So If Cooperatives Are A Compromise ......

[global1]

and they can pull in Repug votes for it - you got to know that we are going to be screwed by this compromise.

This is smoke and mirrors folks. Don't stand for it. My priority is 'single payer' my fall back is a legitimate 'public option that competes with health care insurers'. Nothing less.

Don't let big insurers and big pharma sandbag healthcare reform. Call your Congressperson and Senators now.

And I don't trust this Conrad guy as far as I can throw him.

[Recursion]

1. Help me with your logic

Your argument, as I understand it, is that if a plan is something Republicans in Congress would be willing to vote for, it is by that fact unacceptable to you?

[global1]

2. When The Party Of 'No' All Of A Sudden Jumps On The Bandwagon For A Plan......

that is coming out of 'left field' - yes - I get a bit suspicious. Hmmmm..... maybe big insurance and big pharma money got to them. Hmmmm......

[redqueen]

3. No, it's because the co-ops are designed to limit the size of risk pools.

I'm not sure if there is some concocted, ostensible reason for it, but the real reason (IMO) is to drive the costs of the public plan *higher*... to benefit the for-profit health insurance industry.

It's basically rigging the public option to be more expensive than it could be otherwise.

[Recursion]

4. OK, so fix the idea and run with it

I like coops in general; a nation-wide one wounds like a really good idea. Just scuttle the part where it's a bunch of little coops, and make it one big one.

[backscatter712]

8. Good point.

I was also mentioning that they were trying to break up the market influence - one big government-run public option could exert a huge amount of market pressure to drive prices down. A single co-op that's one of hundreds wouldn't be able to do that. Gee, I wonder why the Rick Scott groupies like this plan?

[redqueen]

9. Exactly.

Just another way to try to hamstring the public option so that for-profit insurers can keep raking in the $$$$.

[rucky]

6. The arguement is that we're not pulling Republicans in, we're moving to them.

[bhcodem]

5. Co-ops are how insurance companies started

If memory serves me, isn't that how the first insurance companies got started in the first place? People pooled their money to protect all in the group. The only difference here is that the proposed co-ops are supposed to be non-profit which is also how insurance companies started out.

[backscatter712]

7. The Conrad co-ops are nothing but bull manure.

They're not any sort of structure that hasn't already been put together by the insurance industry on its own - it's known as a "mutual" (think mutual fund) - an insurance company in theory owned by its own members, sort of like a credit union.

But the thing is that this plan will create a huge number of federal, state and local health co-ops, and in this way, dilute their ability to do anything to health care prices. They won't be able to have any influence on prices - that's why the Rethugs and DINOS and the insurance lobby likes this plan - it would allow them to claim victory and pat themselves on the back for reforming health care, while turning around and going straight back to murder-by-spreadsheet. Nothing changes.

It's a crock of shit, and needs to be called out immediately and loudly to everyone in Congress as a crock of shit.

A strong public option is where we hold the line. We need everyone to shout the co-op proposal down and make sure it's as unpopular as the trigger.