So – how, if at all, will that make a difference in what Congress comes up with?
I read 56 percent of Republicans are for the public option. The politicians will not fool the people if they offer a plan without it.
I really fear the worst of both worlds, being required to purchase insurance but not having a public option.
Very little. How the industry is paying them to vote matters more than what the public wants; this affair helps demonstrate how democracy is nearly dead in this country.
Yikes - that does not sound good to me. Given that in many places there is limited competition, it sounds like more bonuses might be on the way for top executives!
You beat me to it, Der Trihs. What we think has nothing to do with what’s going on in Congress.
Write your legislators. They are in the business of being re-elected. If they fail on an item people are serious about ,they risk their seat. Make it plain you will not vote for them again and you may be surprised. It is a battle that can be won.
Nothng. With a push-over for a President, you won’t get the public option. He will compromise the bill to ineffectiveness.
Yeah, no shit. It doesn’t keep me up at night but it does disturb my wa.
You can be sure that I will be writing to Eleanore Holmes Norton making it clear how I expect her to vote on this vital matter.
What?
Polls only matter if they agree with the speaker’s agenda. Otherwise they are easily cast aside.
Not by politicians or political parties that spend a fortune running them. They treat them with great respect and often modify their policies in accordance.
From your cite -
But all this is meaningless, because -
As always, it’s a great idea, as long as we don’t have to pay for it. Since we always have to pay for it…
Regards,
Shodan
Meh…they want to get elected but if they play nice with their corporate sponsors they likely have lucrative positions on some Board if they get booted. They can also make a fortune lobbying if they have significant connections. Add to that a rather generous “severance” (the more proper term escapes me for some reason but hopefully you get the idea) upon leaving Congress.
Frankly I am amazed they work as hard as they do to stay in and more do not cash out. I guess being in that position of power is quite alluring to them but they are hardly in dire straits if they lose their job and their future is better served by bending over for their corporate sponsors.
Tough luck for you and me.
Not true, we can make the Republicans pay for it!
Not much, unless the demographics of the people who support it change. The biggest hurdle in Congress right now is the Blue Dog Democrats. Unless the increased support is part of **their **constituency, it doesn’t really matter. They’ll still be opposed to it. Increasing the number of Charles Schumer’s constituents that support the PO isn’t going to help it get passed.
Not only do I support the public option, but I’d be completely happy spending all night banging it.
You do realize that the extra revenue is to subsidize the uninsured and under-insured, and has nothing to do with the public option which is supposed to be revenue neutral.
As for supporting what is in Congress, I’d love to see the question asked, since there is a gigantic gimish of bills floating around now. I don’t think there is anyone in the universe who would support all of them, so the level of support stated is probably higher than what can be justified.
Then we might as well pay for it the cheapest, most effective way. Which would be some form of UHC.
Or are you under the impression that health problems magically vanish if the government doesn’t pay?
From afar, the healthcare issue looks like a mighty battle between oligarchy and what’s left of democracy in the US. If the public win this one then there may yet be hope.
Interesting how it was easier to manufacture consent - sorry about that - for foreign policy (wars) born of corporate interests than it has been to resist this domestic initiative.
Looks a vital battle to win.