Howard Dean: "The bill in Washington is about change"

[ProSense]

"The bill in Washington is about change," he said. "The best way to think about it is that Barack Obama has done something that previous presidents haven’t done."

link

[Laelth]

1. I like this quote from the article better.

The more Democrats in the U.S. Senate compromise with Republicans on health care reform, the less effective it will be, Howard Dean said on Oct. 15 at Fordham.

:dem:

-Laelth

[quantass]

Still baffles me why Democrats feel Repubs are the mainstream and not their constituents nt

Doesnt it occur to them that the people voted them in overwhelmingly...so why listen to the minority party that the country hates. But i guess this is why this whole cycle plays out: Republicans hold power UNTIL they screw up the economy and then the people give it to the OTHER party which happens to be democrats and when everything is fine and dandy they fearfully run back to their tv dinner republican propaganda. So with that said maybe i ahve answered my own question...democrats obey republicans because in the end the people listen to republican fear regardless of logic. What really needs to happen is for democrats to fight back ... thank you for the new breed of democrats in Grayson, Weiner, and anchors like Dylan Ratigan.

[msongs]

6. lol maybe their "real" constituents are lobbyists and corporations nt

[Lugnut]

14. I thought elections have consequences.

Silly me.

[Laelth]

2. This quote is also quite nice.

Here’s a truth about a single-payer system—it is far more efficient and less expensive than the private system. The average cost of Medicare is that for every premium dollar, 4 percent goes to administrative costs and 96 percent of that dollar is spent on health care. With private health insurance, only 80 percent goes to health care.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Actually, I think that 80% figure is a major overstatement.

A large part of what goes to the health care providers is used to pay for billing coders and other paperwork pushers who don't work for the insurance companies but are needed to comply with all the paperwork the insurers require. My small outpatient clinic (3 or so full-time equivalent providers) has one staff person who spends half her time fighting with the insurance companies over payments. I keep warning her she's going to get a cauliflower ear from all the time she spends on hold while insurance people do whatever it is that they do while they have you on hold.

[quantass]

4. Although the Bill hasnt finalized and it is inevitable to be very weak it IS change at least...

The tea leaves are becoming very clear and so is my prediction back in late July that it would end up being a bill with a PO but with a silly trigger signed by the president -- i'm making a killing on the Predictions trades Market right now. Sure i am upset with that expected final bill but hey at least it will be in the direction of movement. It is true that Obama has progressed further than any other and it is clear he is trying to do so by easing its way through the process rather than forcing a great bill through (which would have possibly killed it right away -- e.g. Single Payer).

I like to think of this as what happened with SS or Medicare when it first passed. From my limited reading on both they were not very good but it was the ammendments that improved them dramatically. This is what i am hoping for Healthcare reform. I expect a very weak bill to be signed by Obama but there is hope that the problem grows and like the Financial market it "forces" the president and congress to take REAL action -- ideally with Obama in office so he can get the credit for it.

I would have pushed through a strong PO (at the very least) or a Single Payer (at best) but realistically both would be tough to get through and so i understand how Obama is playing -- even the whole constant kissing the arse of the repubs. So by at least signing into law a bill that has the workings to attempt reform, even if it benefits the Inusrance companies and not the people for several years via mandates...it will lay the groundwork for what will no doubt be fixes, and deletions that will eventually and inadvertently be for the benefit of the people since Washington will realize that they are going broke.

[ProSense]

5. That argument runs counter to reality

here, here and here.

You simply cannot ignore that a strong public option has broad support.

[inna]

7. the way you misread/misrepresented his post is nothing short of Orwellian.

:thumbsdown:

[ProSense]

8. Continue denying reality. n/t

[inna]

9. you're the one who's in denial.

:shrug:

[Cha]

15. No, she's not in denial.

[Captain Hilts]

10. Really amazing, isn't it? The term 'public option' has little meaning on Capital Hill. nt

[ProSense]

11. Little meaning? Saying anything doesn't make it fact. Here are one:

The robust plan would save the government money, because the payment rates (roughly, Medicare rates plus an extra 5 percent for doctors) would be lower than negotiated rates would be. With negotiated rates, the public plan would likely pay fees roughly equivalent to those paid by private insurance plans.

link

That clear enough for you?

[Captain Hilts]

12. And they've been clear from the get-go they're willing to jettison it if Republicans and Blue Dogs

object.

Gives with one hand and takes away with the other on this issue.

[ProSense]

13. Blue dogs and Republicans? Are you still in July? n/t