Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Healthcare We Can Believe In
I am not a wonk. Usually this is not a problem. But when it comes to healthcare reform, it matters. You see, I long to dash forward, flaming sword in hand, to champion President Obama's healthcare plan. Every day I get e-mails from Health Care for America Now, Organizing for America, MoveOn.org and similar groups urging me to write my Congressman, attend a town-hall meeting, host a gathering. But how can I speak knowledgeably about a plan that does not yet exist and in which the parameters keep shifting?
I'd like to tell people, Obama's plan is great--for example, it has a public option that will insure those who can't afford private coverage, help rein in the insurance companies by competing with them for members and drive down drug prices through forceful negotiation. But maybe the final bill won't allow the government to negotiate drug prices, because that's the price of Big Pharma's support, which apparently the Obama administration negotiated for in secrecy. Maybe it won't even have a public plan; it will have insurance co-ops instead. And then, maybe, I should say those will be just as good, as Rahm Emanuel's brother, Ezekiel Emanuel, the MD/PhD bioethicist, says.
OK, but what are insurance co-ops? I poked around online for fifteen minutes and discovered that they're untested, small, unregulated, that they exist in twenty states and that Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota really likes them--but I didn't discover what they actually are. I understand "public option," and "public" has a good, strong ring to it--it says, Healthcare is a right, part of the common good, something everyone should have, and if you can't afford it in the marketplace, the government will provide it. "Insurance co-op" speaks a whole other language, of commerce and complexity and exclusivity.
Sarah Palin puts forward crazy lies about how "Obama's death panel" will euthanize Trig Palin and the elderly; right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh talk about socialism and compare Obama to Hitler. We respond with wonkery: burdens lifted from small business, the unsustainability of rising costs. But people who would believe Obama wants to kill Grandma are the last people who'll respond to rational economic arguments. They are too irrational and, let's face it, too ignorant. The retirees ranting about the evils of government healthcare don't even get that the Medicare they rely on is a government program.
Whatever happened to, um, health? Wasn't that a big part of the original case for reform? The 46 million uninsured, the 20,000 people who die every year for lack of medical care, the studies showing that people without insurance get worse care than those with it, even after car crashes? Where are all those people with infuriating stories of being denied essential care by insurance company bureaucrats, and those who thought they were covered when they weren't, and those who were hit with huge bills because of fine print in their contracts? What about the people who can't quit their jobs because they need the insurance? The people who struggle and sacrifice to pay enormous premiums? The people who cut their pills in half to save money, or who can't afford them at all? And what about doctors? My internist and gynecologist no longer even take private insurance because of the endless hassles and frustrations. Why don't we hear more about how fed up doctors are with the status quo?
Listening to the radio earlier this summer, I heard a 59-year-old nurse named Robin Batin testify in the most heart-rending way before the House subcommittee on oversight and investigations, chaired by Representative Bart Stupak. When she developed invasive breast cancer, her insurance company, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, rescinded her coverage because of a pre-existing condition--dermatitis--even though her dermatologist called to say it was acne, not, as the company claimed, a precancerous condition. Stupak confronted the heads of Assurant Health, UnitedHealth and WellPoint with the fact that there are some 1,400 conditions that can be used to cancel a policy, most of them so minor and obscure that the executives had never heard of them. Between 2003 and 2007, the three companies saved $300 million by rescinding at least 19,776 policies. By the time Batin finally got her surgery, her tumor had doubled in size. The Congressmen were shocked--they had no idea. Neither did I. The program? This American Life. I love Ira Glass, but come on, people! "Rescission" should be a word on the tip of everyone's tongue by now.
As of this writing, it is far from clear how much of the vocal opposition to reform represents wider popular feeling and how much is a mobile mob of gun nuts, birthers and teabaggers paid for and organized by lobbyists and Republican outfits like Americans for Prosperity, Conservatives for Patients' Rights and FreedomWorks. Several polls show a majority of Americans still want reform. But polls don't mean much politically if everyone stays quiet. Where's the superb organizing the Obama campaign was famous for? Where's the pushback from the left--for the public plan, or even for single-payer? It may be a non-starter in Congress, despite the upcoming vote on Representative John Conyers's HR 676, but one thing you can say for single-payer--it's easy to explain and to understand.
Oh army of Obama supporters who swarmed the country less than one year ago, we need you back knocking on our doors and sleeping on our sofas. We need you to stand on street corners handing out fliers that explain what healthcare reform is really all about and how people can make sure it doesn't get swallowed whole by the drug and insurance companies. Surely you're not too young and strong and healthy and vegan to care about boring parent stuff like health insurance? The diss on you was always that you were infatuated with Obama's charisma and with vague notions of "change"--not with the long slog of political engagement. That isn't true, though, is it?
- Posted in
83 Comments so far
Show AllMs. Pollitt is a terminal Kool Aid case.
My thoughts, exactly!
Fair enough point. But I'm tired of the accusations against liberals doing nothing.
That's bullshit. Liberals or anyone against corporate interests have been and are ignored.
The media, Congress, and Obama will minimize, ignore, or arrest those involved in single payer protests.
The media's constant coverage of the corporate Right is deliberate. Joe the Plumber types are unwitting corporate tools. It's not due to the their real American appeal or excellent organizational skills. There's racist, repulsive, hate filled crazy shit with these people, but no matter. The only thing that matters is buckets of cash.
freepressmyass August 14th, 2009 11:16 am..........We need some say in the MSM. Without a voice, we are LOST.
Why? I thought this was Pollitt at her best.
"Where are all those people with infuriating stories of being denied essential care by insurance company bureaucrats, and those who thought they were covered when they weren't, and those who were hit with huge bills because of fine print in their contracts? What about the people who can't quit their jobs because they need the insurance? The people who struggle and sacrifice to pay enormous premiums? The people who cut their pills in half to save money, or who can't afford them at all? And what about doctors? My internist and gynecologist no longer even take private insurance because of the endless hassles and frustrations. Why don't we hear more about how fed up doctors are with the status quo?"
And yet Obama stated that folks didn't want to give up their insurance that they were so satisfied with.
If folks are so satisfied then why do so many advocate reform to single payer--which is a more of a threat to them than any of these common rabble town meeting mobs being incited by corporate interests.
Read the first sentence of her last paragraph: "Oh army of Obama supporters who swarmed the country less than one year ago, we need you back knocking on our doors and sleeping on our sofas."
The Obama supporters are going to bring about change? ....By supporting Obama??
Not a blind appeal to support Obama so much as a call to action.
Vern: I agree with you on this one (as I do on most of your posts). Pollit has at times been one of the kool-aid kids, but how refreshing to see how her eyes are opened to the fatal flaw in Obama's "health care reform plan," being that it is just so incredibly complex and opaque that it can be enacted only with a great deal of trust that those who implement it will get it right. Add to that the erosion of that trust as we become more aware of the back room deals that will subvert any move toward implementation of actually affordable and available health care for all. Her appeal at the end to the OFA crowd to save us by "knocking on our doors and sleeping on our couches" (as many Obama supporters did during the campaign)sounds like a forlorn "hope" for what she as well as you and I know is not going to happen, as these people were never trained in the factual basis of policy, but in the sloganeering and "mobilizing" of support based on emotional appeals. It's obvious to anyone with eyes to see is that the Obama "plan" is going down, and the town brawls that pass for educating events are just the noisy part of the process of the death throes of an unsustainable "plan."
Agreed. Which may ultimately be for the best since it will force us all to tithe whether we like it or not and actually become worse than the present state of affairs(Like Obama's fix on Wall St). What do you want to bet that it will fuel the next bubble?
Pollitt is always a bit tongue-in-cheek anyway. She can't help herself.
I'm not so sure that Pollitt is being ironic or facetious in calling on the Pennsylvania Avenue Irregulars to help turn the tide.
I agree that this article contains a general call for action, and critiques Team Obama for making such a muddle of their own proposals.
But she drops in the cliché blaming the left for not pushing back sufficiently. And although she's not explicit about this, she seems to suggest that Obama himself has a simpler, clearer, fairer concept of health care legislation than what emerges after his subordinates "process" the message.
I guess my dissatisfaction with this piece is that I think that Pollitt, in true Nation fashion, really DOES "want" to believe in Obama.
The call to action still seems based on divergent, though not mutually contradictory recommendations: the Obama Irregulars and the too-passive "left" need to "make" Obama cough up a sensible and consistent plan that can be championed by grassroots supporters, who in turn must get out there and spread The Word amidst a shitstorm of professional disinformation, recalcitrant yahoo stupidity, and general chaos.
As the title suggests, she still hopes that Obama, the eye of the storm, is ready, willing, and able to offer health care reform we can believe in.
· Yr Obd't Servant
The push back from the left is there, but with a complicit MSM, it does not get heard anywhere as much as the paid mob from the right. Take back the MSM and many problems will be solved. How? Beats me!
Here's a way to fight back for single payer...........
http://www.peaceteam.net/
lobby.php?bill=HR676
Ms.Pollitt owes the retirees an apology. It was Charles Laffer, an economist, who did not know that medicare and medicade were government program. The retirees who are ranting about the plan know very well that both programs are government programs. They can't avoid learning that during the process of enrolling in the programs. They are ranting primarily about the prospect of reducing the medicare reimbusement to hospitals and doctors which would lead to a reductions in tests and services.
The retirees follow the news and vote more often that the average citizen.
Not really. The retirees who believe that Medicare cuts are to benefits and not to insurance companies through Medicare Advantage, and to hospitals in uncompensated care, are misinformed and hysterical.
Actually, it's you who owe Ms. Pollitt an apology. We have the testimony of Republican Congressman Robert Inglis that he tried unsuccessfully to explain to a retiree at a town hall meeting that Medicare is a government program. The incident was reported in the Washington Post on July 28:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/27/AR2009072703066.html?hpid=topnews
That's about a week before Laffer made the remark you referred to, on CNN.
I have long advocated the expansion of Medicare to every legal resident of our country (legal because that will include the so-called "green carders" who are considered to be potential citizens). It is clear that President Obama and the Congress are not going to do that.
However, why do they not trump the "traditional family firsters" who never tire to aver that our children are the future of our country. Take these right-wingers by their words and expand Medicare to children up to age 21 and, if they are in an accredited college, until they leave with or without a degree. I say accredited because without that there will be an incredible bloom of fake colleges just as there is an incredible bloom of fake private elementary schools parasiting on "leave no child behind". Let these right-wingers dare to say no to covering all children with Medicare.
I would add that it is a failure of leadership to frame reform in financial terms instead of in moral terms. We should be ashamed that 46 to 52 million Americans cannot afford healthcare insurance and that countless more cannot afford health care. If we are a nation of commodified needs and not a nation of concerned citizens, we are no longer a caring, democratic nation.
Ms Pollitt is not adequately informed about the public option. Get it out of the bill.
Top Ten Reasons the Public Plan is a Bait and Switch
1. It leaves in place the deficient employer based model. As the National Organization for Women noted in their single payer endorsement (July 7, 2009) of the only viable reform model, single payer, many Americans are tied to jobs they don’t like because of the antiquated employer based insurance model. For those switching from one job to another, those wanting to go on strike, those wanting to quit a job, etc. it prevents the ability to move freely as a laborer.
2. It leaves private insurance, a major contributor to administrative inefficiency and bloated bureaucracy, in charge of health care decisions.
3. It only results in about 10% of the savings that would accrue were single payer to be enacted. That’s assuming 50% of Americans can enroll---an optimistic figure (Jacob Hacker’s assumption that Congress has drastically scaled back to a tiny plan). Since hospitals and doctors will still have to deal with 1300 insurance companies little savings will result by adding a public option, reports Dr. Don McCanne of the Physicians for a National Health Plan, March 26, 2009, www.pnhp.org. 24% of hospital budgets go to billings (only 12% in Canada) and this wouldn’t change under any version of the public option. As Drs. Steffie Woolhander and David Himmelstein note, the bureaucratic savings of the public plan option “would be miniscule”. (The New York Times, Room For Debate, June 18, 2009).,,
4. It does not pay for itself, unlike single payer, requiring a huge tax increase. As the State Legislators for Single Payer Healthcare (including initiating sponsor WI State Sen. Mark Miller) note there is “no increase in total health care spending” with single payer. Instead of everybody in, nobody out, an inclusive approach based on solidarity, public option pits the wealthy against poor, taxing the rich to provide subsidies to help poor people buy overpriced, insufficient private health insurance. In the mainstream media this is being framed as the liberals taxing the rich for their liberal plan to force everyone into big government care, when In reality, the tax proposal would be used to shore up the private insurance system, giving them more customers and higher profits. In her June 24 Congressional testimony, Dr. Woolhander estimated that it will cost 200 billion annually to pay for health insurance costs for those who cannot afford it. That’s a much larger tax increase on the wealthy.
5. It becomes part of the same failed private model: co pays, deductibles, denials of some necessary procedures, services and medications. Coverage and benefits will be similar to the private plans due to inability to control costs. (see no. 3) “The ‘Public Plan Option’: Myths and Facts available at www.pnhp.org and see the excellent analysis, “Health Care Reform 2009: A Train Wreck in Slow Motion by Dr. John Geyman, July 21, 2009 available at www.pnhp.org/blog.
6. It leaves millions uninsured. Mandates have already failed in states where it has been tried, mostly recently in Massachusetts. And, the model for a health insurance exchange, the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program, leaves hundreds of thousands of federal workers uninsured, and does not control costs (Nicholas Skala, Congressional Progressive Caucus testimony, June 4, 2009).
7. It segregates patients into two groups: healthy patients who will be aggressively pursued by insurance companies and sicker/older patients who will end up in the public plan. The public plan will not make private insurers honest. Private insurers compete by denying (necessary) coverage. The public plan will either emulate this model, or quickly go under as it becomes overburdened by the sicker, older patients, reports Dr. Woolhander (June 24 House Subcommittee on House Energy and Commerce).
8. Projected savings claimed by Wisconsin Citizen Action (based on a Lewin group study of Hacker’s original PO proposal) are not based on historical trends with public option plans that have already failed in every state where they have been tried. (see Wisconsin Cost Savings under National Health Care Reform by Dr. Robert Kraig available at citizenactionwi.org) The HMO-Medicare history shows that public plans do not keep private insurers “honest”. “A quarter century of experience with public/private competition in the Medicare program demonstrates that the private plans will not allow a level playing field.” The Public Option Con, www.pnhp.org
9. Private insurers will still continue to deny claims and as a result, a major issue, bankruptcy due to health costs will remain unaddressed. In their June 2008 endorsement of single payer, the U.S. Conference of Mayors noted that “millions with insurance have coverage so inadequate that a major illness would lead to financial ruin.” www.usmayors.org/resolutions/76th_conference/chhs_03.asp
10. The public option will not allow for choice of provider unlike single payer since the public option will need to appeal to a provide network to obtain services for its subscribers. “Patients will still have a limited choice of provider restricted by networks” as a Physicians for a National Health Program fact sheet states.
“The ‘Public Plan Option’: Myths and Facts available at www.pnhp.org
A huge miss.
The truth is that the problems with all the major issues confronting this nation can be traced to the fact that the majority of people in the U.S.A. would even consider voting FOR the likes of either McCain or Obama. Both of these men made it perfectly clear during the campaign of 2008 that they would push this nation further toward a fascist-like totalitarianism.
This nation has become merely the vehicle whereby the mentality of the "Chicago boys", as Naomi Klein has called them, is taken from place to place in order to consolidate wealth. Whoever is "president" is merely their chauffeur and whoever is allowed into the "Congress" is merely house staff.
It breaks my heart to so often hear people try to portray Obama as something he is not allowed to be.
I was with you up to that final sentence. Is that meant to imply something like "let Reagan be Reagan"? If so, I'd suggest that Obama is already portraying himself quite accurately in most cases.
I'm sorry for not being clear.
I meant that, even now, you Still have people in places like the Nation magazine (a supposedly progressive place) unable to see the writing on the wall or the increasing possibility of numbers written on our bodies.
Thanks.
Got it. Please pardon my thick-headed stupidity.
Let us, 1,000,000 of us, march on D.C. early next month to ensure that the ups win the up-or-down vote on a single payer option. We can do this, yes we can!
I'm in. What day?
Congress is back in session on Sept. 5th correct?
Kimli is entirely right! we need a massive demonstration(s) like we saw early on in the campaign. These town-hall shouting matches are defining the situation to our demise. Massive public demonstrations for single-payer will put the "astro-turf" shout-ins in perspective.
Yes we can!
That was the slogan of the Obama campaign, wasn't it? Unfortunately, the slogan of the Obama *administration* seems to be, "I guess we can't after all."
If you could organise TEN million, and get them to just come into town on the first day the Contemptable Congress is back, surround the Capitol, and chant in unison "Single Payer" over and over all day, that *might* make the politiscum nervous enough that you'd get some attention, though probably in the form of a lot of people with uniforms and guns.
But I honestly don't think one million would make a difference. Not in the face of billions of dollars. A look at their investment portfolios would, I'm sure, show that most -maybe all- of "our" reps and senators hold lots of insurance-company stock.
Small (1M adults = only 1/200 of the voting-age population), polite marches don't pay off in legislative terms because the politiscum have convinced everyone that there's no alternative to voting for a lizard so that the wrong lizard doesn't get in. If we have to vote for them anyway, why should they bother listening to us?
What needs to be RESCINDED are the OBSCENE SALARIES that insurance company executives are WRENCHING from the public. What we DESPERATELY NEED is a Public Option that will do this.
Here is a listing of the top 10 Healthcare Company CEO’s along with their yearly/weekly compensation. The total comes to A WHOPPING $85,429,879.00.
This means that before any of us sees a doctor and receives even one minute worth of healthcare, we pay out over eighty-five million dollars each year to these overpaid “gatekeepers” whose only function is to enrich themselves on the backs of hard-working individuals like you and me. Not a SINGLE PENNY of this money paid in salaries goes to the necessary healing of the individuals who are “the insured.”
Can you imagine what a tremendous benefit it would be to have a PUBLIC NON-PROFIT OPTION for healthcare, the purpose of which would be to provide the maximum in healthcare for the minimum of expense. Think of how many individuals could receive healthcare for the $85 million dollars we are paying out now and for which we get nothing more than an “OK” to see a healthcare professional.
1. Ron Williams, Aetna Ins. Co.
Yearly: $24,300,112.00
Weekly: $467,309.85
2. H. Edward Hanway, CIGNA
Yearly: $12,236,740.00
Weekly: $235,321.93
3. Angela Braly, WellPoint Ins. Co.
Yearly: $9,844,121.00
Weekly: $189,310.02
4. Dale Wolf, Coventry Health Care
Yearly: $9,047,469.00
Weekly: $173,989.79
5. Michael Neidorff – Centene Insurance Co.
Yearly: $8,774,483.00
Weekly: $168,740.05
6. James Carlson, AMERIGROUP
Yearly: $5,292,546.00
Weekly: $101,779.73
7. Michael McAllister – Humana Healthcare
Yearly: $4,764,309.00
Weekly: $91,621.33
8. Jay Gellert – Health Net
Yearly: $4,425,355.00
Weekly $85,102.98
9: Richard Barasch – Universal American
Yearly: $3,503,702.00
Weekly: $67,378.88
10. Stephen Hemsley – United Health Group
Yearly: $3,241,042.00
Weekly: $62,327.73
Information for this posting can be found on the website: http://crooksandliars.com/
This healthcare package isn't even done yet and it's already in bad shape. It also already has the MA model of mandatory care built into it. This article makes me want to not only puke but make me go back to the piano and play "Somewhere out there" wishing again for single payer. Sigh, only when the nation is bled dry will we learn. :(
JenniferBedingfield August 14th, 2009 10:59 am..........Can you be more specific about the mandatory part?
I believe we are already bled dry...the effect has yet to be felt...but, alas, it will be in whatever form it takes.....bread lines, unemployment lines, forced innoculation, interment camps...who knows. Eventually, enough MUST be enough (or am I dreaming?) What will finally put folks in the streets?
"Can you be more specific about the mandatory part?"
Sure,
socialistworker.org/2009/07/30/making-the-patient-sicker
Sorry, I can't put the link well. This site says I'm "spamming" and won't let me post if I do. CD, please fix this !
JenniferBedingfield August 14th, 2009 12:09 pm.............. CD does that purposefully to make it difficult to post links. Somtimes you have to split it up in three parts.
What I am wondering is where is the mandatory part in the yet finalized bill...is that what the link explains?
It's towards the bottom. I'll see if I can find another site that explains more about it. Sorry, long day sort of and tonight will be a little long.
From what I have read, and it's difficult to keep up, Obama's plan is about health insurance reform, and as Jennifer stated in her post, everyone will be required to buy health insurance from private insurance companies, in the same way that people have to buy car insurance. The so-called public option seems to become more and more vague as time passes, but according to what I heard Obama, himself, state, the plan WON'T cover everyone.
I have also read that if a person doesn't buy the mandatory health insurance, he or she will be fined at a rate of 2.5% of their annual income, which means if you make $25,000, a person would be fined $650.
In addition, Obama has met with Big Pharma and Billy Tauzin behind closed doors and agreed to NO price negotiations for prescription drugs. Supposedly, voluntarily, drug companies will cut costs on their own to a tune of $80 billion. I'll believe that -- like when pigs fly!
I believe that we need health care reform, not health insurance reform. And, if you listen to Obama, he does use the phrase -- health insurance reform.
If our elected officials were really interested in the public good, they would de-link health care and health insurance from employment and employers. They are always talking about competing in the global marketplace, but they do nothing about making it possible.
I also have to question their compulsion to "keep us safe," an idea they like to toss at us so that they can continue to fight the "war on terror," with NO end in sight.
If they were really interested in our safety, our elected officials would not wait another day, they would pass HR676, single-payer health care, "MEDICARE FOR ALL!"
Kay, thanks. That pretty much sums it all up. We're already getting robbed from all sides and now another side to add to it basically. Sigh... :.(
I agree! We are being robbed, and there is no relief in sight!
While I agree with most of the comments above, those are picking off battles one at a time. The war will only be won with a systemic change. How do we get people to a point where they are willing to go for a Constitutional Convention instead of a violent revolution? And can we make it stick? Is is possible for the Corporate personhood myth to be excised from reas mens (established law)? We can't get rid of legalized bribery (lobbying)(campaign contributions) without getting rid of equating things, corporations, with people. And the natural: food, air, water, earth, flora, fauna mixed up the the unnatural: GMO,carbon credits, private water treatment and utilities, fertilizing poisins, genetically abused animals and plant derivatives.
I used to think our form of government was the be all, end all form of government, in a good way. Now I know it never was and I doubt it ever will be. I'm teetering on the conscientious non-voting stance at this point because I don't want these sham elections presented to the world with the assumed sanction of my participation in the fixed outcomes. I think I will keep registering to vote then not go on the big day. At least the rest of the world will get the message. Here it wouldn't matter anyway. I think the folks posting "my dollars are my votes, my time is my vote and my labor is my vote," are right. That will be the new participatory "democracy" if you will.
Oh and on the rare occasions when my solidly registered-Republican townies talk about health care, even they know single payer universal healthcare is the way to go. They think those teabaggers act like the "Animal Fair"(poem)was the simile one of them used. Even they recognize those "uprisings" are put up jobs for media attention. In my town of 1306 we're ALL sick of the endless fundraising dances, barbeques, walkathons, counter cans, benefit shows, blah, blah blah to meet our neighbors' human rights needs. Even the die hard Goldwater generation republicans. Once my sons made a spontaneous comment during a benefit performance. "Why are all the pictures on these cans and event posters always YOUNG people? How are we supposed to support YOU elders when we can't even get proper help for ourselves?" Some one did say,'Who gave that kid a microphone?' which made everyone laugh but the point was made and the town hasn't gone back since. Our representatives,local and state Republicans, federal Democrats, however refuse to acknowledge the stance by representing us the way we want with HR767 and local versions.
And the healthcare issue is crossing the boundaries of party affiliation, thought branding etc. I've had what I consider staid, calm "system" people make some pretty radical tar, feather and pitchfork predictions in a personalized way lately, which initially made me double take. Now I just point out localizing the economy and voting with our dollars and time are the best way to make a difference, since politics isn't proving effective with people who are not willing to represent us. They agree. I wish I had more than just the neighbors to back us up in a pinch but if it keeps spreading,I guess it will be a nation. They are what keeps me from despair.
A constitutional convention would be revolutionary. This is the first mention I have heard of such an option. The time may well be ripe and if the corporate slugs
can be kept at bay, we may come out of it with a country that resembles a democracy.
The other option we seem to be steadily marching towards is anarchy. Not a pretty picture. But neither is the one we are looking at now.
Single payer.....its the ONLY way to fly!
To write a new constitution (and start a new republic), we should do so from the bottom up, the way the Venezuelans did a few years ago. We should have a lot of input from local committees and such about what people want in their government. I think a constitutional convention should be the last phase of writing such a document.
Lord Buckley, Thank you for your imput. I completely agree. That would be one way to ensure people participation not personhood participation shaping the policies that distribute resources in a sustainable manner, "unto the 7th generation."
Fine, and do away with the Senate. You will be in good company because Ben Franklin did not want one either.
Bend Over And Grab Your Ankles. This accomplishes two things: 1) It is a symbol of this nation's abject surrender to political gangsterism. 2) It makes it easier for the nurse to insert the thermometer up your backside which both takes your temperature and utterly humiliates you. This will be the only "health care" available to you under "The Entrepreneurial Health Care Act of 2009". Anything else, say a prescription for Aspirin, will cost you thousands of dollars. Don't have the money? Then lie down in the gutter and die!
"The diss on you was always that you were infatuated with Obama's charisma and with vague notions of "change"--not with the long slog of political engagement. That isn't true, though, is it? "
That is indeed the "dis". It turns out to be more accurate than I thought. Listen America, when you are ready for (real) change try this radical notion...join a political party that wants what you want. Simple right? Now what do you want, charismatic leaders, or to not fear financial ruin the next time you need major medical care?
Pollitt says: "We need you to stand on street corners handing out fliers..."
Huh? Are the Democrats in congress on the street corner? Do you really think they don't know what the paycheck they get from the insurance companies is for?
It seems to me that your problem is that you pay "co-pays" and "deductables" - solved with single payer
You risk being dropped by your insurer if you get sick - solved by single payer
You pay twice what we pay outside the US - solved by single payer, so...
So, what is stopping you from voting for a party that supports universal single payer, are you strongly attached to the Democrat's logo or something?
The Green Party unapologetically supports Single Payer.
You don't seem to understand the logic.
Other parties can't possibly win because not enough people will vote for them, and people won't "waste votes" on a party that can't possibly win.
Come to think of it, I'm a bit baffled by the circular logic myself. One wonders how all those "lesser peoples" have managed to survive with multi-party democracies for so long.
No worries for the corporate oligarchy: single-payer is "off the table", and the watered down BS of a "public option" is only going to furhter subsidize private insurance and BigPharma. It is simply going from catastrophic to even more catastrophic.
At the moment, I would rather see NO REFORM pass than the twisted, corrupt kelptocratic "reform" that is "on the table".
The corporate crooks and their political puppets have used this crisis to further their interests and gouge the public for even more money. A different angle of the 'shock doctrine'
Ed Bernays would be proud
These so-called town-hall meetings are nothing less than the "divide and conquer" strategy that the previous administration put to such devastating use.
RE-GROUP and protest in mass for single-payer. The far-right minority is diverting attention from the real issue--HEALTH CARE!
Jill, I don't know if you saw my post earlier, but I believe many people in a tide turning way are beginning to see past all these divisive labels to the basic NEED that unites us all. They are beginning to see the inevitable, it's either single payer univeral healthcare or it's not sustainable. People sooner or later wake up to their enlightened self-interest when the sh*t hits the fan and they are covered in blowback. Dems, Repubs, etc alike all know they're not getting what they've paid in for and I just point them to the big pile of money and say, "Who won? Let's cut them out of the picture. If nothing else then they won't be in between us and the big pile of money. Let alone deny the care my healthcare providers and I have decided is in my best interest." We just have to keep pointing out the ruling class behind the curtain, blowing smoke and pulling levers, breaking promises and repeating to our peers like a broken record," You're my neighbor, I love you, I want you to get your healthcare, it doesn't help me if you don't get it. Who's lording it over us, keeping us from our basic needs? The ones who have waaaaaay more than they need and for whom EVERYTHING is never enough."
CD slow posting, duplicate.