Some People Here Are Getting Hung Up On ONE Phrase from Obama's Speech

[berni_mccoy]

From the speech:

"But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. (Applause.) Now, let me be clear. Let me be clear. It would only be an option for those who don't have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. "

Many here are using this to say it's not a public option since it's not open to everyone.

They are wrong.

What that statement is referring to is that if you have insurance provided by an employer, you are covered by a REFORMED PLAN. Under both bills with a PO currently being considered, HR3200 and the Senate HELP Committee bill, Employers must CHOOSE a QUALIFIED plan from the exchange.

What is a Qualified Plan under the HCR Bill? A plan that meets the same requirements as the Public Option.

And if Insurance Companies cannot provide a competitive solution with the Public Option, what do you think Employers will choose? That's right, they will choose the Public Option.

Obama's statement is intended for Individuals who are not covered by an Employer. And Employers will also be able to choose from the Exchange (in fact they must) and one of their options will be the PO.

So, please, to the people Will Pitt so affectionately called the The Permanently Annoyed And Angry here on DU, please, Chill the Fuck Out.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[joeycola]

2. That part of the speech was weak at best. More like crumbs

tossed to the Progressives in the party. You can not put lipstick on a pig as you tried to do.

[stray cat]

3. Rational and factual - I'm afraid it won't do well on DU - But thanks and recommended!

[berni_mccoy]

4. lol, thanks for your support :-)

[BlooInBloo]

45. Heh indeedy.

[TransitJohn]

5. yeah my employer sponsored plan

will be reformed by screwing me harder and harder. Nice reform.

[Donnachaidh]

6. and those who have insurance are forced to keep it

So the people with over-priced insurance now that might want to change are LOCKED IN, because they DON'T have the option to buy into a public plan.

It's beginning to stink like FR here when people are told to STFU and go to the back of the bus. The cheerleaders must be so proud of themselves. They learned from the other side, didn't they? :sarcasm:

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Are you talking about private insurance or over-priced employer provided insurance?

[Donnachaidh]

18. private insurance AND employer insurance

There are people who have employer-provided insurance that is laughable, and non-affordable. And the poor slobs who try to buy it on their own that have to have deductibles in the thousands of dollars, and 80/20 co-pays on top of that.

Wait four years and then not be able to buy into a public option, which in all likelihood will be written by the insurance execs who contribute to campaigns? Yeah - that's the CHANGE we can all believe in, right? :sarcasm:

[sinkingfeeling]

61. If you were to read the drafts, you would find that there is a table of government assistance to

those who cannot afford insurance. It goes up to something like an income of $66K for a family of four. There are very few policies written in this country that aren't at least 80/20. Most cap the out-of-pocket expenses at $1000-$5000 a year. Co-pays and deductibles have risen yearly. That's the problem. It's what's causing employers to drop insurance coverage, breaking the bank on Medicare/Medicaid, and pricing people out of the market.

I have a contract from 1973 that says corporation XXXX will provide my health insurance to me for FREE throughout my lifetime, including retirement. You want to know what that means today? As a retiree, I can pay them $783 a month for my single coverage and have $40 office visit co-pays, a $2500 a year deductible, and a cap of $3K on OOP expenses.

[berni_mccoy]

9. Again, you are completely wrong. No one is forced to keep anything. Employers and Individuals

can use the exchange.

Only new plans can be in the exchange and these plans must meet the same requirements as the Public Option.

[Donnachaidh]

14. don't think so toots

but nice try anyway... :eyes:

[berni_mccoy]

16. Read the damn bill.

[Donnachaidh]

20. YOU read it.

And maybe have someone who has dealt with double-dealing insurance companies explain it to you as you go along.

[bushisanidiot]

44. Folks like that are bound and determined to undermine President Obama

no matter what rational facts you throw their way.

After President Obama's health care bill is passed with the public option, these "democrats" will find something else to
spew their hatred of President Obama over.

[seabeyond]

17. it isnt people being unreasonable. it is the wording and where we see we are sittin.

trying to figure it out the best we can.

have we ever been screwed by govt. well, ya....

so when given the words, we should ge a tad bet of slack if we think we are being screwed again

i thought wording clear. you see a window that would allow us insured to change to PO. k. then will sit back and watch

but do you mind, if this once, i may not have a lot fo confidence.

[berni_mccoy]

26. That's fine. But there is far to much Fear Mongering going on here and spreading of lies

in order to discredit Obama or shut down discussion of the PO.

[seabeyond]

30. k. but i have been looking for the out and havent seen any. there are a lot of people

like me actually concerned. people working hard, people putting money into insurance, saving, looking to future and getting old. concerned if this coverage you are putting all this money into will cover us when the time comes and not trusting it.

not everything is about unreasonable or fearmongering. some is legitimate concern

[pinto]

46. Good point about the options, including public, in the exchange. As always, though,

I think the devil will be in the details.

[Luminous Animal]

59. Only small employers will be allowed to use the exchange.

(that covers about 39 million people), the self-employed, & individuals. That's it. Large employers will be required to offer insurance but they will not qualify to be an exchange participant.

[Raineyb]

69. I'm not even sure if I trust the use of the word exchange.

What do they mean by exchange? It sounds like a euphemism for co-op or something equally untenable. A public option needs to allow anyone to join otherwise it's just second tier insurance subject to the whims of whichever administration is in government.

[Luminous Animal]

86. Yep!

[treestar]

48. You're asking for the moon

the idea is to help the uninsured. Now you're moving the bar up to include people dissatisfied with insurance they do have?

[Raineyb]

71. That point was to change the system to benefit EVERYONE

Keeping people in crappy insurance that keeps them from seeking medical care because they can't afford the deductibles doesn't help them. And further dilution the pool of insurers continues to give the power to the insurance companies.

There's a reason why Walmart can negotiate really low prices (for them) on the stuff they sell in their stores and it's not because there is so much competition for their business. It's that they can negotiate prices down because of their size in the market. This plan does not do this.

[LeFleur1]

73. Everyone but Women...

who need abortions or they will die. Their is no money in Obama's plan for that.

He threw women under the bus.

[FLDCVADem]

7. My understanding

is that employers will NOT have to choose from the exchange if they already have plans in place on the day the bill becomes law. I believe that is actually part of the bill itself.

[berni_mccoy]

11. Yes, but those plans have expirations. And tell me, what Employer is going to stick with

an overpriced plan that provides less? They are going to flock to the Exchange to save money. Grandfathered plans are going to be much more expensive. Employers are free to keep paying more though.

[FLDCVADem]

19. using my plan as an example

It costs about $11000/year ($6200 employer, $5000) me. Yes, it's expensive, but I highly doubt that it has "less" than an exchange plan, which are set to be the minimum acceptable standards.

Employers that want to keep employees will offer plans that even though more expensive, will keep the best workers.

[Luminous Animal]

60. Only small employers will be allowed to use the exchange.

And the public option will only be offered through the exchange. Most people are covered by large employers (defined as more than 50 employees) and they can't flock to an exchange because a firewall is built into the system that bars them from doing so.

[lamp_shade]

10. Yuh I... uh... noticed. If it wasn't that comment, the PAAA's

would find some other comment to bitch about. It gets old, doesn't it?

[rug]

12. There are so many to choose from.

[tekisui]

13. What does PAAA stand for?

[berni_mccoy]

15. Permanently Annoyed And Angry

[Donnachaidh]

21. translation - marginalize those with differences of opinions -- a puke trick adopted

by the cheerleaders.

[berni_mccoy]

23. No, just calling you out for what you are. Speaking the truth sometimes upsets people.

[Donnachaidh]

29. translation - marginalizing those with differences of opinion -- an obviously well learned TRICK

Karl Rove would be SOOOOO proud of you! Now sit up and beg, good boy....

[berni_mccoy]

34. Which perfectly describes your first response. Thanks.

[TankLV]

41. By RIDICULING them and CALLING THEM NAMES - just like Pitt...nice...

[BlooInBloo]

47. Bah. I gotta get a better P.R. guy...

Or at least come up with a better line.

:P

[Raineyb]

72. As opposed to the "It's okay if our guy does it" crowd? Your cheerleading

will not serve anyone well. It's called holding politician's feet to the fire. You might try it once in a while.

[kjackson227]

22. Berni, the President had a great night last night, and so did we (the American people)...

I stand behind this president 100%, and I have absolutely no qualms in doing so. So, I'm not going to let a few purists on DU ruin my enthusiasm. President Obama GETS IT, he's absolutely going to do the right thing for the American people. If some can't see that then to hell with them. Have a great day, I know I will :)

[Fading Captain]

24. Apologists like you and Will Pitt can take a flying leap

There are myriad problems with the Obama plan. Not the least of which is, when Obama is drummed out of office in 4 years, this $30 billion windfall for insurance companies will probably become a $100 billion windfall for insurance companies.

I am sorry. But you are asking us to have FAITH that Obama's plan is leading where we want to go. He doesn't even have the courage to say where that is.
He talks about "The Left" like he isn't one of us.
He talks about health care being a consumer issue.
He talks in pro business terms like "health insurance exchange" and competition.
He praises John McCain and all the rest of Republicans.

He is, as John Edwards correctly said couldn't be done, trying to "nice these people to death."
He is a complete compromiser.

And after eight years of Bushco, and eight years of pro-Republican Clinton Rule, and 12 years before that of Reagan-Bush, we need a fighter.

We've got the house, senate and presidency.

Obama and the Dems continue to act beholden to the Republicans.
Why is that?

[berni_mccoy]

27. Sooo... all you bring to the discussion is that Obama = Bush. Yeah, I've heard that nonsense before

And it doesn't come from Democrats or Progressives.

[Donnachaidh]

31. another Rovian response n/t

[berni_mccoy]

33. Oh, I was wrong. In addition to Obama = Bush, Anyone who Disagrees with You = Rove.

Got it now. Thanks.

[Fading Captain]

35. Very Fox Newsy of you

Way to smear without addressing the point.

[berni_mccoy]

54. Oh, there was a point to being called an Apologist and told to take a flying leap?

Cause I missed it.

[Fading Captain]

57. You only read titles -- Not my fault you didn't see the point - so my entire post in the title for u

..

[Inuca]

38. He talks about

"health insurance exchange"! Oh, the horror! Really!

[Odin2005]

40. What utter crap-spew.

[SammyWinstonJack]

50. +1

:applause:

[Postman]

51. I agree with you 100%

We have a Democratic Party that governs to the right of Dwight Eisenhower and a Republican Party that is plain out batshit crazy.

Obama had a chance to really make a difference.

What a huge disappointment.

[Sukie]

25. Kick and recommend.

I also think the freeper who responded was one who couldn't hide in the shadows as a progressive or liberal, but many on here sure try to.

[Junkdrawer]

28. Under the Senate bill, bad coverage is "grandfathered" in...

...

That sounds great, particularly in conjunction with the new set of standards for employer-provided insurance outlined in the House version of reform. Under the bill — known as HR 3200 — employers must provide "essential benefits" to workers or face a stiff penalty. "Essential benefits" includes elements often missing in the fly-by-night plans offered by big employers: drug benefits, outpatient care, hospitalization, mental health, the works. If your employer does not offer acceptable coverage, you then have the right to go into one of the state-run insurance "exchanges," where you can select from a number of insurance plans, including the public option.

There's a flip side, though: If your employer offers you acceptable care and you reject it, you are barred from buying insurance in the insurance "exchange." In other words, you must take the insurance offered to you at work. And that might have made sense if, as decreed in the House version, employers actually had to offer good care. But in the Senate version passed by the HELP committee, there is no real requirement for employers to provide any kind of minimal level of care. On the contrary, employers who currently offer sub-par coverage will have their shitty plans protected by a grandfather clause. Which means …

"If you have coverage you like, you can keep it," says Sen. Sanders. "But if you have coverage you don't like, you gotta keep it."

This grandfather clause has potentially wide-ranging consequences. One of the biggest health care problems we have in this country is the technique used by large employers — Walmart is the most notorious example — of offering dogshit, bare-bones health insurance that forces employees to take on steep co-pays and other massive charges. Low-wage workers currently offered these plans often reject them and join Medicaid, effectively shifting the health care burden for Walmart employees on to the taxpayer. If the HELP committee's grandfather clause survives to the final bill, those workers who did the sensible thing in rejecting Walmart's crap employer plan and taking the comparatively awesome insurance offered via Medicaid will now be rebuffed by the state and forced to take the dogshit Walmart offering.

This works out well for the states, who will get to purge all those Walmart workers from their Medicaid rolls. It also works great for Walmart, since any new competitors who appear on the horizon will be forced to offer genuine and more expensive health insurance — giving Walmart a clear competitive advantage. This little "glitch" is the essence of the health care reform effort: It changes things in a way that works for everyone except actual sick people.

Veteran legislators speak of this horrific loophole as if it were an accident — something that just sort of happened, while no one was looking. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon was looking at an early version of the bill several months ago, when he suddenly realized that it was going to leave people stuck with their employer insurance. "I woke up one morning and was like, 'Whoa, people aren't going to have choices,'" he recalls.

As a means of correcting the problem, Wyden wrote up a thing called the Free Choice Act, which like many of the prematurely sidelined ideas in this health care mess is actually quite sensible. The bill would open up the insurance "exchanges" to all consumers, regardless of who is offered employer-based insurance and who isn't. But Wyden has little hope of having his proposal included in later versions of the bill. Like Sanders, who hopes to correct the committee's giveaway to drugmakers, Wyden won't get a real shot at having an impact until the House and Senate meet to hammer out differences between their final bills. In a legislative sense, the bad ideas are already in the barn, and the solutions are fenced off in the fields, hoping to get in.

...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29988909/sick_and_wrong/print

[berni_mccoy]

32. Those plans are a dead-end. Why would an employer choose to continue to pay more?

When they could go to the exchange and purchase a better plan that is cheaper, one of those options being the Public Option?

That is what will happen to "grandfathered plans".

That is the reality of what will happen.

[Junkdrawer]

37. Your whole post assumes Ron Wyden's Free Choice Act were part....

of current legislation. It is not. I wish it were, but it is not...


...

Enter Wyden. The Free Choice Act is not a health-care-reform bill. It is best understood as a reform of the health-care-reform bill. In particular, it reforms the nature of the Health Insurance Exchange. Under the bills being considered right now, the exchange will be limited to the uninsured, the self-employed and small businesses. Maybe it will be expanded over time. Maybe not. In addition, it is barricaded by what's called a "firewall." The firewall essentially bars individuals from entering the exchange so long as their employers offer them a basic level of health-care coverage.

The Free Choice Act starts by setting the rules for the exchange: Within five years the exchange is open to all employers. More importantly, it's open to all people. The firewall is extinguished. But as the late, great, Billy Mays would say, that's not all!

The key component of the Free Choice Act is called "cash-out." Under the Free Choice Act, if I decide that I don't like any of the health-care coverage options being offered by my employer and would prefer to choose from the many options being offered on the Health Insurance Exchange, my employer has to give me a voucher that covers 65 to 70 percent of the cost of the lowest level of exchange plan. (That is the average portion that an employer pays of his employee's health insurance premiums.) I can take that voucher and, along with whatever money I want to throw in, choose a plan on the exchange.

...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/the_idea_that_could_save_healt.html

[FLDCVADem]

43. Why are you assuming

that the plans in the exchange will be better and cheaper?

[berni_mccoy]

49. Because they will be need to meet specific requirements

No pre-existing conditions
No lifetime caps on coverage
Controlled premium rate
etc.

The plans in the exchange will need to be qualified as called out in HR3200.

And they will be competing with the PO, which doesn't have a profit-driven overhead.

[FLDCVADem]

52. There is no controlled premium rate that I'm aware of

And you're assuming that everyone with employer sponsored insurance doesn't already have something as good or better than what is proposed.

As for the public option, don't count on that going too well. I foresee many doctors refusing to accept it due to reimbursement rates.

[berni_mccoy]

53. The controlled rate will be the rate of the PO.

And it sounds like there is nothing that will convince you that PO will be worth while. I know other people who think that way too.

[FLDCVADem]

55. No, it's that

you're going back and forth between talking about just the public option and all the options in the exchange.

While I support a public option, I don't believe that it is going to be the panacea that so many see. Right out of the gate, I see many doctors refusing to accept it. I was discussing the issues with our doc last week, and he flat out said that he wouldn't accept a public option plan in his practice. Maybe he's the exception, but I'm not so sure.

[berni_mccoy]

84. The Public Option IS An Option IN THE EXCHANGE. That's what makes Private Insurance COMPETE.

That's the whole point. The Exchange is available to everyone (employers and individuals not covered by an employer). One of their choices IS THE PUBLIC OPTION. That's how premium rates will be controlled.

[Odin2005]

36. Quit talking sense!

Don't you know that you are supposed to go around screaming "BETRAYAL" like a chicken with it's head cut off? :sarcasm:

[TankLV]

39. Was it "Good Evening."?

some people didn't listen after that...

[bushisanidiot]

42. Outstanding post! You've explained it PERFECTLY!

I thought I heard Bill Clinton saying something about just making sure to get a health care bill passed now and we can make changes to it later.. cuz once the american people get something good from the government, they won't want to turn loose of it (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, V.A. benefits, etc.)

I think this is a REALLY GOOD START! President Obama has done more for us in his first 7.5 months than any president in the last few decades have done and I think we need to support him and trust him more than we have been. Some here want his head on stick right along with the repukes.. after 7.5 months on the job!! INSANE!!!!

[Spazito]

56. Exactly!

It is the same old, same old with the same posters. From day 1 of the President's term, they have posted negative posts and OPs and they will continue to do so no matter the issue. The PAA are simply irritating and of little consequence, imo.

[Luminous Animal]

58. I don't think you are right.

The way I read the bill, only employers with fewer than 50 employees, the self-employed, and individuals without insurance will be allowed to choose the exchange option and the public option will only be offered within the exchange; thus, the vast majority of citizens who are currently insured by their employer will be barred from choosing the public option unless they pay 100% out of pocket for their premiums.

[Junkdrawer]

64. YOU are correct. And Ron Wyden is trying to correct this with the Free Choice Act...

...

Enter Wyden. The Free Choice Act is not a health-care-reform bill. It is best understood as a reform of the health-care-reform bill. In particular, it reforms the nature of the Health Insurance Exchange. Under the bills being considered right now, the exchange will be limited to the uninsured, the self-employed and small businesses. Maybe it will be expanded over time. Maybe not. In addition, it is barricaded by what's called a "firewall." The firewall essentially bars individuals from entering the exchange so long as their employers offer them a basic level of health-care coverage.

The Free Choice Act starts by setting the rules for the exchange: Within five years the exchange is open to all employers. More importantly, it's open to all people. The firewall is extinguished. But as the late, great, Billy Mays would say, that's not all!

The key component of the Free Choice Act is called "cash-out." Under the Free Choice Act, if I decide that I don't like any of the health-care coverage options being offered by my employer and would prefer to choose from the many options being offered on the Health Insurance Exchange, my employer has to give me a voucher that covers 65 to 70 percent of the cost of the lowest level of exchange plan. (That is the average portion that an employer pays of his employee's health insurance premiums.) I can take that voucher and, along with whatever money I want to throw in, choose a plan on the exchange.

...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/07/the_idea_that_could_save_healt.html

[berni_mccoy]

68. Read it IN THE BILL Right here: Section 202, paragraph (e) subsection (3)

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

LARGEREMPLOYERS.—
(A) INGENERAL.—Beginning with Y3, the
Commissioner may permit employers not de-
scribed in paragraph (1) or (2) to be Exchange- eligible employers.

[Junkdrawer]

74. Read pg. 115 of the Senate Bill - Employees offered coverage are locked out...

http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

And, when I read Obama's word from last night, it looks to me like he supports the senate version:

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.

[berni_mccoy]

77. You're going to have to cite it because that language isn't in the bill

In fact, quite the opposite. Employers are eligible and the size qualification depends on the state. Both Bills must be merged, and we must push for the adoption of the section under HR3200 that phases in all employers.

[Luminous Animal]

80. As the bill quite clearly states...

other employers may be phased in. But then again, may be not.

In your OP, you stated this:
"Under both bills with a PO currently being considered, HR3200 and the Senate HELP Committee bill, Employers must CHOOSE a QUALIFIED plan from the exchange."

And you are just plain wrong. But you didn't let your cluelessness come in the way of bashing other DUers.

[Luminous Animal]

75. (B) Phase-in

"In applying subparagraph (A), the Commissioner may phase-in the application of such subparagraph based on the number of full-time employees of an employer and such other considerations as the Commissioner deems appropriate."

Clear as mud.

[Arkana]

62. But no don't you see that's wrong because AAAAAAAGGGGGGG

[ddeclue]

63. No I'm hung up over the non-commital to a public option - NO LINE IN THE SAND

as in you don't send me a public option and I'll veto it.

He did that for adding to the national debt - he did NOT do it for public option. It was more in the vein of "hey here's a suggestion..." not exactly inspiring.

[berni_mccoy]

65. I think you stopped listening at Good Evening. Obama said very clearly that the Bill MUST

have a Public Option or BETTER.

And since he's already rejected Baucus's idea of a co-op, that only leaves the PO.

[Luminous Animal]

67. When will you address the fact that you are wrong.

The exchange will be only open to enroll small businesses and individuals. Large businesses will be required to purchase insurance for their employees but they will not be allowed to participate in the exchange.

[berni_mccoy]

70. I'm RIGHT! Read it IN THE BILL Right here: Section 202, paragraph (e) subsection (3)

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

LARGEREMPLOYERS.—
(A) INGENERAL.—Beginning with Y3, the
Commissioner may permit employers not de-
scribed in paragraph (1) or (2) to be Exchange-
eligible employers.

[Junkdrawer]

76. Read pg. 114-115 of the Senate Bill - Employees offered coverage are locked out...

5) QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘qualified individual’ means an individual who is—

...

(v) not eligible for coverage under employer-sponsored coverage (except as provided under
sub-paragraph (B).

...

http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

[berni_mccoy]

79. You are confused. An Employer-sponsored coverage CAN BE the Public Option.

[Luminous Animal]

83. For small employees only which translates to

39 million workers.

[Luminous Animal]

78. What part of "may" do you not understand?

Y3 is 2016, 7 years from now and you ignore the rest of it...

"(B) PHASE-IN- In applying subparagraph (A), the Commissioner may phase-in the application of such subparagraph based on the number of full-time employees of an employer and such other considerations as the Commissioner deems appropriate."

The may-be phase in will not be at the discretion of an employer and it will be subject to restrictions.

[berni_mccoy]

81. Wrong. May = Option. And it's not the discretion of the employer. It's the Exchange commission.

What Employer isn't going to use the Exchange? They would be stupid not to.

[Luminous Animal]

85. It is up to the Commissioner to expand the eligibility pool

not the employer. In 2016, it will be up to the Commissioner to decide the rules for that expansion. The Commissioner may decide to expand the eligibility to employers with 50 or less employees, or the Commissioner may not. What employer isn't going to use the exchange? Those which are barred from doing so.

[Spoonman]

66. The "phrase" I have a problem with

is the one NONE of them have spoken.

That phrase would be: ALL LAWYERS GET FUCKED! or LOSER PAYS!

Revamping the insurance coverage is not the solution, tort reform is the #1 solution.

I deal with this shit every day, and a significant cost factor built into premiums for individuals, hospitals and medical professionals is litigation costs .

These cost have been left unaddressed by the politicians in order to protect their own interests i.e. other lawyers.

*****

For those of you who try to dispute me on this... get fucked, I spend 4-6 hours a day dealing with litigation issues.

I see the numbers and until you deal with it like I do, you are talking pure shit!

D.C. is full of lawyers, and thats why they refuse to address this cost factor!

[Sebastian Doyle]

82. Some cheerleaders here are completely ignoring the first half of Obama's speech.

The part where he talked about corporate mandates. Which cannot coexist with a TRUE public option, because if you are forced to pay a corporation, that's not a choice.