The Democrats’ decision to delay the start of the coverage expansion until 2014 is by far one of the worst and totally avoidable mistakes ever made by a political party.

Not if that political party deliberately wants to screw its base.

Support for the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administrations signature health care law, has hit a record low. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation poll, only 34 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the new law while 51 percent have an unfavorable view of the law.

Who could have predicted? Oh, FDL predicted this before the law ever passed that it would be unpopular and that Democrats would take a beating in 2010.

If some or all of the coverage expansion had kicked in already,, there would at least be a reason for people to re-examine their opinions about the law

The individual mandate hasn’t kicked in either, so people could also re-examine their perception of it negatively with Obama breaking is promise not to raise taxes on those making less than $250K.

I still think by far the biggest problem for the law though is that is hasn’t really done anything to help people yet.

nope, that’s not it

the biggest problem by far is the mandate without providing a public option to compete against

that is the reality jon, obama wrote a corporate bill forcing the sale of a corporate product who’s only goal is profit in a non competitive atmosphere and he provided no option that would force competition

THERE is the problem

What was the strategic rationale for pushing benefits out to 2014? Never made any sense to me. Almost as if, dare I say it, Obama and his congressional co-conspirators wanted to have plenty of time to work their ill.

they live in an insane fantasy world where they think regular people care about CBO scores.

obviously the terribleness of the law makes it hard to defend but even a good law would be tough for people to defend or like if it wasn’t doing anything for a very long time.

I still think by far the biggest problem for the law though is that is hasn’t really done anything to help people yet

Of course it couldn’t be that the ACA is the biggest corporate give away since the beginning of this country. Naw, it couldn’t be that.

I prefer to call that law The Rube Goldberg Health Insurance “Reform” Act of 2010.

In pushing for the passage of that garbage scow of a law, Obama broke a record that will stand for all time: most political capital squandered in the shortest time.

The worst part for me is now we have to hear incessant advertising from the likes of United Health Care and Kaiser Permanente about how they are all about helping the American people live fruitful and healthy lives, as millions of Americans die and go bankrupt.

So, meanwhile, with large majorites in both houses, through 2010,we now have what? 50 million or so with no health care? Egad !!!

It stems from the same “logic” that brought forth a law that the average citizen finds totally incomprehensible, except for one feature: the hated mandate.

Just wait until it does kick in, if that ever happens, and people are forced to buy such a sh*tty product from the likes of Humana and United Health Care.

Good point, and good branding.

They live in a real world, but it’s a parallel universe. None of the harm they inflict affects them. They have no skin in the game, to coin a phrase, and that’s a huge problem. Maybe the only problem that really matters.

all according to plan, the zero was created to do this and it is no accident, it is not incompetence, it’s design

The goal of the law was to force millions of people to buy a corporate product. The young and healthy is who the health insurers wanted revenue from, their most profitable market segment. By not providing the public option, there is no competition and there won’t be any competition, and die-hard Obama supporters are waking to that reality. The government assist to the health care industry put that industry into the same league as big oil, which is: you have to do business with us, like it or not, and pay whatever we tell you to pay. All the whining from the health insurers is just like all the whining from big oil, both hugely profitable, but always hungry for more flesh. It’s a lovely country, isn’t it ?

the worst part for me is now I have to hear how “liberal politics don’t work”

the zero has not only played the corporate line, he’s ruined the progressive perspective

Hmm, Michael Moore was wondering why there are such, well, dunces looking for the thug nomination. He suspects maybe the thug powers already have their candidate:zero.

I guess he’s been reading my work here then, I’ve been saying for quite some time the real power brokers would be out of their mind getting someone in there other then obama, THAT’S why there hasn’t been a real candidate

their plan fell short becuase romney want in inspite of the power brokers and I think he IS electable inspite of his religion

the biggots will have a far easier time voting for romney then allowing obama another term

I can’t WAIT to see what the puppet masters do to undermine romney’s campaign, it should be a doozy

look for something like having a few wives hidden somewhere or some drinking coffee behind his pastors back (do they have pastors in the mormon religion?)

or they might go after his religion, things like “he believes the devil is Christ’s blood brother” and “he believes he is a god and equal to Jesus”

you heard it here first

Actually, we should care about the CBO score. However, when they are playing shenanigans to achieve a good score, that should tell us something about the efficacy of their plan.

It may not really matter to the 99% if we elect zero or Romney.

I want romney over zero, we can mount a far more effective defense against a republican elected as one, it is almost impossible mounting d against a republican elected as a democrat

Profits. that all anything is about these days. Imagine profits on some guy with cancer struggling for his life. WTF kind of society do we live in?

Well, I am not particularly happy with democrats either. Even Pelosi thinks we need austerity. And guess who proposed a few trillion in spending cuts including SSMM?

nobody believes austerity will work, they are using the shock doctrine to steal our stuff

I know we don’t believe it,but you know what they say about repeating a lie. Pretty soon all sorts of smart people think it’s right. And it is an easy lie. Just say, as zero did, well, we have to do what any family does, tighten our belt. That’s a lie and that was a chief reason I dropped the asshole.

Glenn Greenwald made that point some time ago: McCain would have given congressional Dems someone to push against. Tribalism is a bitch, and Pelosi is one of the most salient believers.

Yes, the bill was always terrible for young healthy adults who could take a risk not getting insurance while they saved or looked for jobs with insurance. Now of course there’s no saving or jobs in their futures anyway, so they don’t need to wait until 2014 to be upset with Obama and the Dems. And there’s lots of time to cut out any of the positives in the bill — they’re working on cutting the medicaid increases, they’ve already cut long-term care, etc.

What is Greenwald’s basis for his claim that Capitol Hill Democrats would push back? They cowered under their desks in the fetal position during the entire Bush presidency, including the two years they had a majority in both houses.

And let’s not forget that Barack Obama is an alumnus of the Senate Democratic caucus, who are some of the most timorous creatures in the animal kingdom.

Very well put.

At the end of the day, the American people will still be forced to purchase a product, from an industry which has no antitrust provisions to prevent price collusion between the handful of providers. Supporters insist MLR regulations will prevent that from happening, but it’s been apparently proven that the industry sees MLR as something to be faked.

We’re dealing with a ghoulish industry that profits off the suffering of others, and apparently sees no problem with denying their customers care when they need it most via rescission. Is the ACA going to prevent that? Not if the industry wrote the frigging bill!

The ACA requires far too much cognitive dissonance — and blind trust in politicians like Max Baucus — to possibly support. I’m glad that democrats are finally starting to see the light. Next, I hope we see a real liberal movement start.

You are right. It’s far more difficult fighting the enemy if he’s “behind your lines, dressed in your uniform.”.

The real problem is that THE ACA SUCKS.

Keep in mind that the title “Affordable Care Act” is totally irrelevant, and the actual wording of the statute itself barely more so. The real effect of the law is determined by the implementing regulations which control the government agencies which are assigned to administer the law, and those, with the connivance of O’Bushma, are being written by the healthcare-denial thieves themselves, through their unbelievably-well-paid lobbyists.

The ACA, even if it survives, will do nothing of real substance to help anyone but corporatist pigs; all the good parts will be watered down into insignificance or made voluntary, while the really bad part–the individual mandate–will survive and prosper (i.e. even made tougher, if anything). The result will be that We the People would be forced to buy crappy “insurance” policies from healthcare-denial criminals at horrific expense, or pay a nasty penalty if we choose not to. The winners, as usual: The corporatists and oligarchs.

No, the writing was on the wall when O’Bushma killed the public option–it was clear then that all that would come out of the healthcare-reform effort was more pelf for thieves and a raw effing for the rest of us. If we are lucky, this atrocious piece of Blue Shit law–and O’Bushma’s administration itself–will soon be relegated to the dustbin of history.

INdeed, in trying to get something passed, we ended up wth a five legged mule. That’s what you get eith a governmetn like the one wew are saddled with.

(See how I worked the mule thing in with saddled?)

33 comments and you were able to boil it down to 11 letters.
Well done.

We “tried” to come up with our “own” plan when there are 4 or five working models we could have copied.

The turd in the punchbowl is the individual mandate, which unfortunately is the nexus for some bon bons in orbit there. It overshadows all.

WSJ has a skeptical piece today about urges to repeal. It seems written by an ACA booster lacking imagination and who doesn’t see the death by a thousand cuts as the more likely undoing of ACA:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203687504576655130486204862.html

Yep and just to prove demodogs are as batshit crazy as the zombie party they will kill this and Oh how about that budget deal. Yep Main Street doooooomed and they all wonder why people are in the streets.

If you’re like me you probably have fond memories of the “health care debate”. Too bad it only took a year. Or was it two? Time sure is fun when your having flies. And what a surprise – the outcome was known from the beginning. That rascal Obama had worked it all out in advance in the back room.

HAHAHAHAHA

I hope Oromney is HALF as much fun.

“And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for you meddling Firebaggers!” — unmasked Scooby Doo villain

What we were given is the RomneyCare plan which was the Chamber of Commerce’s counter plan to Clinton’s single-payer national healthcare. Only the Republicans wanted this – as it is merely a mandate to keep the insurance companies rolling in dough.

Yes, there were a couple bits and bobs for us – but overall, it is a horrible solution. Especially when compared to single-payer solutions that are enacted throughout the world. This was Obama’s gift to the insurance industry and a big “screw-you” to the American citizen. How could it NOT be viewed unfavorably?

You can’t make this stuff up.

Here’s a video starring ex-Speaker Pelosi answering a journalist who asked about the 1,800 (one thousand eight hundred) companies who received Obamacare waivers. Pelosi: “They’re small. . . They’re small. I couldn’t speak to all 1,800 of them, but some of the lists that I have seen have been very, very small companies.”

McDonald’s, the large hamburger outlet, is one of them, according to the journalist.

If 1,800 companies can get waivers than probably individuals can too, same-o same-o, ya think?

Absolutely!

It’s the synergy of the mandate coupled with unaffordability and no public option, although O had promised affordable coverage from the gitgo.

It’s no more complicated than that. It’s fatal, and no amount of urgent parsing will change it.

The bon bons can be arranged piecemeal without ACA.

This could be a good thing. Don’t you think it’s time for some fresh thinking with regard to these bankrupt political/ideological frameworks?

Democrats, Liberals, Progressives – this group ain’t gonna move mountains anymore. In fact, they exist only to preserve the status quo. They are as much of the problem as Conservatives.

re-branding does nothing, we need to draw the line in the sand and exclaim in bold that we ARE progressives BECAUSE THOSE are the policies that WORK and the policies that MADE US GREAT

we need to stop ducking and come out swinging

Obama has his Law about insurance put together with minimal input on design from those specialized in the area – the actuaries, unlike Vermont that had an actuary run the single payer project and got a very good plan – albeit a plan likely to be stopped by Obama but still a workable design.

New York City’s pension plan actuary ran into the same type of “we do not want honesty or competence” for the past 20 years as the city tried to cover up the ridiculous cost of early retirement for police/fire/trash workers by having high interest discount assumptions (they assumed high investment returns based on the work product of “investment advisors” and “economists” who were very good at providing the result desired – actuaries are allowed to bow to other professions and use their results, but if in actual charge are bound by “ethics” to give their “best scientific advice”. So nonsense police/fire/trash contracts moved the NYC pension cost from 1+ billion a year to 8+ billion in 15 years, despite the sponsor (NYC) telling the actuary to use those high interest rates).

Well I get word tonight that the actuary doing NYC’s plan has pushed a bit and has agreement to lower the interest assumption from the current 8% – a number well above what I was using over those years (5% to 6.5% based on the talents of the investing folks) – and a number well above the latest 10 year NYC average of 2.5%.

I doubt this freedom of action will continue – the NYC Controller is making a point of saying that the change he is “likely to approve” is not a way to push back on the nonsense early retirements for police/fire/trash by showing how costly the practice is. Reminds me of when my work was used in the 70′s to cost a Mass expansion of early retirement, with police/fire complaining that it was unfair because in prior pension gifts to police/fire the legislature never considered cost.

And we wonder how the Greeks got in trouble with their age 50 retirements for hairdressers because of the danger involved in that profession.

In any case maybe we will get lucky and the ACA will be replaced by a clone of the Vermont Law – but that will need a Wall Street favored person supporting the idea – not an actuary – as it will need to be sold politically – not by mathematical/actuarial logic and experience.

Standing up and saying “We are progressives!” will only get you ignored, and rightfully so. Technocratic “we know what works” policy is not the way forward. “Policies that work” is the mantra of both parties. Working for what, and for whom?

The energy pulsing through OWS is not progressive IMO – it goes beyond that, and speaks to fundamental issues of justice and the relationship of Capital to Labor. This is more urgent, hopeful and more vital than trying to revitalize a progressive movement that has become synonymous with backwards-gazing middle class complacency.

Well, if you had shitty insurance, and your insurer were being forced to change it by the new law, or if you were an outlier that your state was being forced to cover by the new law, you’d probably like the new law.

I’ve never seen a bunch of so-called progressives sound so Republican in all my born days.

I hated this law and still do. I still think single payer is the way to go and the way the country will have to go. But I think the poor support is largely a result of all the right wing trashing of Obamacare in the last two years. I think these Dem. politicians who failed to support it also lack any understanding of the problem or what’s at stake. Most people (including me until I had to) have a hard time relating to these health care insurance issues. Until you’ve personally dealt with the BS and see for yourself how you are being screwed by health insurers, you don’t want to engage your brain. It’s hard work. True some of the most meaningful provisions of Obamacare don;t kick in until 2014. But there are some which have already started kicking in for people. I noticed a change in my own insurer’s policies this year on coverage. Yes, we’ll see rate increases, but I think we’ll also see a lot of benefits of this law before 2014.

Well, if you had shitty insurance, and your insurer were being forced to change it by the new law

Who are these people? Seriously. The evidence doesn’t indicate the law has done anything to get anyone better insurance.

Where the law has required more generous benefits and extended additional coverage to dependents, we’ve seen insurance companies raise their premiums at will, pass those costs onto employers, who have promptly passed those costs directly onto their workers (assuming they didn’t get one of the many, many, many many waivers for their deficient insurance plans).

The insurance market was a mess before this law, and it’s not obvious how anything in this law, with the possible exception of potential ERISA waivers for innovative state programs (like, say, Vermont’s attempt at single payer) and funding for community health centers will ultimately help people.

We’ll see if the tax credits are funded and if the individual markets function properly starting in 2014 is it? You have to admit, if Democrats wanted to run on this bill, all the key provisions were set up to take FOREVER to implement, giving Republicans every opportunity to run against a bill that hasn’t immediately helped anyone.

Hear Hear!

Until very recently, I would have thought as you do. To make Glenn Greenwald’s point, let’s team up, you and I, and look up the R and D numbers on the Bush legislation of your choice. We’ll see who and how many Rs and Ds voted for what. Game on?

Yep, the Cavinator caved in to what the insurance companies wanted (a windfall way beyond their wildest dreams) and the Cavinator caved in to what PHARMA wanted (a fabulously astronomical windfall beyond comprehension) and the cake topper for Republicans, even though they won’t admit it, the Mandate!!! The only part they truly love. This was all so stupid. The VA was revamped and modernized about 30 years ago, they have a computer system that is lightyears ahead of anything any hospital system has, they utilize Evidence Based Medicine, and they negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. Designed as a model for the Public Option, a foundation. Too bad they didn’t anticipate the Iraq mess, but someone was definitely thinking ahead.

It was written by an aide to Max Baucus, who was AHIP. I clearly remember a discussion of the properties of the file that was upload. Written by Big Insurance, for Big Insurance. From that point on, it was doomed to fail. This turkey could be killed by Thanksgiving.

Elizabeth Fowler, VP for Public Policy and External Affairs, WellPoint, Inc. Elizabeth Fowler was subsequently appointed by President Obama as

…deputy director of the Office of Consumer Information and Oversight at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The post gives Fowler broad power to implement the recently-passed health care law…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/16/white-house-defends-hirin_n_649237.html

The article quotes people who are mostly supportive of Fowler. This article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/16/white-house-defends-hirin_n_649237.html

isn’t, and has an outline of Fowler’s job history.

It’s the same sh*t as appointing Immelt as jobs czar or Geithner as treasury secretary.

What we were given is the RomneyCare plan which was the Chamber of Commerce’s counter plan to Clinton’s single-payer national healthcare.

If memory serves, Clinton’s plan was not non-corporate single payer but the old profit-based private system set up in some sort of complicated network system to try to control costs.

Exactly, when there is nothing progressive in it and it is in fact Bob Dole/ Romney/ Bush father’s health care plan and they still call it progressive.

I’m not sure anymore that he caved in. I think that was his plan all along and with Joe Lieberman playing the bad cop to kill the extension of Medicare for people over 55. If they got this into the health care reform law now no one would talk about cuts in Medicare.