[Dialogue] Emailing: Guaranteed Health Care Key Plank in Democrat's Platform - CommonDreams.org.htm
Harry Wainwright
h-wainwright at charter.net
Mon Aug 11 19:48:39 EDT 2008
<http://www.commondreams.org/> Common Dreams NewsCenter
<http://www.democracyinaction.com/dia/organizations/CD/signUp.jsp?key=1439>
Get Email
Home <http://www.commondreams.org/> | Newswire
<http://www.commondreams.org/newswire.htm> | Contacting Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/contactingus.htm> | About Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/about.htm> | Donate
<https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/105/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_K
EY=1869> | Sign-Up
<http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/24/signUp.jsp?key=1439> |
Archives <http://www.commondreams.org/archives.htm>
Discuss this story
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/themes/common-dreams/images/
icon_comment.gif> Discuss this story <> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/plugins/print/images/print.g
if> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/11/10923/print/>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp> E-Mail This Article
Published on Monday, August 11, 2008 by Associated Press <http://www.ap.org>
Guaranteed Health Care Key Plank in Democrat's Platform
PITTSBURGH - Democrats shaped a set of principles Saturday that commits the
party to guaranteed health care for all, heading off a potentially divisive
debate and edging the party closer to the position of Barack Obama's
defeated rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The party's platform committee moved smoothly through a range of issues for
the fall campaign and approved a document that will go to the Democratic
convention in Denver later this month for adoption.
There was little dissent - or room for it - in the day's meeting and a
compromise on health policy took one flash-point off the table.
Obama, soon to be the Democratic nominee, has stopped short of proposing to
mandate health coverage for all. He aims to achieve something close to
universal coverage by making insurance more affordable and helping
struggling families pay for it.
Advisers to Obama and Clinton both told the party's platform meeting they
were happy with the compromise, adopted without opposition or without
explanation as to how health care would be guaranteed.
In return for the guarantee, activists dropped a tougher platform amendment
seeking a government-run, single-payer system and another amendment
explicitly holding out Clinton's plan as the one to follow.
The party now declares itself "united behind a commitment that every
American man, woman and child be guaranteed to have affordable,
comprehensive health care."
Under any system in play, most people would still put out money for health
insurance as they do now, but they would get help when needed.
That was a common feature of the plans put forward by Obama and Clinton in
the primaries. But she would have required everyone to get insurance while
his plan makes it mandatory only for children.
Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean praised "the spirit of this
compromise." Judith McHale, a Clinton supporter who helped to lead the
platform meeting, said Obama and Clinton advisers worked collegially
throughout the process.
For the 186-member platform committee, one imperative Saturday was to
satisfy Clinton loyalists still sore from the often acrimonious primary
fight while keeping policy firmly in synch with Obama's campaign.
Democrats made mostly cosmetic changes to a platform draft prepared for the
meeting, a process designed to showcase unity more than to air differences
in the party at large on hot-button issues such as the Iraq war, abortion
and health care.
Party platforms are a statement of principles that are not binding on the
candidates or the next president and they are typically given little
attention after they are adopted.
Even so, the party's decision to embrace guaranteed health care is bound to
become a leading yardstick by which Obama's presidency will be measured if
he wins in November.
On Iraq, the platform states that Democrats "expect to complete redeployment
within 16 months," reflecting Obama's time frame but not the tone of
certainty he brought to it when he was running in the primaries.
The 51-page platform draft showed the influence of Clinton's supporters not
only in the extensive section on health care but in its assertions about the
treatment of women. Some of her backers believed sexism dogged her campaign
for the nomination.
An extensive section on women's rights is included and the votes she
received in the primaries are described as "18 million cracks in the highest
glass ceiling."
Even so, the platform is thoroughly tuned to Obama's proposals.
It reasserts his promise of energy rebates to struggling families, pension
subsidies, a crackdown on predatory lenders, higher taxes for families
earning over $250,000, tax breaks for others, billions for economic stimulus
and "direct high-level diplomacy, without preconditions," in the case of
Iran.
On trade, it promises a multilateral approach to improving the North
American Free Trade Agreement, without saying specifically what those
changes should be. Obama criticized NAFTA when campaigning in states that
felt disadvantaged by it, but the platform offers no suggestion he would
take unilateral action against the deal.
Instead, it says: "We will work with Canada and Mexico to amend the North
American Free Trade Agreement so that it works better for all three North
American countries."
Democrats typically have a strong plank in favor of abortion rights; this
year's version is stronger than usual. "The Democratic Party strongly and
unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and
legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all
efforts to weaken or undermine that right," it says.
Gone is the phrase from the past that abortions should be safe, legal and
"rare."
The party also pledges to ensure access to adoption programs, prenatal and
postnatal care and income support programs for expectant mothers who need
the help.
The party also:
* Promises "tough, practical, and humane immigration reform in the
first year of the next administration."
* Favors restoration of the ban on assault-type weapons and other
"reasonable regulation" that recognizes the constitutional right to own and
use firearms.
* Favors helping religious groups provide social services as long as
"public funds are not used to proselytize or discriminate."
* Promises to close the Guantanamo detention center.
* Promises to double the Peace Corps.
C 2008 Associated Press
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and
discover new web pages.
*
<http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farch
ive%2F2008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F&title=Guaranteed+Health+Care+Key+Plank+in+De
mocrat%27s+Platform> Digg
*
<http://del.icio.us/post?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive%2F2
008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F&title=Guaranteed+Health+Care+Key+Plank+in+Democrat%
27s+Platform> del.icio.us
*
<http://www.newsvine.com/_tools/seed&save?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.or
g%2Farchive%2F2008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F&h=Guaranteed+Health+Care+Key+Plank+i
n+Democrat%27s+Platform> NewsVine
*
<http://www.stumbleupon.com/url/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive%
2F2008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F> StumbleUpon
*
<http://myweb2.search.yahoo.com/myresults/bookmarklet?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.com
mondreams.org%2Farchive%2F2008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F&=Guaranteed+Health+Care+
Key+Plank+in+Democrat%27s+Platform> YahooMyWeb
*
<http://technorati.com/faves?add=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Farchive
%2F2008%2F08%2F11%2F10923%2F> Technorati
Discuss this story
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/themes/common-dreams/images/
icon_comment.gif> Discuss this story <> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-content/plugins/print/images/print.g
if> Print This Post
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/11/10923/print/>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp>
<http://www.referralblast.com/cs/com/co1.asp> E-Mail This Article
61 Comments so far
1.
canuckchuck August 11th, 2008 12:53 pm
Dumbocrats unite behind a commitment that every American man, woman
and child be guaranteed to have "affordable", comprehensive health care..
Now define "Affordable"..is affordable where Big Pharma only takes
50% of your paycheck, or 45%
2.
FrederickJohnson August 11th, 2008 12:56 pm
Oh, fucking, puleeeze ! The party said that same shit before and
look what they actually did right after they got in. Remember that "partial
birth abortion" ban the Democrats joined the GOP on back in 2003? It was
really nothing but a ploy to outlaw women's reproductive rights and yet like
the GOP the Democrats LIE their teeth off and once again give EMPTY
"promises" which they know they'll never do. Party hacks such as Daniel
FUCKING David, kernel, etc . don't want you to question the cowardly and
backstabbing behavior of the supposed "party of the people".
RALPH NADER FOR PRESIDENT !!!!
VOTENADER.ORG !!!!
3.
Clark Kent <http://www.dailyplanet.com> August 11th, 2008 12:57 pm
Aren't Democrats supposed to be democratic? The vast majority of
Americans (not just Dems) want single payer health insurance. Quit taking
bribes, Dems- do your duty and support the view of the majority of
Americans. Enact single payer, universal health care now!
4.
zaz August 11th, 2008 1:00 pm
The ruling class will guarantee every american the right to buy
health insurance. Falls SHORT guys.
5.
RichM August 11th, 2008 1:07 pm
What they're talking about is a "compromise" between the Obama plan
& the Hillary plan, which were both written by representatives of the
insurance & drug industries. As you might imagine, if you split the
difference between 2 camps only interested in their own profits, you don't
magically wind up with something that benefits anyone besides the sponsoring
industries.
Of course, you try to fix that up in the time-honored big-business
fashion: by PR techniques & advertising, using misleading high-sounding
phrasing. That's why it sounds like such bullshit - because it is.
I love this part right here:
----
On trade, it promises a multilateral approach to improving the North
American Free Trade Agreement, without saying specifically what those
changes should be. Obama criticized NAFTA when campaigning in states that
felt disadvantaged by it, but the platform offers no suggestion he would
take unilateral action against the deal.
Instead, it says: "We will work with Canada and Mexico to amend the
North American Free Trade Agreement so that it works better for all three
North American countries."
----
Get it? The Dems will amend NAFTA so that it "works better." Gee,
how reassuring! Note that the bullshitter Obama will actually do nothing
about NAFTA except talk out of both sides of his mouth.
6.
DaveEriqat <http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/> August 11th, 2008
1:08 pm
Hillary's plan and this plan seek to do the same thing:
Reward the health insurance companies by forcing people to buy their
insurance!
How is that going to lower health care costs? Look at the Medicare
drug benefit recently added. Pharmaceutical companies just announced price
increases of over 1000% on some drugs. Why? Because they could! Medicare is
paying the tab.
Dave
7.
hamster August 11th, 2008 1:09 pm
"There was little dissent - or room for it - in the day's meeting."
"Party platforms are a statement of principles that are not binding on the
candidates or the next president and they are typically given little
attention after they are adopted."
Conclusion: We will have to fight long and hard to enact anything resembling
a progressive agenda.
8.
revengegirl August 11th, 2008 1:16 pm
As long as Insurance Companies, Pharmacuitical Companies, HMOs and
other businesses control how doctors treat patients (and they do) - You will
still be discriminated against depending how well insured you are.
We need Health CARE, not insurance. Why pay the middle man?
Insurance should be for things - NOT people.
9.
jlocke123 August 11th, 2008 1:17 pm
"Under any system in play, most people would still put out money for
health insurance as they do now, but they would get help when needed."
In plain English, more of your tax dollars will be handed to the
multiple existing insurance companies. That means you get none of the
efficiencies from single payer and the help received will hardly be enough
for all the people that currently can't come close to affording the inflated
cost of the current profit driven system.
Compare the Democrats' plan with single payer universal coverage
where costs are cut in half and every single solitary citizen has gold
plated coverage.
If Obama is on your side, why is he proposing to charge taxpayers
double the going rate only to still leave millions of people without health
care? Oh yeah."off the table", I forgot.
10.
luckylefty August 11th, 2008 1:18 pm
Smell the coffee. They're going to do "Mandates". Tax liens.
Garnishments. State enforcement. Steam Shovel $$$ from us to
Billionairefilth Animals for their palatial wealth and private law over us
until we have nothing left and then they tell us to just fucking die. Six
vultures rip at our flesh: Health Care; Energy; Food; Housing; Education;
Transportation. It is a contest among them to see who can devour the most
from our body before we are rendered carrion. That is what Overseers do for
their Masters on this fucking Plantation. BHO is just one guy who wants to
hold the whip for Master. He knows what it means to serve and whom.
You folks are very polite about people who would subject your
children to public vivisection and dine on the bloody remains if Master
ordered it. You know this is true.
11.
greenerthanthou <http://wagelaborer.blogspot.com/> August 11th,
2008 1:24 pm
Absolutely right. Forced payments to insurance companies benefits
only one side - and it's not ours.
Insurance companies look at 43,000,000 uninsured Americans and see
immense profits to be had - if only they had the backing of the federal
government to force blood out of turnips. With Obama, they will. A
Republican couldn't do it, because they have to pay lip service to free
choice. A Democrat doesn't have to. That's why you can expect the draft to
resurface under Obama, also.
The Green Party platform calls for single payer health care. But, of
course, liberals can't vote for that! They can only vote for forced
insurance payments and then hope that they can "pressure" for more.
Good luck with that, DD and the rest.
12.
Samson <http://www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com> August 11th, 2008
1:31 pm
Why is it that a Dem compromise always gives their big contributors
what they want and shafts the rest of us?
13.
Samson <http://www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com> August 11th, 2008
1:36 pm
"Conclusion: We will have to fight long and hard to enact anything
resembling a progressive agenda."
And the place to start is to stop voting for politicians that oppose
a progressive agenda. Which by and large means to stop voting Democrat.
14.
cavedweller August 11th, 2008 1:40 pm
Now that we've entered the Gilded Age Part II, the deregulators who
came to power during Reagan's administration have succeeded in rigging the
deck. The poor and middle class work their entire lives saving money in
retirement plans that get stolen from them by either the CEOs who run the
companies into the ground (Enron) or by the health care industry that fucks
them out of their insurance premiums and never pays off their claims when
the workers get sick. They've enhanced the illusion that poor people "could"
become rich if they toe the line and do what their oppressors dictate. Once
in a while, just as in Las Vegas, one of the poor hits the jackpot,
achieving the American Dream. It's just enough to keep blue collar workers
voting for the likes of McCain and Obama and never uniting with real
progressives like Kucinich or Nader to effect real change.
15.
Skyler August 11th, 2008 1:40 pm
revengegirl: It actually IS as simple as that, isn't it? You hit the
nail on the head. If my monthly insurance premium, along with everyone
else's monthly premium, was paid into a "single" healthcare fund, not an
insurance company, the health CARE in this country would be sailing along.
My mother just had a heart attack and subsequent open heart surgery.
The ambulence ride from the retirement community to the hospital cost $1900.
You read that right, nineteen hundred dollars. The cost of the entire
hospital stay was close to $200,000. In my opinion, it's because of
insurance that those costs are so absolutely insane. The insurance companies
charge so much because they CAN and subsequently THEY are allowing
healthcare costs to soar to such obscene levels. Same with the big pharmas.
As long as the insurance companies exist as they are today, nothing
will change.
16.
Fluffy Kitty August 11th, 2008 1:45 pm
I am really, really, really disappointed to see the Dems won't even
TRY to get a single payer health care reform package passed! I thought I had
understood that the "health care for all" would be accomplished through a
two part program. First, anyone who CHOOSES to keep their health insurance
as is (controlled by the insurance companies) can do so, but as an
alternative, anyone who would prefer a Medicare for All single payer package
could choose that option instead. Our out-of-pocket expenses will never go
down significantly as long as the insurance companies are in control.
17.
Little Brother August 11th, 2008 1:51 pm
"Guaranteed Health Care" = guaranteed health insurance for insurance
corporations.
PS: "An extensive section on women's rights is included and the
votes she received in the primaries are described as '18 million cracks in
the highest glass ceiling'."
18 million "cracks", eh? Sounds kind of sexist, if you think about
it.
18.
whatfools August 11th, 2008 2:02 pm
What's the difference?
Americans are being fed to the Oligarchs as well as the Oilgarchs.
19.
karlof1 August 11th, 2008 2:04 pm
This so-called "insurance guarantee" is similar to the same smoke
blown by Clinton in 1992/93, although the giveaway to Big Insurance is more
straightforward, and just as reprehensible. It will be intresting to read
why the cave by PDA on this issue. The overall Platform looks like another
good reason to vote Green. The only thing it provides working people is more
fleecing and lying.
20.
Jim Glover August 11th, 2008 2:06 pm
Well all you Dem bashers. when you get your man, McCain, in the
white house he will see that your medical care is much more affordable.then
you can march in the streets (Whoopee) and he will give you what you need. a
lesson in how to win wars and keep the people down.
You will all deserve McCain. Good Luck!
21.
wsws.org website August 11th, 2008 2:13 pm
OK, class, here's your next question. .
What's wrong with the following?
*********************************************
- Ralph Nader supports a single-payer health insurance plan.
- Single-payer would be a tremendous benefit to the overwhelming
majority of Americans. At least 85% of the population.
- The overwhelming majority of voting Americans will vote for either
Barack Obama or John McCain - NEITHER OF WHOM SUPPORTS SINGLE-PAYER.
*********************************************
Oh, and class, don't forget, we will be having similar questions on
*other* issues.
(Hint: All the other questions have the same answer as this one.)
22.
HDune August 11th, 2008 2:22 pm
I agree with wsws. The Democrats and the Republicans are the same in
that they represent and work for the ruling class. For meaningful change,
support candidates that represent working people.
23.
greenerthanthou <http://wagelaborer.blogspot.com/> August 11th,
2008 2:25 pm
I knew there would be some pathetic attempt by a Democrat to fall
back on their last argument for Plan B Corporate party- the bogeyman! Used
to be Bush, now it's McCain.
24.
Little Brother August 11th, 2008 2:49 pm
Speaking of pathetic, there are still wretched "moderates" around
contending that while single-payer is the obvious and sensible alternative
to the present lethal quagmire of the status quo, it's still not politically
feasible.
The last time I checked, Paul Krugman was one of these- in fact, his
position clued me in to the fact that he IS at best a moderate. (I'd been
fooled by visiting a site in which he was admired as a John Pilger or Howard
Zinn in economist's clothing.)
Not unsurprisingly, such moderates, IMO, are well behind the curve
of public opinion- they presume that most people are still hung up on the
idea that single-payer is "socialism". I don't think that's the sticking
point it once was. And moreover, there's a definite self-confirming or
self-perpetuating quality to this argument.
Political leaders and the commentariat who argue that the time isn't
ripe for crawling out of the muck onto the dry land of single-payer are
actually reinforcing and sustaining the status quo. Of course, in the
Democrats' case, it's because they place a higher value on the health of the
insurance corporations than they do on the health of the citizens they
aspire to rule.
25.
joneden August 11th, 2008 3:04 pm
The eggs, the insurance companies, will not be broken until we have
a government that serves the interests of the people-not that of their
corporate masters. When will this occur? When the failure of our system
becomes so deep that we experience some sort of a revolution.
www.StudentsForTheEarth.org
26.
zaz August 11th, 2008 3:05 pm
If the lesser of two evils (Obama) NEEDS my vote he will get it.
Otherwise I'll vote third party.
27.
pavroviandog August 11th, 2008 3:23 pm
Here's how the great "insurance" scam works for let's say, Joe, a
55yr old self-employed plumber:
1) Pay $700/per month (in after tax dollars)
2) Have a copay of 30%.of what Healthscam Insurance Co will
designate as eligible for coverage
3) That's only after you've met a $500 deductible
WOW!!!
That means Joe who barely makes enough to cover his bills-including
insurance-will never, never walk into a doctor's office for fear that the
bill for a nurse taking his temperature and drawing blood for a diabetes
test will cost $1500-of which he will be responsible for $500 + 30% of $1000
= $800.
Most of the time, he does not know what it will cost up front and
when he gets the bill the explanation of charges will be so convoluted that
he will have no way of understanding it, let alone fight it.
In other words, Healthscam Inc can hold its "insured" Joe in
perpetual terror of seeking medical care, which in turns means that that
insured premium is RISK FREE! TOTAL PROFIT! Just think, keeping the COSTS
HIGH will make the CO-PAYS UNAFFORDABLE!
It is an ingenious $ytem of extortion and trap$. So the last thing in the
world is for the Healthscam Inc to fight for lower price for basic care,
prescriptions, or $2000 ambulances!
THE CRISIS IS ABOUT HEALTH CARE..not affordable insurance.
28.
rtdrury August 11th, 2008 3:35 pm
Congratulations true believers! Your Demok "can win" masters are
working toward guaranteed slavery for you! Expect to pay for healthcare not
twice what other countries pay per capita, but THREE TIMES!!
God Bless the United States of America!!!
29.
RichM August 11th, 2008 4:05 pm
Note the pathetic emptiness of Jim Glover's post (2:06 pm). Like all
DPA's (Dem Party Apologists), he can't come up with a single specific point
to make about health care, or the contents of the article atop this thread.
His ONLY "argument" is that all critics of Democrats are "Dem bashers;," &
that this will lead to McCain being president.
Isn't it odd that all DPA's are like this? They just have nothing to
say, except "McCain would be worse."
30.
phred42 August 11th, 2008 4:09 pm
The Cowards bent over for Big Pharma and the Insurance Parasites. We
need to elect Democrats rather than these republican-lite DLC and Blue Dogs.
Here is an organization dedicated to doing the right thing!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Citizens Alliance for National Health Insurance
http://www.hr676.org/
THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF HR676.ORG, INC. IS TO RAISE FUNDS FOR A
NATIONAL MULTI-MEDIA ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN TO PROMOTE THE PASSAGE OF.
House Resolution (H.R.) 676
The United States National Health Insurance Act
Affordable Single-Payer National Health Insurance for All!
What Is National Health Insurance (NHI)?
More..
31.
jozef August 11th, 2008 4:13 pm
"Why is it that a Dem compromise always gives their big contributors
what they want and shafts the rest of us?" You have to ask? Democrats =
S.O.S. When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?
32.
eciaccio August 11th, 2008 4:15 pm
Heaven forbid the Dems take on their Health Insurance masters and do
what is best for all of us! Strap each Dem. politician into a chair and
force them to watch SiCKO, then strip them of their health insurance
coverage (paid for by us) and force them to go to emergency rooms.
Time to abandon the Dems. and get behind parties that truly
represent us: Green Party, Working Families Party, or Populist Party.
33.
rtdrury August 11th, 2008 4:25 pm
cavedweller: "Once in a while, just as in Las Vegas, one of the poor
hits the jackpot"
We want a diverse array of opinions among the people regarding
whether the economic system should be structured as predatory capitalism or
cooperative socialism.
The crisis occurs when the elites drive the
government/media/academia to relentlessly promote vicious predation and
extinguish or marginalize the peaceful/productive alternative.
Progressives have real contempt for the elites because they deserve
it, very simply put. The crisis has reached a point now where we are morally
obligated to let the elites complete as much suicidal self-destruction as
they can achieve. This is why we offer zero support to Demoks.
If we progressives vote our principles by voting third party
candidates and if the Repuks win power, the silver lining of the resulting
cloud will very likely be the key to our non-violently achieving significant
and lasting change toward social democracy in the USA.
34.
Nannie August 11th, 2008 4:48 pm
.
Nader will change things.
Nader is our only hope.
Nader is the only choice.
Fight the Two-party system.
VOTE NADER 2008. You'll be glad you did and so will I.
.
35.
jozef August 11th, 2008 4:58 pm
"Well all you Dem bashers. when you get your man, McCain, in the
white house he will see that your medical care is much more affordable.then
you can march in the streets (Whoopee) and he will give you what you need. a
lesson in how to win wars and keep the people down. You will all deserve
McCain. Good Luck!" Oh please. As if we wouldn't get the same from Obama.
Why is it that Democrats cannot come up with a reason to vote FOR their
candidate? They support Obama by saying vote anti-McCain. But they have it
bass ackwards. It's not that a vote for Nader is a vote for McCain. It's
that a vote for a Democrat or a Republican is a vote for THE SAME! Run
Ralph. Run!
36.
drich291 August 11th, 2008 5:01 pm
This is just another area in which my hard-earned dollars are going
to somebody's profits instead of services. In areas of the commons, like
health care, privatization is a diversion of community resources (money,
time, etc) to the benefit of rich individuals and their agents
(corporations). Let them make profits selling salad shooters and SUVs, but
keep the commons free of vultures.
37.
OldBadgertoo August 11th, 2008 5:10 pm
Sell-outs and cowards. But what Obama wants.
38.
Poet August 11th, 2008 5:11 pm
As the Democratic Party Leadership ("How now, Howie Dean?") hoists
both middle fingers to progressives it is time for progressives to vote:
Nader/Gonzalez
or
McKinney/Clemente
Any questions class?
39.
SallyUUKent <http://treecitytimes.blogspot.com> August 11th, 2008
5:12 pm
I'm deeply disappointed that the Dems did not act more aggressively
and back single payer health care, because anything else is just more
corporate welfare for the insurance industry, which is raping us blind and
leaving us all broke.
I've been so completely soaked by medical expenses recently that
I've barely been able to make my monthly rent, which is dirt cheap for where
I live. My prescription co-pays are outrageous because I am on "Tier III"
drugs that don't come in generic, and those in our insurance company's drug
formulary that are under the designation of "Tier III" are the most
expensive, so I end up paying ridiculous amounts of money for fairly common
medications.
I had recent surgery on my left hand that the insurance did not pay
for, and I have no clue as to how to come up with the money to pay the bill.
I wish I could find a legitimate federal grant to pay off my debts, but
there are so many web sites out there that advertise federal grant money
available that I am quite entirely sure that 99% of them are scams made to
bilk desperate people out of their hard earned cash, so it's hard to know
whether there is such a thing as a real, legit federal grant available to
help people pay off debts. Then, if there are such things, how one would go
about writing a grant proposal to receive such money is another mystery.
So it all adds up to the fact that we have a very broken system in
this country that no one has the cojones to address and which means we'll
still all be enslaved by the health insurance industry that is a big
campaign cash cow for so many candidates that they're afraid to bite the
hand that feeds them.
Call me a pessimist, but I doubt that we'll ever get true universal
single payer health care in this country. Just not going to happen, at least
not in my lifetime, anyway. Too much money and power at stake for it ever to
become a reality, sadly. :-(
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif
>
40.
Doom n Gloom August 11th, 2008 5:19 pm
Modern conservatives have gutted the government and raised the
deficit so high that none of the Democratic promises can be accomplished.
The American people remain in the dark by choice. Just who in Washington is
going to fix things?
We already know the reality. Change happens at the bottom first and
slowly works it's way upward. We are clearly in for some very hard times and
must change our values to sustain ourselves through the troubled times. The
Democrats and Republicans have both positioned themselves to sustain
themselves, not us. Today fifty percent of congressmen become lobbyists or
work for industries in and around Washington once leaving congress. Also,
five of the richest counties in America are in the Washington area. Little
more needs to be said.
41.
Pierre August 11th, 2008 5:25 pm
Ralph has the answers. He is the only true progressive. Dems have
turned into lap dogs and puppets for the corp world.long ago. Since Uncle
Nafta Bill. (There's his real first name.) He sold us all down the river, or
maybe that's wrong its the you-know-what creek, and it's not down it's UP!
Go Ralph, go!
42.
Bernice August 11th, 2008 5:43 pm
SOME Democratic members of Congress are fighting for single payer,
but it seems the Blue Dogs have the upper hand on health care so far. I find
it amazing that they take a simple truth (private insurance makes our health
care cost twice as much per person and leaves 47 million people without
access except that provided by overwhelmed hospital emergency rooms) and
pretend that we can save money and provide care to all WITHOUT changing to
single payer.
In Minnesota, Representative Keith Ellison (Dem, Mpls.) is convening
a forum tonight at which he and others will discuss how to promote HR 676,
John Conyers' excellent single-payer plan. On the State level, Senator John
Marty has developed a single-payer tax-supported plan that can/could show
America how it's done when it's done right. (Unless our no-tax governor and
his version of the failed Massachusetts plan can somehow prevent the Marty
plan's passage.)
43.
Gail August 11th, 2008 5:47 pm
"The party now declares itself "united behind a commitment that
every American man, woman and child be guaranteed to have affordable,
comprehensive health care.""
And what percentage of a family or individual's income would qualify
as "affordable"?
44.
ATLAW August 11th, 2008 5:48 pm
I only recently started reading Commondreams and this is one issue
that comes up that I don't understand and don't necessarily agree with. Why
is it a given that single payer is better. There is always lots of very
strong support for it but why? Isn't the issue that some people can't afford
health care and we need to provide them with decent healthcare? That's
great, but why take away the right of other people to have private
insurance? I am in Quebec right now and I can tell you regardless of Michael
Moore's movie people here are very frustrated wth having this right taken
away from them and I have heard personal stories of people having to pay
thousands out of their own pocket to save their lives basically because the
government healthcare wouldn't move fast enough. After listening to them I
am thankful for my private American health insurance and will happily
continue to pay for it each month, I save much more in taxes compared to
Canadian citizens anyway.
45.
cavedweller August 11th, 2008 5:48 pm
Surprisingly, most of us writing in these threads dance around the
most important issue. Clearly, the corporations have bought off the two
major parties. Progressives need to line up behind one leader who calls for
nationalizing the major industries in this country that have been allowed to
run amok. Energy, pharmaceuticals, insurance and airlines are industries
that are ripe for nationalization. The myth that private industry can run
large organizations better than government is exploded by the actions of the
largest industries over the past 25 years.
46.
Gail August 11th, 2008 5:53 pm
P.S.
Would that "affordable" health care coverage actually cover illness'
and procedures that are currently being rejected today by insurers who are
raking-in astronimical profits while many of their paying clients are dying
as a result of lack of coverage?
47.
jclientelle August 11th, 2008 5:59 pm
As a former computer person who worked on hospital systems, I must
say that the chaotic insurance situation creates a Tower of Babel that is
extremely wasteful.
For now let us not consider the profiteering of the insurance
companies, the pharmaceutical companies and the medical supply and service
companies. The administrative costs of recovering revenue from hundreds of
insurance sources, each with their own constantly shifting rules and data
requirements for billing, contributes significantly to inflation of costs.
In order to collect revenue hospitals and doctors must divert time, effort
and dollars away from employing care-givers to employing billing support
personnel. It's nuts.
Bernice suggests that perhaps we could get more traction for single
payer in certain states. That is something to think about. Often states'
rights have been used against a progressive agenda. Maybe it can be a way to
break through here and there.
48.
revengegirl August 11th, 2008 6:12 pm
Now that the Democrat Plan has been announced - Look for all the
propaganda that is being generated by the Main Stream Media about
"Entitlements". They are calling Social Security Disability an entitlement
(meaning welfare).
Social Security Disability is an insurance program that those who work are
forced to buy - not an "entitlement".
This is to promote the idea that Social Security has been "Broken",
and the idea that the whole country would be bankrupted by a similar single
payer plan for all Americans.
The Social Security Medicare and Medicaid systems have been bilked
by the same corporations that caused the problem in the first place.
(Insurance Cos. Big Pharma, Hmo's etc.) and the war machine which borrows
from the Social Security trust fund to continue it's nefarious acts.
First they make a Health "Care" system where only the well insured
have good medical treatment. This keeps poor people from getting diagnosic
tests and preventive care. Then they make people who apply for disability
because of chronic pain or illness wait three years while the government
pays to have the patient investigated (and calls them a liar). If finally on
disability (after being financially ruined during the process), the only
doctors who will treat the disabled person are part of an insurance pool of
Doctors that give out antidepressants like lollypops and pressure them to go
back to work.
By the time the patient is really old and permanently disabled, the
system has only one choice to make a profit - Give the patient the all the
expensive diagnostic tests and medications they can justify in the
paperwork. In other words, if the disabled person is not going to contribute
to the plan of Maximum Productivity by working - Make them like a pod in The
Matrix, with Insurance Cos, Pharma, and for profit HMO's all sucking the
life out of them (and everyone else who pays into the system) - for profit
again.
And if the system is broken, just create more propaganda to blame
the elderly and disabled! (Those welfare cheats!!)Thus preventing any true
reform like Universal Healthcare and keeping the Insurance Companies and the
politicians they have bought in business.
49.
tetti_tatti August 11th, 2008 6:15 pm
Cynical as usual, Democrats are using dubious language that will
enable them to stab Americans in the back once again, while awarding their
big corporate donors in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.
I haven't read all posts but Lesser Evilists are leaving this thread
alone, mostly. Even *they* can't defend this horseshit.
50.
GwNorth August 11th, 2008 6:25 pm
I think this a bad move, and one that is worse then no system at
all.
If you force a person to pay for Insurance , even if subsidized, all
that will happen is thosee firms will escalate the Premiums.
They KNOW the Government has deep pockets, thus they can be even
less competitive.
I would point out that with the Drug Plan, the drug companies are
boosting the price of drugs by something like 3 times inflation and that
this in part because the Consumer (GOvernment) can bear the costs.
BAD idea...but tens of billions more to insurance companies.
I hope the taxpayers in America can see through this.
PK
51.
Reginald Rocktone August 11th, 2008 6:40 pm
It is true that Obama and the Democrats do not deserve the
progressive vote. But I wish all you Naderites (Nannie 4:48 pm for example)
would stop trying to promote your candidate and throw your support behind
McKinney and the Greens. I'm sure that Ralph Nader has a great platform, but
he's not going to win, and voting for him will not accomplish squat except
maybe give you some self-righteous satisfaction. The Greens on the other
hand are a legitimate political party which, while clearly not in a position
to win the White House, would benefit tremendously by capturing a noticeable
percentage of the vote.
Cynthia McKinney is a peace candidate representing a party with a truly
progressive platform.
52.
tailcap August 11th, 2008 6:43 pm
"Advisers to Obama and Clinton both told the party's platform
meeting they were happy with the compromise, adopted without opposition or
without explanation as to how health care would be guaranteed."
-now that should be a red flag, the details are omitted by design, just
trust them
Sounds like typical Obamian. In Obamian there are no red states nor
blues ones, in Obamian you can be both a liberal and a conservative, for
single payer and willing to settle for less, for war (Afghanistan) and
against it (Iraq), for withdrawing troops and for redeployment, for civil
rights and against it (FISA), for the little guy and the big guy (NAFTA),
both black and white.
In other words in Obamian you can be all things to all people. You
can straddle a fence and be in both camps, speaking out one or both sides of
your mouth.
In order to speak well in Obamian you will need to be a complete
calculator to able to weigh whether it is more politically advantageous to
be on one side of an issue or another, or both. The best Obamian speakers
don't actually believe in anything (except winning office), which allows
them maximum flexibility to maneuver and fish for votes.
53.
tailcap August 11th, 2008 6:46 pm
National Health Insurance (single-payer)
Greens: Support
Republicans: Oppose
Democrats: Oppose
54.
Greyfoxx August 11th, 2008 7:02 pm
Taxation without representation . and so why are we so surprised
when the majority is not heard above the roar of a few hundred lobbyists who
shove piles of money into the pocket of those we so stupidly elect to cover
our backs while we as wage slaves give our lives over to the "Corporate
Tower of Babble". It must be that we no longer speak the same language, that
we have become the peons of the new age of Corporate Gobleization. Over
54,000,000 American citizens have no health care at all, and 80 of those who
do have health insurance have to fight like hell to get the coverage they
pay through the nose to get .. and the corporate lobbyists scream "give us
more" and they get more by stuffing more dollars in the pockets of the well
trained congressional lapdogs. We voted power away from the republicans,
only to have the Dims move in and take over with their own group of lobbyist
who want their share of blood. Can anyone in America tell me when Ralph
Nader lied to us? When during any one of his speechs did he lie on any
subject relating to the needs of the American people. Anyone out there when
Ralph Nader lied to us, and when did those in office now not lie to you?
Greed is like alcoholism, enough is never enough.
55.
jareilly August 11th, 2008 7:17 pm
we don't get single payer because the Dems refuse to talk up it's
merits:
1 - choice of doctors,
2 - broadest possible pool meaning lowest per unit cost (everybody is in),
3 - one coverage package,
4 - less overhead
5 - impartial medically-based cost control (vs. current bean-counter-based
cost control or "pay once then churn"),
6 - reduced health/tort litigation - if you know your health care will be
covered you don't have to sue somebody to pay the high cost when you suffer
an injury.
7 - single payer more or less equals Medicare for all and Medicare already
works well - but would of course work better with everybody in and with
price negotiation between pharma, along with providers, hospitals and
government.
The Dems could stand for all this without surrendering any terrain
on "market based solutions, blah, blah, blah". This IS market-based. It's
not national health as in the UK.
Of course that would require the Dems to actually stand.
As Gil Scott-Heron's grandma once said, "You've got to stand for
something or you'll fall for anything."
56.
buminfl August 11th, 2008 7:18 pm
Well, ATLAW, I'm so glad you have everything under control and can
pay out thousands of $$$ to your insurance company every year. The trouble
is, some 47,000,000 of us can't. I'm for a single payer plan not only
because I'm currently not covered, but also because the whole healthcare
delivery system in this country is corrupt and broken. Until proper
healthcare can be deliverd to every US citizen regardless of his/her
economic situation, I will have a real problem with the greedy corporations
that run the system now. If we redirected some of the money that we lavish
on our military, we'd have the finest healthcare in the world instead of its
most efficient killing machine. If you can't understand this, perhaps you
should be visiting websites other than this one.
57.
GwNorth August 11th, 2008 7:20 pm
Just doing a quick calc in the head. If the 54,000,000 Americans
without insurance number is accurate and insurance mandated and costs lets
say 5000$$ per year, thats 250 billion more dollars a year to insurance
companies.
They gotta be salivating.
PK
58.
quousque August 11th, 2008 7:21 pm
I enthusiasicly support voting for the Less Evil Party!!!
Good God is that depressing .
59.
MikeBinSC August 11th, 2008 7:23 pm
When McSame is inaugurated in January, the number of Americans
without health coverage will soar well above 50 Million and many more people
will be DWW(Deceased While Waiting) for some type of coverage, and many will
be children.
One more thing, if you want to vote for a progressive against the
Dems, you should at least join the party and vote Green for Cynthia
McKinney, and help build an opposition party. The only thing you're building
with a Nader vote, is his ego.
60.
Ted Markow August 11th, 2008 7:30 pm
"Obama, soon to be the Democratic nominee, has stopped short of
proposing to mandate health coverage for all. He aims to achieve something
close to universal coverage by making insurance more affordable and helping
struggling families pay for it."
While disappointing, it is a step in the right direction. What we
really need is universal, single payer health care as the rest of the
industrialized world has shown. We are dead last in health coverage and
health care in terms of getting it to all the people.
Let's face it - the American people for all their "support" for
change, do not want change. And change can mean something different for each
of us.
There was a thread here on CD a couple of days ago about good
samaritans and working for the common good. As a nation, we are a long, long
way from a people and a society that are willing to work for the common
good.
So, in the mean time, we will have to take our changes in increments
and hope it's enough. That, and pressure lawmakers in Washington
relentlessly to finally start working for the common good.
61.
Greyfoxx August 11th, 2008 7:35 pm
ATLAW
Fight your own fight in Canada for proper health care, and let us
fight ours here in the U.S. My oldest daughter languished in a hospital in
Seattle for three month with breast cancer and was told she would not live
to Christmas, all because the FDA would not approve a new chemo therapy that
was being used in Canada, so because her husband is Canadian we moved her to
Canada where she received the new inhalant chemo. She is now in full
remission. The FDA has now approved the new therapy.
Join the discussion:
You must be
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-login.php?redirect_to=http://www.com
mondreams.org/archive/2008/08/11/10923/> logged in to post a comment. If you
haven't registered yet, click
<http://www.commondreams.org/archive/wp-register.php> here to register.
(It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making
such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this
site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond
'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Common Dreams NewsCenter <http://www.commondreams.org/>
A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the
progressive community.
Home <http://www.commondreams.org/> | Newswire
<http://www.commondreams.org/newswire.htm> | Contacting Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/contactingus.htm> | About Us
<http://www.commondreams.org/about.htm> | Donate
<https://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/105/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_K
EY=1869> | Sign-Up
<http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1493/t/24/signUp.jsp?key=1439> |
Archives <http://www.commondreams.org/archives.htm>
C Copyrighted 1997-2008 <http://www.commondreams.org/>
www.commondreams.org
Podcast Powered by <http://www.mightyseek.com/podpress/> podPress (v8.2)
<http://www.quantcast.com/p-9bNnJVyoTrfhk> Quantcast
_____
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 7711 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0007.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 4006 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0008.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 173 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0009.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1039 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0010.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 352 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0011.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 276 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0006.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 160 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0007.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 219 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0008.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 998 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0009.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 671 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0010.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 478 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0011.png
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 171 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0012.gif
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 35 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080811/21bf5743/attachment-0013.gif
More information about the Dialogue
mailing list