So ...... what's the general feeling about dropping the "pubic option" and expanding Medicare?

[Stinky The Clown]

I'll just have to wait and see. I'm open minded about this.

My own ideal, from way, way, way back when was very simple: Keep Medicare but change the eligible age from "65" to "birth". I know that's not exactly what is being discussed, but if they start diddling with expanding it, it seems easy enough to *keep* expanding it. And once expanding it, no one would *dare* to contract or deny it.

Anyway, I'm open minded. Where are you?

[AllentownJake]

1. Laughing

Because they will drop the Public Option and do nothing on expanding Medicare. Aren't the conservadems trying to turn Medicare and Social Security over to a bipartisan panel for cuts?

[saracat]

31. I am laughing too.This isn't gonna happen but they will drop the PO

Any word on mandates? Do we still get to pay them? I wouln't be surprised if we do! More is more for the insurance companies? I wonder if anyone now doesn't believe their were "real" back door deals?

[glitch]

33. Or what about "Senate Dem Plan Would Privatize Public Option”

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/12/8/headlines#7

"On Capitol Hill, Senate Democrats have drafted a “compromise” measure that would essentially hand over the so-called “public option” to private insurance companies. Under the proposal, the government would no longer establish a public option to compete with insurers. Instead, the federal Office of Personnel Management would hire the insurance companies to run the health plans."

You can never take your eyes off these DemoCons.

[Echo In Light]

Exactly. It's a predictable, bullshit move that suckers who *want* to believe in, will

[madokie]

2. I'm open minded and I agree with you

[newfie11]

3. It would be a great idea

but it should be for everyone not just 50 and older. If not it still does not solve the problem of high insurance premiums for the under 50 crowd forcing people to go without insurance.

[Bitwit1234]

6. Correct.

One of the reasons for this reform was to force insurance companies to accept everybody, and to give competition so they will have to lower premium costs. If they don't do that most of Americans won't be helped. Medicare type insurance should be made available to all.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

4. Medicare IS the best public option we have

I always thought opening up Medicare was the simple and obvious solution to take care of the uninsured or people who have been priced out with previous conditions, etc. We never had to go through this farce of reform in the first place if the obvious answer had been sought out. But no, because Medicare is true single payer, wouldn't want to expand that at the expense of the for profit leeches, would we?

Allwntown Jake is correct that Medicare is always under assualt with Repubs and Conseradems (love that phrase!) but maybe opening it up will help protect it from those assaults.

All of our great social programs are being threatened. The thread below is a GREAT one about what "they"(you, know, them) would like to do to Social Security.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/7/810692/-The-(Very-Real)-Plot-to-Loot-Your-Social-Security

[Union Yes]

5. Do it yesterday! knr nt

[luckyleftyme2]

10. only if you do it for all ages

of course the insurance companies would love to have just over 50's receive medicare-that leaves them a healthy young pool of suckers to pluck! Imagine the profit spike for them if you dummies voted that in. would it solve anything? absolutely not!
wake up wasn't the golden egg that Bush gave the pharmaceutical industry enough?
we need a public option and a national law that health insurance companies have to be non-profit!

[Lugnut]

30. +1

Medicare for all is the smartest way to go. I don't understand why age parameters need to be there at all.

[Hannah Bell]

35. so corps can extract an income stream from the healthy while letting the public

pick up the tab to treat the sick.

[Lugnut]

36. I know what the corps want.

Medicare for all isn't it. Putting the corps out of bidness is the right thing to do.

[Hannah Bell]

39. i don't know how my post got attached to yours, it was in response to someone asking "why the 50-y/o

limitation".

[Union Yes]

37. Deal! nt

[Gidney N Cloyd]

7. I'm about where you are.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. For me, it would be wonderful as I am uninsured and 58 and yet, I want Medicare for all!

[mmonk]

9. I'm for it IF they don't continue to try and privatize it.

[glitch]

34. YEP. But you know they will... Let them open it up but never take your eyes off of them

And ALWAYS read the fine print. Just like you would with any shady character who you had no choice but to deal with.

[ThomWV]

11. Just in case no one noticed, Medicare is a Single Payer/Public Option system.

[HughMoran]

41. I think we are in shock at who's considering this option

Lieberman? DU was pushing for the Medicare for all option not so long ago, but Lieberman?

:scared:

[donco6]

12. I'm where you are.

Wait and see, but ever-so-slightly hopeful, maybe sorta kinda.

[floridablue]

13. It seems practical to me.

Wouldn't the management and pay system already be in place so that all that would need being done is add the JOBS to perform the work?

[leeroysphitz]

14. Neither course helps me or my family. So my frustration with this damn bill continues to mount.

If this is the best they can do then many of us are going to be sitting at home on general election day (but not on PRIMARY election day!)

[a kennedy]

15. you bet I'm open minded.....and this sounds pretty good.

:applause: :patriot:

[optimator]

16. no matter how pessimistic I am

it is never enough.
So, I EXPECT this to be worse than a watered down p.o.

[mikelgb]

17. If the expand it every 10 years or so

I'm down

[kentuck]

18. Medicare would be a public option.

What are you talking about??

[Stinky The Clown]

22. No ... Medicare would be the holy grial ..... Single Payer

[kentuck]

29. Yes. Single payer is a public option.

and the best one.

[dysfunctional press]

44. it would be 80% of the holy grail.

with medicare, you're still on the hook for 20%(especially when nobody will, or has to, sell you a supplemental policy. i'm 48 and disabled- but until i turn 65, nobody has to(or will) sell me a supplemental policy to cover what medicare doesn't(20%). 20% of something catastrophic would still be catastrophic.

[phantom power]

19. Of all the "foundation for expansion" schemes, this one makes the most sense....

Because it's based on an existing govt program. I think the opportunities for turning it into a mandated private insurance scam are fewer, and that is the scenario that I would find most upsetting.

[Hatchling]

20. Expanding Medicare is a great idea.

I also see where you are coming from, but there are so many younger people out there who are desperately in need of something now, that cannot wait while we fiddle around with stretching the age limit of Medicare down wards slowly.

That strong public option is imperative and Medicare for all is the best solution.

[quiet.american]

21. I'm not quite sure "dropping the public option" actually describes it.

Taking away the excuse for the GOP's (and certain "conservative Democrats") wild-eyed screaming about a "government-run" insurance program, while actually still in essence keeping a government-run insurance program, is a move I can get behind (as well as lowering the enrollment age for Medicare) -- from the NYT:

-----------------------------------

Federal Employees’ Model
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/federal-employees-model/

As Senate Democrats try to devise a government-run insurance plan, or public option, that can get at least 60 votes, some are looking again at a program that has long tantalized policy makers as a potential model: the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

That is the program that provides insurance coverage to more than eight million federal workers, including members of Congress and their dependents.

A team of 10 Democratic senators tapped by the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, to fashion a last-ditch deal on the public option is now studying the federal employees’ plan as a possible blueprint.

The goal would be to provide a menu of private, nationwide insurance plans. The federal Office of Personnel Management would oversee them, conducting the same type of negotiation over benefits and premium prices that it does for federal workers.

The federal employees health plan offers workers an array of different private insurance plans, including preferred-provider networks and lower-cost HMOs. Several of the plans are national in scope — the most popular is a national Blue Cross plan — and benefits are portable, from state to state, and usually can be carried into retirement.

[cilla4progress]

23. When will it take effect?

And are there 2 different plans: FEHC plan AND Medicare?

[alfredo]

24. Lower the age to 26. That's the last year parents would be

able to carry their child on their health insurance.

[hootinholler]

25. They are effectively removing the next largest liability group from the corporate pool

This without the low liability groups contributing to the plan. Essentially I see it as an insurance corporate welfare program.

That being said, it may well be a way to get medicare for all by 2100.

-Hoot

[mainer]

26. Medicare for birth -age 30 first. Cheapest pool.

They're cheaper to insure than 55+ year olds, and it will give you a big pool of contributions to fund it.

[jtrockville]

27. I'd be happy with staged eligibility, so Medicare isn't overwhelmed.

I posted my example of how staged eligibility might work:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7175042&mesg_id=7176089

[Occam Bandage]

28. A much better idea. The "public option" was/is a dead-end.

Expansion of medicare/medicaid not only provides real help to people who need it now, it makes it easy to keep pushing towards single payer. Unlike the "public option," expanding medicare/medicaid is actually a step towards single payer.

[freddie mertz]

32. I am so disgusted at this point, I have just given up.

It's too much crazy to pay attention to anymore.

How did we ever end up with this mess?

I'd suggest lack of leadership and clarity from the top down, but that would ignite the usual flames, so forget I said it.

[Odin2005]

38. It's blatant generational warfare.

The Boomers get Medicare, the rest of us get screwed.

[blindpig]

61. That's right, divide and conquer

But this is one old fart who will cheerfully tell them to shove it up their ass.

[undeterred]

40. there's a "pubic" option?

I just can't keep up.

[Deja Q]

55. If we can't have cost control, then at least we'll have birth control

:yoiks:

[eridani]

42. They've put so many restrictions on the expansion that few would be eligible for it

And I'm not really into throwing under 55 people under the bus. Why not just make Medicare buy-in available to anyone? Or even have a public option that is available to everyone?

[dysfunctional press]

43. it'll probably suck.

'expanding medicare' -let's wait and see what the eligibilty is, and how much it will cost, premium-wise. until then, it's meaningless to even consider.

but- if they allow people 55-65 to 'buy-in', all they're doing is taking the insurance companies' potentially costliest clients, and dumping them and their healthcare costs onto the taxpayers. and we should be happy about this, why...?

[Bonn1997]

45. I think it's a step in the right direction but then we need to run primary opponents against those

Dems who fought the public option.

[dysfunctional press]

46. and in the meantime, they should just scrap this bullshit legislation.

[Bonn1997]

48. But expanding medicare to those 55 to 64 would help millions of people. And no one knows what will

happen in 2010. We need to jump on the opportunity to those millions aged 55 to 64 while we can. My reasoning is simply that helping no one from ages 0 to 64 is worse than helping millions who are in the 0 to 64 range (the 55 to 64 end of the range).

[dysfunctional press]

49. they haven't even said what the buy-in price will be for those people...

don't you understand what a HUGHgift this is to the insurance industry...?

this will allow them to get rid of their costliest customers, and put the responsibility on the taxpayers

they get fatter profits- we get bigger debts.

NO THANKS!

[Bonn1997]

51. If that's the case then the only logical position is to be undecided until getting more details on

the medicare expansion. How can you be against it before knowing the answers to the questions you posed?

[dysfunctional press]

52. past experience tells me so.

some of us have learned to read the writing on the wall...

but that's okay- you'll catch on eventually.

btw- have you told anyone that's excited about the prospect that they should remain undecided until the details come out? there seem to be a few of them out there.(and believe me- they're 'out there'.

[Bonn1997]

53. This is an agreement that the 5 progressive Democrats have endorsed. Bernie Sanders has endorsed it

even though he says it's not ideal. What has your past experience told you about the success of programs Bernie Sanders endorses?

[dysfunctional press]

54. he's not my senator, so i'm not all that familiar with his record...

feingold appears to be against it, however.

[Le Taz Hot]

47. It sucks.

As if DU wasn't divided by age lines already, this will REALLY get the "I wish you boomers would just hurry up and die" crowd going.
They've already started. :puke:

[shadesofgray]

57. I've noticed, and it's scary.Talk about death panels....

[fasttense]

50. So where is the cost control?????

I thought the public option was suppose to prevent the kings, I mean CEOs of health insurance corporations, from jacking up premiums every time they go take a piss. What's stopping them from doing that in this new switcheroo?

Think about it. Suppose you are a 28 year old young woman. You will be required by LAW to pay a king's, I mean a CEO's, salary with your premiums, or pay a fine. What do you get for your money? Well you do NOT get: contraceptive coverage, abortion coverage, dental coverage.

It is a total waste of a young woman's money. Thanks congress, that's change for the worse.

[shadesofgray]

56. PO was supposed to keep the insurance companies "honest."

Obama stressed that repeatedly.

Obviously, Medicare hasn't been keeping them "honest." And obviously, Obama didn't mean a word of it when he said he wanted the public option.

Medicare won't be any real competition for the insurance companies. It will still be business as usual.

[PVnRT]

58. Cynical

I see opening up Medicare (at who knows what cost) to those 55-64 as a toothless compromise intended to capture the votes of that age group, who tend to vote more than younger people.

[varelse]

59. It hurts too much to laugh

they're not even discussing opening Medicare to *everyone*, only to those 55 or older.

[Ganja Ninja]

60. It sounds to me like it's an insurance relief act.

Medicare takes on more of the older more expensive customers and the younger less costly will be forced to buy private health insurance. It's a win/win for the health insurance companies.

[walldude]

62. I am so sick of lowering my expectations

and "keeping an open mind". They just keep whittling away at the bill until there is nothing left but a gift to the insurance companies.