General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy Two Cents - If Obama wants the ACA to help him win in November -
He needs to use his bully pulpit to explain what it is about.
And to make his message simple and understandable.
One of the primary rules in understanding a great deal about winning in politics is that those who have the simpler message can win (at least on that issue) with that message.
Right now, the Republicans have the simple message: "It's a tax and you'll probably face a penalty."
What is Obama's counter to that? As far as I can tell, Obama has an over 2,000 page document that many people are not familiar with, and that probably includes the people in Congress who voted for the ACA.
For instance, we in the public keep hearing that there will be help in paying insurance premiums for any households whose income falls at less than 400% of the poverty level.
But where does the help come from? I see this one point made again and again here at DU and also on some rather wonkish policy sites - but where specifically does a family go for that help? Have the Powers that be even decided where we go?
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)health insurance exchanges that the states will be setting up. I assume it will all be done online. I can't imagine they would burden people with having to traipse all over creation to some brick-and-mortar place to buy medical insurance.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)I am assuming that also, but so far, at least in California, the site set up doesn't offer you financial help. You either come up with the premium amounts or you don't and your income (or lack of it) doesn't seem to factor in to any of it.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)be the insurance companies' responsibility.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Nightmare-ish scenarios people will face.
Just as the banks requested (regarding the mortgage situation) a most complicated application process, and offered up a deadline, and then pretended they never received the information, and then pretended, "Oh yes, we found your ap - it's all okay" and then they call to tell the family they are about to foreclose, as none of the written application papers are anywhere inside the bank's processing center, and on and on, so too will it end up being for those of us relying on the Big Insurers.
What we needed :
[h2][font color=blue]
SINGLE PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE !!
[/h2][/font color=blue]
What we public citizens got: the short end of a very slimey stick in the butt!
While Rahm Emanuel got all his friends the Big Insurers exactly what they wanted: a program that will still deliver third world levels of care to 90 percent of us, while demanding premiums that we can't afford, plus deductibles plus co-pays. In other words, a juicy set o0f mandated profits.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)to move us closer to Single Payer.
Use the flaws, people. Attack the weaknesses when they hurt REAL LIVE PEOPLE and you won't have to work very hard to get this changed. Yes, it will take time and be incremental. But we WILL improve it. And we WILL win in the end.
First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
Never give up. Never, never, never, never, never give up.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)PlanetBev
(4,104 posts)I'd like to see him give a blockbuster speech about health care, in primetime. He could use it to debunk the the lunacy that's being spewed about this bill. Kind of on the order of that Rev. Wright speech he gave in Philadelphia in '08. I knew it was a watershed moment for him, and I was in tears for most of it. It was just amazing.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Was awesome. And I remember tearing up when Jon Stewart commented on it.
Stewart <I am paraphrasing his comments>
"So on Wednesday night, for the first time in how many decades, an adult running for the highest office in the land, spoke to the public as though they were adults."
That Obama seemingly has been lost to us. His handlers, like political handlers everywhere, detest honesty and have no concept of the public needing to be treated like adults.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)If something has a ring of redundancy or repetition it loses it's impact.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)"But the foot's on the other hand now." (In comment section and quoted by someone named William.)
Totally sums it up.
Democrats derided Romney Care when it was only applicable to Massachusetts. Meanwhile Romney defended it. Then it became ObamaCare, and it was defended by the Democrats and derided by the Republicans.
And of course for me it is all academic - I can't afford HC insurance now.
Plus I have been helped by government agencies often enough to know that them that's helping me can also be seriously hurting me. Since I'll probably still fall within the 400% of poverty that will require me to hope an agency reimburses me, so I can pay the insurance premium, I also know the dread this will entail. Like any other government assistance, the penalties for failing to comply will be worth many weeks of nightmares. Forget to report some income, no matter how minor, or how unintentional the omission is, and you can be locked up in a room and told that you are facing 16 years. The fact that the IRS will have some aspect of oversight does not lessen the dread.
eridani
(51,907 posts)People don't give a shit about laundry lists; they care about their lives. That's how I knew that we were going to get fucked over badly in 201--the OFA organizers were full of laundry lists but no values messages.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)he's too bipartisan and not good at using plain language
mopinko
(70,074 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)mopinko
(70,074 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)"Have congress bring me a way to expand coverage without the mandate and I will sign the bill."
Steal their "repeal and replace" bull shit by offering to improve the bill yourself.
As I understand it there were 4 ways to expand coverage:
The far left idea was single payer
The middle left idea was a public option
The middle right idea was an employer mandate
And the far right idea was an individual mandate
Any of the other three are an improvement over what we have. Keep the debate on health care so it stays off the economy. We win on this one every time. Plus Rmoney has issues with his base over this since he did the same thing in MA that Pres. Obama did on a federal level.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)And perhaps would have, if Obama had made it his cause.
This election cycle he is not going to see the historic and enthused 62.5% of voter turnout as in 2008. He'll be most lucky if half the voters how up at the polls.
His momentum is gone; and he faces a far harder challenge than four years ago. When a Democrat tries to out-Republican a Republican, he loses a lot of his base, while gaining none of theirs. And letting Rahm call us "retards" didn't help any either.
demwing
(16,916 posts)but other problems you have to solved by detecting them as they happen, and then fixing them.
By the time the retard comment was made, Rahm was definitely a "detect and fix" kind of problem. As I'm sure you've noticed, Rahm ain't been a part of the administration for many moons...
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Trans Pacific Partnership agreement, which basically "outsources" our jobs by letting the Chinese come here and build the factories/prisons they want, and employ people under whatever conditions these new overlords want, for whatever minimal pay the overlords want, I can't see how I can blame Rahm for all the Administrations mis-steps.
Like you say, Rahm hasn't been part of the game (as far as we know) for quite some time.
demwing
(16,916 posts)either find a different candidate to support, or support the candidate you have.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Whole damn country, that when a policy as subversive to the ideals of Democracy as the TPP surfaces due to a leak, and people's only response is that "I" need a new candidate. Recently, I heard pretty much the same tired "philosophy" when phone banking for Garamendi.
This whole country needs a complete overhaul. Obama was a new candidate - how long did it take for him to be told what he would have to do, and what campaign promises he'd have to give up in order to serve the Puppet Masters.
A new candidate ain't gonna do it -we need to return to a truly complete overhaul of just about everything that is happening in the world of politics.
demwing
(16,916 posts)at every step you bring up negative, unrelated issues.
If you want to have a discussion on the value of Obama's policies, great. Start such a thread and see if anyone responds. but don't join a different conversation in progress, try to change the topic, and click "tsk,tsk,tsk..." when you get shut down.
Or do, but don't expect anyone to care too much.
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office lists the advantages of Obamacare:
1. The Act was designed to reduce overall health care costs by making services available to the 32 million who currently can't get insurance. They often use a hospital emergency room as their primary care physician, increasing costs for everyone. This starts in 2014.
2. For people who can't afford health insurance, the Federal government will pay the states to add them to Medicaid. The income requirement will be expanded to include more of the working poor.
3. Those who don't qualify for the expanded Medicaid will receive tax credits. States will be required to set up insurance exchanges to make it easier to shop for private health insurance coverage.
4. Insurance companies cannot deny children coverage for pre-existing conditions. This benefit applies to everyone in 2014. Insurance companies can no longer drop anyone from coverage once they get sick. If a company denies someone coverage, that person can go to an external appeals process.
5. Parents can put their children up to age 26 on their health insurance plans. This will bring more profit for health insurance companies, since they will receive more premiums without higher costs for these healthier individuals.
6. The Medicare "donut hole" gap in coverage will be eliminated by 2020.
7. People with existing health insurance will keep it. Businesses prefer to offer a tax-free benefit like health insurance to attract good workers. That won't change under Obamacare.
8. Obamacare does not apply to businesses with less than 50 employees. Larger businesses are required to offer health insurance, but receive tax credits to help employees pay premiums. In 2014, the tax credit increases to 50%.
9. The Act will lower the budget deficit by $143 billion over the next 10 years by raising some taxes and shifting more cost burdens.
(Source: CBO CBO Report on Health Care Reform and the Budget; Wall Street Journal, What Health Insurance Ruling Means, June 28, 2012; NPR, Medicaid Expansion, June 27, 2012)
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)the major point. He did an excellent job yesterday. Same speech taken a little further and I think that would do it nicely.
Shiraz
(302 posts)It worked in Mass. according to Rachel Maddow
flamingdem
(39,313 posts)and that will continue until they're called out on it and the facts are everywhere.
byeya
(2,842 posts)This is not the time for a logician; it's the time for blunt to-the-point sloganeering.
Ship of Fools
(1,453 posts)I was called a *vacuous bullshitter.*
I too was excited about and voted for an intelligent person who treated
us like adults. I thought America was all growed up. I was wrong. PBO
needs to accept it and start shouting from the rooftops. I think he actually
has, but because it took so long, he needs to make up for time and
change his tone & body language dramatically ASAP to call attention to
the danger of GOPTbaggers. A little bit of theatre never hurt anybody, imo.
Ship of Fools
(1,453 posts)looks like the goddamned homepage for Cialis or something.
Can't the Ds do better? Sure this is going to be about money,
but decent messaging AND money could make a difference.
Just one pissed-off woman's fucking opinion.