'Public Option' SUCKS

[Orwellian_Ghost]

Came across this:

"Public option" is NOT single payer; it is a cynical deceit

The "public option" parrots never address the arguments made by, e.g., Physicians for a National Health Program (pnhp.org). Why do you think that is?

Public Plan Option in a Market of Private Plans
By David Himmelstein, M.D. and Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H.:

The "public plan option" won't work to fix the health care system for two reasons.

1. It forgoes at least 84 percent of the administrative savings available through single payer. The public plan option would do nothing to streamline the administrative tasks (and costs) of hospitals, physicians offices, and nursing homes, which would still contend with multiple payers, and hence still need the complex cost tracking and billing apparatus that drives administrative costs. These unnecessary provider administrative costs account for the vast majority of bureaucratic waste. Hence, even if 95 percent of Americans who are currently privately insured were to join the public plan (and it had overhead costs at current Medicare levels), the savings on insurance overhead would amount to only 16 percent of the roughly $400 billion annually achievable through single payer -- not enough to make reform affordable.

2. A quarter century of experience with public/private competition in the Medicare program demonstrates that the private plans will not allow a level playing field. Despite strict regulation, private insurers have successfully cherry picked healthier seniors, and have exploited regional health spending differences to their advantage. They have progressively undermined the public plan -- which started as the single payer for seniors and has now become a funding mechanism for HMOs -- and a place to dump the unprofitably ill. A public plan option does not lead toward single payer, but toward the segregation of patients, with profitable ones in private plans and unprofitable ones in the public plan.

www.pnhp.org

Everyone knows that successful negotiations begin from a position greater than what one actually wants. Therefore, starting negotiations with "public option" instead of single payer means that the ultimate outcome will be less than even "public option."

[mike_c]

1. the "public option" is a poison pill meant to destroy hopes of real reform...

...for another generation or so. :puke:

[DefenseLawyer]

3. Hey we tried a government plan in '09 remember?

It failed! Now shut up and pay me.

[mike_c]

38. exactly....

Rat bastards. And it's SO transparent!

[xchrom]

2. crap like 'public option' just opens the door to repuke wins.

they making a mess of the bill -- throwing everything in it including the kitchen sink.

it's a hot mess.

[Sebastian Doyle]

4. Yeah, I wanted to believe a "public option" would work, but no longer.

Howard Dean, god bless him, was genuine when he spoke of the public option, and probably some others were as well. But the DLC traitors & cowards aren't remotely interested in a TRUE Public Option, as Dr. Dean had described it. And the corporatists do not want to compete, they want to control.

And that's because corporatism is a CANCER. Cancer doesn't want an "equal playing field", and you don't give it one, or before you know it, it has the entire field.

No, you cut cancer out. And the pre-existing condition of metastasized corporatism is what's killing us.

It's emergency surgery time. As in HR 676.

[Davis_X_Machina]

5. Dean endorsed the House bill yesterday. n/t

[Oregone]

7. He also stated multiple times the public option is the same as single-payer

(someone else probably has an exact quote. No time to look it up here)

So, despite my past positive image of him, he sort of has a track record of lying on this issue. Yep, I said it.

Im a bit confused myself about that. Im not sure whats up with him.

[BlooInBloo]

10. Link to Howard Dean saying that "public option" is the SAME as "single payer" please?

[Oregone]

16. With quick search...

""Public option is like single payer. It gives consumers the choice. There's no such thing as a pure single-payer plan anywhere." Dean went on to say that there's absolutely no reason for a wedge between single payer advocates and those who support the public option."

http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/06/dean-wyden-the-public-option-single-payer-and-the-rest-of-the-kitchen-sink.html



Yes, like is not the same, but he has said it more than once so Im not sure what language he used elsewhere. Ill keep looking because Im pretty sure he said same.

Regardless, its still a lie. The "public option" approach is not like single-payer, anymore than a chimpanzee is like a herd of elephants

[BlooInBloo]

18. Thanks for clarifying that Dean did not in fact say what you claimed he said.

[Oregone]

19. Actually, Im not sure and paraphrased to start with. He still lied. And Ill still search more

On the other quotes

[Oregone]

21. note:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6085199&mesg_id=6085782

Track record of lying

[BlooInBloo]

23. The reply below yours has a fine example of Dean abusing singlepayer/publicoption lingo, fyi.

[slipslidingaway]

17. Links....

video at link, or you can look up the transcript...

http://www.healthcare-now.org/dr-dean-single-payer-is-not-off-the-table/

"Howard Dean referred to the public option as a single-payer system on yesterday’s ED Show.

To be clear, a mixed, public/private health system that Howard Dean is promoting is NOT single-payer. Only a system where private insurance is completely removed from the market is replaced by a government funded insurance program, with privately delivered care, can be considered single-payer."


http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/06/dean-wyden-the-public-option-single-payer-and-the-rest-of-the-kitchen-sink.html

"Dean also said that single-payer is pretty tough to differentiate from the public option. "Public option is like single payer. It gives consumers the choice. There's no such thing as a pure single-payer plan anywhere."

[BlooInBloo]

22. Thanks for that - and I agree that Dean most definitely did abuse to language there.

[slipslidingaway]

24. YW and thanks for agreeing that the language was abused...

it prompted me to post a poll asking if single-payer is the same as a public option.

[Laelth]

11. Here's what I make of it, fwiw.

Here's what I read into Dean's written public announcement in support of either the Senate bill or the House bill with public option insurance, here:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-15/dr-deans-second-opinion/full

I think Obama has made up his mind, and he has let all the players know that he wants either one of those two bills (or one that falls somewhere in between) to pass. The players are now all lining up behind him.

That's discouraging, imho.

:dem:

-Laelth

[berni_mccoy]

12. Yeah, right, it's a Democratic Conspiracy to SCREW US ALLZ!!1!

Whatever! :crazy: :eyes:

[Laelth]

14. I don't think the President wants to screw us.

I do think he's flexing his muscle to get the players on board. That's all I said, other than to express my disappointment.

I think the President is doing what he feels is right. I think he may be making a mistake. That's all.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Sebastian Doyle]

25. No, actually it's the same old conspiracy by FAKE Democrats to screw us all

That has been ongoing since the DLC was born out of Al From's ass in 1985.

[Laelth]

15. Public option health care is fine.

The U.K. has public option health care, and it works quite well. Public option insurance, however, principally funded my a massive new tax on the majority of those who are uninsured? That's insane, if you ask me. We'll lose the young vote for a generation that way.

:dem:

-Laelth

[TheBigotBasher]

27. What do you mean that the UK has "public option health care".

It has a universal system, largely free at the point of use paid for by general taxation.

[Laelth]

33. It does have a public option system.

No doctors are required to participate in it. Doctors are allowed to compete with it. Insurance companies can compete with it.

Under a single payer system, doctors are required to participate and doctors are not allowed to compete with the state medical system, and nor are insurance companies allowed to offer coverage that duplicates benefits that the state system provides.

There's actually a significant difference between the two. How they may be funded is another matter altogether.

Hope that makes some sense.

:dem:

-Laelth

[TheBigotBasher]

40. You can not opt out of the NHS

you may supplement it with private coverage that rarely covers medical emergencies (the NHS is very good for that). At least 90% of Doctors are employed by it. Consultants may be employed by teh NHS and they may have their own private practice.

Single payer does not (or rather should not) exclude other private medical treatments.

[Greyhound]

31. The two are comletely different.

Theirs is standardized with set procedures and a single bureaucracy. This proposal is a tiered system and $100,000,000,000 in corporate welfare that still leaves millions to die and doesn't even happen for over a decade.

Don't be suckered, this is far worse than nothing.

[Laelth]

34. I agree. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[YOY]

6. I heard the "just like car insurance" line...

You don't have to buy a car. Nobody HAS to buy a car. We all have the need for affordable health care.

[DefenseLawyer]

29. Even having a car, the worse your car, the less insurance you need

The worse your health.... well, it doesn't really add up, does it?

[solstice]

8. Obama is a sham.

[opihimoimoi]

30. Please tell us What the Bush/Cheney Dudes ARE??? They ruined this Nation for 8 fkn years

who failed to protect America even after they had series warnings....

Obama is a Sham? Hardly....

If Anyone is a sham its the GOP....

[Bluenorthwest]

37. It is not either/or

It just is not. Bush is no longer the President. And his criminality and ineptitude does not lower the bar to that level for future Presidents. Being better than Bush is not enough, not nearly enough.
Leonardo DaVinci had a quote that is applicable to Obama in regard to Bush: "He who does not punish evil commands it to happen."
Both Parties can be a sham at the same time. It is not either/or. And this plan is horrible, bigoted, and a sell out to Big Insurance and Pharma.

[solstice]

43. Great quote. Thank you.

[solstice]

42. WTF?!? Where the FUCK did I defend Bush/Cheney?!?!

NOBODY hates them more than I do. You have made a huge, extremely WRONG, leap.

But just because I hate, loathe, and despise repugs doesn't mean I hold Obama to any lesser standards than I do them.

I have voted for nothing but dems since 1972 and I am so disappointed and disgusted with Obama that if I'm still around in 2012, that will be the first year I sit out the presidential election. Because, as I said, I don't vote for repugs and AFAIC, Obama might as well be one given so much of his behavior.

[opihimoimoi]

48. lol

[dionysus]

39. ELEVENS!!1!!

[Laelth]

9. U.K. has an excellent public option health care system.

Public option health care doesn't have to suck. Public option insurance (what some of us will be forced to buy), otoh, does suck. I agree.

:dem:

-Laelth

[wroberts189]

13. MEDICARE FOR ALL NOW !!!! nt

[Hepburn]

35. Exactly. eom

[TBF]

45. I agree - just delete the age restriction and we at least have a starting point.

Fund it by cutting defense.

[TheWatcher]

20. You mean you aren't happy with the Crumbs From The table?

Why, next you'll want a Pony or a Unicorn!

Ungrateful Peasant! Just sit back and watch the Grand Game Of Chess you can't POSSIBLY comprehend!

This Administration's Rope-A-Dope make's Ali's look like a hyperactive, meth-induced FRENZY!

You QUESTION such brilliant STRATEGY?

YOU'LL RUE THE DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111

Or something like that. :)

[leftstreet]

26. K&R

[hfojvt]

28. true, and we never should have invaded Iraq

Now, if only we could figure out some way to go back in time ...

[crickets]

32. K&R -nt

[KG]

36. fuck a bunch of 'Public Option'.

[blindpig]

41. k&r n/t

[Romulox]

44. It's not even a "Public Option" since most won't be allowed to choose it anyhow. nt

[TBF]

46. Medicare for all, as a starting point. K&R on the OP. n/t

[rollingrock]

47. Health insurance companies are crooks!

'Public Option' is a misnomer because the govt is simply paying a middle-man, the insurance companies, to cover people under the public option. which allows these crooked companies to swallow up a big slice of the funds before the patients gets to see a dime of it. even then, they will continue to dream up ways of screwing people out of the coverage and denying care in order to take an even bigger cut. the only purpose for the existence of insurance companies is to deny people care and suck money out of the system. they really don't add anything of value to the process. They are parasites, absolutely good for nothing bunch of crooks!

[GeorgeGist]

49. When Medicare recipeints were given a private insurance option ...

only one-fifth ... left the traditional Medicare program and joined the private plans.

http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2009/03/26/himmelstein-and-woolhandler-on-a-public-plan-option/