• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats Seem Set to Go Alone on a Health Bill

Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

If they fail, it will be 1994 again. It you remember, 1994 happened after the Democrats failed, not after they passed something.

Dont forget about the "assault" rifle ban.
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

Medicare actually operates quite well.

The program is dripping with red ink and you think it's well?
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/health/policy/19repubs.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print

Link has been added to OP, title is fixed.

Some excerpts, if you can get past the blatant Obama-cheering contained in this opinion/analysis masquerading as a news piece:

The Democratic shift may not make producing a final bill much easier. The party must still reconcile the views of moderate and conservative Democrats worried about the cost and scope of the legislation with those of more liberal lawmakers determined to win a government-run insurance option to compete with private insurers.

On the other hand, such a change could alter the dynamic of talks surrounding health care legislation, and even change the substance of a final bill. With no need to negotiate with Republicans, Democrats might be better able to move more quickly, relying on their large majorities in both houses.

Democratic senators might feel more empowered, for example, to define the authority of the nonprofit insurance cooperatives that are emerging as an alternative to a public insurance plan.

This week’s careful administration maneuvering on whether a public insurance option was an essential element of any final bill was seemingly part of the new White House effort to find consensus among Democrats, since the public plan has been resisted by moderate and conservative Democrats who could be crucial to winning the votes for passage if no Republicans are on board.

For the second time in two days, Mr. Obama did not mention health care on Tuesday, a marked departure from the aggressive public relations campaign he mounted in July and early August. The White House is striving to stay out of the fray, aides said, until the president can get away on vacation this weekend.
 
We will get the public option, thank GOD! Seems the dems are getting it done finally:

House Dems Rally Behind Public Option In Weekly Caucus Gathering

aw, cmon, friend, what would you expect of the house caucus?

the point is---the big boys and girls in the senate know the lay of the land, they don't let hot heads prevail like downstairs, which, y'know, is all to be expected

but bill clinton is telling you, he's telling the left of his party---prepare for life without the public option

(see celticlord's thread on the subject)

kent conrad, spokesperson for the blue half of baucus' ubiquitous six, said sunday on fns---we don't have the votes, we never had the votes

ms mccaskill had to promise, in order to get outta the gym alive in hillsboro---it's not on the table, it will never be on any table

when her very well informed audience redounded in outrage against that rather rubbery claim, she clarified---in the senate, it's not part of the senate, it's only in the house

but more to the point---she had to vow she'd NEVER sign a public option, else they'd have skinned her alive

mr baucus has been trying to tell the president for months, it just can't be done, it's just not real

doug elmendorf, of cbo, the mathematician

mr DURBIN---c'mon, friend, dick durbin, the WHIP---i'm "open" to "cutting" the public option

i can provide links to all (i already have, repeatedly)

the prez himself in grand junction---it's just a sliver of what we're trying for

you need to get real

or not

but the prez sure does, needs to get his feet on EARTH

and per the TITLE of THIS thread, he's (STILL) going the wrong way

sorry

but what an IDIOT he is

no wonder so many dems are SO confused

he's created a civil war in a party that only 3 or 4 months ago had the world
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

This way you have of posting is astonishingly annoying.

i appreciate that, but if you think about it, my job is kinda to annoy you

if i were a lib, it would probably bother you less
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

The falsity of this claim has been explained to you numerous times. Why do you keep repeating this lie?

You are obviously thinking of someone else. Medicare is working quite well...there is no lie in that. Seniors overwhelmingly approve of medicare and Republicans have preyed on that with the fear that they might lose it.
Where have you been for the last month?
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

i appreciate that, but if you think about it, my job is kinda to annoy you

if i were a lib, it would probably bother you less

How can anyone tell.....no one actually reads your posts...haven't you noticed?
 
apparently southern dem does, else how could he find my way so annoying?

besides, why would you care?

i was talking to him

health care's dead
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

i appreciate that, but if you think about it, my job is kinda to annoy you

if i were a lib, it would probably bother you less

Don't know about Southern, but I would still be equally bothered. Seriously, post coherent paragraphs and sentences. I never even read your posts, I just find it annoying.
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

You are obviously thinking of someone else. Medicare is working quite well...there is no lie in that.

No, it's absolutely not. Have you ever read one of the Trustees Reports?

I'm not trying to be rude, but nobody who has ever seriously looked at Medicare could deny that it faces serious and systemic problems in the immediate and long-term future.

The HI trust fund is not adequately financed over the next 10 years. At the beginning of 2009 the assets of the HI trust fund were $321 billion and are projected to be exhausted during 2017, under the intermediate assumptions. The HI trust fund does not meet the short-range test of financial adequacy. Although the short-range financial status of the HI trust fund has not been considered satisfactory since 2003, the outlook has further deteriorated as a result of the current economic recession.

The difference between Medicare’s total outlays and its “dedicated financing sources” is estimated to reach 45 percent of outlays in fiscal year 2014, the sixth year of the projection. Based on this result, the Board of Trustees is required to issue a determination of projected “excess general revenue Medicare funding” in this report. This is the fourth consecutive such finding, and it again triggers a statutory “Medicare funding warning,” indicating that Federal general revenues are becoming a substantial share of total financing for Medicare.

Under the intermediate assumptions the HI trust fund is projected to be exhausted in 2017, 2 years earlier than in last year’s report, reflecting much lower projected payroll tax income as a result of the recession. For the 75-year projection period, the actuarial deficit has increased from 3.55 to 3.88 percent of taxable payroll.

The HI annual cost rate is projected to increase from 3.31 percent of taxable payroll in 2008 to 12.07 percent in 2083—8.55 percent of taxable payroll more than the projected income rate for 2083. Expressed in relation to the projected Gross Domestic Product (GDP), HI cost is estimated to rise from the current level of 1.6 percent of GDP to 5.0 percent in 2083.

Part B outlays were 1.3 percent of GDP in 2008 and are projected to grow to about 4.5 percent by 2083. These cost projections, however, are understated as a result of the substantial reductions in physician payments that would be required under current law. Actual future Part B costs will depend on the steps Congress takes to address the situation but could exceed the current-law projections by 18 to 21 percent in 2015 and by as much as 10 percent for 2030 and later.

Part D outlays are estimated to increase from 0.4 percent of GDP in 2008 to about 1.8 percent by 2083.

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2009.pdf

Seniors overwhelmingly approve of medicare

Of course they do.

1) They aren't paying for it
2) They're getting it
3) By the time it all completely goes to ****, they'll be dead
4) They, like you, probably don't have any idea of the problems the system faces

and Republicans have preyed on that with the fear that they might lose it.

This isn't fear-mongering, it's what's known as a "fact." Medicare is ****ed.

Where have you been for the last month?

I've been learning something about what I'm talking about. What have you been doing?
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

Don't know about Southern, but I would still be equally bothered. Seriously, post coherent paragraphs and sentences. I never even read your posts, I just find it annoying.

your loss

i sure don't read yours, i couldn't distinguish you from 100's of others

there's only one The prototypical Prof

incomparable

LOL!

health care's dead
 
Re: Nyt: Dems plan to go it alone on heathcare... Developing...

This way you have of posting is astonishingly annoying.

I know what you mean, if he put together one real paragraph with a logical flow of thought I would give him a thanks just for that. Sometimes it seems as if he has an actual point to make but that stream of consciousness thing makes him sound like one of those old beatniks reading some strange poem not meant to mean anything.

In reference to the topic I would add that there is nothing to be lost at this point by doing a little shoving. Playing nice is never a good idea if only one party does it.
 
ah, they're talking about ME again

The non pareil Prof

gotta make buzz in this biz

spy out my piece tomorrow, Prodigious Political Pratfalls, on PPPP (partisan politics, political platforms---i find that page precious, LOL!)

you'll clap

it's sentences are all complete

LOL!
 
ah, they're talking about ME again

The non pareil Prof

gotta make buzz in this biz

spy out my piece tomorrow, Prodigious Political Pratfalls, on PPPP (partisan politics, political platforms---i find that page precious, LOL!)

you'll clap

it's sentences are all complete

LOL!


sarahmed.jpg
 
remaining problems in obamacare, AFTER the death of the option

1. it fines individuals

2. it forces them to buy for themselves coverage they can't afford

3. it bends the cost curve the wrong way

4. it effectively extends coverage to illegals, per the killing of heller in ways and means, july 17

5. it generalizes funding of abortion

6. it massively cuts medicare and medicaid

7. it looks to end of life costs for scary savings

8. it taxes benefits

9. it taxes small business 8%, in the middle of a depression

10. it surcharges those who make more than 250G, couples over 350, a pointy problem politically

11. it's foot in the door incrementalism to ultimate nationalization, or so says obama in an earlier, more candid, less rehearsed day

12. the prez never read it, which is part of the reason he's been such an ineffective salesperson

these are the biggest reasons why health care's dead

check out "Prodigious Political Pratfalls" by The incomparable Prof tomorrow on PPPP

it will DOUBLE your basic understanding of politics
 
Back
Top Bottom