Comments on: Liberals Help Rahm and Blue Dogs Off the Hook With “Opt-Out” http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/ Politics for liberal newsgeeks Sat, 18 Feb 2012 01:33:20 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: ellewilson http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53075 ellewilson Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:33:43 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53075 In this health care fight, we've got a big, big problem. It starts with the fact that although an overwhelming majority of the population--in all states--tell the opinion pollsters that they support a public option. Great. In the blue states, that support generally translates into actually electing and putting pressure on our elected officials to vote for it. But in the red states, those citizens have ducked responsibility. Even though they may say they support the public option, they have elected Republican bozos who stonewall HCR every step of the way. And they continue to ALLOW their elected representatives to do so, and to act against their own best interests. It's some bizarre combination of stupidity and hypocrisy. Adults in red states, no matter how desperate or impoverished, are perfectly capable of voting and lobbying. There are many examples in our history of them doing so when they were pissed enough about something. So if there are so many people who want and need the public option in red states, are they not acting like they do and holding their legislators accountable in the way blue staters are mostly doing? This is a much bigger issue than corrupt insurance companies and stubborn Repubs and Blue Dogs, because it reflects a failure of citizens' political will. I'd go even further and call it freeloading. If red state citizens who want the public option continue to allow a small minority to dominate the debate, and the public option goes down nationwide because of it, that's unconscionable. If we're able to get a nationwide public option--which seems seriously in question now--it will be because blue staters did the heavy lifting and therefore those red state citizens will get something that they either opposed or simply failed to show up for. The opt out solution works because it places civic responsibility squarely on the red state citizens to fight for the po if they really want it. And further, it gives Dems and others a magnificent organizing tool, the likes of which they've never seen before, to get rid of their Repub idiots. In this health care fight, we’ve got a big, big problem. It starts with the fact that although an overwhelming majority of the population–in all states–tell the opinion pollsters that they support a public option. Great. In the blue states, that support generally translates into actually electing and putting pressure on our elected officials to vote for it. But in the red states, those citizens have ducked responsibility. Even though they may say they support the public option, they have elected Republican bozos who stonewall HCR every step of the way. And they continue to ALLOW their elected representatives to do so, and to act against their own best interests. It’s some bizarre combination of stupidity and hypocrisy.
Adults in red states, no matter how desperate or impoverished, are perfectly capable of voting and lobbying. There are many examples in our history of them doing so when they were pissed enough about something. So if there are so many people who want and need the public option in red states, are they not acting like they do and holding their legislators accountable in the way blue staters are mostly doing? This is a much bigger issue than corrupt insurance companies and stubborn Repubs and Blue Dogs, because it reflects a failure of citizens’ political will.
I’d go even further and call it freeloading. If red state citizens who want the public option continue to allow a small minority to dominate the debate, and the public option goes down nationwide because of it, that’s unconscionable. If we’re able to get a nationwide public option–which seems seriously in question now–it will be because blue staters did the heavy lifting and therefore those red state citizens will get something that they either opposed or simply failed to show up for.
The opt out solution works because it places civic responsibility squarely on the red state citizens to fight for the po if they really want it. And further, it gives Dems and others a magnificent organizing tool, the likes of which they’ve never seen before, to get rid of their Repub idiots.

]]> By: davidgmills http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53069 davidgmills Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:02:26 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53069 That's not what would happen. Congress will never let us opt out of the bad shit. Congress would only let us opt out of something that is good. That’s not what would happen. Congress will never let us opt out of the bad shit. Congress would only let us opt out of something that is good.

]]> By: davidgmills http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53068 davidgmills Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:42:11 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53068 One more thought. Would it even be constitutional? Should the legislature of one state be permitted to deny its citizens a federal right while another state's legislature permits its citizens to have the same federal right? Where's the equal protection? One more thought. Would it even be constitutional? Should the legislature of one state be permitted to deny its citizens a federal right while another state’s legislature permits its citizens to have the same federal right?

Where’s the equal protection?

]]> By: davidgmills http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53067 davidgmills Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:38:08 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53067 Why don't we just let some states opt out of civil rights laws as well? Can you imagine if during the civil rights era, the only way to get a civil rights bill passed was to let certain states opt out? Let certain states continue to have their citizens discriminated against so the bill would pass? This is as dumb as it comes, and scary for the future. What a precedent! But I am sure Rahm doesn't give a shit. But since I live in a red state and since my 25 year old daughter does not have health care, nor does her boyfriend, nor did my granddaughter for several weeks, nor does my son-in-law for a couple more months (while he is in a waiting period with his new job), this just pisses me off that some of our progressive friends in the safe states would sell the rest of us down the river. I would like to believe that most states would fall in line and offer the public option, but there are some real hard-headed Republicans in this land who have proven they just don't give a shit about most of America. I think putting my health in their hands would not be much better than putting my health in the hands of insurance companies. Why don’t we just let some states opt out of civil rights laws as well?

Can you imagine if during the civil rights era, the only way to get a civil rights bill passed was to let certain states opt out? Let certain states continue to have their citizens discriminated against so the bill would pass?

This is as dumb as it comes, and scary for the future.

What a precedent!

But I am sure Rahm doesn’t give a shit.

But since I live in a red state and since my 25 year old daughter does not have health care, nor does her boyfriend, nor did my granddaughter for several weeks, nor does my son-in-law for a couple more months (while he is in a waiting period with his new job), this just pisses me off that some of our progressive friends in the safe states would sell the rest of us down the river.

I would like to believe that most states would fall in line and offer the public option, but there are some real hard-headed Republicans in this land who have proven they just don’t give a shit about most of America. I think putting my health in their hands would not be much better than putting my health in the hands of insurance companies.

]]> By: Maven http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53048 Maven Sat, 10 Oct 2009 23:41:59 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53048 The problem is that Baucus's Finance Committee's bill includes no public option at all. That shouldn't be a problem for the American people as there are the votes for one to be added on the Senate floor as an amendment, but as Jane says, it is apparently a political embarrassment. At this point, I think most U.S. citizens (according to polls) would like to tell the operatives to just suck it up. The problem is that Baucus’s Finance Committee’s bill includes no public option at all. That shouldn’t be a problem for the American people as there are the votes for one to be added on the Senate floor as an amendment, but as Jane says, it is apparently a political embarrassment.

At this point, I think most U.S. citizens (according to polls) would like to tell the operatives to just suck it up.

]]> By: Maven http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53047 Maven Sat, 10 Oct 2009 23:33:16 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-53047 Marcos, There is no "robust" public option being considered, as you well know. The only public options in the bill in the House, and the bill in the HELP committee of the Senate are public in name only. They allow only state by state plans run by the same private insurers that are big players in that state's current private health insurance. The plans would have some defined minimum coverage, and depending on which one you're discussing, some federal subsidies, but they would suck up the same exhorbitant administrative costs as private plans do now limiting how many subsidized people our taxes could afford to cover. These plans would also do nothing to limit the total (gov't + private) premiums, and we can predict w/ the cos.'s strong lobbies those would increase precipitously. [BTW, who's stopping these thieves from using the premiums paid them by the insured to work against their customers' interests. Now there's something that needs passing.] So you are offering a straw man argument that if we accept an opt-out, we'll get a "robust" public option. Until you can show it to me, I see absolutely no reason to entertain such a likely disastrous provision. Marcos, There is no “robust” public option being considered, as you well know. The only public options in the bill in the House, and the bill in the HELP committee of the Senate are public in name only. They allow only state by state plans run by the same private insurers that are big players in that state’s current private health insurance. The plans would have some defined minimum coverage, and depending on which one you’re discussing, some federal subsidies, but they would suck up the same exhorbitant administrative costs as private plans do now limiting how many subsidized people our taxes could afford to cover. These plans would also do nothing to limit the total (gov’t + private) premiums, and we can predict w/ the cos.’s strong lobbies those would increase precipitously. [BTW, who's stopping these thieves from using the premiums paid them by the insured to work against their customers' interests. Now there's something that needs passing.]

So you are offering a straw man argument that if we accept an opt-out, we’ll get a “robust” public option. Until you can show it to me, I see absolutely no reason to entertain such a likely disastrous provision.

]]> By: shell http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52910 shell Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:55:05 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52910 Enough! I have seen these red states act dumber than dog droppings for way too long. (Over 30 years) And I KNOW -- I grew up in a red state. And I left. Every citizen's right. But if you CHOOSE to stay in the red state, you get what you deserve. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. Duh! If Opt-Out is the only way for sane Americans to get an option, so be it. I'll take the sane plan, in California, and let my friends and relatives in Oklahoma live with their decision to stay there. And by the way, to this day, friends and relatives in Oklahoma tell me I was a fool to move to CA. Senile, or mentally retarded? Take your pick. Enough! I have seen these red states act dumber than dog droppings for way too long. (Over 30 years) And I KNOW — I grew up in a red state. And I left. Every citizen’s right. But if you CHOOSE to stay in the red state, you get what you deserve. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. Duh!

If Opt-Out is the only way for sane Americans to get an option, so be it. I’ll take the sane plan, in California, and let my friends and relatives in Oklahoma live with their decision to stay there.

And by the way, to this day, friends and relatives in Oklahoma tell me I was a fool to move to CA. Senile, or mentally retarded? Take your pick.

]]> By: MarkH http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52874 MarkH Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:34:56 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52874 <blockquote><p>If you don’t want the Public Option, DON’T CHOOSE IT. But don’t take that choice away from your neighbor.</p></blockquote> <p>Excellent!</p> <p>Clearly those who oppose the PO don’t want individuals to have a choice.</p> <p>Put another way, they preach about “personal responsibility”, but don’t really want people to have it.</p>

If you don’t want the Public Option, DON’T CHOOSE IT. But don’t take that choice away from your neighbor.

Excellent!

Clearly those who oppose the PO don’t want individuals to have a choice.

Put another way, they preach about “personal responsibility”, but don’t really want people to have it.

]]> By: MarkH http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52873 MarkH Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:31:16 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52873 <blockquote><p>I’d hoped we’d managed to secure the dealer’s table last November, but…we’re playing the hand we’re dealt.</p></blockquote> <p>The trend was (and is) clearly in the Left direction, but the founders decided we shouldn’t change too quickly, so they staggered Senate elections. It takes a sustained change in the country to really move that body.</p>

I’d hoped we’d managed to secure the dealer’s table last November, but…we’re playing the hand we’re dealt.

The trend was (and is) clearly in the Left direction, but the founders decided we shouldn’t change too quickly, so they staggered Senate elections. It takes a sustained change in the country to really move that body.

]]> By: MarkH http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52872 MarkH Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:28:30 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/10/09/liberals-help-rahm-and-blue-dogs-off-the-hook-with-opt-out/#comment-52872 <p>I hope you realize the peculiarity of this post: first you say she should keep firing until they’re ‘not moving’, but then you sign out ‘Peace’. Very interesting.</p> I hope you realize the peculiarity of this post: first you say she should keep firing until they’re ‘not moving’, but then you sign out ‘Peace’. Very interesting.

]]>