After ignored voters send us to electoral Siberia, will the GOP repeal the Mandate?

[Faryn Balyncd]

(. . . . like they did in Massachusetts?)




(Ooooops!.....that was Rush's, and Sean's, and Laura's, and Mark's favorite presidential candidate who ENACTED the Mandate in Massachusetts.

What was I ever thinking?)

:sarcasm:

65% to 72% of voters favor a "public plan like Medicare" available to Americans under 65, while 20% to 26% oppose.

But only 34% of voters believe the current no-public-option plan is "better than passing nothing".

Even Scott Brown voters favor a Public Option. 82% of 2008 Obama voters who voted for Brown, favor a Public Option. Yet each of these voters (out of disgust, a sense of betrayal, or desperation) voted for a Senate candidate who vowed to kill the current bill).

So, if we continue to ignore the voters who overwhelmingly favor a public plan, and actually pass into law a no-public-option mandate. . . . . and betrayed voter's send us to electoral Siberia in November . . . . . . can we then count on the party of Mitt Romney to repeal the Mandate?

Or (not wholly unlike W's wars) will the no-public-plan Mandate outlast us...to remain our bitter and enduring legacy?




Do we really want to go over that cliff?





:kick:


"If Barack Obama’s bill gets changed to exclude the public entities, it is not health insurance reform…it rises and falls on whether the public is allowed to choose Medicare if they’re under 65 or not. If they are allowed to choose Medicare as an option, this bill will be real health care reform...."

- Howard Dean

[upi402]

1. If Dems FAIL on public option, we wil NEVER in our lifetimes

get Health Care Reform. What we have is Medical Insurance Company corporate socialism. And the Clinton-Republicans know it.

[Faryn Balyncd]

2. agreed.........and the public plan HAS to be part of the original bill.

A no-public-plan mandate sets us on a coarse more likely to end with Zeke Emanuel's avowed goal of the gradual privatization of Medicare.


Passing the lobbyist written bill with the goal of "tweaking" it to add a public option later is a diversion.

[TheIdiot]

3. ditto...

we need a public-option... just don't need to destroy the party (or bankrupt the country) to get it... re-boot and focus... i mean, WTF???

[LibDemAlways]

4. The GOP is giddily anticipating that the Dems will enact a no public

option mandate. It's a win-win. The repukes secretly love it because it enriches the ins. companies and big pharma, and at the same time they can honestly say to outraged voters, "Don't blame me. I didn't vote for it." They have the Dems doing their dirty work. Sucks for us.

[DisgustedInMN]

5. K & R