If you have "no place to go," come here!

Sure, I can go naked for 5 years

What could go wrong?

Senate passage of historic health care legislation seemed all but assured Saturday after Democratic leaders made changes that would put limits on federal abortion funding, increase Medicare taxes on the wealthy and create a federally supervised health care alternative.

No one could be denied coverage, or have their rates increased, because of pre-existing conditions, as of 2014.

Where are insurance rates gonna go from now 'til 2014? Three guesses!

And the beauty part?

Not only does Obama not want to run on this bill in 2012, the Dems don't want to run on it in the 2014 mid-terms either! That really tells you all you need to know...

No votes yet


Fredster's picture
Submitted by Fredster on

the Dems don't want to run on it in the 2014 mid-terms either

I don't think they'll want to run on it in 2010!

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

The last thing they want to do is to take this up again next year. But the immediate objective of the Medicare for All movement should be to make them do so.

This could be our opportunity. They're now on the verge of passing this bill. When it gets done there'll be something concrete to aim it. We can circulate models comparing HR 676 or S 703 with the actual bill that passes. We can social network, demonstrate, get letter writing and telephone campaigns going. We can stop HCR from dying or even from going off the table. We can fund our own polls showing that people hate this bill and can compare this bill with Medicare for All in those polls. Along about May the Dems are going to realize that they own this bill and that their fates are tied to getting a better one.

If we get people to understand that passage of a Medicare for All bill will require reconciliation or even using the nuclear option, perhaps we can get one of those two things done and a much better bill passed.

Everybody In, Nobody Out!

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

Take good care of yourself and also get rich enough that when it does take effect in 2014 you'll be able to buy one of their Cadillac plans that will really protect you.

sisterkenney's picture
Submitted by sisterkenney on

In a blog I saw at Huffpost, an interesting thought (blog itself, meh, not so much):, it was suggested that the mandate is unconstitutional:
Might not be a bad idea to see if the ACLU would care to get involved?
In addition, reading about Spitzer et al's call for an investigation into AIG, why not see if there is a way to create a citizen-sponsored investigation, grand-jury type?, into the undue influence that ins co's and pharma $$ has on politics in general, and the Senate bill in particular? Or is there a way to force a Pecora-type investigation? I'm not a lawyer (altho I could play one on tv), but if our elected reps won't stand up for us, maybe we can push these things through somehow?

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

I like these thoughts, and I also think this bill is unconstitutional because of the monopolistic nature of private insurance compelling people to take insurance without choice, and failing to control what insurance companies can charge. In effect, in the absence of a free market, the bill gives the insurance companies the power to tax the public. However, I don't think this SC will declare the bill unconstitutional. This is a really biased court.

Submitted by hipparchia on

just so long as you don't don any pumpkins!

off topic, i know, but since we're all in need of one more thing to worry about...

Submitted by jawbone on

or later?

BTW, did none of the access bloggers wonder why Obama didn't have anyone from Ted Kennedy's staff on board to work health care reform? But DID have former Baucus health care (or would that be "health insurance") staffer?

Oh, and if Repubs do take over that might be just to Obama's liking -- then he won't have to explain why he can't implement Democratic principles....