The Lies Begin With The Name Itself- The Affordable Health Care for America Act

[Orwellian_Ghost]

And why is a bill better than no bill? Why is a bill that funds absolutely useless parasites like health insurance companies at the expense of our grandchildren's unearned pay better than nothing? Why -- when blocking a bill would almost guarantee a better debate in round 2 -- is it more important to pass the bill and close off the opportunity for valuable reform? Is there nothing this bill could do that would lead you to oppose it? If the senate turns the "public option" into something that does not even exist until possibly "triggered" years from now, then will you oppose the bill? But the public option barely exists in the House version either. Why wait until the last minute to pointlessly pretend you oppose this pig?

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/47433

[Cleita]

1. You've got it. The minute that bill was framed in language of affordability

instead of accessibility, any solid foundation of health care security was thrown away.

[DonCoquixote]

2. replies

"And why is a bill better than no bill?"

Because there is a difference between having no momentum towards a desired goal, and starting momentum towards that goal. People may hate the way the bill works, but at last, at long last, the idea that NOTHING SHOULD BE DONE will DIE. Keep in mind, that IS the dominant solution that has been in place for 40 years.

"Why is a bill that funds absolutely useless parasites like health insurance companies at the expense of our grandchildren's unearned pay better than nothing?

Because we know that unless the balls starts rolling, your grandchildren might not even make it. As far as Health insurance, yes they are scum, but if we wind up with a system like Germany, Australia, or even France, we will be way ahead. Despite having much better regulated Health insurance than we do, their insurance exists, unlike single payer. Plus, we do need a plan B to have people in those industries productive again, or else they just add to the unemployment numbers, which will NOT be a decent sell.

"Why -- when blocking a bill would almost guarantee a better debate in round 2 -- is it more important to pass the bill and close off the opportunity for valuable reform?"

But the public option barely exists in the House version either. Why wait until the last minute to pointlessly pretend you oppose this pig?

Your last question is unclear, but as far as waiting to see what happens, sorry to say, that is how bills are done. I could ask you a bunch of questions about how you expeced to get single payer from the get go, but that is another thread.

ER, this is the sort of leap of Faith normally ascribed to the religious. You have NO guarantee and you know it. The GOP knows 2012 is one year closer, and that if they can get in a Palin or Huckabee, all talk of Healthcare reform is dead, dead, dead. Joe Liberman is exploiting just this fact to make himself important

"Is there nothing this bill could do that would lead you to oppose it? "

Several things, could, such as keeping the stupak amendment in. However, the Senate still has plenty of chances to cut that out.

"If the senate turns the "public option" into something that does not even exist until possibly "triggered" years from now, then will you oppose the bill?"

I oppose a trigger, but again, I will have to see what happens. We are nowhere near that stage.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

4. Hey Don

Before you get the ball rolling you might think about the direction it's heading.

The ball went in the wrong direction. Again.

It's all about privatizing the public sector be it education, heath care, infrastructure. All of it.

I'm taking bets. You in?

[DonCoquixote]

39. Your point

The problem with that idea is, the ball was already rolling, towards the idea of going back to business as usual, GOP elected in 2012, and the issue of health care reform being DEAD.

As far as bets go, well, Social Security and Medicare all have flaws, heck, even the Canadians love to complain about their Health Care system (as I hear down here in tourist central, Florida). That being said, NOBODY, and NOBODY, would entertain the idea of going back to the status quo before those programs came about. Even when W. tried that, it blew up in his lips like an exploding cigar, and that was well before Wall Street went south, before Enron even blew up.

Now, are the scum going to try to make the most of things, yes, but sadly, in a democracy, the name of the game is to get at least 51% of the people agree with you. Yes, Obama won the election, but we are not near the point where 51 percent of the country is on board with single payer. And yes, Obama can use his pulpit better, however, as big as that pulpit is, it is countered by media pulpits, and worse, church pulpits. I may want single payer, or at the very least, something like the French and Germans have, but I am not so naive to think that 30 years of GOP cultural domination can be wished away in four years. Yes, talk of revolution, but note that like any quick fix, revolutions have a nasty way of going 360 degrees. If we want real change we CAN believe in, we will need to work on the masses, and understand that those masses are so pumped full of GOP toxins that will NOT just be pooped out of their system just because of any one Election.

[Overseas]

47. You're right that continued privatization of other public services

has added to my depression about the passage of this kind of health reform bill.

The House bill "is always DOA" when it reaches the Senate, we were told. So I expected it to have a lot more progressive elements, which the Senate would then bash to protect their campaign funding and protect themselves against the corporate political-smear advertising budgets. Instead we were treated to a disappointingly mild Congressional bill. That was depressing.

So I've been trying to get with the program and hope that getting anything passed was a first step because other great reforms of the past were wimpy looking on first passage, then subsequently improved. So I've held back on posting about my disappointment.

But you reminded me of why I have been even more depressed about this "better than a lot of people have now" health reform package-- it comes on the heels of hearing about my new Democratic administration continuing the destructive trend of privatization of public services--
-- privatizing education through charter schools, instead of funding educational innovations at our public schools and making them better,
-- continuing to award private contracts for military services like guarding our embassies, when the Marines used to do those jobs with much more professionalism and accountability
-- continuing to employ Blackwater/Xe even after their reckless and sometimes illegal activities.

A large part of my hope for the Obama Administration was that they would expose the failures of privatization, particularly in our military services. The war profiteers have done a lot to injure our international reputation which our president has been trying so hard to rebuild. At least I'd hoped to see his administration drop contracts with the worst of them. They undermine his diplomatic efforts.

Privatization is justified by saying that there is too much corruption when the government provides the services. Or that they can save us money. Both justifications can be shot down with facts. Yes, sure, there has been some corruption in our government services but far less than we have seen in the privatized services received through contracting with the likes of Halliburton, KBR and Blackwater/Xe. They've provided shoddy services at great expense to the taxpayers.

I had a lot of hope in the pragmatism of our new president. Hoped that while he was more centrist than I am, he would use pragmatism to reach progressive goals. De-privatizing military services would save us money. But it would require re-thinking our military priorities because we couldn't sustain the levels of military engagement we have now without giving so much work to the privateers.

The big lie in modern America is that the private sector can do things better. In many cases it has done worse. We tend to forget that the last time national health insurance was defeated, we were told that the "wisdom of the private sector" could do better to control costs. Yet all the triggers of decency have blown off their hinges-- private profits have soared, millions more have been dumped from coverage, millions more have gone bankrupt from medical emergencies. And still we have our legislators talking about instituting "triggers" just in case things get worse-- when they are already extremely cruel and I'd say immoral. Still we hear our legislators talking about how to protect the private sector from competition from the public sector when they already had over ten years to prove their case and failed miserably. We have to listen to our legislators talk about keeping health care in the public sector "revenue neutral" even after the privatization of healthcare in the USA has not been at all "revenue neutral"-- their private profits have soared at the expense of all of us.

US privatization of health insurance is a dramatic example of the failures of privatization and yet we've had to watch all the posturing to protect it while tens of thousands die early for that lie.

Privatization of military services has contributed greatly to our national disgrace in the conduct of the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet it continues.

So I was provoked to respond to your thread because you reminded me of just why my depression about the "Oh well, we passed something that will help some people," is so strong. The myth of "the wisdom of the private sector" or "the private sector can do things better" has not been more broadly repudiated. I think more people can see that now because there is strong public support for a public option, but corporate power is so strong that our legislators and new Democratic administration continue to pretend that "the private sector can do better." Sometimes it can and other times it leads to disaster.

[Chisox08]

19. I see the Dems in Congress using this as an excuse to put off

real reform for another generation. I wanted single payer but I was willing to settle for a strong public option that is open to all Americans. Not forcing me to get ripped off by the insurance companies. I've been ripped off for to long by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois and I'm sick of it.

[FrenchieCat]

3. Many good people disagree with that.

many, many good people.

Sorry, but that is just a fact....
and these are not dumb or gullible people either.


Anyone who believes that waiting till later to do something better,
is incorrect in my opinion....because doing nothing will not
pain insurance companies. It will not send them to jail.
It will not make them reconsider premium prices,
it will not make them provide insurance to those who can't afford it,
and it will not force them to cover pre-existing conditions.

So the critics can say what they will,
call the reform all kinds of names, etc., etc...,
but in essence, anyone who is actively fighting against this bill passing,
is working for its defeat alongside the Insurance companies.

Strange bedfellows; different goals, but same results.

[Lars39]

6. It was a fucking sham the minute the insurance companies were consulted.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

7. Doesn't matter

whether they are "good people, "nice people", "community oriented", "have different opinions" or assorted variants.

You have to be blind or blinded not to see what is happening and connect the dots.

"When good people do nothing..."

I'll be there will you?

[FrenchieCat]

10. When I say good people, I mean people who understand this as well if not better than you do.....

You seem to feel you have the corner market about all of the facts,
and you have determined that you know, and everyone is is good but stupid.

Did you know that the House bill gets rid of the anti-trust provision
currently protecting the large health insurance monopolies?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

12. Wow

What an enormous and profoundly important provision. Everyone gather round did you hear of the crumbs and bones we get to suck on tonight?

How anyone can defend this crap is probably the more compelling story.

[Donnachaidh]

14. of course, those folks who will be forced to buy insurance with NO price controls

won't have the cash to sue the insurance companies anyway. They'll be too busy trying to pay their share of the government sponsored corporate welfare....

[FrenchieCat]

15. What does nothing get you? Any crumbs? Any bones?

hell the fuck naw.

You don't get shit, not even a tiny piece on a stick.

How can I defend what crap? Those who are deluted into thinking that nothing
is better that this bill, because they think that in time the people will figure it out,
after more lose their health care insurance,
are the ones who have a story to tell.....


But meantime, Fuck that.
If you want to help the insurance company keep status quo,
by refusing to acknowledge what is in the bill that will help real people,
that's your right, but it is not a fact.
If you want to punish the health care industry and the insurance companies,
deriding this bill ain't gonna accomplish that.

In the meantime, the Insurance Industry applaud you.
They feel the same way about this bill; just a real pig it is.

[Hannah Bell]

16. I hear it's a 2000-page bill. how do you know *what's* in it?

[FrenchieCat]

18. Obviously the same way you do.

[Hannah Bell]

20. i.e. you don't, for sure, & neither does 99% of the population, because few people

have the fortitude to read the equivalent of 4 novel's worth of legalese, which, to understand completely, will also require referencing earlier legislation every few pages.

and that's just the way the fucktards who wrote the bill like it.

which is my prime reason for rejecting it on its face.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Well Go Hannah Bell,

Let ignorance be your guide!

Bumper sticker generation personifided.

Good for you.

I've read portions of the bill...
and I have read what those who have read even more than I have
had to say about it........
There are certain folks in the government whom I trust more than others,
and I have listened to those with an open mind (as I am a Liberal, who does not claim to know all just cause) and so, in the end, my decision to want a bill rather than not at this point
in the process, is an informed one.

[Hannah Bell]

22. I have just as much second-hand information as you about the bill, & i've

*also* "read portions," so where the hell do you get off telling *me* to "let ignorance be your guide"?

[FrenchieCat]

31. You said....

"my prime reason for rejecting it on its face"....
is because it is 2000 pages long.

Nuff said. Far as I'm concerned the length of a bill,
is the exact excuse the GOP are using in wanting to vote it down.
Y'all obviously think alike.....
Good for you! :headbang:

[Hannah Bell]

48. if ordinary people can't read it & know what they're getting, it's bullshit.

which, despite the rhetoric, isn't the gop's concern.

[Egnever]

25. Wow thats the most embarrassing post I have seen in a while

Maybe in my whole time here at DU.

Did you even bother to try? Or did you just "hear" it was 2000 pages and your brain imploded?

Remind me to never ever take your posts seriously again. Willful ignorance is a pathetic condition and becoming all too common in this country. Thanks for all you do to advance that cause!

[Hannah Bell]

30. i've read "summaries" and "sections," just like the poster i responded to. but i'm not

arrogant enough to pretend i've read all 2000 pages, nor stupid enough to rely on summaries (which conveniently omit the nitty-gritty of finances) like some people.

possibly including you.

i also believe our "representatives" count on the electorate not reading the bills. most of the reps don't either, they rely on what their sponsors tell them to vote for.

[Toots]

33. One could say the exact same thing about the Obama election.

:shrug: don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. There are some good things in this bill. There are some things that are not very good as well. As time goes by I believe we will weed out the bad and add more of the good. If this bill is passed there will be no way in hell Republicans will ever get rid of it and people will begin demanding it be improved.

[blindpig]

Are you kidding? Big Insurance is gonna love whatever passes.

Hell, they helped write it, didn't they? Surely you are not taken in by their 'don't throw me in the briar patch' game, are you?

Concerned industries bought and payed for this fiasco, why shouldn't they like it?

[blindpig]

36. Are you kidding? Big Insurance is gonna love whatever passes.

Hell, they helped write it, didn't they? Surely you are not taken in by their 'don't throw me in the briar patch' game, are you?

Concerned industries bought and payed for this fiasco, why shouldn't they like it?

[quinnox]

5. And as a Duer asked - Why would it be bad if the health

Insurance industry went out of business? They always say "Can't have public option, it would kill the insurance industry" So? They never answer the question and it is never asked byt he media either. Why would it be bad if a broken system is completely scrapped?

[FrenchieCat]

8. Because if they go in that manner, they are taking many of us with them......

its happening now, and you don't even see it?

What do you think all of those health care horror stories are about?

Are you one of those who wants to break the insurance companies, because you are advocating that if we wait long enough for enough folks to be uninsured, then maybe, just maybe, the general public will come around to the idea of single payer?

Oh my......who will be stepping up for that sacrifice, those who can least afford it?

How cool! :sarcasm:

[Hannah Bell]

17. huh?

[dflprincess]

9. Sounds like a name Bush would have come up with

it's right up there with his "Clean Skies Act".

This bill may provide "coverage" but it won't be affordable and won't guarantee access to care. It might decrease the number of uninsured but it will increase the number of underinsured. And being underinsured can be just as bad for your health as being uninsured.

[FrenchieCat]

11. So the bill should have been named something horrible,

and then it might have been good?

Bottomline is that pasing NO bill will not drive insurance companies out of business,
will not penalize them, will not make them beg, will not punish them,
will not have them going to prison,
will not do a damn thing that will result in anything good for people, period.

[dflprincess]

13. The bill should have been named honestly

something like the "Insurance Company Profit and Campaign Donation Protection Act" would have been more accurate.

This only forces most of to continue to pay to prop up a broken system. The high out of pockets the bill permits will still prevent people from getting the care they need. It does nothing to help other areas of the economy (except credit card companies who will reap the benefit of people still having to pay for medical expenses with credit) as employers will still bear a big part of the burden.

If Congress had been serious about eventual reform they would have left in the amendment that would permit states to find their own solutions to the mess - instead they chose to make us captives of the insurance companies.

[Autumn]

37. Another DUer used the term

"The Insurance Industry Profit Protection Act of 2009" Seems like a very reasonable name for it to me.

[ipaint]

23. The insurance industry is losing all of the baby boomers in the next 20 years starting in 2011.

Estimated over 100,000,000 customers. They will be hurting shortly.

Hence the need for a "National Insurance Mandate Bill"

Boy those insurance companies and their health industry co-horts sure are worried:


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Health insurers, drugmakers and other companies expect U.S. Senate lawmakers to soften health reform legislation narrowly passed by the House of Representatives that calls for a greater government role in the industry.

Pharmaceutical and insurance sector stocks rose with the overall market on Monday, up about 2 percent following the approval of the House bill late Saturday that includes a public insurance option and a government role in drug prices under the Medicare insurance program.

Company executives and investors took the House vote in stride, with expectations growing that a final measure could be delayed until next year.

"We feel much more encouraged by what's developing in the Senate," Eli Lilly and Co Chief Executive John Lechleiter told the Reuters Health Summit in New York.

...Morgan Stanley pharmaceutical analyst Andrew Baum said the Senate is unlikely to pass any bill with an "unbridled public plan" that could deflate prices.
Any eventual healthcare reform is likely relatively benign to the pharmaceutical part of the healthcare value chain," Baum said in a note to clients.

"We have long anticipated that Obama was willing to sign virtually any version of health reform that he could spin as a victory and that he would have to intervene to get liberal members to compromise on cornerstone issues," Kim Monk, a healthcare analyst at Capital Alpha Partners in Washington, said in a research note.

Monk and a growing number of analysts see cracks that could push any final measure until early next year, possibly as far as February or March.

Shares of insurers close up 2 percent Monday on both the Morgan Stanley Healthcare Payor and the S&P Managed Health Care indexes. Pharmaceutical companies rose 1.9 percent on the NYSE Arca Pharmaceutical stock index.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5A83WD20091109?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0


The only thing the industry was worried about is the 1% chance that americans will finally collectively wake up and realize they do have the power to demand real reform. They counted on the tried and true "pragmatic compromise" approach which is easily manipulated for financial gain by the industry. They were right, americans as a whole remain clueless and the tried and true pragmatic, always ready to compromise, middle of the roaders will do the heavy lifting for the industry free of charge.

[blindpig]

43. There it is, plain as day.

Does this not tell the story?

[kath]

24. yup, right up there with the Healthy Forests act, the PATRIOT Act, etc.

What they call "affordable" is so far removed from reality that it's absolutely mind-boggling (and leaves Americans paying at least 10-15 times what Canadians pay for health care)

[BeHereNow]

26. Recommended and laughing my ass off at some of the replies.

WHERE can I get some of what she is smoking?
I too, would like to live in a perpetual hallucinatory state of "deluted."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Love the made up words to go along with the fantasy reality!
It's GREAT comedic relief, truly.

BHN

[Bluenorthwest]

34. Comedy gold, I agree.

But then again, I'm delutional!

[Starry Messenger]

42. personifided, too.

[QC]

35. Yes, this thread has personifided fun! n/t

[ProSense]

27. Should have called it the "Prevent 40,000 Deaths A Year Act"

It would have been something to see the 39 no voters cast their vote against that.

[Egnever]

28. when blocking a bill would almost guarantee a better debate in round 2

History would dissagree. As every attempt we make at it gets progressively worse. Clintons attemp was a better bill than this one, and nixons before that was better still. One more try and we might be looking at paying people to take health care away.

But keep on dreaming those big dreams!

[arcadian]

29. AHCAA... sounds like somebody with a horrible hacking cough

who needs to go to the hospital...

[Orwellian_Ghost]

32. Bumpage

[paparush]

38. We fight over the scraps.

The military gets Trillions.
The banks, autos, and insurance agencies are getting Billions.

We, the huddled masses, are squabbling over the scraps. And, yes, these scraps can literally mean the difference between life and death for those uninsured and under-insured.

Sickening really.

[SIMPLYB1980]

40. Eat your shit sandwich or not.

Either way it's going to pass.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. The lipstick smeared all over that pig is fading fast.

[mule_train]

44. If you ever want to know what a bill does, just read the title, and invert it

"Prior to the affordability act, this family of 4 had to choose between food and health care, and that hurt insurance profits

Now, that family of 4 chooses between buying health care, and going to jail, and insurance exec bonuses are safe

Health care execs can finally sleep at night, knowing that wall street bankers arent getting a better deal than they are"

[mule_train]

45. why is it 2000 pages? who wrote it?

hint - who wrote the bailout bill?

(another hint - it sure as hell wasnt anyone looking out for YOU)

[mule_train]

46. "Prior to the affordability act, this family of 4 had to choose between food and health care"

"Now, that family of 4 chooses between buying health care, and going to jail, and insurance execs can finally sleep well, knowing their bonusses are safe"

"Daddy, I'm hungry! Shaddup! You want daddy to got to jail?!?!"

[Cherchez la Femme]

49. That's the entire problem with that bill

In a few short years it's going to turn from a (nice) car payment a month into a Ferrari payment a month, while giving for-profit insurance companies lots of new, by-law, 'customers'

and NO incentive whatsoever to lower costs.

And we're supposed to cheer about it? :banghead:

Me? I can't even afford a car payment, even economy, new OR used.
So if I can't afford their mandatory health care my taxes will go up, and if I don't pay THOSE they can imprison me.

edit: And Thank Goddess I'm a gay woman, because if any pregnancy preventative failed I'd be in really big trouble;
(but I'm still in solidarity with my non-gay sisters)

Only in America.