Every single person who says "start over" is in total denial. Every single one.

[BzaDem]

No exceptions. If you even just say the words "start over," you are in denial.

People who say "start over" are people who can't come to terms with the fact that the current option (Senate bill + reconciliation for fixes) is not what they want. Confronted with the tension between really, really wanting something and not being able to get something, they make up a completely implausible scenario and close their mind from even thinking superficially about its feasibility. I guess it is a natural human reaction, because I have been seeing it all over the place here.

In reality, the filibuster is not going anywhere. 60 votes is here to stay. A vote to go nuclear and lower the threshold through a point of order might get 15 supporters, maybe 20.

And in reality, regardless of what you feel the reason is, we are going to lose LARGE numbers of seats in both houses in the fall.

Looking at history, it will probably take us another one or two decades to get back to the point where we have a president, a 40+ seat majority in the House, and a 60+ seat majority in the Senate. It will only be at that point that the option to tackle healthcare. And you know what? We probably still won't do it. After seeing what happened the last two times, we still probably will not do anything substantive (or even try very hard).

If we are lucky, we might get incremental reform (that pales in comparison to the current Senate bill) in a decade or two. If we are unlucky, it won't even be tried until most of the government wasn't even around to remember what happened.

What certainly won't happen is a collapse of the healthcare system prompting an immediate enactment of Single Payer. If you believe that, I guess you believe that the collapse of our economy last Fall will usher in an immediate reform of the financial sector from the top down. Oops. That didn't happen.

There will be an ever increasing number of uninsured, and people who get very ill will continue to go bankrupt. The pain for these people will continue to be unbelievable. But NOTHING will be done about it, because despite all of this, the number of people who are sick and/or uninsured is too low to force Congress to do anything. This isn't going to change significantly. The skyrocketing medical costs will continue to be shifted onto the relatively smaller sick population, and a healthy majority of people will oppose or be indifferent to HCR because they will continue to be satisfied with their health insurance (only because they never have to use it).

For those that think that withholding your vote until this is fixed will actually cause it to be fixed, please point out ONE time in the history of the United States where that has worked. Progressives will continue to be unenthusiastic and turn out to vote in lower numbers, until they are reminded to vote by a massive Republican landslide election. They will then become enthusiastic until Democrats win again, and become unenthusiastic thereafter. The cycle will continue, but it won't cause your policies to be enacted.

And for those that think that the solution to all of this is to start a third party, you should take a quick glance at our Constitution. We live in a structural-two-party, winner-take-all system. It is structurally impossible for a successful third party to form, and it is mathematically impossible for any third party to win a non-negligible number of elections for non-negligible federal offices.

What is the point of all of this? The point is that we currently have a choice. We can either enact the Senate bill (with some changes via reconciliation), or the above description will continue to describe the status quo for most of your lifetime.

Many want to kill the Senate bill. Some think that having a mandate to purchase a private product is so bad that anyone with a pre-existing condition should be thrown under the bus. I don't think I am going to convince anyone who thinks this that this is BS. But let's be clear and unambiguous: the choice is really between:

Senate bill + reconciliation for changes

or

NOTHING.

No pie-in-the-sky starting-over plan this year, no massive political revolution in 5 years for Single Payer, no attempt to deal with this legislatively in 10 years, and no successful third party run in 15 years. It is really this or nothing for a very, very, very long time.

If you think that we should kill the bill, by all means argue that. But argue why having the status quo for 20 years is better than the Senate bill. Don't argue why some magical non-realistic plan that you favor is better than the Senate bill. Those who argue the latter are in denial and are not being honest with themselves.

[crispini]

1. Reality. It's ugly and no fun, but it's all true.

[regnaD kciN]

2. Amen!

:applause:

[elocs]

28. The trouble is that DU does not like reality, or dealing with it. n/t

[cali]

3. recced. I've been saying this over and over and over and over

If you think the bill should be killed (and honestly I waver between thinking it should be killed and hoping it can be improved) have the fucking intellectual honesty to admit the obvious. Once dead, it's dead, jim. moribund. an ugly corpse. expired.

[regnaD kciN]

8. I find it funny...

...that at least one person unrecommended this thread before anyone had even replied. It seems that simple-minded, knee-jerk ignorance isn't limited to the right side of the political spectrum.

[SergeStorms]

17. Looks like the Obama....

fealty squad is hard at work denying any recs for this post. Talk about being unable to handle reality. :eyes:

[TicketyBoo]

22. Dare I say

"Ditto"?

(Or is that a cuss word here?)

[laughingliberal]

4. If they don't find a way to get new customers the insurance companies will be dead long before 20

years pass. I don't know how long it will take before they go back to the drawing board but it won't be 20 years. Please explain how an industry which is losing millions of customers due to people and companies dropping their coverage and more losing coverage due to unemployment continues to profit. Raise premiums? That results in the further loss of customers. They stand to start losing 11 million customers, on average, to Medicare every year for the next 2 decades. It is an economic impossibility for these companies to survive unless people are forced to do business with them.

Given that the purpose of the current Senate bill is to save their industry, I think it would be wise to get more concessions from them. This industry can't pick up and move. No other country would put up with their criminality and we shouldn't, either. Close the damned loopholes that allow them to continue on with their worst practices of gouging and rescissions. Get rid of Ensign's amendment which will not only allow gouging of those who have employer sponsored benefits with health concerns but will also allow your employer access to your private health information. Then talk to me.

Added on edit: In a related story watch this 'deficit commission' that Conrad is demanding like a hawk. If this bill fails to pass to bail the bastards out I fully expect the next hat trick to be a new push to privatize Medicare.

[spooked911]

40. Interesting comments, thanks

I hope what you're saying is true

[laughingliberal]

46. There's no getting around it. How long it will take for them to succumb completely, we don't know

It's obvious they can't survive indefinitely like this. With the working and middle classes being left with less and less money year after year people are having to drop coverage and, as the premiums skyrocket, businesses are being forced to drop coverage. They have been losing numbers for a while now and propping up their balance sheets with outrageous increases in premium rates. They will continue that for a while but they really have reached that point where premium increases result in fewer customers. So far, they have been able to raise premiums enough to cover the loss of numbers but they are rapidly approaching the place where they have priced themselves out of the market, the point where premium increases will lose them so many customers there will be net losses as the result. Add in the loss of an average of 11 million a year to Medicare for the next 20 years and you have to ask at what point over those 20 years will it become critical. I believe the customer base will begin consolidating as insurance companies fail. That's why it will be important to strip their antitrust exemption and heavily regulate them. It, actually, might not be such a bad thing to have fewer companies if we make the exchange national and our reps have the will to pass major regulations. Fewer companies might be easier to monitor.

There is a reason health care reform came up at this point in time and we were treated to the play acting of the insurance industry 'coming to the table willingly.' Damn right they came willingly. The part of this legislation which has been essential to the industry and the legislators they have bought is the mandate. The only way for them to gain more customers now is for people to be forced, under penalty of law, to buy their product. And their fight to kill reform has been a bit of theatre. What they want to kill is everything except the mandate and the government subsidies to help people pay them their premiums. This is where there is confusion and they appear somewhat schizophrenic. On the one hand they don't want any real reform so they've worked to kill anything that might force them to provide real help for people (and with the Senate bill they have, largely, succeeded) and on the other hand they have to have that mandate pass.

So, some of this is repetition of my reply above. But the important things for me are that people need to get off their knees and realize we hold more cards than we know and start acting like it. The next thing of concern, as I said above, is if this bill goes down we will see a huge push to privatize Medicare. I think that may be their plan B. With Conrad behind the push for this 'deficit commission,' I'm sure banking and insurance see this as the opportunity to grab that trust fund they've had their eyes on for years.

[spooked911]

50. I see.

Thanks again.

[pundaint]

5. Start over. This bill is worse than nothing, it will force costs up right away.

The People will demand something better, now that they know. It will be too big a political lever, to not be used.

[regnaD kciN]

6. First off, no it won't ...

...and, second, if we "start over," can you show us how we can get the necessary regulatory, non-budget-related changes through a Senate with 41 Republican votes vowed to filibuster? (And, if you say "reconciliation," you only prove how ignorant you are of the reconciliation process.)

[laughingliberal]

9. The President is calling for a pared down approach. Ask him how that gets done. nt

[DCBob]

10. Pared down means less controversial which means easier to get votes

Not too complicated.

[laughingliberal]

13. Yes. Pass the parts they agree on and then see what shakes out. nt

[MercutioATC]

15. That worked SO well for TARP.

Good idea, bad implementation.

By the time they had given away what it took to get the votes to pass it, it had significantly deviated from the original concept.


Same with HCR. In trying to please everybody, they're making it a debacle of the first order.


Start over.

[tkmorris]

16. There's nothing controversial in there, never was

The problem is no matter WHAT the Dems propose the Repubs will find something in it to create a controversy over. We could introduce a resolution that declared apple pie to be mighty tasty and they'd filibuster it. They'd have people go on Tweety and MTP declaring that an excess of apple pie causes health problems, and furthermore the bill discriminates against cherry growers. They'd say that boosting the apple pie industry would create a shortage of apples, and our toddlers would not have apple juice to drink in their sippy cups. They'd introduce an amendment declaring Johnny Appleseed to be a terrorist.

You can't compromise with a house cat, nor a Republican. It just makes them bolder.

[SergeStorms]

18. When you pare down........

a piece of shit, you get a smaller piece of shit. That's my take on it. ;) I guess President Obama wants Americans to eat less shit :shrug: The shit peddlers will not be happy about that. They want Americans to eat heaping helpings of shit, and pay out the nose for it to boot.

[elocs]

34. I think it's simplistic to chime in with "start over" like saying it makes it happen.

I don't see it happening and as far as reconciliation goes just as many here have a simplistic view of what that really is and what it entails and they don't want to spend the time to learn about it.

After all, its' so much easier to simply chant, "start over, start over, reconciliation, reconciliation" than to deal with the reality of the situation.

[cali]

7. ack. you are in big time denial. kill it fine. but there is no starting over

not in this congress and not in the next.

duh.

[leveymg]

11. This can be a good Bill. The Kennedy Medicare for All amendment goes a long way toward fixing it,

as does adding Rx drug re-importation (the Durbin Amendment), and lifting the anti-trust exemption on the insurance industry. What you end up with is expansion of coverage and a Public Option plus further cost control by policing of prices of the private insurance industry.

That would be worthwhile HCR reform.


Medicare for All Act - Amends the Social Security Act to add a new title XXII (Medicare for All) under which: (1) each eligible individual is entitled to benefits which include the full range and scope of benefits available under the original fee-for-service program under parts A (Hospital Insurance) and B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) of title XVIII (Medicare), with parity in coverage of mental health benefits, subject to appropriate cost sharing; (2) each enrollee is free to choose his or her own doctor and private health plan; and (3) benefits are not less than the benefits offered to Members of Congress and Federal employees under FEHBP (Federal Employees Health Benefits Program).
Establishes the Medicare for All Trust Fund.

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose: (1) on the income of every individual a tax equal to 1.7% of wages received; (2) on every employer an excise tax equal to 7% of the wages paid to each employee; and (3) on the self-employment income of every individual, a tax equal to the applicable percentage of the self-employment income for such taxable year.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/26/772564/-Kennedy...



the full text of the late Senator Ted Kennedy's Medicare for All bill:

Text of S. 2229 <109th>: Medicare for All Act bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-...

[cali]

12. and you think that';s possible in this Congress

let alone the next one?

dream on, candide.

[leveymg]

14. They realized Tues. that they're dead meat if they don't pass real HCR.

Yes, they're capable of self-preserving behavior, as is any animal.

[cali]

19. really? give me an example?

[leveymg]

37. All examples will be yesterday.

Comment attributed to Obama that Party must move Left (I know, that was hedged). Comments that House progressives will not sign off on the Senate version of the Bill. Contrapoint to above comment by Steny Hoyer that he stands ready to push through the current Senate Bill. Trial Balloon comments by Pelosi about "patches" needed before House will do reconciliation. Clearly, there's positive movement - as to whether that gets us to a clean, acceptable HCR Bill containing the good stuff will determine whether the Democratic Party lives or dies.

[laughingliberal]

47. I think a problem with this approach is people don't trust them to do that

After what we saw during the debate with not only the Senate but also the lack of support for real reform from the White House there is huge skepticism that if the House capitulates and passes this atrocity that anything in it will get fixed. At the risk of harping, we are all still waiting for them to 'fix' NAFTA as they promised.

[ixion]

20. Nothing.

then so be it.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TicketyBoo]

23. Absolutely

correct.

[Geek_Girl]

24. Personally I would rather have nothing

Mandatory Health Insurance, taxing health insurance benefits and subsidizing the Health insurance companies is worse than what we got now.

[MadHound]

25. Nothing then, because quite frankly the Senate bill will ruin me, and much of the middle class

As far as the rest of your diatribe, you're simply repeating the tired old excuses that the Dems have for not doing the right thing.

[BzaDem]

26. The fact that I'm repeating them doesn't make them not true.

You can argue all you want about Democrats not doing the right thing. In fact, that's my point. The Democrats won't do the right thing. And soon, they won't even be able to. This is the only option to cover anyone for decades.

[MadHound]

27. Get this through your head, kill this goddamn bill,

Otherwise it is going to kill the middle and working class. I'm a teacher, I don't get paid that much, thanks to how this country undervalues education(but that's for a different thread). If this bill goes through, my rates are going to go way up due to the excise tax funding mechanism. I'm sorry, but I can't afford that kind of ratcheting up of my rates.

Furthermore, without a public option, all that this bill does is hand a mandated monopoly over to the insurance industry. Under that scenario the middle class is going to pay an increasing amount of their income to the insurance industry, that is, after all, how monopolies work.

In addition, with the anti-abortion language in the bill, women will see their right to choose diminished. Pardon me, but I don't think that we should sacrifice the rights of women to have health care reform, especially this half assed, harmful health care reform.

The Democrats aren't doing the right thing now, which is why this bill needs to die. Yes, we can start over again, but the only reason we won't is because of the cowardice of the Congressional Dems. Instead, they're going to try and ram this abomination through, and kill the middle and working class. Maybe you can live with that, but I certainly can't

[BzaDem]

29. The excise tax funding mechanism?

Your plan is over 8500 for you or 23000 for your family? Really?

I'm glad you at least realize that we won't start over, and that those with pre-existing conditions will continue to be left to go bankrupt and seek care in emergency rooms.

[eridani]

31. If the Senate bill passes, people with pre-existing conditions will still go bankrupt

The Senate bill reinstates such discrimination via the Ensign amendment.

[BzaDem]

33. Because apparently to you, 20-30% premium variation is the same as 1000% variation.

The Ensign amendment (as bad as it is) doesn't even come remotely close to reinstating such discrimination.

[eridani]

35. Insurance companies will use it to do whatever they damned well please

Just try protesting it and see where that gets you.

[Raineyb]

49. And if one can't afford the 20-30% it may as well be 1000%

If everyone is forced to buy insurance why the hell should they be allowed to charge anyone more for any reason? They've got the numbers to make up the difference?

[MadHound]

32. Yes, it is,

Teachers, along with many other such like middle class professions, get great benefits in order to make up for crappy wages. Millions of people will be hit hard.

You're right, we won't start over, but not because we can't start over, but because the cowardly Dems simply won't start over. Big difference.

Oh, and given the loopholes in the bill, don't worry, those with pre-existing conditions will still be going bankrupt and seek care in emergency rooms. Either that or they'll go bankrupt paying outrageous premiums, just like the rest of us will.

Kill the bill

[Skidmore]

38. Please explain how it will ruin you.

Right now people are suffering, dying, and being ruined in the thousands. How will it ruin you. Do you have health insurance? Do you receive medical care? Millions have neither coverage or access to care. We try to get something that supports the most people. And when I hear statements like yours, what comes to mind is that there goes that mind set of "I got mine."

[MadHound]

41. OK, here it is

As a teacher, I get pretty good insurance benefits. This is a stab at making up for the crappy wages that teachers get. If this bill goes through, two things will happen. First, my rates will go up as the excise tax will be passed on to myself, the end user. On my salary paying another thousand dollars or more will be a huge hit on my bottom line. This same situation will be faced by millions of other people all across this country. Instead of balancing the health care budget on the backs of the middle and working class, why not simply tax the rich? Is that too much to ask for, or are you one of those who want to protect the ill gotten gains of the rich in this country?

Furthermore, under the Senate bill we will be handing a mandated monopoly over to the insurance industry with no effective check in place to keep prices low (no strong public option, no public option at all). As in any monopoly, prices for insurance will rise and rise, by some estimates up to twenty percent of a family's income. I certainly can't afford that, can you?

It would be OK if this bill did support the most people, but the fact of the matter is that it will ruin most people financially. What, are you one of those who wants everybody at the same equal level of poverty and despair?

We can get a better bill if the White House and Congress will actually stand up and fight for it. But I simply can't support a bill that destroys the middle class. This is not relief and reform that will help all and actually do good. This is a bill that expedites the transfer of wealth upwards, from the poor, working and middle class straight to the top, making the rich richer.

How can you support that?

[KharmaTrain]

30. The Window Has Closed Shut...

To those who want to kill this bill, you may get your wish...and with it goes any chance for any reform for years, if not decades. This could become yet another "third rail" that politicians will talk about but never want to go anywhere near. And for millions who are uninsured or under insured you're SOL. I put a lot of the blame on the Senate who never was interested in reform and turned what should have been a logical and needed reform into a political game with millions of lives at stake.

Let's be very straight here...if this bill goes down, there won't be any "starting over"...at least for a long, long time. But seems like that suits many here just fine. So be it...as they say "the will of the people"...or more specific "the will of the people with the most money". The golden rule wins again.

[Skidmore]

36. Well said.

[sendero]

39. This bill is worse than nothing..

... so if those are the two choices, I'll take nothing.

[invictus]

42. +1

[LWolf]

43. You forgot one thing.

The part where you say, "In my opinion," instead of spouting your point of view as if it were fact.

:thumbsdown:

[groundloop]

44. This is the sad truth. However, a news item said House dems will refuse to pass Senate bill

therefore increasing the possibility that we get NOTHING. I'm plenty pissed off right now, during the campaign I had dreams of true universal healthcare. This is directly affecting my family because my wife has a health issue and we've fought United Healthcare and lost. The current system is so stacked against the consumer it's unbelievable. Some members of the house have talked about passing individual pieces of legislation and sending them to the senate - looks like that's our last hope.

It's been somewhat unbelievable watching the train wreck in the senate. I suppose nobody should have gotten too excited when Arlen Specter defected and gave us that 60th vote, because we never really had 60 votes. The rebuplican party is much better at this game, they manage to keep all their members pretty much in lock-step, at least until they get past the procedural votes. It's just a damned shame that a few selfish Democratic senators held the process hostage for so long and bucked the party on procedural votes for their own personal gain.

I believe President Obama's reelection may be in doubt for many of the reasons stated in the original post. That's scary as hell, just think what this country will be like with a Gingrich, Romney, or whatever right winger you care to name in power along with control of the house and senate. Our political system forces us to vote for one candidate out of two, and even though we don't agree with that candidate 100% we damned well better not loose our focus on the fact that we will be much much worse off when the right wingers regain control.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. The Bill is discriminatory and no one likes it

The only people I know who favor this so called reform are those whose money is tied to selling Insurance Products or politicians. Months of reading the same anti real reform, pro big Insurance posts from a handful of the same posters did not convince me to betray my own family to serve yours, and this repetition of the fear routine will not do that either. You keep serving your masters, know for that is what you must do. But I don't. So deal with it.
In addition, the whole thing is now in the hands of the House, not your Senate right wing allies. So surprise, the power is across the Hall now! Snowe will not save you! Joe is not there for you! Max is not even welcome in that Chamber, so good luck to you and Humana!

[slackmaster]

48. You're saying that just about everyone is in denial except for you