We have been punked, or perhaps not...

[nadinbrzezinski]

Let me 'splain this.

Back in 1935 a Democratic party chose the center as well, when crafting the Social Security Act. The left, (and I am proud to call myself a lefty too), at the time railed against FDR since it did not go far enough. Granted, what some folks wanted went very far... these days it is the third rail of US Politics, and has only gone farther over the years.

Back in the 1960s Medicare passed by a very thin margin. Why? The republicans would never vote for socialist ideas, and just like SS they didn't. And not all Democrats were convinced voting for this was a good idea. Can you say third rail?

I hate politics in the sense that what I want (single payer, public system, no insurance companies) can realistically pass in the US. What can pass in the US is a system closer to Germany, the Netherlands or Switzerland. That is a highly regulated private system.

In an ideal world a public system would be enacted tomorrow and we would not even be having this discussion, but we do not live in an ideal world, and the right still holds too much power. Hell, the US is a very narrow political system. Yes our LEFT is center in most places, and our Right is falling off the table... and the true radical left does not exist in this country, at least within the political system.

But I choose to live in reality and if this passes, I do expect some fees, after all you need to pay it and Americans do not believe that anything you get "for free" can be good. Never mind the only way you can get that system funded by taxes, you need to take over health care and make it government run. That will not happen, not in this country... so get over it. Now we can work to make any thing that is passed, better and closer to our ideal system. But a public, single payer system... we the people may want it... or at least some of us do... but that will not pass in the US... no way, no how... and that is the sad fact, but the real fact.

So instead of looking at Canada, look at Switzerland and Germany. Both have better systems with far better coverage than we do...

And of course I expect the invective from people that do not understand the reality of the US... and you want that reality to change... be willing to fight the good fight, because right now the USSC will gut any limits to corporate money. That is where the real punking is coming from... and yes fascism is here but that is a whole different story. Oh and 2010 will tell us a lot of where the GOP is going, again another story.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. kick

[eridani]

2. Too bad that the proposals on the table have NOTHING in common with any of those countries

Regulations proposed on insurance companies have no limits on premiums, allow profit-taking, and validate age discrimination.

In the Netherlands, adults pay 100 euros/month with NO copays or deductibles, and NO age discrimination or any other kind of discrimination. Nothing proposed by Obama comes anywhere near that.

What in the hell is wrong with VOLUNTARY buy-in to Medicare as the public option?

[Hannah Bell]

3. medicare is going to be defunded. this is the reason for establishing

a new duplicate system.

step by step, same as charter schools & public schools.

your question is the obvious one. it's not desired by those calling the shots.

medicare will be slowly defunded. my prediction.

[leftstreet]

14. 'Medicare For All' becomes 'Insurance For All' n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

18. I think you've got it exactly, Hannah.

That what scares me.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. Voluntary buy in will not pass in the Senate...

When it comes down to it, if the hosue and the Senate can not pass a bill, it won't get there. I like single payer, but it was never going to pass. The public option is probably not going to pass. But the European systems, as they have in Germany and Switzerland (Japan also) provide health care for all and prople don't go bankrupt. And those system also allow profit taking because they are based around large, privatly owned health-care systems. Profits are limited but not outlawed.

In Congress, all but a relative few will not support really progressive bills. This is probably the best we can get now.

Note: That does not mean it won't change for the better. Look at the history of Schip and medicare, both have gotten better over the years.

[eridani]

25. The bottom line is that all proposals so far are too damned expensive

--especially for sick people. No individual adult should be paying more than $200/month for all health care expenses, period.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Becuase quite frankly this is the best we can get RIGHT NOW

doing a whip count.

Look the country is way ahead of its elected "representatives."

But just like SS which didn't go far enough, it will

And SCHIP

And Medicare

And other programs...

The US is a really, REALLY backwards country socially... that is the truth.

[eridani]

26. Then we are screwed. When the non-policy wonk majority sees NO changes through 2 election cycles--

--they will blame the Dems, and anything that got passed will get repealed.

[ddeclue]

5. No I'm quite sure..we just got punked. nt

[Joe Fields]

6. no invective here, nadin, those are exactly my thoughts on this.

I know that what I want is unrealistic, the same as you. I've been around long enough to realize that this may be a pretty good deal, considering the mountain still left to climb to get this passed. The devil, of course, will be in the details. The whiners need to get to work. This outcome is far, far from over.

[Cleita]

7. Unfortunately, systems like in Germany and Switzerland won't pass

here with the climate of protecting insurance company profits. They will not stand for being well regulated and non-profit. We have been thrown under the bus again. The only thing that is going to work in this country is angry demonstrations all the time and every where like we had in the sixties. We are going to have to scare the pants off of our well-fed and unconcerned by the common person politicians. Also, I hope a group of lawyers does some pro-bono and dedicated work in lawsuits for every family who has had someone die because of denial of coverage or lack of coverage until they are sued out of existence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. If you are willing to go for NATIONAL STRIKES

I AM THERE

But the last one was in 1952

hell I participated in the two failed ones during the Bush years... yes kiddies, there were attempts.

So realistically what we will get at the end of the day will be the Frankfurt model... not the Canadian model... that is what is being set here.

[Ozymanithrax]

23. No matter how mad the left gets...

We still can not get enough of them to run a national strike, or even a long term protest.

The civil rights protest of the sixties took years. Brown Vs. the Borad of Education followed more than a hundred other failed bills.

Change is dificult and quick fixes don't exist.

The modren liberal movement is to tied to their computers and comfort. If we had been this way in the 60's, Obama would be sweeping the streets or driving a bus today.

[Joanne98]

10. I don't know. I got a bad feeling about this....

It's almost like they're working together. I want more info on the exchange.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Joanne, quite frankly, you always have a bad feeling

the info on the exchanges is in the bills... read bills. There are several versions of the damn things. but all of them essentially mean... a collection of cheaper policies where the individual can go shop for his or her health care. Since it is you, me and hundreds of thousands of others, they are cheaper since it is a pool of people not one or two or five.

And this is exactly what happens in France, in Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland.

Of course they are also highly regulated so follow the trail of bills in Congress and what comes out of conference.

[liberalpragmatist]

11. Even in other countries, universal coverage came in steps

In most countries, universal coverage came step-by-step.

In Canada, single-payer was just a "public option" offered in a single province. It was expanded greatly in the 50s and 60s such that every province was directed to create a single-payer system (Canadian Medicare).

In France, people are insured through non-profit sickness funds which are heavily regulated by the government. It grew out of a system of cooperatives that was continually expanded over decades. The system itself didn't become truly universal until the late 90s.

In Germany, people are also mostly covered by sickness funds, constructed by Bismarck in the late 19th Century, in which people were insured through giant funds that were funded with employer contributions and taxpayer dollars.

One thing Obama got wrong was his statement that he wanted to be the last U.S. president to tackle health care reform. If he's successful, he'll establish a program that will provide insurance to millions, rein in insurance company abuses, and create a structure that can be expanded and deepened in coming years.

It's very easy to envision, for example, a firewalled exchange and public option being first opened up to larger businesses within the next decade and then to everybody.

[Deja Q]

12. Both you AND Joanne98, above, make good points.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. exactly and what was presented last night

was very close to Bismarks sickness funds.

It is the absolute first step. That said, I almost get it why Obama said he wants to be the last one to deal with this. If he means getting foot in door, he is absolutely right. If he thinks he will be the last one... well let the hilarity follow.

[4lbs]

19. I think President Obama was intimating that get a lot (but yes, not all) of what we want, this year.

Then, over the next 7 years of hopefully two-terms and likewise Democratic control of Congress, they add to it and move it further left in Progressive ideal until it is where we truly want it by the time he leaves office.

[Cleita]

15. Heavily regulated by the government is not going to happen here.

The corporate influence in our government is too strong.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. People said SCHIP could never happen

and I could go on...

[Cleita]

22. SCHIP has been around for a while. It was cut back during the Bush administration

but there was no problem bringing it back because people already had experience with it as being a successful program in the past.

[Hannah Bell]

20. in UK:

"So the great day came - 5th July 1948. On the day itself three-quarters of the population had signed up with doctors under the scheme. Two months later, 39,500,000 people, or 93 per cent were enrolled in it. More than 20,000 general practitioners, about 90 per cent, participated from the scheme's inception."


in canada, saskatchewan passed its bill 1946, national bill to pay 1/2 the costs for any province adopting same = 1957. 1961: all ten provinces.


france: securite sociale passed 1945.

"With the end of the War, France made a leap into the future with the founding of Securite Sociale, a program of health care and pension benefits that remains the basis of the French system today."



each of these post-war institutions are analogous to our medicare. we already have medicare; why aren't we making it more universal?

[Cleita]

21. Exactly. That question is THE question those who could do something about

our health care crisis aren't asking or answering. My only conclusion is that the health care industry has bought the best government to further their interests. Interesting because an average of seventy percent, depending on which poll you are looking at, want universal access to healthcare regardless of their ability to pay, but yet our leadership is pandering to the thirty percent who have vested interests in keeping things going as they are. Very telling in Obama's speech was his reference to health care being one-sixth of the economy. So it's really about profits. In a caring and egalitarian society, health care shouldn't be regarded as part of the economy at all.

[Ozymanithrax]

24. We are not making it universal...

because the American people are not willing to force their government to act.

These changes will only happen when we force our elected officials to do it. In a two party system, the only way to punish your political party for failing to do its job is to remove them from power. The only alternative here are the Republicans. If we had a system more like that of Britain or Canada, people can support a different party, one that is still close to their personal political concept. In the USA we only have two choices, Honey Mustsard (Democrats) and Gray Poupon (Republicans). No matter what, they are both mustard and we all get pooped on.

The question should be, "How do we develop a sustained movement for change that is willing to work for a decade before any success?"

[Hannah Bell]

27. if you look at modern us history, there were two such sustained movements:

labor & civil rights.

in both cases, behind-the-scenes agents were supporting forces.

"how do 'we' develop a sustained movement" = complicated question.

who's got the money?

historically, such movements gain impetus from 1) funds from foreign powers 2) funds from domestic interest groups.

almost never happens: a bunch of people without significant money found & sustain such a movement.

money makes the mare go.