’t see it happening. As long as the 60-vote rule is in effect, there can be no truly progressive legislation from this Senate.

Sorry to read that you are ill SZ. Relax; get well. America will still be here in spite of the Party of No.

Democrats only care about their two base supports; Welfare Moms and Big Unions, both represented by the most corrupt organization on the face of the earth, ACORN.
.
You really are comedy gold, Rusty. Just out curiosity, what exactly do you think that ACORN does that would make it the “most corrupt organization on the face of the earth.”

Sucks to be you stuart, heck of a time of year to be in bed sick, no doubt. We’ll say a pray or two and hope you get well soon. Rational voices on the left are indeed a poverty around here when you do not post comments.
.
square1 says:
.

One of the thing that I (almost) admire about Republicans is their willingness to do anything to win an argument, even if it makes them look like idiots. Case in point is their pathological inability to properly state the name of the opposition party: D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C.

.
WHEN Democrats become “democratic”, then and ONLY then will I refer to their party affiliation as being democratic. Until that time, I will ALWAYS refer to them as Democrats.
.
Moving on…
.
So far as your delusion that I am saying that YOU believe that cost controls are contained in this bill, that is not what I was after in my earlier comment. I was simply asking for ANYONE, including you to define in this bill anything that will make it less costly overall, even minimally to everyone. And, then take a stab at how that will in any way persuade voters to vote for Democrats over Republicans after this totally obsene excuse for Health Care Reform is passed. I think if anything, the voters will decide that this is not what they want, and due to the cost of insurance premium increases because of this bill, more Americans will be totally pi$$ed.
.
Yes, preexisting conditions will be a thing of the past, not immediately, but in 3 or so years. Yes, recission will be stopped, and you can keep your high cost insurance if you can afford to keep it. But, unfortunately, like medicaid the Government decides who can and can’t afford insurance. The vast majority of working adults in the US will never be determined to be eligible for Medicaid or any subsidy offered by this Government.
.
So far as holding politicians accountable, I have. Most recently on the Dorgan Amendment which would have curtailed in my opinion drug costs by allowing the purchase of drugs from out of the country. 17 Republicans voted “nay”. 38 Democrats voted “nay”. While, the majority of Republicans voted for it, along with 20 Democrats and 2 Independents.
.
While you are correct that both parties, and their respective representatives should be held accountable for this mess, I am in total agreement. I also believe like most Republicans believe that this bill is bad overall, and we need to stop and start all over again.

This is indeed a very sad situation. I am confident that you are correct in pointing out the current Democrat bill being proposed by Obama, Pelosi and Reid will end up just like Massachusetts Health Care, only on a national level.
.
Thank you for your comments and well thought out discourse.

Yes and despite the party of SPEND TAX AND SPEND more!

And despite the party of “no” and BORROW AND SPEND AND THE FUTURE BE DAMNED!

Three posts in two days-kudos to TIME and their work ethic.

I’m sure that Joe is working furiously on his Pete Hoekstra mea culpa.

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2009/12/hoekstra_fundra.php

It’s the dreaded Christmas/New Year’s curse. We’re all fat and overfed waiting by the computers because we can’t do anything else and they’re doing who knows what and ignoring us.
.
I fart in their general direction.

Art for the record I don’t think people are backing hypothetical bills. I think they are highlighting some of the component parts of the two existing bills and highlighting them because the discussion has focused so much on the public option at the expense of everything else in the bill. As for Bob Herbert, or any other member of the media for that matter, there are very few that can discuss this issue with any kind of actual knowledge informing their opinions and he isn’t one of them. If you want a media opinion I would put more stock in Ezra Klein.

As far as thinking that there will be no coverage until 2014 that is also mistaken assumption. Yes, the exchanges won’t be up and running until then, because that is where most of the reform will be taking place as the government negotiates with industry for cost to meet a basic plan, perhaps a streamlined plan for the young people and a more extensive plan for those who can pay more. This is where the government can dictate rules and force insurance companies to toe the line. But in the mean time those who do not have to rely on subsidies but have been shut out of the private market because of preexisting conditions will be able to buy into a high risk pool immediately and the age extension will go into effect so parents will keep their college graduates from aging out of their policies immediately and the pre-existing condition ban goes into affect right away for children of people who have insurance so they have to be covered..

[...] Read more on Time Magazine [...]

Dee – thanks for replying to my comment. I keep going back and forth on this thing. The reforms on pre-existing conditions are huge – and I understand the arguments why that reform can only work if there is also a mandate, in order to widen the risk pool.

At this point, I’m justing hoping the “pro” side is right, and the bill will actually be better than the status quo. Of course, even that is not a straight forward question. It will undoubtedly improve things for some (many?) people.

And of course, we haven’t seen the final bill.

“At this point, I’m justing hoping the “pro” side is right, and the bill will actually be better than the status quo.”
.
Unfortunately, with regard to any number of benefits – such as whatever cost controls and coverage of those who would do without happen – we’ll be trying to compare a situation that didn’t happen with one that did, just like the stimulus. A significant number of us don’t appear to be up to those sort of mental gymnastics:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/economic_stimulus_package/december_2009/for_first_time_plurality_believes_stimulus_plan_hurt_the_economy

On public perception of the stimulus plan, I blame the GOP.

It’s one thing to say that classical text book macroeconomics is all wrong. It’s another thing to say that of course, everybody knowns classical text book macroeconomics is all wrong, with no further justification. That’s just out and out dishonesty.

If only there were some elite group who had the means to inform the public of truth about it.

Did you not pay any attention to the news? I mean, I thought that even the liberal news was making mention of it since I read about this, albiet a mere two sentences worth, in an Associated Press report.

Republicans did try and help shape it, but every suggestion and alternative that they brought to the floor was shot down and ignored by Democrats. In fact, I think only one Republican, in the very begining, got one thing, but that one thing was really insignificant and nothing to grant.

First of all reform is not the issue, it’s reform that is being handled this way that is the issue.

Republicans are not convinced that this reform is good for the U.S. population. In fact, other nations that have tried this kind of reform have proven that it is ineffective and actually decreases the quality of healthcare over-all because it over uses the system to the point that nobody is able to recieve adequate health care anymore.

But you know what does happen, people become dependant on the government and the politicians who set up this system because their relatives are suffering and dieing and they want them to somehow be put higher on that priority list. (Kind of like people who are stuck in Democrat spearheaded welfare reform, when you’re having trouble paying your bills, you love Democrats because you know they are the ones giving something, even if that something disappears as soon as you ATTEMPT to become independant.) Of course, it may take years for us to realize this, but until then, we’ll love Democrats for their courageous victories, and when we realize what’s really going on, somehow Democrats are not the ones really at fault. But we know here today, Democrats made this happen. Somehow, we won’t know that a few years from now.

But that’s not all. Democrats have effectively silenced the other more than half of this nation by completely gaffing off their representative’s input. So what this results in is a very one sided, very liberally created, very Democrat health care bill with almost no bipartisan construction to represent the opinions held by everyone else.

And their’s even more reason, but this is only a reply, you want the other side of the arguement you have to stop looking at only liberally biased news reports. It’s okay to see what the other side is argueing, even if you’re liberal news media tells you to ignore them like the Democrats are doing to the Republicans, you don’t have to follow so blindly that you won’t even consider the other side’s arguements. And about 90% of the news media today is liberally biased, as in they support Democrats, so you’re going to have to do some poking around to find those obscure and hidden conservative articles and reports that are hidden in most hard-to-find corners of the news media.

For such a smart and manipulative group, as you are making Republicans sound like, for such God-like knowledge and wisdom of the human psyche, for such Satan-esque shrewdness, they sure are stupid. I mean why would they allow themselves to reach precipice of oblivion if they were, in fact, merely manipulating people into only thinking that they don’t support health care.

Not to mention, that doesn’t even make sense because if you’re making a power grab using something as fickle and dynamic as congressional law, you don’t leave it in the hands of your enemies to write down the wording and dictate policy. Do you know why? Because, when you do that, you will almost never get it the way you need it to be, and you won’t have any say to ensure that it does in fact give you that power. I mean, have you been paying attention? Do you realize how often bills change wording and policies before they are finally approved? Even this health care bill is not the same animal that the House introduced, and now, if the house doesn’t approve the bill with it’s changes, the Senate will have to review an even different animal.

It’s far more likely, that if in fact anyone was making a power play using this bill as their medium, they would ensure that they were key in spearheading the bill, writing it and dictating its policy, and they’d likely pretend to listen, but ignore any and all suggestions or alternatives that would hinder that power grab.

6.1:
You mean they are using the strategy Democrats used all throughout the Bush presidency, but with only about 1/10th the media support.

Well, it obviously worked for the Democrats against Bush.

I really think it’s just because Republicans are not socialists and to support socialist things means that they should be running on the Democrat ticket.

In other words, if they agreed with Democrats on the these socialist things, like this particular health care bill, they wouldn’t be Republicans. Generally people tend to run on the ticket of the political party they most agree with.

Honestly, I think they need to repeal parts of it, the expensive parts. I mean we are already poised to spend about the equivalent to the national debt with the three stimulus’ that have been approved over the last year. And that’s not including the health care bill that will spend over $1 trillion in ten years, (most likely a lot more) and that debt will never go away because we will always have to pick up the tab for forcing health care to operate in the negatives, as this bill does.

Also, I think that we are headed into a spiral of borrowing ourselves out of recession. I mean the news, albiet liberal, has been claiming that we are headed out of recession, yet Democrats keep on passing new stimulus bills. It seems like they are just going to keep borrowing out of recession, and everytime our dollar gets less valuable, and we haven’t even started to see the effects of this borrowing, both financially, and where congressional law is concerned. I mean Democrats have yet to really start dictating policies using the power of what our states owe them to enforce it.

I don’t know how things are going to look in the next election, but I’ll tell you what, when time comes to pay the piper, and the health care system is too clogged up, and priority lists are being made, and the elderly are having trouble getting the treatment that they need, people are not going to be happy.

But by that time, I’m sure that just less than half all the people just like you in the nation will be convinced that this bill was the result of Bush’s actions, and that somehow Republicans are to blame.

I only say that because of how one sided our informative media has become, how everything we see and hear today is favors the liberal opinion and bashes the conservative opinion, yet more than half the nation is still more of a conservative mindset. In otherwords, people are being brainwashed by informative media to be liberal. And that’s why when this bill demonstrates it’s failure, people will be convinced it’s somehow the Republican’s fault, and that Bush caused it.

[...] details some of the high-visibility things that would kick in immediately under health reform, versus the [...]