Reid is going to Come out with an Opt-Out Bill. The White House says they Support Reid's efforts.

MadBadger

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:08 PM
Original message

Reid is going to Come out with an Opt-Out Bill. The White House says they Support Reid's efforts.

So why still all this Trigger Bullshit?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gateley

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message

1. Why all this opt-out bullshit is what I'm wondering... nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MadBadger

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #1

3. No idea

The health care debate has completely turned me off Politics and DU recently.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gateley

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #3

13. Ditto -- I glomp on to some key phrases and think that we have

hope, then learn what they're considering including in the package. I don't understand it all, I just know that I'm tired of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

damntexdem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #1

28. Because Reid is nervous about getting it out of the Senate.

Thinks he'll need the 60 votes. Of course, it could get out with a bare majority under reconciliation -- and it will likely be scored by the CBO as not increasing the deficit, so be eligible for such consideration.

Still, if it can get out of the Senate, then it will go to conference committee, where it can be improved -- especially getting rid of the opt-out.

And when that hits the Senate, there will be much more pressure to approve it -- at least not to let the GOP filibuster it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message

2. Because since they can't beat Obama on this, they want to at least make it like he didn't want it.

Its called being desperate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MNDemNY

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #2

5. Could you translate that remark into English?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #5

7. Try hooked on phonics, should work out just fine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MNDemNY

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #7

10. SYNTAX ERROR

:crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Strawman

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message

4. What about this: opt out with triggered public option in those states that do?

Since those opt-out states will still be driving up costs for federal programs like Medicare by not having a public option, why not put a triggered public option in as a fail-safe for cost containment in those states? If their representatives are insistent on being tools of the insurance industry, at least don't let them mess this up for the rest of us.

Has anyone proposed this combination? Is there something I'm not thinking of why this wouldn't work?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #4

6. Not sure thats necessary. My understanding is all states will have to participate for a year or more

My theory is no one will be opting out because it would be political suicide to do so.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. Required participation better last longer than a year

Edited on Mon Oct-26-09 01:21 PM by dflprincess

a year would hardly be long enough to return any reliable data on how well a health insurance program was working.

Of course, if it is limited to a year and after a year it's shown that this health insurance reform scam doesn't work, maybe they'd have to look seriously at single payer. Maybe it could work out well for us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #8

9. I'm not sure what the number is. But I think 1 yr would be enough to make the citizens wanna keep it

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. Citizens, maybe,

but when has what the citizens think or want entered into this debate? If our opinion mattered we would have, at the very least, a real option (open to all of us from day one) or, at best, a single payer system.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #11

15. When you are talking state level politics, its a whole different ballgame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #15

18. No, it would depend on the state

and just who is benefiting from the public option. And, how much money the insurance companies are shoveling to state politicians. When their intersts are at risk, they do start sending money to the locals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #18

21. I think it should be mandatory that the state holds an election on it, but that might not be

...legally enforcable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dawgs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #9

12. Exactly. Name one politician (at least a sane one) that would take health care away from people?

Which is exactly what would happen if every state had to wait a year to opt out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #12

17. Tim Pawlenty

he single handedly cut 30,000 of the neediest people off General Assistance Medical Care. A couple years ago, there were a several thousand people who wound having their Minnesota Care (a state program that covers those who can't get insurance elsewhere) premiums raised so high they could no longer afford them. Both Republicans and DFLers share blame for that one.

Sadly, I'd have to call Timmy sane, but he is calculating and blinded by ambition.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Strawman

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #12

19. It wouldn't be that clear cut

Especially if estimates of the small numbers of people who would be on the public option are to believed. The administration has gone out of it's way to downplay and minimize the effect of the public option, wrongly in my view. If a small proportion of a state residents are on it within a year and they are concentrated in strong Democratic districts, I think the insurance lobby campaign cash might overwhelm the political benefits of voting to keep the public option for state level legislative candidates.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Aramchek

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #8

20. "Single Payer or Bust" is a failed position

All it does now is slow us down.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #20

23. True, I do support single payer

and will not concede defeat to the insurance companies yet.

However, if you read the post in this thread, I conceded the advantage of testing the "public option" for only a year might make it clear to the corporate stooges in D.C. that "reform" that's designed only to protect a failing industry isn't going to work and they will finally have to do something that will work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Aramchek

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #23

24. wanting the Public Option to fail is extremely counterproductive

Not only would that not lead to Single Payer,
It would likely mean the end of all efforts at Healthcare Insurance Reform for years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dflprincess

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #24

26. By not allowing the public option to be open to everyone

and limiting it to those who are already the hardest and often costilest to insure it is already being set up to fail. I really don't understand how it can be called an option when most of us won't be allowed to choose it even if we want it.

The goal of most the current legislation being proposed is to protect the status quo, not us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Strawman

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #6

16. Not sure it would be suicide considering all the insurance industry money you'd get

I have to think the health insurance lobby money can be even more overwhelming in state legislative races.

I'll have to read more on the "opt-out" flavor of the public option. I didn't know it required participation first before allowing states to opt out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

phleshdef

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #16

25. I don't think that matters, it will be one of those things like trying to privatize social security.

People will be livid and your ass will be voted out in favor of opponents that promise to protect the public option.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MarjorieG

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #4

27. Easier to opt-out of reasonable sounding fall-back (which it isn't)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RDANGELO

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:28 PM
Response to Original message

14. Here is a hunch.

The rumors about Obama and the trigger are in hopes they can still get Snowe's vote on the opt-out.
If Snowe thinks that the President is sticking with her, she might be more likely to vote for the final bill and cloture. They are messaging her ego.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ipaint

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Oct-26-09 01:44 PM
Response to Original message

22. Article on what to look for in an opt out PO

Several news sources are reporting that Harry Reid plans to put a national public option with an opt-out provision in the merged Senate bill. So far, there have been almost zero details on how this national public option with an opt-out provision would be structured. I�m going to explain four important variables and how they could affect the success and availability of the public option.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/10/26/the-when-how-who-and-what-of-the-public-option-opt-out/

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:10 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.