Entitlement “Reform”: Will Obama (continue to) take Zeke’s advice (& privatize Medicare)?

Who is getting "95% of what I wanted" on HCR?

When President Obama hired Zeke Emanuel as a “White House adviser” on healthcare financing, Rahm’s older brother had the perplexing credential of advocating a healthcare system based upon (1) mandatory private insurance, (2) the closing (sic) of public plans to new enrollment, and including the (3) taxation of healthcare benefits.





The public, diametrically opposite of Zeke, poll after poll strongly supports the policies of the president’s campaign: (1) a public option, and specifically (2) no mandates and (3) opposition to taxation of healthcare benefits (the position, interestingly, of John McCain). (Parenthetically, only as these popular positions have been reversed in the emerging “reform”, has public support for the mutant bill collapsed.)

Yet when push came to shove, we have seen the Administration come down on Zeke’s side every time. Not only did Rahm that pressured Harry Reid to drop the last remnant of a public plan (the Medicare Buy_In option) from the Senate bill to placate Joe Lieberman, but the president now labels healthcare benefit taxation not only acceptable, but essential, intervening to reverse the House of Representative’s support for the president’s former position.

Since Rahm approvingly pronounced his brother Zeke’s proposals a "game-changer", Zeke's position has prevailed in every major battle.






Now, the president tells us we must tackle “Entitlement Reform.”

Zeke’s recommendation to privatize Medicare by attrition (requiring new retirees to continue with their pre-retirement private plan) was essentially impossible without mandates.

But with the passage of an individual mandate, that incompatibility no longer exists.

The corporate hijacking of healthcare reform creates a system ready & eager to privatize Medicare itself.






Will Obama continue to take Zeke’s advice? . . . . Will (as this "White House adviser on healthcare financing" proposes) we see “Entitlement Reform” mutate into the incremental privatization of Medicare?





Is this a bad dream?








(Part of me thinks it must be, but somewhere in the back of my mind, I hear echoing “But Obama will NEVER sign a bill without a public option.”)








:kick:




:kick:





"If Barack Obama’s bill gets changed to exclude the public entities, it is not health insurance reform…it rises and falls on whether the public is allowed to choose Medicare if they’re under 65 or not. If they are allowed to choose Medicare as an option, this bill will be real health care reform...."

- Howard Dean

What is worse than the enemy you know? A snake in the grass working in your party but against your interests. Obama has got to be pressured to kick him out. Asap.

He better run for Chicago mayor. Get him out of our hair.

:shrug:

The Chief Executive decisions at the White House.

All the old bad things are now handled by the mesmerizing New Boss. (Same as the Ol boss.) Only cosmetic differences exist.

Why can't you accept that we can hate Rahm WITHOUT hating the Prez?

Why does it have to be "love Rahm to prove you love Obama"?

It's not like Rahm DESERVES anyone's loyalty.

assault, then we don't have any balls at all. We paid for Social Security. The government spent it. If they don't come up with the money, time to overthrow the government. And I am dead serious.

and the Corporatist Democrat Congress will fuck us again.

:sarcasm:

:thumbsdown:

...that a major goal of the DLC is to privatize Social Security.
Just go do some research on their website.
They call it "Entitlement Reform",
AND it IS next on the list.

The DLC New Team

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

:scared:























:rofl:

Mock as you do, might you be whistling in the dark?



Though nobody is saying anyone is worse than Bush, your hyperbole creates a convenient straw man for those that choose to ignore what is happening.

I think it was rather chilling.

What we're saying is that any "entitlement reform" has to be right-wing and unacceptable. You would have to agree with that if you're really a Democrat, right?

You know only the rich benefit from any change to Social Security. Why do you not care about that?

clear is that we have traitors among us, those who pretended to be one thing but turned out to be something entirely different. I think it's time to come together and start planning, or we will surely perish.

However, we need to stop catering to their enablers. The whole "vote for a corporate Dem, or else the sky will fall... do not worry about the issues we'll fix them later... vote DEM DEM DEM NOW AND DO NOT THINK JUST VOTE FOR US OR ELSE THE PUPPY GETS IT!!!!!" looks more and more like black mail and we need to stop playing their game. Either vote for actual liberal candidates who are not afraid of expressing from the get go where they stand on issues, or primary out corporate assholes... and if the choice comes down to a blue dog and a GOPer, then just vote 3rd party.


What I am tired of is being force fed candidates who quack, walk, and look like a republican.... but are too chickenshit to run as one now that their brand is tarnished beyond repair. And then having people crying to high heavens because said candidate ends up talking, walking and acting like a republican, well no shit Sherlock!

We need to cut it with the whole party before country, and we need to stop listening to "pragmatic" politicians. Because pragmatism in politics implies a lack of ideology, or at least a lack of ideological constraint. That is very dangerous, because ideology is one of THE focal points of politics... without ideology we can't understand a candidate in his or her whole context. I am not willing to support a candidate who wants it to have it both ways: feel entitled to liberal votes, without having to cater to liberal policies and/or ideologies. A pragmatic politician makes as much sense as an agnostic Pope. If you are too chickenshit to admit in public that you support liberal policies uncompromisingly, then I have no interest in voting for you. It is that simple...


I am a liberal, and I will only vote for a liberal candidate or a liberal electoral program. I am not interested in supporting conservatives. If the Dem party is too chickenshit to put forth a liberal candidate/program, my vote will go somewhere else. I am tired of having the DLC et al feel entitled to my vote.

What I find utterly disgusting about this whole state of affairs, it is that the same DLC troglodytes who are too chickenshit to actually stand up for liberal ideals (since they are really conservative lackeys)... are all too "brave" when it comes to abuse and beat into submission those who disagree. That selective strengthening of their spines only when it comes to undermine liberals is what drives me nuts. And that is why I am done with their shit...

what bu$h could not accomplish.

Makes him worse than bu$h in my book.

It's not like he hasn't hinted at doing exactly that, now has he? :eyes:


Oh but he calls it entitlement reform and I don't like the sound of that, guess you do, though?

are what the wealthy perpetuate themselves on. If there were real entitlement reform, it would be aimed at the wealthy. Social Security and Medicare taxes are the bulk of what the government takes from our checks. How can these programs be considered entitlements?

Do you care at all about the people who will be hurt by this?

Or will you laugh at the resultant suffering and death?

And I mean, *incredulous*. I've always been a realistic pessimist, so to speak, but... I honestly NEVER expected all this from the Obama administration.

Obama's administration already refused to give a cost of living adjustment to SS recipients for this year (based on the phony CPI numbers) for the first time in history, and theres every likely hood they plan to give no COLA for next year either.

(How can ANYONE know what inflation will look like in a year?)

The HCR is loaded with reductions in Medicare expenses, and going after Social Security itself seems the next goal.

I cant think of a less "liberal" idea than attacking the money spent on our senior citizens in the midst of a deep recession.

Im starting to wonder if Obama is a Democrat, or a Republican with these attacks on the elderly.

At the very least he's being poorly advised.

we seniors have alot of experience getting fucked over!..and the liars who lie..

:wow:

:wow: :hi: ..but i get that senior discount now..sheeeet...how did this happen?

:shrug: :wtf:

but i look gooooood....:toast: :toast: :toast: :bounce: :bounce: :thumbsup: :fistbump:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

we have to create another political party. The Progressive party? Currently we have one party with two faces. I know I have said this repeatedly in other posts, but it is true. We could draft people like Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Alan Grayson, etc.. but we have to do it soon.

and it is pretty damn disappointing.

Paul

start talking about "reform". It's starting to mean the middle and working classes are about to get screwed.

x(

"social welfare programs" or "Social insurance" are what they were known as pre-Reagan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entitlement

is closer to reality

:thumbsup:

People say we put in less than we take out. They forget that the value of our premiums (or contributions or taxes) increased in value with the inflation of money. That is why the cost of living increases make sense. They simply insure that our benefits increase as the value of our premiums or contributions increases.

K & R to the op, thanks for keeping the information front and "center".

say anything definite about anything and pretended he was the reincarnation of Robert Kennedy.

that are not from the Medicare Advantage subsidies ($1177 billion) will start the ball rolling. There is no way they are going to find $323 billion in savings from waste, fraud, and abuse, or 'best practices.' Medicare will continue on the path to insolvency and we will see a big push to reform (read privatize) it.

SS is next. They raised the payroll tax under Reagan to levels not needed to sustain the trust. That allowed them to keep pumping the money into the general fund and using it for spending that once would have been paid for with revenue collected from income taxes collected from the wealthier among us. Now come the baby boomers into retirement age and they don't want to pay the money back. So, we will now get reform (read privatization) of SS.

can get away with killing the New Deal and Great Society, privatizing the schools, etc.

getting their whole loaf of bread buttered on both sides --

after that, what do you expect them to do except to PRIVATIZE . . .

OR PIRATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE???

Are you kidding?

That's the first warning -- first siren to go off -- after this health care

fiasco!!

How can it be that DU can't get this?????????????????

That's the second reason why this health care bill fiasco has to be KILLED!!!

from trying to sound the warnings about this stuff?

logical understanding of capitalism/corporatism and their influence over

the Dem Party --



Meanwhile, we're trying to get liberals/progressives here -- and everywhere

to begin to UNITE as a voting bloc and for discussion --

re anything --

If you're interested it's the DFA forum here -- that's Democracy for America --

Moving slowly at the moment, but we hope it has promise/????


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=244&topic_id=2468&mesg_id=2482

I only see the hard-core cheerleaders waxing on now

The North American Work Camp Inc.

Sad as that truth is !!

Pretty damn frightening.

I'm sad and a scared that things are looking bad. My hope and change is riding far away over the horizon now. There are clouds of dust, and the booms of wars from far away. Billions and billions spent for war, cutbacks for seniors. *sad*

at Firedoglake..some time ago..but you put it together wonderfully..thank you!!


fly

Obama himself is a DLC neoliberal.

It just keeps getting worse.

And this administration (Obama's) fully subscribes to the core of the idea of a "unitary executive", i.e., a "hierarchical, unified executive department under the direct control of the President." If you do not buy this, then look at the statement of "non-" signing statements at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/us/politics/09signing.html. Implicit in this argument is the unitary executive definition above.

Thus, The President (in this case Barack Obama) is in direct control of the "unified executive department" and is thus responsible for ALL of it actions. Including those pointed out in the OP.

No wonder people feel thrown under the bus, or just sold out.

It is not the only conclusion one can come to, but it is certainly very reasonable one.

If it is reasonable, it is likely felt very strongly. It is not persuaded by silly straw-man mocking arguments that "Oh, I guess Obams is worse than Bush."

Of course he is not, and that was not our choice. He is better than McCain/Palin, also. No question.

However, better than Kucinich? Better than Dean? Who knows. In any event ALL of those questions are straw-man comparisons.

Instead, the point is that the Obama Administration is WRONG on Healthcare. Period.

We do not have to support what is wrong to support the man or the Administration as a whole.

If we take that tack (must support whatever action is taken by the Administration, or we are not supporting the Administration as a whole), then WE HAVE NO SAY and NO POWER. We used it up in that promise to support no matter what, and we are taken for granted.

Don't be taken for granted.

Meanwhile, if you're interested ....


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=244&topic_id=2468&mesg_id=2482


We're trying to get liberals/progressives together at the old Democracy

For America forum here at DU --

to discuss whatever --


:)

When he said that he had a lot of political capital to spend, and he was going to use it to PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY and START TAXING HEALTHCARE BENEFITS!

His numbers started tanking immediately and never recovered. Now, why is a "Democrat" pursuing these same policies.

Sorry, but this ain't change I can make believe in.

A major change on the political landscape is inevitable, but I've long thought the fracturing of the two party system would begin on the right. As disappointed as I am with HCR, I still hold out hope (albeit increasingly vain hope) that, if nothing else, political realities will force them to step back and rethink their current direction. However, a continued move in the direction of privatization would indicate the end of the party as we know it. Privatization only works with strict government regulations and as we well know, corporations in this country are rarely subjected to the type of regulations that the public interest requires.

of the Democratic party are rapidly becoming the 3rd party because the rethuglican wing of the Democratic party has decided we are all the 'fringe'.

thanks for the heads-up.

And, fucks up every time, making the average citizen eat the cost. "My kind of town"?

n/t.

:hi:

Or post some of your solutions to the healthcare conondrum. Give us all some pointers on how to deal with the obstructionist Republican party and their representative, Rush Limbaugh, who stated a year ago about our new President, "I hope he fails."

Well, I can tell you this much. I do not want Obama to fail. How do you feel?

There is no health care conundrum since what both the people want and what will save money is well known and posted all over the web. What good does it do to explain it again, since the Administration is firmly on the side of the Vampire Insurance and Pharma industries?

The Rs are not the problem. Remember how we were told over and over that the Ds could not do anything in the minority? Remember working since '06 to get the Ds a majority? (not that the battle was not going on before but I, and many others, were involved in concerted efforts with that sole goal since '06). Notice how the Rs do not seem impotent even though they are in the minority? Notice how our 60 votes have not resulted in "change we can believe in?" on anything to do with militarism or money? No, the Rs are not our problem right now.

What does "want Obama to fail" mean? I am old and jaded, and before Obama, while I was enthused when Clinton became President (didn't take long for that to fade), and I worked hard for Kerry and Ds in '04, never, ever before have I wanted so much for a candidate to win and to succeed as Obama. Never have I had so much hope that a candidate could succeed. Never have I felt that a candidate could be actually transformative as this man, this first Black President, this smart, articulate man who had been a community organizer and so had seen real poverty, who had the not just the backing but the enthusiastic stamp of approval of men like William McNary, who knew him from way back.

But Obama has put many of us in a real "conundrum." Of course we don't want him to "fail." But "his" health care plan is not a win for us, it is a win for the insurance and pharma vampires who've been preying on us. His war policies are not a win for peace, surely not for the infants and children still being blown to bits and incinerated by his "drone" attacks in AfPac. His administration is showing no signs of giving us a "win" on civil liberties with their support of Bush totalitarian policies. So, how can we want "Obama" to "win" on these policies?

No, of course I don't want Obama to fail. But I don't define "success" as scraps and bones for us, a feast for Banksters and Corpo-crats. I want him to succeed as what he ran as - at being the people's president, at "change we can believe in."

It is not my definition of "fail" that is the issue, it is Rush Limbaugh's. He is the one who made the quote. I completely object to the quote, it was made before Obama was even inaugurated...Limbaugh and most Republicans didn't even want to give the man a chance. So, yes I do believe Republicans have been obstructionists and planned it that way all along.

I respect what you have to say, particularly this: "Never have I had so much hope that a candidate could succeed." I too, felt and still feel, the same way.

I will not put all of the blame for the health care (whatever you wish to call it) on Obama and Democrats. Yeah, they all messed up, to put it very simply. Republicans, however, deserve blame, too.

The feast for the bankers was originally given while George W. Bush was still in office. I have hope that the Obama administration will make significant reforms. I was particularly heartened by Obama's speech last week when he stated, "We want our money back." Let's hope we get it.

Thank you for your thoughtful post; it seems to describe very well what many Democrats are feeling. Please note, though, that the word "fail" does not belong to me. It belongs to Rush Limbaugh.

I was responding to your last line question, not realizing you were quoting that evil windbag. It looked to me as if you were tarring FB with the same brush, which would be absurd. I wish I had as much "hope" left as you do - I'll just have to hope that you are reading the winds better than I do.

Oh, that's right, there wasn't any. I don't recall Hillary's plan as opposed to Obama's or Obama's as opposed to McCain.

Where is this BS coming from? Deficit reduction?

Ok, here is how we reduce the deficit:

We roll back the Bush tax cuts
We negotiate drug prices for all government subsidized healthcare (Oooh, that would mean even private plans that get subsidized premiums!!)

We scale back the war machine

We get some windfall profit taxes on oil, banks, insurers and pharma.

How are the deserving rich going to make a decent profit if we do all this nonsense you're talking about?

It actually seems pretty obvious

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7494534

Based on their performance on HCR, I would have to say "thanks, but no thanks" to President Obama and the Dems if they ask me if I want them to take on "Entitlement Reform" on my behalf. I'm not entirely sure it would be on my behalf. Sorry. That's what happens when you break the trust.

sort of opposition to all of this. We can't just sit here and take it, because from what I'm seeing even those Democrats who many of us feel "speak" for will in the end MOST PROBABLY vote for anything that this administration wants!

I'd bet that even Grayson, Waters, Conyers, Kucinich and many of our more "people friendly" Democrats won't buck the system!

If we can't do something as a people to show our anger, we are going to get MORE people like Scott Brown! And yes, I don't KNOW that Brown is a new reality, but it sure looks like we're going across to the VERY DARK side!

Obama et al have me flummoxed and I can hardly BELIEVE that it has come to this! What I also can't believe is that there are still people here on DU who constantly prop up Obama and don't see what's happening!

Pelosi says one thing and in the end, falls on her sword and the HOUSE falls too! When will we as a people say ENOUGH and do more than blog day after day or do all the usual things that have brought NO SOLUTIONS other than to say... yes, I signed a petition, or called or wrote or ANYTHING! We need to Unify in some way, and we NEED a leader who REALLY wants to help "we the people!" With Rahm & Zeke, we KNOW what is happening and Obama doesn't seem to think what they're doing has ANY down side!

Just keep the RICH happy and all will go well, and this only ensures that the rest of us are going to eat crow or something worse! I'm so stressed, worried and afraid most of the time and have lost ALL HOPE about getting any CHANGE that was promised.

Every time I hear about mandates, I recall spending one Saturday afternoon talking with a couple "on the fence" as to whether they should vote for Obama or McCain. There were 3 of us and we sat there for almost 2 hours explaining WHAT a McCain health care plan would mean to them. They had a daughter who was in need of health care because of MS so we explained HOW the McCain plan would be hurtful to them. I often wonder what those people are thinking today, and I'm so sorry I LIED to them!

America. Stop the outsourcing. Stop the importing without import taxes. Free trade is hurting Americans.

K & R

This administration seems to be siding with media corporations on all the so-called "intellectual property" bullshit. Ari Emanuel is in with that RIAA/MPAA fascist crowd that wants you to believe you don't actually OWN that CD that you paid $15 for at Best Buy, and if you should dare to copy the songs to a hard drive, or your Ipod, or make some sort of mix CD, you should have to pay them all over again.

The whole fucking family is evil.

It is a very deep web of influences that have pushed the bill where it is now and we must push back! I am so grateful for Howard Dean and his very honest statements that are so few among our politicians.

...and we all know how well THAT worked out.


By the way, how come Karl Rove is still wondering free following his part in the Valarie Plame outing????



PS: My spouse just made an excellent point. Obama is our Trojan horse! We thought he was something special, so we pulled him into our city and elected him our president. While we were all celebrating our victory, out of the horse popped Rahm & Zeke Emanuel, the Goldman Sachs gang and the Wall Street & insurance lobbyists to steal away our hope and destroy our financial futures.
Obama is a Trojan corporate horse!

privatize SS and 'Reform' Medicare. Bush didn't get the job done on SS and the Corporatists have long wanted to gamble on Wall St. with all that money.

I have heard remarks about Medicare, 'cutting costs' eg. It is something maybe they should be asked about?

I want to save my "fuck you, asshole" comment until I have this confirmed as concrete fact.

but I've heard more than a few times that it is a gosl for this year.

“But Obama will NEVER sign a bill without a public option.” and I don't know why anyone would have thought that. Yes I read that quote from his TV address but I also listened to every damn speech he made about it, every answer at a town hall.

He always said he was willing to look at something else that could provide competition and keep them honest but that he thought the public option was best.

I am not thrilled with bill we will get but the weak public option it was coming to was crap. They still have the exchange that includes at least one non-profit, what the hell do you think we can get from this Senate.

People dismiss the huge changes the bill brings, things that will improve life for millions.
I don't like the mandate but try to find one knowledgeable economist who will say it doesn't need to be there when you are insisting on no preexisting condition bias, no annual or lifetime cap on treatment, no rescinding, a limit on how much more you can charge older people and a maximum on how much anyone has to pay out of pocket in a year. You need a maximum sized pool, you need the very people that would be likely to skip it, the young and healthy or the cost would be crazy.

A mild example of a change this plan would do...someone in my state with a preexisting condition can only get an individual policy through one company (that is forced to take every9ne because it's non-profit, which makes their rates suck because they are the only one taking sick people. The option available to them covers only 1 doctor visit per year, the copay is 30% for all covered services. The maximum the plan will pay out in a year is $5,000.
Now that is junk coverage.
So they would all be eligible for the same plans at the same rates as everyone lese when this passes.
So look at what that one small example does to insurance companies...and to the damn people who need real coverage.
I love Dean but this is real reform. Not the best and not the end. You know other countries didn't suddenly get full universal coverage, right? It came in steps. Can we take the first one?

The excise tax is nothing like McCain's plan as you must know.

There is so much about this I don't like and I am sick of feeling like the defender as though it were a great plan.
But I am sick of the crap about it.

The plan in your example will seem awfully familiar. I call it junk, its worse and more expensive than any insurance I've ever had.

They can still cancel for "fraud" just like they always have. The state pools allow for continued mickey mouse with regulators and policies. The anti-trust is still in effect.

Corporate welfare at best and likely generational theft by forcing many and the treasury to pay for a stinking card they can't afford to use save for their bogus "wellness" visit that will allow them to find excuses to charge more.

not a preexisting condition.
The House bill has it 2:1
CA average is over 9:1 now.

There are NO higher rates for preexisting conditions.

The fraud they can cancel for now has nothing to do with preexisting conditions. It would only involve the 2 or 3 things that affect premium. Age and location for sure and senate has a 1.5 to 1 for smoking. They can't do it like they do now because preexisting conditions or treatments can't affect the plan or rate.

I called the plan I describes as junk to and you make ZERO sense saying there will be a lot more than that. I can't debate with myth.

the 2-3X cost of premiums is discriminatory and called "ageism". It perpetuates unaffordability.

There are no regulatory bodies who can enforce the insurance corporations.

model is old economy thinking. The alternative in naturally affordable access via a single payer model, and the ways to offset the cost are to remove the insurance industry that is nothing more than the disease that is clogging the system... Greed is not sustainable-midnight

It doesn't matter who the president is or who has the majority in Congress. The same policies will continue to take from the other 99% to benefit the 1%.

Eventually, the forces that are corrupting our entire government will privatize everything.

This is going to be an extremely shitty new era in government/politics/life.

I picked the wrong damn time to stop sniffing glue.

and start weeding out the neoliberals in the democratic party. otherwise the DLC takeover will continue and there will be no chance to avoid getting steam rolled by privatization.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7503549

I pretty much distrust the entire list except for Dorgan, and he's leaving after the crap they pulled with his drug importation amendment and I think Jim Webb does what he thinks is the right thing (the only guy in the world sticking up for the most overlooked population in the country - prison inhabitants)

Feinstein? Blecchhh! Warner - an empty suit. Evan Bayh, don't get me started.

Understanding that Obama is lightyears better than a puke, it still is perplexing to see him use his honeymoon and majorities in Congress to advance the corporate agenda.

the neoconservatives privatized war, and turned a nice profit for their war industry buddies.

it is now Obama's mission as a neoliberal true believer to privatize everything else...and turn a nice profit for his finance industry buddies.

the washington consensus is turning inward.

The horse may change, but the jockey stays the same.

... and it ain't you nor I.

Just when you think it can't get any worse....

Dems look at bypassing Senate health care vote

Jan 17, 11:30 PM (ET)
By CHARLES BABINGTON


BOSTON (AP) - A panicky White House and Democratic allies scrambled Sunday for a plan to salvage their hard-fought health care package in case a Republican wins Tuesday's Senate race in Massachusetts, which would enable the GOP to block further Senate action.

The likeliest scenario would require persuading House Democrats to accept a bill the Senate passed last month, despite their objections to several parts.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100118/D9D9U7Q80.html

*************************

So, that means we would be stuck with the Senate version of "health care" reform, the version that is mostly about keeping corporate profits intact and full of loopholes such as:


Provisions permitting insurers and companies to charge more than double to employees who fail “wellness” programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.

Insurers permitted to sell policies “across state lines”, exempting patient protections passed in other states. Insurers will thus set up in the least regulated states in a race to the bottom threatening public protections won by consumers in various states.

Insurers can charge four times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.

Insurers may continue to rescind policies for “fraud or intentional misrepresentation” – the main pretext insurance companies now use to cancel coverage.


For all those wide eyed optimists that think we can accept a bad health care reform bill and then amend it later -- have you heard of NAFTA? There's another bill they promised to look at after 6 months and amend if needed. This health care bill will be another NAFTA.

WE'VE BEEN HAD. No more centrist policies. Medicare for ALL NOW!!!

see so many parallels now to what she describes--"The merging of the political and corporate elites, huge transfers of public wealth to private hands, often accompanied by exploding debt, an ever-widening chasm between the dazzling rich and the disposable poor and an aggressive nationalism that justifies bottomless spending on security."

Dems are not immune to its ideology, or claims to be non-ideological. It goes by many names, but liberal or progressive are not in its grip.

Much like addiction, it is a non-discrminatory affliction. And it is in contrast to the ideals and values of traditional progressivism/liberalism.

I hope. Privatizing the armed forces sure has worked well and saved sooo much money (sarcasm).

More and more it looks as if Obama is just another shill for corporate greed and the top 1%.

I am very disappointed but then I guess the lesson is NOT to take campaign promises seriously. They are lies like any other lie. The end justifies the means: Lie to get into office and then do as you and your puppet masters please.

health insurance that I ever had in my lifetime. I don't think I could face the rest of my old age without it.

After the health care debacle to now set their sights on social security - possess these people no shame or sense of decency? Not a shred of solidarity with people who have worked all their lives? Wait... don't say anything, I think I know the answer, and it is NO.