Health Care for undocumented persons…….

1. Do you want dead, sick and injured people clogging the front doors of American hospitals?

2. What IS the first thing they ask you in the ER? Hand over your insurance card bub…

3 after 43 pages of detailed information given orally and hand written, some idiot says….. “you better leave because this is going to cost you a boat load of money”……. (witnessed this myself)

My son was a project manager for a major home builder and they did a raid on his crew. approx 2/3 were legal, about 1/2 of that 1/3 were with ID that was not valid and then the remaining were without.

All those with documentation legal or not, they were paying taxes, health insurance premiums, social security & medicare taxes. OOPs there goes revenue to the treasury

Did you see a different speech? I saw a speech where Obama threw the progressive base under the bus and put the thumb-screws to the progressive caucus. Fighting against Obama there’s just no way to get any bill worth a net positive out of this. The bill should be destroyed. Progressives won’t even be able to do that I bet.

Watching the talking heads it seems that nobody is even talking about the possibility of the progressive caucus holding firm. The discussion even on MSNBC is in fantasy land where Obama is a huge leftist again.

it will become a huge asset to Democrats by the time the 2010 election rolls around

Get real. The effects of this bill will be so toxic…. well… lets just say there’s a reason Obama is putting off the effects until just after the 2012 elections instead of just before. That is the signal that he knows this is a terrible bill.

And what’s more I bet if the progressives do hold firm then some House Republicans will cross the aisle to secure a victory for the insurance industry over the public interest.

Do you still watch main stream media and believe you will come away with some insight of reality. Obama, the politicians, corportations, and the wealthy, they are all the same.

The only people who will benefit from the guidelines laid out by Obama tonight are the problem – the insurance companies. No bill will be better than this garbage.

The man I voted for is a cold-blooded, calculating politician who doesn’t give a damn. It is all bells and whistles. He has betrayed damn near every principle he has allegedly stood for since he entered public life. I now fully understand why he called on Emanuel, who is the man he wishes he could be.

Dammit, it had to be a minority individual to turn his back on those who elected him – the little people. That hurts, and it hurts bad.

I do find it a little disturbing that a Chevron ad just popped up above.

Everyone at Kos is so busy howling for Wilson’s blood that none of them seem to have noticed that what they had been saying for weeks would be the worst of both worlds – a mandate without a meaningful public option – is now officially Obamacare.

Today I filled out the paperwork to change my voter registration to Unaffiliated. In 2012, I don’t care if the Republicans run a Cheney/Bachmann ticket. The Democrats are dead to me.

-Health insurance companies are corporations with a fiduciary responsibility to earn a profit for its their shareholders.

- They do not have a legal responsibility to provide medical care.

Last night, I had a great conversation with a Dr. who was just beside herself because she’d spoken to a group of retirees who are afraid that the health care reforms will ‘take away their health care’. Not one of those retirees had an accurate concept of the fact that health insurance companies exist to return ‘wealth’ to their shareholders.

Today, I spoke with a woman who’s been in the workforce for over 20 years. She expressed anxiety and frustration about the ‘teabaggers’, but is unsure how she feels about reform.

When I pointed out that corporations are legally obligated to make money for their shareholders — **not** to provide health care — she was startled. She was completely taken aback. I could almost see the light bulb snap on in her eyes.

After she made that connection, she seemed far more confident in her heretofore fuzzy, amorphous sense that reform is urgently needed.

The Dems need to educate the public on the points that you’ve made.
Once people understand these simple facts, you can almost watch them to a double-take.

And to any healthCo opportunists or lobbyists who may chance to read this: this isn’t personal. It’s a simple set of facts that all the PR, teabaggers, and b.s. on the planet won’t change.

Lane, you are writing about what Obama should do. Of course, what he should do is enact single payer, but he isn’t doing what either you or I want. Obama’s approval ratings are tumbling precisely because he seems determined to organize the biggest sellout possible to the insurance, medical, and drug companies. The public clearly isn’t buying it. And the speech tonight with all its vagueness and lack of a clear direction is not going to change the current dynamic.

The bottomline is that Obama was elected with a mandate of change and he is giving us the same old same old or worse.

In your own deluded way, you do make a point. The point which you seem to hit upon is that nothing has changed. Polls still show pluralities and majorities opposed to the public option in the states where many Blue Dog senators live (i.e 60% opposition in Arkansas (Pryor, Lincoln) and 47% opposition vs 39% in favor in Nebraska (Nelson) to name only two states). It is highly unlikely that conservative Democrats are going to change their mind in the numbers required to turn those numbers around. Therefore, those Democratic senators are not going to turn their views around. We are still where we are before: the public option cannot get through the Senate due to opposition from Blue Dogs and Joe Lieberman.

With that being said, the rest of your conclusions are asinine. You blow off that people with “pre-existing conditions” will no longer be denied treatment, as well as blowing off reduced co-payments and subsidies for poor folks and the working poor to get coverage. Maybe to a trust fund baby, that’s no big deal, but to people whose lives are on the line it is a big deal. So go ahead and sacrifice other people’s coverage and other people’s lives while you’re out on the town in daddy’s car using daddy’s credit card tonight, oh great hero for the people.

What?

Crumbs to the starving. Hard to turn them down.

Apparently the incivility in Congress may be leaking into our public discourse.

It just seemed so blow hard-ish.

Discourse? Nah. People aren’t talking to each other here. Well, sort of talking At Each Other.
I just got home from work, okay, 1/2 hour ago. Was reading, ie. lurking in and out while I was at work. Wacky.
The snippits of the speech that I’ve seen on teebee is not the speech I was reading about here at the Lake. For the most part.

So little, so late, we had a moment, a window to educate, agitate and organize around a premise most moral and we missed our window. Tonight, Obama left a trail of his organizational skills and a voice yet to be heard. Feel sold out and realized that language is framed to reflect a reality that is made by some for others. Listened for the words ’single payer’as within the range of his reality and realized his range is one filtered down through corporate lobbyists writing the final words for any bill addressing our access to affordable health or rather lack of it.

blub.

They do not have a legal responsibility to provide medical care.

That’s a bullet point, but not quite true. Health insurers are legally obliged to provide health care in accord with the terms of the contract. Now, the big problem is that the insurers (mostly) set the terms of the contract to please themselves. For the consumer, it’s a take-it-or-leave-it proposition.

But the behavior of the insurance companies has become clear. They will use the slightest legal justification to cancel unprofitable contracts and divert care into the arbitration process in hopes that the patient will die or go away. And the insurance companies are not held liable for the deaths attributable to those abuses.

I fell that way to. I am not confused but rather dismayed.

And why does “our” side always have to lie about the public option and pretend that its purpose is to add “competition”?

All this mindless grovelling to the altar of the free market. As if the free market could ever work for health care. As if it hasn’t been proven to be an utter failure by the very crisis it has produced. And how could adding ONE more insurance agent to 1000 others suddenly be the straw that allows the free market to suddenly magically start working?

They contradict themselves anyway because they say well the public option has to be bilked to not be “too good” so it won’t be “unfair” on the poor insurance companies. Unreal. Absolutely unreal that these people so often supposedly on “our” side are concerned to not put prices down because it might effect the record breaking profits of the monopoly industry that literally produces NOTHING.

But then they turn around and say the public option will bring prices down because it has the unfair advantage of not having to pay shareholders and some other overheads. So which is it please? Is it “fair” for the PO to have an advantage or is it not? It seems like they want to calibrate the advantage minutely so it will juuuuust be enough to compete but not so much to actually do anything. That’s not a market. That’s rigged.

Not that people can just jopin the public “option” anyway. An option that you can’t opt for! How is that going to provide competition? It makes no sense at all but everyone goes around parroting it.

Madness. But logical for the same reason single payer is rejected. “Our” side is simply more concerned to maintain huge monopoly profits for the insurance industry than to cut prices for the consumer. Period. Ignore the ethics. It’s economically unsustainable. Health care costs are a financial ticking bomb. At best Obama kicks the can down the road four years. But if we can’t get a real solution now then when? Does health care have to come from a Republican? Is that the only way to get it?

And now Obama has made his pretty pretty speech so we all have to go back to pretending he’s the most liberal guy in the senate or whatever it was. The progressive caucus will crumble and prove themselves a total joke for purposes of any further negotiations.

I’m sorry, Mare. You’re personal situation must make this whole debate harder for you than for me. I just wonder which pipe people who are raging here for hours and hours are hitting. Not meaning you, of course.
Hugs.

My perspective is that we need to look at healthcare reform through a rational lens – not one infused by outrage and indignation. Fixing healthcare isn’t about getting the rich or the insurers or even about making everyone or anyone happy. It’s about containing runaway costs and reforming an irrational structure of risk pricing and risk management, and, in doing so, expanding coverage and improving the quality and availability of healthcare. If we begin with these principles, as opposed to who is to blame, then we might somehow work our way out of this mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. I thought the president’s speech had some good points, although I was disappointed that he did not come out one way or another on the full PO (as opposed to his minimalist version of one) and that he did not explain how his proposed mechanisms will actually contain and roll-back underlying healthcare (as opposed to insurance) costs. We may yet get to a point where a scorched earth strategy may be necessary, especially against the conservadems and industry bribees, but tonight’s speech pulled me back from that brink somehow and gave me enough hope to say that we need to keep on talking – and applying pressure to our legislators.

ding ding ding! all true!

and aRFKUS, since the insurance industry is writing the bills, how can you know that all those happy ponies they are promising, like ending denial of coverage over pre-existing conditions, are actually going to be in the bills, and will actually be enforced?

pitifully naive, considering all that has happened in this faux reform debacle.

I thought the speech was pretty good, as speeches go. I would like to see evidence (better late than never) that Obama can play political hardball. The anti-reformers are the bullies on the playground. Their only response to conciliatory gestures is to beat you harder.

So what was your take on the speech? As far as I could see Obama appeared willing to accept any idea from any side. The problem was this speech was supposed to be about what his bottomline was. It seems he doesn’t have one. And while he occasionally used insurance companies as a target, he also made them sound indispensable, which they aren’t. He equated progressives with the lunatic Republican fringe in order to justify his positioning himself in between. What was up with that? I didn’t expect much from his speech I felt frustrated by it anyway.

Not to worry. I am aok. The one thing in the speech that we need is the immediate coverage for people like us. I am hoping that happens.

I’m not a fan of bullies. On either fucking side. Is it late enough for me to use that language? It’s been a long day for me. Prolly a good thing I was only lurking, on and off.

My letter to every member of congress tonight:

Dear Senator/Representative:

We need the public option NOW!
We have waited long and wearily for a true public option with NO triggers!

We are SO tired, absolutely tired. Tired from our usual work and ever present worry.

Now we are tired from having to “work” to convince 435 people to understand WHY we need the Public Option.
We do we have to work so hard to be heard by our elected representatives?? Why???

When will we be able to trust the 435 people to think of us instead of the health care lobbyists who spent $360 BILLION to buy 435 votes?

Hugh, I said I only saw snippets on the news. I was at work. Only in and out lurking. My take was that it wasn’t the one that I was reading about earlier. I qualified my comments and apologize that I can’t, at this point, argue fairly. Just said what I felt.

well..at least it looks like Joe Wilson (R-Sanfordland) sort of apologized. http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs…..-care.aspx

it’s still clear he never read the bill.

Joe Wilson is a racist. He will never apologize for that.

since I live in undocumented central….with good old sheriff Joe….

WHAT is the PLAN to deal with sick, dying and injured people that so not have “proper” documentation? In one of the sheriff’s sweaps ……. an ASU student was snagged and deported……. he was a birth citizen BUT had no documentation on him, group had been swimming in the river……. NO ONE would investigate he was a legal citizen……

so john is jay walking across the street….boom, he is hit by a car, bleeding, fractured and the big question is WHAT do we do with him?

Are we going to have a body sweep company and turn the bodies into soilent green?

They don’t provide health care. They provide – or claim they’ll provide – payment for services rendered by health care providers.
I want to see the health insurance companies regulated, because right now they’re bloodsucking parasites on society, and they’re killing us for their own benefit.

Well, actually I want to see them fold up, dry up, and blow away.

Nice description of the kabuki going on. Obama talked about how removing insurance companies would disrupt a major part of our GDP. That was dishonest. Our GDP is being disrupted precisely by the dysfunction of our healthcare system and its exploding costs. And while insurance companies funnel the money to providers, they also skim off profits from it. But they don’t actually produce the healthcare that is the big chunk of GDP. That’s the providers.

I agree too that competition is out of place in the healthcare system. Your life is not like your car. Your car screws up you can always get a new one. Medicare has shown it can hold down costs if it is allowed to do so both by its low overhead but also negotiating price. But as it is, as you say, the public option is supposed to create competition, even though there is no indication this is so, but if it it does happen, then this is seen as inherently unfair. It’s crazy. And Obama is doing nothing to make what is happening less crazy and more comprehensible.

Chipolete fodder (sp?)

I don’t have any problem with your anger. I got very thick skin. But you’re wrong if you think I don’t get it. Look at my earlier comment here for example:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7983

It’s despicable. Obama is holding the people with pre-existing conditions hostage and using them as a threat against the progressive caucus. “Vote for my trillion dollar industry bail out or I’ll tell people you screwed them on things like pre-existing conditions.” That’s hardball. But if the progressives back down they might as well go home and wash their socks until 2012.

Without the strong PO costs will continue to rise and the people who are most expensive to keep on the books will get dropped somehow. Lawyers are cheaper than surgeons. But it’s true that to hold firm progressive would have to sacrifice these people with pre-existing conditions. The idea of course is that if Obama is defeated he will be FORCED to go back and get a much smaller bill just so he can announce mission accomplished.

Since even Republicans agree pre-existing conditions are bad ANY bill will contain it. The reason nobody minds fixing pre-existing conditions is that it won’t cost the insurance industry anything; they just hike their premium prices on the rest of us (which I am FINE WITH if it means an end to pre-existing).

More of a problem is that it’s hard to see how you get pre-existing gone without introducing individual mandates. And hard to see how that can work without cost controls. And that can’t happen because congress is owned by the industry.

And of course it isn’t just the pre-existing stuff but a range of minority groups that would benefit and are being held hostage in the same way.

I know it sucks but we have to TRY to win something here.

It probably won’t happen anyway now…….

Obama talked about how removing insurance companies would disrupt a major part of our GDP.

Sounds familiar. Sounds like O’s rationale for putting the same financial geniuses in charge of the system who caused the collapse.

Hi ES…..How are you tonight?

for those of us who are living with a health care crisis……FU

Best I could tell from reading assorted interpretations of the Baucus plan yesterday… especially Scarecrow and massacio’s points..

If I broke my arm under mandated Baucus insurance, I would spend twice as much as I did this year without coverage at all.

As if I could afford it.

No forking mandates, without real care, realistic coverage, Which absolutely means no triggers.

And I was appalled when Obama brought up with pride on his own accord that “illegals” would not get help.

Hi Miss Katymine.. I’m doing fine. Nice to see you up and about..)

I’ve decided that I’m going to avoid that state. I already try to avoid TX whenever possible. Sanfordland is now added to my list of travel advisories.

We should have had a position to the left of single payer. That isn’t even a left position. It’s the position of every other — which is to say every working — health care system in the industrialised world. That is NOT left.

Our start position should have been that nobody can buy better health care than the poorest person gets for free. When I’ve talked to right wingers and asked them what they would do if they could fix the system they often suggest this. It just seems like a neat idea to people. I grin and inform them that they just suggested something to the left of what Cuba has…..

Yes, in both the financial and healthcare crises, there are reasonable, workable solutions. Both would require major restructuring of the current system. But as Obama said tonight he would rather build upon a broken system. Without real reform, all that means to me is that he is committed to continue what doesn’t work. That is coming to be for me the model of his Administration.

so at is the plan with FDL tonight? Do we stay on topic or do we have “what is on your mind”

“And I was appalled when Obama brought up with pride on his own accord that “illegals” would not get help.”
God didnt that just make you proud to be am American again??Anyway president jujitsu raised more questions than he confirmed the answers to, for instance what is this “short term emmergency” insurance pool. the “mcain idea”?? sound like they are setting up a high risk pool for them to drop people out of all that wonderful “low cost” insurance we’re going to have the “choice” to buy, when we get sick, or when we fail the physical….im listening to that phony campaign worker guy talking about how everything is all better now, and how obama “hit it out of the park” nice kabuki.. if anything is clear, these people will stop at nothing to get this sleazy deal through. I love the new axlrod strategy too, dont you? the demonizing the uninisured? all those “irresponsible” folks who cant sefl pay? PLAN for the white house to begin to demonizing us now.

Obama did not invite the left to talk him into a public option more robust than the cramped model he rolled out. His version is only for the uninsured; it needs to fund itself; it’s for 5% or less, probably because it won’t piggyback on Medicare rates. In short, it’s a toothless, blue dogbitten tiger.

By contrast he extended a hand to the right to talk him down from his communistic excesses: co-ops or, as Scarecrow noted, triggers.

It was the Emanuel/DLC play in spades. Nothing here to celebrate whatsoever. We got exactly what the realists among us expected.

The only opening for a tactical move along Lane Hudson’s lines – other than ignoring him and ginning up the CPC – is to use his own words against him, make the case that his gutted option won’t even do what little he asks of it. For starters, it needs to be available to everyone under the mandate whether insured or not. Then it can compete with the privates and cherry-pick their rolls. That’s what competition means, isn’t it? The privates can sure as hell go after those under the PO (though I doubt they’d want to since the uninsured tend to be unhealthy).

It needs Medicare rates to vie with the insurance giants. Why shouldn’t it have this? It needs to be big enough for its reforms to change how medicine is practiced on people below age 65. It also needs to be big enough to win favor with hospitals and doctors, as private insurers are able to do. And so on. Obama would have us forget all this. Don’t. Don’t ignore drug pricing either. That may be shrinking the program’s scope.

You see the point. We should be driving a Mack truck through the gap between Obama’s stated goals and the option he sketched out. He tried to take away the keys, but so what? Let’s get on with it. Be sober, critical, and insistent. Learn the ins and outs of the option, see the more or less of it.

My first move will be to give my take to the people in Congress who claim to be mine.

right! wasnt that nuts? why build a new house when we have a foundation right here? on this sink hole ajacent to the fault line.

Its an expansion of medicare to include childless adults up to 133% of the poverty income levl, about 14,500 per year. that it! its the HR3200 plan. thats all the “PO” is at this point..

I didn’t hear Axel.. thank Dog. Sure fits the profile of the evening.

At least there is less room than ever to deny these demons are truly evil excuses for human beings.

I was astonished that he yelled out like that. He clearly feels no shame on the subject.

That isn’t even a left position. It’s the position of every other — which is to say every working — health care system in the industrialised world

I usually tell people that I am on the left. But in some ways that really isn’t true. Like most progressives, I am for what works. That is why I am critical of Obama, just as I was critical of Bush. What they are promoting won’t work, and in fact will cause further damage.

It was his modus operandi in the bank crisis.

Go for it.

What should be clear by now is that Obama doesn’t want a real public option. Not in the sense we think of it, and maybe not at all. Making it pay for itself is absurd. People who can afford to should be charged, but others should not. The money for this would be less than we have paid for Iraq each year.

As I’ve said before, I think the starting point should’ve been VA-for-all – buyout all of the service providers. Then either turn them over to the states, with guarantees of Federal subsidies, like the Canadian single-payer system, or just run them like the national health service (and get rid of insurance altogether, in the latter alternative). This may actually be the cheapest solution, since once the system is nationalized, government will set all prices, just like they do very well and very economically for the VA. Healthcare workers would be salaried government employees, for the most part.

We let them turn what should’ve been a debate about healthcare reform into a debate about insurance reform. No country in the world has managed to socialize insurance without socializing at least part of their underlying healthcare system. Nobody’s even tried.. because it so obviously won’t work in the long term. We talk about Medicare-for-all as some type of panacea – it really isn’t. Single payer works, but only if the government has some say over the price of the real health services single payer insurance pays for. That works well enough in Canada, where citizen’s get excellent care for 1/2 the cost. Singapore, which arguably as the world’s most efficient healthcare system, at a third our unit cost of services, actually has a socialized healthcare system but a (partially) private insurance system (for gold-plated add-ons). This is what we should’ve asked for.. and what’re ultimately going to end up after a lot of pain and misery, when the current system (if unreformed) fails in a decade or so (which it will) or when the reformed system fails in two or three decades. All of these measures under discussion now are just stop-gaps.

Upstairs now.. LL Night

Honestly blub, do you really think it would have mattered what we “asked for”?

I looked up his record. In 2002, he accused Congressman Filner (D-CA) on the House floor of harboring a “visceral.. hatred of America.” He had to apologize. In 2005, in response to Congressional concerns about Gitmo abuses and torture reports, he accused the Dems of “waging Guerilla warfare” on US troops and went further to accuse then minority-leader Pelosi as well as Waxman of being “terrorists.” This guy’s special.

I’d just written in one of the live blog threads that I figured the result of this would be that someone would be facing this problem again in a decade. So I think you’re right there. I have to agree with solerso, though, it wouldn’t have mattered what we’d asked for. The only calculus that matters is what will get through Congress and the White House, and right now it’s looking like either nothing or something that will be worse than nothing.

it would’ve changed the tenor of the whole debate. They would’ve thrown the same arguments against VA-for-all as they would have against the Strong PO or Medicare-for-all, but the whole dialogue would’ve been shifted leftward. We might even be compromising between partial system socialization and the Strong PO now instead of between the Strong PO and nothing (which is where we’re at now). Yeah, maybe it wouldn’t have mattered, but at least the public and the media would’ve had a whole different debate and vocabulary in mind. Now, even the best possible solution (Strong PO or Medicare-for-all) would fall FAR short of what is economically needed for a long-term solution (and I don’t think Medicare-for-all works at all). This has to be about costs and single-payer with social pricesetting. It’s either that, or in a decade this country won’t have any type of healthcare system at all. It’ll just be cash-for-service.

I’ll just end my participation in this thread by noting that I’ve updated the Whip It! list of Reps who have either signed the pledge or ought to. Please read and comment if you see an error or an oversight.

Oh yes, I forgot that on your world it is not representatives and Senators who write bills, but the Illuminati in their Ivory Towers and their Congressional minions. Typically insane and unmedicated, you’d be the first one who would benefit from better health care coverage.

Oh I’m not angry with you, although I do look down at the low regard with which you place other people’s lives. It’s one of those situations where your comments would be intellectually funny, if their implications were not so vile.

Firstly, you characterize Obama’s plan as merely a “bailout.” If you mean what you say, then you’re clearly not operating with all your pins on the bowling lane. The bailouts were given to strategic financial and economic sectors. Health insurance companies are not strategic to the fundamental operation of the economy. If AIG goes down it would have brought the economy down. If Humana Insurance goes down, it’s not going to affect the country. If you were just joking, it just shows the irrational kind of thinking you have which you pass off as humor, but is really rooted in more of a conspiracy theory outlook on society.

Given that you think that Obama is playing one reform off against another indicates that you see this as a conspiracy theory. That after Obama was done with his speech he took his limousine over to some abandoned highway, pressed down on a panel on a wall, opened up a secret staircase to some room full of health insurance industries who he promptly reported to that the master plan was well under way and no one expects a thing. Maybe you don’t explicitly say that, but that is the logical extension of your beliefs isn’t it?

In any case, you claim premiums won’t go down. The chance for a public option trigger is good. If the premiums indeed don’t go down then the public option is activated and liberals win. You should hope Obama passes these reforms and your prediction comes true.

It isn’t hard to see how the ban on the pre-existing conditions drop would happen. It becomes against the law. I mean if you can’t see how it’s hard that there are penalties for breaking the law, then it’s only hard for YOU to see that. It’s not hard for normal people to see that. Most people see that breaking laws results in jail time and law suits which generally make it impossible to break the law.

With regards to cost controls, again hard for you to see where that is, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. After all it’s hard for you to see that laws get enforced.

Let’s look at your conclusion, just one part of it. You essentially contradict yourself. You simultaneously hold that:

* A law banning the dropping of coverage for pre-existing conditions will be adopted

* A law banning the dropping of coverage for pre-existing conditions will not be adopted because there are no “cost controls”

Given that you can’t even make your prognostication consistent with itself, how much of these evil forces at play exist beyond the confines of your own mind?

we needed a roosevelt speech we got a carter speech

obama still bends over for the repubs

as do all demos

go independent the demos no longer represent you

they pretend they do to get reelected

another speech just what america needs

love the guy but just another spineless demo

the repubs eat demos for lunch

time to drain the swamp as jefferson recommended

right. my sister called me after the speech, she knows where i am on this and she saw the other speech. the one where obama is all about a PO. I didnt have the heart to explain to her ,”thats not what i saw”.The fucked up thing is that she worked in claims for many year. she has told the hysterical mother that her claim for her dying child is being rejected and that there is nothing she could do. she knows how corrupt they are, and she reaffirmed to me that without the mechanism of a strong PO, insurance companies will forcibly extract every single DIME that they can from 200 million people. cost will go up, care will become worse and wal street will get fatter. I am almost too astonished for speech. i think that our “leadership” are so addled with neo liberal “free market” junk science economics, that they really believe that market based “reform” will accomplish the goals they have laid out. its not possible. even if the market were a willing partner in ethical, sane reform (which of course it isnt) its just not set up that way. the market is for making money. social welfare programs are for social welfare and the good of society and the country. the market dosent care a flying fuck about society, good, or the country.

that was NO carter speech. carter was at least, and honest and liberal man.

“and the people who are most expensive to keep on the books will get dropped somehow” remember the comment about “emergency” insurance pools? while we wait the 4 years ( or longer )for the “reform” to kick in?
heres what i think. those high risk pools will be where sick people get dumped and they will be criminally expensive, just like the the high risk car insurance pools in states where car insurance is mandatory. the “exchange” and all that horseshit, is never going to happen. between the time of the signing and 4 years elapsed time, they will be forgotten in laws that “improve” on the bill. dems will probably lose congress next year so whatever is passed this year will be souped up by the republicans into a laser beam proof,ultra high power, inter-galactic rip-off reactor the democrats would blush to even dream of. oh its gonna get much much worsem before the whole thing implodes.

get used to the idea that when the pres. talks about “cutting cost of healthcare” hes talking about the governments cost. this is the beginning of the end of medicare, of the VA of it all.

“It isn’t hard to see how the ban on the pre-existing conditions drop would happen. It becomes against the law. I mean if you can’t see how it’s hard that there are penalties for breaking the law, then it’s only hard for YOU to see that. It’s not hard for normal people to see that. Most people see that breaking laws results in jail time and law suits which generally make it impossible to break the law. “

there will be no law as to how much we, who have “existing consditions”( ie human bodies)
will get to pay for coverage though. he never, has never adressed that. i guess the magic hand will take care of it, duh, we should just know that right? as for the “low regard for other peoples lives” well apparently we all have our own axe to grind huh?

man you are smug asshole. what does a 100 year old racist screed have to do with the way the WH and senate leadership handled this whole fucked up process? are you saying max and kent arent whores for the insurance industry? really? so then your willing to lie as well as use lame ass straw men and personal attacks to vent your spleen. i dont know why you’ve made yourself the defender of the trillion dollar handover to the insurance industry , personal reasons i guess, everyone has personal reasons.Personally i hope your existing condition is covered, and they triple the cost of the policy.

look it over

http://www.cpusa.org