Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Why the public option is necessary

Health Care Public Option 2009

  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 08 September 2009 - 05:33 PM

Read this. It's long but exceptionally well-written and informative. But be forewarned: it contains bad words.

It's Matt Taibbi's latest article on this ungodly mess that Congress and the Obama Administration are making out of health care reform.

Taibbi explains the various plans, the compromises, the hidden costs and the potential effects. It reads like a story--one with a likely unhappy ending for us folk. And this explains why a strong public option would have to be part of any meaningful health care reform--any that really helped us all to be insured well and at affordable rates. Without it, some of us may end up actually worse off than we were (like Wal-Mart employees who would be required to buy Wal-Mart's bare bones insurance.) And it looks like the public option has been watered down to nothing. If what they're calling a public option now passes, it does no good. It's already dead.

Here's the article:

http://www.rollingst...ick_and_wrong/7

Quote

page 2

Here's where we are right now: Before Congress recessed in August, four of the five committees working to reform health care had produced draft bills. On the House side, bills were developed by the commerce, ways and means, and labor committees. On the Senate side, a bill was completed by the HELP committee (Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, chaired by Ted Kennedy). The only committee that didn't finish a bill is the one that's likely to matter most: the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by the infamous obfuscating dick Max Baucus, a right-leaning Democrat from Montana who has received $2,880,631 in campaign contributions from the health care industry.

The game in health care reform has mostly come down to whether or not the final bill that is hammered out from the work of these five committees will contain a public option i.e., an option for citizens to buy in to a government-run health care plan. Because the plan wouldn't have any profit motive and wouldn't have to waste money on executive bonuses and corporate marketing it would automatically cost less than private insurance. Once such a public plan is on the market, it would also drive down prices offered by for-profit insurers a move essential to offset the added cost of covering millions of uninsured Americans. Without a public option, any effort at health care reform will be as meaningful as a manicure for a gunshot victim. "The public option is the main thing on the table," says Michael Behan, an aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. "It's really coming down to that."

The House versions all contain a public option, as does the HELP committee's version in the Senate. So whether or not there will be a public option in the end will likely come down to Baucus, one of the biggest whores for insurance-company money in the history of the United States. The early indications are that there is no public option in the Baucus version; the chairman hinted he favors the creation of nonprofit insurance cooperatives, a lame-ass alternative that even a total hack like Sen. Chuck Schumer has called a "fig leaf."

Even worse, Baucus has set things up so that the final Senate bill will be drawn up by six senators from his committee: a gang of three Republicans (Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Olympia Snowe of Maine, Mike Enzi of Wyoming) and three Democrats (Baucus, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico) known by the weirdly Maoist sobriquet "Group of Six." The setup senselessly submarines the committee's Democratic majority, effectively preventing members who advocate a public option, like Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, from seriously influencing the bill. Getting movement on a public option or any other meaningful reform will now require the support of one of the three Republicans in the group: Grassley (who has received $2,034,000 from the health sector), Snowe ($756,000) or Enzi ($627,000).

This is what the prospects for real health care reform come down to whether one of three Republicans from tiny states with no major urban populations decides, out of the goodness of his or her cash-fattened heart, to forsake forever any contributions from the health-insurance industry (and, probably, aid for their re-election efforts from the Republican National Committee).

This, of course, is the hugest of long shots. But just to hedge its bets even further and ensure that no real reforms pass, Congress has made sure to cover itself, sabotaging the bill long before it even got to Baucus' committee. To do this, they used a five-step system of subtle feints and legislative tricks to gut the measure until there was nothing left.

Edited by Spectacles, 08 September 2009 - 05:50 PM.

"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Health Care, Public Option, 2009

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users