independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 22nd Nov 2009 8:16pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > 'Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
  Create new topic   Printable version   (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
AuthorMessage
Thread started 08/17/09 6:43am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

'Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped

http://www.nytimes.com/20...ml?_r=1&hp


August 18, 2009
‘Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

PHOENIX — The White House, facing increasing skepticism over President Obama’s call for a public insurance plan to compete with the private sector, signaled Sunday that it was willing to compromise and would consider a proposal for a nonprofit health cooperative being developed in the Senate.

The “public option,” a new government insurance program akin to Medicare, has been a central component of Mr. Obama’s agenda for overhauling the health care system, but it has also emerged as a flashpoint for anger and opposition. Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, said the public option was “not the essential element” for reform and raised the idea of the co-op during an interview on CNN.


Oh well, we've gone from single payer, to public option, to health co-ops. Time to roll over and claim it as victory. Sure the Republicans have been out there lying for weeks about the plans, but the real problem is the Democrats who won't call them on it and who can't even get their own party in line to support the bill.

We can piss and moan about how stupid the American populace is all day long (70+ percent support reform, 20% support the bill) But in the end the Dems allowed themselves to be beaten by Fox News, a couple of radio hosts, and the cowards in their own party.

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 08/17/09 7:25am

HatrinaHaterwi
tz

avatar

Mars23 said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/health/policy/18talkshows.html?_r=1&hp

August 18, 2009
‘Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

PHOENIX — The White House, facing increasing skepticism over President Obama’s call for a public insurance plan to compete with the private sector, signaled Sunday that it was willing to compromise and would consider a proposal for a nonprofit health cooperative being developed in the Senate.

The “public option,” a new government insurance program akin to Medicare, has been a central component of Mr. Obama’s agenda for overhauling the health care system, but it has also emerged as a flashpoint for anger and opposition. Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, said the public option was “not the essential element” for reform and raised the idea of the co-op during an interview on CNN.


Oh well, we've gone from single payer, to public option, to health co-ops. Time to roll over and claim it as victory. Sure the Republicans have been out there lying for weeks about the plans, but the real problem is the Democrats who won't call them on it and who can't even get their own party in line to support the bill.

We can piss and moan about how stupid the American populace is all day long (70+ percent support reform, 20% support the bill) But in the end the Dems allowed themselves to be beaten by Fox News, a couple of radio hosts, and the cowards in their own party.


Don't forget shill newspapers who'll print anything to sell a paper now-a-days.

If you don't mind, I'll still just wait until I see what's in the final bill before I decide for myself who has been beaten. Thanks!

Of course, I'm a Liberal! I'm an American, damn it!

This country was founded on the premise of Liberty and Justice for ALL...remember?


My wallet is STILL on hiatus! finger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 08/17/09 7:30am

marxisreal

The Democrats received more money from the health industry than the Republicans in the election year 2008. And this year they're still leading the Republicans by a fine margin in this regard. I guess the industry wants to exert maximum "influence" on law makers, and the Democrats have the majority. Maybe this can help to explain the watering down of their proposals.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 08/17/09 8:08am

Dauphin

avatar

dammit. Just let me pay my way and allow me to opt into an insurance plan that comes from a pool of real choice.

I don't understand why I can't purchase wholesale medical insurance on a national level without it being a government run option.

Why are employers responsible for providing health insurance? Isn't it a BENEFIT and not a right?

Also, the republicans haven't been exactly LYING. They've been quoting the bills and asking hard questions. Things that real journalists and congressfolk SHOULD have been doing from the get go.

Pundits like Rush, Beck, et all have only been extrapolating the direction in which these bills take the government. Basically, saying if you give an inch, they'll take a yard. And the greedy little House and House wanna-be republicans have been exploiting this to rile up votes for next year's elections.
[Edited 8/17/09 8:11am]

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

All Glory To the Hypno-Toad! eek

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 08/17/09 8:27am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

Since I am loathe to rely on shill newspapers, I'll use an oft quoted source to illustrate the point.

http://www.huffingtonpost...60733.html

On Saturday, President Obama downplayed the significance of a public option, telling a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colorado: "All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."

On Sunday morning, Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius made waves when she told CNN's "State of the Nation" that the public option, the government alternative to private health insurance, is "not the essential element" of the administration's plan. She added that the White House is open to health insurance cooperatives as an alternative to a government-run plan.


Currently the word is that Sebelius "misspoke" but no word on Obama saying essentially the same thing a day before.

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 08/17/09 8:28am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

Dauphin said:

dammit. Just let me pay my way and allow me to opt into an insurance plan that comes from a pool of real choice.

I don't understand why I can't purchase wholesale medical insurance on a national level without it being a government run option.

Why are employers responsible for providing health insurance? Isn't it a BENEFIT and not a right?

Also, the republicans haven't been exactly LYING. They've been quoting the bills and asking hard questions. Things that real journalists and congressfolk SHOULD have been doing from the get go.

Pundits like Rush, Beck, et all have only been extrapolating the direction in which these bills take the government. Basically, saying if you give an inch, they'll take a yard. And the greedy little House and House wanna-be republicans have been exploiting this to rile up votes for next year's elections.
[Edited 8/17/09 8:11am]


"Death Panels"

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 08/17/09 8:33am

Dauphin

avatar

Mars23 said:

Dauphin said:

dammit. Just let me pay my way and allow me to opt into an insurance plan that comes from a pool of real choice.

I don't understand why I can't purchase wholesale medical insurance on a national level without it being a government run option.

Why are employers responsible for providing health insurance? Isn't it a BENEFIT and not a right?

Also, the republicans haven't been exactly LYING. They've been quoting the bills and asking hard questions. Things that real journalists and congressfolk SHOULD have been doing from the get go.

Pundits like Rush, Beck, et all have only been extrapolating the direction in which these bills take the government. Basically, saying if you give an inch, they'll take a yard. And the greedy little House and House wanna-be republicans have been exploiting this to rile up votes for next year's elections.
[Edited 8/17/09 8:11am]


"Death Panels"


sorry. I don't consider most "conservative pundits" and opportunistic politicians as actual Republicans. I was referring to the men and women voters who have been going to these town halls and confronting the public servants.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

All Glory To the Hypno-Toad! eek

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 08/17/09 9:00am

HatrinaHaterwi
tz

avatar

Mars23 said:

Since I am loathe to rely on shill newspapers, I'll use an oft quoted source to illustrate the point.

http://www.huffingtonpost...60733.html

On Saturday, President Obama downplayed the significance of a public option, telling a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colorado: "All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."

On Sunday morning, Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius made waves when she told CNN's "State of the Nation" that the public option, the government alternative to private health insurance, is "not the essential element" of the administration's plan. She added that the White House is open to health insurance cooperatives as an alternative to a government-run plan.


Currently the word is that Sebelius "misspoke" but no word on Obama saying essentially the same thing a day before.


He did not essentially say the same thing the day before he was addressing the misleading notion that the whole thing hinges on the public option aspect of it, which it does not.

The fact that saying that has morphed into "public option may be dropped" would be purely laughable, if people weren't so quick to despair every time the media plays them like yo-yos!

Of course, I'm a Liberal! I'm an American, damn it!

This country was founded on the premise of Liberty and Justice for ALL...remember?


My wallet is STILL on hiatus! finger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 08/17/09 9:04am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

Mars23 said:

Since I am loathe to rely on shill newspapers, I'll use an oft quoted source to illustrate the point.

http://www.huffingtonpost...60733.html



Currently the word is that Sebelius "misspoke" but no word on Obama saying essentially the same thing a day before.


He did not essentially say the same thing the day before he was addressing the misleading notion that the whole thing hinges on the public option aspect of it, which it does not.

The fact that saying that has morphed into "public option may be dropped" would be purely laughable, if people weren't so quick to despair every time the media plays them like yo-yos!


I was pointing out that Obama and Sebelius said essentially the same thing, yet one of them misspoke. The two quotes are right there.

"one aspect of it" vs "not the essential element"

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 08/17/09 9:24am

HatrinaHaterwi
tz

avatar

Mars23 said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:



He did not essentially say the same thing the day before he was addressing the misleading notion that the whole thing hinges on the public option aspect of it, which it does not.

The fact that saying that has morphed into "public option may be dropped" would be purely laughable, if people weren't so quick to despair every time the media plays them like yo-yos!


I was pointing out that Obama and Sebelius said essentially the same thing, yet one of them misspoke. The two quotes are right there.

"one aspect of it" vs "not the essential element"


Ok but how does either statement indicate the public option may be dropped?

Of course, I'm a Liberal! I'm an American, damn it!

This country was founded on the premise of Liberty and Justice for ALL...remember?


My wallet is STILL on hiatus! finger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 08/17/09 9:43am

JellyBean

We cave again and again.

“When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” Brazilian bishop Dom Hélder Câmara
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 08/17/09 11:26am

Dauphin

avatar

JellyBean said:

We cave again and again.


I know! It's the Patriot Act all over again. Voters duped into giving away more power to the government.

Sad.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

All Glory To the Hypno-Toad! eek

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 08/17/09 11:36am

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

I will wait to see if this is Chess or stupidity before flipping out.

2009: Mermaids and Dolphins...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 08/17/09 11:47am

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

Mars23 said:



I was pointing out that Obama and Sebelius said essentially the same thing, yet one of them misspoke. The two quotes are right there.

"one aspect of it" vs "not the essential element"


Ok but how does either statement indicate the public option may be dropped?




[A]ny plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans - including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest - and choose what's best for your family.


To me, going from "must have" to "a small sliver" is certainly different rhetoric. In politics, many times that's all we have to go on.

Of course there was this:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/P...ealthcare/

A key Senate negotiator said Sunday that President Obama should drop his push for a government-funded public health insurance option because the Senate will never pass it.
President Obama at a town hall meeting earlier this week pushing his health care reform plan.

Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota said it was futile to continue to "chase that rabbit" due to the lack of 60 Senate votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

"The fact of the matter is there are not the votes in the United States Senate for a public option. There never have been," Conrad said on "Fox News Sunday."


Now one senator might not seem like a big deal, except that he sits on the finance committee .

And the White House now says there will be a "competitor" to private insurance, but refuses to say that means they still support a public option.

Asked Sunday if Obama would accept a bill lacking a public option, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the president insists on more competition in the health insurance marketplace to offer consumers better choices.


"The bottom line ... is: Do individuals looking for health insurance in the private market have choice and competition?" Gibbs said on the CBS program "Face the Nation." "If we have that, the president will be satisfied."


Wouldn't it be easier to say "The President still insists on a public option in this bill"?

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 08/17/09 12:28pm

HatrinaHaterwi
tz

avatar

Mars23 said:[quote]

HatrinaHaterwitz said:



Now one senator might not seem like a big deal, except that he sits on the finance committee .

And the White House now says there will be a "competitor" to private insurance, but refuses to say that means they still support a public option.

Asked Sunday if Obama would accept a bill lacking a public option, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the president insists on more competition in the health insurance marketplace to offer consumers better choices.


"The bottom line ... is: Do individuals looking for health insurance in the private market have choice and competition?" Gibbs said on the CBS program "Face the Nation." "If we have that, the president will be satisfied."


Wouldn't it be easier to say "The President still insists on a public option in this bill"?


Perhaps but I still don't see where it's been said that "public option may be dropped" by any one other than shill spin operatives doing their damnedest to see that it is!

http://www.marketwatch.co...2009-08-17

Bucking a bearish Monday trend in the broader stock market, shares of health-insurance companies including UnitedHealth Group Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!unh/quotes/nls/unh (UNH 28.58, +0.52, +1.85%) and Aetna Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!aet/quotes/nls/aet (AET 29.69, +1.41, +4.99%) rose after the comments by Obama as well as members of his administration over the weekend. Health insurers have fought a public plan.

Of course, I'm a Liberal! I'm an American, damn it!

This country was founded on the premise of Liberty and Justice for ALL...remember?


My wallet is STILL on hiatus! finger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 08/17/09 3:12pm

babynoz

avatar

I believe that what Mars23 is alluding to is the fact that the white house has lost control of the message and are now trying to modify it to regain some percieved loss of support. Many of the president's grass roots supporters are disappointed and rightfully so.

Secondly, the corporate owned congress critters have pretty much left the president on his own. The corporate media also gives a lot more air time to the staged dramas unfolding at the so called town meetings than to the actual details of the proposal currently on the table. They have effectively misrepresented the fact that the majority of Americans still favor health care reform.

I'm not overly impressed with Obama's approach to the issue even though I realize that he alone cannot get this legislation passed. It would have been better if he'd kept it simple...for example, something like what I read today on Thom Hartmann's blog.



http://www.thomhartmann.c...ent-obama/

Dear President Obama,
I understand you’re thinking of dumping your “public option” because of all the demagoguery by Sarah Palin and Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich and their crowd on right-wing radio and Fox. Fine. Good idea, in fact.

Instead, let’s make it simple. Please let us buy into Medicare.

It would be so easy. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel with this so-called “public option” that’s a whole new program from the ground up. Medicare already exists. It works. Some people will like it, others won’t – just like the Post Office versus FedEx analogy you’re so comfortable with.

Just pass a simple bill – it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people – that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it.

So it’s revenue neutral!

To make it available to people of low income, raise the rates slightly for all currently non-eligible people (like me - under 65) to cover the cost of below-200%-of-poverty people. Revenue neutral again.

Most of us will do damn near anything to get out from under the thumbs of the multi-millionaire CEOs who are running our current insurance programs. Sign me up!

This lets you blow up all the rumors about death panels and grandma and everything else: everybody knows what Medicare is. Those who scorn it can go with Blue Cross. Those who like it can buy into it. Simplicity itself.

Of course, we’d like a few fixes, like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and filling some of the holes Republicans and AARP and the big insurance lobbyists have drilled into Medicare so people have to buy “supplemental” insurance, but that can wait for the second round. Let’s get this done first.

Simple stuff. Medicare for anybody who wants it. Private health insurance for those who don’t. Easy message. Even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can understand it. Sarah Palin can buy into it, or ignore it. No death panels, no granny plugs, nothing. Just a few sentences.

Replace the “you must be disabled or 65” with “here’s what it’ll cost if you want to buy in, and here’s the sliding scale of subsidies we’ll give you if you’re poor, paid for by everybody else who’s buying in.” (You could roll back the Reagan tax cuts and make it all free, but that’s another rant.)

We elected you because we expected you to have the courage of your convictions. Here’s how. Not the “single payer Medicare for all” that many of us would prefer, but a simple, “Medicare for anybody who wants to buy in.”

Respectfully,

Thom Hartmann

"After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 08/17/09 3:19pm

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

THOM

HARTMAN

IS

RIGHT

exclaim

2009: Mermaids and Dolphins...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 08/17/09 3:34pm

uPtoWnNY

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I will wait to see if this is Chess or stupidity before flipping out.


Just politics as usual. The Dems will fold because they don't want to get destroyed in 2010.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 08/17/09 3:35pm

lazycrockett

avatar

OH the DNC the party of cowards.

"...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 08/17/09 3:55pm

babynoz

avatar

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

THOM

HARTMAN

IS

RIGHT

exclaim


Thom has offered a way out of the convoluted mess that this proposal has become. One of the problems I'm having with Barry right now is his apparent reluctance to be responsive to those who actually support him in favor of chasing some Kumbaya dream of bipartisanship.

I said at the very beginning of this election that IF he had the ability to bring together a coalition capable of loosening the stranglehold of the corporatocray he would be worth supporting. I viewed him as the only candidate of the three we were given to choose from who would even try. He's a brilliant guy but 7 months in, whether he has the skill and the will to pull this off has yet to be seen.

I can imagine the magnitude of the monstrous machine he's facing and I sometimes wonder if he regrets taking the job. But he took it nevertheless and so far this is the third or forth time he's compromised on what he professes to stand for.

Change is still a ways off but as they say, hope springs eternal.

"After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 08/17/09 4:06pm

babynoz

avatar

uPtoWnNY said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

I will wait to see if this is Chess or stupidity before flipping out.


Just politics as usual. The Dems will fold because they don't want to get destroyed in 2010.


If only they would find the cojones to stand for something they'd gain more support. The right feeds and seeds their base and hence their coalitions are strong. Except for token gestures they generally care less than a damn about who's not on board with their agenda.

And they throw a crapload of $$ into their initiatives. They are STILL buying up progressive radio stations and changing the format, especially in the south.

The dems are still being out manuevered on many fronts. If they can't get anything done having both the white house and both houses of congress than who the hell is going to support them in 2010? I'm going to remain an independent because they haven't given me any reason to do otherwise.

"After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 08/17/09 4:14pm

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

babynoz said:

uPtoWnNY said:



Just politics as usual. The Dems will fold because they don't want to get destroyed in 2010.


If only they would find the cojones to stand for something they'd gain more support. The right feeds and seeds their base and hence their coalitions are strong. Except for token gestures they generally care less than a damn about who's not on board with their agenda.

And they throw a crapload of $$ into their initiatives. They are STILL buying up progressive radio stations and changing the format, especially in the south.

The dems are still being out manuevered on many fronts. If they can't get anything done having both the white house and both houses of congress than who the hell is going to support them in 2010? I'm going to remain an independent because they haven't given me any reason to do otherwise.


I'll probably change my affiliation to independent come 2010. The Democratic party doesn't deserve my headcount.

2009: Mermaids and Dolphins...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 08/17/09 4:36pm

lazycrockett

avatar

I wish that the democrats or for that matter any politician would stand up and push a single payer option through and not be so damn concerned bout their next election.

It would be wonderful for just once that a party would put the people who elected them first. Some may fall in the next election but once this hurdle of health care was put to rest I think the majority of people in this country would be truly impressed with this plan once it was implemented and come back to the fold in droves.

but alas.

"...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 08/17/09 4:42pm

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

lazycrockett said:

I wish that the democrats or for that matter any politician would stand up and push a single payer option through and not be so damn concerned bout their next election.

It would be wonderful for just once that a party would put the people who elected them first. Some may fall in the next election but once this hurdle of health care was put to rest I think the majority of people in this country would be truly impressed with this plan once it was implemented and come back to the fold in droves.

but alas.

don't be tryin to make me miss large balls Hillary was in charge! no no no! lol

2009: Mermaids and Dolphins...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 08/17/09 4:43pm

lazycrockett

avatar

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

lazycrockett said:

I wish that the democrats or for that matter any politician would stand up and push a single payer option through and not be so damn concerned bout their next election.

It would be wonderful for just once that a party would put the people who elected them first. Some may fall in the next election but once this hurdle of health care was put to rest I think the majority of people in this country would be truly impressed with this plan once it was implemented and come back to the fold in droves.

but alas.

don't be tryin to make me miss large balls Hillary was in charge! no no no! lol



Well you damn well know that after her bruising in the first go around The Bitch side of her would have come out and forced this down our throat. smile
[Edited 8/17/09 16:44pm]

"...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 08/17/09 5:53pm

Mars23

Moderator

avatar

moderator

babynoz said:

I believe that what Mars23 is alluding to is the fact that the white house has lost control of the message and are now trying to modify it to regain some percieved loss of support. Many of the president's grass roots supporters are disappointed and rightfully so.

Secondly, the corporate owned congress critters have pretty much left the president on his own. The corporate media also gives a lot more air time to the staged dramas unfolding at the so called town meetings than to the actual details of the proposal currently on the table. They have effectively misrepresented the fact that the majority of Americans still favor health care reform.

I'm not overly impressed with Obama's approach to the issue even though I realize that he alone cannot get this legislation passed. It would have been better if he'd kept it simple...for example, something like what I read today on Thom Hartmann's blog.



http://www.thomhartmann.c...ent-obama/

Dear President Obama,
I understand you’re thinking of dumping your “public option” because of all the demagoguery by Sarah Palin and Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich and their crowd on right-wing radio and Fox. Fine. Good idea, in fact.

Instead, let’s make it simple. Please let us buy into Medicare.

It would be so easy. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel with this so-called “public option” that’s a whole new program from the ground up. Medicare already exists. It works. Some people will like it, others won’t – just like the Post Office versus FedEx analogy you’re so comfortable with.

Just pass a simple bill – it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people – that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it.

So it’s revenue neutral!

To make it available to people of low income, raise the rates slightly for all currently non-eligible people (like me - under 65) to cover the cost of below-200%-of-poverty people. Revenue neutral again.

Most of us will do damn near anything to get out from under the thumbs of the multi-millionaire CEOs who are running our current insurance programs. Sign me up!

This lets you blow up all the rumors about death panels and grandma and everything else: everybody knows what Medicare is. Those who scorn it can go with Blue Cross. Those who like it can buy into it. Simplicity itself.

Of course, we’d like a few fixes, like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and filling some of the holes Republicans and AARP and the big insurance lobbyists have drilled into Medicare so people have to buy “supplemental” insurance, but that can wait for the second round. Let’s get this done first.

Simple stuff. Medicare for anybody who wants it. Private health insurance for those who don’t. Easy message. Even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can understand it. Sarah Palin can buy into it, or ignore it. No death panels, no granny plugs, nothing. Just a few sentences.

Replace the “you must be disabled or 65” with “here’s what it’ll cost if you want to buy in, and here’s the sliding scale of subsidies we’ll give you if you’re poor, paid for by everybody else who’s buying in.” (You could roll back the Reagan tax cuts and make it all free, but that’s another rant.)

We elected you because we expected you to have the courage of your convictions. Here’s how. Not the “single payer Medicare for all” that many of us would prefer, but a simple, “Medicare for anybody who wants to buy in.”

Respectfully,

Thom Hartmann



I was partly saying that and I agree with Thom Hartman as well. I didn't get to hear his show today and would have liked to hear that.

I am not convinced, however that the WH will not totally cave in the end. The House says they will only pass a public option bill, the Senate will not pass the same bill. So there is an impasse and the WH does not seem to have the clout with their own party to sway the Senate.

The language used this weekend was used to soften the blow, but is having the welcome (to me) effect of mobilizing the base of the party to tell them that non passage of a public option is not an option.

So, yes I am disappointed that we lost the message and got outdone AGAIN by the hate and lies, but I am also doubtful in the White House sacking up on this one.

This is untoward! This is not toward!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 08/17/09 6:26pm

violetblues

avatar

Obama is a grandma killing, communist, socialist, ………this all reminds me of a movie I once saw.

[Edited 8/17/09 18:34pm]

flag
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 08/17/09 6:27pm

realm

avatar

I told you guys a few days ago. Most of the Pharmaceuticals and most of the major doctors were giving Obama's plan the nod. Right then I knew the pay off gone down. American greed.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 08/17/09 6:34pm

babynoz

avatar

Mars23 said:

babynoz said:

I believe that what Mars23 is alluding to is the fact that the white house has lost control of the message and are now trying to modify it to regain some percieved loss of support. Many of the president's grass roots supporters are disappointed and rightfully so.

Secondly, the corporate owned congress critters have pretty much left the president on his own. The corporate media also gives a lot more air time to the staged dramas unfolding at the so called town meetings than to the actual details of the proposal currently on the table. They have effectively misrepresented the fact that the majority of Americans still favor health care reform.

I'm not overly impressed with Obama's approach to the issue even though I realize that he alone cannot get this legislation passed. It would have been better if he'd kept it simple...for example, something like what I read today on Thom Hartmann's blog.



http://www.thomhartmann.c...ent-obama/

Dear President Obama,
I understand you’re thinking of dumping your “public option” because of all the demagoguery by Sarah Palin and Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich and their crowd on right-wing radio and Fox. Fine. Good idea, in fact.

Instead, let’s make it simple. Please let us buy into Medicare.

It would be so easy. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel with this so-called “public option” that’s a whole new program from the ground up. Medicare already exists. It works. Some people will like it, others won’t – just like the Post Office versus FedEx analogy you’re so comfortable with.

Just pass a simple bill – it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people – that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it.

So it’s revenue neutral!

To make it available to people of low income, raise the rates slightly for all currently non-eligible people (like me - under 65) to cover the cost of below-200%-of-poverty people. Revenue neutral again.

Most of us will do damn near anything to get out from under the thumbs of the multi-millionaire CEOs who are running our current insurance programs. Sign me up!

This lets you blow up all the rumors about death panels and grandma and everything else: everybody knows what Medicare is. Those who scorn it can go with Blue Cross. Those who like it can buy into it. Simplicity itself.

Of course, we’d like a few fixes, like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and filling some of the holes Republicans and AARP and the big insurance lobbyists have drilled into Medicare so people have to buy “supplemental” insurance, but that can wait for the second round. Let’s get this done first.

Simple stuff. Medicare for anybody who wants it. Private health insurance for those who don’t. Easy message. Even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can understand it. Sarah Palin can buy into it, or ignore it. No death panels, no granny plugs, nothing. Just a few sentences.

Replace the “you must be disabled or 65” with “here’s what it’ll cost if you want to buy in, and here’s the sliding scale of subsidies we’ll give you if you’re poor, paid for by everybody else who’s buying in.” (You could roll back the Reagan tax cuts and make it all free, but that’s another rant.)

We elected you because we expected you to have the courage of your convictions. Here’s how. Not the “single payer Medicare for all” that many of us would prefer, but a simple, “Medicare for anybody who wants to buy in.”

Respectfully,

Thom Hartmann



I was partly saying that and I agree with Thom Hartman as well. I didn't get to hear his show today and would have liked to hear that.

I am not convinced, however that the WH will not totally cave in the end. The House says they will only pass a public option bill, the Senate will not pass the same bill. So there is an impasse and the WH does not seem to have the clout with their own party to sway the Senate.

The language used this weekend was used to soften the blow, but is having the welcome (to me) effect of mobilizing the base of the party to tell them that non passage of a public option is not an option.

So, yes I am disappointed that we lost the message and got outdone AGAIN by the hate and lies, but I am also doubtful in the White House sacking up on this one.


IMO he's been taking the base for granted too often in favor of futile attempts to win over people who will never be won over.

"After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 08/18/09 10:42am

ShinNihonKikou

Mars23 said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/health/policy/18talkshows.html?_r=1&hp

August 18, 2009
‘Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

PHOENIX — The White House, facing increasing skepticism over President Obama’s call for a public insurance plan to compete with the private sector, signaled Sunday that it was willing to compromise and would consider a proposal for a nonprofit health cooperative being developed in the Senate.

The “public option,” a new government insurance program akin to Medicare, has been a central component of Mr. Obama’s agenda for overhauling the health care system, but it has also emerged as a flashpoint for anger and opposition. Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, said the public option was “not the essential element” for reform and raised the idea of the co-op during an interview on CNN.


Oh well, we've gone from single payer, to public option, to health co-ops. Time to roll over and claim it as victory. Sure the Republicans have been out there lying for weeks about the plans, but the real problem is the Democrats who won't call them on it and who can't even get their own party in line to support the bill.

We can piss and moan about how stupid the American populace is all day long (70+ percent support reform, 20% support the bill) But in the end the Dems allowed themselves to be beaten by Fox News, a couple of radio hosts, and the cowards in their own party.


If there's no public option I will no longer support Obama. There is no real health reform without that option, and anything less shows they're paid off by the insurance industry.

"Greed is Good." -Gordon Gekko
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
  Create new topic   Printable version   (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > 'Public Option’ in Health Plan May Be Dropped