Huh! I think Thom Hartmann just said how President Obama could get

[Cleita]

us single payer. He says he can sign a statement lowering Medicare Coverage to age 0 if Joe Lieberman kills the bill in the Senate. There were other circumstances involved but having a senior memory I can't remember exactly how he said it could happen. So, does anyone else have any knowledge about how this could be done?

[FLyellowdog]

1. Sounds like a plan to me. nt

[Buzz Clik]

2. If Obama took that sort of unilateral action (which he will not)...

... the word of the moment for knuckledraggers would be "Impeach".

[yurbud]

8. they'd have a tough time getting any traction for that, especially after both parties didn't

bitch about Bush's signing statements.

[global1]

11. On What Basis?.........

what reason would the knuckledraggers use to push impeachment?

We're talking about a move that would save lives here.

[tekisui]

15. Let 'em. You know they will at some point, anyway.

[napi21]

3. The way Thom explained it, Reconciliation in the Senate

can only be used for bugetary issues. Since Medicare is already a law, Obama could do a signing statement lowering the age to enroll in Medicare to zero & then the Senate could do a bill to fund Medicare for the additional money needed to accomplish that.

[brooklynite]

4. People who propose "simple" solutions like this...

...aren't being much more responsible that people who water down the complex ones. The issue isn't whether you can extend eligibility to everyone; it's how you pay for it. Medicare is designed to be a retiree's program, and is paid for by employed workers who will in turn received benefits paid for by others. This has an inherent flaw, in that the pool of recipients is projected to grow (and the medial costs per recipient to increase), while the employed population doesn't keep pace because of reduced population growth. By opening Medicare to everyone, you exponentially expand the costs while not increasing the revenue stream. Anyone proposing using Medicare as the mechanism to deliver health care to everyone should be responsible enough to propose a way to pay for it.

[vanbean]

5. I'll take that responsibility. Either raise or eliminate the cap. Easy.

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. Paying for it is the EASY part

1) End the occupation of Iraq.

2) End the occupation of Afghanistan.

3) Close all tax loopholes

4) Roll back the tax rates on the rich to Eisenhower administration levels.

Problem solved.

[Egnever]

10. You think thats easy?

:rofl:

[Sebastian Doyle]

14. I think it's goddamn necessary for the survival of this country

This ridiculous corporate blow job excuse of a "health care bill" should be conclusive evidence that it is god damn time we stand up to the corporate fascists and the ridiculously rich and made them pay their fair share.

[Cleita]

9. That I can answer for you and it's a simple solution.

P/R tax has to be increased for employees and employers alike. I'm sure whatever the bite is out of wages it will be less than what people are paying for health care coverage today. Herein is the crux of the problem we are having with the insurance company cartel. That money they are collecting in premiums would go into the Medicare fund for actual health care and they would be cut out of all that lucrative money.

[global1]

13. You Got To Think Out Of The Box........

Medicare is a retiree's program because they said it is and have treated it as such since its inception. Just change the definition of Medicare. We need to be creative.

If Obama did this it would be fantastic. And even though it would be a signing statement and could be reversed by a future Repug president - once the cats out of the bag - it would be hard for them to reign it in again.

I say "Go For It".

[geckosfeet]

7. Signing statements? Yeah. George Bush knows all about them.

[Garbo 2004]

12. I don't see how President signing a statement supercedes statute. Regardless of what Bush did. nt

[Cleita]

16. I think Thom qualified it as if there is no statute passed because of

filibustering, not enough votes, etc.. Then he could fall back on this.

[Garbo 2004]

18. Medicare program is existing law---including 65+ requirement, with specific exceptions.

How can a presidential "statement" supercede existing statute? It doesn't, unless you're GW Bush/Cheney who believed that Presidential dictate overrode statute.

Does Hartmann explain how the existing Medicare statutes can be legally ignored/overriden by the Presidential edict?

More specifically: to change existing law requires legislation.

[yurbud]

17. please copy and paste this into an email to the White House LINK:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

[yurbud]

19. my letter to Obama on Hartmann plan:

President Obama,

Thank you for starting current movement to reform health insurance. Unfortunately, the public option in the House bill does not appear strong enough to be real competition for private insurance, and the Senate version will likely be even weaker given the corruption of Blue Dog senators and the willingness of former Democrat Joe Lieberman to filibuster any public option.

You can correct these flaws by signing an executive order to open social security to EVERYONE and allowing those who want to to buy in.

You could also overcome the objections of some rural representatives about tying the public option rates to Medicare reimbursement rates by directing Medicare to increase payments.

We need real health care reform that isn't a gift to the health insurance industry.

If we end up with something that is obviously less than that, you will jeopardize your chances of being re-elected and the Democrats of continuing to hold their commanding majorities when your only real opponent is the corpse of the Republican Party that hasn't finished dying yet.

Please demand that Rahm and the Blue Dogs put principle ahead of pocketing corporate money on this one issue.

It not only makes policy sense, but it makes political sense since a grateful public won't look too closely at the syphilitic corruption of the Blue Dogs for a while after they get this right (if they do).