Democrats Feel the Heat, Tell Obama Healthcare Reform Must Include Public Plan
By Susie Madrak Wednesday Apr 22, 2009 3:00pmAs Howard Dean has said, any reform effort that doesn't include a public plan is not really reform. So it's nice to know we're having an impact:
As Congress returns to begin an intense debate over reshaping the nation's $2.2 trillion health-care system, prominent left-leaning organizations and liberal House members are issuing a warning to their Democratic allies: Don't cave on us.
The early skirmishing -- essentially amounting to friendly fire -- is perhaps the clearest indication yet of the uphill battle President Obama faces in delivering on his promise to make affordable, high-quality care available to every American.
Disputes over whether to create a new government-sponsored insurance program to compete with private companies shine a light on the intraparty fissures that may prove more problematic than any partisan brawl.
More than 70 House Democrats recently warned party leaders that they will not support a broad health reform bill that does not offer consumers a government-sponsored policy, and two unions withdrew from a high-profile health coalition because it would not endorse a public plan.
"It's way too early" to abandon what it considers a central plank in health reform, said Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union. He said the organization pulled out of the bipartisan Health Reform Dialogue because it feared its friends in the coalition were sacrificing core principles too soon. "You don't make compromises with your allies."
Last week, two top administration officials suggested that Obama is open to compromise on the public plan, comments that set off alarm bells in some corners of his party.
"That's what got the left nervous. I took that as a signal to Senator Grassley" that Obama is willing to negotiate around an issue Grassley has vehemently opposed, said Len Nichols, health policy director at the New America Foundation, a nonprofit think tank, referring to Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa). "It was the first time the president indicated he could live without it."
Login or Register to post comments.
Health care for profit is immoral. Single payer is the only way.
Selling food and water for profit is also immoral.
That may be but you might want to argue that point on another thread.
False choice.
I'll die if I don't get that food. How dare you profit off my needs?
Become a farmer, or a hunter gatherer.
But air is free.
Yes, it is.
Unless you go to one-a-them-there oxygen bars. ; )
Or Newt Gingrich is around, then all the air becomes polluted.
ALL THE WAY.
Thank you Alice....
Can we take this to a vote???
Anybody here know Roberts Rules???
Don't tell his wife?
http://www.robertsrules.org/
It's called healthy competition!
If the insurance companies can't offer a better deal than the government can, they have no business being in this business.
Really. And to stay competitive, the insurance companies should be allowed to tax everyone's paychecks. It would be healthy.
Not the insurance companies.
However, I would *gladly* pay more in taxes to the government if I felt I were receiving something of equal benefit for it. Not more war. Not more bank bailouts. Not Congressional junkets.
You may disagree, but health care in Europe and Canada is pretty good. I'm sure you can find people who don't think so, but many do. I would be satisfied with a Canadian-style system and would happily contribute more to have it, since our own system is so screwed up, unaffordable, and unapproachable.
That's a big if. When was the last time you got services from the government that were worth the money taken from you?
The last time I sent a sealed envelope 2500 miles and it got there in 3 days and cost me all of 42 cents you braindead moron. You probably didn't know that because you have no one in the world who would want to correspond with you.
Why don't you get your sorry ass over to some wingnut blog where you fit the mold but will be just as reviled as you are here, and most likely will be put out of your misery if you deviate from the goopers official talking point of the day.
Everyone at this site is sick of you and your inane babbling and nonsense.You think you're clever, I'll bet, but it's just another example of how stupid you are. To paraphrase your hero Rummy "There are those we know we know are stupid".
I've seen enough verbal diarrhea from uneduated ignorant losers just like yourself to last me a lifetime because drones like you are a dime a dozen. Face it, you're just another misfit desperate for the attention you've craved all of your empty life.
I've seen you in grade school when you were the slowest kid in the class and disrupted the class because that's the only way you could get attention.
I've seen you try out for sports and fail miserably because you weren't willing to do the work necessary to make the team, then blame it on the coach, or your jockstrap, or your acne.
I've seen you on construction sites when you thought you were the toughest guy on the crew and watched your knees shake and the paralysis set in as soon as you got more than 30 feet off the ground.
In short, junior, you're nothing special except in your own twisted mind and you never will be, because you're too stupid to realize what a fool you play.
Just go away and leave this site to adults who have something positive to contribute, because it's quite apparent that you lack the intelligence and morality to add anything worth reading.
Keep on playing the fool, chump. It's a role well suited to your personality.
Oh and next time you mail that letter to your mail order bride and it gets to her, you can thanks all the union workers that made it possible.
BAAAAAMM!
No, the insurance companies shouldn't have the right to tax anything. Try to break out from the repug way of thinking for just once in your life.
The government could use some competition as to who taxes people's paychecks.
Yes, let's give those poor insurance companies a break, shall we?
LCR's are such pitiful creatures. They're the kings and queens of Stockholm syndrome.
Yeah, you're right. The government is the one in dire straights. They need that money so they can hand it over to insurance companies.
Might become the biggest issue of the next decade. I won't be holding my breath for a solution though - too many vested interests with deep pockets.
...wait a minute. Should that headline read "...Must Include a Public Plan"?
Yeah, I'm a little confused about this post. Can somebody explain what Susie is saying, please.
is working for the insurance companies now, or is it the public, I can't tell either lol
"Health care for profit is immoral. Single payer is the only way."
"It's called healthy competition!
If the insurance companies can't offer a better deal than the government can, they have no business being in this business."
I could not agree more with these two comments. I realize Obama is being torn every which way by the myriad problems the country (and, by extension, he) faces, but this is why we elected him. A compromise on this, the *most important issue* facing Americans--and American business--is tantamount to compromising the people who live here.
Form a monopoly?
Ok, maybe monopoly isn't the right word.
But what do you do when they control the cost's to the public?
When they force the price up so high, that most people can't afford it?
Or how about a pre existing condition? What happens to those people by no fault of their own, that they can't get med ins coverage?
...we're on the same side of this matter. I'm agreeing with you. If I indicated otherwise, I spoke poorly.
If an anesthesiologist makes millions of $$$ a year he is ripping off his patients.
Those guys take a big chance. It's not right that a few bad apples spoil the whole bushel.
The ins co's saw an opening to gouge clients.
Thanks to some unscrupulous lawyers.
This is a double edged sword. IMO, Some doctor shouldn't be doctors.
It all comes back to the Ins Co's. Sharks on a feeding frenzy.
OK I see where you're coming from
Thanks.
Basic Care is a must.
Insurance co's can still make their billions on Life, Disability (from work), Premium Plans (IE private rooms, etc.), 45 million Americans without health care is immoral and a crime.
Take the profit out of it NOW!
the same kind of health care that the congress has? Aren't they on a public plan?
wheres the cry for cheaper medicines , from canada ? why must i remind you of this?
we have to go to Canada? we should be able to get it here
Once their constituents see the benefit.
They'll lose even more voters.
Then they'll go the way of the dinosaurs.
As well they should.
they will claim that it was their idea, and that the democrats were the impediment to their efforts. Of course that position would then be appended to say that perhaps they could increase efficiency by reducing regulation and encouraging "free market" elements.... The bastards will never stop as long as billions can be made while people are at their most vulnerable.
You gotta read the Fala speech, that exactly what the Pukes were trying to do to FDR and the Dems in '44, they basically blamed the Dems for the Great Depression then.
http://www.hpol.org/fdr/fala/
but, frankly, only people in their own party and flat-out morons (one in the same?) will buy that shit for two seconds.
Just like Republicans who like to say Democrats are the party of racism and slavery, and republicans are for minority empowerment, because Lincoln was a Republican.
What can you do about people who have that much of a core of dishonesty, other than to just accept that it's gonna happen and trust that anybody that has their head screwed on even half-way won't buy it for a second.
If someone gave me the opportunity to have five minutes with Obama, that's the one thing I would tell him to say when the debate starts in earnest.
Republicans are opposed to universal healthcare PRIMARILY because they know that it will work, and that it will work well. They're smart enough to realize what a well-functioning publicly-funded healthcare system does to their political movement, because they've been opposed to it for so long and harpooning the concept has been such a central tenant to their philosophy.
Just get this talking point into the public discourse, and I PROMISE you people will pick it up and run with it.
that's for sure.
Remember this?
"Private Industry can administer Health Care more efficiently and less expensively than the government."
Now they say this:
"We'll be driven out of business if the Government offers Health Care because we won't be able to compete."
.. So let them die !!
I called Sen Kennedy's office today and informed him to make sure the democratics don't cave in. We need government sponsored healthcare insurance. I also e-mail Obama about it.
I agree with those who are writing that the heading should say public instead of private. It's a little confusing.
If anyone here has ever tried to get "approved" for treatment or tests or care, you know it is an
adversarial relationship with rep who knows he/she will get a bonus for NOT
approving any of it.
The system is F#@k'd!
PS often these individuals are nurses, therapists (if you are lucky) that often
do NOT have any clue of your ailment.
Their MISSION is to not spend ANY of their co's money on you!
Every ten BMWs on their lot could buy an nice new MRI machine for your local hospital.
Those employees could be working at local hospitals everywhere instead.
And those billions in profits? That would build those hospitals and employ thousands.
Democrats in heat
There's gotta be a Youtube clip of that.
the ceo of aetna was on npr a few weeks ago and said that if something is NOT done soon healthCare insurance costs will double by 2017. the number of uninsured is now about 47-49 million and on a
sharp rise. this rise will continue as unemployment continues to rise. people can't afford the high cost of COBRA. another demographic is UNDERinsured. these people have healthCare insurance that's NOT inclusive. approximately 25% of those with healthCare insurance are actually UNDERinsured. with wages remaining stagnate the last 8-10 yrs. and healthCare insurance rising people just don't have the money to keep pace. some of the people NOT insured are undocumented workers/"cheap labor". these people do NOT have healthCare and/or auto. insurance so the burden to absorb the cost is SHIFTED to the paying pool. these people have been used in my opinion to bring down wages/cost of corporations. corporations that do provide healthCare insurance for their employees receive TAX benefits/credit. this essentially is TAX credits that are subsidized by TAX payers many that don't have healthCare insurance. in order keep shareholders fat and happy for-profit healthCare ins. corporations cherry pick clients/pts and discriminate against others. i say we "socialize" healthCare insurance NOT socialize medicine.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090328/ap_on_go_...
this is just one of the ways the healthCare insurance cheats/unfair advantage.
"Don't cave on us." roflmao!
I was encouraged the other day when you actually wrote more than a one sentence introduction to your post followed by a quote, but it looks like you are regressing again.
I have been to your site where it is apparent that you clearly have a vested interest in this legislation, and if motivated, you could provide a wealth of knowledge to this discussion. It is stunning that you consider yourself a "professional" but fail to take advantage of this platform to show off that talent.
Please roll up your sleeves and quit being so dang lazy with your posts.
Peace.
Rick Beagle
there have been many examples of a smaller business that NO longer can provide healthCARE insurance
to it's employees after one seriously ill employee racks up a very expensive medical bill(s). this i feel is one of the reasons woman are discriminated when applying for work. the possibility of child birth with complications.
In Washington D.C and other major cities this Friday afternoon regarding our desire for a Single Payer/ Not for Profit Healthcare System.
I'll be attending a demonstration here in lil' ol' Pittsfield, Massachusetts at the Town Rotary this Friday.
I suggest all of you make some clever signs and go out in to your communities Friday afternoon from 4 pm until 6 pm.
This will be my sign: "People for Healthcare... NOT "Profits".
as above
Isn't healthcare one of the major beefs the republicans have with the car companies? That the companies are paying too much toward healthcare for their retirees and can't compete because of it. Wouldn't government run healthcare be a viable solution to this problem? Of course, the repups would rather just walk away from their debt...but if the rest of us are all paying into this sytem that we can also benefit from, isn't that easier to sell than handing over truckloads of free money for them to piss away?
If they let the private insurance companies take over or get a big foot in the door our health care is dome..
When you are a senior you have to have Medicare and it is use primary insurance... If cost around $100 something a month.
Then it leaves a lot of the claims not paid.. So you have to take a secondary insurance from a private insurance company
If will cost you anywhere from $400 to ??? a month and it only pays after Medicare sets the amount the provider will receive and pay a portion of the bill. The private insurance will pay part of the remaining portion accounting to what type of insurance you took and the amount you pay them...
Can anyone imagine what the private insurance company would charge and what they would not cover or pay if they had control of the whole health program..
You see what Exxon and other Global corporations do when they gain monopoly over products,, and you see what can happen when Global Empires like the Financial Institutions can do to us when they gain the power they have.. by the destruction they have caused to our economy with their greed and crimes.
Our roads are now being given to private corporations, which they will charged a toll for anyone to use them.. After seeing what Exxon , utilities and other private corporations charge for the use of their controlled items we knew we will be charged an arm and leg for the use of these roads...
Privatization is for a profit and we have seem what the salaries of the CEO's of the Global Bank Empire receive as their salary for the criminal actions. Wait till it spreads to every public service we now have...
The workers , seniors and poor will have no jobs , health benefits , no retirement ,,, but it will make no difference because they will not be able to afford the price of the health policies , gas prices or to pay the tolls in order to drive on the private owned and controlled roads taken from tax payers..
Global Empires now with their control of our government and country are the problems with our manufacturing & jobs being sent overseas. They are responsible for the high price of prescription drugs , hospital costs , the wages and benefits being cut from workers in this country. To gain this wealth and control over us they have sent our manufacturing plants and jobs overseas , while giving our tax money to foreign countries for rebuilding their infrastructure while our is crumbling...
We need to Bust the Global (monopoly) Corporate Empire if we ever wish to gain back control of our country and lives..
I'd like to point out that "privatization" is a misnomer when it comes to cases like these. In these cases, "privatization" is when the government gives away something it once monopolized to a favored private party. For example, when a road is built using tax money and then transferred to a private party who then puts tolls on the road, making the users pay twice, this is not the free market.
And if workers, seniors, etc. have no money, how can they buy goods and services from corporations (which are an artifact of the state and also not really free market)? The profits of the corporations will go down. They don't want that.
We need to Bust the Global Corporate Empire's hold on our government more than anything.
like we treat Obama.
We aren't ever going to get universal health care. Any type of plan they come up with will be riddled full of holes and most of our politicians are bought and paid for. No what we will get is an incompetent rollout with subpar services that everyone will hate. Then the private insurers and the GOP will say "see, the government doesn't work"
No we will not get universal health care and I suspect what we will be getting will be even worse than it is now.
And they'd be right, wouldn't they? If the plan were riddled with holes by bought and paid for politicians, isn't that proof that our government sucks?
so in a sense, yeah government will work but it will work for the people who don't want universal health care. (pointing out the obvious) :P
there will be little or no legislation that truly purports to be for the common good.
disheartening that hundreds of important federal positions are still vacant. It doesn't lend to an air of determined organization. I mean where are all these new thinkers? It feels like the same old same old....
fix the title of the thread
It should say "Public" ?
zackly
If there is no public option, I can live without it.
No public option means no mandate!
Does anybody proofread anymore?
My COBRA has gone up 32% in less than two years and I've never cost that #@*$(@# insurance company a nickel. How could I with a $2500 deductible? I'm very likely to be forced to let it lapse this month.
Yippee.
I can't wait until something that could have been caught early if I had access to general/preventive care costs the taxpayers a fortune. On the upside, my old insurance company will still be giving out 6 figure bonusii.
Privatize the profit, socialize the losses. Pretty sweet deal.
Privatize the profit, socialize the losses. Pretty sweet deal.
Hey, wheygey's just pleased as punch with that, so why aren't we?
Michael Moore's documentary "Sicko" for anyone here at Crooksandliars who hasn't seen it.
After I viewed it I was firmly in favor of a system similar to that in Canada, England, France and even Cuba!
Not only does Moore explain the dire straits the American People are in right now, whether insured or not, but it is a very entertaining piece of film making.
...When the company I retired from was taken over by at&t a while back, I was introduced to 'Consumer Driven Health Care'. Basically, it means that through higher deductibles (it went from $300 to $2,300 for the family, and $4,500 maximum annual 'out-of-pocket'...not including the monthly premiums), you determine how much 'health care' you're entitled to...if you don't have the money, you don't get it...get it? Consumer-Driven.
I'm not sure just how much this President is willing to compromise on...a hellovalot more than I had hoped...but he'd better get the hell off this one if he expects to hold this coalition together. There's just so much those of us that have supported him will take in the name of - 'well as least he's better than the alternative'.
... any postings about Obama's alleged policies by Ms. Madrak. I have yet to see one where she doesn't get all excited and jump to easily disprovable false conclusions based on non facts put out there by some hack journalist or even ex Bushies.
This is what Obama proposed during the campaign and has never backed away from:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
Chicken Little Susie strikes AGAIN!
A PUMA alert may be in order as an automatic tag to her sig.
Can not be reformed by simply Following the small Reforms Obama has
talked about so Far. If he Caves on HealthCare it will certainly make
him a One Term President. Americans have Ranked this as one of there
Biggest Issues and ignoring this will split the Party in Two.
OK. This is getting silly. Everyone is allowed to have their opinion, but to really be debated it must be based on reality. Let's start the conversation by saying that having the Yankees play the Red Sox in the world series is fair competition. Telling the Yankees that they get to make the rules as the game goes along, is not fair competition. This is what oponents of the public plan are trying to point out.
Currently the Government run Medicare and Medicaid. They set the prices paid to doctors and hospitals based on numbers they decide. These reimbursement rates are not tied to any realistic databases of actual costs. Some reimbursements are lower than the actual cost to the doctor or hospital. Some doctors opt of of medicare. Others do not, because they make up the difference by the higher reimbursement made by private insurance companies. Because private insurance companies are forced to pay these higher rates to balance the government reimbursements, health insurance premiums are very high and getting worse. The government also tells the insurance companies what conditions need to be covered. Know one tells the government what has to be covered under Medicare. They are judge and jury. So let's get back to the fair competetition arguement....
So they are placed on an even slate and offer plans to the public. One is forced to pay higher payout levels and the government plan uses there payment schedule. The government premiums can be lower because of lower reimbursement levels. Initially, (eventually their waste and mismanagement would catch up with them, but unfortunately private insurance wouldn't last that long)so more people join the public plan because it is less expensive. Less and less people join the private insurance plans and therefore their costs rise. Soon their is only one plan available. Government run healthcare, not because they won fair and square, but because they set the rules, they decide the reimbursements, they decide what is covered, they can change the rules mid stream if they are losing customers.
If you want a single payer system, then I can see why you would want a public option now, because it is obvious that there would eventually be one. If you think the government plan would just be another plan to see who would be best, then you need to learn more.
It's more complicated than this, and on the surface, it doesn't seem like it's that bad of an idea, but you can't have an entitity compete who doesn't have to worry about anything. If the plan is going broke, like Medicare, or social security, you don't go out of business....You just change the rules, ration care, print more money, increase the deficit, no one get's fired, who can compete with that? Why not have the government create a bank to compete, How about a government car company, that will show GM how to do it.
Login or Register to post comments.