Healthcare Reform in the US - Page 42

On March 22 2010 12:00 Jibba wrote:
Yeah, because Nancy Pelosi is really dependent upon the pro-life vote.

The pro-life democrats are being taken care of. That's what this weekend was all about.

If HR 3590 is passed all momentum, all urgency is lost. Worse than that, the healthcare system will be improved only to the point where conditions are bad, but not bad enough to risk the expansion of the role of government in healthcare. The Captains Of Industry running health insurers may be terrible people but they aren't stupid. They certainly won't repeat the same mistakes and push the limits of acceptable practices again; they've peered over the edge of the cliff and did not like what they saw.

HR 3590 is essentially a blueprint for any private industry threatened in the future by necessary reform. Allow for non-material changes at the margins, bonus points for avoiding key reforms that damage your core profitability (double bonus points if the marginal reform actually increases profitability). Passing HR 3590 and declaring it a success sends the following message to all future representatives and senators: Feel free to ignore popular opinion and the public interest when considering legislative initiatives, the corporate interests that fund your campaigns and bribe you (delayed-payment style) are what matter. Who's going to be concerned with the consequences of supporting industry when on the healthcare issue an obvious, popular and effective solution was thrown under the bus with no consequences for those involved?
On the flip side of the previous paragraph, think of the outcome if congress passed the public option. The public option would be wildly popular, essentially everyone would try to get on the plan. How do I know this? Easy, we already have a public option, only it's called Medicare and limited to those 65 and above. Of those eligible for Medicare, how many enroll? Essentially everyone. And how popular is it? Popular enough that republicans, who on a philosophical level despise the program and opposed passage of Medicare just like they oppose healthcare reform today, often spend significant time explaining why they support Medicare. They (feign) support for Medicare because they have to, because it is so popular.

Now imagine if the healthcare reform process produced legislation as popular as Medicare. Democrats would have a significant political advantage for the foreseeable future. How could republicans campaign on a track record of opposing policy that will have made such a positive impact on voter's lives? Alternatively, we can pass HR 3590 and force even more people into the arms of an already despised industry. Why don't we just hand republicans ammunition to campaign on.

When I say I oppose HR 3590 it's not even just the healthcare issue I'm considering. We have (or had) so much momentum to really push for good legislation that would be the right policy and that in turn would make for good politics. And we so desperately need that momentum and political advantage. The list of issues that need immediate attention is quite long. What about climate change? What about long-term peace with the Islamic world? The current status quo on these issues is a danger to our people and our nation just as real as death is to those without health insurance. How long will progressives continue to capitulate to conservatives and special interests who keep us from addressing the underlying fundamental problems of the world we live in. I see us at a fork in the road. We can pass HR 3590 for some measure of short-term minimal gain, or we can hold out for a better long-term solution and greatly improve the liberal political position.

On March 22 2010 11:59 HuskyTheHusky wrote:
The one thing I want to know is... am I gonna get healthcare for free or be forced to buy it?

On March 22 2010 12:02 KunfO wrote:



Her election personally to the House? No.

The vote to decide the speaker of the house when there are 60 less Democrats? Yes.

On March 22 2010 11:48 Caller wrote:

not much is going on trust me

On March 22 2010 11:59 HuskyTheHusky wrote:
The one thing I want to know is... am I gonna get healthcare for free or be forced to buy it?

On March 22 2010 12:03 Jibba wrote:
I'm glad you've got your PhD in political science from an established Wikiversity.

On March 22 2010 12:03 LuckyFool wrote:
Now we get to vote on if we should revote what we voted on before... sigh.

On March 22 2010 12:05 BuGzlToOnl wrote:


AMERICCAAAA!!

On March 22 2010 12:05 KunfO wrote:


Your criticizing me for knowing the obvious fact that the election of speaker of the house is different from Nancy Pelosi's personal election to the house?

btw Im only minoring in Political Science..

On March 22 2010 11:38 KunfO wrote:
This will pass, but it won't pass the class action lawsuit of thousands of people against the government who will not stand to be forced to purchase insurance or be jailed. I know I'll be canceling my health insurance as soon as this bill is signed into law just so I can join it.

On March 22 2010 12:05 BuGzlToOnl wrote:


AMERICCAAAA!!

On March 22 2010 11:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
It's pretty boring comparing to British, or Australian, or Korean which there would be punching, I assume, be happening at this stage.

On March 22 2010 12:08 Jibba wrote:

I'm criticizing you for claiming to know the outcome of the next sets of congressional elections, and assuming that the general public is in agreement with your own personal opinion.