By Dave Anderson:
At this point, no one likes the healthcare bill in the Senate. Let's accept that as a given. Let us also accept that there are some good things in the bill (notably recission, the framework of an exchange and regulation), some not so good things in the bill (mandate without adequate subsidies) and some crap in the bill (gutting choice if Nelson gets his way, no viable public competition, and insufficient anti-cherry picking language).
The question on killing the bill or not is the following... Given that Democrats are probably facing a net loss of seats in the 2010 elections, and given that Harry Reid et al are not willing to go nuclear, will something better pass in 2011, 2012 or 2013 when Democrats will be coming off of a structurally tough defensive year as the Class of 2006 is up for re-election for the first time?
Remember, right now the projected loss seats include reform supporters Dodd, Burris, Kauffman, and Bennett. Democrats who have been trouble-makers for reform who are at risk of losing Lincoln and no one else. So in a Senate where there are 57 Democrats (lose the above five, pick-ups in New Hampshire and Missouri) where Nelson, Lieberman, Bayh and Landrieu feel vindicated, what will emerge?
Or is the bill so fatally compromised, that a negative answer to the first question is irrelevant as the status quo is preferable to any changes that could potentially go through the Senate?
It seems to me that the entire process to date has been all about staying in power, including keeping those big pharma and big insurance dollars coming in, and those big bank and big fossil power dollars. I have been such a supporter and booster of the Dems and had high, but not irrational, hopes for "change". I'm not seeing it. I'm torn about this bill because it's such a transparent giveaway to insurance and pharma but as you say, does maybe some good for all the bad. But I don't think we get any real reform until Americans are CRUSHED under the current system. Passing this bill, which doesn't solve the problems, only makes it the Dems' fault.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion? Let Lieberman and the GOP kill reform. Insurance premiums will double in under 10 years, under 5 at the rate they're raising mine. Americans will scream and it will be the GOP's fault, not the Dems'. Apparently it doesn't hurt enough yet for us to demand real changes.
Green Dreams --- in your calculation, there is an implied assumption that the Left/liberals are effective at capitalizing on a shock moment.
ReplyDeleteI don't share that belief as liberals/Left got rolled on the bank bail-outs, and were steamrolled by 9-11.
My sense is that in a shock moment, the right is far better organized to steam-roller something through that will seem to protect the declining positions of a decent proportion of the population while facilitating the transfer of income and wealth upwards by throwing several tens of millions of people out on their asses, but they'll either be the unpopular, unconnected, or invisible to the voters who matter in that circumstance.
"Or is the bill so fatally compromised, that a negative answer to the first question is irrelevant as the status quo is preferable to any changes that could potentially go through the Senate?"
ReplyDeleteThere is something to the fact that once an entitlement/benefit is in place people will like it so well that it can't be repealed. The problem is for a huge swath of young workers and middle class people this A significant new tax that provides minimal benefits. If there were strict controls on pricing, co-pays, and coverage requirements it could work. ut this bill has none of this. So a 28 year old waiter or 45 year old independent plumber or computer programmer working contract projects will be forced to pay hundreds of dollars a month and then if they break an ankle skiing they still have to pay $1500 in co-pays as well.
I mean I'm not in congress so it doesn't matter what I think, but from where I'm sitting it looks like a really hard to sell this as a great new benefit for a lot of people.
GreenDreams
ReplyDelete"It seems to me that the entire process to date has been all about staying in power, including keeping those big pharma and big insurance dollars coming in, and those big bank and big fossil power dollars."
Obama and the majority of the Democrats are not and never were interested in any real health care reform - they can't afford to piss off the oligarchs. When we finally realize we don't have a Democracy but a Corporatocracy here in the US of A it becomes a lot easier to understand what is going on here. Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman are not making things difficult for the Obama and the Democrats they are giving them cover.
Ron, I completely agree. Our corporate oligarchy will not allow the public good to prevail over private gain. Not ever.
ReplyDeleteDo we give up? Certainly nothing will be done through legislation, nor apparently Executive Order. And the only systemic remedy I see voters capable of exerting would be state by state rejection of "corporate personhood." Except of course, the persuasion artists would go all out to defeat any such effort, and entirely too much of the electorate is malleable to the point of sheepishness.