Krugman: New health plan "good enough to go with"

[mcablue]

Today;

Here’s what’s being reported. No public option, but a trigger which is unlikely to be pulled. But some good stuff in exchange: nonprofit plans available through the exchanges, plus Medicare buy-ins for the 55-65 set (me! me! me!).

If this is the final plan, it’s better than most of us were expecting — and definitely good enough to go with.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/the-health-care-compromise/

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. While I greatly respect Krugman

how in the hell are people with no money going to be able to pay for the new plan?

[Oregone]

5. The subsidized exchange?

The public option, which was but a single plan in the exchange, offered no benefit over the other plans with its watered down form. Now, with them having to spend 90% of premiums on health care, their premiums may be forced to be even more affordable

[vaberella]

2. You don't know what people want. So doors open for Krugman and close for me.

Brilliance. Whatever---I'm more supportive of health change, so if it's something that helps most people I'm supportive.

[Schema Thing]

12. I think this helps everyone, and hurts no one.

Some of us it doesn't help enough, however.

[vaberella]

13. Well wth the house PO I'd be given care starting in Jan.

Now, it doesn't look to be the case. Things look better when I turn 55. And I'm about 30 years away from that. Not that I'm against expanding medicare to 55, that's great. I'd prefer 45. But 55 is great.

[Mass]

15. What difference for you between a PO like was defined in the Senate bill and that.

I agree that we do not have enough information on this deal, but the PO was so restricted that it would have been way to expensive for most people. So, how is that different from the OPM that at least has the right to negotiate the contract a national level.

It is disappointing, but no more than yesterday's Senate bill was disappointing.

[Oregone]

3. Much better than I was expecting

I can't help but feel the shiny "public option" just became a distraction that both sides were hung up on for no good reasons. The Democrats watered it down but insisted it must be in there to impact the system (which is wouldn't). The Republicans forced capitulation but couldn't accept it in its shittiest form. And all their constituents came out and did a hissy piss fit over it.

With it removed, you see instant improvement in the bill and progress. Good riddance to the useless distraction. But Im very surprised. Now Im perplexed the Democrats manufactured and sold this idea if they weren't 100% sure it would pass. I never thought the PO would be gone (Im still not sure)

[mcablue]

4. How do you know there is "improvement" if this hasn't been scored by the CBO yet?

Just saying.

[Oregone]

8. The devil is in the details, yes...

But the expansion of a popular, existing socialistic health insurance entity towards the single-payer goal is something I would consider an "improvement". To top it off, regulating that 90% of premiums will be spent on health care expenses is also an improvement over 85%.

Yes, no one knows what is going on here. It could blow. Im optimistic because this seems to be the first honest step in legislation they seem to have taken in the entire fuckn process

[kenny blankenship]

11. Krugman has been consistently lame on this subject since the election

He's approved basically every piece de merde proposal as "good enough" as they appeared.

[vaberella]

14. I will agree with you on that and hence the reason I don't se why he's given much stock now.

But it's whatever really.

[andym]

7. The expansion of Medicare is a surprisingly good outcome

I almost can't believe it, because it is closer to single-payer than anything else offered. True it is very limited now, but it sets a powerful precedent about how to proceed (lower age barrier) in the future, especially the part that Medicare would be subsidized in the Exchange (in 2014).

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Heads.

Exploding.

[Jersey Devil]

9. What I like is that everyone understands Medicare

It will be very hard to be against Medicare because the public knows what it is. The mysterious "public option" however, was capable of being twisted into anything that someone opposed to it would want to make it. This makes the bill much harder to oppose politically.

[Oregone]

10. And in terms of popular support...

This throws in another million people who will be dead set against killing Medicare, and will view it as popular and beneficial to society. The next time you lower the age, it may be a tad bit easier.

[jefferson_dem]

16. Liberals Falling in Line?

Liberals Falling in Line?

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who had previously indicated he would oppose a weak health care bill, told Rachel Maddow last night that the new components of the emerging deal "may be stronger than the weak public option."

These and similar remarks by Howard Dean and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) are sending signals that liberals are happy with the tradeoffs made by the "Gang of Ten," and may even view the Medicare buy-in as a "path to a single-payer model."

Here's the clip via MSNBC: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/12/09/liberals_falling_in_line.html