I’m honestly confused because while I usually find PBS reliable, I have a card in my wallet reading “National Health Insurance” that seems to contradict this.
Though I don’t remember where I read this now, in my head is the idea that the public option health insurance service would be required by law to charge “market rates,” which I took to mean it can’t be cheaper than the market average or something like that.
Does anyone know where I might have gotten this information or misinformation?
“Er…”, you’ve completely misunderstood my question, I think. I am not advocating writing “let’s do co-ops” into law. I am asking what it means to write “let’s do co-ops” into law. That is the alternative people often mention to writing “let’s do a public option,” and I do not understand what this alternative means.
Heaven only knows, friend Frylock. People been dumping metric buttloads of toxic crap into the river of our public discourse, even the catfish and snapping turtles are crawling out hoping simply to die in peace.
If someone had told me six months ago that “death panels” would be an issue in all of this, I wouldn’t have believed it. If you had told me that the President…any President!..would be screamed at for a speech to school kids to work hard and stay in school…
I would have offered drug counseling, that whatever you were on, stop it. That if you can’t get there behind a bong hit and a nice cup chamomile tea, don’t go.
Once the howler monkeys start in, its hard to know much of anything, anymore.
Don’t worry, at least the USA doesn’t invade countries on the other side of the world on entirely bogus pretexts and contributes to the death of several hundred thousand innocent civilians, before embarking on a program of systematic torture.
Ok, so you think the public option is a winner, but it’s been distorted with lies and smears. That means you have one more option - convince the American public that the Republicans are liars, and get them on your side.
What has actually happened here is that Obama has completely screwed up the framing of the debate. He announced he wanted major reforms to health care, then backed away and let the yammerheads in the House and Senate draft their own bills. Between all the competing bills, this was bound to create plenty of options for Republicans to pounce. And in the meantime, because there are different bills involved, no one on Obama’s side can articulate exactly what the reform will look like, so Republicans can take the most extreme elements out of each bill and use them to tar the whole thing.
In other words, I’m agreeing with you to some extent. It’s possible the American people want a ‘public option’, but the issue has been so mismanaged by the White House and the Democrats in general that the whole process looks unfocused, chaotic, and somewhat scary.
I gather Obama knows this, and his next plan is to spearhead the issue and drive it from the White House, so that there can be some coherency and a ‘plan’ that people can understand.
So, good luck with that. But keep in mind that if he’s successful in re-framing the debate and setting out a clear plan for health care reform, the American people still may not want it. In which case, clinging bitterly to an unpopular plan will destroy the Democratic majorities in the next election.
One thing to keep in mind about poll numbers, however - you can always get grand plans to poll well when the plans are relatively non-specific and the costs of such plans are not discussed. If I poll people and ask, “Are you in favor of providing college education to ever child in America?” You might get a majority of voters to say yes. Now ask, “Are you in favor of providing college education to every child in America, paid for with tax increases on the middle class, even if this means your own child may see her costs go up and her classrooms be more crowded?” Your poll numbers will plummet.
In short, you don’t know how popular something really is until people understand what the costs are.
So the negative effects of all of your side’s irresponsibility and lies are actually Obama’s fault. Got it. :rolleyes:
No, because the majority of Americans DO want the public option according to the polls. This is both the Democrats and the Republicans going against the public.
Isn’t this pretty much what we have now? How’s that working out for you?
Except for “more competition?” One word: monopolies. We have anti-trust laws for a reason. They insure competition.
If he’s like most libertarians he thinks that monopolies are wholly the fault of the government.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090823/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_insurance_competition There is no competition. we have allowed any merger that is proposed. In Maine as this article says, Wellpoint has 71 percent of the market. No 2 Aetna has 12. That is not competition. That is what all insurance companies seek, an end to competition.
The fact that so many people on this board want a public option convinces me that it won’t happen. We are a good barometer for that.
I agree with this. I’m of German descent, but my cultural roots are in the British Isles. I would like a British-style system.
Nappy roots.
It’s probably a modification put into one of the bills as a compromise. We can get the public option so long as it does no good.
This also applies to tax cuts. They’re insanely popular, because people don’t understand the costs.
Yeah, well, larger risk pools are the point of insurance. That’s why we should have a public plan; it’s a very large risk pool.
Really? Educate me.
Guys, you’re forgetting: socialism! Death panels!
No profit margin, no encouragement to require more treatment than necessary (every item carrying a profit) resulting in German healthcare GDP at 10.1%, France 11%, UK 8.8% and the USA 15.3%, projecting at 19% in the decade to come.
Huge drag on the USA’s ability to compete internationally.
Ditching Reid would be a great start. Not only doesn’t he have a spine, he appears to be completely made of jell-o.
-Joe
It isn’t over, just admittedly delayed.
From what I know of it the co-op plan seems like a decent half measure, we don’t have to go with a massive gubmint program if that scares people, I’ll sit here and hold my breath as conservatives proclaim Medicare and Medicaid utter failures.
I’m slightly left of center and very much a believer in realpolik but it sure looks like the Democrats are gutless.
I share Obama’s disdain for a squabbling selfish entrenched congress, this isn’t on him.
I guess…I hope we do better later.
Well, I’m confused too because I thought I heard T.R. Reid on NPR specifically mention Japan as an example of a country without a public option. I was looking for the transcript when I found the PBS site. Here’s somebody else saying the same thing, but it looks like he may have gotten it from Reid too