Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 10:53 PM Apr 2012

Once Upon a Time, Liberals Hated the Individual Health Insurance Mandate



Once Upon a Time, Liberals Hated the Individual Mandate
by Avik Roy, Contributor
April 2, 2012


There’s a lot of talk—much of it inaccurate—about the minority of conservatives who supported the individual mandate in the past, but oppose Obamacare’s requirement that all Americans buy health insurance. But these critics have devoted less attention to the fact that many liberals—including President Obama—opposed the individual mandate in the past. “The liberals hated it,” notes Jonathan Gruber in a recent New York Times profile. “People forget that.”

“This is not real reform,” said Howard Dean of Obamacare’s mandate in December 2009. “You’re going to be forced to buy health insurance from a company that’s going to take on average 27 percent of your money so they can pay CEOs 20 million dollars a year…and there’s no choice about that. If you don’t buy that insurance, you’re going to get a fine. This is a bill that was fundamentally written by staffers who are friendly to the insurance industry, [endorsed] by Senators who take a lot of money from the insurance industry, and it’s not health care reform. And I think it’s too bad that it should come to this…I’d kill the bill entirely.”

Dean, to his great credit, has been consistent all along in his criticism of the mandate. Not so for President Obama, who on the campaign trail in 2008 ridiculed Hillary Clinton’s support of the mandate. “I don’t think the problem is that people don’t want health insurance,” he told Ellen DeGeneres in 2008, “it’s that they can’t afford it…if things were that easy, I could mandate everybody to buy a house, and that would solve the problem of homelessness. It doesn’t.” As President Obama’s staffers began pushing for a mandate, Ron Suskind reports, Obama expressed concern about Constitutional challenges to the provision. As we know now, he was right to have done so.

Former AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, representing the core Democratic constituency, was even more ardent than the President in his hatred of the individual mandate. In 2006, when Mitt Romney was about to sign his Massachusetts legislation, Sweeney went ballistic. “Who would have thought that Massachusetts—long considered a bastion of progressive thinking—would take a page out of the Newt Gingrich playbook for health care reform?” he asked. “Forcing uninsured workers to purchase health care coverage or face higher taxes and fines is the cornerstone of Mr. Gingrich’s health care reform proposals. And it is unconscionable that Massachusetts has adopted this misguided individual mandate.”

Read the full article at:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/04/02/once-upon-a-time-liberals-hated-the-individual-mandate/


-------------------------------------------------------------------

In SCOTUS case, Obamacare has industry allies
by Timothy P. Carney
Senior Political Columnist
March 25, 2012


Corporate America's stance on the Obamacare case before the high court this week will surprise those who followed Obama's narrative or most news coverage of the law, which was supposedly a broadside to the special interests. But back then, health-sector lobbies either supported the bill or at least supported its core provisions. Today, industry briefs before the court show the same lack of "special-interest" opposition.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Massachusetts filed an amicus brief with the court in support of Obama's Department of Health & Human Services. The insurer writes that it played a central role in crafting Mitt Romney's Massachusetts health-care law that served as the prototype of Obamacare, and that it "remains firmly committed to the 2006 health care reform and the individual mandate, and believes that the closely related reforms enacted by Congress in 2010 will further advance important economic and social goals."

The American Hospital Association is a $20-million-a-year lobby (the third-biggest lobbying organization in terms of spending since 1998, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics). The AHA has filed briefs in support of the law, and its amicus brief before the Supreme Court argues that "the court should uphold the individual mandate."

The health-care law provides new taxpayer subsidies to hospitals, and the individual mandate could reduce the "uncompensated care" hospitals now provide for the uninsured. Plus, more universal and subsidized health coverage could allow hospitals to raise prices.

Read the full article at:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/scotus-case-obamacare-has-industry-allies/446831

134 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Once Upon a Time, Liberals Hated the Individual Health Insurance Mandate (Original Post) Better Believe It Apr 2012 OP
That's because we didn't want insurance at all, just a universal health plan, but Cleita Apr 2012 #1
We "got stuck" with the insurance industry bill when the administration decided to stick us with it Better Believe It Apr 2012 #5
Then what? cliffordu Apr 2012 #52
Obama's health care plan in the primaries was the same as Hillary Clinton's plan, only Liquorice Apr 2012 #68
More ProSense Apr 2012 #2
Timothy P Carney?... SidDithers Apr 2012 #3
Avik Roy? ProSense Apr 2012 #8
It's worse than that.... SunsetDreams Apr 2012 #10
Oh my! n/t ProSense Apr 2012 #12
Holy shit, hahaha. joshcryer Apr 2012 #16
Yikes indeed. What stranger bedfellows. Here's Ezra Klein's take: joshcryer Apr 2012 #14
There is ProSense Apr 2012 #18
Thanks, Sid... russspeakeasy Apr 2012 #13
As long as it is a hatchet job, BBI promotes it. emulatorloo Apr 2012 #24
Hey Sid! Scurrilous Apr 2012 #38
Hehehe... SidDithers Apr 2012 #76
Mandates suck, but not as bad as what we had before. Hoyt Apr 2012 #4
It will be far worse. This legislation was written by big business lobbyists. Need I say more? Better Believe It Apr 2012 #6
So just don't purchase it. You're not being forced to buy anything. Pay the tax instead. FarLeftFist Apr 2012 #7
And pay again when services are needed? MannyGoldstein Apr 2012 #11
That's the ideal solution.. russspeakeasy Apr 2012 #15
And two-thirds of Americans want it MannyGoldstein Apr 2012 #17
I'd go for Medicare for all, but the cost is still going to tick folks off. Hoyt Apr 2012 #19
Unless we totally fuck it up, we'll save a fortune MannyGoldstein Apr 2012 #20
At best you'll save 15%, and then only if people moderate expectations. Hoyt Apr 2012 #23
Exactly right! You get it. Better Believe It Apr 2012 #22
Having a reasonable Medicare for All payroll tax would be fine. Who is proposing that? Better Believe It Apr 2012 #21
I like your post Go Vols Apr 2012 #37
You can choose to look at it that way or you can look at it as helping your fellow Americans. FarLeftFist Apr 2012 #39
Huh? That isn't how taxes work. girl gone mad Apr 2012 #44
The Govt IS shouldering the cost. MILLIONS of new people will receive MediCare. FarLeftFist Apr 2012 #116
Paying taxes for a Medicare for All single payer system is good but that's not being proposed. Better Believe It Apr 2012 #95
But MILLIONS of new recipients of MediCare IS progressive. FarLeftFist Apr 2012 #117
Their won't be millions of new recipients of Medicare. The qualifying age remains 65 years old. Better Believe It Apr 2012 #124
Actually, because some people will qualify to have their premiums subsidized the government will dflprincess Apr 2012 #114
That's actually a good way of looking at it, being if you choose the tax it will be done during tax FarLeftFist Apr 2012 #118
Yeah, we got a raw deal, but we're helping people, and progressing. joshcryer Apr 2012 #9
The significant parts of the article of course BBI omitted those. Leads with the negative, emulatorloo Apr 2012 #25
Assumes people won't read the links. joshcryer Apr 2012 #42
Same tactic Bobbie Jo Apr 2012 #82
*Liberals* still do. Marr Apr 2012 #26
BLAST you and your Republican talking points! Zalatix Apr 2012 #27
I hope people don't listen to a guy in Romney's Health Care Policy Advisory Group joshcryer Apr 2012 #30
See post #3. Poor choice of source. emulatorloo Apr 2012 #31
True, unfortunately his name sullies the basic fact that he's right. Zalatix Apr 2012 #33
And the present "fight," where everyone argues for what they were once against, is very strange. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #59
Exactly. Zalatix Apr 2012 #60
I have always been for mandates. joshcryer Apr 2012 #66
using a RWer to once again slam dems? have you no shame? don't answer. dionysus Apr 2012 #28
Almost as offensive as passing far right wing legislation and calling it a liberal victory. girl gone mad Apr 2012 #45
lol dionysus Apr 2012 #50
The Heritage Foundation, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich are not Right Wing? Dragonfli Apr 2012 #85
+100000 nt woo me with science Apr 2012 #78
The ACA is "far right wing legislation"?... SidDithers Apr 2012 #79
The Heritage Foundation, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich are not Right Wing? Dragonfli Apr 2012 #86
Comedy gold... SidDithers Apr 2012 #90
You have neglected the needs of your own country, you need to convince people like Michael M. Rachli Dragonfli Apr 2012 #92
X100 You sum it up perfectly. bvar22 Apr 2012 #97
. dionysus Apr 2012 #111
The post of an educated man Dragonfli Apr 2012 #119
i'd like to take this opportunity to thank you guys for the continued free entertainment... dionysus Apr 2012 #123
Again, the entire depth of your arguing ability, 11 year old comedian. Dragonfli Apr 2012 #125
+1 Poll_Blind Apr 2012 #112
Yes, exactly. nt Mojorabbit Apr 2012 #113
So did you embrace the Republican/RW support for mandatory private insurance .... Better Believe It Apr 2012 #96
what i don't embrace are anti-dem campaigns... dionysus Apr 2012 #108
So how do you feel about mandatory private health insurance first proposed by right-wing Republicans Better Believe It Apr 2012 #109
i'll just leave you to your little campaign. dionysus Apr 2012 #110
I have hated that Heritage Foundation POS for at least 20 years now, I must change 180 now Dragonfli Apr 2012 #29
<tweety voice> You bad ol' Democrat! Zalatix Apr 2012 #35
No ProSense Apr 2012 #40
What? Dragonfli Apr 2012 #46
Not a chance ProSense Apr 2012 #48
Dance all you want to, I won't dislike you for it, but it has been a GOP plan for over 20 years Dragonfli Apr 2012 #49
I'm ProSense Apr 2012 #51
None of that changes the reality that it is a bad Right Wing Idea from 20 years ago Dragonfli Apr 2012 #53
And ProSense Apr 2012 #54
Blue links do not negate history, particularly history within easy memory. TheKentuckian Apr 2012 #75
This message was self-deleted by its author ProSense Apr 2012 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author ProSense Apr 2012 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author ProSense Apr 2012 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author ProSense Apr 2012 #55
"being duped by Romney advisers makes one a better Democrat" NCTraveler Apr 2012 #87
^^^^I taut I tay a pudy cat! ^^^^ Dragonfli Apr 2012 #47
One thing I've always wondered... BlueCheese Apr 2012 #32
This might ProSense Apr 2012 #36
Political opportunism to differentiate himself. He never ruled it out. joshcryer Apr 2012 #41
He didn't rule out jail time either. Or execution, for that matter. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #61
*sigh* I remember. Edwards and Hillary were for the mandate. Obama flopped. joshcryer Apr 2012 #62
no idea what your point is. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #63
It was never a strong position is all I'm saying. joshcryer Apr 2012 #64
Yep. He lied. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #65
Eh, I doubt he planned to flip flop, made him look weak. joshcryer Apr 2012 #67
Obama is NOT a liberal, this article is bogus on that account nt msongs Apr 2012 #34
Happy Birthday, Obamacare (Part Deux!) ProSense Apr 2012 #43
It's the best we can do in a country that will not allow government based solutions. mmonk Apr 2012 #69
And yet two thirds of Americans want Medicare for all... Fumesucker Apr 2012 #70
But no solution is on the horizon and corporatism is getting worse. mmonk Apr 2012 #71
Isn't going quite as planned, is it? Ikonoklast Apr 2012 #72
Continually rehashing the past is unhealthy for relationships and AtomicKitten Apr 2012 #102
The mandate was a minor point of difference between Obama and Clinton's Healthcare plans. JoePhilly Apr 2012 #73
Pathetic. Truly. You really are desperate. Makes me queasy. cali Apr 2012 #74
Once upon a time, liberals didn't post opinions from right-wing authors...nt SidDithers Apr 2012 #77
Why are you using a RW gasbag as a source? Odin2005 Apr 2012 #80
Are you denying the fact that Republicans proposed the mandate and liberal Democrats opposed it? Better Believe It Apr 2012 #84
So are you admiting that the article was absolutely true on corporate support for the mandate? Better Believe It Apr 2012 #94
k&r and thank-you for saying it in plain english. robinlynne Apr 2012 #81
Evidently, ProSense Apr 2012 #83
John Edwards was the first candidate to propose a "Public Option". bvar22 Apr 2012 #98
And now Edwards owes the gov't $2.1 million. Go figure. AtomicKitten Apr 2012 #100
He also ProSense Apr 2012 #103
looks pretty mandatey to me AtomicKitten Apr 2012 #104
The "Mandate" is not the problem. bvar22 Apr 2012 #107
Edwards was, or is. robinlynne Apr 2012 #134
REAL Liberals still HATE the individual Mandate DLCbeedaGOP Apr 2012 #88
... SidDithers Apr 2012 #89
Go figure. nt Bobbie Jo Apr 2012 #91
the real ones still do.... mike_c Apr 2012 #93
+100 wickerwoman Apr 2012 #120
American's concerns and lives are "off the table", the corrupt table that is just1voice Apr 2012 #99
See Gore Vidal, Frank Zappa, etc. n/t Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #101
Once upon a time, the Democratic Party was run by liberals. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2012 #105
Considering the sources you quoted, MineralMan Apr 2012 #106
Well this Liberal still does. Matariki Apr 2012 #115
liberals used to be against a lot of things Enrique Apr 2012 #121
I still do. Ganja Ninja Apr 2012 #122
This message was self-deleted by its author Dragonfli Apr 2012 #126
I still hate it :( varelse Apr 2012 #127
This message was self-deleted by its author Dragonfli Apr 2012 #128
This message was self-deleted by its author Dragonfli Apr 2012 #130
So when your last thread didn't go your way, you decide to post again? jeff47 Apr 2012 #129
well, yeah. the anti dem campaign never stops. dionysus Apr 2012 #131
The use of right-wing sources is particularly telling...nt SidDithers Apr 2012 #132
So you disagreed with the following comment? If so, why? Better Believe It Apr 2012 #133

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
1. That's because we didn't want insurance at all, just a universal health plan, but
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 10:58 PM
Apr 2012

since we got stuck with the insurance exchange, we know the only way it will work is with the mandate.

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
5. We "got stuck" with the insurance industry bill when the administration decided to stick us with it
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:07 PM
Apr 2012

So let's unstick ourselves and hope the "Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act" mandate goes down in flames.

Liquorice

(2,066 posts)
68. Obama's health care plan in the primaries was the same as Hillary Clinton's plan, only
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 03:03 AM
Apr 2012

it didn't have the mandate. Obama primary supporters argued strenuously that the mandate itself was wrong, not his insurance plan. I personally had many debates about it as a Clinton supporter, and I always argued that the mandate was important because the plan wouldn't be nearly as good without it. This was a very contentious argument that went on all through the primary. It's somewhat irritating that people don't seem to remember that now.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
3. Timothy P Carney?...
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:07 PM
Apr 2012

Do you even check the sources you use? Or is any article that's critical of Obama OK with you?



Forward by Ron Fucking Paul?


Praise for Obamanomics:

PRAISE FOR OBAMANOMICS

"Conservative muckraking at its best ... an indispensible field guide to the Obama years."

-Columnist Jonah Goldberg

"Every libertarian and free-market conservative who still believes that large corporations are trusted allies needs to read this book, as does every well-meaning liberal who believes that expansions of the welfare-regulatory state are done to benefit the common people."
-Congressman Ron Paul

"This meticulously researched book is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand how Washington really works."
-David Freddoso, best-selling author of The Case Against Barack Obama


Awesome.

Sid

SunsetDreams

(8,571 posts)
10. It's worse than that....
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:21 PM
Apr 2012


About Me
I am a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research and a member of Mitt Romney’s Health Care Policy Advisory Group.


http://blogs.forbes.com/people/aroy/

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
14. Yikes indeed. What stranger bedfellows. Here's Ezra Klein's take:
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:24 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/revealed-the-democrats-devious-plan-to-compromise-with-the-republicans/2012/04/02/gIQAqdrQrS_blog.html

Both Democrats and Republicans changed their mind on the individual mandate, he argues. But there’s a key difference: The Democrats changed their mind in order to secure a bipartisan compromise on health-care reform. Republicans changed their mind in order to prevent one.


Of course, the Republicans get a pass, as usual.
 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
6. It will be far worse. This legislation was written by big business lobbyists. Need I say more?
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:13 PM
Apr 2012

Fewer benefits at a higher cost in order to enrich the insurance, big pharma and general for-profit hospital industry.

Notice the big increases in health insurance premiums since the "health care reform" was signed into law?

You ain't seen nothin yet!

When the insurance industry gets a lock on our health care system forcing us to buy their crapola insurance you won't be singing "Happy Days Are Here Again"!

FarLeftFist

(6,161 posts)
7. So just don't purchase it. You're not being forced to buy anything. Pay the tax instead.
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:15 PM
Apr 2012

Paying the tax will enable you to help your country & not pay a corporation.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
11. And pay again when services are needed?
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:22 PM
Apr 2012

Shitty deal, and not what we elected Obama to fight for.

How about we just work to get Medicare for All, desperately wanted by two-thirds of Americans - but not by the Third Way, I get that.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
17. And two-thirds of Americans want it
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:27 PM
Apr 2012

Any political party that wanted to pass it and wasn't scared of its own shadow could get this through - or destroy the opposing party in the next election if they opposed it.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
19. I'd go for Medicare for all, but the cost is still going to tick folks off.
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:38 PM
Apr 2012

It will still be quite expensive. And it will go up every year just like commercial insurance.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
20. Unless we totally fuck it up, we'll save a fortune
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:43 PM
Apr 2012

Every other country with single-payer insurance pays far, far less than us - at least 30% less. Heck, we'd save 20% or more just from the reduced "administrative" costs: these are 5% for medicare, 25%+ for private insurers. Add to that the increased leverage of a single payer, and we'd save big.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
23. At best you'll save 15%, and then only if people moderate expectations.
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:49 PM
Apr 2012

Someone in their 50s will still be paying $600+ a month.

At some point the whole system has to change and we/patients are going to have to accept some sacrifices. I'm more than ready, but a lot of folks aren't.

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
21. Having a reasonable Medicare for All payroll tax would be fine. Who is proposing that?
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:46 PM
Apr 2012

If you don't buy a policy from the insurance industry crooks you'll be fined by their government!

Is that the "tax" you had in mind?

FarLeftFist

(6,161 posts)
39. You can choose to look at it that way or you can look at it as helping your fellow Americans.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:50 AM
Apr 2012

It's not like the Govt is taking the money and paying the ins. companies with your tax dollars, they'll be using it to cover healthcare costs of the Nation. I'm FOR single-payer, show me the votes.

girl gone mad

(20,634 posts)
44. Huh? That isn't how taxes work.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:15 AM
Apr 2012

The money will be destroyed, nothing more. The fine is just as stupid as shifting the costs for overpriced health services and health insurance onto young workers is. Hello? We still have a crappy economy here. The government can afford to shoulder these costs much more easily for now than our private sector workers can.

FarLeftFist

(6,161 posts)
116. The Govt IS shouldering the cost. MILLIONS of new people will receive MediCare.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 12:33 AM
Apr 2012

That is a GOOD thing. And the ppl who can afford to purchase will be able to do so at a reduced rate through exchanges as well, which will in effect balance the cost of millions of new MediCare recipients. Look, it took Canada almost 15yrs before they fully implemented universal care. This is the biggest step in that direction in the past 60yrs.

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
95. Paying taxes for a Medicare for All single payer system is good but that's not being proposed.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:26 PM
Apr 2012

Fines on people who refuse to give money to profit gouging private insurance parasites is not progressive.

FarLeftFist

(6,161 posts)
117. But MILLIONS of new recipients of MediCare IS progressive.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 12:35 AM
Apr 2012

Also, profit-gouging will be regulated due to exchanges/reduced rates. And that is only for ppl that can afford it in the first place. Plus, the new anti-discriminatory regulations put on the industry IS progressive as well.

dflprincess

(28,081 posts)
114. Actually, because some people will qualify to have their premiums subsidized the government will
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 10:31 PM
Apr 2012

be taking tax money and paying the insurance companies. Of course, the people who qualify for subsidies will have to pay the premiums first and then apply for a tax credit when the file their 1040s so it won't be a direct transfer of tax money in to the insurance companies' pockets.

FarLeftFist

(6,161 posts)
118. That's actually a good way of looking at it, being if you choose the tax it will be done during tax
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 12:40 AM
Apr 2012

time & you probably won't wind up paying anything but instead getting a slightly less tax refund.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
9. Yeah, we got a raw deal, but we're helping people, and progressing.
Tue Apr 3, 2012, 11:20 PM
Apr 2012

From the linked article:

For liberals and progressives, universal health insurance coverage is the holy grail, not just of health policy, but public policy. Many were willing to take the other sides idea because it was what could pass the House and the Senate and be signed by the President. They were willing to invest much political capital pushing the ACA even as they held their nose over many of the details, because it moved toward universal coverage.

The change of mind around the individual mandate is just as telling for Conservatives. I think the story that more Republican politicians were supportive of the individual mandate that rank and file conservatives, and conservative health policy types is likely true. For one thing, there really aren’t that many Conservative policy types that focus on health policy, and it is not a core issue that most conservative voters think a great deal about. And as Stuart Butler notes, one of the reasons that Republicans likely supported a mandate in the 1990s was so that they would have something with which to argue against the Clinton plan.

Progressives and liberals have shown a clear commitment to using any feasible approach to expand insurance coverage toward their ultimate health policy goal. Conservatives have mostly shown a clear commitment to arguing against the policies of progressives and liberals in the health policy realm. There is nothing about the historical record to suggest that Conservatives will be willing to expend political capital to advance a health reform proposal (briefly: idea, white paper, commerce and ways and means committee hearings and mark ups in the House, CBO, PR and political rallies, parsing of the plan by the other side, bazillion blog posts, full House vote, then to the SENATE!, etc).



Thanks for the article, good stuff.

emulatorloo

(44,159 posts)
25. The significant parts of the article of course BBI omitted those. Leads with the negative,
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:15 AM
Apr 2012

And hides the positive. All in the service of presenting a distorted picture of the truth.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
42. Assumes people won't read the links.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:07 AM
Apr 2012

Clearly.

I read them both. Both right wing hatchet jobs, but at least Roy posted an opposing view.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
26. *Liberals* still do.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:17 AM
Apr 2012

It's the Third Way sorts and 24-hour Party people who either love it or don't care either way.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
27. BLAST you and your Republican talking points!
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:18 AM
Apr 2012

LOL I can hear it now.

Well said, Better Believe It. Maybe now people will listen.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
30. I hope people don't listen to a guy in Romney's Health Care Policy Advisory Group
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:22 AM
Apr 2012

Global warming right wing anti-government Carney.

emulatorloo

(44,159 posts)
31. See post #3. Poor choice of source.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:23 AM
Apr 2012

Why would DU'ers want to listen to Timothy Carney?

Why would a DU'er be promoting a right wing liar of his caliber?

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
33. True, unfortunately his name sullies the basic fact that he's right.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:37 AM
Apr 2012

History shows Liberals were AGAINST the individual mandate before they were for it.

The individual mandate is a plague of ignorance first launched by the Heritage Foundation.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
59. And the present "fight," where everyone argues for what they were once against, is very strange.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:16 AM
Apr 2012

Like psyops.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
92. You have neglected the needs of your own country, you need to convince people like Michael M. Rachli
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:28 PM
Apr 2012

That Insurance is better than what you enjoy, Health Care.
Only a hypocrite would knowingly support a policy for his friends he would not also want his own family to share.

I tried but I could not find anything in my searches when looking for proponents of a Heritage Foundation style blueprint to replace the health care system currently enjoyed in Canada.

It is virgin territory, you can be an active player for change at home rather than an observer of the change you love so much being implemented across the border.

We both know you are no hypocrite (a bit of a child-like joker perhaps, but no hypocrite).

So be the change you wish to see!!! The one you have been waiting for is you!

You can read one of your doctors thoughts and perhaps get his info so that you can reach him to change his mind.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/03/opinion/oe-rachlis3

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
97. X100 You sum it up perfectly.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 03:25 PM
Apr 2012

I've always had a problem with people who live in a civilized foreign country and enjoy the benefits of Universal Health Care
insisting that we Americans settle for FAR LESS than they take for granted.
That just smells bad.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
119. The post of an educated man
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 01:53 PM
Apr 2012

That has taken too much LSD for his own good.

Eloquent as only a master debater can be

"he said masterbater didn't he?" not really, but you have your 11 year old humor, that should keep you amused for a while.

My answer to this "." is this ".." now we both smart people!

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
125. Again, the entire depth of your arguing ability, 11 year old comedian.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:51 PM
Apr 2012

Try discussion instead of posting smiley men. It would look forward to more than an exchange of graphics that say nothing.

But that is just me.

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
96. So did you embrace the Republican/RW support for mandatory private insurance ....
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:31 PM
Apr 2012

when they first proposed it?

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
29. I have hated that Heritage Foundation POS for at least 20 years now, I must change 180 now
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:21 AM
Apr 2012

because some Democrat somewhere thinks right wing think tanks are "cool".

I guess I am a bad Democrat now because I haven't moved a mile or two to the right.
So be it.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
40. No
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:00 AM
Apr 2012

"That's okay, though. I'm a bad ol' Democrat, too!"

...clearly, smarter. I mean, being duped by Romney advisers makes one a better Democrat.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
46. What?
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:20 AM
Apr 2012

"I mean, being duped by Romney advisers makes one a better Democrat."

Romney's advisers implemented RomneyCare, so I supposed you have been duped as well.

Don't feel bad, if you squint your eyes hard enough Republican Ideas look Democratic to some.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
48. Not a chance
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:25 AM
Apr 2012
"I mean, being duped by Romney advisers makes one a better Democrat."

Romney's advisers implemented RomneyCare, so I supposed you have been duped as well.

Don't feel bad, if you squint your eyes hard enough Republican Ideas look Democratic to some.


I've long argued that Romney vetoed the best parts of the MA health care law and the Democratic legislature overrode his veto. http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=503100

His adviser is trying to use Democrats to justify Romney's flip flop.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002514808

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
49. Dance all you want to, I won't dislike you for it, but it has been a GOP plan for over 20 years
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:31 AM
Apr 2012

I am simply incapable of supporting Corporate first Republican measures no matter how they are re-branded and dressed up.

I can't do the 180 from progressive ideas without snapping my spine.
Third way Democrats lack a spine so it is much easier for them.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
51. I'm
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:42 AM
Apr 2012
Dance all you want to, I won't dislike you for it, but it has been a GOP plan for over 20 years

I am simply incapable of supporting Corporate first Republican measures no matter how they are re-branded and dressed up.

I can't do the 180 from progressive ideas without snapping my spine.
Third way Democrats lack a spine so it is much easier for them.

...dancing with common sense.

Rep. Anthony Weiner: ‘Howard Dean Is Wrong,’ We Shouldn’t ‘Let The Perfect Be The Enemy Of The Good’

By Igor Volsky

This morning, single-payer advocate and public option supporter Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) defended the merged Senate bill, arguing that it’s still worth passing. “It’s not that they got a bad bill on their hands, it’s a pretty good bill,” Weiner said. “I think that Howard Dean is wrong. And I don’t think we should let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

Asked “what is it in this bill that’s going to lower costs and provide more choice” since Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) insisted on stripping the bill of the public option and the Medicare buy-in provision, Weiner argued that covering more Americans would minimize the cost shift from the uninsured:

WEINER: No, that’s easy. I mean frankly, when you have 30 million people who are uninsured today going into hospital emergency rooms getting very expensive costs, passing along the burden. We in New York City pay $6 billion what could be in extra taxes for the uninsured. Theoretically, those people are going to be covered now, so they’re going to get better health care than they’re getting today.

O’DONNELL: How if there is no public option?

WEINER: I understand there is no public option but there are 30 million people who are going to be getting health insurance who don’t have it today. Those people are going to be getting more efficient less expensive care, not passing onto you and me higher costs. That’s a good thing. That’s an unvarnished good thing.


Watch it:

- more -

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2009/12/18/171132/weiner-dean/


Kucinich on the Affordable Care Act: "I hope the law is upheld."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002503243

Bernie Sanders: The Court and Health Care
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002496175

Damn "Third way Democrats"

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
53. None of that changes the reality that it is a bad Right Wing Idea from 20 years ago
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:57 AM
Apr 2012

I am also less surprised that the party sided with the Corporations in this then you may think.
It in no way changes what this law is and where it originated.

I believe it will fail people miserably, I see millions more insured in "bronze plans" as you do, but one thing those that make more than most don't understand (people like politicians) is that they will not go to the doctor very often if at all because the co-pays will not fit in a budget that also has overpriced minimal coverage insurance in it.

Also, the biggest problem will still remain, refusal by insurance (over money) to allow the performance of procedures regardless of what one's physician says, each and every time they can get away with it.
They will have even more opportunity to commit murder by spreadsheet.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
54. And
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:03 AM
Apr 2012

"None of that changes the reality that it is a bad Right Wing Idea from 20 years ago"

...continuing to repeat that doesn't change the facts: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002512603

Oops!

Response to Dragonfli (Reply #53)

Response to Dragonfli (Reply #53)

Response to Dragonfli (Reply #53)

Response to Dragonfli (Reply #53)

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
87. "being duped by Romney advisers makes one a better Democrat"
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:33 PM
Apr 2012

The Obama admin wasn't duped. They invited them in.

BlueCheese

(2,522 posts)
32. One thing I've always wondered...
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:37 AM
Apr 2012

When Obama ridiculed the individual mandate in 2008, was he being dense or deliberately misleading? If it's so clear that it's necessary now, why didn't this occur to him back then?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
36. This might
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:42 AM
Apr 2012

"When Obama ridiculed the individual mandate in 2008, was he being dense or deliberately misleading? If it's so clear that it's necessary now, why didn't this occur to him back then?"

...help: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002512603

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
41. Political opportunism to differentiate himself. He never ruled it out.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:05 AM
Apr 2012

In fact he proposed fines if it didn't "work as hoped."

Krugman predicted he'd need the mandate to keep cost projections down.

Krugman was wrong that it would kill Health Care's chances (and so was I and a few other people who didn't like Obama's health care plan).

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
62. *sigh* I remember. Edwards and Hillary were for the mandate. Obama flopped.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:38 AM
Apr 2012

Here's the part about fines: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/26/john-mccain/fines-are-possible-but-for-uninsured/

I can't find the statement where he said that he would maybe implement the mandate but I know he said it, it was in the great mandate debates of 2007.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
64. It was never a strong position is all I'm saying.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:43 AM
Apr 2012

Political opportunism. He said what the American people wanted to hear.

joshcryer

(62,276 posts)
67. Eh, I doubt he planned to flip flop, made him look weak.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:51 AM
Apr 2012

It's already being used by right wingers to discredit him, etc.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
43. Happy Birthday, Obamacare (Part Deux!)
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 01:12 AM
Apr 2012
Happy Birthday, Obamacare (Part Deux!)

March 24, 2012

By Avik Roy

Obamacare was signed into law on March 23, 2010. This week, the White House organized activists in an effort to tout the law’s alleged benefits: seniors on Monday, women on Tuesday, young adults and kids on Wednesday, health costs on Thursday, and pre-existing conditions on Friday. So let’s go through and discuss what the law actually does in these areas.

<...>

Kids: Shoved into the Medicaid ghetto

Four in ten children in America spend some of their childhood on Medicaid or its cousin, CHIP, the worst-run health programs in America. Obamacare massively expands Medicaid, driving up the number of children who will be enrolled in these programs.

Study after study shows that Medicaid has poor health outcomes, and that expanding the program will make it even more difficult for children to gain access to needed care.

<...>

Will Obamacare enjoy a third birthday?

Republicans are certain to repeal the law next winter, if they manage to win the White House and a majority in the Senate. That outcome, of course, is far from assured. Either way, we will all be thinking about American health-care policy very differently come March of 2013.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/miarticle.htm?id=7952


I'll help you promote Roy's perspective.

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
70. And yet two thirds of Americans want Medicare for all...
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 07:16 AM
Apr 2012

It's not the country that won't allow a government solution, it's the politicians and corporate executives forcing an unpopular system on a populace that disagrees with it and would much rather have something else.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
71. But no solution is on the horizon and corporatism is getting worse.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 07:21 AM
Apr 2012

Many on Medicare don't even realize it is a government insurance program and vote against keeping for themselves.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
73. The mandate was a minor point of difference between Obama and Clinton's Healthcare plans.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 07:50 AM
Apr 2012

It had no effect on my support for one of them over the other.

And it had absolutely zero effect on my selection of Obama versus McCain.

Just one more manufactured outrage widget designed to get Dems to stay home in the fall.

Obama hates us wahhhh!!!!

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
84. Are you denying the fact that Republicans proposed the mandate and liberal Democrats opposed it?
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 11:22 AM
Apr 2012

That's one hell of an admission from a capitalist publication.

And it's been well documented in many publications including ones that might be far too liberal for your tastes.

And if you wish to dispute any of the facts presented on how big corporate interests are backing the health insurance industry law please post them now along with credible links.

Go ahead.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
98. John Edwards was the first candidate to propose a "Public Option".
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 03:38 PM
Apr 2012
"Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards was the first Democratic presidential candidate to propose a public option as part of his health care plan, unveiled in 2007. Behind the scenes, his wife, Elizabeth, was a strong advocate."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32508223/ns/politics-health_care_reform/t/public-option-obscurity-center-stage/


Candidate Obama, after seeing how popular Edward's proposal was,
borrowed it and incorporated it into HIS campaign rhetoric.
Sadly, Americans would later discover that , like the "Renegotiation of NAFTA" and "making EFCA the Law of the Land"
Obama wasn't really serious about actually fighting for one,
and quickly negotiated the Public Option away behind closed doors with the health care Industry.

Though both Obama and Edwards campaigned on a "Public Option",
the one Edwards proposed was much more robust, and would have been based on an National Plan,
not the watered down State Insurance exchanges in the Obama's soon to be dropped proposal.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
103. He also
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 04:10 PM
Apr 2012

"John Edwards was the first candidate to propose a "Public Option"."

...proposed this:

<...>

Edwards' truly universal health care plan will ensure that every American has health insurance. He will require proof of insurance when income taxes are paid and when health care is provided. Families without insurance will be enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP or another targeted plan or be assigned a plan within new Health Care Markets.

Families who lose coverage will be expected to enroll in another plan or be assigned one. For the few people who refuse to pay, the government will help collect back premiums with interest and collection costs by using tools like the ones it uses for student loans and taxes, including collection agencies and wage garnishment.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=91170#axzz1qqZ9tZYk

Yikes!

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
107. The "Mandate" is not the problem.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 05:48 PM
Apr 2012

A MANDATE without a robust, publicly owned/government administered NATIONAL Public Option is The PROBLEM.
Public Options administered by the individual states will be so diluted and burdened with redundant administrative costs that they would not be able to offer marketable cost savings.
The bigger the risk pool,
the greater the savings.

Even Candidate Obama stated that a Public Option was necessary to "Keep the Insurance Companies honest."

Howard dean stated that without a Public Option, there is NO reform.

I agree with Candidate Obama and Dr Dean.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

 

DLCbeedaGOP

(6 posts)
88. REAL Liberals still HATE the individual Mandate
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 12:36 PM
Apr 2012

always have, always will.

Single Payer IS the ONLY solution and everyone knows it.

mike_c

(36,281 posts)
93. the real ones still do....
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 02:17 PM
Apr 2012

Sorry, I'm perfectly happy to own my elitism on this one. The individual mandate began life as a conservative republican plan, and it will always be a plan that serves the needs of conservatives and entrenched wealth rather than progressive ideals and real people.

wickerwoman

(5,662 posts)
120. +100
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 02:41 PM
Apr 2012

It's still unprecedented and unconstitutional to require private citizens to purchase something (particularly from profit-making, private entities).

And don't give me that auto insurance bullshit. Driving is a choice. Living isn't.

I don't think that's a precedent worth setting, no matter what the short term benefits are in terms of a compromise(d) health care package.

 

just1voice

(1,362 posts)
99. American's concerns and lives are "off the table", the corrupt table that is
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 03:58 PM
Apr 2012

It'll be less than 1 year before this nation collapses again like it did in 2008 due to unsustainable predatory capitalism.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
105. Once upon a time, the Democratic Party was run by liberals.
Wed Apr 4, 2012, 04:12 PM
Apr 2012

Alas, now it's run by ambitious politician whose only "principal" is gaining power at any price.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795

Matariki

(18,775 posts)
115. Well this Liberal still does.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 12:22 AM
Apr 2012

I think it's an unprecedented step in a dangerous direction.

On the other hand my partner recently asked me if I had to choose between the status quo and the mandate which would I pick, and I had to reluctantly say the mandate. But it's an evil choice, IMO. I want a single payer system and I want the insurance cartel out of healthcare altogether.

Ganja Ninja

(15,953 posts)
122. I still do.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:03 PM
Apr 2012

I think it's a cop out to avoid a true single payer government run healthcare plan and keep the for profit system in place.

Response to Ganja Ninja (Reply #122)

Response to varelse (Reply #127)

Response to Dragonfli (Reply #128)

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
133. So you disagreed with the following comment? If so, why?
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:36 PM
Apr 2012

"The insurance industry and big pharma will have a lock on the for-profit health care system under what I call the "Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act".

The unnecessary insurance industry will add hundreds of billions of dollars every year to the cost of medical care without contributing anything of value that will improve our health.

They are useless parasites feeding off public with the approval and help of the government under the individual mandate."

Perhaps it was way too liberal for your tastes. Is that the problem?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Once Upon a Time, Liberal...