« Change we can pretend in | Main | Jillionaire attitudes and ethics: Compare and contrast »

10/26/2009

Comments

...and to add to the "entertainingly speculative aside," it will be interesting to see how Rory Reid plays the opt-out. Will he use it as an active campaign plank, or just hope that his Republican challengers don't bring it up and then he won't either?

I "miss" all the people who have been bashing Harry for the past month while singing the President's praises. Now, the resounding silence. Let's hope President Obama ads his voice to the non-Snowe public option. And if there are really "progressive" Democrats out there (as opposed to people who always like to bitch about something), how about a cheer or two for Senator Reid. He took a very risky political position because he thinks it is the right thing to do, even though Nevada is almost always a Red State in statewide elections. He did the correct thing because it was correct, not necessarily popular with those who actually vote in off year elections.

Ok, he adds the public option but let's the States opt out. What happens if most, if not all the States opt out? He is just passing the buck onto the States and is really ducking the issue.

Is the "public option" really the right thing? It's not the same as "single payer" (which is the Canadian system). "Public option" has been tried without success in Massachusetts. It cuts costs a little bit, not a lot, and not as much as its proponents claim.

It's depressing to see how many otherwise sensible people got suckered into backing "the public option."

For anyone interested, I refer you to the Physicians for a National Health Plan. From their website pnhp.org
(pay special attention to the last paragraph).
*********
"Tell President Obama that single-payer health reform is the only practicable way to achieve his stated goal of universal, comprehensive coverage at an affordable price."

"Only single payer, by redirecting the vast sums wasted annually on bureaucracy and paperwork back into care, can assure high-quality coverage for everyone with no net increase in U.S. health spending. Only single payer can rein in costs."

"Lesser reforms, with or without a “public option,” won’t fix our broken system."
*************

If it survives and get enacted, I predict
disillusionment with "the public option" will occur in about 6-12 months. Until then, rational argument seems to be of no avail.

If passed, this will provide more people access to the Cadillac of healthcare... expensive and unreliable.

Dan,
States that 'opt out' will have to atone for that when the Governor is up for reelection. Most people want coverage or at least the option of coverage. States that opt out will most likely have to offer some sort of alternative or the politicos will be out on their ear.

Last night, on Countdown, Senator Schumer made a comment that will go unnoticed and its significance will be lost because too many people are more interested in bashing and screaming than in actually knowing something. Olbermann asked him about the bill and Schumer said there is no better vote-counter than Harry Reid. Which, you might be amazed to know, is the majority leader's job.

Meanwhile, I continue to receive emails from lefty groups I belong to, all taking credit for pressuring Reid into this. There's a word for that, and it's what comes out of the back end of a bull. He presented the measure that he saw as likeliest to pass and politically shrewd.

How much of a victory is health care for only 10% of Americans? I hope Sen. Wyden can get the bill fixed so the Public Option is open to the entire Public and is single payer...or Medicare for all.

Ned: I love it how you always bitch and moan yet never offer any solutions.
You are absolutely wrong about the lack of success of the PO in Mass.
Krugman yesterday:
"[T]he experience in Massachusetts, which passed major health reform back in 2006, should dampen conservative hopes and soothe progressive fears.

"Like the bill that will probably emerge from Congress, the Massachusetts reform mainly relies on a combination of regulation and subsidies to chivy a mostly private system into providing near-universal coverage. It is, to be frank, a bit of a Rube Goldberg device — a complicated way of achieving something that could have been done much more simply with a Medicare-type program. Yet it has gone a long way toward achieving the goal of health insurance for all, although it’s not quite there: according to state estimates, only 2.6 percent of residents remain uninsured."

Mike S-

"And if there are really "progressive" Democrats out there (as opposed to people who always like to bitch about something), how about a cheer or two for Senator Reid. He took a very risky political position because he thinks it is the right thing to do, even though Nevada is almost always a Red State in statewide elections."

Agreed... except for the part about the Red State. This state has turned Blue, and I really do think Harry Reid will be justly rewarded next year for standing up for working Nevadans. I can't wait to see Lil' Tark Shark & Miss Sue Lowden shoot each other in the foot over who's more out of touch with Nevadans.

Prof. Green-

"Last night, on Countdown, Senator Schumer made a comment that will go unnoticed and its significance will be lost because too many people are more interested in bashing and screaming than in actually knowing something. Olbermann asked him about the bill and Schumer said there is no better vote-counter than Harry Reid. Which, you might be amazed to know, is the majority leader's job."

True, and I apologize for ever doubting you on that. Reid delivered, and I'm glad he has. He's won me over, and I'll be even happier if either the state opt-out can be tossed out in Conference and/or Conference adopts a Medicare+5 public option.

I also hope all the Reid-haters on the left eat their crow and notice the egg on their faces. He delivered, and he did so thanks to all of us here IN NEVADA who urged him to do what the people are asking for.

FYI. Reid said that his health care bill allows a state can opt-out "if they pass a law" to do so.

A governor, like Gibbons, if he is still around, can only sign the law or veto. All the candidates have to say is, "that is a legislative decision and I'll wait and see what the legislature decides."

MA plan is not all roses and is short on money; just kicked off all the legal immigrants not in-country five years. MA is short on medical personnel.

BTW, why does NV require a nursing instructor to have an advanced degree to teach at a state college? Surely there are competent nurses with BS degrees that can teach and thus we can have more classes opened to more students.

Finally, Reid is showing the kind of leadership that has long been absent.
Welcome back, Senator. We missed you. Now, don't blow it, OK?

Mike, we've disagreed in the past but I'm in accord with you that Sen. Reid is showing more testicular fortitude on this issue than the occupant of the Oval Office, who ran up the white flag before battle was even joined. Depending on the eventual outcome in the Senate, I wonder if historians will -- in trying to make sense of Harry's bewildering variety of positions on the public option -- chalk it up as a brilliant fake-out that kept everyone guessing? (They'd certainly be right about the "kept everyone guessing" part.)

David, I think a big part of the problem with Obama--and it's a problem from our perspective--is that he means what he says. He wants bipartisanship. He thinks it's important to have Republican votes. Well, fine. But not when it means having to give up on what is supposed to be principle. A lot of people on the left decided he was liberal, and he is, on a lot of issues, but they--we--made him out to be far more liberal than he is, while others make Reid out to be what he isn't. That's true of some on the left who think he's a wimp, and those on the right--not to name names, Sherm Frederick--who are too intellectually dishonest to want to know the truth anyway.

MG,

I think Obama is holding his powder dry for another issue.

Yes, he had a Joint Session address over the health care issue, but I believe he really is anxious to address overwhelming debt and the entitlement programs that are going to bring us to our knees (or whatever is lower after what the banks [again], Bush and his SEC,Phil Gramm, John Ensign and the rest of the Republican Party have done to America).

Soon after the Joint Session address, Obama promised a major speech on the debt; he never gave it. I think he held off so as not to color the deck of the health care issue before he scares the hell out of everyone when he addresses the debt issue.

What are Obama's plans for entitlement reform? How will he address the tsunami of debt that is upon us? Is it too soon to start the debate on how the Value Added Tax (VAT), is to be constructed? Will Obama wait till post election 2010? I don't know if we can wait....for Congress, it seems "cap and trade" is next up in the program.

Dear NVRed:
Paul Krugman is entitled to his opinion, of course. Krugman says the Massachusetts plan covers "almost" everybody. But he doesn't mention the cost.

Let's listen again to Dr. Himmelstein of Harvard, who said the following (in April 2008) about the Massachusetts experience with an Obama-type plan:

"With spiraling costs threatening to derail Massachusetts’ health reform, politicians and health policy wonks are rounding up the usual cost-control suspects."

Read all the details here, in the article "Fantasies of Cost Control"

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/david-himmelstein/2008/04/fantasies-of-cost-control-by-david-himmelstein-md/

Last May 22, Himmelstein (and Dr. Sidney Wolfe) were interviewed by Bill Moyers. Himmelstein said "And our plan is already starting to fall apart. They're already draining money out of the community clinics and public hospitals that have been the safety net."
You can read the whole transcript of the Moyers show at

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/transcript2.html

You criticize me for not offering solutions? The solution is single-payer. Read the Bill Moyers transcript, it's a real eye-opener.

Dave404, I have a journalist friend who is, let's say, to the left of all of us here, including The Gleaner. He said that whenever Obama does something, even if it's something he finds disagreeable, he knows that it is planned--in other words, that Obama is thinking way ahead about other things or related matters, and that he is thinking four and eight years down the road and beyond. I think that's an excellent analysis of him. It's why he may not make the decision I want him to make on, say, Afghanistan, but he's looking well ahead.

sign Reid's petition for support of public option... we need to flood congress after he went out on a limb!

http://harryreid.com/ee/index.php/publicoption

The comments to this entry are closed.

Glean the Gleaner



  • Web lasvegasgleaner.com