Submitted by R. Neal on Mon, 2009/12/21 - 10:39am

AP reports the late night/early morning 60-40 vote. Republicans voted unanimously against the bill that they have gutted and repurposed for the benefit of their insurance industry benefactors.

In 2010, voters should be asking Republicans in Congress why they don't want every struggling family to have access to affordable health insurance, and why they (and Blue Dogs) wanted to mandate coverage but not provide competition or affordable options, and then tax it.

Actually, I can answer that. This is not about the nuts and bolts of the "reform" package, which is actually a pretty sweet deal for insurance companies. (How many other industries enjoy a federal mandate requiring people to buy their unregulated product?) If they can't muster the votes to block it, Republicans will be happy to let the 58+2 majority pass it so they can go to tea parties and foam at the mouth about the socialist government takeover of health care bankrupting America and killing grandma, then stop by the bank on the way home to cash their checks from the insurance companies.

No, what this is really about is setting up Democrats for "failure." Republicans desperately want to stop any progressive reforms whatsoever, otherwise people will start to realize there might be another way that might actually work. They especially want Obama to fail, even at the expense of American working people and families. Just ask GOP leader Rush Limbaugh. The only failure, though, will be the failure to pass any legislation that might actually drag America into the 21st century.

Once again they have out-maneuvered Democrats and placed themselves in a win-win scenario for Republicans and their wealthy friends, at the expense of their very own struggling low-information voters who support them. If the bill passes as is with all the Republican poison pills, it could be worse than the status quo and Republicans will say "I told you so." If it fails to pass they can point to the Democratic "majority" and say "losers."

100
vote
Stick's picture

Banana Republic

We are very quickly becoming a banana republic in which the only legislation that can make it through our esteemed Congress makes possible the looting of public funds by private interests, war-making, or both. This will not end well...

Andy Axel's picture

No, what this is really

No, what this is really about is setting up Democrats for "failure." They desperately want to stop any progressive reforms whatsoever, otherwise people will start to realize there might be another way that might actually work. They especially want Obama to fail, even at the expense of American working people and families.

And Obama is on the stump, desperate to characterize this legislative POS as a "win" for the Democratic team.  Chump.

What he doesn't seem to get is that this may have been the only opportunity he would ever have to guarantee himself a 2nd term.  All posturing aside, what needed to happen was for a legislative package to emerge that (a) was accessible to people who needed it, and (b) that would have an immediate and tangible benefit for them.  That isn't what happened, or even a remote possibility of what's going to happen.

This was uninspired, unimaginative, and sadly... not unprecedented.  Thorougly predictable. 

Grade:  The most minimum score possible in an F without it being a zero.  What is it that you get for signing your name when sitting for the SAT and not answering a single question?  That.

____________________________

Calling to the underworld. Come out of the cupboard, you boys and girls.

Virgil Proudfoot's picture

This really is a triumph for Obama

Folks, you seem to be missing the point.

Obama is proving himself a true crusader, a man with a great deal of spine. Despite all this carping by the people who actually voted for him, he will indeed stand up for the rights of the people he sees as his constituents. But he sees his constituents as the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies, who paid for his campaign and the campaigns of the Democrats in Congress (the Republicans, too, but that's another matter).

So Barry O really is standing up and doing what he sees as right: transforming the public demand for healthcare reform into a lovely Xmas basket for Big Inscos and Big Pharma.

 

 

Somebody's picture

Then again...

Perhaps Mr. Obama has done what he really campaigned on, which was to press forward into the vast and imperfect middle ground.  Given the amount of vitriol spewing from both left and right over this legislation, I'm beginning to believe that Obama is doing what I expected of him from the outset.  

Had he actually done what the liberals demanded and the conservatives feared, what we would have right now is exactly nothing.  No bill. No change, whether you believe in it or not.  Health care reform would be dead as a doornail and untouchable for another 20 years.  If there are shortcomings in the current bill (and rest assured there are) its passage will be a game changer, and I believe that it will open up the opportunity to revise and refine over the coming years, because the longstanding stalemate over the status quo will have ended.

The political question moving forward will be whether or not the liberal wing of the Democratic party will choose to eat their own young, just like the Palin-led conservative wing of the Republican party eats their own impure brethren, or if the Democrats will realize that they've actually gotten a win here.  Do you really want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

Virgil Proudfoot's picture

It isn't just the "liberal wing" of the Democratic Party

You seem not to remember that a single-player plan, which was carefully kept off the table, and a true public option both polled extremely well among the general population, not just Dems. Both enjoyed majority support, and either one would have addressed the cost issue which remains unresolved in the current Senate bill.

But Obama and the congressional Dems decided to stiff the majority, who elected them, and instead service the needs of the inscos, who funded their campaigns. Now the taxpayers will be forced, under threat of a fine, to line the pockets of the insurance CEOs who now own the healthcare system, by force of the federal government.

That's the Change You Can Believe In.©

Somebody's picture

The single-payer plan may

The single-payer plan may indeed have polled well with the general public, but that's not who votes in the Senate.  If single-payer can't reach the magic sixty votes in the Senate, then you can't go all-in on single-payer, because you will lose.  Single-payer was off the table because the votes weren't there.  A public option was closer to reality, but clearly the votes weren't there, either.  So which would you have preferred?  Should President Obama have presented a single-payer or public option bill and lost, or should he have just withdrawn the whole thing?

President Obama has a philosophy of not sacrificing the good for the perfect.  That's actually what he campaigned on, and if they were paying attention, the majority who elected him should know that.

My understanding is that the current Senate bill includes not only a mandate for buying health insurance, but also the elimination of denials and recisions for pre-existing conditions, and that it also requires insurance companies to spend more on services and less on profits.  The devil is in the details, but those sound like significant improvements over the status quo to me.

bill young's picture

Somebody

I agree with your comments.

R. Neal's picture

The political question

The political question moving forward will be whether or not the liberal wing of the Democratic party will choose to eat their own young, just like the Palin-led conservative wing of the Republican party eats their own impure brethren, or if the Democrats will realize that they've actually gotten a win here.  Do you really want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

Honestly, I don't see how any Democrat - liberal, progressive, moderate, fiscally conservative, or otherwise - can call this a victory.

As I've said before, the current bill is broken. If we're not going to have a robust public option, take away the individual mandate and we'll call it even.

I think Congress should also seriously reconsider expanding Medicaid unless they can come up with a way to fund it, permanently. And get rid of all the tinkering with Medicare. It makes people who think Sarah Palin is relevant nervous.

I think hospitals and physicians would also be justified in taking back the pay cuts they took to help pay for the bill and move it along, given that the current version looks nothing like what they thought they were agreeing to. But I'm not clear on what all the backroom dealing was on that.

The stuff about letting insurance companies operate across state lines according to the state regulations where their home office is located is also troubling. Remember credit cards and North Dakota? That stuff should probably go, too, unless there is some way to set up federally regulated national insurance companies.

What's left would then be regulation of the insurance industry, including revoking their anti-trust exemption. That would be a better start towards incremental change that might actually help some people.

The other stuff about "best practices" review boards and such should probably be funded, too, but a lot of that is already going on in various government agencies. Maybe we need another czar.

Somebody's picture

Why are the public option

Why are the public option and individual mandate the yin and yang for you?  It occurs to me that the elimination of denials and recisions for pre-existing conditions is the yin to an individual mandate yang, and I believe both are in the bill.  You can't require someone to buy insurance if the insurance companies can deny service to some people.  Likewise, it's not fair to insurance companies to require they cover everyone if the young and healthy can opt out.

Virgil Proudfoot's picture

What plan are you referring to?

The mandates are in there all right, along with requirements to (eventually) allow pre-existing conditions, but without a public option there is no effective cost-control mechanism, so the inscos can charge essentially whatever they want. And you will be required to pay, regardless of the faulty nature of the product you are being forced to buy, or pay a fine. Plus they want to tax the benefits of union workers, who have been the foot soldiers for the Dim Party for decades.

The insco lobbyists seem to have moved the Dim congresscritters into an alternative reality.

bizgrrl's picture

If we're not going to have a

If we're not going to have a robust public option, take away the individual mandate and we'll call it even.

Exactly! I don't see how forcing people to buy something they can't afford will help.

In a recent Newsweek article touting the Cleveland Clinic, there was mention of the high cost of processing insurance claims from "thousands of different health plans from hundreds of insurance companies all over the country".

whatever else a government-run health-insurance system would accomplish, it would impose a uniform billing system on the current one, in which clinic's 2,000 doctors require 1,400 clerks to handle their billing.

I was excited when this process of healthcare reform was first brought up, now I am just hoping they don't make it worse for those of us that have to find and pay for their health insurance out-of-pocket, i.e. not covered by an employer's plan.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is used to make sure you are a human visitor and to prevent spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Shortcuts

Upcoming events:


User login

Citizen Blog-O-Rama

Local Media Yokels

Nashville Media Cats

Daily Rag

Film at 11

Wire Reports

Support KnoxViews



Your secure donation helps support this site.



TN Progressive All-Stars

Nearby:

Beyond:

At large:

Government:

Media: