Post by unlawflcombatnt on Aug 16, 2009 13:21:52 GMT -6
Our Liar-in-Chief has officially killed the public option for health care reform. Though Obama clearly and unmistakably said previously that there would be a public option, he has since reneged on this promise (like he's done on most everything else.)
Without a government-administered public option, any health care reform legislation will worsen health care in this country. This was the ONLY part of the legislation that had any potential to "bend-the-cost-curve."
Now insurers will receive the huge windfall of mandated health insurance enrollment for another 50 million Americans, without any competition from a non-profit driven government-administered program.
The Obamatocracy is fully aware that a public option could be implemented without extensive government control, and without tremendous costs. But by imposing additional rules that currently don't exist, Obama gave public-option opponents (mainly the insurance industry and its shills) all the ammunition they needed to label this as "government-run" health care.
Some of the inclusions in the legislation--both vague general goals and certain specifics--helped torpedo the public option.
By requiring that any insurance, and any public option, offer the same coverage that Congress receives bolsters the claim that this really is "government-run" health care. Though I don't agree that this constitutes government-run health care, I certainly see how it might be used to support such claims.
Mandating too many specific benefits is problematic as well. It also makes it appear that government really will be controlling health care. Though I don't share that view, I can certainly see this could be used to support such claims.
Had Obama and his supporters simply removed some of the most overbearing of those rules--such as the payment of doctors for end-of-life care counseling and panels to determine what treatments were most cost effective--the public option could have easily survived. Its opponents simply would not have had the ammunition needed to label it as "government-controlled health care," enraging the public as a result.
Now discussion is taking place to remove some of these same overbearing provisions, such as payment for end-of-life care counseling.
But now it's too late. Now much of the public has been convinced by insurance industry propagandists and their dupes that the current legislation is government-controlled health care.
Any legislation put forward now will be nothing but Corporate Welfare for the health care insurance industry, with Big Pharma tagging along.
Without the public option, health care reform legislation will be nothing more than an extension of the Bush Administration's no-corporation-left-behind policies. By subsidizing the health care industry with public money, Obama is proving that even the most profitable of all industries can feed at the public trough--and share in the same taxpayer-funded largess that the financial industry currently enjoys.
Below is the latest article on Obama's public option flip-flop, from Examiner.com:
"
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
Sunday, August 16, 2009
"Bowing to Republican pressure, President Barack Obama's administration signaled on Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new U.S. 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 would likely enrage his liberal supporters but could deliver Obama a much-needed win 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 sought the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured....
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.
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 still would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.....
"What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.
On Saturday, Obama himself appeared to hedge his bets.
"All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform," Obama said in Grand Junction, Colo. "This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."
Lawmakers have discussed the co-op model for months although the Democratic leadership and the White House have said they prefer a government-run option.
Conrad, the chairman of the Senate's budget committee, called the argument for a government-run public plan little more than a "wasted effort." He added there are enough votes in the Senate for a cooperative plan....
Republicans say a public option would have unfair advantages that would drive private insurers out of business. Critics say co-ops would not be genuine public options for health insurance.
Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, said it would be difficult to pass any legislation through the Democratic-controlled Congress without the promised public plan.
"We'll have the same number of people uninsured," she said. "If the insurance companies wanted to insure these people now, they'd be insured."....
Obama, writing an opinion piece in Sunday's New York Times, said political maneuvers should be excluded from the debate.
"In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain," he wrote. "But for all the scare tactics out there, what's truly scary - truly risky - is the prospect of doing nothing."
Congress' proposals, however, seemed likely to strike end-of-life counseling sessions. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session "death panels," a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, declined to criticize Palin's comments and said Obama wants to create a government-run panel to advise what types of care would be available to citizens.
"In all honesty, I don't want a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats setting health care for my aged citizens in Utah," Hatch said.
Sebelius said the end-of-life proposal was likely to be dropped from the final bill.
"We wanted to make sure doctors were reimbursed for that very important consultation if family members chose to make it, and instead it's been turned into this scare tactic and probably will be off the table," she said."[/ul]"
Without a government-administered public option, any health care reform legislation will worsen health care in this country. This was the ONLY part of the legislation that had any potential to "bend-the-cost-curve."
Now insurers will receive the huge windfall of mandated health insurance enrollment for another 50 million Americans, without any competition from a non-profit driven government-administered program.
The Obamatocracy is fully aware that a public option could be implemented without extensive government control, and without tremendous costs. But by imposing additional rules that currently don't exist, Obama gave public-option opponents (mainly the insurance industry and its shills) all the ammunition they needed to label this as "government-run" health care.
Some of the inclusions in the legislation--both vague general goals and certain specifics--helped torpedo the public option.
By requiring that any insurance, and any public option, offer the same coverage that Congress receives bolsters the claim that this really is "government-run" health care. Though I don't agree that this constitutes government-run health care, I certainly see how it might be used to support such claims.
Mandating too many specific benefits is problematic as well. It also makes it appear that government really will be controlling health care. Though I don't share that view, I can certainly see this could be used to support such claims.
Had Obama and his supporters simply removed some of the most overbearing of those rules--such as the payment of doctors for end-of-life care counseling and panels to determine what treatments were most cost effective--the public option could have easily survived. Its opponents simply would not have had the ammunition needed to label it as "government-controlled health care," enraging the public as a result.
Now discussion is taking place to remove some of these same overbearing provisions, such as payment for end-of-life care counseling.
But now it's too late. Now much of the public has been convinced by insurance industry propagandists and their dupes that the current legislation is government-controlled health care.
Any legislation put forward now will be nothing but Corporate Welfare for the health care insurance industry, with Big Pharma tagging along.
Without the public option, health care reform legislation will be nothing more than an extension of the Bush Administration's no-corporation-left-behind policies. By subsidizing the health care industry with public money, Obama is proving that even the most profitable of all industries can feed at the public trough--and share in the same taxpayer-funded largess that the financial industry currently enjoys.
Below is the latest article on Obama's public option flip-flop, from Examiner.com:
"
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
Sunday, August 16, 2009
"Bowing to Republican pressure, President Barack Obama's administration signaled on Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new U.S. 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 would likely enrage his liberal supporters but could deliver Obama a much-needed win 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 sought the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured....
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.
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 still would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.....
"What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.
On Saturday, Obama himself appeared to hedge his bets.
"All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform," Obama said in Grand Junction, Colo. "This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."
Lawmakers have discussed the co-op model for months although the Democratic leadership and the White House have said they prefer a government-run option.
Conrad, the chairman of the Senate's budget committee, called the argument for a government-run public plan little more than a "wasted effort." He added there are enough votes in the Senate for a cooperative plan....
Republicans say a public option would have unfair advantages that would drive private insurers out of business. Critics say co-ops would not be genuine public options for health insurance.
Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, said it would be difficult to pass any legislation through the Democratic-controlled Congress without the promised public plan.
"We'll have the same number of people uninsured," she said. "If the insurance companies wanted to insure these people now, they'd be insured."....
Obama, writing an opinion piece in Sunday's New York Times, said political maneuvers should be excluded from the debate.
"In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain," he wrote. "But for all the scare tactics out there, what's truly scary - truly risky - is the prospect of doing nothing."
Congress' proposals, however, seemed likely to strike end-of-life counseling sessions. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session "death panels," a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, declined to criticize Palin's comments and said Obama wants to create a government-run panel to advise what types of care would be available to citizens.
"In all honesty, I don't want a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats setting health care for my aged citizens in Utah," Hatch said.
Sebelius said the end-of-life proposal was likely to be dropped from the final bill.
"We wanted to make sure doctors were reimbursed for that very important consultation if family members chose to make it, and instead it's been turned into this scare tactic and probably will be off the table," she said."[/ul]"