Obama's Healthcare Plan

[quote]jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd[/quote]

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.[/quote]

No it never works. Being passionate about an issue and directing people to the issue works. Outbursts never work in politics. Voters doubt your character and ability to stay calm even when the shit is flying. Throughing red meat to yoru supporters only makes them happy- the majority runs from you.

jnd

[quote]jnd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.

No it never works. Being passionate about an issue and directing people to the issue works. Outbursts never work in politics. Voters doubt your character and ability to stay calm even when the shit is flying. Throughing red meat to yoru supporters only makes them happy- the majority runs from you.

jnd

[/quote]

I have to disagree, I think there are alot of people who are REALLY pissed to see this bill, and I think it is encouraging to see a fellow politician who is equally heated about this issue.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
jnd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.

No it never works. Being passionate about an issue and directing people to the issue works. Outbursts never work in politics. Voters doubt your character and ability to stay calm even when the shit is flying. Throughing red meat to yoru supporters only makes them happy- the majority runs from you.

jnd

I have to disagree, I think there are alot of people who are REALLY pissed to see this bill, and I think it is encouraging to see a fellow politician who is equally heated about this issue. [/quote]

EXACTAMUNDO!

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
I don’t think it’s correct to say he presented a plan.

He presented a campaign-promises-type speech touting a claimed plan that in fact has not been presented to Congress or the public and I expect not in fact written.

Where is the actual Obama plan? With the concrete details.

Why not present it to the public and Congress as a bill that’s ready to be voted on?

Agreed, but I am assuming that the WH is going to reveal it? I mean, there needs to be a written plan for it to pass in Congress, correct? However from what I understand, a lot of politicians don’t even read the fucking thing. Too busy playing Solitaire.[/quote]

I have not heard of a plan for the White House to present to Congress any specific completed plan, nor have they done so to date.

So far as I know, no “Obama plan” – other than campaign style promises – exists.

Or if by “my plan” he means “The plan written by my party in Congress” well which then does he mean? The Senate bill? Or the House bill? They are different.

Does he even know whether “the Obama plan” has government-run insurance (or coverage) in it? He has said both that he wants it and that it doesn’t need to have it.

Unfortunately, the level of political analysis in the media has gotten to the point in which even such basic problems such as Obama not ever having presented a fleshed-out completed plan or anything like it and lacking any announcement to ever do so simply doesn’t get discussed, and nonsense such as his having a speech extolling “his” plan when he hasn’t completed or so far as we know even started one – but rather has left the matter entirely to Congress – and neither he nor they even have matters solved such as whether there is going to be goverment-run insurance or not.

Calling that speech “the Obama plan” would be like calling his promises that now is the time the oceans will stop rising, now is the time the planet will begin to heal, we are the ones the world has been waiting for, no family will pay more for energy and jobs will not be lost but rather created because of new green technologies, the “Obama environmental plan.”

When the actuality at hand was the horrific 1000-page cap-and-trade bill his party was previously trying to ram through.

I agree with this, closing the donut hole is a great idea. But this will take money… just looking at what it would have cost to do this is 2007, it would have been around 15 billion. Now add on all the baby boomers who will gain coverage in the next few years and this will skyrocket… How will this be paid for?

Im sorry 15 billion is actually innacurate… I forgot the fact that most people that hit the coverage gap tend to just stop taking most of their medications… it would actually end up being much more than 15 bil.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
jnd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.

No it never works. Being passionate about an issue and directing people to the issue works. Outbursts never work in politics. Voters doubt your character and ability to stay calm even when the shit is flying. Throughing red meat to yoru supporters only makes them happy- the majority runs from you.

jnd

I have to disagree, I think there are alot of people who are REALLY pissed to see this bill, and I think it is encouraging to see a fellow politician who is equally heated about this issue. [/quote]

I agree that people are pissed. BUT–You can be pissed about a bill and make lots of noise about IT in the appropriate forum. But when you become completely unhinged in front of the POTUS (and more importantly the cameras) and act as if you are at a townhall with birthers and teabaggers, then you look like you are out of control-- and the majority of voters do not like that.

jnd

Health-care reform in America

Fired up and ready to go
Sep 10th 2009 | NEW YORK
From The Economist print edition

The president weighs in, successfully, on health-care reform

AP
AP

â??THE time for bickering is over. Now is the time for action.â?? With those fiery words, delivered to a special joint session of Congress on September 9th, Barack Obama made his case for reforming Americaâ??s troubled health system. Coming after a legislative recess in which his efforts were demonised at town hall meetings across the country, this speech was widely seen as his best, and perhaps last, chance to rescue his most important domestic policy initiative from failure.

The speech was a success on several measures. It was passionate, which is essential if he is to win over a sceptical American public and energise his liberal base. Mr Obama has seemed professorial, even pedantic, during recent town hall meetings on health reform. This week, though, he seemed to have fire in his belly. For weeks, right-wing critics have made nonsensical but alarming claims that his reforms will lead to â??death panelsâ?? and other travesties. Mr Obamaâ??s efforts to deflect such attacks by taking the high road have left many on the left cold, and confused the general public. In his speech, he denounced the rightâ??s â??bogus claimsâ?? bluntly, insisting that such talk was â??laughable if it werenâ??t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain andï?¥simple.â??

The most powerful part of his speech was his invocation of Senator Edward Kennedy, the liberal giant who had championed health reform for decades before he died last month. Reading from a letter he had received from him posthumously, as his widow listened from the gallery, Mr Obama made the moral case for change: â??At stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.â??

During this passage, he cleverly reminded Americans that leading Republicans currently hostile to Democratic efforts at health reformâ??including Senators Orrin Hatch and John McCainâ??had worked hand-in-hand with Mr Kennedy on earlier, smaller efforts at health reform. That points to the second reason to think that Mr Obamaâ??s speech may yet succeed in kick-starting reform this autumn: it managed to position the president as a reasonable and moderate adult in a room full of petty and partisan ideologues.

The Republicans did not help their cause with their behaviour during his speech. Some, including their whip in the House, were caught fiddling with their BlackBerrys. Others rudely waved hand made signs or copies of Republican health bills. And one, from South Carolina, even shouted out â??You lie!â?? when Mr Obama insisted that his reforms would not cover illegal immigrants. (He later apologised.)

The speech positioned Mr Obama as a moderate in style and substance. He pointed out that while some on the left are demanding a single-payer system and some on the right want to abolish the system of employer-provided insurance, he considers both options too radical. He also announced a surprising idea to use executive authority to encourage state-level experiments in curbing malpractice abuses.

Mr Obama also unveiled the main elements of his own centrist reform plan for the first time. He wants to expand coverage to some 30m Americans without insurance, principally by introducing an individual mandate for cover, insurance exchanges, subsidies for the less well-off and heavy regulation of insurers. He also accepted an important proposal to tax the most lavish of insurance plans.

Crucially, he made it plain that he would not accept a health-reform bill from Congress that raises the deficitâ??not now, not ever. He also vowed that most of the $900 billion his plan will costâ??again, the first time he has given a firm figure for his initiativeâ??will come not from taxes on the rich, as the current bills in the House envision, but from internal savings to be realised within the health system.

He offers two reasons to suppose that this claim is not complete bunk. The first is the White Houseâ??s support for empowering an independent panel of experts to cut costs in Medicare and other government health schemes. This matters, because Congress has shown it is incapable of making such difficult cuts. More impressive is his vow this week that any final bill must include provisions for mandatory spending cuts that would kick in if budgeted cost savings do not materialise.

Will this speech be enough to get the presidentâ??s reform agenda back on track? It just might be. One reason to think so is the deft way Mr Obama signalled a willingness to compromise on the â??public optionâ?? this week. The left has insisted on a government-run insurance scheme, but this ill-founded idea is strongly opposed by the health-care industry and by Republicans. It also has no hope of passing the Senate, as Max Baucus, the head of its Finance Committee, confirmed this week. Mr Obama voiced theoretical support for the idea, but by also supporting other optionsâ??including, crucially, the idea that such a plan could be triggered only if necessary laterâ??he has, in effect, dealt it a death blow.

Several committees in the House have already passed versions of health bills, but all contain the public option and are seen as too far to the left of the Senateâ??and now, it is clear, of where Mr Obama stands. So all eyes are now on the Senate Finance Committee, where a â??Gang of Sixâ?? led by Mr Baucus has been working to forge a moderate bill that could provide the backbone for any final health law this year. Mr Baucus this week unveiled his own $900 billion proposal (also a moderate approach without the public option), and announced plans to finalise a bill next week.

Earlier this week that effort seemed to be flagging, as two of the Republicans in the gang, Charles Grassley and Mike Enzi, appeared to be undermining its efforts. That leaves Olympia Snowe, the free-spirited Republican from Maine, as the most courted legislator in recent memory. Mr Obamaâ??s speech and sensible proposals, which are similar to those drafted by Mr Baucus, and his openness to the trigger option favoured by Ms Snowe, can only boost efforts at compromise.

Whether it is enough to keep Ms Snowe and perhaps one or two other Republicans firmly on board remains to be seen. But even if it does not, the next few weeks could yet produce a bill that is better than anything seen thus far and which would be worth passing. He was not the first president, Mr Obama said, to take up health-care reform; but he was determined to be the last.

[quote]jnd wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
jnd wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
jnd wrote:

Republicans will not win anything in '10 if this is the tone they take. It NEVER works.

jnd

Bullshit. It worked for Democrats recent election years…so we will see.

I’m encouraged to actually see some passion stirring in the right wing of congress. The republicans have been nonexistant and need to do more to combat this particular public option reform with conservative values in action.

No it never works. Being passionate about an issue and directing people to the issue works. Outbursts never work in politics. Voters doubt your character and ability to stay calm even when the shit is flying. Throughing red meat to yoru supporters only makes them happy- the majority runs from you.

jnd

I have to disagree, I think there are alot of people who are REALLY pissed to see this bill, and I think it is encouraging to see a fellow politician who is equally heated about this issue.

I agree that people are pissed. BUT–You can be pissed about a bill and make lots of noise about IT in the appropriate forum. But when you become completely unhinged in front of the POTUS (and more importantly the cameras) and act as if you are at a townhall with birthers and teabaggers, then you look like you are out of control-- and the majority of voters do not like that.

jnd
[/quote]

Just think if he didn’t shout out what he did. The issue of citizenship verification would not be as out in the open as it is now. People keep talking about the outburst, but no one questions whether the reason for his outburst is valid.

Thank God he yelled, there should have been more people outspoken as him. Why? Because the POTUS is being dishonest with the American people with a straight face. THAT is more outlandish to me.

President Obamaâ??s prime-time address to Congress and the nation on health care prompted a Republican congressman to shout â??you lie!â?? Did he? Hereâ??s what weâ??ve found:

* Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldnâ??t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
President Obamaâ??s prime-time address to Congress and the nation on health care prompted a Republican congressman to shout â??you lie!â?? Did he? Hereâ??s what weâ??ve found:

* Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldnâ??t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.

[/quote]

It does say that actually enforcing the ban is problematic. That replublicans do have a point there. It even mentions verification amendments that were voted down.

The part about it that I thought was particularly stupid was his choice of what statement to call a lie.

Neither the House or Senate bills give any new privileges to illegal aliens with regard to health care.

They are already able to get all kinds of free medical care.

If one is going to call the President of the United States a liar to his face and on national television, it ought to be on a thing which is factually false and which he has to know is factually false, but is choosing to deceive people.

The illegal alien thing wasn’t an example of that.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
The part about it that I thought was particular stupid was his choice of what statement to call a lie.

Neither the House or Senate bills give any new privileges to illegal aliens with regard to health care.

They are already able to get all kinds of free medical care.

If one is going to call the President of the United States a liar to his face and on national television, it ought to be on a thing which is factually false and which he has to know is factually false, but is choosing to deceive people.

The illegal alien thing wasn’t an example of that.[/quote]

You could see it as more of an open statement.

Granted, it would be kind of superfluous to say that to a democratically elected politician, it is like accusing an athlete of training.

Anyhow, Obama lies.

I think that is more of a problem than mere questionable manners.