Imagine the conversation a Dem rep has with a constituent after killing off HCR- or just read this:

"This is quite a system. What do you call it?"

by isamuel, Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 05:21:01 PM EST

The Senate seems set to kill off the public option in exchange for a package of compromises on other issues. This is going to cause understandable heartburn among progressives, but do we really think that a member of Congress should vote against the whole bill if it's this compromise or nothing?

How would such a Congressperson explain that decision to one of her constituents? Consider:

Jane: So, Congresswoman, what's going to happen with health care in this country?

Rep.: Well, Jane, I've got good news and bad news.

Jane: Uh oh. Better start with the bad news.

Rep.: The bad news is, the health care bill isn't going to pass because I've decided to vote against it. And I'm the critical swing vote.

Jane: Oh, no. Really?



Rep.: Yes. You see, I'm just not convinced that it's a good bill. For example, what do you do?

Jane: I'm a cashier at the local Wal-mart.

Rep.: And do you have a family?

Jane: Yes. I'm raising two kids by myself.

Rep.: Must be hard. Do you have health insurance?

Jane: No, I don't. See, my employer doesn't offer it, but I can't afford to buy it. An individual plan is incredibly expensive. I was looking forward to health care reform because I thought it would have changed that. Wasn't it supposed to give me access to a health insurance exchange where everyone paid the same price?

Rep.: Well, yes and no.

Jane: Yes and no?

Rep.: I don't know how much you make, but it's quite possible you wouldn't have been on the exchange.

Jane: Oh, that doesn't sound too good. Maybe this bill was bad after all. Why wouldn't I?

Rep.: You might have gotten health care for free.

Jane: For free?

Rep.: Sure. The bill had a big expansion of Medicaid benefits so that if you're a working person without much money, you might have had access to government health insurance. No charge.

Jane: I thought the bill didn't have a public option.

Rep.: Oh, it didn't. That's why I voted against it.

Jane: But you just said I might have gotten free government health insurance.

Rep.: Right. But if you made more money, you might have lost it! Once you weren't eligible for Medicaid, you'd have to buy private insurance.

Jane: Yikes. Or what?

Rep.: Or you pay a fine.

Jane: That seems unfair. The government requires me to buy something and doesn't even give me any help?

Rep.: Oh, no, you would have gotten big help paying for it. Major subsidy.

Jane: Oh. Well, still, even with a subsidy, we all know how much insurance plans cost.

Rep.: Actually, they would have cost a lot less. Remember, everyone would have been paying the same price, and insurance companies would have been required to spend 90% of the money on health care.

Jane: I see. So you voted against this because there was no public option?

Rep.: Absolutely. It's just unfair to make someone buy something they can't afford.

Jane: And the public plan would have been free?

Rep.: No. It would have been financed through premiums.

Jane: So I would have had to buy health insurance anyway.

Rep.: You bet. That's how we get universal coverage.

Jane: But the public plan would have cost less because it would have been financed by the government, right?

Rep.: No way! It's a level playing field. That's why I was so excited to vote for it.

Jane: What does that mean?

Rep.: Basically, the public plan would have had to compete on the same terms as every other health insurance company, and be financed entirely through premiums you paid.

Jane: So why is it better?

Rep.: Because making you give money to health insurance companies is bad.

Jane: Oh, right. Because they can deny me coverage based on pre-existing conditions and charge me more because I'm a woman. That does sound bad, truthfully.

Rep.: Actually, the bill I'm voting against would have outlawed that. People couldn't be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions anymore.

Jane: This is a lot to take in.

Rep.: You ready for the good news?

Jane: I could use some.

Rep.: The good news is, now that health care didn't pass, you don't have to buy insurance!

Jane: I don't?

Rep.: Nope. You can keep living just like you have been---with no insurance at all.

Jane: That's the good news?

Rep.: Absolutely. Wouldn't it have been awful to be forced to buy health insurance? I mean, those awful insurance companies.

Jane: But I want health insurance. That's the point! Where am I going to get it now?

Rep.: From a health insurance company.

Jane: You said giving money to health insurance companies was bad.

Rep.: Oh, the worst.

Jane: Do I get any help paying for it?

Rep.: No.

Jane: Can they deny me coverage because of a pre-existing condition?

Rep.: Yes.

Jane: Can they charge me more because I'm a woman?

Rep.: Absolutely.

Jane: And lifetime caps?

Rep.: I'd read the fine print.

Jane: This is quite a system.

Rep.: I'll say.

Jane: What do you call it?

Rep.: From now on? Liberalism.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2009/12/10/17211/322