During the campaign Obama said something to the effect that it was idiocy to keep doing the same thing and expect different results. When is he going to take his own advice and decide that this bipartisan crap ain’t working.

GOP doesn’t want a Public Option as it would mean helping too many “others”

My congresscritter (Harry Teague, BlueDogette-Oilpatch) is having a public coffee in a couple of hours. I’m going to go personally whip him on health care reform. Here are my talking points, what am I missing?

1. The problem is neither health care itself nor health insurance, the problem is health care finance.

2. Single payer (HR-676, HR-1200) is preferable.
- it works (Canada, UK, Spain, etc.)
- it reduces transaction costs.
- it doesn’t result in the horror stories being disseminated now by the insurance industry. For every Canadian or UK story they tell, there are several as bad or worse here.
- it doesn’t have to be socialized medicine. Canadians don’t have socialized medicine, but they do have single payer.

3. If single payer is a bridge too far, a strong viable public program is mandatory. This means a program that is:
- Available immediately, no triggers.
- Properly funded via premiums and government budgeting.
- Nationwide at its inception.
- Comprehensive.
- Not hobbled by the law, that is, able to negotiate prices.

4. This is necessary.
- Health insurance costs played a role in the GM/Chrysler debacles.
- The rate of uninsured individuals is a disgrace nationally and here in NM.
- Our current spending is at least twice (per capita) that of other industrial economies, but our measurable health outcomes are worse.

5. Health care professionals and providers recognize the need. The AMA is no longer the voice of American medicine. Ignore them. Listen to the professional primary care specialty societies, AAP, AAIM, ACOG, AAFP.

6. The health insurance industry is lobbying you and your colleagues to protect their rents. The system is broken, it does not work. We need something that works. Please sign on as a sponsor to HR-676, please agree to oppose any bill that comes to the floor without a strong public option.

What have I left out?

i agree … “pleasing the republicans” isn’t anywhere on my list of what i’d like to see in terms of my health care options ..

The GOP does not want a public option because a large % of their base will lose Billions in income, which will mean less funds flowing to Repug coffers.

Since BO has the best ground game laid out and always at the ready, the Repugs need Big Money to support their campaigns. Therefore, a viable public option = bigger losses for the GOP in ‘10, ‘12, and so on.

Same for Green Energy & getting a MidEast peace deal … the Oil & Weapons Barons will earn less, meaning less $$$ to the Repug coffers …

See if you can connect with Scarecrow & Selise regarding this … and Good Luck, dude !

Hapless Harry Reid is too frightened to stand up to the Republics. As long as he remains the leader, pleasing the Republics is always a top option.

This is another litmus test for the Dems, Jane. They flunked War Supplemental.

I don’t think Reid is “frightened” of the Republicans. I think it’s more likely that he actually agrees with them.

Without a Public Plan that does not use Recission to thin it’s ranks there can be no reform. Clearly when the Ins. Industry CEOs told Congress they would not stop kicking the sick off their rolls they drew the line in the sand that should force the Public Plan. Unless Recission as a policy is stopped dead in it’s tracks any other changes made will just be cosmetic. What good does it do to force the industry to insure everyone if they still can refuse to payout the claims ? It really is that simple and we should make this point over and over and over again.

Howard Dean is right: health care reform is now about how the Senate works and not about what the American people need. We need to be very sure that the Senators can all get along after passing health care reform. Their comity is the highest value. Their relationships with one another are what matter the most.

As long as our Senators are all friends after this hard work, I’m happy.

They flunked War Supplemental.

Is there such a thing as an “F+”?

It was close….

You really should take a “less is more” approach to these situations. You’ll try to make your points but either the politican or other audience members will interrupt and you’ll only get to something like, “It’s works in Canada,” and they have all their talking points ready for that, and that’s all anyone will remember about your presentation….oh, that Canada guy…silly Socialist.

One sentence would be much better. I personally like how Jane phrased it above, where she says single-payer “controls costs best.”

Maybe ask the chump why he doesn’t want to support the plan that keeps costs down the most, by far, and serves everyone. Many more doctors support single-payer than do not.

You know, there is something to be said for being able to get along with your peers. It makes getting work done easier.

But sometimes you have to agree with your colleagues that you are going to disagree. It’s important for everyone to be able to disagree in ways that are not disagreeable. The Senate seems to have carried this idea much, much too far. They have forgotten that it’s possible to disagree with your friends, and even more possible to disagree with colleagues.

With the R’s having decided to go off and play by themselves, I don’t understand why the D’s are bothering. Going off and refusing to join dialogue is a very disagreeable way of disagreeing.

Agreed, this issue is simple.

Our current, for-profit, health care system just simply doesn’t work for everyone. Increasingly it isn’t working well for just about anyone.

Senators and members of Congress either support a Public Plan, or they are absolutely and unapologetically corrupt.

Thanks, bonkers. I was vacillating between approaches, and by training went to the here’s why approach.

We need a public plan that is:

* available nationwide
* on day one
* and accountable to Congress and the voters

Couldn’t have said it better Jane! Thanks for being all over this vital concern for all but the rich of this country!
What puzzles me is why there is not more support from Corporate America who are dying under the weight of the cost associated with providing health care. With Universal Health Care the American worker would almost be on equal grounds in the world with all the other countries That DO have Universal Health Care!! It just makes no sense except maybe because it is the members of the “Old Boy’s Club” who wouldn’t want to hurt another member of the club!!

I like the use of “bailout for insurance companies” meme.

I think we progressives are so far above the self described fiscal conservatives (GOP and Blue Dogs) on this issue that we should take that sword out of their hands right now, once and for all.. while waging this particular battle.

It can’t hurt to simply say “I want access to the same plan you have.”

Force the bastards to say they are better than you and don’t deserve it.

Also “How can a public servant not be for a public option?” should help bunch his shorts as well.

Haven’t the bloodsucking b@st@rds of the “Health” Insurance Industry drained the American people ENOUGH?

We need a president and congress with the BALLZ to tell them their free ride is OVER.

Per Paul Krugman, yesterday: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06…..ugman.html

[…]

It would be a crushing blow to progressive hopes if Mr. Obama doesn’t succeed in getting some form of universal care through Congress. But even so, reform isn’t worth having if you can only get it on terms so compromised that it’s doomed to fail.

What will determine the success or failure of reform? Above all, the success of reform depends on successful cost control. We really, really don’t want to get into a position a few years from now where premiums are rising rapidly, many Americans are priced out of the insurance market despite government subsidies, and the cost of health care subsidies is a growing strain on the budget.

And that’s why the public plan is an important part of reform: it would help keep costs down through a combination of low overhead and bargaining power. That’s not an abstract hypothesis, it’s a conclusion based on solid experience. Currently, Medicare has much lower administrative costs than private insurance companies, while federal health care programs other than Medicare (which isn’t allowed to bargain over drug prices) pay much less for prescription drugs than non-federal buyers. There’s every reason to believe that a public option could achieve similar savings.

[…]

This is another symptom of the ‘root cancer’ – lobbyist and ‘public campaign financing’.
Cancel ‘health care bene’s’ for all elected officials, why should they get what they won’t ALLOW us to have.
The 20000 people/year that die from lack of coverage is ‘blood’ that should be thrown in the face of the ‘obstructionists’…bastards

Without campaign finance reform, both Democrats and Republicans will remain enslaved to the money from corporations such as the health care and pharmaceutical industries. Passing public health care under such a circumstance is almost an exercise in futility: even if both chambers of Congress DID pass such bills, back-room deals would eviscerate the bill that finally makes it to the President’s desk.

Go ahead and try. Then try to get us to withdraw our military from the Mideast, or to signficiantly cut the military budget. And when six years of the Obama administration have gone by with little actual progress, then let’s see if we can’t form a grass-roots movement to elect enough Congresspeople to force through Campaign Finance Reform.

CFR would be the ONE bill where, by voting for it, the Congress would not have to fear the repercussions from their corporate masters.

The only reason the GOP is relevant is because of the MSM propaganda soap box that they own.
If the people were not exposd to their mendacious douchebaggery twenty four seven, there might be a chance for a real public health care plan.
For some mystifying reason, the Dems still cave to their blustering 100% of the time.

It is sickening to watch, so I quit.
We need a new Tip O’Neill

Harry Reid is the most worthless Majority leader in history.

Perfect.

Wiping coffee off monitor.

I figure you’ll only get a couple minutes at most so I’d make what is most important in your mind hit first. If you get a chance you can either elaborate or go to the next important.

I did read that and Paul sure says the way it is!! As Paul says we need public funding for all elections! Here is where each and everyone can start. http://youstreet.org/ They are all for public funding of elections!!

and start trying to serve the best interests of the public.

There you go again, Jane, with one of your damned ‘novel concepts’.

We need a new Tip O’Neill

My old congress critter when I was growing up!! He knew how to run the house!!

Amen sister and don’t forget to include the estimated 18,000/per year that die from lack of ins when counting the cost.

Does it seem like the citizens of Iran are better informed and more courageous than our own citizens? I think so. Here we have 76% of our population in favor of the single payer option and we are even debating the outcome??? What if we just name a day and everybody walk silently and peacefully down the main street of our cities with placards crying for public option health care? The stage has been set by Iran so let’s do it!!

Thanks for that link. The more time passes, the more I become convinced that our system of legalized bribery is at the root of the rest of our problems.

The only one’s interested in pleasing Republicans are Democrats and Obama. Bipartisanship will be the downfall of the Republic.

I second that one. It’s very annoying to have someone who ran on ‘change’ fighting it – or having his advisors fighting it, more likely, but he chose them.

Thank you, again, Jane. That’s right: a credible public option that controls costs the best is single payer. To bail-out insurance companies from their greed and predatory practices – a la the banksters – is a plan that would cost the most

Everything government does, everything two or more people do by cooperating together, meets the GOP’s absurd definition of “socialism”. It’s code for not lining the pockets of private corporations with public money. If it’s the public’s money, then meeting their needs ought to take priority over private companies.

Had private insurers been less cooperative among themselves, had they not adopted universally rapacious contract terms and processes for dealing with their customers, the public would not need to put their money elsewhere. They did, they won’t change unless forced to, and we do.

The US population is about 300,000,000. If each person paid $60 per month (as Canada does) that would mean an income to the health care program of about 21.6 billion $ for one year. Figuring out what that would be for ten years has too many zeroes for my adding machine, but it sounds like a lot of money to me!

I don’t give a rats ass what the GOP wants. They already fucked the country up beyond repair. I don’t want to pay for their lifetime healthcare and all the perks they get for being Congresspeople either. Why is anyone even paying attention to the insane clown posse?!?
If the bill doesn’t have a public option then do nothing because without that option we are fucked anyway.

“Small Business”, which is typically Republican-leaning, should love the public option. It relieves them from the overhead burden of paying for health insurance for their employees. It would increase the ability for businesses to hire and thus, decrease the unemployment rate.

It would also induce those employees that are near (or past) retirement and that are only working for health benefits, to actually retire. And thereby freeing up jobs for those coming into the market. And again, reduce unemployment.

What people fail to realize is exempt tax status pervasive for many of corporations in the health services is already socialized medicine! The lack of tax revenue generated by tax exempt corporations like BC/BS, is a subsidy, the tax payers have been paying for decades. Healthcare is already “”socialized”" for the benefit of the corporations who now stand to make trillions by having politicians pass laws mandating that citizens must have insurance, and enter into contracts under fear of tax penalty. BULLSHIT!!! Excuse me folks we already have a energy delivery system even the King of England would have be proud today. Now the GOP some demorats look to sell America out to the tax exempt health services and for profit health insurance, in return for political contribution? This is corporate servitude shoved down the throat of America as if we the American people are treated like some street whore. The GOP and demorats….the hypocrites they are! Family values go out the window with healthcare bean counters and profiteers at life’s expense. Your right Jane! “they” are all concerned about…..protecting corporations at the people’s and the republic’s expense! “They,” inhale very quick!!!!

Just a suggestion why not amend the tax code and use tax incentives as a means of controlling healthcare prices/costs for the healthcare corporations?? Lets see…….. tax liabilities create the necessity for cost control in most American’s homes! That is until you get sick can’t work…. lose your insurance, then your home! I just cant see how tax exempt status for corporations in the health services “relieves or lessens a burden of government,” when 53% of bankruptcies origins lie in the outrageous cost of healthcare? Lets all be Dred Scott and be denied constitutional protections to protect the business interests of insurance corporations as the SJC’s decision in Dred Scott vs Sanford perpetuated the slave’s servitude for the economic benefit of the slave owners……

The GOP and some Democratic members sure enjoy their publically funded health care. And they sure think it works well for them.

But, it will never work for the little people. Just look at Canada or France. Unless you have really seen their health care systems, other than what our American corporate media is willing to allow you to really see.

I like the GOPer’s hypothetical “how are we going to pay for it”? Or “who is going to pay for it”?

WHO IS PAYING FOR THEIR HEALTH CARE AND HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR IT?

America has citizens who cannot afford health care themselves but must pay taxes to cover Congress.

Why won’t they get out in the FREE MARKET on their own and pay for their own health care. Tax payers can then cut congress’s pay to remove their coverag4e dollars and save the tax payers some real money.

I imagine the health care industry would slip in a health care coverage plan into congress’s campaign fund for their support of the industries corporate favored representation. This way Americans do NOT have to pay directly for them. The health care industry could raise our rates and deny our care to cover congress.

Many are not even trying…. But I really enjoy the competition arguement from the GOPer’s………….!