Goddammit.
A number of takes on why, despite the compromise of a compromise of a compromise (all for the egos of a few grandstanding Senators who were supposed to be all about health care reform), the best move right now is to pass the bill and keep working for more. It’s not going to be much like the health care we see and envy in other countries, and people concerned about “cost” have made sure we have no recourse against private industry jacking up premiums. But it’s still far from nothing, notches a victory for certain principles that we have lacked in the past, and leaves ultimate goals closer within reach. It has been opposed by mountains of stupidity, but also pure entrenched power.
It’s unfortunate to watch this country take a stab at fixing a problem, at truly reforming a rotten way of doing business, and watching good arguments trumped by the simple presence of immobile corruption. The Republican Party is so bought, sold, brainwashed and utterly enslaved that it can feel proud of fighting to make sure “real Americans” stay broke, sick, and dying. They’re so corrupt that they will still look at this bill, which is what one would actually expect from a Republican administration if one were to actually live up to its principles (remember Medicare Part D, the price of which they lied to us about and then stuck on the national credit card?) and still vote against it, providing more idiotic yammering about “Obamacare gubmint socialism!”. It’s certainly no liberal triumph. It is not even good enough. But it is not something we can afford to turn down. It will provide real help for many, first and foremost. And if this fails, good luck next decade, folks. A win, even one this modest, puts Democrats in good position for 2010 and more gains. Yeah, it’s a bitch, but if we have to win a couple more Senate seats to improve it, then we will have to make that effort.
Make no mistake, this isn’t over. Harry Reid better try something via reconciliation, anything that can be squeezed in there. But for now, give President Lieberman and VP Nelson, two walking tubs of health insurance cash, what they want to get them to stop acting like teabagging idiots. See if Snowe will go along, now that there’s virtually nothing left for a Republican to object to. Let this battle play out, and keep fighting the war, as they say.
Otherwise, what’s your plan? Crap all over Democrats and let us see what can get done with a Republican controlled Congress?
-jb
December 16th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Name 100 specifics about the bill that will make things better. Hint, you can’t because it’s re-written hourly. Here Jeromy, I have a brand new almost looks that way car for just $5000, but you can only buy sight unseen, and there’s no guarantee it will start, move, or roll or have tires. But it’s a cream puff. It’s also red, or is that rust.
December 16th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
See, “It has been opposed by mountains of stupidity…” above.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
See, “It has been opposed by mountains of stupidity…” above.
So, you can’t name one then. Pass that Bill!!! Well, what’s in it? I don’t know.
December 16th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
At least at CSPT we did give the index and the reference site. But with the amendments, it’s changed and the don’t post the amendments
December 16th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
It’s my fault you can’t do the slightest amount of research? Quit messing around and get to making an argument besides, “I haven’t bothered to read what this bill does, but I vociferously oppose it!”
December 16th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Really, I write about this a fair bit and give lots of informative links. Did you bother reading any of the articles I linked to today?
December 16th, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Okay, I’ll ask this: What in this is actually an improvement from a progressive perspective? Sure, we’ve gained some reforms in regulation, but in order to make sure we can pay for them we’ve saddled ourselves with a health insurance mandate which is both onerous and most likely to be entirely ineffective (see: Massachusetts).
The links are good, and provide a _little_ hope. But not much. Without a reasonable overall strategy, it’s just throwing money at the problem, not offering a structure under which we can solve it.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
That’s all very much true, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t bandage the wound. I’m glad as long as people can see how this isn’t the real liberal goal, it is a wrenching compromise that fills my mouth with bile. In the meantime, it gets $900 billion or so out there helping plans be affordable, prevents discrimination against previous conditions, and creates an exchange where plans can compete under regulations that target how medical bills are incurred. Fee-for-service is killing us, and salaried doctors can make tort reform (a pittance, albeit) easier to implement.
Massachusetts has dropped the number of uninsured to under 3%. I really encourage all manner of debate and innovation as long as it is understood that our systems must seek to provide universal health care. I believe our problems will be less horrendous and easier to tackle than if we let our current system continue its downward spiral.
And again, we’ll be able to say, “Um, how’s that Republican-style health care reform working for you? Yeah, see, we had this idea, about a public option, you may have heard of it. CBO said it would cut costs, but that wasn’t good enough for Republicans who gave us Medicare Part D with deficit spending. Maybe try listening to us this time?”
December 16th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/20-questions-for-bill-killers.html
Nate Silver spells things out. It is an incomplete solution, but one that solves many problems. It is, remarkably, more fiscally conservative than anything we got from the years of GOP rule that put us in this deficit hole. If we can simply agree to keep future efforts deficit neutral or reductive, we’ll be able to make real strides forward.
By jove, though, I wish I could simply see a line on my tax bill that says “National Health Care tax” and be covered anywhere at any time. I wish that medical debt was a national horror long extinguished.
Of course, without the ability to negotiate prices, at the insistence of “fiscal conservatives,” we’ll see prices climb. Cue “Remember when we said we should be able to negotiate prices? Care for another 14% increase in cost?”
December 17th, 2009 at 7:28 am
I think the key questions are 1) would this bill be any improvement on the status quo, and 2) would this bill create a framework that could be improved on in the future?
I think the answer to both is now no.
Ian Welsh posted a strong reply to Nate Silver here.
December 17th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Name 100 specifics about the bill that will make things better.
Name 100 specifics that will make things worse! Oh snap!!
Stop asking people to m ake your arguments for you. That’s not how this game works.
December 17th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Name 100 specifics that will make things worse! Oh snap!!
Stop asking people to m ake your arguments for you. That’s not how this game works.
Hey, he’s praising, he can defend himself.
December 17th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Yes, but we’re waiting for you to actually present a critique.
December 18th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Critiquing others’ massive argumentation flaws is a civic responsibility, sort of like picking up litter–even if it’s not technically on your property, if the owner hasn’t had the opportunity to clean up the problem it’s a good idea to take care of it oneself.
December 18th, 2009 at 11:52 am
I think it’s pretty funny that Yorkshire reads the above post and says “He’s praising it!”
Did you read anything before you started trolling, Yorky?
December 19th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
desmoinesdem: The most devastating thing I read was a DailyKos entry. It pointed out that the same Democrats who are for the bill are in general the same crowd who caved on Iraq.
But the comparison isn’t pat. Paul Krugman says go with the bill, which should be evidence enough that principle can dictate a yes vote.
And Iraq is hard to get out of, once you’re in. So, I expect, will universal health care once it is mandated. We have to control costs either way. If we stick with the system we got, we’ll go broke quicker with a hard climb back up. This bill has some important seed money for cost reform, and increasingly we know how the medical billing of the future will look like based on successful hospital models that we already see working in America. Healthy and robust salaries for doctors, with bonuses for good health results, will lead the way. The exchange will provide a good regulatory bottleneck for national plans. These are good tools that can be improved upon.
I do love the songs of despair I hear of late. This “success” is still a stinging setback. The majority has been thwarted. The votes already exist for this bill. But the radical anti-health care reform forces and the corporatist hacks colluded and a real solution was prevented.
The bill collapsing and health care reform being put off for another decade (the only thing that would happen if we listened to Dean) is simply not an acceptable course of action. It’s simply giving up. This is the bill that is possible right now, for disgraceful reasons. But if it loses, it won’t be a victory of our principles, it will be a defeat of them. A loss would condemn the entire effort, right down to the belief that all Americans should be covered.
We need to pass it with open and flagrant begrudging over what was lost. We need to step forward and claim a victory for universal health care. Republicans will be forced to move to the left on the issue to survive politically, much like in Europe.
That is vitally important. Universal health care shouldn’t be controversial. The sooner this reform effort can make UHC the status quo, the better.