Health Care Compromise or Sellout?
We've got a bunch of angry leftist Readers Who Comment this morning as they ponder the news that a Senate version of health care reform could well emerge without addressing many of President Obama's priorities.
Those who want a single-payer or at least a government health insurance option seem to be in agony as they read Shailagh Murray's and Paul Kane's story, which says, "Assuming the fragile [bipartisan Senate Finance] committee coalition holds, the legislation...would scramble the reform landscape by introducing policy ideas that have their origins in the political center." That, of course, describes a political compromise that might actually attract votes from both sides of the aisle.
The most pointed reader attacks are aimed at insurance companies, Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats for getting in the way of health care proposals that reek of socialism to Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats. The right is quick to point that out, plus the usual complaints about illegals getting treatment and demands for "tort reform," code words for limits on malpractice awards. We're not hearing much from those who understand that compromise or no action are the only probable outcomes.
We'll start with noaxe397 who said, "...Interesting that a novice, African American senator from a liberal northern city could get elected president on a public option, price competiton, universal health care platform, but experienced Democratic legislators cannot run with that ball."
And now to this tripartite conversation:
WWWexler wrote, "If the bill does not include a robust public option it will be rejected by the people. The GOP and right wing of the Democrats will pay dearly for failure to pass the right health care reforms..."
algibbs replied, "I don't know where you get your news , maybe some left wing web site , but you are dead wrong! The huge majority of Americans DO NOT want a public option in their health care... The blue dog Democrats and the Republicans have effectively stopped the public option , and everyone but the illegals , and the deadbeats in our country are applauding that fact..."
And jarstfer said, "...poll after poll shows strong support for public option (60-70% of all people polled consistently favor public option)...The oppositions is just well funded... Doctors, nurses and other health care professional take the Hippocratic oath so they are bound to treat anyone, legal or not. No matter what you wish, illegals will be treated in this and every country owing to the ethical obligations of the health care professionals."
Aprogressiveindependent wrote, "The possible health care bill described in this article does not represent the political center, but would be a sell-out to conservative and special interest groups. A bill with no employer mandate and no public option would be a major political defeat for president Obama, even more so a defeat for the people in this country. Millions of people would probably continue to be uninsured..."
But hill_marty said, "Sounds like great progress to me. They dumped Obama's lunatic generalities and are doing the work we expect reasonable centrists - Blue Dogs and Republicans - to do. Can't wait to hear more, and to see Rahm program Obama's teleprompter to say, 'just what we wanted' LOL!"
mypitts2 wrote, "Republicans will reject anything out of hand (see Sotomayor). So, if "Democrats" are gutting the bill to appease that crowd, they've wasted the American people's time and money. Without the public option, insurance costs will still be out of control..."
kay5 agreed: "45 million new lambs to get fleeced by the insurance industry. I wonder what each of the 6 Senators will pocket in donations. How much did this "news" article cost, by the way?"
indy474 wrote, "True health care reform is dead without a public option and I will lose a great deal of faith in Pres. Obama and the rest of the Dems if they cave in on this... Single payer all the way!!!!!..."
book134 said, "It is interesting that one sees unending criticism of any type of government sponsored health care plan because it may cost the government (ie taxpayers,) money. Yet when it comes to massive Corporate Welfare programs like the annual half a Trillion dollar funding of unnecessary military largess or the multi-Trillion dollar banking/insurance bailout, we hear hardly a peep from them. Why? Because many of these people have personal financial interests in these corporations... Our utterly corrupt system at work!"
theamazingjex wrote, "not content with degrading the presidency, the constitution and human compassion, the GOP set's it's sights on degrading the notion of comprimise."
KRittenmyer said, "THe Newsmedia including the WAPO spends hours discussing the politics in Congress regard this bill and absolutely ignores the fact that it is thrown to gether by political hacks with little knowledge or guidance from the medical profession...We'll see what kind of trash these people put tother and call it 'reform' meaning we'all have a disfunctional medical syste[m]..."
HeavyD1 wrote, "The WaPO coverage of the Health debate will prove to be on par with your faithful and exuberant transcription of the lies leading to the Iraq war.
Since when does the GOP or the Blue Dog Democrats represent the center?..."
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) was quoted in the story as saying "Without knowing what's in it, I don't think anybody's going to get that far out there." This caused infuse to write, "I wish more Democrats understood this much basic logic. Including those who gush here."
concernedaboutdc said, "...This is a compromise designed to deal with problems in the Senate. But it doesn't deal with problems in America. And I think it's time for the Senate to stop playing politics, do what has to be done... If the Republicans don't want to get on board, then Democrats can pass a government insurance option without the Republicans."
We'll close with KingDavidRetired, who wrote, "...While I think it obvious that it would be in the country's best interest to pass some meaningful legislation in health care, I think it also obvious that if the government cannot pass a bill... perhaps the government is far too cumbersome and top-heavy to act upon something that should be obvious... This... is an opportunity to see just how well the country can still function..."
All comments on this article are here.
July 29, 2009; 6:49 AM ET
Categories: Health-Care Insurance | Tags: Health Care Reform, Senate, Single-Payer
Save & Share: Previous: Can Pelosi Deliver on Health?
Next: Military Pork: Wasteful or Helpful?
Posted by: Dermitt | August 5, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: woebegoner | July 30, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.