home

Weiner: Have An Up Or Down Vote On Public Option

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 02:49:52 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Via FDL:

< Friday Afternoon Open Thread | NY Gov. David Paterson Drops Re-Election Bid >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Weiner: Have An Up Or Down Vote On Public Option | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Sorry that would violate the Deal the WH (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Radix on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 05:05:15 PM EST
    made with hospital groups.

    if there is a hero (none / 0) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 02:52:22 PM EST
    in this its Weiner.

    Glenn Greenwald states objection to BO's PO pretty (none / 0) (#2)
    by jawbone on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 03:39:26 PM EST
    well.

    Makes clear BO is pushing a bill w/out the part the public really wants, strong public option (or government run program similar to Medicare). Sheesh.

    Joe S. points out the BO desired bill will be a giant giveaway to the for-profit private insurers. They are the parasites; we are the unwilling hosts.

    Mandates to buy from the parasites is using government muscle to force people to pay Corporate parasites.

    It's a Flee Tax. (none / 0) (#3)
    by Salo on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 04:34:46 PM EST


    Parent
    PO vs. POS from a Conservative POV (none / 0) (#4)
    by Pianobuff on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 04:37:33 PM EST
    If...and I mean if HCR passes, I'd rather see a PO than the POS that's out there.  The basket case of a plan that's out there is a schizophrenic mess.  Actually I'd rather see single payer than this BOS (Basket o' s***).

    Personally, I'm for the incremental approach which is unpopular here I know, but if it's between one thing or another what's out there is the worst of all worlds.  Just my opinion.

    havent we been trying (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 05:17:29 PM EST
    the incremental approach since, oh, Truman?


    Parent
    Still can't fix this? (none / 0) (#7)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 05:38:07 PM EST
    The more this debate goes, the more it becomes apparent--given all the free market bromides by conservatives--that health care should not be subject to full fledged market forces....

    Either go the full-on socialized medicine route, (and the more I hear from conservatvies how horrible a place Britain is, the more like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany it is, the more I think Britain is not such a bad place), or regulate the daylights out of insurers--making them into public utilities like the local power company.....

    Parent

    Urg (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by cawaltz on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 07:46:50 PM EST
    The power companies where I live are deregulated. Right now, they are increasing the rate something like 22%. Last year they got something like 17%. Lots of unhappy campers because everyone is pretty much stuck since they have no competition. The year we had warm climate we got an increase to make up for decreased usage. This year we face the increased rate due to increased demand. It's heads they win-tails we lose.

    I've seen my $100 electric bill double in the last couple years so whatever you do do not compare it to public utilities in my neck of the woods.

    Parent

    I also thought it was a poor compare (none / 0) (#11)
    by nycstray on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 08:44:51 PM EST
    I could rant for weeks about Con Ed . . . .

    Parent
    Utilities were deregulated in the (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by observed on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 08:50:40 PM EST
    90's. Isn't that the reason prices are out of control now?

    Parent
    Overton Window (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by beowulf on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 09:03:58 PM EST
     While Socialized medicine may or may not be the optimal solution-- lobbying for   VA Hospitals for All would certainly move the Overton Window leftward, suddenly Medicare for All is the moderate reform. :o)

    Parent
    Good luck with that (none / 0) (#14)
    by cawaltz on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 09:49:30 PM EST
    VA hospitals are means tested(they treat the poor and service connected, everyone else pays. I actually pay MORE to use the VA then I would to see a primary care doctor on the outside). They have exceptionally high staff turnover. Additionally, you don't get to choose your provider. The treatment you receive is a toss up based on said provider's expertise. They do authorize tons of tests though to figure out what's wrong with you. I doubt that helps a bottom line though.

    Parent
    Medicare For All (2.00 / 1) (#16)
    by norris morris on Sat Feb 27, 2010 at 12:45:44 AM EST
    I know everyone complains about how terrible the care is in England,Canada,etc., but we are the only country in the free world [and not the free world] that has no government system healthplan.

    We are about 37th in the world regarding the quality of our current healthcare.  Many are not insured, and we overtreat and overmedicate.Actually our mortality rate is worse by far than France,England, etc etc etc.

    Having lived in France for a time I can't speak highly enough about the level of overall medical care, the availability of affordable drugs, and a system that actually works. But then again they aren't spending 709 billion a yr for a war in Afghanistan which is the first thing Obama rushed to do.

    Our priorities are killing us and so are our leaders. Obama is no different in policies than Bush, and his lousy healthcare giveaway to corporations is merely bait and switch to shore up his corporatge devotion for his next election.

    He has already promised away the public option, along with generics and drug importation, and taken a giant assault on women's rights.

    And the fools on this blog who think there's a chance of a decent bill or a PO are kidding themselves. It seems too hard for most of us to face the fact that Obama is an inexperienced faker who couldn't articulate this plan for good reason.

    He didn't dare. There are still many factors that are entirely unknown in this bill and many of these kick in when he will no longer be president. Therefore they can be repealed. In fact the bill is so backloaded and dependent on
    questionable financial models, that no certainty exists of its ultimate success.

    Obama has basically insured his re-election by holding the insurance and drug monopolies to a deal whereby they have agreed not to run ads against his bill [meaning him]. This healthcare fiasco is to be Obama's legacy.

    This has been Healthcare Reform from hell.

    Parent

    In my experience, the everyone who complains about (none / 0) (#17)
    by jawbone on Sat Feb 27, 2010 at 11:12:59 AM EST
    British and Canadian health care is not living under those systems. That "everyone" is usually an MCMer* in thrall to Villager Think, in pay to the BHIP (Big Health Industry Players) or a Repub trying to bamboozle the American public.

    It's quite possible more people in Britain complain those Candadians do.  Thatcher did try to do a semi-Norquist on Britain's NHS, which caused ongoing problems. Labor promised to fix things, right? But maybe Blair got off track after getting his war on.

    But every Canadian I've ever talked to (an admittedly small sample) has been aghast at what we here have to contend with. One woman, transferred here by her Canadian company, had to have US insurance while here. She was very shaken when she had an eye problem on a Saturday which required immediate attention. She went to the ER, her insurance company didn't want to pay for what the ER opthalmologist said was absolutely necessary, that she could wait until Monday to see her regular doctor and get a referral, etc.

    The ER eye doc had to spend precious time, over several hours, arguing with incompetent insurance company clerks. Finally, he just did the procedure bcz, he said, if it were not done within a limited time, her eye could have been permanently damaged.  

    The woman told me she had applied to transfer back to Canada at the first possible opening.

    My neighbor's mother, a retiree in AZ, met a Canadian snowbird in AZ and married him, the two living in Britsh Colombia and AZ.  When he was diagnosed with cancer, they hightailed it to Canada for treatment.

    I expressed some surprise, as the MCM had been adamant that our care was better. She replied that she would have her treatment for anything serious done in Canada and had instructed her kids to get back to Canada as soon as practical if something happened while she was in AZ.  She said her husband's treatment was fanstastic, hassle free, no waits. Just CARE.

    Again, these two people and my other contacts are very small...but none have wanted to trade systems. They like not having to go bankrupt to pay for insurance and/or CARE.

    So, I agree with your call for a complete, comprehensive single payer system -- just a small quibble with "everyone."

    Medicare for All ... make the Improved Medicare for All...with a robust private option. NOW.

    (We're not going to get anything like that, are we? And here we thought we'd elected a Democratic president.... That news magazine cover of Obama as FDR sure looks ironic now. Even painful to comtemplate.)

    *MCMers -- Members of the Mainstream Corporate Media

    Parent

    It was Time magazine, 11/24/08 (none / 0) (#18)
    by jawbone on Sat Feb 27, 2010 at 11:16:05 AM EST
    Cover story; The New New Deal.

    Ha.... Ha.... Ha.... Sob....

    Parent

    Maybe you misunderstood me... (none / 0) (#8)
    by Pianobuff on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 07:40:24 PM EST
    I'm not arguing for an incremental approach on this blog, though that's my preference.  I'm just saying that given one choice or another (a lukewarm crony-capitalism bill vs. a more extreme socialized solution), that I would prefer a more extreme solution, whether it is full-on free market or socialized care.  Is that clearer?

    Parent
    Checking Patriot Act Votes - Weiner is Yes (none / 0) (#15)
    by seabos84 on Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 10:29:15 PM EST
    I've had little luck with tracking down these dam votes

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll067.xml

    'tween the house and senate web sites.

    Of course, when sold out media reports they seem to neglect including a URL to the vote cuz ... they can't find it either? They don't care, anyway? None of them really want us to know, anyway...

    WTF, anyway.

    The following vote was 315 - 97 and I think it was, ultimately, the patriot act house vote.

    grayson and weiner both voted yes.

    ugh. hope I'm wrong.

    rmm.

    Weiner: Have An Up Or Down Vote On Public Option | 17 comments (17 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment