Is it a conservative plan? A liberal plan? A neo-liberal plan? A progressive plan?

[Writer]

Seriously, now...

[Jennicut]

1. As long as it works then I don't give a craps ass what people call it

[John Q. Citizen]

4. Works to do what? Return things to how they were before? Change things from

how they were before?

A plan isn't enough.

We need to understand the goals of the plan. And what you call it effects to some degree how well it will work to achieve whatever it is you want to achieve.

[Jennicut]

6. Works to make the economy better and yet concentrates on long term solutions

for long term problems. Stimuluz 2009

[John Q. Citizen]

9. When the light rail comes...

[FrenchieCat]

7. I guess once there is a plan, and it is offered up,

then you can question it......which I'm sure you will do.

"a plan isn't enough".....

no, but its where one starts.

Plan: a method for achieving an end b: an often customary method of doing something : procedure c: a detailed formulation of a program of action d: goal , aim
3: an orderly arrangement of parts of an overall design or objective
4: a detailed program (as for payment or the provision of some service) <pension
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plan


:eyes:

[John Q. Citizen]

11. A plan is crucial. if you don't have one you can't change it. In fact, I am highly optimistic

about big health care reform right now.

Kennedy is introducing a bill. Baucus has put a white paper out about his principles for health care reform. These are of course necessary so that they can be debated and the good parts improved on, the bad parts dumped, and the forgotten parts remembered.

You may notice that nobody bothered to comment on, hold hearings on, debate or mull over the Conyers/Kucinich bill. This is a shame but i'm confident that in this new atmosphere that it too will be properly scrutinized and considered, debated, and thought about.

The last time anybody looked at a comprehensive health care bill was Hill's secret and humongous managed care fiasco which left a lot of interested parties out of the discussion including the Dem congress, the people, and the care providers. I can't imagine why it failed. It was a plan, after all. (eye roll)

I'm very happy to see a number of both complimentary and competing plans out so we may put them to the test of scrutiny and argument. Heck a business association of health insurance mobsters even said they would concede on pre-existing conditions if insurance was mandatory for everyone. They weren't saying that a year ago.

But we as citizen must ask ourselves what kind of plan we could support, and what kind of plan would be unsupportable. I think it's important for people to start to think along those lines, or they may end up with a plan that's a hum dinger for somebody's major campaign contributor but for the rest off us, not so much.

Some unions and community groups are using 3 basic principles to evaluate various plans or proposals. They say the plan, to be acceptable has to offer health care that is:

1. Affordable for everyone
2. Accessible to everyone
3. Choice of care provider for everyone.

I think that's a pretty easy and fairly quick way to see if a plan makes sense.

[Double T]

2. Ahhhh........Might be a SMART plan.

Remember SMART, the opposite of stupid as in the last 8 years!

[democracy1st]

3. agrees just work screw the Nader BS

[John Q. Citizen]

5. Seat belts got you down?

[democracy1st]

8. yep

[firedupdem]

10. I consider his plan his agenda....it's clear....can be read at

change.gov.

As long as he works to get those things done, I'm fine with the people he chooses to help.

[Armstead]

12. I give a shit.....REagan had a Plan too, and it seemed to work...

....until the chickens came home to roost from the CONservative scam.

If -- and I say IF -- we simply put a plan in place that creates 80's style "happy talk" and 90's style "endless boom" then we're going to blow a golden opportunity.

So yes, it does matter.

[Demeter]

13. Ain't NO Plan At All

Throwing money at the wrong target is theft.