Obama '08?

Congress seems to be doing something about health care after all. I noticed that they are discussing fineing people without health insurance $3800. Of course no one has explained how someone who cant afford to spend money on health insurance can come up with $3800. How about someone explaining to me what a wonderful country we live in and how our government and congress only have our own best interest in mind. What a bunch of crooked business oriented bastards. That includes the Supreme court justices too.

rebel, I'm in total disagreement with that kind of fine for people who do not purchase health insurance; I'd rather see some kind of sliding fee scale for doctor-hospital visits. I believe in a fee system, because that will help minimize the abuse of the system.

I agree that some kind of fee system should be in place that takes ability to pay into consideration. What drives me up the wall is the fact that a national health plan is rejected by our legislators because it might drive insurance companies out of business. If they cant compete with a national health plan, prefferably a single payer plan, than they shouldent be in business. After all all the business people claim that privite plans are more efficient than medicare which is a government run plan. Sounds good untill one does the research and finds that the private insurance plans cost 10 to 20 percent more than medicare. Is our economy based on compatetion or not. I dont think it is in spite of what business claims.

It goes to show that the health care industries tv ad campaign is very successful! They have millions to spend on tv ads in their attempts to defeat a government health plan, but the majority of dummies fighting against the government plan are those already under a government plan called Medicare. There's no cure for stupid.

Im not sure stupid explains why a person would fight for an industry, private health insurance, that spends all its time screwing the very people it claims to want to help. I think insanity would be a better description. I dont know of any group of people who are seriouly ill that dident have to fight tooth and nail for the coverage that thier insurance company owed them.

i think that it's got a lot to do with simple party opposition.

"iff'n yer fer it, then i'm agin' it". stubbornness and fear of change (of any kind, not just obamachange) factor into this a great deal, i believe.

Yeah, that's why the argument is framed as being against a "government takeover" of private industry rather than eliminating a product that provides no value and increases the complexity of the market.

This is a non argument.
No matter how much money the insurance companies have to spend, the govt has more.
And, the President doesnt have to pay for airtime, all he has to do is call a press conference.

He hasnt done so, yet.

I would look for President Obama to indicate tonight that the "Public Insurance Option" is going to be effectively removed from his plan. The Repubs cite that as a deal-killer, and he needs a few of them (like Olympia Snow). Lib Dems say the bill is dead unless they have that included, but they will realize that they will face re-election in 2010 - well ahead of Mr Obama in 2012.

Reports are that he is going to do the exact opposite of this, and the Dems are prepared to go it alone, with or without the Republicans.

This whole pretension that the public option is a 'deal-killer' is ridiculous. There's no 'deal.' Republicans in Congress are not willing to offer anything in exchange for anything the Dems would give up, period. The idea that Obama and the Dems should somehow be negotiating with them presumes that they are acting in good faith, when the available evidence suggests that they certainly are not.

Cycloptichorn

I readily concede, Cyclo, that I may be totally wrong about Mr Obama and the Public Plan.
There was an amusing interview this pm with one of President Clinton's aides about the speech he made before Congress about health care. The aide saw fit to take away Mr Clinton's glasses. The text, after all, would be on the teleprompter.
Alas, the wrong speech was downloaded. All Mr Clinton had was a printed version in 12-pt type. And he didn't have his glasses.
9 or so minutes before the teleprompter could be rebooted.
I had forgotten about that.

bump

Well, that rocked.

I thought it was a fine speech, but I am biased. There were a few paragraphs towards the very end that struck me as brilliantly written. Soaring rhetoric.
I have a couple of pages of notes.
I think, Cyclo, that you may owe me a virtual dinner over the "public option" thing. He did not mention that until 8:41 ET and then implied that it would be a minor part of the plan, impacting only 5% of the population.
****, my notes made so much sense when I wrote them. I wish I could read them.
Re health care - "Kick the can is not an option."

Did yall notice that Mr Obama got booed at one point?

Yeah, "you lie!" Pelosi looked like she wanted to wade into the audience and slap him. TPM has identified the guy.

yeah, also what piece of paper were the repubs holding/waving?

I think it was supposed to imply that they have their own, rival plan.

Which as far as I can tell, they don't.

I think the important or salient point here is "did Obama lie?" Did the heckler act inappropriately, yes in my opinion. But was he correct? I am not sure, I think technically he may be wrong and Obama correct, but practically he was correct and Obama lied. Here are the reasons as I understand it. Using House Bill 3200, it does not explicitly include coverage for illegals, but it also provides no mechanism for establishing or identifying illegals or making sure that only legals are covered. Further, Obama and the Democrats have frequently talked about the 45 million or so uncovered, which everybody knows includes illegals, and this number is the group that they want to provide coverage for, so simple logic follows that their plan is to provide coverage for the people included in that number, as a practical result of their legislative plans, which therefore includes illegals.

So I believe it is entirely logical to assume that Obama is lying when one analyzes the practical results of what he talks about. Actually, Obama does not have anything that he has personally written down, and we as yet do not have anything really tangible to read except House Bill 3200, do we?

Conclusion, in my opinion, Obama lied, which is nothing new or unusual.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamacare-wont-cover-illegal-immigrants--55021087.html

"Under H.R. 3200, a 'Health Insurance Exchange' would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens"whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently"participating in the Exchange."

CRS also notes that the bill has no provision for requiring those seeking coverage or services to provided proof of citizenship. So, absent some major amendments to the legislation and a credible, concrete enforcement effort in action, looks like the myth on this issue is the one being spread by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et. al.