Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Real Reason Obama's Plan Doesn't Include A Public Option

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 » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:34 PM
Original message
The Real Reason Obama's Plan Doesn't Include A Public Option
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/the-real-reason-obamas-pl_b_473924.html

The reason Robert Gibbs gives for President Obama's health care plan not including a public option -- that despite majority voter support, it can't get 51 Democratic votes in the Senate -- doesn't hold up. The real reason is that Obama made a backroom deal last summer with the for-profit hospital industry that there would be no meaningful public option.

This is one of the great under-reported stories of the health reform saga. Much has been written about the Obama administration's deal with big Pharma to continue to block Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices or to allow consumers to buy cheaper drugs from Canada, in exchange for Pharma running pro-Democratic ads and giving campaign contributions to Democratic candidates. That's the reason, under pressure from the White House, that Senate Democrats voted down an amendment that would have allowed consumers to buy cheaper drugs from overseas.

But Obama's deal with the for-profit hospital lobby to insure there would be no public option has, as best I can tell, only been reported in two articles in The New York Times. On August 13, The Times reported that while President Obama had presented himself as "aloof from the legislative fray," particularly in connection with the public option, "Behind the scenes, however, Mr. Obama and advisors have been...negotiating deals with a degree of cold-eyed political realism potentially at odds with the president's rhetoric." One of the deals reported in The Times article was the Pharma deal. The other was a deal with the for-profit hospital lobby to limit its cost reductions to $155 billion over 10 years in exchange for a White House promise that there would be no meaningful public option.

According to The Times:

"Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan paying-Medicare rates...or controlled by the secretary of health and human services. 'We have an agreement with the White House that I'm very confident will be seen all the way through conference', one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, director of the Federation of American Hospitals, told a Capitol Hill newsletter...Industry lobbyists say they are not worried 'We trust the White House,' Mr. Kahn said."
Mr. Kahn's lobbying group, with whom the White House made the deal, represents America's investor-owned, hospitals whose profits could be diminished by a public option with the negotiating clout to negotiate lower prices. To say that the deal included ensuring that any public option would not be "controlled by the secretary of health and human services" is code for saying it would not be national in scope and would lack negotiating clout--In other words, the Obama administration made a deal that a national public option on day one comparable to Medicare was off the table. "


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

I know this is over a week old, but Jesus H. Christ, it is disgusting. If the man I voted for, donated to, and worked very hard for did this, well . . .,
I'm done. Then there's arne duncan and his horse fucking bullshit race to the bottom shit, more of a reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, this was posted at abandon last week.......
Edited on Thu Mar-04-10 06:40 PM by FrenchieCat
As for you being done, it should have been your last sentence!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Some people clearly still need to see this.
Eh hem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Certainly! A pile on never hurts!
After all, some need to defeat whatever....
just so they can feel vindicated!

The feelings run deep and hard.

Me, I want health care to pass, and Republicans to lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. What happened to you, Frenchie Cat?
Edited on Thu Mar-04-10 06:45 PM by Hell Hath No Fury
Seriously. You've been here a long time and you used to see through the bullshit with the best of them. You know damned well if Bush had been pulling this shit, you would have ripped him up one side and down another. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I want health care for 31 million people who don't have it.....
Edited on Thu Mar-04-10 06:56 PM by FrenchieCat
as well as for my Nephew, who's already enjoyed Cancer at stage 3-4 at the age of 18 months,
and is being denied health care now. Bush wasn't and has never offered him health care,
nor the 31 million others......and Bush was in office at the time.





When did 31 million people stop being important to you
in order to be "incensed" about a politician?
I think that is a more important question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. I want health CARE for them
Unfortunately, nothing in this bill particularly demands this. It only demands that they BUY health Insurance, whether they can ever afford to use it or not. I know folks right now that have health insurance, but they can't afford to use it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. My SIL can't buy Insurance for him.....period.
With this bill, it happens instantly.

As for others, many would buy insurance, they can't afford it,
and with this bill, they could.

You can fool some as to what is going to happen,
but you can't fool me.

Sen. Sanders is on our side, but you aren't. It's as simple as that.
Thank God he has a vote, and you don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. But what you are missing
You will "own" insurance. But it will be like owning the car and not being able to buy the gas. He'll be sick, and he'll have a $500 copay, or a $2000 "donut hole" or any other manner of costs which they can't afford. They'll be force to pay for the insurance, but the money to USE the insurance will not be there.

I understand, you're gonna get yours, screw everyone else. Some of us have a slightly larger view.

But congratulate your SIL on supporting insurance company profits. Hope she can still afford the health care she needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #12
20. I want affordable care without a mandate, alternatives to the companies,
negotiable meds, all of it. We ain't getting shit but a ginned up system that sucks more money out of our pockets by the companies, still denies for pre-existing conditions and lets people die when they hit a certain limit. Nothing changed but the penalties if you don't go along. Nice system, nice president. Not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
24. That is just wrong and this is the second time you have done this. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. That's just pure nonsense
Edited on Thu Mar-04-10 06:40 PM by ProSense
The Senate-passed bill includes a Franken provision, co-authored by Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), that would require insurance companies to use 85 percent of customer premiums on medical costs.

But Franken’s big push has been on the public insurance option, a controversial liberal priority that dominated the debate last year and caused Republicans to charge that it was the first step to socialized medicine.

Franken said he supports health care legislation that does not include the public option, but he said the public option is still his preference for reform. He signed on to a letter penned by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) pushing for the public option through budget reconciliation rules that would allow the Senate to sidestep a GOP filibuster.

“I really think the public option is the right thing to do. Now, whether we can get it through reconciliation is a whole other story,” Franken said. “I know that Sen. Jay Rockefeller is someone who’s for the public option but doesn’t think that it will be able to go through reconciliation because, I think, of the rules. It doesn’t fit under the rules. I think it does, but we’ll see.”

link



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. And anyone who believes they are going to revist it --
anytime soon, is living in a fool's paradise.

The view from those rosy glasses must be awful purty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Why, because
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #9
29. If it couldn't get 60 votes in this Congress
It certainly won't in the next.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. You don't believe Sherrod Brown?
He's on Ed right now saying that Dems will never give up getting the PO.

I'd really like to know why you don't trust him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. OK, so explain this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damonm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Crickets...
Interesting.

facts don't usually stop them that fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. For months nobody wanted to discuss the Pharma deal and I still
do not see anyone pushing for Medicare to able to negotiate drug prices (saving 300 billion as mentioned in the Obama HC Plan) or pushing for re-importaion of drugs.

P. Obama has mentioned he may seek more, but we will not know until there is a final bill.


The Legacy of Billy Tauzin: The White House-PhRMA Deal

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2010/02/12/the-legacy-of-billy-tauzin-the-white-house-phrma-deal/

"...In the 2008 campaign, Obama declared his intention to include all stakeholders as he sought to reform the nation’s health care system, but also supported key Democratic health reform policies. Among these were several that targeted the pharmaceutical industry: Allowing re-importation of drugs from first world countries with lower drug prices and providing Medicare with negotiating authority over prescription drug prices in the recently enacted Part D program. These weren’t just promises, Obama had already voted for both of them as a senator in 2007. (Roll Call Vote 132 and Roll Call Vote 150.)

Set to carry out this agenda were two Capitol Hill veterans, schooled in the monied Washington culture, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and deputy chief of staff Jim Messina.
Emanuel was a former fundraiser, Clinton administration official, investment banker and member of the Democratic leadership in Congress. Messina was the former campaign manager and chief of staff to the powerful Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus. Both were known for their unparalleled legislative abilities..."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #13
26. Pah the real deal is to not have medicare buy as a pool and no reimportation from Canada
Until you see those two things fixed the deal with pharma stands.

What a piddling little concession they are making to try and convince us they are not bought. Pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hulka38 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
30. Then do it WH. Blow up the deal that should never have been made in the first place.
Gotta consider that campaign cash though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
15. If that's true, why only 35 signatories on the letter?
35 < 51
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
16. Most hospitals including for profit and not for profit are going bankrupt
Edited on Thu Mar-04-10 07:13 PM by stray cat
because in part they give the government a cheap skate rate for Medicare and Medicaid, have to treat those without money and the rest of us with insurance can not pay enough to compensate. The hospitals eat the bills - for example an illegal immigrant with no place to go and terminal cancer has been treated in a hospital at a cost for one person of over one million per year because there is no place to release him because no one will take him. He doesn't need that degree of care of he can't be released on the street and no less expensive place is obligated to take him and eat the expense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
18. Matt Taibbi told us this was the case.
Deal was made. End of story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denimgirly Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 01:02 AM
Response to Original message
21. Yup. One of the BIG Reasons Dems. will lose there seats -- People are Angry.
Edited on Fri Mar-05-10 01:03 AM by denimgirly
Dont worry..Obama will be back to populist rhetoric and admonishing the backroom deals he created just in time for re-election. It's all politics, and business as usual.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyAndProud60 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 01:45 AM
Response to Original message
22. If he did this, someone really needs to ask him what the fuck? How can someone who seems so smart do
something so dumb? There is no coming back from all these deals he made. And it's not even clear what the country got for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
27. Funny thing is, both deals have just pissed people off - gaining him nothing...
...and potentially inspiring a primary challenge from a Dem who works for the people instead of corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spheric Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. This whole health care reform debacle is...
...the most stunning political move I have ever seen or heard of. I can't think of one thing the Republicans wanted in this bill that isn't included, or one thing they opposed that wasn't removed. This bill couldn't be more Republican if they'd written it themselves. And they can completely walk away from it. It's not their fault -- the Democrats did it all on their own while they opposed it in unison at every step.

They have managed to rat-fuck the American people without having to take any responsibility for it. In fact, they can point out to their constituents what a piece of shit this legislation really is and be totally correct. So, of course they will while pointing out that the whole thing was created through back door deals.

It's unbelievable what Obama has done. And it's not just on health care reform. The Democrats are going to take a blood bath in November and it's easily understandable why. What a disgusting show on all counts.

:banghead:

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 Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency 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