Pass the Bill (Krugman column)

[dtotire]

Pass the Bill

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 17, 2009

A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy. Declare that you’re disappointed in and/or disgusted with President Obama. Demand a change in Senate rules that, combined with the Republican strategy of total obstructionism, are in the process of making America ungovernable.

But meanwhile, pass the health care bill.

Yes, the filibuster-imposed need to get votes from “centrist” senators has led to a bill that falls a long way short of ideal. Worse, some of those senators seem motivated largely by a desire to protect the interests of insurance companies — with the possible exception of Mr. Lieberman, who seems motivated by sheer spite.

But let’s all take a deep breath, and consider just how much good this bill would do, if passed — and how much better it would be than anything that seemed possible just a few years ago. With all its flaws, the Senate health bill would be the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare, greatly improving the lives of millions. Getting this bill would be much, much better than watching health care reform fail.

At its core, the bill would do two things. First, it would prohibit discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of medical condition or history: Americans could no longer be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, or have their insurance canceled when they get sick. Second, the bill would provide substantial financial aid to those who don’t get insurance through their employers, as well as tax breaks for small employers that do provide insurance.


more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

[dtotire]

1. Amend It Later n/t

[Laelth]

2. Evidently Krugman is not uninsured.

He sounds really clueless in this essay. The individual mandate is a very bad idea, and the Democratic Party will be punished for it (and rightly so) if we force this bitter pill down the throats of the uninsured middle class.

Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the solution to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Blue Meany]

3. All this may be for the good, but it is also unlikely to be

popular and thus sustainable in its current form. Historically, programs that benifit everyone, such as Social Security, are popular and those that benifit the needy, such as welfare, are not and are under constant attack. Add to this the fact that these provisions will be costly but will not be offset the cost-saving mechanisms inherent in a public option and you have a prescription for a populist campaign for a repeal. Indeed, I think that the so-called "moderate" senators were really trying to remove those elements of the bill that would allow it to be a successful program.

[Daveparts still]

4. It is too easy for those

in big homes and sitting by warm fires to tell the poor how their money should be spent.I remember Tim Russert's columns written in his multi-million dollar ocean front home explaining why the corporate path was the correct path

[Tutankhamun]

6. I used to love the way Arianna Huffington would attack russert.

Constantly pointing out his hypocrisy, half-truths, blatant lies, and utter bullshit. She really kept after him. Unfortunately, the M$M acted as if Russert were unassailable.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. The readers' responses are at least 90% opposed

and the criticisms are coming from all parts of the political spectrum. Only the "yay team" Democratic Party loyalist or the people who haven't looked at the details of the bill are in favor of it.

A mandate to buy a private-industry product that everyone KNOWS is of terrible quality and dishonestly administered is not going to appeal to anyone of any political persuasion who has to be careful not to run out of money by the end of the month.

Like the members of Congress, Paul Krugman is insulated from the concerns of ordinary Americans. He is a well-meaning Ivy League professor (and therefore the recipient of excellent health and retirement benefits) who earns extra income from writing and speaking. Unlike his NY Times colleague Bob Herbert, he appears never to get out of Princeton and mingle with just plain folks.

If you contrast the two columnists, Krugman usually does a good job on economic theory and policy, but Herbert tells you how these policies affect those without money or power.