I wonder how long it will take the Governors, Representatives and Senators to realize that if they opt out they will lose all kind of federal funding for all their other projects and needs.

Typical Democratic end around play.

Public Option! Public Option! Braawck! Corky wanna cracker! Braaawck!

--Corkatiel

I'm willing to sell the above stalker to the lowest, er, highest bidder. He ain't much, true, but if you have no one to personally sniff your ass wherever you go, he'll do.

No thanks, Corky. I already have a sick goat following me around.

What this is is a calculated attack on medicare.

step 1: have a so called 'public option' that doesn't insure people, raises costs, and fines the poor who can't afford it.

step 2: companies get to dump their private coverage.

step 3: the people revolt against the 'public option' fines.

step 4: the 'public option' is removed, the people are worse off, and no one mentions national health care in this country again.

step 5: they do as much damage to medicare as they can.

Both parties are in on it.

I support medicare +.

I wonder how long it will take the Governors, Representatives and Senators to realize that if they opt out they will lose all kind of federal funding for all their other projects and needs.

There's no provision to cut off funding to states that opt-out. That wouldn't be necessary, and it wouldn't really be an opt-out plan if that were the case.

Instead, it seems to me that states which opt out will make a lot of their own uninsured or poorly insured citizens angry. So the opt-out provision forces states to either accept the public option or take explicit action to deny it to their people.

This is kinda how it worked when some states wanted to reject stimulus money. Even in the reddest states, the governors caught hell for suggesting they would turn it down.

People are hurting everywhere for lack of health insurance.

What this is is a calculated attack on medicare.

How is it an attack on Medicare? Democrats love Medicare and would gladly extend it to cover everybody if they could get it passed.

What incentive would a State have to opt out anyway?

Hope and Change 2009

The chickens have been fed, the eggs collected, time for golf. Maybe I will see some of you libtard losers as I pass through the pick-up window.

No, I do not want to super-size it.

ahhh, what a good time it is to be on the right side of history!

"No, I do not want to super-size it."

Talking about "super-size," did anyone watch "60 Minutes" last night regarding the Medicare fraud taking place? If the federal government can't control it for Medicare, can you IMAGINE what will happen if it takes over ALL the health care?

How is it an attack on Medicare? Democrats love Medicare and would gladly extend it to cover everybody if they could get it passed.

#7 | Posted by rcade

It's an attack on paying the benefits that were promised under the program since they've already spent the "trust fund" and are now looking for cover to avoid paying.

How do you cut $500B out of Medicare over ten years, while the eligible population is increasing, and not cut benefits? And if you want to say by reducing waste, then why don't we just go ahead and do that now. No new legislation required for that.

If the Republicans even proposed reducing the growth of Medicare as they have in the past, never mind actually cutting it, you'd have an aneurysm.

This legislation will saves thousands of lives. One of whom may be that of my twenty year old son. He was born with vascular problems which have hospitalized him four times this year alone and required two surgeries. Currently, he is at UCLA Ronald Reagan Hospital. He had a pulmonary embolism earlier this year which sent his heart into complete arrest four times while in the ER. He is on the tail end of being covered by my insurance. HealthNet has already tried to terminate him, but eventually backed down. Young people like him need access to coverage. The Public Option will provide that coverage. It is simple as that.
It is not just lazy people or stupid people who don't have insurance.

"If the Republicans even proposed reducing the growth of Medicare as they have in the past, never mind actually cutting it, you'd have an aneurysm."

It's not just Medicare...once the government has created ANY type of subsidy or entitlement it is political death to even suggest freezing it, much less to cut it or stop it altogether. Anyone believing that government health care would ever cut costs is either terminally ignorant or dangerously naive...maybe both.
My favorite example is the Mohair Subsidy. Read about it sometime. During WWII the government subsidized mohair sheep farmers due to the requirement for the wool for GI clothing and all. Guess what, there is absolutely no great demand for mohair today but the subsidy still exists and is increased from time to time.

He is on the tail end of being covered by my insurance.

he is eligible until age 24 right?

Young people like him need access to coverage. The Public Option will provide that coverage. It is simple as that.

I agree

But lets stop pretending that this will be a budget neutral item as I'm sure there are thousands and thousands of cases like your son where you can't collect enough premium to absorb those costs. Many unhealthy people will sign up for this first chance they get.

Right thing? yes
Cheap? not even close.

He is eligible until he is 23, so long as he is college. But his medical condition has made it impossible for him to attend. So for insurance purposes, they tried to consider him ineligible.

He is eligible until he is 23, so long as he is college. But his medical condition has made it impossible for him to attend. So for insurance purposes, they tried to consider him ineligible.

does he live at home? that was an exception to the rule in Kansas for years.

Now days, we have been seeing carriers waiving the "full time student living away from home" requirement and just agreeing to cover them regardless.

But that has been Kansas.

#17
That's the thing, if the public option begins by insuring the previously uninsured, i.e. Those with pre-existing conditions and those with no real history of healthcare then yes it will be expensive because they are the most expensive to treat. That's why many don't already have healthcare in the first place.

And that's the whole point too. The only way to bring costs down is to get everybody into the same risk pool. Spreading the risk out among as many people as possible. Its what the insurance co's do but they like to stack the decks in their favor.

Many are ideologically opposed to the idea and that ends all discussion really.

still time to shovel more pork into this turkey.

Democrats love Medicare and would gladly extend it to cover everybody if they could get it passed.

They have the votes to pass it. What's stopping them if they love it so much?

And that's the whole point too. The only way to bring costs down is to get everybody into the same risk pool. Spreading the risk out among as many people as possible. Its what the insurance co's do but they like to stack the decks in their favor.

#20 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-26 10:53 AM

But liberals are too busy waving the pom-poms for a half-assed attempt at health reform so they can claim some victory for Democrats. Party over country and all.

There's no provision to cut off funding to states that opt-out.

#6 | Posted by rcade

Just like there was no provision in the 55mph speed limit to cut off highway funds to the states that didn't comply.

You, sir, live in a fairy tale dream world.

They have the votes to pass it. What's stopping them if they love it so much?

#22 | Posted by joe

Most Democrats love Medicare and would gladly extend it to cover everybody if they could get it passed.

Does that fix your problem with absolutes now?

Just like there was no provision in the 55mph speed limit to cut off highway funds to the states that didn't comply. You, sir, live in a fairy tale dream world.

The speed limit wasn't passed with an explicit opt-out provision, was it? You're comparing apples and oranges.

But many Democrats are too busy waving the pom-poms for a half-assed attempt at health reform so they can claim some victory for Democrats. Party over country and all.

#23 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

I've changed your statement so that I may agree with you.

"Does that fix your problem with absolutes now?"

How would like to have Counselor Joe as your defense attorney? With his "skill set" you would probably end up in San Quentin for stealing bubble gum.

I've changed your statement so that I may agree with you.

#27 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2009-10-26 11:35 AM

Let us also prepare a petition so that folks who want to opt out of police and fire department protection, schools and library systems have the right to do so.

Remember it doesn't take 60 votes to pass healthcare reform in the Senate, it takes 51. I suspect that a handful of Repubs (think Maine) would NOT support a filibuster against their own constituencies. herm

Herm you are absolutely right. This is a key issue for Democrats and the nuclear option isn't a last resort, its just another tool in their bag.

It's key for their party, so they need to muscle as much stuff through as they can while they have the chance.

There are no real classic liberals in power nor media.

Not one.

There are no real classic liberals in power nor media.

Not one.

#32 | Posted by Shawn

Very true.

Limited central governmant and property rights are both the core of this country's existence and the derision of a certain and extremely influential faction of this country as it exists today.

jeff you are an imbecile.

I'm not going to waste time talking about the federalists nor the fact that 'property' included slaves.

Nor will I attempt to teach you what a real classical liberal stands for.

I will just reiterate that you are a completely ignorant imbecile.

I love it. Like with the "stimulus" $$$$, it will be fun to watch all the repug governors decline the public option and then say goodbye to politics.

LMFAO

Anytime you hear loonytarians talk about "classical liberals" you should reach for a gun. It's totally dishonest. I can provide quotes from so-called "classical liberals" like John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, Benjamin Franklin, etc., that would make your typical right-libertarian's head explode.

#14 | POSTED BY MODER8 AT 2009-10-26 10:29 AM

God bless and keep you and your son!

....you should reach for a gun.....

don'tcha know null, libs don't have guns....

LOL

That is the point nullifidian.

There are no real libertarians either.

Null and Shawn, the libertarian and green party stance is an easy one to take, because your party is never in power to sway from their beliefs. You never get disapointed, because they will never be in office, and you always get to sit back and feel superior to the "dumbass" Democrats and Republicans, whose politicians will without a doubt fail at delivering many, many times.

"and you always get to sit back and feel superior"

Well said, Andy. We have a lot of 3rd party purists around here. They don't get much done. For example, take "libertarians"...please!

Null and Shawn, the libertarian and green party stance is an easy one to take, because your party is never in power to sway from their beliefs. You never get disapointed, because they will never be in office, and you always get to sit back and feel superior to the "dumbass" Democrats and Republicans, whose politicians will without a doubt fail at delivering many, many times.

Posted by andyuhenet at 2009-10-26 05:32 PM | Reply

Great post andy.

Where's K?

"You never get disapointed, because they will never be in office, and you always get to sit back and feel superior to the "dumbass" Democrats and Republicans"

I don't call them dumbasses, I say they're scared to stand up for what they want, and more so of what the other side wants, so they make the devil's bargain, and lash out at anyone who points it out.

-the devil's bargain

The reality is that compromise is almost always necessary, however repugnant, to make even the slowest progress.

If you want to stay within the law, which is where politics comes in.

"I say they're scared to stand up for what they want,"

No, Hagbard. We make the tough choices and live in the real world. I picked my poison and I would do it again in a heartbeat. There was only two conceivable alternatives on election day last year when I was in the voting booth. Either Obama, or Johnny Bomb Bomb and the Crazy Bitch would be the president/vp-elect the next morning. That was the reality that faced you in the voting booth. And you ducked it. You didn't choose.

"You didn't choose."

Because you're presenting a false choice. There were more than two people on the ballot. The fact that our elections are largely limited to the wealthy means most Americans will not notice third party candidates - but that doesn't mean I have to pretend they don't exist.

I voted for who I wanted to be the president. It's not my fault you didn't do the same.

I voted for who I wanted to be the president

In some other dimension where they might actually the next day be President elect, as Bill says.

"I voted for who I wanted to be the president. It's not my fault you didn't do the same."

You ducked the big choice. The only choice presented to you. If you can't make the big decisions, Ryker, then I suggest you step aside for someone who will.

No. The "choice presented to me" was "who do you want to be the President of the United States?" My potential answers were: John McCain, Barack Obama, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, etc. Again, the fact that most Americans don't see millions of dollars worth of advertisements and televised debates featuring certain other candidates does not mean they were not part of the choice.

I voted for who I wanted to be the president. You didn't. Not my fault. Your fault.

"I voted for who I wanted to be the president."

And ran away from making a choice as to what really-existing-reality would begin to govern the country the next morning. A real profile in "don't blame me" you are.

#51 | Posted by Timex

You've never had any dealings with medicare or medicaid, have you?

The reality is that compromise is almost always necessary, however repugnant, to make even the slowest progress.

----------

Like the 3/5s compromise...

Like the 3/5s compromise...

#53 | Posted by Shawn

Most likely end the same way too....worked out so well for everyone..

Like the 3/5s compromise...
#53 | Posted by Shawn

Oh snap.

Don't kid yourselves -- The Dems have always had all the votes they need to pass whatever health plan they want. They just have to figure out how to play the people by having certain so-called moderate-conservative Dems in Red states vote so they have cover come election time. Its all a con, folks. They are Dems first and Americans last when it comes to their power.

jeff you are an imbecile.

I'm not going to waste time talking about the federalists nor the fact that 'property' included slaves.

Nor will I attempt to teach you what a real classical liberal stands for.

I will just reiterate that you are a completely ignorant imbecile.

#34 | Posted by Shawn

Oh shit!

You really scolded me, Shawn!

Gotta love faux intellectuals - they can never actually make an argument, but they sure like to pretend to be intelligent and well-read. Oh, and they are usually angry too, but NOT usually to the degree that Shawn is.

I have never once actually observed you actually engage in discourse on this site.

Not once.

I guess you are just too smart for everybody who has the temerity to disagree with you.

You were picked on as a kid, weren't you?

"They are Dems first and Americans last when it comes to their power."

Unlike Republicans who passed tax cuts they knew would bankrupt the government and did so specifically because they wanted to bankrupt the government.

Republicans who passed tax cuts they knew would bankrupt the government and did so specifically because they wanted to bankrupt the government.

#58 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2009-10-27 07:47 AM

My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.
Grover Norquist

Tax breaks for the richest 1%, two unnessary invasions/occupations, delayed Katrina response, then the economic crash.....

Mission Accomplished, neocons!