I am a life long, loyal Democrat but I sat out Bill Clinton's last election

[Raven]

because I was so disgusted with him and I'll sit out Obama's next election if this HCR bill turns out to be what some of you folks say it is tonight. I am going to wait and see. If this place is in its usual form, the HCR bill is not as bad or as good as portrayed here. We'll see.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arcadian]

5. It's Obamas fault

[Jennicut]

2. I have never sat out any Presidential election since I was eligible at 20 in 1996.

I voted Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama. And I live in CT. You never know, I don't want a Rethug near the WH.

[WCGreen]

7. Carter Carter Mondale Dukakis Clinton Clinton Gore Kerry Obama

Nine Fucking elections and only two old fashioned dem's amongst them...

[laughingliberal]

39. Those were exactly my votes! Was 17 when McGovern ran and campaigned for him

but first presidential election I was eligible to vote in was 1976.

[sufrommich]

55. My voting record too. nt

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

11. Ha! you didn't vote for Dukakis...zomg that was some depressing shit.

[Jennicut]

24. Yup, I was 12. But I liked Gore and Biden back then. My parents loved Reagan.

I thought he was an old fuddy-duddy confused geezer.

Funny, Dukakis fell off the map but Gore and Biden went on to become our VP's.

I think I was born being into politics and I can't believe how much I remember about that campaign. I remember Gary Hart getting caught on the boat with Donna Rice and Dukakis riding the army tank.

[RKP5637]

28. Dukakis riding in that tank really did him in... it was just plain silly looking. n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

37. Sigh. That was my first Presidential election. eom

[Codeine]

40. Mine too.

We got started on a sour note.

[laughingliberal]

41. Oh, God, it was! I campaigned for Gore for the nomination in 1988

and it was hell trying to get through the campaign for Dukakis after he won the nomination.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

15. I was off by 1 year in 2000, but I did learn a lesson from that election.

And I will always vote and always vote Democratic.

[dchill]

20. Wow!

Four winners in a row! What a streak!
;)

[H2O Man]

3. I won't sit it out, but

I will not be able to get 10% of the people I got to vote for democrats in '08 to do so again.

[havocmom]

16. ain't it the truth

I don't see myself even trying next time.

[RKP5637]

26. Same here, I will not be able to get the republicans I did last time to vote democratic. I

know that for a fact.

[dmallind]

54. Herein lies the dichotomy

We have one set of gloomy gusses saying they won't support Obama because he isn't liberal enough, and another saying that the Republicans who gave him a shot in 08 will never vote for him again.

How can both be correct? If he is too much of a right winger why won't the right wingers who presumably didn't know that in 2008 but voted for him anyway think "well gosh I was right! Look at how corporatist and Republican Lite that guy is!". If the Republicans who voted for him are too disappointed that they won't repeat it, wouldn't it necessarily be because he is further to the left than they were persuaded of in 08?

[RKP5637]

64. My guess is the republicans have gone farther RW than in 2008, and the memory

of Bush is fading. Now any ills they perceive they attribute to Obama. Most republicans I know at least have fundamental difficulties in thinking with an open mind, that is unfortunate.

[ibegurpard]

4. I didn't even though I was unhappy with him

but I was a lot younger and more naive then.

[DFLforever]

6. I've been voting for Democrats since 1960 and

Pres Obama is the first one I've been completly happy to have voted for...
and yes, that includes JFK.

So I guess I balance you out..

[readmoreoften]

14. No, you don't "balance her out." Learn some math. 2-1=1.

There were TWO VOTES for Obama, take away ONE VOTE, equals ONE VOTE. If it Equals TWO VOTES, then it would be balanced.

On the other hand, since many people who voted for NIXON and REAGAN will be encouraged to vote for Obama, he may be balanced out after all.

[DFLforever]

19. learn language

you think I'm talking math... I'm talking attitude.

[readmoreoften]

8. I've never sat out an election and never not voted for the [D] party. This will be my first time.

My family's first time as well. Really, come on. As if this cheap bipartisan nonsense could hold back the Republicans for long. Obama's mandate was a center-left mandate. His failure to honor that mandate has squandered his presidency. Until we have a real left opposition, we will continue moving right.

[Birthmark]

48. Agree on all counts.

Surprisingly so does my wife. She has NEVER failed to vote in any election -even silly local crap- and has ALWAYS voted Democratic. She says she's done. So am I.

Hell, we're so far out in the boondocks now that it really doesn't matter to us. It's not like much will be different out here if civilization collapses. :)

[readmoreoften]

9. Dupe.

.

[kiva]

10. I've voted in every presidential election since 1976.

I will not be voting for Barrack Obama again.

[frylock]

12. kerry and obama are the only dem presidential candidates i've ever voted for..

looking forward to going back to voting third party again.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. I voted 3rd Party twice. 1968 and 2008. Between times, except for McGovern, I held my nose.

My nose holding days are over.

[grantcart]

17. Friendly suggestion

Stop reading people's opinion of the bill and start reading original documents.

The level of misinformation about the bill is unparalleled.

The bill is not a home run, at best its a double but it gives a chance to get home - to continue to increase federal responsibility in health care.

Not going to tell you what to think but will give you two things to read:

1) CBO says that 26 million people that currently are not uninsured will have access to insurance exchanges and 15 million would be added to medicaid and CHIP

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=446

the number of nonelderly people who are uninsured would be reduced by about 31 million, leaving about 23 million nonelderly residents uninsured (about one-third of whom would be unauthorized immigrants). Under the legislation, the share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage would rise from about 83 percent currently to about 94 percent. Approximately 26 million people would purchase their own coverage through the new insurance exchanges, and there would be roughly 15 million more enrollees in Medicaid and CHIP than is projected under current law. Relative to currently projected levels, the number of people purchasing individual coverage outside the exchanges would decline by about 5 million. The number of people obtaining coverage through their employer would be about 4 million lower in 2019 under the legislation, CBO and JCT estimate.

The proposal would call on OPM to contract for two national or multi-state health insurance plans—one of which would have to be nonprofit—that would be offered through the insurance exchanges. Whether insurers would be interested in offering such plans is unclear, and establishing a nationwide plan comprising only nonprofit insurers might be particularly difficult. Even if such plans were arranged, the insurers offering them would probably have participated in the insurance exchanges anyway, so the inclusion of this provision did not have a significant effect on the estimates of federal costs or enrollment in the exchanges.

2) What will these exchanges be like? Who will have control and how much power will they have?



http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/managers-amendment.pdf




(q) Part IV of subtitle D of title I of this Act is
19 amended by adding at the end the following:
20 ‘‘SEC. 1334. MULTI-STATE PLANS.
21 ‘‘(a) OVERSIGHT BY THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
22 MANAGEMENT.—
23 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.— The Director of the Office
24 of Personnel Management (referred to in this section
25 as the ‘Director’) shall enter into contracts with

snip

7 (at) least 2 multi-State qualified health plans through
8 each Exchange in each State. Such plans shall pro9
vide individual, or in the case of small employers,
10 group coverage.
11 ‘‘(2) TERMS.—Each contract entered into
12 under paragraph (1) shall be for a uniform term of
13 at least 1 year, but may be made automatically re
14 newable from term to term in the absence of notice
15 of termination by either party. In entering into such
16 contracts, the Director shall ensure that health bene
17 fits coverage is provided in accordance with the
18 types of coverage provided for under section
19 2701(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Public Health Service Act.
20 ‘‘(3) NON-PROFIT ENTITIES.—In entering into
21 contracts under paragraph (1), the Director shall
22 ensure that at least one contract is entered into with
23 a non-profit entity.
24 ‘‘(4) ADMINISTRATION.—The Director shall im25
plement this subsection in a manner similar to the
56
BAI09R08 S.L.C.
1 manner in which the Director implements the con
2 tracting provisions with respect to carriers under the
3 Federal employees health benefit program under
4 chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, including
5 (through negotiating with each multi-state plan)—
6 ‘‘(A) a medical loss ratio;
7 ‘‘(B) a profit margin;
8 ‘‘(C) the premiums to be charged; and
9 ‘‘(D) such other terms and conditions of
10 coverage as are in the interests of enrollees in
11 such plans.
12 ‘‘(5) AUTHORITY TO PROTECT CONSUMERS.—
13 The Director may prohibit the offering of any multi-
14 State health plan that does not meet the terms and
15 conditions defined by the Director with respect to
16 the elements described in subparagraphs (A)

3) Is there anyplace to go and see what these plans might look like?

Yes you can go and see what the OPM does for 2,000,000 federal employees

Go to this link for federal employees and put in your zip code. You will be able to see what kind of plans the OPM currently negotiates for federal workers in your neighborhood.

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/search/plansearch.aspx

Don't have the latest information on the subsidies but the report is that the amount of subsidies went up in the final bill


In those links above you will find that the bill does the following


Headline points already promoted


* Extend health insurance coverage to 31 million more Americans, including 14
million lower-income, working people through Medicaid
* Prohibit insurance company discrimination based on gender or pre-existing
condition -- and make sure you can't lose your insurance when you get sick
* End the upward, unsustainable increases in insurance premiums
* Increase funding for community health centers in 10,000 communities across the
country, enhancing primary care for more than 25 million people who have
traditionally been uninsured or underinsured
* Close the prescription drug "doughnut hole" for seniors
* Require insurance companies to spend at least 85% of their income on patient
care, not executive pay or profits
* Cut the federal deficit by $132 billion, according to the Congressional Budget
Office


In addition there are a laundry list of other health care projects that progressive would be happy about if they were offered on their own.

* Increaces CHIP
* Expands Health Care for Native Americans


Tackles the critical backassward incentives that have pushed US costs out of control

* Eliminates co pays for preventative care/tests so that more people will get earlier diagnosis and much cheaper treatments
* Pilot program to find a way to transition from "pay for services" to "pay for outcome".
* Modernize Medical record keeping to reduce costs

Controls gross margin, net margins and plan profits



But read it for yourself.

[sabrina 1]

53. The bill does not extend coverage to 30 million uninsured.

That statement implies that the government is providing them with insurance, like every other modern democratic society. It is deceptive language and I've had to explain it many times to people who actually thought that is what it meant.

The bill forces people who cannot afford coverage (unless you're a rightwinger and believe they are just selfish, lazy, no-good Lieberals who want the rest of us to pay for them) to pay for cheap coverage. That does not translate to health CARE! Those premiums will have huge deductibles and co-pays and will most likely be pure profit for the crooked Insurance Industry as most of those people will not be able to use them.

And if they do not pay, this Democratic Congress went even further than any Republican would have dared and turned the IRS into a collection agency for Big Insurance. And if they still cannot pay, they are threatened with jail.

That is why I oppose this bill. That, and the fact that we were lied to, I don't believe in rewarding liars. And the fact that there is simply no excuse for why there will not be a PO in the bill. None, zero, all excuses have been eliminated. This is a 100% Democratic Bill which they are going to pass using Reconciliation they eliminated every Amendment that did not reward the Insurance Corps. It is simply outrageous, an open slap in the face to those who supported them.

Anyhow, thanks for the links. I am just sick of Washington's deceptions, and the use of language that is chosen carefully to deceive people.

[grantcart]

67. There are multiple factual errors in your post

you neglect the fact that there are hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies, which news reports announce have been increased in the final bill.

Those premiums will not have huge deductibles and copays, and you cannot sort a credible expert that will agree with this error. By expanding the pool and increasing the risk pool the plans will become more affordable. The MLR will be much lower than it currently exists in the US. For the plans in the exchange OPM will have the authority over price, MLR, profit and coverage. I have cited the language in the bill that authorizes it, I have given you a link that shows what OPM currently does for federal employees. You have cited nothing.

They cap the copays so medical bankruptcies will be a thing of the pass.

Fines for non participation have been reduced in the final bill and their implementation delayed.

You can continue to wallow in misinformation or you can read the bill and find out why Sanders, Dean and every progressive Senator and Congressman are voting for this bill.

[sabrina 1]

68. Subsidies, tax dollars that apparently ARE available

and should have been used to go directly to public program. Instead those subsidies will pass through the greedy hands of the corrupt Insurance Industry where as much as they can take out for profit, will go into their pockets. Explain if you can, this detour of Public Money to the very people Obama claims are such bad guys?

And don't bother telling me about the cap, that now they can only take 20% instead of 30% of premiums for profit, and of course, the 'we'll fix it later and make it only 10%'.

I Fines, punishment for not being able to afford healthcare, and I know dozens of people in that position. They simply don't have the money to lay out, and wait for the bureacracies being created to get around to re-embursing them. Already, some doctors do not accept patients on medicaid because it takes so long to get paid and sometimes, they don't get paid if it is decided that the patient doesn't qualify for the program. That too, was not meant to happen, but it does and I again, am familiar with it. Not only are doctors and hospitals left without payment, patients have to come up the money themselves, and often end up either dead or in bankruptcy. There is absolutely NOTHING that will prevent Insurance Corps, whose main function is profit, from finding ways to preserve as much of those subsidies as they can. They wrote the bill. They paid hundreds of millions of dollars to get it the way they wanted.

You can go on believing in the myth that the poor and working class won't be victimized once again by this maze of bureaucratic hoops they will have to jump through in order to even figure out what they are entitled to, and by the for profit vultures who are now in the mix.

Otoh, it will benefit Private Insurance to have the government pay out more subsidies as the more tax dollars they can get their hands, the richer they will be.

I know very well what is in the bill. I also know that it is a scam. Every scam has some 'good in it', it wouldn't have defenders and investors if it didn't. The 'good' things, in your estimation, will turn out in the long run, to be just like all the other 'good things' pitched by salesmen/lobbyists when government money goes into private hands.

If I were a greedy profiteer, I would right now be setting up a non-profit medical center, faith-based, to get my hands of money that for decades the Private Ins. dreamed of getting. Medicaid funds. A dream come true for them.

Rules governing Wall St. did nothing to stop the corruption. Rules government the Oil Industry, or Defense Contractors, have done little to stop the graft. Money trumps all and I oppose this Congressional validation of an industry that does not belong in our health care system, as a result of Congress monetary relationship with them.

You are free to keep trying to find ways to justify it. I am persuadable by the crumbs we are supposed to accept.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

18. Might not have to sit this one out,

I remember Obama say something a little while ago about a one-term-president... here it is...

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/president-obama-good-term-president/story?id=9657337
"I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president," he told ABC's "World News" anchor Diane Sawyer in an exclusive interview today.

I wonder what Dem will run!

[leftstreet]

21. I'm betting it'll be Hillary

I think that's the deal

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

58. Wasn't Hillary was given Secretary of State so she would not run in 2012?

[amborin]

30. as it's turning out, he'll be neither

[upi402]

22. same and same

Wont vote corporatist. Brown and early Nader for me. Kerry when my vote was needed in my state to keep a Rethug from getting our electors. Hope my reasoning is becoming clearer to more and more Dems by now. But most here wont see much benefit until 1014. Those with a sick child will, or small business.

Working class, "FUCK OFF AND DIE... suckers!"

[RKP5637]

23. I have always voted (decades) to try to keep the republicans out... Sometimes I'm

not pleased with the choices, but I'll be damn if I'm giving the republicans my vote. For me, I will just not cave in that way. And I will work in the primaries for the democratic candidate I think best, but if it's not them, I will still vote democratic because IMO the alternatives are dreadful.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[depakid]

29. That's EXACTLY what a lot of people will be doing- either that or voting 3rd party

Better hope that the administration's new allies among the health insurers, PhARMA and Wall Street make up the difference when it's time to put boots on the ground and GOTV.

[Ramulux]

33. Nice

Exactly what i was thinking

[EFerrari]

34. The 101st Chairborne has been heard!

LOL

[readmoreoften]

52. Because "voting" is doing the hard work of democracy. :eyesroll:

Try organizing a protest or a labor strike. As if your "vote" for Democrat or Republican shapes the future. Clearly, they do what they want without a bit of concern about you or imput from you. ESPECIALLY because you'll vote for them no matter what they do--and you openly admit it.

[FrenchieCat]

27. You should do what you've got to do to make your point.

I mean, since you are so miserable,
might as well take us all with you.

[bigwillq]

31. Why sit out? No one says you have to vote for Obama.

But vote for someone. Heck, vote for me!! :)

[ScreamingMeemie]

35. I'm in! You for President!

I'll even knock on doors. :)

[bigwillq]

63. You can be my campaign manager!

:hug:

[lonestarnot]

32. I've never sat out an election and I don't intend to break my streak.

I still desire democracy and that's why stars streak across the sky, to catch the dreamer's eye.

[sandnsea]

36. It's not going to make anyone homeless

and it's not going to provide near enough free health care to people who really need it.

So it's neither as bad as the worst doom and gloomers say, or as good as the cheerleaders say (although I'd say nobody has said it's the best bill we could possibly have).

It's a place to start and for those who never see doctors to start having to deal with the reality of aging and health and how to pay for it.

[ScreamingMeemie]

42. It very well can make one with a preexisting condition homeless.

To think otherwise would be truly obtuse. Check out high risk pool average rates and ask yourself if the average lower to middle class high blood pressure patient could afford that premium, that deductible, all the prescription costs and still keep a house. Be honest.

[sandnsea]

43. If I have to say subsidy one more time

I swear I'm going to come through my screen and shake somebody.

[ScreamingMeemie]

44. You'd be shaking the wrong person... Not enough.

I've made this my life since I lost my insurance in October. It's a nice little pat answer, but it simply isn't enough of a subsidy. So, keep your hands to yourself. Thank you.

[sandnsea]

46. Well if we had got behind the Kennedy bill a year ago

It would be enough of a subsidy.

And when people start buying the insurance, IF it isn't enough, then Congress will quickly hear about it and we'll have to expand the subsidy or insurance companies will have to reduce the premiums. Either way, we'll finally have a national voice to complain.

[ScreamingMeemie]

47. I'll put my money in life insurance.

For my son. This does nothing but reward the wrong people again.

[sandnsea]

50. I'll bet you'd go for Grayson's Medicare Buy-In though n/t

[ScreamingMeemie]

51. Life insurance it is. I've lost hope for change. n/t.

[Skittles]

38. if it mandates in any way forcing to pay to the very crooks causing the problem

it WILL BE as bad as they say

[hfojvt]

45. I didn't sit it out, but also didn't vote for any of the big three

My understanding was that Dole was gonna lose anyway, but there were apparently not enough protest votes like ours to matter. And it's unfortunate that 1994 was not reversed for over a decade.

[Raine]

49. Same here

sad to say, but I can't vote for someone who puts greedy crooked corporations ahead of citizens. :-(

[hobbit709]

56. I have held my nose on more than one occasion since 1972.

But I will still vote.
Anyone that doesn't vote should STFU about what happens.

[asdjrocky]

57. It's looking like I'll sit this one out.

And it really looks like the 22 people in my neighborhood I registered to vote will probably sit this one out too, unless we see some real change and we see it fast.

[ThomWV]

59. 3 years from now you will not even remember the HCR debate other than there was a lot of lieing

And that it took forever.

[peekaloo]

60. Actually

I voted for Perot the second time.

[Nye Bevan]

61. President Dole! Yeah! That would have sent a message!

And this time maybe your plan will work! President Palin! That will *really* send a message!

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BurtWorm]

65. Raven, this place is in its usual form.

The bill is probably not as bad and not as good as the opponents among us claim it will be.

Personally, I think it will be good for Democrats if it passes, but unfortunately, it will also be good for the insurance industry. It will be good for Republicans because the enriched industry will shower them with money and they can still pretend to the nuts who elect them that they voted against socialism. The Dems have exposed themsleves to be utter weaklings as usual. If the bill doesn't pass, that will only be reinforced. If it does pass, they need to have pressure put on them to get a public option bill through. And they need to figure out how to outsell Republicans, to stop trying to be reasonable about this and make the American people fear NOT having a public option. Because the American people are such fucking dolts, they won't do anything unless you scare them into it.

[Urban Prairie]

66. Great, exact revenge by apathy or instead by voting for a virtually certain 3rd party loser.

Obama has served only about a quarter of his first term, it doesn't please me what has (hasn't) happened, but I will wait until after the '10 elections to begin to pass any judgement on the potential success or failure of his presidency.

Still if Obama does not run again or is defeated as a result, I may be able to witness 1980 redux in '12...another one term Dem POTUS who will be remembered by many as being a failure.

May as well envision the worst case scenarios: A GOP majority Congress resulting from the '10 and '12 elections, along with a Palin/Jindal, Palin/Bachmann, or perhaps Jindal/Palin duo in the WH.

I most certainly will remember the decades of the 80s and 00s as instead being the "good old days"...that is, if I would somehow survive through the remainder of the 10s.