This USA Today poll regarding HCR needs a bump

[joeprogressive]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-20-Health-Care-Senate_N.htm


It doesn't reflect the true will of the people, who overwhelmingly want this bill to pass.

[barbtries]

1. except it's not a great bill

i did vote yes on the poll but would certainly like to see REAL health care reform. disclaimer: don't know enough about the current bill. probably talking through the wrong hole.

[joeprogressive]

2. I want single payer but at this stage this bill must pass or nothing

will for a decade or more.

[lxlxlxl]

6. If you don't pass a bill, you will wait longer than that

If this bill doesnt pass, do you think you will sustain a Dem / Progressive majority in the House and Senate? Obama is out, best case scenario in eight years, and could lose his majorities in the House / Senate next year. If we pass a flawed bill, at least we can change it in the future. If we don't pass a bill, I think the press and the GOP will do their hardest to make the Dems look 'weak' and make Dem majorities seem meaningless. the GOP will make a comeback and where will we be? year 2000 all over again? another Republican president in 2016 can eradicate any positive change Obama makes in the next eight years.

[barbtries]

7. i feel the same way

it is vital that SOMETHING be done. i really should study up on the bill though. does it disallow "pre-existing" conditions, rescission, coverage caps? i should know this. but as you said, if it's defeated we go back to the stone age. just getting tired i suppose.

[FreakinDJ]

3. 31% YES - its not doing too well

[jonnyblitz]

4. you assume we will all vote the way you want us to.

these "DU this poll" threads are a fucking pet peeve of mine. I always vote the opposite.

[rgbecker]

5. You and Lieberman.

It's so hard to be a Democrat.

[Kitsune]

8. Happily voted no.

Because I'd never vote to stick the American people with this foul giveaway to the Insurance Mafia.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Another one for the party of NO!

Good for you, bad for the American people.

Oh well, soon you'll have plenty to cry about,
and absolutely nobody will give a shit,
cause you didn't care enough about anyone but you
and your intellectual findings that there is no grey in politics.
Know that whatever you "wanted" as reform was just a pipe dream,
that wasn't ever gonna be,
no matter what.

The Party of NO applauds you. They love you.

[Kitsune]

10. Oh, yes, call me a Republican. Brilliant debating tactic, that.

Never mind that the Republicans are the ones hiding with D's next to their name, inserting anti-choice amendments into an unrelated bill and watering down the only good part of the entire package until it barely covers anyone. This mess is going to seriously hurt the Democratic party. They can't keep selling out the people that vote for them and expect there to be no consequences.

[TomCADem]

11. So, You Voted With AHIP and U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Against AFL-CIO and AARP?

I tend to trust the latter over the former personally.

[Kitsune]

12. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Even if for the wrong reasons.

As it stands presently, I just can't support this bill. When it started out? Yes, I was all in favor of it. But the Democrats have watered it down beyond the point of meaninglessness. The way it is, it's going to make things a hundred times worse for the vast majority of Americans, all in the name of getting more profit for the insurance mafia. The idea of a public option is there just to distract you from the fact that everyone who doesn't qualify for it (some 99% of the population!) will instead be required by law to pay these exorbitant premiums. And this is a bill the Democrats are proposing? If I'd know that by voting Democratic I was voting for crypto-Republicans I probably would have sat the election out on the national level.

[TomCADem]

18. Its A Good Bill. Covers Millions Of Uninsured. Cuts The Deficit.

Eliminates dropping coverge for pre-existing conditions. Mandates that all insurance coverage must meet certain minimums to eliminate the insurance non-coverage out there. Aren't these good provisions?

[IndianaGreen]

20. You better do some good research on this crap of a bill you are defending

What you are defending is NOT what you are getting!

[TomCADem]

23. Did the research. Thank you. Its a good bill.

Have you looked beyond AHIP paid for talking points? Personally, I trust the AFL-CIO and AARP more than AHIP and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. I tend to think that each has their own self interest at stake.

Here for your reference:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102325.html

"Each bill includes bans on lifetime limits, premium disparity based on health status and sex, and coverage denials based on preexisting conditions."

Are you suggesting that this is a crappy requirement?

[IndianaGreen]

27. My union is not happy with the threat the bill poses to union's health benefits

The bill is crap and it is not progressive at all.

[slipslidingaway]

24. cuts the deficit - maybe you missed my prior post to you on this issue...

a good portion of the deficit reduction will come from using revenues paid in advance for the new CLASS provisions.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=7926&mesg_id=8540

While the program itself sounds good, notice how this new piece reduces the deficit by 72 billion in the 10 year window.

Nice way to reduce the cost for Now.

The headline news was that this bill would reduce the deficit by 104 billion...

BREAKING: CBO Releases Numbers On House Health Care Bill : Reduce Deficit by $104 Billion

...so where did that reduction come from, it appears a large portion (72 billion) is due to this new long term care insurance, aka CLASS.

While that is something to celebrate, the plan would have people paying in over the 10 year budget window for something they will need in the future, naturally this will be all gains until people start drawing from the fund. For reference this is shown on page 26, Table 3 of the CBO report.

It reminded me of the SS Trust Fund that was pre-financed and helped to reduce the deficits, especially during the Clinton and Bush years.

[FrenchieCat]

13. I didn't call you a Republican.......

But you see it as they do in the end,
and want the same results,
as the option is pass or fail.
You can either join forces and
work extra hard to change things that are in this bill now that you don't like,
or you can continue to want the same end as what the Republicans want.
If you want this bill killed, then, like I said,
the Republicans love you.....
no matter what you say.

[Kitsune]

15. Hey, if you know a way to make Democrats stop acting like Republicans, please, share it.

Because they certainly don't seem to be responsive to the vast majority of Americans that want single-payer, let alone a public option that'll actually accomplish what it's ostensibly there for.

[TomCADem]

19. Wait! So, the Republicans Who Are Voting Against The Bill Are Acting Like Democrats!

Well, check out Free Republic, because that is really DU, and up is down, and black is white.

[FrenchieCat]

22. I am but one person, and so are you.....

At this point, it's all about Black and White....
Either we choose to continue to fight for the minimum of what we want in this bill,
by doing all that we can,
or,
we throw our hands up in the air, criticize the bill as a no go,
and give the Republican the win that they
are working so hard for.

There really is no other scenario.

We have what we have, and we have to work with what we have.....
that is the reality,

and anything else at this point won't get us anywhere
other than in a totally fucked up irrevokable position
that won't be rectified for years to come with simple naysaying.

The line drawn in the sand is either this bill passes and we go from there,
or the bill doesn't pass, and we are handed our ass and then some,
and we not only go nowhere, but we start taking steps back,
with no alternative in place for years.

I've made my choice.

[Cha]

29. Put down your stupid broad brush from your teetering perch on high.

[IndianaGreen]

14. I would vote No as well

The Public Option In Name Only premiums will actually be higher than premiums in the private sector.

[Cha]

28. Good..progress will still be made without

the club for stagnation.

[nyc 4 Biden]

16. Voted Yes!

No bill is perfect. But this is our cause. Many of the progressive congressmen and women I respect are supporting it, so I will too.

[IndianaGreen]

17. Our cause is universal health care, which this bill certainly is NOT

From 12 to 24 million Americans will remain without health coverage. The so-called "public" option's premiums will be higher than those of private insurers. The rates won't be tied to Medicare rates, so any bargaining for rates will be done with the industry. The mandates will hurt the working poor and the taxes on purposely misnamed "Cadillac" plans, will hurt the working class and their hard fought health benefits.

[TomCADem]

21. 31 Million More Will Be Insured. You would oppose that?

Without this coverage, many of these millions could die due to lack of coverage. Yet, are you suggesting that we should hold out, perhaps for a couple of more decades for Truman's dream of universal health care while millions of people perish?

Or, should we pass this bill, and continue to work for more reform?

[slipslidingaway]

25. The basic plan in the senate bill has a 60% actuarial value...

something we should be discussing, having insurance does not mean that you can afford to use the policy. At what point do we just label the basic plans catastrophic coverage???

[TomCADem]

26. Senate Bill Mandates Preventative Care

So, no, its not just catastrophic coverage.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10731/Reid_letter_11_18_09.pdf

###

Policies purchased through the exchanges (or directly from insurers) would have to meet
several requirements: In particular, insurers would have to accept all applicants, could not
limit coverage for preexisting medical conditions, and could not vary premiums to reflect
differences in enrollees’ health. The options available in the insurance exchanges would
include private health insurance plans and could also include a public plan that would be
administered by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). The public plan
would negotiate payment rates with all providers and suppliers of health care goods and
services; providers would not be required to participate in the public plan in order to
participate in Medicare. The public plan would have to charge premiums that covered its
costs, including the costs of paying back start-up funding that the government would
provide. State governments could elect not to make the public plan available in their
state. The legislation also would provide start-up funds to encourage the creation of
cooperative insurance plans (co-ops) that could be offered through the exchanges;
existing insurers could not be approved as co-ops.

###

Finally, with the subsidies, lower income families who are insured will be able to purchase even more generous coverage.

[slipslidingaway]

30. In the future there will be discussions about what exactly is considered...

preventative care.

Still there will be many items that will not fall under that heading and companies will pay roughly 60% of the bill, the House has a 70% actuarial value.


The actuarial squeeze on low and middle income families

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/10/27/the-actuarial-squeeze-on-low-and-middle-income-families/

"...The Health Affairs article by Jon Gabel and his colleagues shows that plans with an 80% actuarial value are not providing adequate financial protection to individuals with modest incomes who need health care. Having a plan with an 80% actuarial value can place you in the ranks of the underinsured.

Basic coverage under the proposals before Congress would provide an actuarial value of 65% or 70%. That means that the patients would be responsible for the remaining 30% or 35% of health care costs, although the proposals would limit the total amount for which the patients are responsible under the plans. Patients also would be responsible for out-of-network services and for services and products not covered by their plans.

If there is a cap on out-of-pocket spending, then why should the precise actuarial value make difference? Simply, the lower the actuarial value, the greater the likelihood that the patient will have to spend the full amount up to the cap. Thus more individuals will be negatively impacted. Also, the amount of the cap makes a very big difference. The proposed caps on out-of-pocket spending, when added to the patient’s share of the premium, create a financial hardship for most low and middle income individuals and families..."


--------Did you see my reply above about the CLASS revenue being used to lower the deficit?

[TomCADem]

35. Isn't That A Good Thing? Without Reform, There Is No Such Discussion...

It is like attacking the Clean Air Act, because it did not spell out that greenhouse gases could be regulated, but apparently left it to future discussion (and litigation). However, does that mean that the Clean Air Act should not be passed even though it left a lot of gaps to future regulation?

In answer to your point, I think having a discussion of what constitutes preventative care is a good place to be compared to the status quo where no such discussion is even taking place.

[slipslidingaway]

36. Point being insurance companies will find a way to maximize investor...

profits, that is their responsibility.

Did you see my reply above about the CLASS revenue being used to lower the deficit?

[Sebastian Doyle]

31. Anybody read some of the comments over there?

"Chances are most of the liberals on these boards pushing for free health care are AIDS infected homosexuals."

Really classy as always, repukes. :puke:

[Cha]

32. That's how stupid they are.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[patrice]

34. Is it just me, or are there several bushites calling for the legalization of marijuana in those comm

ents?