Please don't make me Google -- What the hell is the Trigger option? Thanks! nt

[gateley]

[mikelgb]

1. a compromise on a compromise on a compromise

[gateley]

6. I assumed that much, judging from the posts I've scanned. I'll read on -- thanks! nt

[aquart]

9. Oh, it's way worse than that. It's a flat out lie.

It would mean we lost. We get nothing. The insurance companies get to leech us bloodless for eternity.

Can we now stop pretending that there is anything to be gotten from sucking up to REPUBLICAN Olympia Snowe? AND SHAME ON THE PEOPLE OF MAINE.

[gateley]

13. That's the sense I'm getting reading these responses -- it would mean we lost. nt

[gkhouston]

19. Yes, it would -- but Obama would be able to *claim* victory.

No trigger is necessary. If the insurance companies were going to meet the conditions of a trigger, they'd be able to compete with a public option. It's a shell game.

[gateley]

37. They can claim victory, but we'll know what it really means, it means (as aquart said) we lost. nt

[valerief]

2. Bullshit. Public option kicks in if insurance companies don't "behave."

Who would ENFORCE this damn trigger? How is behaving defined? I'm sure no one would enforce it and insurance companies would have to start bumping off even more grandmas than they do now before the trigger would kick in.

Bullshit.

[gateley]

11. Yikes -- it's worse than I thought --thanks (I think) nt

[Eric J in MN]

3. If private insurance premiums keep going up for another 5 years...

...and the law isn't changed by lobbyists within 5 years, that would "trigger" the creation of a public option.

[gateley]

15. Man, why even bother? Very discouraging. Thanks. nt

[t0dd]

4. An Olympia Snowe and Blue Dog love child. nt

[gateley]

18. Now that it's been explained to me, I agree with you. nt

[d_b]

5. it's a nice way of saying no public option

"if the greedy industry that is at the root of the health care crisis doesn't shape up, we'll pretend to go after them again"

that's what it is.

actually, it's comedy. trigger=comedy.

[gateley]

20. It's more than that (I'm learning) - it's a diss to those of us who were

trusting that we would get real reform, and insulting that they think we will believe this.

[d_b]

30. what's really sad

is that my dumbass dumped over a grand into various democratic party bank accounts last year.

[gateley]

44. Well, it's not over yet, so let's wait and see --

THEN we can engage in self recrimination! :7

You did the right thing. Obama HAS done some good things and we do have some good people. Just imagine if you hadn't? :pals:

[GrantDem]

7. A cop-out from the healthcare corporate whores in Congress -->>

It allows them to say they reformed healthcare while letting the healthcare industry continue to fuck everyday Americans.

[gateley]

21. Excellent! This is the America we've come to know and love! Sheesh. nt

[GrantDem]

33. Other than the "love" part... yep, pretty much.

[elehhhhna]

8. hope it means we all get HC at least as good as Roy Rogers beloved horse got...

but I doubt it.

[t0dd]

12. Hahah.. the Roy Rogers Horse Act of 2009! nt

[Warren Stupidity]

10. That is where instead of health care reform we get

sent to a Roy Rogers restaurant and get fed Trigger.

[KansDem]

14. Let's say you catch me robbing a bank...

...and I say, "Don't make me suffer the consequences of my actions! Let's have a 'trigger!' If I stop robbing banks within the next xyz years, then I won't do jail time. If, however, I'm still robbing banks after xyz years, then I'll go to jail! Deal?"

At least that's how I think it will operate...

[valerief]

17. Yeah, but they have to come up with metrics during that time period.

If we can't count our votes in America, how can we trust the accuracy of those healthcare metrics?

[gateley]

26. You know, it's beginning to occur to me that America can't do ANYTHING

right -- heartbreaking.

[valerief]

27. That's why we're the richest nation. Of course, it's only the richest for the rich. nt

[NMDemDist2]

38. I think it was Churchill who said

America always does the right thing, but only after they've tried everything else first.

[gateley]

41. He nailed it. I'd like to add an addendum: ...and a second, third and forth time. nt

[gateley]

23. EXCELLENT analogy! Thanks!! nt

[Toucano]

29. Good analogy. n-t

[LostInAnomie]

16. Political brinkmanship that allows the insurance companies to escape unscathed.

We're getting fucked over again.

[gateley]

24. My hope keeps dimming day by day. I'm so disappointed. What next? nt

[Ms. Toad]

31. My goal is to make sure people have access to health care

and that access is not limited nor higher fees charged based on pre-existing conditions. Taking the insurance companies out of the picture (or scathing them) would be a nice side benefit - but is not even close to my primary goal.

Changing the rules by which insurance companies are permitted (and currently do) cherry pick the most profitable patients will have a far greater impact on how many people have access to health care in the foreseeable future than creating a government run insurance company.

I don't oppose a public option, and I would strongly prefer a single payer system - BUT if something has to go to get some sort of reform passed, it is far more critical to me that we not tank the prohibition on denying, refusing to cover, or charging different rates based on pre-existing conditions, or on imposing lifetime caps.

[LostInAnomie]

35. "...will have a far greater impact on how many people have access to health care..."

"...in the foreseeable future than creating a government run insurance company."

No, it won't. A public option would cover everyone, and would introduce competition into the market and lower costs. Forcing insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions will do is allow those that can afford insurance to buy it.

[Ms. Toad]

42. None of the current proposals for the public option

cover everyone. Only one is well defined (the house plan)

Public option is a term that is too often bandied about without any understanding that the only thing that is required is that there be a government run insurance option (and not much more is included in the existing bills). A public option doesn't inherently have to accept everyone. A public option doesn't inherently have to charge the same premium to all participants. A public option doesn't inherently have to cover pre-existing conditions. A public option doesn't have to inherently subsidize people who can't afford insurance.

Under the only current proposal with any details, the public option is merely one choice in a pool that includes private insurance options. That pool (both the public and private options) is ONLY open to micro-employers and unemployed individuals starting in 2013, and slowly phased for others after that time. It takes 4 years past 2013 for the pool to be open to everyone.

AND it is not the availability of a public option that has the biggest impact on cost and access. It is the restriction on new coverage (whether from a public or private entity) beginning in 2013 that guarantees access, guarantees premium parity, guarantees coverage for pre-existing conditions, eliminates lifetime caps, imposes mandatory coverage, and provides subsidies. If you pull out all references to the public option, these changes will all still remain, and will make a major difference in access to health care.

A public option can be added to the pool later and improve it - but unless a single payer plan is implemented, if we fail to implement rules requiring the existing (and continuing) insurance system to provide access, coverage, and premium parity everyone who is not young and healthy or rich is toast - (and even that isn't much protection for a real medical calamity).

[fascisthunter]

22. it's sugar frosting on a shit cake

[gateley]

25. It's not even real sugar -- probably high fructose corn syrup. nt

[flyarm]

28. Obama Doesn’t Want You To Know He Knows Public Option Is Popular

Obama Doesn’t Want You To Know He Knows Public Option Is Popular
By: emptywheel

Friday September 4, 2009 11:23 am

Greg Sargent has a really important find.

The White House is circulating happy poll numbers in favor of health care reform.

But the White House is not circulating the happy poll numbers--from the very same polls!!--in favor of the public option.

Okay, so the White House is circulating an upbeat polling memo citing a bunch of public surveys showing that public opinion still tilts heavily in Obama’s favor on health care.

The memo, by Obama pollster Joel Benenson, doesn’t mention the public option (the White House may not be committed to it) and largely cites general numbers showing support for action and for Obama’s plan.

But here’s the funny thing: We went back and checked, and virtually every poll cited in this memo also found strong support for the inclusion of a pulic plan.

Click through for Greg's numbers: the White House doesn't want you to know that 60%, 55%, and 59% (and 43% in a flawed MSNBC poll) of people surveyed want a public option.

So Obama is not just planning to ditch progressives and the rest of the majority of the country in favor of a public option. But he's willing to be dishonest in doing so.

[gateley]

34. Hmmm. Sounds like politic as usual. nt

[HillbillyBob]

32. Epic FAIL!

So more people can end up like I did, unemployed, sick, homeless and disabled.
Trying to get care before I got too sick to care for myself on the streets with no income because I was too sick to work, and buried under hospital bills that I could not pay when my insurance company reneged on their part of the deal. .

So another 18,000 people die every year because they cannot afford insurance.

Mandating that people buy insurance when they can barely afford food is a fucking sin.

We need a real public option not some fantasy that a trigger is gonna make things better if it ever kicks in.

Medicare for all is the proper solution it is what our so called representative government should have started with.

[gateley]

36. Yes! Yes on epic FAIL, yes on Medicare for all.

How are you doing now? :hug:

[madfloridian]

39. Great post up at Fire Dog Lake explaining it clearly.

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7845

"Those that want a trigger for the public health insurance option are saying, "Let's give the insurance industry one more chance to clean up its act." We've been there and done that, fifteen years ago. That was the same argument the insurance industry made in 1994 and we've seen what happened since. Premiums are rising four times faster than wages. People are going bankrupt at the rate of one every 30 seconds due to health care costs. 95% of the insurance markets around the country are anti-competitive. And 14,000 losing their coverage every day.

They didn't clean up their act last time, and they won't this time. And this time, an individual mandate will require us to purchase insurance from these very same companies while we're waiting for the trigger to be triggered, if indeed it ever is.

When the idea of a "trigger" for the public health insurance option was floated a few months ago, I and others explained why the proposal was not a public health insurance option and not health care reform. In fact, a trigger would be nothing but a win for the insurance industry because it serves to kill the public health insurance option outright. The case is the same now that it's being floated again.

Why? There are a multiple reasons.
1. By any rational measure, triggers have already been triggered

2. Triggers as proposed would make the public health insurance option non-functional

3. Triggers will never be triggered

[kenny blankenship]

40. Ok I'll explain it for you. Actually, come back later. For now just go away.

Later -much later- you'll get your explanation. For now DON'T WORRY! just sign on the dotted line and go away.

Later on, when the time is right, I'll explain what a trigger option is. Actually, later I'll agree to agree with you on a time that we can discuss what a trigger if the time is right. You want to know, and I fully support the idea that I should explain what the trigger option is - when the time is right for it. But only if I agree with you at that time that the time is right. So, you'll get your explanation, eventually, but for now just go away.

Got it now?

[AzDar]

43. Another concern: when the Repubes are back in charge (and they will be if this bullshit continues)..

couldn't they just alter the trigger?

So it really IS nothing.