I don’t feel like going point by point through the recommendations put forward by President Obama’s deficit commission appointees Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, mainly because their real goal is to advance conservative ideology; they are a wish-list of horrific, anti-middle class proposals supported by only two men with no real political power. But I do want to highlight their treatment of a robust public health insurance option, a very popular progressive idea that would also have the added benefit of cutting the deficit. It perfectly encapsulates the anti-progressive, anti-middle class, pro-corporatist ideology the “serious” people try to advance using their deficit hysteria.

To show how far the debate is from the perfect, let’s outline what the perfect would look like and contrast and compare against the rest of the spectrum from very good to bad.

Nancy Pelosi may not have enough votes for the “robust” public option tied to Medicare rates plus 5%. The Hill has published the official whip count [note: The Hill has now removed this page. Data was copied and posted here] of those House Democrats who oppose the robust public option. As I’ve pointed out countless [...]

It is not just unlikely that current health care reform bills, without a public option, will fail to provide millions of more people with quality affordable private health insurance–I fear such reform will make it impossible to them to get quality affordable health insurance.