'Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation"
that Reid already promised this months ago.
Why should the Dems not use reconciliation to insure 40M people and save 10s of 1000s of lives when the Repugs used reconciliation to enrich the wealthy with tax cuts?
Say what you want, but nothing the Republicans ever did with reconciliation forced every single American to take it up the ass.
And the real number isn't 40 million, it's like 13 mil, and it won't save any more than our medical system we currently have does.
You Lie. health care reform won't bugger every single American.
"t's like 13 mil" but still no way The Greatest Kickass Country In The History of the Universe can provide them health insurance.
Oooo...Ooooo....why don't you post a "poll"?
It won't be anything other than some meaningless political theater. Obama and the dems will pretend to be transparent and bipartisan and the repubs will pretend not to be obstructionists. There will be a bunch of sad stories, a bunch of rhetoric and a bunch of vagueities about needing to "do something", but not much in the way of actual ideas or meaningful discussion.
That's easier to do when:
1) you don't make bipartisanship and crossing the aisle a big part of your campaign.
2) your pressing legislation that the public wants.
Yet, the Dems still tried to follow that path. The problem was that their policies are so unpopular that even their members are weary of following them.
So Congress should enact legislation based on popularity?
Like the TARP?
The reality here is that the democrats were on a situation where if they rammed legislation through and it worked, then they could have pointed to the GOP and scream obstructionist! and use it on the campaign trail.
Anything else was setting them for failure. The Republicans wanted no part in health reform. None.
I believe their members could have been convinced if necessary. They're just too chicken to pass anything without the GOP blessing because they're always second-guessing what the poll is going to say the next day. That's squarely on Pelosi and Reid.
No.
I think it's more on Axelrod - the WH never showed the willingness to sell the stuff to the reticent crowd: the voters and the democrat members of Congress. At least Bush went to dozens of townhalls trying to sell the SS reform. Plus, the deals that Axelrod already had in place with interest groups, like the big pharma industry, complicated the marketing of the measure. But basically, they didn't want to run the risk of sending out their platform out of the window (and Obama didn't win the elections due to his policies) in the first year in office. They were so clumsy that they were severely hurt, but even today Obama's personal appeal is more popular than his policies. It's a good lesson though - promising the impossible has its negatives.
Reid was the one burying the bipartisanship approach and trying the let's ram this through their throats.
I think that Republicans wouldn't mind to own part of a health-care reform - but not one that goes in the opposite direction they propose. That wouldn't make sense whatsoever. It's not a matter of degree, it's of direction.
Obama failed on this subject. Fact.
Now he wants to save face by doing this but it will only make him look worse, IMHO.
Especially since the Republicans offered to do this last summer and were rebuffed by the White House and Congressional Democrats.
speaking of republicans.....reagan library needs docents, yoni.
any balls left?
What is the great Republican idea for health care?
Spell out their platform for us.
tort reform Texas style!
Texas still leads nation in rate of uninsured residents
12:00 AM CDT on Wednesday, August 27, 2008
By JASON ROBERSON / The Dallas Morning News
[email protected]
Texas once again led the nation with the highest percentage of residents without health insurance, a U.S. Census Bureau report showed Tuesday, although the same study also reports a slight dip last year in the percentage without coverage across the nation.
Almost one of every four Texas residents 24.8 percent were uninsured in 2006 and 2007, based on an average of the rates for those two years. That's up from 23.9 percent for 2004 and 2005.
The national number also increased a bit for the two-year period to 15.5 percent. However, looking at 2007 by itself, the percentage of uninsured in the country fell from 15.8 percent in 2006 to 15.3 percent in 2007. (State percentages were given only for two-year periods.)
California still has the highest number not percentage of uninsured residents at 6.7 million, compared with 5.7 million Texans. The Texas number is up from 5.5 million in 2006.
McCain adviser
But the numbers are misleading, said John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a right-leaning Dallas-based think tank. Mr. Goodman, who helped craft Sen. John McCain's health care policy, said anyone with access to an emergency room effectively has insurance, albeit the government acts as the payer of last resort. (Hospital emergency rooms by law cannot turn away a patient in need of immediate care.)
"So I have a solution. And it will cost not one thin dime," Mr. Goodman said. "The next president of the United States should sign an executive order requiring the Census Bureau to cease and desist from describing any American even illegal aliens as uninsured. Instead, the bureau should categorize people according to the likely source of payment should they need care.
"So, there you have it. Voila! Problem solved."
Mr. Goodman's analysis drew a sharp response from the Center for Public Policy Priorities, an Austin-based think tank focusing on poverty issues. "That is not the same thing as having health insurance," said Eva Deluna, a budget analyst for the center. People without insurance are less likely to seek care, and when they do, the cost to the health system is greater, she said.
Fight on statistics
According to Mr. Goodman, only people who are denied care are truly uninsured everyone who gets care is effectively insured by some mechanism. "So instead of producing worthless statistics that people fling around in vacuous editorials and pointless debates, the Census Bureau should produce meaningful numbers, identifying all of the sources of funds people will draw on if they need medical care," he said.
Ms. Deluna argued that the situation actually is worse now than the Census Bureau reported. The just-released data does not reflect the recent economic downturn, she said.
It makes no sense, she continued, for Texas to have the nation's highest percentage of uninsured residents, while having one of the nation's strongest economies for job growth.
In luring jobs to Texas, state and local officials have simply focused on the number of jobs, rather than on quality jobs offering health insurance, Ms Deluna said.
"People are working harder than ever, but the jobs they have don't provide health insurance," she said.
The number of Texans receiving health insurance through their jobs dropped to 11.9 million last year, from 12.1 million the year before, according to the Census Bureau.
Nationally, the overall number without insurance fell to 45.7 million last year, from 47 million in 2006.
The decline came as more Americans shifted to government Medicaid and Medicare coverage, said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a nonprofit health care advocacy group in Washington D.C.
An estimated 1.3 million additional people signing up for Medicaid and 1 million more signing up for Medicare were the main drivers of the lower uninsured rate, he said. "Ironically, this all happened while the president was trying to cut back on Medicaid," Mr. Pollack said.
Household incomes
In other findings, the report said:
The nation's official poverty rate in 2007 was 12.5 percent, unchanged from 2006. However, the number of Americans living in poverty grew to 37.3 million in 2007, up from 36.5 million in 2006.
Real median income, adjusted for inflation, rose for both black and non-Hispanic white households between 2006 and 2007, representing the first real increase in annual household income for each group since 1999.
Among racial groups, black households had the lowest median income in 2007 at $33,916. That compares with a median of $54,920 for non-Hispanic white households. Asian households had the highest median income, $66,103. The median income for Hispanic households was $38,679.
GGA: Your solution to Texas leading in uninsured would be to make a law saying they have to have insurance? WTF.
What is your solution?
Those who are in favor of insuring the uninsured sponsor some of the uninsured themselves.
Insurance coops?
Isn't that implicit if you're paying taxes?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
