Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dave Lindorff: Sue the Bastards (Dem AGs should also threaten to sue over HCR)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 11:22 AM
Original message
Dave Lindorff: Sue the Bastards (Dem AGs should also threaten to sue over HCR)
Edited on Sun Jan-03-10 11:28 AM by highplainsdem
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Sue-the-Bastards-Why-are-by-Dave-Lindorff-100102-270.html

Very good op-ed piece by Lindorff on why Democratic AGs as well as Repubicans should be threatening to sue over what Lindorff describes a an "execrable bill" that slams unionized workers; states with higher health care costs and insurance plans (such as New York, California, Florida and Connecticut); the "near poor" who are likely to opt to pay the tax penalty rather than get insurance they can't afford; and the vast number of people likely to lose employer-provided health care:

The right has done a much better job of analyzing the health reform bills in House and Senate, with most of the left holding its collective nose and backing the measures, apparently thinking that things can be "fixed later." (We saw how well that idea worked when liberal Democrats went along with President Bill Clinton's and the GOP's trashing of welfare programs back in the early 1990s. "We'll fix it later" was the mantra, but it never got fixed, and millions families are suffering today because of that Democratic treachery.) But the reality is that because of the mandates and penalties in both versions, and the relatively limited penalties for not providing coverage, many employers will probably end up reducing, or worse, dropping health coverage for their employees and taking the penalties, leaving workers stuck with having to buy crummy coverage through the new "insurance exchanges" envisioned in the bills. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that some 10 million workers who currently have employer-provided health care will lose it, but other experts predict that the number could be much higher.

Democratic states whose residents stand to be hurt by this legislation should be preparing to sue to protect their residents. Unions (most of whom have been backing this legislation when they should have been marching on Washington in protest), should instead be threatening to sue if it passes.

Eventually, of course, they will. The courts will be tied up for years in challenges to the inequities and constitutional violations contained in this legislation. Meanwhile, though, Americans are going to get socked with higher tax bills, higher insurance premiums, higher medical bills, and poorer coverage.

What is maddening is that none of this had to happen.

We could have had health coverage for everyone, and at much lower cost than today, by simply expanding Medicare to cover everyone. The reason we don't have Medicare for all is because, with the exception of Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John Conyers (D-MI) and a few other members of the House, and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the Senate, neither the ruling Democrats in Congress, nor President Obama, ever had the integrity and guts to point out that Medicare for All would be a net savings for almost everyone. Yes, expanding Medicare would mean higher taxes for everyone, but thenet financial impact, after factoring in the elimination of many hugely expensive current federal, state, county and municipal health care programs such as Medicaid, veterans care, charity care, etc., an end to private insurance premiums paid by employers and individuals, and the end to workers compensation and embedded health costs such as medical coverage riders in car and home insurance policies, would be positive, not negative.

-snip-

The problem is that the political system is broken. The Democrats elected to majorities in House and Senate, and the Democratic president elected a little over a year ago, don't see their role being to do what the public elected them to do. Rather they see their role as being to prevent the public from getting what it wants, in order to protect the interests of the very industries that are benefitting from the status quo--in this case the insurance companies, drug companies, physicians and hospital companies.

Until Americans rise up and start making politicians accountable to them, what we'll get instead of real reform or, in this case, real health care reform, will be rip-offs, screwjobs and flim-flam, which in the end, after months of sturm and drang is all the current health "reform" legislation really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. no thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes please
(A response to the DLC message, "no thank you".)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. That is my position, as articulated by a professional writer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Champion Jack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. What a crock of steaming bullshit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karmadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. Resistance might make our Corporate Masters mad. We better just take whatever they give us.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Bingo. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. Because Dem AGs want to be Dem Governors and Dem Senators.
It's never been politically healthy to go against President Rahm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-03-10 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC