Health Care Reform Gearing Up - Page 38

In case you haven't gotten your daily dose of white anger today, check out this link. It has a video of a bunch of teabaggers mocking a guy with Parkinson's.

You know, I'd be a lot more sympathetic to their arguments if they didn't get off on being such smug dickheads.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/arc..._03/022907.php

And I can't wait till Malkin exposes this guy as a fraud. I wonder if he has granite counter-tops or not.

God Damn! Just when I thought Snaieke couldn't get any dumber....


That's possibly one of the stupidest things I have ever seen on the internet. Breaking news!!! Obama to be impeached for stumping for congressional Democrats!

Compassionate conservatism at its finest.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/vir...nfirms_vi.html

Some interesting things coming out this week on the health care front. Apprently, Idaho has also filed suit and 37 other states (or 36, not sure if ID or VA were counted) are attempting this symbolic gesture.

Discuss.

The very first link in the comments had an answer that seems convincing to me but I don't understand the procedurals involved in this.

That being said, with Kucinich and Kildee both breaking from their "no" votes to a "yes" it seems like deem and pass shouldn't be needed anymore but who knows.

I also wouldn't believe anyone who is saying they'll vote no (like the Dem whip who just said he'd vote no) because at this point, I'd want to vote no and get a sweetener like LA, CA and NE also.

None of which mitigates the fact that the Republicans are in an uproar over a tactic they themselves went to court to defend.

Yeah, that's less a defence than a cry of "well when we did it we were right!".

They didn't use it on legislation this large nor did they use it in this fashion. This is being used as a way to avoid political attacks in the upcoming elections. Now, these people aren't afraid they're going to lose because they can't get healthcare passed, they're afraid that the people polled now who are against it are going to remember they passed it come November. They want the cheap political cover to say they didn't vote for it, which is quite pathetic.

I mean, as it stands now it's plausable* that the Republicans could control the Senate come November.. the folks in the house are shitting twinkies about reelection chances.

As to the bill itself, I'm not pleased with it at all. I personally would prefer it be taken back retooled and then voted on. As it stands now, you and I will be paying more for health care** due to this bill and the horse trading to get it passed.

* Boxer's seat is a toss up.

** that is if you have health insurance.. if not, my bad.

Well, maybe if the Republicans were actually interested in an honest debate on health care rather than simply shouting down anything the Democrats propose, we wouldn't be here right now.

I'm sorry -- is there a page limit in the rules? No? Then who gives a fuck.

And Drier used it to avoid having the GOP vote on an unpopular immigration issue. Oops.

Yep. I'm sure there'll be lots of people who say: "Well, my insurance company can't drop coverage when I get sick now, and my pre-existing conditions are covered. But those goddamn bastards in Washington didn't give an up-or-down vote on BOTH bills prior to passage, nor did they send the reconciliation bill to conference after its passage in one of chambers in our bi-cameral Congress.
Those. Mother. Fuckers.

ETA: And most of the people pissed off at the democrats for voting for it probably weren't voting for them in the fall anyway.

Yep. Which is unique to this situation. Never before in the history of Man has any politician wanted political cover to do something.

Which is completely different than now, where the insurance companies never ever raise rates, and send their customers lollipops every quarter. Just to thank them for their business.

I'm sorry, but this procedural wrangling is just a tempest in a teapot.

I love how Obama attackes the insurance companies and they will be the ones making the most money from the new bill. Sure having to remove annual and lifetime caps will hurt their profits, but adding 30 million new members will offset that by just a bit. And with pharma licking their lips at all the new Rx that come out of the increased coverage this bill does nothing to lower costs. Between the limited immediate improvements and the massive cost I really think this will resonate with voters come November. But this is America and we have no long-term memory so who the hell knows.

I actually like a lot of what's in the bill (the Senate bill is much, much better than the House bill), but the fact that I do not believe it will reduce costs or attack the core issues with what drives costs now makes it an overall failure.

And regardless of what happens this weekend this battle is far from over. Who knows how the Senate handles the reconciliation items and what amendments come out of this. The state legal battles could become very interesting as well. Even if it's just window dressing if massive lawsuits arise the courts could throw some curveballs that make it to the SC and create havoc with parts of the bill.

The best thing about all of this? It sure as hell makes November interesting. If you think the political battles are ugly now just wait.

There will be after the lawsuits - see VA, ID and 37\36 other states.

Polls show this health care bill is unpopular, THIS bill - not the idea of health care reform. Also, polling indicates the reason for independents and moderate conservatives are shying away from incumbents is due to the horse trading and dirty deals made to get this bill to where it is now. You can't lay a blanket "they weren't going to vote for them anyways" to this because the folks that are in peril are not only Democrats who are in conservative districts (thus, they won over the people who wouldn't NORMALLY vote for them) but those in hardened liberal districts and states as well (see Mass. election as well as the polling for Boxer etc...)


Insurance industry isn't the culprit in the high cost of medical care. They're not the reason it costs $25,000 for an emergency chopper ride or $55,000 for a broken femur that would only cost $1,500 in Peru or Brazil.

Due to Obama and his horse trading, the pharmaceutical industry will now have patents on drugs up to 12 years. That means there will be no generic prescriptions for those drugs for 12 years and they can charge monopoly rates for 12 years and do you know where brand name drugs fall under your insurance plan? at the highest level of co-pays, not to mention it will exhaust your prescription benefits limit all that much faster and you'll be paying out of pocket the rest of the year. Why do you think the pharma industry is pushing for this bill to pass?

If you're so concerned about the kowtowing to the pharmas and insurance giants then why have you and you ilk denounced EVERY NATIONALISED HEALTHCARE PLAN THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN, you goddamned infuriating SOB? You think the Dems WANTED to auction off compromises like this? Who was it that forced their hand?

That's just an outright lie. Republicans were excluded from the START and they had proposals they wanted to include and they were told to fuck off from the majority.

The bill that is being voted on now, happens to have been the bipartisan effort by Bachus in his committee, that some Republicans were on board for and what happened? Harry Reid et all decided to start making tweaks and adjustments and excluding input from Republicans just like they have done all year but only AFTER the bills he wanted to pass were rejected through party infighting. Just like the jobs bill that had bipartisan support that was yanked before voted on so Reid could push out a smaller bill that would not get Republican support except 1 guy (a good guy) Scott Brown. It's all political and it's all been bullshit.

Remember how Obama said he would look into tort reform? How has that progressed? The Democrats and their hubris thought they didn't need to include the Republicans and they could push this through on their own and get all the credit and seize more seats, it's backfiring.

The donation records to Democrats indicate they weren't forced into shit, they welcomed it with open arms.

Yeah, you're absolutely right, the Republicans have wanted to tackle healthcare for years! What fools we've all been! We all must have imagined those Republican senators and Congressmen shouting people down like children and talking about death panels!

Seriously, fuck off.

Again -- who gives a damn?

Polls also show that items in this bill -- THIS bill -- are popular.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that coverage of pre-existing conditions will be an electoral club for the GOP.

First, which polls? There's been a lot of confusion in the polls regarding HCR.
Second, you mean the Nelson and Landrieu bribes? You're right. If there was only someway to pass the Senate bill and then, somehow, pass ANOTHER bill to remove those? Hmmm...It would take some form of reconciliation between the two bills in respect to the federal budget?

Assuming you're correct in reading the tea leaves (I know, I know...), so you suggest, in order to help these struggling democrats, the house should kill the bill, demoralize the base, in an attempt to attract conservative voters?

That's a great strategy: piss off your base.


Again, assuming you're correct, insurance is not the only factor in the exploding cost of medical, but it is ONE of them. And one that should be addressed.

And I'm sure the voters will punish the democrats the same way they punished the GOP for forbidding medicare to import cheaper drugs from Canada when medicare part d was enacted.

Oh and the deal with Pharma happened in April of 2009, a few short months after Obama took office and before the health care reform became a prominent agenda item. It isn't like the "obstructionist" Republicans after refusing support forced this hand.

Maybe because the GOP's proposal's are completely ineffective in dealing with the issues in US Health Care. Tort reform does nothing to control costs or expand coverage. So why include it. Especially when....


Remember how Obama offered to put tort reform in the bill and asked what Cantor and the boys were prepared to offer up? Remember the silence?

The GOP was never, ever going to support any attempt at reform. So why put their bullshit ideas into the bill?

CBO Numbers are out. Here's the scoop:

How I read the back and forths in this thread (mainly cause I have Sneakysnake on ignore):

Arnie: With our utter annihilation imminent, our federal government has snapped into action. We go live now via satellite to the floor of the United States congress.
Speaker: Then it is unanimous, we are going to approve the bill to evacuate the town of Springfield in the great state of-
Congressman: Wait a second, I want to tack on a rider to that bill - $30 million of taxpayer money to support the perverted arts.
Speaker: All in favor of the amended Springfield-slash-pervert bill?
[entire congress boos]
Speaker: Bill defeated!
Kent Brockman: I've said it before and I'll say it again: democracy simply doesn't work.

Then I just want to drink myself into a coma.

The American people give a damn.

Items are popular yes and that is why it was suggested to take this bill back, pull it apart and come up with a compromise that would get GOP support. Because that is what the American people want, according to polls and according to election results in Mass.


I've seen a lot of polls over the last few months, none of them have been good with regard to this bill and a quick google search shows this one:

[source]

The cat's out of the bag. You can't take back the public perception of the Louisiana Purchase nor the Nebraska deal, not to mention the deals with Pharma, etc.. the only way to reconcile this is to kill the bill as it stands and retool it and guarantee GOP support, even a little .. Scott Brown would be a huge win due to his rise to fame.

The base wants single-payer. They're already pissed off and without the single-payer option who knows which way they will vote but to pull the bill might give them hope they'll go single payer. I don't see a correlation between pulling the bill and losing the base when they're already alienated over this bill.


It's a small piece of the puzzle and the Democrats are using all the tools in the shed to force this piece down. The reason for the rise in health care costs is due to the rise in medical costs, not the other way around. The rise in medical costs and the subsequent increase in insurance costs forced people to drop their insurance plans which shrank the financial pool forcing insurance companies to raise their rates even more. Now, the cost savings that Americans are going to benefit from is only the cost increase associated with the decreased insurance pool.. these are just a few percentage points however and all it will do is prevent insurance from rising for the short term, it won't stop the real culprit which is rising medical costs and with the added pool of people with insurance those costs will also continue to rise even further. Unfortunately, the Democrats used all the tools in the shed to get this passed and now what are they going to do to address the real problem? that's the question that is hovering around my head with regard to this bill. I'm for the bill, I'm for increasing that insurance pool by mandating insurance, I'm for lifetime caps being removed and forcing insurance companies to accept people who would otherwise be declined coverage but I'm not for using all the tools in the shed to get us there.

Polls probably also showed that desegregation was unpopular. That's why we have a representative republic instead of a straight democracy. Can you imagine anything getting done in this country if everyone had an actual say in the matter?

Kind of hard to exclude someone when they've made it clear they're not interested in being included.

Comparing the health care bill to desegregation. Wow. Scraping the bottom of the barrel already RICHARD?

This is what will happen. If the bill passes and the Democrats are voted out in droves, it will be seen as a mandate from the American people for the GOP to retract it once they're in charge. They're already talking about doing it and if they're voted in, that's the only way it will be seen.

Wasn't comparing the two at all. I was saying that asking a handful of people what they think about a piece of legislation doesn't really gauge whether it's a good piece of legislation or not.

So, it was that handful of people that said they wanted health care reform back when Obama & co. started this push (they only mention it in every single speech or press conference)... now they're against it and they should be dimissed?

That would be a refreshingly honest choice in the fall if/when HCR passes. Both parties will be running on essentially the same line: The GOP will repeal health care reform if they are in power. So, yes, if HCR passes and the GOP is voted into power, I'd agree that the country (for reasons I would find bewildering) does not want health care reform, or at least has been convinced it doesn't.

Mind you, if HCR falls apart again, an elected GOP Congress doesn't necessarily mean shit other than complete and utter frustration at the Democratic party to get anything done. Neither does expected Dem losses that does not drastically change the balance of power, stemming from both the unsustainably large advantage they currently hold and general disappointment from both sides of the political spectrum.

Um, yes, a handful of people wanted health care reform.

I'm going to need to work out more, because my eye muscles currently lack the strength for the rolling I feel is necessary right now.

First of all, I doubt Americans really give a shit about bipartisanship. They want results, and this bill -- THIS bill -- fixes problems with health insurance.

Second, I wouldn't point to Mass as a bellwether of anything. Once Coakley insulted the Red Sox, it was over.

Before I hovered over the link, I just knew you were referencing Rasmussen. And I was right. Sorry pal -- Rasmussen's been an outlier during this whole process and their opinion polling skews way to the right.

You keep yammering on about getting GOP support for a bill. There is now way that the GOP will support any attempt at reform because 1) it would give the democratic party help in elections, and 2) they don't see the need for reform in any meaningful way. To say nothing of the fact that this bill -- THIS bill -- incorporates several GOP ideas in it.

There is no compromise with the GOP on this issue, or really, any issue. McConnell has made that clear. The GOP will not support anything that could help the democratic party. It's just that fucking simple.


Yes they do. But they also realize that this bill -- THIS bill -- while imperfect, accomplishes many good things. So they're pushing for it.

Seriously, HCR was dead in January. Passing the Senate bill and fixing it was a non-starter after the Mass Special election. Do you think the House Democratic caucus would push this through WITHOUT significant pushing from the base? Do you honestly believe they grew a set of balls? Please...

Then quit reading Hotair and Powerline and check out some left-leaning blogs.
You know, actually DO some research before you talk out of your ass.



This last paragraph is just a nonsensical circular argument.

You don't think there's a correlation between the results of this type of poll and the fact that close to 50% of the population didn't vote for Obama in the first place? If the numbers were at least in the 60s then it might mean something.

I don't like this bill at all (I think it's a wasted opportunity and does t go nearly far enough) but at the end of the day those CBO numbers don't lie.

No, they're really against THIS bill.

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php


This bill came from GOP idea's, that's why they're in there and they lost GOP votes and almost Bachus's vote when they started tweaking it from the original version that came out of committee.

They didn't grow a set of balls they just think Obama will be able to save them. They're pushing ahead and polling is still down, we'll see if it rebounds if this passes. It's a long way to go between now and November.

Also, I don't read too many liberal blogs.. I don't want to have to get on high blood pressure medication

When you get to the nitty gritty of the polls, you see that it's the independents that are most against it and they're the folks that Obama won over. They're the ones that put Scott Brown in the Senate and they're the ones that decide elections. The base voters are the base voters. Liberals favor Obama and anything he does, Republicans are against him (or vise versa for Bush) but the independents \ moderates are the ones that really matter.

The CBO numbers aren't that different from when they rated the bill in the Senate. Like I said, I like the bill.. I just don't like the corruption involved with it. It's a good start but unfortunately, they've used almost all their resources to get this passed and now when it comes time to get to the real problems... they're all outta carrots and the stick is gonna be very short.

How many of those who are opposed to the bill don't like it because it doesn't do enough? That would seem to be a de facto yes if the bill gets passed.

Support for the reform the Democrats were advocating started out +5% to +9% last year. Once the actual bills were out and people had a chance to see the cost, the taxes, the deals, etc., opposition for the Democrats' health care plan(s) has climbed 20 points while support has fallen roughly 10 points. Opposition has been greater than support by double digits for most of the past 6 months. You can check out the polls for the last year or so here. These are not popular bills. If they were, the Democrats would be pounding the drum of how much Americans want these bills to pass.

Parts of the different bills are incredibly popular and would get a great deal of bipartisan support, or at least enough to overcome Republican opposition, if passed in separate, smaller bills. Taken as a whole, moderates and conservatives don't like the huge comprehensive bills being proposed. The Democrats may have even garnered a lot more support for their comprehensive bills if the economy weren't in the toilet right now. Reform is clearly needed and the bills contain a lot of those reforms. But I think there is the perception that this is the wrong time to be focusing so much energy on a comprehensive health care bill. There is a legitimate concern that the new taxes, heavy borrowing, and unpredictability of how businesses would react could very well have a negative effect on the already tanking economy. With unemployment hovering near double digits, the focus should be on job creation right now.

I think the Democrats should try to pass a few of the popular reforms (like the ones regarding pre existing conditions) right now. Then once we are out of the recession and closer to "full" employment, try it again with a comprehensive bill that covers the rest. I think the Democrats would find a much more supportive public, even when it comes to something like a public option once they have more confidence in the economy. A more supportive public increases the likelihood of peeling off some cross-over Republican votes (Collins, Snowe, Brown) while keeping moderate and conservative Democrats on board.

I still say a good portion of opposition is directly attributable to the misinformation being spewed by its opponents. Death panels, anyone?

Of course, anyone who gets their information from Sarah Palin's Facebook page probably wasn't on board with reform to begin with.

And with the staggering number of televised speeches, interviews, press conferences, and town hall meetings on health care reform we've seen from the president over the last year, it's not like he hasn't had every opportunity to present his side of things directly to the people. To his credit, he has addressed his opponents' arguments every chance he gets. But for all of Obama's eloquence and persuasive abilities, a majority don't seem to be buying what he's selling. At this point, it's pretty obvious that the problem is with the product, not the salesman.

you're greatly overestimating the masses.

If I may stay in your analogy I as an outsider would argue by perception that it is the market itself that is the problem. But then again I am only watching from the other side of the world.

Of course, you can't do this. The reason why has been explained ad nauseum, but I'll try again. If you outlaw discrimination against pre-existing conditions, you MUST have an individual mandate. If you don't, what's to stop me from not carrying insurance until I get sick, then calling up Blue Cross and getting onboard? Nothing. Now, if you have an individual mandate, you have to have the subsidies (for obvious reasons). You can't pass this thing piecemeal, and the Republicans know this, making their call for incremental changes completely disingenuous.

I'm willing to risk looking hilariously wrong here, but support for the bill / general Obama approval will rise markedly after passage. People like to see shit get done. I think a significant part of the hesitancy right now is too much exposure to the "sausage factory" for too long.

There are certainly some people with intractable reservations, and others buying into the Republican noise machine, but I think many are just throwing up their hands at all the nonsense in general.

That makes sense and I can see how one action requires the others. I still contend that an individual mandate as presented in the Senate Bill is unconstitutional under the Takings Clause. But that was already debated 4 or 5 pages ago.

I've heard you. I've understood you. You, apparently, do not understand what I am saying.

This bill -- THIS bill -- is unpopular. But, if you exclude Rasmussen, not as unpopular as you'd suspect, and the numbers are trending up, as your graph shows.

HOWEVER, the I-N-D-I-V-I-D-U-A-L portions of the bill are quite popular.
Check it out....

So it seems to be a case of people not having any idea what's in the damn bill. As I wrote before, when Auntie's pre-existing conditions are covered, no one's going to give a damn about the process.

Read what McConnell has said. There is no way any member of the GOP would vote for anything that would remotely help the democratic party. Obviously, successful HCR would help the democrats, which is why no one in the GOP will vote for it.

If you don't believe me, look at the pattern of this Congress: mindless, knee-jerk obstructionism. The GOP forces cloture votes on everything -- even shit they end up voting for.

There is no way in hell anyone in the GOP would vote for this bill. At all. You can't be this naive.

Then maybe you shouldn't discuss what the "base" is saying.

There are two ways of looking at the disparity. One is that people are opposing it without knowing what's in it. The other is that individual, cherry-picked provisions are popular. But when you bundle it into a bill with new taxes, new spending, and special deals to buy support of certain lawmakers, the public is opposed to the whole package.

Exactly.

The special deals are being removed via reconciliation. And as Matt M pointed out, the other items that aren't as popular -- the individual mandate for one -- have to be in there for the good stuff to function properly and for the bill to not increase the deficit. Unfortunately, the days of unfunded health care spending ended with Medicare Part D.

And from what I've seen regarding this question, it's mostly people opposing it without knowing what's in it.

Thank God we're a representative republic, and not some clusterfuck direct democracy where the will of the people can't pull the head of the people out of the ass of the people.

I don't give a good god damn what the American people think. Nobody voted for the American people. The American people voted for a Democrat running on the pledge to reform the Healthcare system. No mulligans!

"But you wouldn't be saying this if there was overwhelming public support for the legislation!"

Not in this instance, no, but the underlying sentiment would remain strong. The American people were pretty gung-ho about invading Iraq, and I said the American people were full of shit then, too.

Obviously the American people aren't the ones voting on health care reform. But they elected certain representatives who have to answer to them every 2 or 6 years. A lot of Blue Dogs, moderates, and pro-life Democratic Reps (like my Democratic Rep, who I have voted for multiple times) did not run on a pledge to reform the health care system. They ran on issues that appeal to the voters in their districts. That's how they get elected. If they seen numbers in their district that show widespread opposition to a particular bill, they need to weigh the apparent will of their constituents against their own personal policy preferences, assuming they differ. Of course, a lot of the Democrats in question do oppose enough of the different health care bills to vote against them. And we're talking about politicians here. Most of them wouldn't have the personal courage to cast a vote like this knowing it will probably mean they'll be tossed out this November. But I respect those who will cast a vote they believe in knowing it might cost them their jobs.

You didn't even click the link did you?

Removing Rasmussen doesn't matter. PEW, PPP, CNN and almost every single other poll is showing strong opposition to the bill.

Your laughable link? to "health care for America now"? Yeah.. that's totally unbiased.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/24...turf-campaign/

In case you don't believe Michelle Malkin.... a quick DNS lookup shows....

[source]