Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who put the mandate in HCR...?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
LeftHander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:52 AM
Original message
Who put the mandate in HCR...?
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 10:52 AM by LeftHander
I want a name. Thx.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. Who put the bomp In the bomp bah bomp bah bomp?
Who put the ram in the rama lama ding dong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoFlaJet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. LMAO
I wanted to post the same thing BWAHAha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Who was that man? I'd like to shake his hand.
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 10:59 AM by tridim
Kind of ashamed that I know that lyric. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. President Obama. It is the centerpiece of the entire scheme. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftHander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. really....?
Or did it come from a anonymous Republican as a result of a backroom deal...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes, really. Without mandatory insurance, there is no bill. It is the lynchpin.
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 11:00 AM by Romulox
And Republicans aren't supporting this bill, so its unpopular features may not be blamed on Republicans, sorry.

This is President Obama's mandatory corporate insurance bill--he's staked his Presidency on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. November is going to be very interesting
this is one of the few elections where their is a definite difference of opinion and the public has their strong positions as well. So far the dems haven't been able to put lipstick on the pig and sell it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. That's because "mandatory private insurance" is a much stronger frame than anything they've got. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. The posters on here who are expecting the public to heartily embrace this
thing and reward the Dems for it are going to be very sad the morning after the midterm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. They're clueless.
Their response to pointing out that it's unpopular is "la la la I'm not listening!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. The public still hasn't been told what's in the bill. If it were any good
the Dems would be shouting it from the rooftops.

The White House has put out a totally misleading video ad for this travesty which states that 30 million will "get" insurance under this bill. What it fails to mention is that those 30 million will be forced to enrich the coffers of a bunch of crooks in the process. The Christian Science Moniter published an article today about what's in the bill. The first thing they mention is the mandate. When the public finds out they've been had, it's not going to be pretty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Actually, 15 million of the 30 will go on Medicaid.
Which could have been accomplished without mandating the rest to buy private insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #30
46. Well we are cutting Medicaid here in Georgia so good
luck adding more people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
22. This, AFTER he campaigned against a mandate, which was the
linchpin of Clinton's health care plan. He argued that a mandate without an option for government backed insurance - you could call that medicare for all, or a public option - would be nothing but a giveaway to the insurance companies.

He convinced me. That's why I still oppose this new plan of his.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. Someone who is obviously slavishly obedient to their corporate pay masters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
8. I did
I happily take credit for applying the basic foundation of universal coverage that every economist agrees is necessary once you take away an insurance companies' right to choose its clients. Once you say that a company must take a customer and cannot charge extra for a preexisting condition then you have 'regulatory adverse selection' and the system will collapse without universal coverage.

Explained yesterday (for the 1000th time) in more detail here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7952599&mesg_id=7952694
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
9. pre-existing condition did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
12. Hillary Clinton?
How about Paul Krugman? Those aren't the only names possible, but I guess they'll do. The mandate isn't a republican idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Hillary Clinton?
What?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
31. The major difference between Obama and Clinton's HC plans during the primary was mandates
She was for them, he was against them. He says he's changed his mind for the reasons that she and other left leaning people (e.g., Paul Krugman) advocated them earlier -- pre-existing conditions, spread the risk, etc.

I'm not rehashing the primaries -- I supported Obama -- but them's the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muffin1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. I know she was for them during the primaries.
It sounded as though you were saying she was consulted, or that you were rehashing the primaries by saying he got that brilliant idea from her.

Sorry, I'm a little touchy these days...:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. No worries. The OP wanted a name so I gave him/her one
Obama got traction in the primary from not supporting mandates, but that doesn't make them a republican idea.

:-)





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
43. No, it's still a Republican idea.
Everything that comes from the DLC is a Republican idea. It's all they know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
13. The health insurance corporation's lobbyists, obviously
who helped fund many a campaign, including Obama's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
15. Yes, that would be good to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
16. Karen Ignagni on behalf of her clients. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
17. Because there was no way to get universal participation via single payer...
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 11:39 AM by ehrnst
One of the reasons that single payer works is that everyone is in - via paying through tax.

In order to control costs, you must have everyone participating (larger pool = lower costs per fish). In order to do that, you need to mandate it - either through taking it out of everyone's paycheck, or require them to buy it.

Without those three (cost controls, universal buy - in, and help for those who need help to buy in) legs, the health reform stool collapses.

Unless you go single payer, then mandates are needed.

This is the way universal coverage is done in Switzerland & the Netherlands:

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2009/Jan/The-Swiss-and-Dutch-Health-Insurance-Systems--Universal-Coverage-and-Regulated-Competitive-Insurance.aspx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. The mandate will be immediately challenged in the courts.
The constitutionality of requiring the public to purchase the product of a private corporation under penalty of law will be one for the judges to decide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. Auto insurance is mandated in many states - In VA if you aren't insured, then you pay $500. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. 1) States and the Federal gov't are different actors, with different powers; 2) Driving is optional.
The US Constitution lays out different powers for State and Federal governments. Auto insurance mandates are issued by the States, not the Federal government. Nor is auto insurance mandatory for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. True, however, you can opt out of buying health insurance by paying a tax.
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 12:05 PM by ehrnst
So that's not forcing you to buy a private policy, under "penalty of law."

You can opt to pay (or not pay) a tax.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. A fine, lien, or imprisonment are all "penalties of tthe law". A "fine" and a "tax"
are conceptually distinct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. The "tax" is a fine collected by the feds for failure to comply.
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 12:17 PM by LibDemAlways
No way to get around that being under penalty of law. It's written into the legislation. According to an article in today's Christian Science Moniter, by 2016 the fine will be $695 per family member to a max of $2095.00. Cheaper than exorbitant premiums, but still a big chunk of change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. It's a tax you have to pay unless you have private health insurance
nothing unusual about that. There are currently tax exemptions if you purchase something, such as a house our a hybrid car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. It's a fine for not purchasing private health insurance. It's penalizing people
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 12:57 PM by LibDemAlways
for refusing to hand over their hard earned dollars to crooks who are going to give them shitty "coverage" with big co-pays and deductibles.

This bill is going to be a giant albatross around the necks of the Dems in Nov. That mandate may well sink them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. tomato, tomahto
If it's enforced through the IRS, it's a tax. Whether or not it is an albatross, is a different question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
18. Hillary supported a mandate, John Edwards too --all in their plans
Obama didn't before but now does.

so basically, the mandate was supported by a lot of big names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
38. And Barack Obama ridiculed them for it.
to get our votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. he didn't ridicule them for it
my goodness, just can't report things as they actually are --gotta embellish! :eyes:

yes, he criticized that part of their plans, but he was respectful while doing so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Oh yes he did. He said that was like mandating homeless people all buy a house to end homelessness
Candidate Obama Opposed Senate's Health Care Mandates:
"If a mandate was the solution, we could try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody buy a house," he said on a CNN morning show on Super Tuesday during the election. "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. You could post a YouTube clip of him saying those exact words
and the pom pom squad would still deny he said it. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. i got nothing
:rofl: :hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
20. DLC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. you cannot forbid exclusion and not mandate participation
everyone has to be in the pool or insurance does not work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
37. He shall be remembered as The Great Mandator
Edited on Fri Mar-19-10 01:18 PM by kenny blankenship
Aetna will build a great marble statue to him in their Hartford Connecticut corporate headquarters. Vice Presidents will doff their hats as they pass by. The CEO will lay a wreath every year to commemorate the passage of the Guaranteed Profits, No Matter What Act of 2010.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-19-10 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
41. Baucus?
This piece of shit bill is the one he wrote, for the most part. Not the slightly less crappy one Chris Dodd wrote and attached Ted Kennedy's name to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC