If the health insurance industry mandate is a great "reform" so is cutting Social Security benefits!

[Better Believe It]

If the court upholds the insurance industry law, single payer will be dead for years.

That's because the health insurance companies and big pharma will have a lock on the for-profit health care industry.

It's their baby.

I suppose you can describe this horrible piece of Wall Street legislation as "health care reform", but the fact is the insurance industry wrote this bill via their lobbyists behind closed doors in order to guarantee their stranglehold over the health care system.

These parasites contribute absolutely nothing to improve our health care. They are useless "middlemen" and need to be driven out of our medical system, not rewarded!

Instead these vultures will be paid off with tens of millions of new forced customers who will shell out hundred of billions of dollars for second rate medical care.

And that's labeled by some as "health care reform"???

Sorry.

I'll pass on that so-called "reform".

Oh .... but I can't if the Supreme Court says it's legal.

So what's the government going to do if I refuse to give thousands of dollars to an insurance company for inadequate benefits .... fine me?

I just don't recall any wave of popular movements and demonstrations demanding that we be forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars to the insurance industry sharks in the name of progressive "reform"!

I must have missed that.

So what's the next "great reform" going to be? Increasing the Social Security retirement age and/or cutting benefits?

I can hardly wait for that one.

And like Senator Schumer pointed out on Sunday, the mandated insurance gimmick was originally a right-wing Republican idea that was rejected at that time by Democrats:

Meet the Press transcript for April 1, 2012

Excerpt:

SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY):

Well, I'd say, first, that of course, you take constitutional questions seriously. But at the time and still today, most constitutional scholars say it'll be upheld. Harvie Wilkerson***(as spoken)***he's the dean of the very conservative judges on the Courts of Appeals. He said it would be a heavy lift to overturn this law. And let's look at the context. The idea of a mandate came from Republicans. It was--it was proposed by the Heritage Foundation in 1993, people like Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole and that, you know, supported it in those days. In 2009, Mitt Romney, the Republican nom, you know, in the middle of the healthcare debate, the likely Republican nominee, said that the mandate was what should be used as opposed to Democrats who were then arguing for expanding Medicare.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46915274/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/meet-press-transcript-april/

[ProSense]

1. Let's see

"If the health insurance industry mandate is a great "reform" so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

If the ban on pre-existing conditions "is a great 'reform' so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

If expanding Medicaid "is a great 'reform' so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

If strengthen Medicare "is a great 'reform' so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

If the MLR rule "is a great 'reform' so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

If free contraception "is a great 'reform' so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

Nope, doesn't work.

[HiPointDem]

5. Making fun of the poster doesn't constitute a counter-argument to the content.

[ProSense]

9. Hmmm,

"Making fun of the poster doesn't constitute a counter-argument to the content."

...what?

"If the health insurance industry mandate is a great "reform" so is cutting Social Security benefits!"

That's hilarious.

[Uncle Joe]

14. If they can mandate you directly pay a private for profit "health" insurance corporation

for your coverage, they can mandate you directly pay what would be your social security dollars to a private for profit broker on Wall Street.

If they can't, why can't they?

[ProSense]

18. It's already

If they can mandate you directly pay a private for profit "health" insurance corporation

for your coverage, they can mandate you directly pay what would be your social security dollars to a private for profit broker on Wall Street.

If they can't, why can't they?

...happening for children's health care.

<...>

SEN. OBAMA...According to Senator Clinton...there are more people covered under her plan than mine is because of a mandate. That is not a mandate for the government to provide coverage to everybody; it is a mandate that every individual purchase health care...If it was not affordable, she would still presumably force them to have it, unless there is a hardship exemption as they've done in Massachusetts, which leaves 20 percent of the uninsured out. And if that's the case, then, in fact, her claim that she covers everybody is not accurate....

MR. WILLIAMS: And Senator Clinton, on this subject --

SEN. CLINTON...Senator Obama has a mandate in his plan. It's a mandate on parents to provide health insurance for their children. That's about 150 million people who would be required to do that. The difference between Senator Obama and myself is that I know, from the work I've done on health care for many years, that if everyone's not in the system we will continue to let the insurance companies do what's called cherry picking -- pick those who get insurance and leave others out.

<...>

SEN. OBAMA...I do provide a mandate for children, because, number one, we have created a number of programs in which we can have greater assurance that those children will be covered at an affordable price. On the -- on the point of many adults, we don't want to put in a situation in which, on the front end, we are mandating them, we are forcing them to purchase insurance, and if the subsidies are inadequate, the burden is on them, and they will be penalized. And that is what Senator Clinton's plan does.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/us/politics/26text-debate.html?pagewanted=print

Also, I doubt Republicans can get away with dismantling or killing Social Security. Remember, Bush tried to sell privatization.

[FSogol]

11. Seems like some of us differ on what "content" constitutes.

isn't worthy of a counter argument.

[Bandit]

21. Free contraception???? Who gets that?

As far as I know Contraception is to be included in the insurance policy.. Insurance policies are not FREE...Just another right wing talking point...Free Contraception..Indeed...

[Ikonoklast]

2. Stick to cutting and pasting.

At least some of that tripe makes sense.

[FSogol]

4. Yeah, that's a new low even for him. n/t

[ProSense]

8. Looks like

the OP took your advice.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=509433

[quinnox]

3. Yea, but it will probably be thrown out by the supreme court anyway

We all know how the conservatives will vote, and Justice Kennedy seemed very skeptical in the part I heard on tv when he was questioning the mandate. Frankly it would be a big surprise to me if the supreme court doesn't throw it out at this point.

[HiPointDem]

6. We do?

I'm not sure why, since the Republicans first came up with the idea of a health-insurance mandate.

[quinnox]

10. well, nothing is guaranteed but

I also heard Scalia a little, and he sounded like he had already made up his mind to vote no, at least to my ears. And he has a lot of influence among the conservatives on the court. Granted, there might be some surprises in the votes, I suppose, but I still think its dead in the water.

[Better Believe It]

7. The insurance industry and big pharma will put tremendous pressure on the SC to leave it intact.

[FSogol]

12. Why? Because they like to be forced to insure people with pre-existing conditions?

[kenny blankenship]

17. Sure, if they can charge them nosebleed premiums

and they will.
And in return they get the Govt to force every working age American into their loving embrace. Plus they get the US Treasury to make up whatever differences between their exorbitant costs and lower income workers' ability to pay.

What's not to like about ACA for them - THEY FUCKING WROTE IT!

Liz Fowler, Wellpoint VP for "Public Policy", disguised as a Senate Staffer, seated behind Max Baucus, Senate Finance Committee Chairman.

She did such a good job monkeywrenching reform as Baucus' chief health counsel in the Senate that Obama made her Deputy Director of the Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Health and Human Services Dept. Hey, if you let the fox design the henhouse, you may as well let her run it too, right?

[DonCoquixote]

13. and you think Joe cares?

Please...Joe Scalia is more powerful than the president and congress, and he knows it. He is already prepping to elect Mitt Romney thanks to the Florida vote fixing he sanctified. He will kill it just to confirm the power he stole in 2000.

[Better Believe It]

16. He has just one vote against The insurance industry needs five votes for their law.

I'd say it could good either way right now.

We won't know for sure until they release their vote and written opinions.

[sabrina 1]

19. I think it will stay. It saved the Insurance Corps who were losing money as a result of

high unemployment for one thing. This bill saved them. Now they have forced payments from people who cannot afford it and the Government handing over public funds on their behalf to the Ins. Corps. There is no way the current right wing SC will strike it down unless there is something to keep funding the predatory Ins. Corps to take its place.

I remember when Whistle-blower Wendel Potter was interviewed after he had quit the industry, describing when he saw Americans lining up at animal stalls to receive free healthcare from a human rights group that normally operates in third world countries. He was asked how that affected the Industry, did it move to feel bad? His answer, 'oh no, they saw all those people as potential income'. And then came this bill, fulfilling their dream.

I'm betting on it not being struck down.

[SidDithers]

15. Wow...

Sid

[treestar]

28. LOL

[Honeycombe8]

20. You are part of the healthcare system, already. So, either you pay for it yourself (with subsidies,

if you are poor), or you expect me to pay for your healthcare.

So, you're saying you expect me to pay for your healthcare, while you choose not to, even though you are financially able to?

Interesting.

[Better Believe It]

22. Please don't believe and spread the health insurance propaganda claims designed to divide us.

The health insurance industry is trying to divide us by claiming those who don't buy their insurance are forcing the rest of us to pay for the healthcare of others forced into emergency rooms.

That's a clever lie meant to divide us. The for-profit healthcare industry makes enough money to cover emergency care for poorer working class people while still making huge profits. Health care costs twice a much per capita in the United States as in other advanced capitalist nations. And that money goes to the insurance industry, big pharma and others who are exploiting the sick to advance their private profit schemes.

The idea that insurance companies would lower their insurance rates and/or improve covered benefits "if only" millions of "deadbeats" would buy their product is a total fantasy but clever propaganda.

Just the opposite is true. With mandatory payments to them amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars every year, the insurance industry will see a dramatic increase in their profits with no improvement in our health care and/or our benefit coverage.

Why should they charge less and provide more simply because millions are forced into buying their insurance that doesn't contribute anything to improving our health care system? It's a utopian fantasy having nothing to do with reality to believe such nonsense.

They are in business to make huge profits by exploiting their customers and are parasites that need to be removed from the health care system.

They are up to no good!

Why do you think I should support them or believe their propaganda and big pharma?

[Better Believe It]

23. In Supreme Court Case, "Obamacare" Has Industry Allies. "It could allow hospitals to raise prices."

[b[In SCOTUS case, Obamacare has industry allies
by Timothy P. Carney
Senior Political Columnist
March 25, 2012

Corporate America's stance on the Obamacare case before the high court this week will surprise those who followed Obama's narrative or most news coverage of the law, which was supposedly a broadside to the special interests. But back then, health-sector lobbies either supported the bill or at least supported its core provisions. Today, industry briefs before the court show the same lack of "special-interest" opposition.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Massachusetts filed an amicus brief with the court in support of Obama's Department of Health & Human Services. The insurer writes that it played a central role in crafting Mitt Romney's Massachusetts health-care law that served as the prototype of Obamacare, and that it "remains firmly committed to the 2006 health care reform and the individual mandate, and believes that the closely related reforms enacted by Congress in 2010 will further advance important economic and social goals."

The American Hospital Association is a $20-million-a-year lobby (the third-biggest lobbying organization in terms of spending since 1998, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics). The AHA has filed briefs in support of the law, and its amicus brief before the Supreme Court argues that "the court should uphold the individual mandate."

The health-care law provides new taxpayer subsidies to hospitals, and the individual mandate could reduce the "uncompensated care" hospitals now provide for the uninsured. Plus, more universal and subsidized health coverage could allow hospitals to raise prices.

Read the full article at:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/scotus-case-obamacare-has-industry-allies/446831

[TheKentuckian]

24. What do you think will happen under the plans of a brain trust that thinks

the best way to control costs is to make increasing profits only possible by increasing system wide costs when the entity you apply it to is the one that dictates allowable charges?

Something like an MLR might control costs when applied to folks like durable equipment manufacturers or hospitals and suicidal when applied only to the ones with the purse.

It is well beyond goofy to think this old scheme works to our advantage. The point is to prop up the insurance cartel and big money for pharma at our great expense. Guaranteed issue isn't a big win when you are required by law to buy their shit. If I must by the shit then they must sell it, wowzers! That's progress!!!

Crumb loving bastards!

[Better Believe It]

25. At what point will we tire of getting pushed around by big business interests and fight against them

and reject the Democratic Party leadership policy of surrender to or compromise with those special interests and Republicans?

[TheKentuckian]

26. Probably around the time when the other choice is to watch one's children suffer and starve and

it is too late for any solution save violent mobs more afraid of empty bellies than death.

[treestar]

27. Don't see why that is so

Single payer is a long way off for this country - unless we get off our asses and start electing people who will vote for it. The average voter needs to turn off the TV and pay attention to real issues.

[Better Believe It]

29. Didn't most get off their asses and elect "people who will vote" for single payer in 2008?

Unforunately the elected Democratic President and Democratic Senators did not support a single payer system.

In fact, President Obama would not even support a limited public option!

And to date not a single Democratic Senator to date has signed on as a co-sponsor to Senator Sanders Medicare for All legislation!

It's kind of hard to pass single payer legislation by electing people who are opposed to it.

Don't you agree?

Well, maybe you have a better plan for 2012 that will result in the election of candidates who will pass single payer legislation.

I'm listening.

[treestar]

30. No they didn't, or it would have been passed in 2009

Obama supported a public option. He would have signed it had Congress passed it. People need to get a grip with how the system works.