• 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!

The new message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit, and instead stressing a promise to "improve it."

...

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House's first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed. "Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy," says one slide. The presentation's final page of "Don'ts" counsels against claiming "the law will reduce costs and deficit." The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.

...

The Herndon Alliance, which presented the research, is a low-profile group which coordinated liberal messaging in favor of the public option in health care. Its "partners" include health care legislation's heavyweight supporters: The AARP, AFL-CIO, SEIU, Health Care for America Now, MoveOn, and La Raza, among many others.

New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

Probably not the message that most Dems had hoped to be pushing in August of an election year.
 
I guess we really DID have to pass it to find out what's in it.
 
New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Democrats have, apparently, finally come to the conclusion (I assume internal polling) that Obamacare is a big political loser and the number of people supporting repeal is growing. Why else go through all the trouble of trying to move people from the "repeal" camp to the just "improve it" camp?

BTW, it seems their strategy is just to continue to lie to people about the benefits of the reform. i.e. slide 8. HIPAA already prevents a new employer from denying benefits for a pre-ex condition when the employee had coverage with a previous employer.

New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Democrats have, apparently, finally come to the conclusion (I assume internal polling) that Obamacare is a big political loser and the number of people supporting repeal is growing. Why else go through all the trouble of trying to move people from the "repeal" camp to the just "improve it" camp?

BTW, it seems their strategy is just to continue to lie to people about the benefits of the reform. i.e. slide 8. HIPAA already prevents a new employer from denying benefits for a pre-ex condition when the employee had coverage with a previous employer.

New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

Must be a bitter pill for the WH and Co. to swallow. They pass their wet dream bill and instead of the people rejoicing they are pulling out the pitchforks.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

hipaa does that? i didn't realize that?
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

hipaa does that? i didn't realize that?

Seriously Lib, you should go hit the link, and click on the Powerpoint the story is based off of, you might find it of interest. I really do mean that.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Seriously Lib, you should go hit the link, and click on the Powerpoint the story is based off of, you might find it of interest. I really do mean that.

i will....but hipaa certainly doesn't address portability like one might think.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Hummmm, . . . I've been talking about improving it from day one, saying it would have to be imporved. Could it be they are tlakig about improving beecause that is what is needed? Just saying.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Seriously Lib, you should go hit the link, and click on the Powerpoint the story is based off of, you might find it of interest. I really do mean that.

i did. what i found was an illustration of how to communicate the advantages of the healthcare bill in ways people understand. much like, i'm sure, there have been many presentations put forward against the bill. nothing to see, really.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

I'll be the first to admit there's always room for improve. It's the very reason I was so upset to learn that despite accepting some Republicans ideas (contrary to what we've been told) and including them in health care reform legistlations, most Republicans still refused to vote in favor of it. So much time wasted trying to stop it instead of putting forth the very best ideas based on sound research to put forth the very best legistlation Congress could draft. Sad really when you stop and think about it.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Seems to me that the Democrats were wrong in expecting the American people to greet them with bouquets of flowers as "liberators."
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Seems to me that the Democrats were wrong in expecting the American people to greet them with bouquets of flowers as "liberators."

seems to me the dems underestimated the targeted, insistent influence of the republicans on this one. we always do, sadly.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Right, because the Republicans are separate and distinct from the American people.

Not the Republican's fault, though, that the Democrats have governed against the will of the people. Really, really not.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Right, because the Republicans are separate and distinct from the American people.

Not the Republican's fault, though, that the Democrats have governed against the will of the people. Really, really not.

of course not. when that bill was passed, it was NOT against the will of the people. that's changed, because so much misinformation has been spread that people don't even know what the bill is about, except they believe it will entail death panels. THAT'S what republicans are good at, staying on a simple, repeated message, "dems bad, republicans good".
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Oh, but it was, not least because they were disgusted with the tactics being used to pass it.

It's funny, though; when people favor Democrats, it's because they're smart and "waking up," but when they don't, it's because they're under the thrall of Republican "dirty tricks." Maybe -- just maybe -- they have minds of their own and just don't agree with you.

In any case, my point stands -- the Democrats aren't getting the flurry of approval they expected, not by a long shot. If you have to blame boogeymen to make you feel better about it, go ahead.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

I'll be the first to admit there's always room for improve. It's the very reason I was so upset to learn that despite accepting some Republicans ideas (contrary to what we've been told) and including them in health care reform legistlations, most Republicans still refused to vote in favor of it. So much time wasted trying to stop it instead of putting forth the very best ideas based on sound research to put forth the very best legistlation Congress could draft. Sad really when you stop and think about it.

Rep. hands were tied as far as stopping the bill. The very best they could do was to try and incorporate some good ideas into it. That doesn't mean they should have been expected to vote for a bill that they found to be bad, just because they contributed in a small way to it.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

of course not. when that bill was passed, it was NOT against the will of the people.
70%? against on the day it passed was not against the will of the people?
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

70%? against on the day it passed was not against the will of the people?

ma'am, every time i have asked you to post facts, or have challenged you on anything, you have not replied. i believe about half were opposed, and not a few were misinformed. please link 70% opposed when the bill passed. thanks.

Health care reform in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On March 22, 2010—one day after the health reform bill was passed by the US House—a Gallup/USA Today poll found that 49% of Americans thought the bill was a “good thing,” 40% said it was a “bad thing” and 11% had no opinion. In reaction to the enacted bill, 15% of Americans said they were “enthusiastic” about it, 35% were “pleased,” 23% “disappointed,” 19% “angry," and 8% had no opinion. A combined 50% had favorable views, versus 42% had unfavorable views. The poll had a +/- 4% margin of error.[93] However, by July 2010, 53% of Americans favored repeal of the recently-passed law.[94]
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

70%? against on the day it passed was not against the will of the people?

I don't know if it ever got that high (maybe on an outlier poll), but they were certainly against it when it passed. Some polls showed a plurality in favor of it after it passed, but with big misgivings about it, and that didn't last long at all.

Well, Queen Nancy was right -- we couldn't find out what was in it until after it passed -- and when they started to, people really turned on it.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

i will....but hipaa certainly doesn't address portability like one might think.

If the insured (the child) had received treatment within the 6 months prior to the effective date of the new policy, he will be subject to a 12 month waiting period where he will not receive coverage for that specific condition (completely different then the emotional “insurance company won’t give coverage” stated on the slide) . However, that waiting period is reduced by the amount of time they were covered by the prior insurance plan (including COBRA) offered through his prior job. Consequently, if they simply had coverage for one year there will not be any waiting period applied. They are playing emotional games.

(a) Limitation on preexisting condition exclusion period; crediting for periods of previous coverage
Subject to subsection (d) of this section, a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, may, with respect to a participant or beneficiary, impose a preexisting condition exclusion only if—
(1) such exclusion relates to a condition (whether physical or mental), regardless of the cause of the condition, for which medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received within the 6-month period ending on the enrollment date;
(2) such exclusion extends for a period of not more than 12 months (or 18 months in the case of a late enrollee) after the enrollment date; and

(3) the period of any such preexisting condition exclusion is reduced by the aggregate of the periods of creditable coverage (if any, as defined in subsection (c)(1) of this section) applicable to the participant or beneficiary as of the enrollment date.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

I don't know if it ever got that high (maybe on an outlier poll), but they were certainly against it when it passed. Some polls showed a plurality in favor of it after it passed, but with big misgivings about it, and that didn't last long at all.

Well, Queen Nancy was right -- we couldn't find out what was in it until after it passed -- and when they started to, people really turned on it.

i very rarely see anyone articulate the reasons why they are against health care reform. at least not honestly and intelligently. the bill may have flaws, but it's a start. and the pieces that went into place almost immediately are sorely needed. you might disagree about funding, but the fact is we don't know yet how that will shake out. there is no single payer issue, what's your probelem with it? and that 70% stuff is not true.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

If the insured (the child) had received treatment within the 6 months prior to the effective date of the new policy, he will be subject to a 12 month waiting period where he will not receive coverage for that specific condition (completely different then the emotional “insurance company won’t give coverage” stated on the slide) . However, that waiting period is reduced by the amount of time they were covered by the prior insurance plan (including COBRA) offered through his prior job. Consequently, if they simply had coverage for one year there will not be any waiting period applied. They are playing emotional games.

(a) Limitation on preexisting condition exclusion period; crediting for periods of previous coverage
Subject to subsection (d) of this section, a group health plan, and a health insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, may, with respect to a participant or beneficiary, impose a preexisting condition exclusion only if—
(1) such exclusion relates to a condition (whether physical or mental), regardless of the cause of the condition, for which medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received within the 6-month period ending on the enrollment date;
(2) such exclusion extends for a period of not more than 12 months (or 18 months in the case of a late enrollee) after the enrollment date; and

(3) the period of any such preexisting condition exclusion is reduced by the aggregate of the periods of creditable coverage (if any, as defined in subsection (c)(1) of this section) applicable to the participant or beneficiary as of the enrollment date.

i read it.....

To illustrate, suppose someone enrolls in a group health plan on January 1, 2006. This person had previously been insured from January 1, 2004 until February 1, 2005 and from August 1, 2005 until December 31, 2005. To determine how much coverage can be credited against the exclusion period in the new plan, start at the enrollment date and count backwards until you reach a significant break in coverage. So, the five months of coverage between August 1, 2005 and December 31, 2005 clearly counts against the exclusion period. But the period without insurance between February 1, 2005 and August 1, 2005 is greater than 63 days. Thus, this is a significant break in coverage, and any coverage prior to it cannot be deducted from the exclusion period. So, this person could deduct five months from his or her exclusion period, reducing the exclusion period to seven months. Hence, Title I requires that any preexisting condition begin to be covered on August 1, 2006.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

i very rarely see anyone articulate the reasons why they are against health care reform. at least not honestly and intelligently. the bill may have flaws, but it's a start. and the pieces that went into place almost immediately are sorely needed. you might disagree about funding, but the fact is we don't know yet how that will shake out. there is no single payer issue, what's your probelem with it? and that 70% stuff is not true.

Never said the 70% stuff was true (in fact, you quoted me as being skeptical of it), and I have no interest in debating the merits of the bill with you (as though "single payer" could be my only objection to it, anyway). It was not what I was referring to. Doesn't matter at all to anything I said.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Oh, but it was, not least because they were disgusted with the tactics being used to pass it.

It's funny, though; when people favor Democrats, it's because they're smart and "waking up," but when they don't, it's because they're under the thrall of Republican "dirty tricks." Maybe -- just maybe -- they have minds of their own and just don't agree with you.

In any case, my point stands -- the Democrats aren't getting the flurry of approval they expected, not by a long shot. If you have to blame boogeymen to make you feel better about it, go ahead.

i blame misinformation, as simple as that. "the sky is falling and taxes will be raised"........that's the never ending mantra we hear. dems are certainly not perfect, but they are damn sure more interested in people than republicans are.
 
Re: New Dem message: 'Improve' health care, don't talk cost

Never said the 70% stuff was true (in fact, you quoted me as being skeptical of it), and I have no interest in debating the merits of the bill with you (as though "single payer" could be my only objection to it, anyway). It was not what I was referring to. Doesn't matter at all to anything I said.

you're right, i posted that challenge to someone who is not up to it.

and if you don't want to debate the merits of the bill, that's fine. neither did republicans, nor do they now.
 
Back
Top Bottom