There would be no "controversy" about health care if the uncertainty had not been introduced

[SoCalDem]

The '08 campaign was all about a PUBLIC HEALTH CARE PLAN ... not "reformed" insurance plans & co-ops & exchanges.

By allowing Baucus & his merry band to dismantle what we WANT and NEED, and substitute a bunch of gobbledygook wiggle-words into the mix, they have soured a whole lot of people who the really need. This is why the republicans are perceived to be making headway. This is why they were able to finagle an extra month to muddy the waters.

They should have decided early on that they would NOT get any real republican support, and they should have been aware that they would be pissing off insurers, so a 51 vote plan should have been the goal all along...and done QUICKLY..right after the stimulus.

Getting the public plan in place, early would have also brought a lot of support to dems who are running in '10.

Once in place, the republicans would never be able to take a way coverage gained by so many people who have not had it before. People always fight the hardest to KEEP something valuable.

Bipartisanship has not existed since Eisenhower, and it's not coming back anytime soon, so the congress needs to get over it..

Just today, a republican was on MSNBC bragging about how they were going to "just ram it down their throats", when referring to the opposition to health care. They don't care about their constituents who do not have health care. They only care about beating democrats.

If a public plan hurts some blue dogs, so be it. Once we have health care in place, they could even gain support from people who just might be grateful for their assistance.. If not, then they can stand or fall on their own merits. If they are not strong enough to win as an incumbent, then we need to recruit better.

Historically, republicans are at their weakest point, and we should not be kissing their asses, we should be kicking them while they are down..

[OHdem10]

1. Along with these points, add to that further uncertainty was created

by the fact that NO DEMOCRATS WENT ON TV to refute the misinformation
that was being spread daily 24/7 by Republicans. Since it was
Republicans who were on TV saying This is in the bill and That
is in the bill while-the bill was not even written and No
Democratic Senators or House Members were on TV to knock down
the lies---the public was left to believe the lies.

[SoCalDem]

4. They really couldn't because it got so bollixed up, they didn't even know what was in it

from minute to minute..

It needs to be SIMPLE..with as few moving parts as possible.

For starters, they could have just said that :

new medicare lower age limit is 50
SChip upper limit is 21
...

eliminating pre-existing condition limitations of insurance
eliminating liftetime caps
making it portable and cheaper than COBRA (cobra needs to go entirely)
Incorporation of the whole USA into the same "group" as the federal group for their insurance plans
allowing "kids" to remain on parents' policies until age 25 (unless they marry)

eliminiating medicaid and rolling that money saved into subsidies for poor people,

It would take a page..maybe 2..

[Echo In Light]

9. By design n/t

[BlooInBloo]

2. (shrug) They tried the opposite if how Clinton did it way back when...

They might have gone a little bit too far.

[SoCalDem]

6. In '93, people could afford health care, and HMOs were pretty cheap too

I remember our prescription plan back then was $2 ..any drug, and our co pay was $5 for office visits..

people did not feel the need as much as they do now..

[DJ13]

3. Obama needed to do a reversal on the 08 campaign and push for single payer

That would have drawn enough heat to allow an easier path towards a public option.

[kirby]

5. Not true...

The '08 campaign did not focus on a public health care plan. Just about all the candidates, including Obama, spoke of reforming the existing insurance system, creating a national health insurance exchange which would sell insurance policies for those without an employer. He did mention a 'Medicare for all' option, but only for people who did not already have coverage or were self-employed.

Me personally, I support a single-payer which takes the 29% administrative overhead and profit away from the private insurers. But lets not twist what the candidates ran on and call it a mandate.

As far as a '51 vote plan', that is impossible. The Senate requires 60. If Reid had any spine, he would lean hard to get 60.

[JDPriestly]

7. Edwards was right and Obama was wrong about how to get

the reform we need. Obama should not have discussed the matter with the health care insurance companies. He should have worked on his plan with congressional leaders alone and then announced it to the public. Then the public should have weighed in and changes wanted by the public should have been added.

[gratuitous]

8. I'm not so sure

Any reform of health care is going to necessarily rein in the excesses of health insurance companies. Whether the move was to some watered-down the-party's-over-boys dram of milksop or full-blown single payer, the people making out like bandits under the current system would gin up "controversy" no matter what reform was proposed.

The Democrats will be best served by plowing ahead and ignoring about 90% of the mud being slung.

[pinb1212]

10. I wish Obama would have put his hands into it a bit more.

Yes, he did offer some guild lines. 3 Bills coming out of the house, and 2 coming out of the Senate. That's a lot for anyone to get their head around. I don't know which of the house bills I support the most. Do any of you?
So many different bill's, makes it a lot easier to demagogue.

I guess there are actually 4 bills in the house. They've been promised a vote on single payer.