President Obama: It's Time To Fight

[t0dd]

Run time: 01:01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzNdyXHd0oQ   Posted on YouTube: October 24, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: October 24, 2009 By DU Member: t0dd Views on DU: 2157

 
Responding to news first reported by TPMDC, that the White House is pushing back on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's inclination to include an optional government insurance program in the Senate's health care bill, one of the left's most hardline progressive groups is taking aim directly at President Obama.

In an unprecedented move, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee will air a new TV ad and is gathering signatures on an emergency petition warning the administration not to support a health care compromise, favored by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), that could kill the public option.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/progressive-group-ad-targets-obama-for-imperiling-public-option.php

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. Beauty!

K&R

[ooglymoogly]

2. To bad the only "public option" O is maneuvering for in the

back rooms of congress is one that has no teeth and is in fact no public option...kicking the can down the road and off the cliff with the useless trigger flim flam. Beware the public option in sheep's clothing that is a giveaway to the wolves in the insurance industry and has no meaning as a true public option as a benefit to the people as a whole. kr

[ProgressOnTheMove]

4. From all I read and hear there will be a public option but the trigger is a separate thing from it

From all I read and hear there
being available in 2013, which is mostly down to budgetary accounting. The senate passing a trigger option version is mostly to get it out there and then for it to merge with the house bill containing a full public option. It's overly complicated but the end game is the public option will pass. Sooner would be preferable, but getting it is at least something. There was a hard push in the 90s by the WH to pass reform and that met resistance in the congress. This is why Pres. Obama has used diplocmacy over force this time. It's not exciting, but it is getting results.

[sandnsea]

5. "diplomacy over force"

After 8 years of having so much legislation rammed down our throats and a President who never listened to anybody, it is stunning to me that the people who most criticized him are now criticizing Obama for not being exactly the same. I just don't get it.

[bertman]

10. Let me help you "get it", sandnsea. "Ramming down our throats" something that 70% of

Americans want, but the Congress and Senate who are paid off by the Insurance and Pharmaceutical industry don't want??

For anyone who hasn't been asleep or living in a cave for the last sixty years while Congress was preventing the American people from having universal healthcare, "ramming something down our throats" is what the politicians have been doing and what our wonderful new President is now aiding and abetting them in.

[sandnsea]

13. Unfortunately that 30% is compiled into specific states

And there is still a Senate to consider. That's the way our government works.

He is getting this done without completely trashing out system of government. Regardless of lobbyists or just plain government haters, our government is still supposed to function on coalitions, not steamrollers.

[bertman]

14. Twisting arms, applying pressure, making deals ARE the way our government works.

"Getting done" a healthcare reform package where only a small percentage of Americans get an opportunity for a public option and the rest of us are mandated to buy insurance industry products is PITIFUL.

My wife and I spend over $10,000 a year on health insurance premiums and that's not counting deductibles and copays. Because it's partly paid for by my company we will not be eligible for the public option. Last year '08, the premiums increased by 18%, this year by 12%. We've been "warned" by the insurance companies that our premiums will be going up even more due to the changes that are coming. Boy, I can hardly wait for this reform. Personally, I'd prefer the steamroller approach.

[sandnsea]

15. How much do you think a public option will be? n/t

[bertman]

16. What do you mean by "how much"? How much will a policy cost? How much will the

whole package cost the nation?

[sandnsea]

17. How much will your share be?

However you want to define it. How much will your premium be. How much will an average premium be. How much do you think you will have to pay.

[bertman]

19. My hope would be somewhere around half of what I'm paying now. Given the overhead

and profit that private insurance companies have, as well as trying to guarantee a share dividend for investors, any public option worth its salt should be 50 or 60% of private.

What do you think a public option premium will be?

[sandnsea]

20. CBO reports it will be 10% less

http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2009/09/cbo-dropping-public-option-to-cost-110-billion/

Medicare spends $10,000+ per person. There won't be a 2.9% payroll tax, or any other tax, to pay for it either. Where is that $10,000 per person going to come from?

Public or private, your relief is going to come from the subsidy. Better make sure it's enough. So far, the HELP Bill is the only one that is.

Here's a cool map, that shows Medicare spending.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6851311

[bertman]

23. Medicare spends $10,000+ per person OVER 65. That's the most medical-treatment intensive age

group in the country. That bolsters the argument for extending the Public Option to all age groups, which would make a much larger pool and drive down the cost per recipient.

This whole Limited Public Option/Trigger/Opt Out debate is just a set of shiny keys designed to keep us from seeing and adopting the only truly comprehensive and effective reform--a broadbased Public Option in the mold of Medicare.

Unfortunately, our President and much of Congress are staring at the shiny keys.

[sandnsea]

24. You still didn't answer the question

How much do you think you will have to pay? There won't be any taxpayer funds. So let's cut the Medicare in half, $5000 per person. For you and your wife, that's still $10,000 a year. Who is going to pay for that?

[bertman]

25. If that were the best game in town then certainly I'd pay. At least then I wouldn't have

copays and deductibles and insurance company weasels telling me that my pre-existing condition means I won't have ANY coverage.

Last year I paid an additional $4000 plus for medical services that were not covered by my insurance, deductibles, and copays. With a $5000 annual premium for a Public Option I'd still be coming out way ahead.

And I did answer the question a couple of replies back. I said around half of what I'm currently paying.

By the way, there would be taxpayer funds if we reinstated the tax rates before Bush "rammed through" his tax cuts for the wealthy. That's a tax bill I'd love to see President Obama RAM DOWN THE THROATS of the top income earners. The chorus of right-wing Latter-Day Deficit Hawks couldn't possibly be against lowering the deficit AND providing health care for more Americans, could they?

There would also be reduced costs of medical care and prescription drugs if we allowed the Public Option to negotiate for better prices instead of having to accept the largesse of Big Pharma and Big Insurance, as President Obama had "negotiated" in his early meetings with the Industry Giants.

[sandnsea]

26. Medicare doesn't fund everything

That's why there are supplemental policies, and Part B that costs $97 a month and I don't even know how much Part D costs.

Yes, you said half of what you're currently paying. And I pointed out that there are no figures to support that cost for the public option. You never responded to that reality.

Bush shouldn't have rammed through his tax cuts, although he didn't ram them through. People always seem to love tax cuts. And yes of course the deficit hawks would be against raising taxes if it was going to "handouts". I wish we'd roll back the Bush tax cuts too. But I really wish we'd remember the kind of government we're supposed to have and work harder to get the truth to those ignorant enough to be fighting against the common good. Ramming legislation through, any legislation, isn't good for anybody in the long run.

[bertman]

27. I believe that the Bush Tax Cuts for The Wealthy were done as a Budget Reconciliation.

That's a perfectly legitimate way of ramming through legislation that you can't get any other way.

I did respond. I stated that there would be other ways to raise the revenue to cover more of the costs or to lower the costs of medical services and pharmaceutical products. Unfortunately, these options were given away in the early "negotiating" stages (note the quotation marks, as there was a piss-poor attempt by the administration that started from a weak first proposal that was laid on the table). This should have been a package deal from the git-go, but due to the lobbying efforts by Big Pharma and Big Insurance and the undermining from the DLC Democrats in the Obama administration, many of the best options for funding and reducing costs were taken out early on.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

3. Outstanding spot.

Every time I see something like this, I'm so glad Obama insisted on keeping his Blackberry. I have to believe he's is very much in touch with
how we are feeling "out here." Yes we STILL can!

[flamingdem]

6. Then why does he continue to kiss Olympia Snowe's azz? nt

[Thornleylv]

7. Percentage

It no accident that obama was elected by the same percentage that was for a public option 58%

[tomm2thumbs]

8. nicely played and all the right points

thanks for posting

[bobbolink]

9. It's time to put country ahead of party. I wish I had the money to donat to this group!

Very well done.

[bertman]

11. We need more ads like that. Recommend highly.

[Grassy Knoll]

12. Oh, if it was that simple, to deal with these jerk offs !

[grahamhgreen]

18. Past time for him to stop being rolled by people who hate him.

[pundaint]

21. Who's being rolled?

One can never believe the explanations in politics, that's just campaigning. When we see the result we'll know who was being served. If the insurance revenues rise, they are being served, if the Pharmaceutical revenues rise, they were being served.

We all know what insurance and drug companies do to earn their money. Either we were being rolled by those who sold us healthcare reform, or the revenues for those two leeches will go down. No talk, just numbers.

[tomp]

22. obama has publicly stated that americans ALREADY pay enough...

...for health care nationally to provide for excellent health care for all. the money is there ALREADY. the debate over funding is absolute bullshit obfuscation.

[yurbud]

28. kick

[yurbud]

29. I'll bet those poll numbers are similar in states and districts of Blue Dogs & Republicans