Congress still debating the public option...

[Winnie]

But the good news is that these first public option amendments were defeated!

From Senate Committee Rejects Public Option for Health Overhaul - WSJ.com

Mr. Baucus has said a bill that contains a public option wouldn't garner 60 votes in the full Senate, which is the total needed to avoid a filibuster. He pointed to provisions in the Finance Committee's current bill that would impose new regulations on insurers, such as one that would bar insurers from excluding potential policyholders if they have a pre-existing health condition.

This is the only up-side to trying to rush this legislation through. I feel fairly confident they don't have time to beat the Blue Dogs into submission on this tragic public option idea.

Of course, if they put the entire thing off until next year and took time to get input from their constituency, we would certainly end up with better reform than it looks like we are going to get. Thoughtful discussion and debate combined with incremental changes would be preferable but unlikely.

 

[kkddbb]

But the good news is that these first public option amendments were defeated!

From Senate Committee Rejects Public Option for Health Overhaul - WSJ.com



This is the only up-side to trying to rush this legislation through. I feel fairly confident they don't have time to beat the Blue Dogs into submission on this tragic public option idea.

Of course, if they put the entire thing off until next year and took time to get input from their constituency, we would certainly end up with better reform than it looks like we are going to get. Thoughtful discussion and debate combined with incremental changes would be preferable but unlikely.

its being rushed for political gain, not because they want to assist the american people. its a way for them to say "hey, look at what we did for you". what they dont tell us is the long term outcome of the plan or the specifics.

its time for the dems to stop talking about bipartisanship and start acting on it. fact is, the gop plan is much cheaper, less government and still covers those who want coverage.

did you also notice that the president is all of a sudden saying that 30million are without coverage versus the 47million he drilled into our heads during the campaign? so somehow 17million or so all of a sudden have coverage. and what he nor any other dem is telling us is that nearly 18% of those 30million make a household income of 75k. i dont know about you but 75k is surely enough to buy insurance, but they simply dont chose too. and than there are those who simply dont want insurance for whatever reason. and theres illegals.

allowing insurance companies to cross state lines and malpractice reform are two major factors to lesson the costs, non of which the dems want. why? ill answer that for you, because they dont get it and it doesnt allow them to take the political credit-period.

 

[30ashopper]

The committee on Tuesday afternoon voted, 15 to 8, to reject an amendment proposed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, to add a public option called the Community Choice Health Plan, an outcome that underscored the lack of support for a government plan among many Democrats.

Mr. Baucus voted no, as did Senators Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Bill Nelson of Florida, joining all 10 Republicans in opposition.

 

[kkddbb]

BRAVO!!!!! once again the clear thinkers are the victors, but once again we had to play the liberal game first. its not just a defeat to the dems, its a major defeat for liberal media, especially the zombies at mslsd.

 

[AlphaCrab]

From a CBS from two days poll I heard 65% of Americans wanted a public option? Sounds like no one is listening to the people--like, so what else is new?

 

[Winnie]

I was shocked by this as well...until I read the next paragraph:

A similar amendment that would create a public plan, but that would pay doctors and hospitals at negotiated rates rather than Medicare rates, was offered by Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.). It failed by a 13-10 vote, with Messrs. Nelson and Carper voting in favor of it.

He must think that the hope of higher cost is better. When I wrote him this Summer to give my thoughts on the subject, he was "undecided."

 

[30ashopper]

From a CBS from two days poll I heard 65% of Americans wanted a public option? Sounds like no one is listening to the people--like, so what else is new?

I don't quite get the polling on this, and why the numbers seem so hard to get right. Maybe it's because most people don't understand the concept? I've seen poll results that indicate only about 40% support it, and results indicating 75% support it. I don't know which is right, I think it might have something to do with how the poll questions are worded.

 

[Winnie]

From a CBS from two days poll I heard 65% of Americans wanted a public option? Sounds like no one is listening to the people--like, so what else is new?

From this article: Rasmussen and CBS polls differ greatly on public option in health care and there is a reason why

A perfect example is provided by recent polling from Rasmussen and CBS on the public option. CBS puts support for the public option at 65%. Rasmussen meanwhile puts support at just 35% for the public option.

Is it really possible for either organization (with decent reputations) to be off by 30% in their projections?
The answer is no. A closer look at each poll reveals two main reasons why the results differ so greatly.
First the survey sample for each poll is significantly different. Rasmussen's poll includes only "likely voters" which excludes more lower incomes individuals and Democrats who support the public option but may not vote. The CBS poll is a telephone survey of all citizens not just "likely voters" which will naturally increase the amount of people who support the public option.

This explains it! Politicians are completely uninterested in what the non-voting public thinks about anything. As well they should be.

I don't quite get the polling on this, and why the numbers seem so hard to get right. Maybe it's because most people don't understand the concept? I've seen poll results that indicate only about 40% support it, and results indicating 75% support it. I don't know which is right, I think it might have something to do with how the poll questions are worded.

Not only how the questions are worded, but what other questions precede the target question.

 

[BeachSiO2]

I posted on another thread, but does anyone know completely what a public option is (good and bad) and do they unmderstand it. I don't completely understand the different proposals and I work with the federal government everyday (in DC now). I understand most of the marketing plans that have been promulgated, but not the legislative plans. This goes for public option, trigger, and republican plans. The devil in the 1000 pages of detail is my problem...
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Bob]

score one for the insurance lobby, friend of all through profit