Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiObama's Health Care Struggle -- Waterloo or Water Down?
Push
finally came to shove in Washington this week as the battle for health
care escalated from scattered sniper fire into all-out combat. If it
all seems to be getting more and more confusing, join the club. It's
hard to see what's happening through all the gunsmoke.
The Republicans have more than health care reform in their bombsights
-- they want a loss for Obama so crushing it will bring the
administration to its knees and restore GOP control of Congress after
next year's elections. In the words of Republican Senator Jim DeMint,
"If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will
break him."
The "Waterloo" of DeMint's metaphor, of course, is not the 1974 ABBA
hit but the battle in 1815 that ended Napoleon Bonaparte's rule as
Emperor of France -- a humiliating defeat and a turning point in
European history. Right-wingers like Glenn Beck see Obama as Napoleon
incarnate, a popular emperor who must be stopped.
Here's what Beck said on his television show Monday, July 20: "I'm
telling you, this guy is dangerous. He's never lost before. He won't
understand... like, 'Who are you to question me?' I mean, this guy is
practically an imperial President now. When he starts to lose and
people start to question him and push him back against the wall, he's
not gonna know how to react."
The Republican strategy is almost identical to the way they turned
health care into Waterloo for Bill and Hillary Clinton in 1993. Back
then, one of their chief propagandists, William Kristol, urged his
party to block any health care plan for fear that Democrats would be
seen as "the generous protector of middle class interests." Now he's
telling the GOP to "go for the kill... throw the kitchen sink... drive
a stake through its heart... We need to start over."
So in lockstep are the Republicans that when strategist Alex
Castellanos issued a memo outlining their battle plan, party chairman
Michael Steele parroted large sections of it word for word in a speech
at Washington's National Press Club. Asked a health care-related
question that took him off script, Steele replied, "I don't do policy."
As the Republicans fired away, big business stepped up the attack, too,
their lobbying and advertising guns blazing. The Chamber of Commerce,
for one, announced a major campaign of rallies and print and Internet
ads to crush the White House plan for a competitive public option
allowing consumers to choose between a government plan and private
health insurance. In key states where members of Congress remain on the
fence, the airwaves are vibrating with television commercials aimed at
shifting hearts and minds away from any change that might threaten
profits.
President Obama rejected the Republicans' Waterloo metaphor and mounted
a massive media counteroffensive of his own. But the President has
already run into booby traps of his own making and minefields laid by
members of his own party, exacerbated when the Congressional Budget
Office reported that reform plans, instead of controlling costs, would
send the national debt further into the stratosphere.
Meanwhile, supporters who want to scrap the present system for
fundamental change are staring glumly though the fog of war at a
battlefield in total disarray. They fear that in the White House's
desire to get a bill -- any bill -- passed by Congress, it will have
been so compromised, so bent to favor the big interests, that it will
be less Waterloo than water down, a steady diluting of the change they had hoped for and that America needs.
The big drug companies are already so pleased with what they've been
promised that they've brought back Harry and Louise -- the make-believe
couple who starred in TV ads that helped torpedo the Clinton health
care plan -- but this time they're in favor of reform.
According to the Associated Press, the drug industry's trade group
PhRMA (the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America) and
the drug company Pfizer "reported spending more money than other health
care organizations on lobbying in the second quarter of this year" --
$6.2 million from PhRMA, $5.6 million from Pfizer.
"Including its latest report, PhRMA has now spent $13.1 million
lobbying so far this year. Pfizer has reported $11.7 million in
lobbying expenses for 2009."
This is part of the reason, as Alicia Mundy and Laura Meckler recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal,
that "the pharmaceuticals industry, which President Barack Obama
promised to 'take on' during his campaign, is winning most of what it
wants in the health-care overhaul."
Their story describes "a string of victories" plucked from the Senate
Finance Committee by drug company lobbyists, including no cost-cutting
steps, no cheaper drugs to be allowed across the border from Canada,
and no direct Federal government negotiations with the pharmaceutical
companies to lower Medicare drug prices.
And that's not all. The Senate Health Committee is giving the biotech
industry monopoly protection against competition from generic drugs for
12 years after they go on the market.
No wonder the cost of reform keeps going up and up and up. Could it be
that Harry and Louise are happier because, this time, they're in on the
deal?
75 Comments so far
Show AllWas I the only one who didn't know this????
From: www.blackagendareport.com
by Bruce Dixon
Their plan doesn't cover the uninsured till at least 2013.
2013 isn't "day one." It's not even after the midterm election. It's clear after the president's second term, if he gets one. Congress passed Medicare in 1965 and president Lyndon Johnson rolled out coverage for millions of seniors in eleven months, back in the days before they even had computers.
................
I thought they had it wrong...but did a google...and the info about the uninsured not being covered until 2013 was on several other sites. Is this possible????
Forget "Move-on", and let's move-out of the Democratic Party
and sit out the next election, and watch the Senator Dodds
in motion doing their own thing and getting clobbered in the
next election. We of the working classes have been screwed Royally by the Clinton Machine, and now it is Obama's turn to turn the screw on us, he has already endorsed Sen Dodd who lives of the Bankers and Insurance donations..
Dodd is now being protected by his home town newspaper, the
Hartford Courant who has removed by complicated means the comment section that was writing comments discrediting Dodd.
I won't sit out(i'll vote for whoever the greens and/or socialists prefer)but ur so right bout getting these dems out.maybe losing a few key seats will wake them up!
Health care should NOT be in the hands of the U.S Congress . Health care should be a local decision which it was before R.R. and his V.P. destroyed it . Some of the remnants of the facilities are still intact in some States and should be expanded with the stimulus money to include all citizens of the States including Seniors and Veterans . This would give the States control over their medical costs and increase the number of jobs . With the States Medicare , Medicaid , and Veterans care funds put in to these facilities along with fees charged by the State to the employed it would solve the employers health care problem making them less inclined to move out of the U.S. or the State . The medical providers should be under contract which would also control costs . The AMA and the insurers will be totally against such a plan but forward thinking patriotic State governments now have the right to set up similar situations thanks to Rep D.K. of Ohio .
Health care is merely another vehicle for transferring all the wealth of the society into the hands of 1/4 of 1%. When the money is all gone, so is the health care, just like middle class homeownership and 401(k)s. Poof! All gone. Richfilth animals don't want you to have ANY health care. In their world, the 55% of the proles who survive past the age of 10 (45% infant mortality) are supposed to be dead at 47 and glad to be out of Master's Hell World, where Master and his spawn live to 125. Full medical for Masters, e.g. cloned body parts, gene therapy, the works. YOU get nothing...that's how White America has always done business.
This is what melanin deficient White America chose when they chose Exclusion...refused to make an equal place for everyone at the table and now they and their grandchildren are doomed to squalor and degradation beyond the imaginations of most of readers here - and they did it to themselves with their own choices. Although they will kill you for saying it - just to prove you're wrong...
If you would like to help pressure Congress to pass single payer health care please join our voting bloc at:
www.votingbloc.org/Health_Bloc.php
What has "congress" done to earn my trust?
What is their record of accomplishment that qualifies them to run any aspect of my life?
This is a serious question.
And the serious answer is that the congress is YOU. You know, you've heard it before, "we the people" that's the government, that's congress.
The government constantly passes laws that affect your life. Like it or not, that's the system YOU live under.
Sorry phasor, Congress is not "we the people" but "we the corporations". We've been co-opted.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Co-opted? I'm confused.
I'm no expert in American history.
Wasn't it the American land owner elites that decided to revolt against the British crown and declare independence. Did they use populist rhetoric to covertly gain support from the populace.
Is it today the capital owner elites who believe they have a god given right to control the political course of America.
And that "we the people" has lost its power and democratic symbolism. Is that America today?
"And that's not all. The Senate Health Committee is giving the biotech industry monopoly protection against competition from generic drugs for 12 years after they go on the market.
No wonder the cost of reform keeps going up and up and up."
Shouldn't the developers of new drugs reap the rewards? Profit incentive leads to good medicine and health. Heresay here I realize, but true. What about artists who write songs, should their work be public domain? It's intellectual property. They made it, they own it.
The "cost of reform keeps going up..."? Yes! There is no Free Lunch! Whether private industry or government charges for it, there will be a cost. Jeez Moyers, how long have you been on this planet?
"Shouldn't the developers of new drugs reap the rewards? Profit incentive leads to good medicine and health. Heresay here I realize, but true. What about artists who write songs, should their work be public domain? It's intellectual property. They made it, they own it."
I'm afraid that's been tried already but guess who really gets to walk away with the rewards. It ain't the workers in the end but the top goons. Single payer healthcare would put the brakes on the middlemen top goons of Big Pharma and Big Insurance. As a true pro-lifer (not an anti-abortionist bible thumper) and a true patriot who believes in defending our nation (not one who believes in wars and corporate patriotism), I put health care for all before profiteering. Intellectual property is just a bullshit idea used to privatize and stifle creative thinking.
Love Payne. Great game.
So who will create effective life-saving drugs with no incentive?
Innovative and successful products should be put up for sale. People and corporations will profit. So what? Developers put in the effort and took the risk, and the consumer is willing to pay for the benefits.
I'm open to other ideas, but what's the plan? How does "Single payer" deliver medicine? It's a slogan until you can explain the mechanism for delivering results that is superior to good product = improved health = sales = profit.
And artists getting paid for their work? How is that stifling and why shouldn't their efforts be rewarded?
We can go down the "profit is evil" road, but the burden is on you to lay out the tried=and-failed collective route. If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always rely on the support of Paul. But why would Paul or Peter contribute anything useful when you their efforts are to be snatched away?
Might be workable, lay it out for us.
RedLA, hoping my reply is not misplaced.
Single payer is a health insurance plan that is run by a single entity, the government, just like Medicare.
Pharmaceutical companies, Doctors, hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers, etc. are and will remain for profit corporations developing drugs, providing care just as they do today.
Single payer is a much more cost efficient health insurance system than what we have today. Except for the U.S., every country in the G8 or even the G20 have a form of single payer with universal coverage.
This whole economic and healthcare mess starts out with the "wholesale volume sale good, quality production not important and not good for the economy" madness. See, the Gordon Gecko "greed is good" fits in to putting profits before principle first. If the goal is to pump up the sales and turnover all in the name of profiteering at all costs, a shoddy system is most likely what we're bound to be faced with. Pharmaceutical companies, Doctors, hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers, etc... can get back to doing quality production and care instead of falling into the trap of going desperate for profits. The more people go desperate on profits, the more all of us lose and very badly so in the end.
"Innovative and successful products should be put up for sale. People and corporations will profit. So what? Developers put in the effort and took the risk, and the consumer is willing to pay for the benefits."
Developers don't get paid much for their efforts. Most of the money from the consumers goes towards the bosses who do nothing but all the ordering around and bullshit presentation. I've seen it myself.
"How does "Single payer" deliver medicine? It's a slogan until you can explain the mechanism for delivering results that is superior to good product = improved health = sales = profit."
First of all, as maxpayne pointed out the goal is to eliminate the obstructionists who pretend to be middlemen. Big Insurance and Big Pharma are the ones blocking alternative practioners, good medicine and reasonable prices, and actual quality care. If the profit is supposed to deliver, then why are the healthcare services in this country even worse than they were 30 years ago as a result of putting profits before quality care. India may be doing fine at the moment but as soon as the profit run ideology takes over there, things will be just as bad there if not worse just like here.
"And artists getting paid for their work? How is that stifling and why shouldn't their efforts be rewarded?"
Look at the current system. Artists are not getting paid. Instead most of the pay goes towards royalty. Blaming P2P is a lame idea.
"We can go down the "profit is evil" road, but the burden is on you to lay out the tried=and-failed collective route. If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always rely on the support of Paul. But why would Paul or Peter contribute anything useful when you their efforts are to be snatched away?"
If you really think that Paul is gonna help us even though we robbed Peter just to pay Paul, you haven't been paying attention. Paul cannot be trusted anyway and who's really snatching away the efforts.
Bennett Miller
Shreveport, LA
Jeezums-peezums.
Obama is going to make Jimmy Carter look like a god. :O
Holes in History:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HizNRKUe3A
Bill/Michael -
You've report is non-arguable, now promote.
What actions can we take to move the needle back to a strong public option or single payer?
I propose the debate should be referred to as pro-patient care option vs. the pro-insurance company option.
Can you, and is it appropriate for you in your roles, to make a clarion call for the community on a specific date to raise the stakes for pro-patient care?
- Steven F.
"Pro patient" is good marketing. But the proposals on the table seem to be politicians allocating health care resources. How is this more efficient than consumers being in charge of their own care? Washington-run entities do not have a good track record.
"Washington-run entities do not have a good track record."
Since when has Big Insurance proven any better? Please explain.
I give an insurance company (BC/BS) money to cover me.
But I don't have to buy their plan. I can walk away.
Can I decide not to pay taxes for ineffectual govt care? Clearly no.
If Big Ins sucks, don't buy it. Doesn't that provide more freedom than mandated govt care?
During the Bush years govt was a creepy intrusion. It should be! What happened?
That sure says what little you know about the way the corrupt insurance industries work.
"If Big Ins sucks, don't buy it. Doesn't that provide more freedom than mandated govt care?"
Clearly, you know nothing about single payer health care and are totally confusing it with mandatory care which is totally different. Single payer gives you choice whereas mandatory care doesn't. Stop spewing all that Big Insurance and Pharma propaganda around. Clearly, you're not benefitting from them but are making yourself look dumber than usual.
Bennett Miller
Shreveport, LA
This is one of the most intelligent proposals I've heard, so far. Thanks for posting it.
This is exactly why we must flood congress with calls, letters, emails, tweets... Support amendment HR676 to be included in health care reform. Sure I would like to cut HR3200; however I can't compete with the influence that the medical insurance has over congress. I do recognize a good bill when I read it.Call Congress tell them that you support 'Single payer' public option to be included in the Health Care Reform bill. Now is the time to be heard.
Capitol Switchboard 202-224-3121
Nancy Pelosi
202-225-4965
sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
I have to say I would prefer a job to a primary care physician.
The public will take the Pharma's ads and pitches, hook, line, and sinker. They love those drugs.
Personally, I never plan on taking drugs, unless absolutely necessary.
Prevention is the key. I'm talking Acupuncture and the such. There is no discussion here about CAM, or natural legitimate remedies, like Homeopathy.
The drug companies are sure to win, no matter what unless people change there idea of what health care is. This is illness care, not health care.
Homeopathy is a placebo, and no reliable, repeatable studies have ever shown differently...it is money wasted...
At the risk of sounding insufferably pedantic, I just want to call everybody's attention to the fact that our whole constitutional system was designed precisely to water down extreme solutions to problems and to put a brake on revolutionary impulses. There's always going to be some swings of the liberal/conservative pendulum, but the central tendency will be to come to rest in the middle.
So, since Obama isn't in fact an emperor, what's he going to do except to work with Congress whether he really likes the ultimate result or not? What are congress-people and senators from swing districts and states supposed to do but pay strict attention to the middle of the road and the next election cycle? And what are the congress-people and senators who are on the fence, and whose votes are needed -- NEEDED -- to get something passed, going to do except to use the enormous power they have in this situation to their own benefit and the benefit of their most important constituents? And just when do you all think greed is going to be wrung out of the system -- let alone human nature?
Let me be clear and say that I'm a dyed-in-the-wool liberal and would love to see a rational single payer plan, but I just don't see it in the cards any time soon. Demographics may ultimately work to overwhelm the system in favor of a single payer plan -- the tidal wave of baby-boomer voters gettin' old combined with the up-and-coming generally more liberal youth -- but even then I think it's a long shot.
P.S.
Seems to me the underlying theme (or meme?) in this discussion is a desire for revolution.
But even if the revolution happened, human nature would remain. I once heard Herbert Marcuse speak. He was one of the most important communist philosophers of the 20th century and Angela Davis's thesis advisor at UC San Diego. In response to a question about what he thought of the revolutions that had been informed and inspired by his works, he said, "I've come to the conclusion that until there's a fundamental change in human nature that no system of government will work and that, if such a change took place, then any system would work." I remember it clearly enough to quote it because it seemed so at odds with my understanding of his thought, which suggested that a change in the system WOULD change human nature.
I have medicare. I have a $800.00 allowance for physical therapy. I spent $350.00 to improve my "range of motion" in my neck. Then it occurred to me that giving up my allowance for other people with more important needs was the right thing to do. I feel much better
Did anybody take the time to watch the first half of Bill Moyers last night? Marcia Angell of PNHP was one of the guests. It is excellent. He started the program with much of what is written here in this article. Please take the 25 minutes to watch this and pass it on. It's a shame we can't seem to educate the Obamabots. I tried this morning. Put it on every health care article I could find on HuffPo, especially the Obama "hangout" articles where all the fans who looooove their Prez post:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07242009/watch.html
Thanks for the link. I watched it in full just now.
As I have stated on these threads before, my sister and her family are Canadians. They view the Canadian healthcare system as a national treasure. My sister has gotten better health care in Canada than I have been able to get in the U.S. even when I was an insured U.S. civil servant.
If we equate health insurance companies with tobacco companies, then we will be how harmful and immoral they are! The lobbyists, health insurance companies, and pharma should have nothing to do with crafting a health care bill.
The only right thing to do is to have single payer health care and if medical insurance companies want to offer add-on plans, fine, but they should never again be in control of our lives and health. Never again!
The last (and only) time there was a general strike in this country it led to the 8 hour day and the 5 day workweek. Now's the time for healthcare.
I suggest Sept 3&4.
#usstrike
In your analysis, you refer to traditional conservative versus liberal division. This diversification does not reflect ideological split within American society and it is not productive anymore, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henryk-a-kowalczyk/conservatives-liberals-an_b_170072.html .
Furthermore, as almost everyone in the debate, you focus on the game aspect of the process. You seem to be not concerned in understanding what the core of our problem is, and what our viable solutions might be.
The government proposes a big overhaul of the health insurance industry without even defining what the health insurance is.
We need to treat separately health maintenance plans, which should be optional, from the rudimentary lifelong health risk insurance, which should by mandatory.
Lastly, President Obama should present at least two alternative health reform proposals, so Americans could debate and select the better one.
There are plenty of details in the 1018-page document; however, the logically coherent concept behind them is missing. More, in my open letter to President Obama,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henryk-a-kowalczyk/the-health-care-bill-wher_b_242496.html .
My conclusions are not as important as my way of arriving with them. I outlined it in my one-minute video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfOR-MRPIG8 .
Let us have some debate here. Could you point to me flaws in my logic?
Henryk, you appear to be treating health care as a commodity. I'm wondering if you have read HR 676. From your statements on Huffingtonpost it would seem not. Clients would see the provider of their choice and the government would collect taxes to pay the fees and have no say in medical decisions. Independent studies have shown it to be the most rational cost efficient delivery of health care. Congress refuses to do a CBO cost study because it would shatter the illusion of insurance industry cost reform. And as you surely know, Congress does not represent the voters, it represents the corporations.
You favor the free market approach to medical care, but left out a big expense, including the obscene profits the insurers are making and the administrative costs of over a thousand different insurers paperwork requirements at both ends. This increases market driven health care costs by 30%.
The mission of corporations is to make as large a profit as possible and the mission of health care delivery is to make the population as healthy as possible. Those two goals are at odds with each other and in the case of the insurance industry, profit wins and health loses.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
There are some recent articles at PNHP and AfterDowningStreet that describe exactly *how* the Public Option has been watered down and *why* the version on the table now may fail to bring any relief to those who need health care now.
In a nutshell, much of the support for the Public Option concept is based on papers written by Jacob Hacker describing a Medicare Plus program which, according to him, could be successful if it would:
• Enroll 129 million enrollees (or 50 percent of the non-elderly);
• Have overhead costs equal to 3 percent of expenditures;
• Pay hospitals 26 percent less and doctors 17 percent less than the insurance industry (but these discounts would be offset to some degree by increases in payments to providers treating former Medicaid enrollees); and,
• Set its premiums 23 below those of the average insurance company.
But, the Public Option being discussed now does NOT satisfy those criteria, and could be caught in a Catch-22: Not able to attract patients unless they can offer a wide variety of doctors, and not able to sign on doctors unless they can offer a large number of patients.
This is important reading, and the authors clearly support a SINGLE PAYER solution.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/44739
http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2009/07/20/bait-and-switch-how-the-“public-option”-was-sold/
Do you remember how the Republicans staged a big Brewhaha during the recess last year? They received a lot of Free TV time for their so called stand.
Oh, I have a great idea. All the Senators and Congress that have signed on 676 or SINGLE PAYER, please stand up for us by staging a SIT-IN on Captiol Hill. Read testimony after testimony from us, the common folk about why we want SINGLE PAYER. Read testimony on how it works. Have two people on the Senate Floor every single day doing this. And for Congress (since you have more than 25 signers for SP, do a round robin and speak on the floor of Congress. C-Span will have to carry it. Other news outlets will carry parts and the MSM will have to cover bits....The main objective is that WE ARE HEARD.
One more thing, invite us, "We the people" and let us be heard as well.
Thank you,
Dawn
It's "brouhaha".
A brewhaha is a beer-induced brouhaha.
And Boehner loves his beer!
Do you remember how the Republicans staged a big Brewhaha during the recess last year? They received a lot of Free TV time for their so called stand.
Oh, I have a great idea. All the Senators and Congress that have signed on 676 or SINGLE PAYER, please stand up for us by staging a SIT-IN on Captiol Hill. Read testimony after testimony from us, the common folk about why we want SINGLE PAYER. Read testimony on how it works. Have two people on the Senate Floor every single day doing this. And for Congress (since you have more than 25 signers for SP, do a round robin and speak on the floor of Congress. C-Span will have to carry it. Other news outlets will carry parts and the MSM will have to cover bits....The main objective is that WE ARE HEARD.
One more thing, invite us, "We the people" and let us be heard as well.
Thank you,
Dawn
Excellent idea Dawn. It's just pathetic that even the original author of the bill John Conyers isn't even fighting to put it on the table. One can only help but wonder if JC is worthy of being trusted to fighting for the people anymore. I'd like to see him help Kucinich out some more for a change.
For our very survival, individually and as a nation, we must kill the health care profiteers, "insurers" and big PhRMA, and drive a stake through their black little hearts.
This sickening charade being played out in Washington D.C. is
another manifestation of corruption, and is in no way a serious attempt to "reform" health care. They are pretending there is a foundation on which to build a system - what? companies closing, or unable to afford to provide health care to workers? private insurance? There is no foundation to build on - it's already rubble.
The fact that so many in our government are without either backbones or ethics is a tragedy and a crime.
What's oozing through Congress under the guise of health care legislation must be stopped - and replaced by single payer.
Otherwise, this is an insurance company bailout - and the reinstatement of the Republican party to power.
See you all in Washington on Thursday (July 30th)
For our very survival, individually and as a nation, we must kill the health care profiteers, "insurers" and big PhRMA, and drive a stake through their black little hearts.
This sickening charade being played out in Washington D.C. is
another manifestation of corruption, and is in no way a serious attempt to "reform" health care. They are pretending there is a foundation on which to build a system - what? companies closing, or unable to afford to provide health care to workers? private insurance? There is no foundation to build on - it's already rubble.
The fact that so many in our government are without either backbones or ethics is a tragedy and a crime.
What's oozing through Congress under the guise of health care legislation must be stopped - and replaced by single payer.
Otherwise, this is an insurance company bailout - and the reinstatement of the Republican party to power.
See you all in Washington on Thursday (July 30th)
This is the best analysis I've seen of the health care debate yet. The reason nothing substantial will get done in terms of reform is that congress and administration are too wimpy. They're afraid of the drug and insurance and hospital industries. Obama is trying too hard to please them, and the GOP doesn't give a rat's ass about reform because they like the system the way it is -- in the hands of the Almighty Capitalists, left to the winds of the free market, where the system can roll the dice on our health. If the GOP cared at all, they would have accomplished change sometime in the past 10 years while they still had power. Now they just want to use health care, or the failure thereof, for their political take over. Anyone who can't see that is in denial.
The Congress isn't afraid of Big Pharma and the evil rat bastard insurance companies. Individual Congress members are taking millions of dollars in bribes from Big Pharma and the evil rat bastard insurance companies. The polite term for these bribes is "campaign contributions."
"The reason nothing substantial will get done in terms of reform is that congress and administration are too wimpy."
Not quite but close. They're not too wimpy to escalate war funding and pushing for more Wall $treet bailouts. They're also not too wimpy to stifle public opposition to corporatism and the Military Industrial Complex.
While these macho dogs growl and tug over their oversized porterhouses, the country, the three hundred million people, are left with a ticking bomb. To call this a national health care debate is too kind and is far from credible. The health of the American people and the fiscal well being of future generations are not even in the picture! The malfeasance of most congressional members in both houses, particularly, the leadership will, I pray, doom their reelection. I fear however, that the sociopaths will remain, since Americans are no longer able to appreciate their neighbors' plight, let alone understand; "there, but by the grace of God go I".
Sioux Rose
When one reads about the money spent by the insurance companies to buy advertising time and/or politicians, the same money that might have been used to save lives, added to the fact these for-profit behemoths are utterly callous in their placing profit before persons, can one feel other than contempt for them? I have already prepared myself for the possibility I might have to pay a fee (extortion) rather than be forced to purchase their "product." That our so-called "free" nation would force persons to buy these poliicies when evidence shows they are the "Swiss Cheeses" of contracts, filled with loopholes, makes my blood boil. If it's a matter of jail time or a fee versus direct extortion, I'm considering options A & B.
I think there will be widespread protest if anyone is forced to pay fixed fees. I certainly could not pay anything, so I will be one of these. Let them put us in jail. There is more access to health care by prisoners than for many people, which is not saying much.
Sioux, it's even scarier when you get to meet some of these people resigned to policies that they don't even know about but cheer simply because it's their man who's passing them. No wonder the pols feel "safe" from those of us on Main Street who are trying to bring economic justice. Our own brothers and sisters on Main Street have to get in our way. :(
Is it just me or did this article sound more like "the Republicans are blocking Obama's plan" again? While the Republicans are indeed creeps, forget them as they're in the minority and the Democrats have a filibuster proof majority that they cannot invent excuses for failure. I appreciate the author for bringing up the drug companies towards the end of the article but why aren't they discussing the real culprits, the Democrats themselves and most of all the Obamabots out there? I suggest they read today's article "Health Care Hypocrisy by Ralph Nader" to get the real complete scoop.
P.S.: After I was physically assaulted today by another unknown Obamabot for ruining my picnic day while trying to discuss single payer with someone else who was rallying for Obama's plan but actually knew little about it and nothing on single payer, I HATE THE OBAMABOTS EVEN MORE AND STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE EVEN MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE REPUBLICANS ! See my comment under that article for details and no, I won't stop questioning Obama's policies no matter what !
Also, thanks Jerry, Henry8, Ted, pjd, and everyone else here for understanding the issue even better. If only more people were tolerant and understanding of healthcare like you all would there not be such desperate defending of corporate crooks.
Sioux Rose
JENNIFER: It's dangerous to say that the OBAMA fans are more dangerous than Republicans. For one thing, the real danger is an under-informed or deceived public. Even those long programmed can wake up if truth hits them like a lightning flash, and the fact is, the truth is NOT, for the most part, getting out there. In some respects the attitude of "who's worse" causes divisiveness, whereas a more enlightened route, like that introduced by the wise Kathy O Dat, instead offers a unique strategy based on unifying enough justifiably disgruntled sorts to bring a new political party into momentum. God-dess knows it is needed! And there's room for Nader in Main St, too. Right Ms. Be for Kids?
I just tried to post an overview of my recent dental purgatory, but apparently hit a censor button as the material did not upload to this site, and it got erased. My time is too precious for do-overs. Sorry, team... maybe I'll share it another time.
Sioux Rose, thanks for your nice words and support for the Main Street Party. It's far more popular on Main street than on CommonDreams. I talked with a small businessman who is interested. He didn't even flinch over the $10 living minimum wage. He's more upset over the regulations and taxes strangling his business. I've also talked with a small farmer who loves the idea. I'm not quite sure why it's not catching fire among the left. Maybe some of them could explain that. If I said it's because it leaves out social issues, I'd just be guessing.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
I'm usually able to keep in mind that both fans are the result of a poorly informed public. I think I'm still reeling from the shocking assault earlier today. I didn't even tell any of them that I voted for Nader. All I did was discuss an issue and yet some other supporter of Obama's plans gave me the unexpected. He was pulled back from further hitting me from his supporters so my apologies for saying they're all as bad. I think I'll get be back to normal in a few days. I'm sorry I'm just not quite myself today. :(
You were assaulted and battered. There were numerous witnesses. You should press charges.
Better nothing than this bill.
Hopefully, we can keep the Obamacare bills from ever getting to a vote, and replaced with HR676.
If we end up being on the same side as the loony-right, so be it.
Sorry to say it, but this sounds very much like just another call to support Obama's "lesser evil" in order to avoid a Republican victory. The obvious question is whether the U.S. public will be conned again so soon after its previous betrayal. The historical record isn't encouraging.
It was revolting to see Obama yesterday spend so much time on inviting that professor for a beer in the White House, the racist cop, etc. The loser is displaying all signs of a one-termer. No guts, no focus, plenty of dishonesty and backstabbing of his voters.
This whole health care farce is designed to fool the idiots on Democratic Underground into believing that "at least Obama tried". Democrats have no intention of changing anything, except make it worse for labor, elderly and minorities.
Greed is what dictates all rules in America. Greed is good. The hell with health care and everything else.
You said it! The degree of corruption in national politics has reached the level of the hopeless. Obama, The Great Lying, Timid, Gutless Wonder who probably spends most of his time wondering how he's going to be reelected.
Go on, America, bring back the Republicans. It's what you wanted all along anyway. You'd all be better off blowing your brains out!
So far, he's been a complete bust on everything. Absolutely everything.
As for the Cambridge incident, I think its the professor and now, sadly, Obama, who are the racists.
His hot-headed friend flew into a rage and the cops acted accordingly.
I'm still taken aback that Obama actually called the cops stupid. He had the question in advance. Very curious. Thought he was more intelligent and savvy than that.
Now both he and his friend look like, well ...racists (and stupid). Obama HAD to say something, or else the 9-11 tapes would be played to the public--then they'd REALLY look bad.
Looks like Obama is on the fast track to being a one-termer.
Yup, don't dare talk back to a cop - Even inside your own home!
Anyone who doesn't see the role of race in this is willingly blind or living in some kind of la-la-land. If he were white, the cop would have been as polite as can be. I know; I've seen it.
PJD, I'm with you for two reasons. One, it is time to re-remember not just the Constitution but the Magna Carta. A man/woman's home is their castle. If you aren't there with a warrant, you better watch how you're talking to the homeowner. PERIOD.
The second is once you've been subject to profiling you are never the same person. Long story cut short. I'm the mother of teenagers. I'm the teacher of teenagers, I'm a "townie" mom (lots of teens afterschool in rural school district). I was driving back home with my two teen boys in the front seat of our family sedan on a Friday night. We were stopped for a NON offense. When? As the State trooper passed us on the divided federal highway and saw the three of us sitting in the front seat. The alleged offense? Not dimming our brights. In Wisconsin, you don't have to dim your brights on a divided highway for the oncoming traffic. When he turned the flashers on it was after he passed us and had seen into our interior.
We pulled over immediately. The officer then approached us from the passenger side. This segment of highway is very well designed, with wide, generous, level shoulders that I had pulled over for, well onto the shoulder. He snuck up on the passenger side instead of approaching me, the driver, on the driver side. He asked for registration and license. As I was handing them towards him, past my passengers, he cracked on keeping our hands in sight, which they very well were. We were completely lawfully driving, belted and deporting ourselves. He then stated he stopped us for not dimming, to which I responded, "on a divided highway?" Then he went into some song and dance about courtesy and 500 ft. Once he saw that it was MOM and two sons with a large screen TV in the back, he saw that his profiling for 3 teens in a front seat had broken down. He couldn't get rid of us fast enough then,'letting us go' with a "warning" for a non-existent offense.
I was pretty PO'd about being stopped for nothing, especially when I realized that the things some of my students had complained about were probably true, that they had in fact on some occasions, been stopped for nothing. Other than fitting profiles. Profiles the police say they DONT do.
In the prior years, when our "good kid" sorts complained about this,we teachers would respond,"for nothing? uh..." figuring they're learning to drive , they probably didn't realize.... BUT when I share about my incident at a community event, it turned out that 6 of 8 of us adults who accompany teen drivers had almost the same story. Adult out of sight in vehicle, teens visible, driving lawfully, Friday or Saturday night, after dark, pulled over,some offense that did not occur cited, NOT issued ticket, citation, warning once adult presence was known. Sometimes, the cop to excuse/justify the stop would throw in a prior criminal complaint profile that was so outdated as to not just be closing the barn door after the horse had escaped, but after the nag had been dispatched swayback to the knacker and boiled down to glue.
As mad as this incident made me, it taught me some much needed lessons. Don't discount someone because of their age or I'm just as guilty as "profiling"(though I'm not violating the Constitution when I do it)and if they'll do it to 'good kids' you know damn well they'll pick on the not as fortunate. We wrote an editorial to the local paper to inform both teens and their parents and local politicos we intend to hold all patrollers of our local highways accountable for this. Jurisdiction of this section of federal highway is patrolled by 2 county sheriffs departments (highway is boundary) State patrol and the 2 city police departments this segment is between.
I haven't heard as many complaints lately as when we first published the editorial 6 months ago, but we'll see once school starts again. Oh, and for those of you following the Crivitz, WI flag/free speech stories, we're about 1 1/2 hours from there.
I guess the point I'm making is rural or city, black or white, old or young, fascism isn't pretty. And I don't believe the cop in the Gates story because of what I've seen: Police that have been "sensitized" in fact PROFILING. This officer Crowelly supposedly teaches how not to do this thing he was caught red-handed doing.Like Orwell's 1984, Sensitization = Profiling justified.
"racist cop" Thats an astonishing statement. With everything that come out, the fact is that it looks like the racist here was Gates. Surely you don't abide by the "if its a white cop and a black male" involved its the white cop thats the racist.
The evidence so far contradicts the charge of racism. Perhaps like our President that showed vast stupidity by his remark, its better to wait till the facts are known.
Your view of America is obviously flawed in my view.
Other than that, we agree.
My view of America's spot-on, you might not like it, but it's accurate. I was calling the cop racist from Obama's perspective. Obama's a race-baiter, he uses racism when it serves him. Shameful. I don't know what really happened between the professor and the cop and I'm not really interested.
What I am interested in is exposing Democrats for the criminals that they are. At least Republicans don't hide the fact that they're always ready to backstab you.
And the Democratic hacks we have in the media defending the Obamination! Randi Rhodes spent the entire week on the birth certificate non-issue. It's easy to attack the loonies on the Right. I want to see Rhodes confront real intelligence, Nader or McKinney supporters, people on the left who can put 2 sentences together and show her that Obama is the Beije Bush, a fraud of unimaginable magnitude.
In response to Mr. rose above
Perhaps he saying that by framing his article in the terms established by the combatants, that he (moyers) gives credence to the frame they have put around this debate.
It's not about healthcare for all
it's about killing the insurance companies for the good of us all..
Mr KiNG: "It's not about healthcare for all
it's about killing the insurance companies for the good of us all."
Well, depend on what it's is (sound familiar?), meaning that there is a purely semantic play of words involved here. I thought the Moyers article and PBS program were exactly about "health care for all" in which the whole emphasis was on "killing (or at least severely regulating) the insurance companies for the good of us all."
But then Lakoff generally loses me about "framing" and maybe I'm missing some "spin" that being put on the health care crisis.
Healthcare, Medicaid, Medicare- The impact of greed.
No matter if you are left or right.......
Left and non profits make money. Greed & self interest are evident.
Right and big businesses make way too much money, more than they could ever truly need.
Problem- the tax payer funds greed while the vulnerable & people providing the direct support get little.
Greed is destroying us.
The only safe thing that should be said about this legislation and water is th it should be "drowned"
Reform? Where? Its Horsefeathers from start to finiosh and Obama deserves what he gets for allowing Waxman and Pelosi to be in charge.
This piece is essentially the lead-in material for last night's Bill Moyers Journal "sit down" discussion of the health care "reform" bill with Trudy Lieberman and Marcia Angel. It you missed it, it is well worth 25 minutes of your time and can be see and heard at:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07242009/watch.html
Brian Brademeyer, what was the point of your post?
"The first sentence is probably accurate..and sums up the rest...BUT Ted Markow -- I also BELIEVE that there are MANy MANY americans that are decent people with a conscience - such as you and many here. "
Agreed, Jerry.
This is a farce. Whether Obama knows it or not, who knows, but it is a farce. As badly as people need health insurance (my kids included), I hope this goes down in defeat. The people need to push back HARD on this. Nothing short of that will change the system. And, it is the whole system that we have to change.
The moral of this whole thing is if Industry is for any legislation, we can be damned sure it won't good for the people.
"The first sentence is probably accurate..and sums up the rest...BUT Ted Markow -- I also BELIEVE that there are MANy MANY americans that are decent people with a conscience - such as you and many here. "
I'm glad you guy's agree on this. I'd go further and say most American citizens are like that.
The problem currently is the Insurance industry. People aren't cars.
Brian Brademeyer: See my reply to Mr. King below, which I wrote before I read your response (thank you) asking for clarification of your post. Substantively if not semantically I think we are in total agreement about the necessity of taking down the "health insurance" industry, and I don't believe Moyers and his guests are in disagreement.
The issue is getting rid of private health insurers, who are literally parasites on the public health system.
Talking in terms of "health care" turns the focus away from insurers, just as Clinton did in 1993. Results this time will likely be similar if discussion isn't refocused on the insurance parasites.
See today's Nader article, where (except for title, which he might not have written), the references are to health *insurance*.
Seven references to "health care", one to "health insurance".
Shame on Bill Moyers for regurgitating the corporate spin on this issue!