home

Holy Joe! Lieberman Open To Medicare Buy-In

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:24:04 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

How about that?

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) is a must have vote. He just gave his Democratic colleagues some breathing room. Lieberman said he's open to both the Medicare buy-in idea, and a separate proposal to extend the private system that insures federal employees to individuals and small businesses.

Who'da thunk it?

Speaking for me only

< President Snowe Says No To Medicare Buy-In | Leaving the Cult? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Holy Joe! Lieberman Open To Medicare Buy-In | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I'm thinking... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:20:38 PM EST
    maybe a check from the ins. co. lobby bounced or something.

    Rule #1 (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by trillian on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:04:14 PM EST
    Anything Joe is "for" will turn out to be a bad deal for the rest of us.

    That's my instinct too. (none / 0) (#22)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:18:29 PM EST
    My first response to this post was basically that if Lieberman is supporting this, then there must be some sort of significant betrayal of the best interests of this country that would yield something really great for the private insurers.

    We shall see.

    Parent

    Yup - along the lines of (none / 0) (#23)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:24:49 PM EST
    Privatization of Medicare - the Lieberman Amendment

    Why should Stupac have all the fun?

    Parent

    Hmm, maybe this will fall into place after all (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:30:08 PM EST


    Conrad isn't (none / 0) (#2)
    by magster on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:32:58 PM EST
    mcjoan made a good point that Conrad's opposition might be based on the buy-in's potential to scrap Conrad's proposed entitlement reform commission and game of chicken with Pelosi.  

    If scrapping the commission is an upshot of trading away the PO for this buy-in proposal, that would probably get the progressive caucus to go-along.

    Kind of stunning that the progressives have to factor in these kinds of threats to core Democratic principles and existing programs from within its own party...

    Opt Out (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:34:27 PM EST


    Parent
    ?? I don't know what you mean.... (none / 0) (#4)
    by magster on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:39:35 PM EST


    Parent
    If ND wants to not participate (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:50:15 PM EST
    in Medicare buy-in, that could potentially be allowed.

    Parent
    Hmmm.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by magster on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:52:29 PM EST
    Is that an option under this new proposal?

    Parent
    Yup - Opt out is the best bet (none / 0) (#10)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:01:28 PM EST
    Apparently the Dems have no leverage over these guys at all. Until they are ready to withhold all support and say 'fine, we are ready to let your seats go Republican if you don't play ball', there is no amount of head-cracking that can be done by leadership.

    I come that conclusion reluctantly after months of wishing for a stronger majority leader and POTUS.

    Parent

    Lieberman (none / 0) (#5)
    by lilburro on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:50:06 PM EST
    is a dolt.

    Why is this so much better than the PO to him?

    Probably because (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:39:21 PM EST
    as people keep pointing out, the 55-64 demo is the second highest-risk, and therefore expensive, group.    The ins. cos. probably don't mind losing that group, or a portion of it, if they can get their billing cycles around those healthy 20-somethings an actual PO would dip into.

    Parent
    Exactly, gyrfalcon (none / 0) (#26)
    by christinep on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 06:29:58 PM EST


    Parent
    heck, i'll take it. (none / 0) (#29)
    by coigue on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:38:48 PM EST


    Parent
    Smart. (none / 0) (#30)
    by lilburro on Wed Dec 09, 2009 at 12:41:32 AM EST
    Imagine though where the House stands with this bill.  PO stripped away...but Medicare for All remains.  Progressives can say why not extend it?  Not just 55...say 40.  In terms of camel's nose, I think sliding the age of eligibility for Medicare down could be as effective.  Cos when the members of the fledgling AAYP (American Association of Young Persons) realize only their parents get to take advantage of the plan...ok, not a real org yet...but in reality, pushing the age down only leads to obvious absurdity.  Are you REALLY excluding the healthiest people in the country?  If your ideology is "gov't can't do anything right" or "gov't doesn't do enough" here is where you meet.

    Honestly AAYP is my obsession of the day.  Young people are a huge bracket, and the government never caters to them.  Why not, esp. why not in healthcare?  Why not get value from your tax contributions NOW and not fear going to the doctor ( a fear I hold).  Etc.  What Obama voters coulda been...and that includes lazy old me.

    Parent

    lord, don't ask (none / 0) (#8)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:54:08 PM EST
    he might explain, and then I would have to shoot out my eardrums

    Parent
    He said that the bill with the PO was (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:13:37 PM EST
    "unnatural" which I thought was trully weird.

    Like there is some established "natural order" of healthcare insurance or something.

    More and more I think the guy is something of a loon.

    Parent

    Lieberman himself once (none / 0) (#25)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 03:44:27 PM EST
    proposed this idea years ago, I think I just heard Paul Begala say?

    Parent
    When looking for motivations, (none / 0) (#9)
    by KeysDan on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:56:18 PM EST
    look to what his self-interests might be. My guess, is that the T.V ads taken out against him have cracked his shaving mirror, and the Medicare idea doesn't have the word public option in it. Hence, a clean shave for him.  But who, at this point,  really cares as long as he votes right.

    Parent
    Come On (none / 0) (#16)
    by pluege on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:26:34 PM EST
    LIEberamn has been clear as a bell:

    he
    is
    protecting
    private
    insurance
    company
    profits

    Why wouldn't he be for these proposals - they mean more business for private insurance companies?
    LIEberman is against the Public Option because

    the PO
    competes
    with
    private
    insurance
    companies

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:07:58 PM EST
    knowing how Lieberman is and how TPM has been at tlimes, I will wait and see.

    "It's a trap!" (none / 0) (#12)
    by kmblue on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:09:41 PM EST
    I'm quoting one of the many "Star Wars" movies.
    I'm 55, so trying not to get my hopes up--especially where Holy Joe is concerned.

    The thing about Joe is that he doesn't (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by andgarden on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:11:03 PM EST
    actually care about policy. He just cares about being important. So let's see if he has a more acceptable pound of flesh.

    Parent
    choose words more carefully please (none / 0) (#27)
    by noholib on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:29:52 PM EST
    Hey come on andgarden, do you really need to resort to the rhetoric of "pound of flesh" when referring to Lieberman?  Keep it clean, buddy-- no more allusions to Merchant of Venice please. I don't like many of the positions he's taken, but he doesn't need to be compared to Shylock.

    Parent
    MOT here (none / 0) (#28)
    by andgarden on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:51:49 PM EST
    It's not a close analogy, anyway.

    Parent
    He's open but (none / 0) (#14)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:19:03 PM EST
    President Snowe is not.

    What ever happend to reconciliation? (none / 0) (#17)
    by magster on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:33:51 PM EST
    Getting agreement on 60 votes out of 62 Senators is impossible.

    Using reconcilliation (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:51:53 PM EST
    would eliminate the "this is the best that we can do" excuse for why this so called reform is better for the insurance industry and pharma than for real people. Thus, no reconciliation.

    Parent
    It'a all about ego (none / 0) (#18)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 02:40:38 PM EST
    I think Joe found himself out on a limb with his voters and this gives him a way of backing down without looking as foolish as he really is.

    Now he's relevant again! Mr. DeMille, Joe is ready for his close up again.

    Holy Joe! Lieberman Open To Medicare Buy-In | 30 comments (30 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment