Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_...overhaul</a> >>Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system. Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run plan. Such a concession probably would enrage Obama's liberal supporters but could deliver a much-needed victory on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers. Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess. Obama had wanted the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured, but didn't include it as one of his core principles of reform. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is "not the essential element" of the administration's health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory. Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own. With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.<< Wow, Compromise and asking for Bi-partisanship... Great... Now lets get rid of the "timetable" and have some serious discussion and debate on what the Health Care Bill should and shouldn't contain. This bill does NOT need to be signed next month! Slow down and make sure it is done right.
Originally Posted By HRM Discussion, feedback, compromise. I'm sure everyone will take credit for this. Let's still maintain this heightened sense of urgency to get something done... maybe not in a month, but soon.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 It's called compromise, and finally President Obama is deciding to compromise instead of forcing the Republicans to agree with him or be accused of not being bi-partisan.... I loved how during the first 6 months, it was the President's way or you were against change, now that he is settling in he is realizing that he needs to broker deals and not force others to agree with him..... Hopefully he continues this route and doesn't go back to how he acted in the last few months.
Originally Posted By ecdc You guys can't possibly be serious. It was Obama that wasn't being bipartisan? We're really sticking with that story? He watered down his stimulus package way too much in order to appease Republicans. He met with them repeatedly in the White House. Hell, he invited them to watch the Superbowl. Right now it's been three Republicans and three Democrats on the Senate Finance committee doing the negotiating. Obama's been too bipartisan. He's tried to appease Republicans and they have instead played politics and tried to derail everything he's done. They've accused him of socialism and then turned around and kissed the Rushfather's ring. Screw bipartisanship; he should give them the finger and move on without the GOP. But, unfortunately, as the last few weeks have shown, Democrats are spineless cowards who have no interest in standing up for what's right. Instead, they continue to let Republicans, tiny, pathetic minority though they are, dominate the conversation. They don't have the stones to stand up and call the Republican party with their Hitler protesters and their "I hope he fails" buffoons what the really are: A pathetic party of racists, bigots, and ignorant fools.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 A pathetic party of racists, bigots, and ignorant fools.<< Yeah your comments are so much better than calling someone Hitler.... Bravo my friend, for showing Democrats are no better and no worse than Republicans....
Originally Posted By ecdc Because the Republican party has embraced those with pictures of Obama-Hitler, and has defended them, I am left to conclude that they agree with these people, or at least need them to win elections. I saw Dick Armey and Tom Colburn on Meet the Press today, and they point-blank refused to denounce these people. The Republican party has conscientiously chosen to appeal to the lowest-common denominator. That is who this party is. Let's call it what it is. There's *millions* of people who believe the President isn't a citizen. He's received 400% MORE death threats than Bush. These "Hitler" protestors are not 10-12 people. There's thousands of them. So prove me wrong or stop whining about how Democrats and Republicans are alike. They aren't. Republicans are ignorant, dangerous patriots on steroids; Democrats are spineless cowards. See, there's a big difference.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Yeah your comments are so much better than calling someone Hitler.... Bravo my friend, for showing Democrats are no better and no worse than Republicans...." Racist, bigots and ignorant fools is res ipsa loquitur as it relates to many Republicans. Obama is Hitler is still, well, something that comes from racists, bigots and ignorant fools. And Obama didn't cry uncle here. Far from it. Some Republicans also have dog---- for brains.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Moreover, except for one reasoned response from poster HRM, I didn't see any response from Darkbeer or William to X's post, reproduced here: You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President. You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy. You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed. You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed. You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us. You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war. You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq. You didn't get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos. You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people. You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans. You didn't get mad when we didn't catch Bin Laden. You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed. You didn't get mad when we let a major US city drown. You didn't get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark. You finally got mad when.. when... wait for it... when the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick. Yes, illegal wars, lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich richer, are all ok with you but helping other Americans... What about it? Huh? What about it?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Yep SPP, just like when I asked what is wrong with socialised medicine, there was very little response. A clear demonstration of a lack of ability to articulate the concerns or an embarrassment of they way they feel? You decide. I am very disappointed given the stupid gung ho, offence is the best defence mantra the GOP has had, they will now use this to shout weakness and I seriously doubt it will make much difference to the averice right wing (the real facists). For the first time in Obama's admin, I am dissappointed. I do agree with Darkbeer, it is right to properly debate, but I know first hand after being part of a bill team, there is less chance of success once a timetable disappears.
Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/16/white-houses-mixed-messag_n_260733.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...733.html</a> The White House is now saying they're not caving on a public option. Of course, such clarifications wouldn't be necessary if they'd just stand up, push the legislation THEY wanted through, shunted Republicans aside, and told anti-American psychos with pictures of Hitler exactly where they could put their signs. Enough! Pass the damn bill. Let Republicans say the sky is falling. Perhaps the screaming nut cases at the town halls could just say it's a sign that Jesus is nigh at hand.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I do agree with Darkbeer, it is right to properly debate" If only he would, as opposed to posting link after link. We can read the web too. As for the GOP, the reason for my bluntness and anger is there IS no reasonable debate. Instead we get lies, distortion and incendiary rhetoric. Screw them at this point. Like ecdc says, ram it through.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>Instead we get lies, distortion and incendiary rhetoric.<<< Sounds like the last 8 years in the White House, you say this like you are surprised. I have come to expect nothing less, and that is why I find the GOP so contemptable.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 My guess is that Sibelius saying that they were open to no public option was a "trial balloon," which the Sunday talk shows are often used for. They've heard from the people who vociferously oppose it; they floated this balloon to see if those who favor it would make their voices heard. I do favor a public option and I AM going to call and email the white house to let them know, and I urge others who feel as I do todo the same. As the the link in number 10 shows, it's quite possible this is already happening. It needs to happen more. People who want real, rational reform have to be just as loud (though more respectful) as those who oppose it.
Originally Posted By HRM WoW.... unfortunately we're back to pigeon-holing, finger-pointing, name-calling, and basically all the grandstanding that got us in this mess to begin with. I'm not going to post a long arguement how the Democratic-led Congress pass Pork Barrel Budgets supported by BiPartisan backdoor sub-committee agreements. I'm not going to post a long opinion how a Republican administration focused on foreign agression with unsupported data to the detriment of domestic investment and growth, I'm too busy trying to keep my job, reevaluting my career and financial plans, and supporting family and friends. I'm just trying to read past the rhetoric, understand the passion involved, and evaluate the tidbits of reasoned debate, (of my fellow LPer's and in the general public domain), so that I can decide on this very complicated HealthCare Reform issue. Just remember, if we truly believe in our governmental process, truly believe, then we must comprise to include ideas and on-going participation of others. Passioned and reasoned debate, yes; and always with an eye and ear towards the final goal. It's not perfect, but better than where we've been. I'm concerned about another Public Bueracracy in the healthcare arena. I also want some oversight and control over the Private Insurance companies. I don't know, but a not-for profit co-op which provides competition to private insurances, and is required to have financial capital reserves similar to the private market seems to be an idea worth discussing and considering.
Originally Posted By HRM Dabab2... I was composing my post, (and eating breakfast - LOL), before you sent yours... Nice post
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>I don't know, but a not-for profit co-op which provides competition to private insurances, and is required to have financial capital reserves similar to the private market seems to be an idea worth discussing and considering.<<< Indeed this can work. A while ago I worked on a pilot where we allowed different organisations to bid for a public contract. We tried to have 3 private, 3 charity and 3 co-operative. They would work in pilot and if that continued, the view would be to use open market with regulation, if not, we would choose to let the contract long term to the most successful organisation. There are numerous models out there, and there is a lot on the spectrum between full on free enterprise and direct control. Sadly many seem to forget that.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26180_Page2.html" target="_blank">http://www.politico.com/news/s...ge2.html</a> >>The end of September is not a hard deadline for a floor vote, but leaders say it’s going to be a pretty firm target because they want it to pass this year and don’t want it to hang out there too long. On the Senate side, leaders plan to try to enforce a Sept. 15 deadline President Barack Obama and Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) have set for the committee to come up with a deal. But Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said told PBS’s Charlie Rose: “More important than any artificial deadline is getting this right.”<<
Originally Posted By HRM Darkbeer, whoose definition of right? will we ever get it right? this legislation will always be a work in progress, medical advances will impact healthcare and costs in unforeseen ways. don't know the answer to the above 2 ?'s. I do feel we have to have a sense of urgency; I also feel we have to get it "right".
Originally Posted By utahjosh "A pathetic party of racists, bigots, and ignorant fools." ecdc, you have been misled by the darkside.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>ecdc, you have been misled by the darkside.<<< Really, if it were the darkside, give me more.
