You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #223: Okay, despite the last subject line jab, I agree to refocus on where we can agree. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-30-10 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #215
223. Okay, despite the last subject line jab, I agree to refocus on where we can agree.

Instead of the tit for tat, let's discuss what we agree on shall we? We agree that the doughnut hole created, effecting the working poor needs to be rectified. Perhaps we can find common ground in our advocacy for that issue? Can you agree to advocate for strengthening this portion of the bill, or are you of the kill the bill ilk, regardless?


I can agree to strengthening this portion of the bill, before it is made law. If there's some way that conference could still be an option, that would be one way. Or if the senate would simply pass another bill, through reconciliation and send that to the house instead - that would be another option.

That does not seem that scary to me. And doesn't really even fell like "killing the bill." But they could take the basic structure of the currently passed Senate Bill, modify it, and pass the strengthened bill with 51 votes.

The House could then vote to approve that bill and let the previous version die. I could get behind that as well, assuming that what I believe to be critical flaws were addressed.

I'm extremely uncomfortable with passing what I consider to be a fatally flawed bill with only a word-of-mouth promise that it will be fixed through reconciliation measures to be too great a risk to me. I don't trust the Senate and they have given me no reason to trust them. If we got stuck with the Senate Bill as is I think that would be a terrible setback.

My ultimate desire is for health care reform that I feel confident will not make the problems we currently have in health insurance worse by doing nothing to stop gross abuses or major holes. If we could address those, even partially - if there was anyway to get health care to a place where I felt it did more marginal good than potential harm - I'd support it.

Ultimately however, I strongly believe that our policy should prioritize the needs of low income and working class individuals and families first, middle class and upper middle class needs second, and the wants and whims of the upper class and investor class last.

That's a tall order in our society, which barely speaks about poverty or the poor by name, and targets everything at the vacuous and expansive grouping called "middle class" in name, and often even then only uses them as a talking point while delivering policy that overwhelming favors the wealth and financial elite.

In this case, with Health Care, its more than I feel the people who were used score points during the campaign, poor people and the uninsured, are getting screwed - because the provisions of the bill leave them on the hook for potentially huge, huge amounts of money for access to care, combined with the cost of premiums and deductibles which, while better, are still potentially prohibitive. These were the very people referenced in campaign speeches from all candidates and used to generate sympathy for the need for reform. But now, they are an afterthought.

We can and must do better. Maybe we could pass the bill as is and fix it later. I can't prove that wouldn't work. But I have to make a decision based on my best guess. And based on what we know from policy and politics historically, and given the fact that this bill leaves critical exploitative and corrupt practices of insurance companies almost completely unchecked - I fear that passing the bill as is will only solidify insurances stranglehold, give them free reign to continue their explosive raising of costs to consumers, continue to mass-deny claims and continue to use fraudulent justifications to terminate polices.

Enshrining that system, and removing all political will to substantively change it, I think does more harm than good to the most at-risk portions of our society in the long run.

What's why I am both so worried, and so passionate about it.

Look however you feel, whether we find some common ground or not, its going to have to wait as I'm heading out of town. I promise myself that I won't be accessing the internet while I'm away, but we'll see if I can keep my promise. See ya in two days.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC