Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Sober Reality of Health Care Reform
FDL Statement on the Passage of the Health Care Bill
The country turned an important corner last night when Congress affirmed the moral imperative of providing quality health care to more Americans and passed the President's sweeping health insurance reform bill. It is to President Obama's credit that he was willing to commit his office to such a challenge when others before him had failed.
But this is not health care reform, and the task of providing health care that Americans can afford is still before us. Too much was sacrificed to corporate interests in the sausage-making process. Rather than address the fundamental flaws in our health care system, we applied a giant band-aid. This health care bill does not come close to doing all that needs to be done to meet the needs of our citizens and our businesses as we retool our economy for the 21st century.
There are many good and praise-worthy things in this health care bill: help for those with pre-existing conditions, guaranteed coverage for children, money for community health centers, and expansion of Medicaid and SCHIP. But there is also cause for serious concern. Never before has the government mandated that its citizens pay directly to private corporations almost as much as they do in federal taxes, especially when those corporations have been granted unregulated monopolies.
This bill fundamentally shifts the relationships of governance in order to achieve its objectives. It was hard to reconcile the President's campaign against the evils of the insurance industry with a solution of "corporate tithing" that drives millions of people onto their rolls. We have empowered another quasi-governmental, "too big to fail" industry with alarming nonchalance.
Over the course of the past year, it was exciting to take part in covering the health care debate as online journalists, watching "new media" mature as we all explored new ways to deliver information beat-by-beat to our audiences. At the same time, we witnessed a political process that could not keep pace with the depth and intensity of this coverage. Myths were exploded almost as quickly as they were generated. In the end, it was not a lack of 60 votes or 50 votes that caused the President to break faith with his supporters and sacrifice the public option, it was a lack of political will.
We saw in the last days what President Obama was capable of when he truly put the force of his political skill behind an effort. But as time wore on, the mountain of data unearthed could lead to only one conclusion: this bill, with its eerie similarities to a plan written by insurance industry lobbyists in 2008, was what the president wanted.
Rather than use his talents to rein in corporate interests, as he promised on the campaign trail, the President used his office to shield them from accountability. This was our chance to weaken them, and the Americans that Obama inspired with his message of change would have fought like hell by his side to do just that. Sadly, that opportunity was squandered. President Obama made himself the defender of the corporate interest problem that we still need to overcome. Perhaps that is the best that can be achieved within our current system. If so, that is a sobering reality.
This bill is a first step, not the last. The Democrats must fix this bill while they still have the chance. Before they leave Americans at the mercy of the system they have created, it is imperative that they address the issues of cost control, the dangerously weak enforcement mechanisms, and the anti-trust exemption for insurance companies.
Even a single, solitary Senator can begin that process immediately by introducing a public option amendment when the Senate takes up the reconciliation bill later this week. Now that the health care bill has passed, there is no need to worry that this move could endanger the overall package. The Senate should also consider the bill ending the anti-trust exemption for insurance companies already passed by the House. And when Congress takes up immigration reform, we hope that they provide for the health care needs of immigrants, a need too quickly cast aside in the face of right wing demagoguery.
We also hope that the Democratic party recalls that preserving abortion rights is a plank in the party platform. Unfortunately, with this legislation, women's reproductive rights were sacrificed for corporate profits. There's no other way to say it. And the party alone is not to blame. It could not have happened without the cooperation of pro-choice groups, who failed to mobilize and did little but issue press releases and fundraise in the wake of the biggest assault on women's reproductive rights in 35 years. Their complete capitulation is symptomatic of the crisis that the passage of this bill has triggered on the left. Liberal interest groups across the board sacrificed the interests of their members, and, in the end, acted as little more than enforcers for PhRMA and the insurance companies, or sat mute in exchange for personal sinecures and carve-outs.
But it is a national shame that a Democratic President who pledged the repeal of the Hyde Amendment would proudly issue an executive order affirming it. How far we've come since 2007, when Barack Obama swore that his first act in office would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act.
And finally, most of all, we hope that members of both parties find the courage to stand up to the corporate lobbyists who dominated this process-because if left unchecked, their pernicious influence will continue to infect every aspect of our government to the detriment of its citizens. We who are voters must clearly communicate in November that we will accept nothing less because the fight cannot end until we as a nation decide to take on the corporate interests that are corrupting our political institutions and strangling their ability to provide affordable healthcare to everyone.
- Posted in
171 Comments so far
Show AllIt's a very distant wish to think that,"members of both parties find the courage to stand up to the corporate lobbyists who dominated this process" Who thinks that this can happen with our Congress? The systemic weakness of our bicameral legislature, our two party politics, the plutocratic forces which control and manipulate it are so evident and so far from being able to be changed. Do you think those in Congress listen to the people? Do you think our media informs them? Those who have any sense and vision will get out while the getting is good. We don't stand a chance of peacefully changing this corrupt corporate plutocracy.
With both parties' mission's now focussed on and limited to getting more K Street and Wall Street money than the other party, any member of either party who fails to gun for the corporations will be pushed out of the respective party post haste.
Every time you or I vote for a Democrat or a Republican we contribute to the problem, not the solution.
I'm afraid it doesn't much matter who we vote for at this point. Even if we elected a truly inspired third party candidate, they'd remain impotent without a supporting third party majority, and the correct third party majority at that (the tea partiers look to be the most likely third party to effect a congressional presence). The cogs in the system are not aligned in such a way as to allow much room for movement, and the movement that may be available in the near future looks to be toward the right (Romney would seem to be the front runner for 2012). Perhaps massive civil disobedience could have some effect but most likely that would simply result in an accelerated loss of civil liberties. I don't see a tenable path forward. Do you?
Sadly, no.
"The Democrats must fix this bill while they still have the chance."
They've had the chance for a hundred years.
Oh, and they wrote this f**king thing, remember?
So, as usual in this ass-backwards country, we're expecting the SOBs who just f**ked us to now fix us?
I'm sure they'll get right on that, as soon as Wall Street fixes the economy they destroyed, and Monsanto fixes the soil they've contaminated, and We The People stop dropping bombs to secure the Peace.
Call me when the Dems got HCR all fixed up and stuff, okay?
The 3000 page Obamacare Manifesto written by the insurance industry is not a baby step forward that can be improved by tweaking as many Obamabots would like you to believe. The manifesto is a giant leap backward that gives the insurance industry more leverage as time passes. When the proverbial feces hits the fan, Democrats will simply blame Republicans for obstructing implementation.
The only remaining hope for real US health care reform will be for one of the states to enact single-payer, just as Saskatchewan started Canada's single-payer system.
We refuse to consider changing our methods, but keep on belaboring the results. Trying to get reform using this system is like trying to get baked goods out of your freezer.
US law requires corporations to act in the best interest of their shareholders.
If I buy stock in an insurance company and the company sells a policy to a customer with a pre-existing condition, the corporation has taken a risk that puts me and every other shareholder's investment at risk. The company deserves to be sued by me and all other shareholders.
This is why private insurance is inappropriate for medical coverage.
... and why capitalism is inappropriate for an economic system.
Exactamundo !!!!!
"D"
"We need single-payer health care with universal coverage as soon as possible."
We sure do, Visiting Professor. Unfortunately, we're not going to get it through the Obama Administration, because Obama killed Single Payer pretty much as soon as he took office.
"But this is not health care reform,"
True, but that statement should have ended with a period.
"The Democrats must fix this bill while they still have the chance."
Recognition of any such imperative seems highly doubtful, let alone a residual chance. In any case, I'm not sure the bill could stand any more "fixing" by the Democrats or anyone else.
Trying to "fix" Obamacare will be tantamount to trying to turn a Yugo into a BMW...it is cheaper to push the Yugo into a lake and buy a new BMW.
.....progresives will be split amongst those:
who like Yugos with accesories,
those who want to push,
those who want to push but for the sake of the lake,
and those who would buy a second Yugo for cheap parts.
What a bunch of crappola! When are we going to learn that our "democracy" is beyond repair, that voting is a futile fetish, and we form genuine worker´s organizations that can bring meaningful, effective pressure on our totally corrupted government? I look forward to the day that a significant percentage of our fellow citizens are "mandated" to buy trash medical insurance at the same cost as their income taxes. It will go a long way to start the revolution.
Tony Vodvarka
"I look forward to the day that a significant percentage of our fellow citizens are 'mandated' to buy trash medical insurance at the same cost as their income taxes. It will go a long way to start the revolution."
We're just about there, I think.
"In the end" is not when this deal was set up, it was way back in the beginning when Obama made a backroom deal with the insurance corporations that single-payer, expanded medicare, what have you, would be off the table before things even got out the gate. Additionally such a deal was cut with pharma too. Now we've been treated to the spectacle of Obama lying to the american people, I assume the "progressive" supporters are re-evaluating. It wasn't about the votes "in the end" it was at the beginning about the deals.
The one thing that can come out of this "fix" is that when all the crazy "tea baggers" realize that granny is still alive and they are all still emptying their pockets to insurance companies and big PhRMA, they may actually stop calling the Democratic side of the corporate world "socialists" (what a joke!) and start acting like adults.
It may also start having people think that fixing your American health insurance system is not an insurmountable obstacle. Future (sorry change takes a long time for some things) presidents and congresses may be able to fix it without all the horrendous hoopla.
Also, as flawed as your bill is, maybe something else can be discussed in your parliament - like ending the wars? like helping people stay in their homes? like helping create jobs? like stopping the criminalization of poverty? (Many Canadians are working on those things too)
Canada's system is not perfect and if your condition is not life threatening, yes, you may wait a couple of months for day surgery, but if any politician tried to take it away -- watch out. Maybe one day, the Americans will think that way, after all, they already do for Social Security and seniors' Medicare.
The sober reality? I need a drink.
On May 5, 2009, soon after Obama's first 100 days, Amy Goodman interviewed Wisconsin's Senator Russ Feingold about health care reform -- from the transcript:
AMY GOODMAN: I know that you have to go give the speech. One last question around the issue of healthcare. Do you support single-payer healthcare?
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: I do. I always have. I don’t think there’s any possibility that that will come out of this Congress. And so, for people to simply say, “That’s—it’s this way or nothing,” are looking at something that can’t happen now. But I would love to see it. And I believe the goal here is to create whatever legislation we have in a way that could be developed into something like a single-payer system.
AMY GOODMAN: Why can’t it happen, since polls show most people are for it?
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: I guarantee you. I know the members of Congress, and it’s not going to pass in this Congress. So, there are certain things that can’t happen right away, and this is one of them. But I do support a single-payer idea.
AMY GOODMAN: Why do they resist it?
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD: Well, I think they’re afraid of the criticisms that it’s a big government bureaucracy program. You know, Paul Wellstone, before he died, started talking about having a guaranteed healthcare for all Americans, but having—giving the states flexibility to do it their own way. That’s not a single-payer system, but it achieves many of its same goals. I think that’s another way to get at this, and Paul Wellstone was even talking about it.
To be honest, it was embarrassing to watch the interview! Bernie Sanders caved in, too -- but Russ Feingold, a progressive, failed to take a stand.
On May 13, 2009, Amy Goodman interviewed Dr. Margaret Flowers and Russell Mokhiber who protested the Senate Finance Committee meeting the previous day, and were arrested along with three other single-payer advocates.
Today, I just don't see how anything is going to change -- with the bill having already been passed. All, or most, advocates for single-payer have already capitulated. In the beginning, the voices of some of the congressmen and women might have made a difference, but one-by-one they were isolated and forced to back down -- through whatever means was available to the Obama administration. Who knows, for sure, how they were threatened!? Don't misunderstand -- I'm NOT giving them a pass!
I still need to go to the roll call to see how everyone voted -- there were some Democrats who still voted against the bill. Were any of them progressive, or were those who voted against the bill the same culprits who consistently vote against women's rights?
Paul Welstone was on the side of the working people of this nation and THAT IS WHY HE WAS KILLED. It was not by the CIA's favorite method--the single crazed gun man---no, this murder was done on a sunny day by ice on the wings of his plane. His death, and the deaths of John and Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr., and Malcolm X and the people who stood up to say that Building 7 of the World Trade Center was brought down by explosives are all dead under mysterious circumstances.
Never under estimate the evil of the wealthy men behind the curtain in our nation.
Don't worry, Obama is in no danger. He works well with the leaders of the New World Order. Sig Heil!
Kay, I have cited this exact Feingold interview several times since it took place, and had pretty much the same reaction you did. It turned out to be a dismal preview-- the first of a series of political letdowns.
Feingold was a mess in that interview, and I daresay he seemed to know it at the time. In fact, he resorted to more or less the same moth-eaten fig-leaf that's being waved so vigorously again today: the No Insurer Left Behind is "at least" a New Beginning, a jumping-off point for "real" reform if we all just BELIEVE and clap harder.
Um, I mean work conscientiously with our moderate political leaders and organizations to Make a Difference. (According to Barney Frank, who recently mocked LGBT activists for influencing only "the grass under their feet" by rallying instead of lobbying, anything else is just a waste of time and effort.)
I classify that Feingold appearance as a personal "last straw", along with Bernie Sanders' decision to take thirty pieces of silver and quit while he was "ahead" just as he began his supposedly courageous task of presenting Congress with true single-payer legislation-- all it took to shut him up (besides a modest contribution) was a tap on the shoulder and the complaint that he was wasting the Senate's valuable racketeering time.
And Kucinich... Gollum or Wormtongue?
Yet even today, these three "heroes" are still being touted by Believers as Part of the Solution as they "continue" to Fight the Good Fight.
If I decide to start selling these magic tiger-repelling rocks laying in my back yard, I sure hope I can get CommonDreams to sell me its mailing list. ;)
Obedient Servant: Thanks for your reply! I agree that Feingold knew he was a mess. His body language screamed SHAME! -- while Amy kept pressing him on the issue! I had a very difficult time watching this part of the interview.
Like you, I just don't know how anyone can fool themselves, thinking that this newly passed bill is now a "New Beginning, a jumping-off point for 'real reform.'" -- as you so astutely remarked.
Who do people imagine will step into the fray to propel the new debates -- to improve this newly passed health insurance reform bill?
I just finished checking the House roll call, and EVERY progressive in the caucus voted for this "historic" bill.
another delusional apologist.....
"time to start to fix it'?
come on... do they actually pay people to come up with these stupid thoughts?
the main point is obama has ONCE AGAIN capitulated the left into accepting things that would have NEVER been allowed if a republican had tried to do it!
Obama is WORSE than the rethugs in that he has defanged the left into a bunch of whiny corporate apologists....
quite pathetic!
...worm-tongue rahm was correct,
that we f-ing retards
will go along, sheeplike
without alternatives.
Yes, and man! does that piss me off. Rahm called it, and he was right. And I so wanted him to be wrong, that cocky little SOB.
F--k Rham Israel Emanuel...
"D"
This thing is a giant head-fake and I'm very disappointed to see Jane Hamsher position on it. She's usually a straight shooter, but I see she's drinking the kool-aid and not calling this thing what it is: a fraud. What I'm certain of after witnessing this fiasco is that Obama is not an agent of change at all. He's a white-collar criminal who fooled me and the rest of the country into voting for a platform that mouthed a message of change and hope and is delivering an administration dedicated to preserving the status quo and lying about it everyday. So, break out the Champagne Big Pharma and Big Insurance companies, and drink it down with your peons in the House and Senate -- you win and we, the American people lose: Well Done!
Ms. Hamsher does not distinguish herself at all when she lauds the Democrats for supposedly providing "help for those with those with pre-existing conditions" without also mentioning the fact that in all likelihood those with "pre-exiting conditions" would have their premiums jacked up by as much as 50 percent. It is also odd that the usually incisive Ms. Hamsher did not point out that this bill, which contains many "good and praise-worthy things", as she put it, does not go into effect until the year 2014. That, to borrow from Ms. Hamsher, is hardly "to President Obama's credit."
..and those folks will also have access to a fund in order to compensate for that exact increase.
Live long Jane Hamsher! She has been our St. Joan D'Arc during this battle for single player. She seemed to me to be the best, most innovative person who had the vision, the knowhow and the fight to make things happen. I believe in her. I donated and phone banked for Jane. I never did something like that before. I felt I made a difference. But it didn't happen. We lost the battle. But Jane Hamsher is fighting a war. It's the time to assess our position and continue the fight. The field of battle has changed. We have to accept that single payer is not in this bill and continue to attack and attack and attack. I will carry a banner for Jane Hamsher. We are all in this war. Now is not the time to despair. Some folks curse Rahm Emanual, others light a candle and move forward. If we can't do it, who will?
Largely agree re Jane Hamsher -- but she's also getting the same kind of
backlash from DLC Democrats who want no criticism of the party, especially
the kind that leads to an awakening.
She, Howard Dean, Kucinich, Nader -- whomever, they become targets.
I have sympathy for them --
But, overall, I have to agree that the folding by liberal organizations --
and their reluctance to MOBILIZE together vs competiting with one another for
the liberal/progressive buck to stay alive has made no sense to me over the
decades I've watched fascism grow in the Democratic Party!
How is Obama still on hallowed ground simply because he's a Democrat while we
had total disdain for Dick Cheney when he made private deals with Energy
Industry -- Remember Enron?
Americans have to movilize -- and our liberal organizations have to come together
to support one another.
And that applies also to the single issue organizations such as NOW, NARAL, Planned
Parenthood, specifically re the battle for reproductive freedom. Certainly those
rights are under steady attack -- as all Feminist issues are -- but ignoring
the Democratic Party fascism because they are still giving voice to supporting
abortion is beyond inane -- it's completely insane.
Meanwhile, we have to support third parties -- Green Party -- cause we're going to
need them. Without competition -- without another option -- the Democrats will
only continue to move to the right!
.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Let's be reasonable about this. No, it's not the bill we would like to have. But there are a few good things mixed in with a lot of bad. We can take this or we can take the highway. Many would say, "I'll take the highway instead of this piece of sh*t." But let's be realistic. This IS the best we're gonna get out of Congress. We have to face that fact. Better to take a bad bill that does a little good IF---big capital IF----Congress and the states are willing to get to work to address some of the glaring inequities in it.
First up: a state-by-state challenge on the constitutionality of the mandate. Let the states throw the mandate out and a large problem with this bill is neutered. The good things stay intact. Leaders should now start slicing, patching, splicing the details contained within framework, much like a contractor would to a set of blueprints. You don't throw the blueprint out, you just pencil in the changes that correct earlier mistakes and resubmit it to the Building Safety Department.
Again, we have to face facts. We're up against a Godzilla-size monstrosity called the health insurance industry that is not going away and is certainly not going to give the people anything decent without a fight that We, the People are likely to lose if we demand too much. In a nutshell, they're too big and we're too small. Being idealistic about this thing gets us nowhere. Being pragmatic at least gets us 75% of what we want instead of 0%.
I don't know about your state, Joe2aT. But I live in Floriduh! And I have no hope that anything progressive or single-payer-like will come out of this state. I've already come to realize that on the federal level, I have no Congressman or Senator I can write to, because they're all right-wing a--holes (including Sen. Bill Nelson). And it's even WORSE at the state level. Now, if I lived in California, or Oregon, or Vermont, maybe then I'd have some hope. But being here in Floriduh, I have none. Nice weather, though.
You're right, Professor. With the likes of Pelosi, Schwarzenegger, Feinstein, et al., it is pretty grim in California as well, isn't it?
I agree with PST777 and Erroll, among others.
I like and support Jane generally, but I felt that she'd been suckered into the "public option" bait-and-switches all year.
I don't try too hard to construct scenarios for political sausage-making, especially when the ingredients are rotten and the butchers are filthy. But for a while, I thought that they MIGHT tack on a fake "public option" just to draw in a few more hopeful moderates.
THAT pretext turned out to be too much trouble, and unnecessary. One might think that this double-dealing and trickery would finally persuade Jane that neither the politicians nor the process deserves her vote of confidence. But she's simply shifting gears to accomodate the depraved status quo.
It's sadly ironic that self-styled "realists" so readily buy into the flim-flam and gimmicks performed by our political sleight-of-hand artists.
There has been a theme, ever since Jan. 21, 2009: hopes... dashed! hopes...dashed! hopes...dashed! Dennis K., my last hope - dashed! And now Chomsky, saying he'd vote for this stinky bill while holding his nose. Who's next? Nader? Are the folks here on commondreams, and wsws.org, and counterpunch.org, on an island, surrounded by sell-outs? I'm feeling pretty hopeless.
It's a cottage industry of manufactured dissent. You actually think these people would risk their book deals and writing gigs by actually upsetting the apple cart? They won't. No reason to feel helpless. Recognize them for what they are and act accordingly.
I'm sorry but this commentary sounds like the "stadium scene" in LIFE OF BRIAN. "Wait a minute -WE'RE the PEOPLE'S FRONT OF JUDEAH." Oh yeah. "Splitters!" "Wren's nipples," calls out Brian.
We can't just compose manifests full of resolutions denouncing evil and feel good that we have called for "someone" to "do something" to overcome evil, and make our special hand gesture and salute.
"Are there any women here at this stoning?"
I will start out by stating that Medicare for all is the only reasonable solution to our healthcare mess. Having said that, it is disturbing to see all of the bashing of Senators Feingold and Sanders at this and other progressive sites. No one knows if the public option is truly dead, and since most of these provisions don't go into effect until 2014, there is plenty of time for further reform. Sen. Sanders indicates a promise was made by Reid to allow a vote in a couple of months. Hopefully that will occur, and if it does not, those of you who bash Sanders/Feingold can declare you told us so. Sen. Sanders has been a zealous advocate for single payer and the problem is not his lack of backbone, but the 58 democratic senators who seem to be looking at their shoes when the issue is raised.
The stark reality that progressives (including myself) don't want to face is that a "No" vote on this legislation would not have kept the public option alive. It would have died a final death, probably for the next decade or so. Millions more uninsured, pre-existing conditions grounds for denial of insurance, cancelation of health policies, etc. I guess if you like the status quo better than proposed changes this does not concern you. The Republicans would have been energized and nothing positive would have come out of this administration. We would have ended up with a far right President in 2012, and for those who think Obama is just McCain with a different name, I am happy we don't have to find out (and don't forget Palin came with the package).
What to do--call your rep. and Senators on a weekly basis. Get your friends and relatives to do the same and don't give into the feeling it won't make any difference. If you bash Sens. Feingold and Sanders without doing anything on your end, you, and not them, are the problem. Take a leadership role even if it is just for yourself and your family. Don't give up.
I am sorry, "The Corporate Elite" who run this country got exactly what they wanted: They polarized America first, then they campaigned with "Fear", and then they rushed to get passage and what "They" called victory.
Barack Obama appears to have a longer list of Council on Foreign Relations members in his administration than any other President.....Yes, Reagan had them,Nixon too, and Bill Clinton had them too..........Why would both Democrats and Republicans have advisors from The Council on Foreign Relations? Wasn't The Council on Foreign Relations started by the Rockefellers and directed by Henry Kissinger?
Get your heads out of your butts! "The Power Elite" select both party's candidates and control the policies of whichever candidate wins. Maybe you should watch David Icke's "Road to Freedom" series..........When Rahm Emanuel said, "Progressives would all fall in line and support the bill," he meant they were nothing but sheep and he was the dog that they were going to be afraid of.
"The Power Elitë" will put Republicans back in power in 2010. Obama will be rendered powerless until another "False Flag Attack". He will be a one term President.
I have never seen a country willing to argue over a woman's right to control her body, yet be willing to send its soldiers to wage wars to kill millions of innocent civilians and men fighting to defend themselves from an invasion force. (Viet Nam 3.8 million, Iraq 1.5 million) Yes, the Invasion of Viet Nam was based off of lies and the Invasion of Iraq was based off of lies.
Th Power Elite just got what they wanted 30,000,000 new clients at, probably, $7,000 a year which is an additional 210 Billion dollars a year.
A man/woman making $40,000 just got hit with an additional tax of $7,000 whether he/she uses the medical system or not......"Welcome to the New World Order!"
Yes, the Democrats and Republicans are shills for the American Oligarchy - no questions about it. Most of the members of congress are the oligarchy.
Health care got improved for 30 million Americans and those with pre-existing conditions at the expense of all Americans. I would have preferred that the $1T, one trillion, Bush tax cuts where rescinded and use that money to pay for health care (after all, Americans pay the lowest taxes on the planet).
Give me a political option and I will listen.
I doubt that Americans pay the lowest taxes on the planet.
Income, Social Security, Medicare, State income, sales taxes, vehicle excise taxes, real estate taxes, property taxes on a stinking desk, beer & wine taxes, taxes on your tires, taxes on your taxes, come wake up and smell the roses, you and me and you and you we all serfs.
meals taxes, gasoline (road) taxes, .....
but who's counting?
I need a joint. Make that two joints.
Wish I had some of that. I'm having a glass of wine. Hence the numerous posts by me that I'll probably regret in the morning. :)
Nonsense, anne faith, you've never been more lucid and charming! ;)
FWIW, I'm not getting much benefit tonight from "some of that", although it's hideously overpriced and underpowered in the first place.
Thanks, OS :) Judging from the posts here on CD, it seems like a number of folks are partaking tonight, in one way or another, to drown their sorrows. It does make me feel better to know that I'm not alone in lamenting this latest dose of American fascism. I'm very grateful for the community of Common Dreamers.
Don't forget to share & don't bogart. :)
"D"
I read this article and just remembered something. Before DK broke everyone's hearts by caving in, FL was asking for donations to help Kucinich but not much was said about single payer itself. It was something like that. I do not understand what the matter with Hamsher is but the article sounds self-contradictory. This bill is the first and final step towards severely damaging the Democratic Party's credibility on health care the same way this same party damaged its foreign policy credibility in the 1960s with Vietnam, damaged its economic credibility half way with NAFTA in 1993, and for most of this decade damaged its credibility on the economy even as they hoodwinked most of us including me into trusting them. There is too much to fix in this bill that it must be cancelled and a new health care system must be put in place.
I will agree with most of the comments on Jane's apologizing for the Democratic Party but I must bring up one important thing which neither the author nor comments bring up. What happened to the cosponsors of HR 676? Without them, it was a slippery slope towards a 100% guarantee that single payer would be off the table.
The only bright spot I see of this bill is now that it is mandatory insurance, I hope people will wake up and realize that all insurance is SCAM.