- Pennsylvania Among 'Terrible 10' Most Regressive Tax States
- February 4 Non-Partisan Training: HOW TO RUN FOR ELECTION BOARD IN 2013: HOW TO RUN FOR COMMITTEEPERSON IN 2014
- Republican Governors Opt-In to Medicaid Expansion
- The Reports of Unions' Death Are Greatly Exaggerated
- Ask Allyson Schwartz to run for Governor
- Mind the gap: Opting Out of Medicaid Expansion Leaves Low-income Families Behind
- Jan. 14 Workshop:HOW TO RUN FOR ELECTION BOARD IN 2013; HOW TO RUN FOR COMMITTEEPERSON IN 2014
- Seth Williams on Guns, Jasmine Rivera on School Closures @PFC Meetup Wednesday
- PA Revenue Strong Midway Through Year; Tax Cut Could Have Big Impact
- What to Make of the Fiscal Cliff Deal?
Sestak Health Care Meeting: Will you let the nut jobs win?
Submitted by Dan U-A on Mon, 08/10/2009 - 2:43pm.
Joe Sestak is going to hold a meeting on universal health care this Wednesday. Like every other town hall meeting on healthcare, insurance companies will partner with crazy, racist, nut jobs to try to disrupt any actual meeting from taking place. It is a holy alliance of the fringes of society, spurred on by Glen Beck, Sarah Palin, and a too compliant national media, with the power and money of the insurance companies goading them on. All to stop every American from getting to see a doctor.
For example, word got out that Sestak's meeting would actually be held in Philly, and so, there was this tweet:
CON SESTAK PA 7TH DISTRICT IS NOT HAVING MEETING IN AREA OF VOTERS THAT ELECTED HIM HE IS MAKING US GO 2 PHILLY WHERE THE BLACK PANTHERS R
Oh, where the black panthers are!?
And, if that was a little to subtle for you, it was followed by this one:
@glennbeck iTS A BLACK CHURCH IN ANOTHER DIS. SESTAK IS GOING TO SAND BAG US
Um, yeah. It is even directed at Glenn Beck. That is too, too, too perfect. That is who will be at the town hall, hoping to drown out any conversation from actually happening.
We can sit back and watch the carnage, or we can show up to these forums and make sure that the insurance companies and the birthers don't win. Here are the details:
Broad Street Ministry proudly presents an Avenue of the Arts Forum:
A Health Care Townhall Featuring Joe Sestak
This Wednesday, August 12th | 6:30 - 7:30pm
Location:
Broad Street Ministry
315 S. Broad St., Philadelphia, PA
b/t Spruce and Pine (across from UArts and Kimmel Center)This event is FREE and OPEN to the Public. PLEASE COME and SPREAD the WORD!!
After being a guest of our “Vision of a Just Society” forum, Congressman Sestak returns for a candid conversation hosted by Rev. Bill Golderer to answer your questions about Health Care Reform.
Be there.
will blog and promote.
let's pack the place. let's pack the place so full the mouthbreathers can't even get in.
bummed i don't think i can
bummed i don't think i can make this. the black panthers are going to have to go this one without me, sadly
We heard about it late and I just emailed
3000 or so health care activists in the region.
The response in the first few minutes has been great.
I can't be there as I'm speaking in Erie that night.
So go get the crazies for me (but nicely)!
Here are our recommendations about how to deal with teh wingnuts: http://www.hcanpa.org/docs/PAGuideforHealthCareActivists.pdf
I'll be there.
I'll be there.
Me too
Easy to find. No tokens or transfers involved.
I'll be the one with the coffee from Last Drop.
You think insurance companies have partnered with racists?
"Like every other town hall meeting on healthcare, insurance companies will partner with crazy, racist, nut jobs to try to disrupt any actual meeting from taking place."
Is this a joke? Maybe I'm being too literal, but if I'm not, this is one of the most absurd things I have read in a while. A sane insurance company would never associate themselves with the behavior of the people at these town halls. And if they did, there would sure to be a whistle-blower somewhere in the organization to put a stop to it. Also, the repulsive stereotype that conservatives are intrinsically racist seems to be insinuated once more. It's not an effective tactic to respond to mudslinging with yet more mudslinging. No one wins when that happens.
These town halls appear to be driven at a deeper level by the fact that there is no balance in the legislative process (Congress and the Presidency are both overwhelmingly populated with Democrats, so the legislative force is being countered with an opposite force, the town hallers), most Americans' innate fear of taxes, the fact that 68% of Americans have healthcare that they rate as good or excellent, and their fear that the Government is going to botch the implementation of healthcare reform. Republicans, conservatives, and fiscal conservatives have been backed into a corner and the only way they are going to influence the process is to get louder. Some obviously think that the situation is so dire and desperate that they are taking their tactics too far though as we have observed.
Furthermore, it's important to point out that a few raving lunatics at a town hall do not represent the whole of those who disapprove of this legislative process (note, I did not say the goal, I said the process). Given we have yet to fix neither Social Security nor Medicare, how can we justify adding yet another program that is likely to be yet another financial albatross? We can't just keep printing money. The threat of a Dollar crisis is very real if we continue to operate on the assumption that the rest of the world is going to want our debt like they have.
Between the War on Terror, spending on homeland security, the recession, the multitudes of bailouts, the Bush stimulus, the Obama stimulus, and the prospects of a double-dip recession, we are in a terrible situation financially. Healthcare is indeed something that needs to be addressed, but taking this slapdash, half-baked approach to get it done is wrong in so many ways, it's truly frustrating to watch. It's about time we learn from our mistakes and history so we quit making the same mistakes again and again and again and again.
i think the emphasis is "nut jobs"
the emphasis, nik, is on "nut jobs", of who many happen to be racists. i don't know how else to describe people who refuse to believe mr. obama is an american citizen, who keep bringing up the idea that he's a closet muslim (as if there's something alien about the religion), and who show up with confederate flag regalia.
and i'm sorry if you see that as mudslinging, but perhaps you need to take a better look at these so-called "conservatives".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbpZXivv-M
from bethlehem, PA.
"go home" "he's a muslim".
Yeah, it's embarrassing, but it's part of a long record.
Worse of course is that the conservatives are allowing themselves to be misled by charlatans like glenn beck, so of course they feel "backed into a corner". they're so full of misinformation, they can't engage a coherent, fact-based debate.
blame your leaders for leasding y'all astray.
They partnered with 90s Republicans
But nobody ever called Trent Lott or Jesse Helms a racist, did they?
Speaking of leaders leading the flock astray
gotta love the sheer chutzpa of Sarah Palin to decry the proposed health care plan as "downright evil" and a plan to implement totally fraudulent "death panels". That isn't spin on Palin's part, thats knowing utter and complete fabrication, lady. And every commentator with half a brain are going to call you on the fact that you are knowingly lying to try and get the political fringes all riled up. "Elect me, I'll tell you bold-faced lies for cheap political advantage".
Example, that bastion of lefty effete liberal thought, AP:
In other words, what is actually proposed is if someone wanted to (and only if they wanted to) take time to make a plan for how they want their end of life to go so they got a chance to talk it out calmly with their family and doctor before they are strapped into the ventilator, once every 5 years they would get a chance for Medicare to pay for the doctor's time to be there to answer questions. Sounds downright nefarious.
Its time to call out the liars for what they are.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
most of this is silly
most of this is silly conservative talking-point boilerplate and not worth responding to, though this really should be highlighted and mocked:
"These town halls appear to be driven at a deeper level by the fact that there is no balance in the legislative process (Congress and the Presidency are both overwhelmingly populated with Democrats"
yes, that's because we live in a democracy, and a majority of people ELECTED democrats.
yes also true
one wonders if there were complaints from the right about "legislative balance" when the gop controlled the white house and both houses of congress.
people don't trust the republicans to answer problems, at least on the national stage.
I don't speak for "the right"
I'm one person, I don't speak for any group of people.
Despite what you assume, I think there needs to be balance. In fact, nothing is worse than sitting by while one party just rams their policy down the country's throat. The Republicans pushed their policy in the early 2000's and now the Democrats are doing the same now. It's not healthy for our country. If you think it is, just notice how divided the country is and how Obama's approval rating has dropped so far despite the apparent economic recovery (which, by the way, from a financial and economic point of view I wouldn't be so fast at embracing as we risk a double-dip recession). Furthermore, this new "era" of Democratic leadership and the "failure" of the Republican Party is greatly overblown. When one party get drunk with power, it doesn't take long for the pendulum to swing to the other side. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Nick you even have your Cato economics wrong
Even diehard anti-Keynsian economists do not fear that anything Obama has proposed will do anything but make us get out of the recession faster. They however fear a massive inflation or possibly a 70's style "stagflation" on the other side when we pull out but nobody who actually studies economics is talking about a "double-dip recession" because it does not make sense from any conceivable cause and effect scenario.
I'm having a hard time seeing a "drunk with power" at a national level. Nationally we Dems seem the proverbial "herd of cats" we have always been while in majority. More I see the national GOP feeding outright distortion and fear mongering even to you because they can't win on the facts. Overall I see a whole lot of posturing to get some sort of "bi-partisanship" and a GOP whose sole unifying tactic is obfuscation of the facts and foot-dragging for foot-dragging's sake.
In other words being right more often than not has made the majority a majority and building your politics on fear and blame games has produced its own results for the GOP.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Not speaking from or for Cato either
I didn't bring up Cato, Keynes, anyone, or anything else. All I said was that we just spent a ton of money, look to be spending even more money, and the prospects of a double-dip recession only further weaken our chances economically. I'm not a fortune teller and I'm not making predictions. But, if you think "nobody who actually studies economics" is talking about a double-dip recession, here is some reading material:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a3IpfKeeveVM
http://seekingalpha.com/article/153118-double-dip-recession-by-2009-don-...
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/08/03/dr-doom-sees-double-dip-recess...
http://247wallst.com/2009/06/15/another-vote-for-a-vicious-double-dip/
http://seekingalpha.com/article/153211-double-dip-recession-what-does-it...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/11/double-dip-recession/ (ironically enough from someone at Cato)
So there we had the IMF chief, a Harvard economics professor, an NYU economics professor, an asset manager, and a fellow of a public policy think tank. People are talking about it. You just aren't listening.
Ultimately though, the prospect is real, but it's not certain. How could we get this scenario? Housing prices start falling again (remember the $8000 tax credit is set to expire and some feel it is a major prop to the market), the commercial real estate shoe drops, unemployment keeps rising or stays at a high level, consumer debt sours, consumer spending doesn't pick up, another wave of foreclosures, implications of the healthcare bill, taxes having to be raised, the stimulus spending not happening quickly enough, a "Black Swan" event, asset deflation due to a stock market correction, or some combination of the aforementioned are some of the main ones. This is not fear mongering. These factors cannot be ignored. Doing so would be like saying in the second quarter of 2007 that subprime only affected a small part of the population and the doomsday prophets were just bears looking to make a buck.
You googled "double-dip" and pulled automatically
most of these articles use the phrase but actually make a more credible case for a slow pullout, rather than a true "double-dip". You also lose a lot of crediblity points for quoting the "Rev. Sun Young Moon says we print everything pro-Republican no matter how uncredible or ridiculous" Washington Times, perhaps the newspaper with the lowest standards for journalistic integrity in U.S.
Deficit spending increases inflationary risks tremendously it's true, someday that will be our problem. It is absolutely 100% not our problem currently. Ulitmately at best this is an argument against a second round of stimulus, not against the long term benefits of budget neutral healthcare reform.
Not covering all Americans hurts the US's competitiveness and makes emergency rooms - the coverage of last resort - tremendously expensive. Ultimately real healthcare reform would put the US economy on much better footing because its currently skyrocketing costs are a recipe for disaster.
The case for a slow recovery are 1.) that banks are still not lending enough to sustain real economic growth because they are still dragging their feet on disclosing/unloading bad debt 2.) the job market and hence concumer confidence still have yet to bottom. But Obama has said flatly he won't sign a health insurance reform bill that isn't paid for one way or the other.
So you are afraid of deficit spending and some versions of healthcare reform make society a tiny bit more redistributive, moving us tad closer to the level redistribution we had under that notorious lefty Dwight Eisenhower as opposed to the last couple of decades where the rich have gotten richer and the middles progressively dropped out. But they are still deficit neutral and hence not part of the problem you are fretting about. Its a red herring to this discussion.
Unless your point is that you like the current system of more expnsive health care for most people because you like how it realy sticks it to the poor and uninsured. Or folks unlucky enough to be victims of the unholy practice of "recision".
Ultimately healthcare reform will be a significant investment in the human "infrastructure" of our economy and give us a stronger economic base from which to build economic growth and has not one thing to do with your take on deficit spending as an intentional response to severe recession, because it won't involve deficit spending.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Of course I googled that
You said that "no one" thinks a double-dip recession is plausible. I provided some links to show some opinions that there are credible sources who think it could happen. I showed that a Harvard professor, an NYU professor, a money manager, the IMF chief, and a fellow at a public policy think tank said they think it is possible. I mean, come on! The IMF chief thinks the worst may be yet to come!
And just to be fair, I included the Washington Times article just to point out the irony of your previous post. I found it to be condescending and certainly not a great way to win an argument.
And I repeat
A number of those articles fret more about a prolonged recovery than a "double-dip" as teh most likely scenario. A few of them seem to be wishing for it to punish the current administration for partisan reason and a some are framed in over-statement to make a point that current indications we may have hit bottom are going to take a long time to translate to the real economy of the job market, consumer confidence. And all of it is sort of about deficit spending to stimulate the economy.
But nobody is talking about any form of health care reform that isn't entirely paid for i.e. is deficit neutral. So its a complete and utter red herring to the health care debate. End of story.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Hahahahaha.
Hahahahaha.
Majority might makes right then I guess
I know it's easy for you to be smug about this now, but I think it's funny how if we read the archives of this site we would find plenty of complaints about the Bush Presidency. That's what the majority of voters wanted, wasn't it?
If you really think that having balance in the legislative process is not important, I don't even know what to say to that. Nothing is worse than having one party control the system. Just look at the corruption in Philadelphia when it was run mostly by Republicans and the corruption now with how it is now run by mostly by Democrats. You simply can't have one party running the show. That's an empirical fact and ignoring it because your side of the aisle benefits from it is dangerous indeed.
But the national GOP is not putting up better alternatives
they are just running interference and sabotage plays.
Hence Senator Jim DeMint's "Waterloo strategy".
Which is more dangerous to healthy democarcy - a cantankerous, constantly disagreeing majority or minority hell-bent on nothing but mis-information and outright demagoguery?
I'll take the people who have plan and have to do the work to explain it over the guys whose whole plan is nothing but "those guys are 'socialists' and not even US citizens".
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Some GOPers are using horrible tactics to realize their strategy
The GOP is not unified right now. Part of the problem seems to stem from the fact that some want to be conciliatory, some want different tactics and strategy, and some are just lashing out because they feel that they have to do something because the Party isn't.
And you can't just take any bad plan put up by default because it is the best presented option.
No I'll take a good plan
and two things are ultimately undeniable.
1.) The status quo with escalating costs is unsustrainable so its anything but a "good plan". In other words just saying "too fast" without specific recomendations is just justifying a system that is already on the road to ruin.
2.) the best plan will come out of thoughtful discussion and better yet concrete suggestions. Not ridiculous, blatant mis-information like these right wing yahoos are currently putting forward.
BTW - the right is unified enough on the "we're victimized" strategy. They have been running on fear and "we white male Christians are the biggest victims of all" for years. The American people are losing faith with self-serving GOP whiners who don't present credible solutions. This is a long term problem the national GOP has failed to deal with for years. "I'm a GOP victim of some vague liberal elite" does not fix anything in the real world or put dinner on most of America's table.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Nick you do get the basic idea
that one of the economic pressures driving the hyper inflation of medical costs is that so many people are cut out of the system. Insurance companies don't compete to deliver coverage more effectively to more people for less but to figure ways to hand pick healthier upscale customers and outfox their competitors in how to skirt the law and eliminate costly sick customers they used to cover till they got sick. As a radio commentator recently said (and I like the analogy) until everyone is covered you can't squeeze the system to get better efficiencies because its like toothpaste tube with the top off. You can "squeeze the system" to work the toothpaste from the back of the tube to the front if everyone is covered to get the most out of the tube but not without it. Countries where everyone is covered as a result have much lower operating costs than places where they are not.
Complaining about a rush to judgement on this basic principle sounds sort of like complaining that people are in too big a rush to accept this crazy gravity thing Newton has everyone in a tizzy about these days.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
countries that have everyone covered have lower operating costs
is not entirely accurate as in australia they simply couldn't afford to keep everyone on the public plan any more so to get people off the public plan they offered a subsidy to every person in the country who will get off the public plan and sign on with private insurance.this subsidy was brought in by the left wing labour govt ,not from the right and was offered as a method for cost control ,not because of any free market ,right wing ideological reasons.
Which is an argument for Obama's plan ultimately
A strong public option competing with private insurance to control costs because competition makes both the private insurance and the public option work harder would be exactly what australia's example indicates in that scenario. So in other words you support a strong public option then ian, correct?
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Health insurers aren't the problem
It's easy to hate big corporations, but more lies beyond what is readily apparent, especially in this case. Let's briefly examine UnitedHealth Group, a huge player in the healthcare arena. Thomson Reuters reports that the net profit margin of UnitedHealth Group is 4.14% for the trailing twelve months (TTM) and a five year average of 5.53%. These margins are razor-thin, even more so when put into the context of the risk they manage. If you don't think so, compare that to Google at 20.56% TTM and a five year average of 22.93%. Compare that to Apple at 21.20% TTM and a five year average of 17.24%.
So why do I bring these numbers up? The point is that the health insurers do make a big profit nominally, but when put into the context of their business, they are not the wildly profitable companies that people make them out to be. When you take a small percentage of a huge number, you get a huge number back. On a percentage basis, these companies are not that profitable. These margins have to be maintained because they allow for fluctuations in their business so they are not insolvent during bad times.
Also, to say that there is not enough competition in insurance and a public option is needed to bring prices down is very misleading. Insurance is one of the most competitive businesses in the country. There are so many players out there already, that helps to explain why health insurance is such a low-margin business. Insurance companies don't do anything fancy. They assign risk to a group, charge a premium based on that risk, financially manage the collected premiums, and pay out claims to their customers. What's left is their profit and in UnitedHealth Group's case over the last twelve months, that's 4.14% of all the money they collect.
The real problem in America is the cost of care provided. It's not the health insurers' fault that the claims that their customers make are much higher than they should be. They just pay the claims. In fact, the health insurers would love for the cost of care to be much lower because then that lessens their exposure to risk, would help to improve the morale of their customers, and in turn their perception publicly. Ultimately though, they are the ones caught in the middle of this mess. Employers want the lowest rates possible. Customers want the best benefits possible at the lowest cost to them. Physicians want to get paid. Shareholders want the most money to be made. Being responsible to so many people is indeed quite the challenge.
Cost of care is so high because of many factors, which include things like the high cost of malpractice insurance, not using preventative care effectively, the unhealthy lifestyles that people lead, and seeking out the wrong kind of care (many people go to the emergency room, which is extremely expensive, when they should be going somewhere else). Going after the insurers is like going after the symptoms of a problem. The symptoms will always been there if the root cause is not corrected. We must fix the causes of these problems before trying to do anything more, especially one that could wind up being yet another huge financial albatross on our government.
Its not about "big corporations"
Its about about a history of repeated abusive practices.
Whining about how "hard" it is for companies with practices like this is akin to saying "you know with economy down smuggling heroin is not as profitable as it used to be."
The current system is in dire need of reform. Its hard to believe anyone who says otherwise is not being disingenuous.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Of course we need reform!
My whole point of bringing this up is the original article insinuates that insurance companies like or, worse, actively support the irrational people who show up to yell-down others. The whole last paragraph of the post you just replied to expresses what reform needs to affect. I support reform, but the difference is that I support a different approach and scope for right now.
All HC supporters in town need to go to the Sestak townhall
The Haters, outnumbered in reality but overrepresented on the floor, are holding debate hostage.
This is critical. This is the most important progressive program since the Johnson Administration, it has the best chance of passing it ever has, but the wingnuts can scare Congress if we passively allow them to monopolize these townhalls.
We must show up for health care and show that America supports health care reform.
Along with HCAN's advice for dealing with the Teabag Health Care Haters, I also like Campaign For America's Future page.
Philly For Change will be in the house. I'm getting questions about whether there will be a meeting spot for the Good Guys at the church on Broad St tonight.
Does anyone know? Marc?
Oh, and Nick
Not that I really approve of engaging with people who defend the health care status quo when the American system costs the most, provides the 37th best care worldwide according the World Health Organization, and immiserates million of its citizens (many of whom I know), but Nick who cares about "blame"?
Commercial insurers in the present system blow something like 12% on paperwork that better systems don't require, and if there were a great big public option run by the same folks who run Medicare, their bargaining power could drive down health care costs because pharmaceuticals and doctors and everybody else would be forced to negotiate.
Ask your grandparents, that's how Medicare works now. Doctors accept less from Medicare for services. And don't cry for doctors. US doctors make more than doctors anywhere else.
Such negotiating is how health care everywhere else in the world works and works better.
I don't defend the status quo
There is definitely a lot of room for improvement in our system. Just because I defend pieces of the status quo (like the fact that an employer could give the choice to its employees to pick an FSA, HRA, or HSA) does not mean that I defined the entire system as it is comprised now.
Also, I have a fundamental problem with running another healthcare system like Medicare, which is projected to be insolvent by 2017.
Medicare's funding problem
has to do with an aging population, medical succes at people living longer. What I think Sam was refering to was Medicaid's remarkable ability to control costs by having bigger bargaining power. In terms of operating costs per person it performs much, much better than most private insurance and truthfully in my personal experiences with both, I found Medicare much more streamlined, much less bureaucratic than any form of Blue Cross/Blue Shield - at least from a consumer's perspective.
The whole idea of saying "its the cost of health care, not the insurance companies" misses the fundamental problem. Insurance companies currently best make money by cutting people out. Those people can't access routine care and then end up in the emergency room when their helath issues becomes chronic and much more expensive to treat. They can't pay because they are uninsured and the hospital eats it - or rather the rest of us eat it with higher helath care costs which in turn costs the insurance companies more, so the insurance companies become even more unethical about who they cut out of coverage. People cut out of coverage put off routine treatment until they end up in the emergency room. Rinse and repeat.
We have a system that ultimately incentivizes cutting people out of care so they end up costing the system more when they finally get to the "coverage of last resort". Thats the wrong approach to the problem if you want to control overall costs. Or if you have a sense of morals.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Live from the basement @ Sestak townhall, biggest ovation
was when Joe said that the #1 issue he would not negotiate about is a public option. He's for it and won't budge.
Seemed to play to the values of the audience.
The wing nuts are like vampires
if you come out with enough people who are curious to hear the truth their disinformation campaign fails miserably.
It helps to have supporters of reform but even if you come in as a skeptic with open ears to hear whats actually being discussed and not what some right wing kook makes up, they shrink away like vampires exposed to sunlight.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
Some came to listen
some came to distribute false flyers representing non-existent groups.
My favorite moment: a fed-up Ben Burrows gets up, heads upstairs, and soon the words "Go Home, Nazi!" echo through the church.
Its sort of amazing the crazies
have not a single pause about using the same catch phrases, the same images, standing right next to the Larouchies.
I stand by my original read. The only way to stop the disinformation campaign is for enough people who demand to hear what the real plan on the table - not some made up gobbledey-gook - is about to show up. They have figured this much out. If they pack the room with people who will scream lies about whats not actually in the legislation, they can make meetings go crazy.
People. Have. To. Educate. Themselves. About. The. Real. Plan.
It's been at least a generation, possibly not since the Civil Rights movement, possibly not since slavery since its been this important for regular Americans to get informed about the actual details of the actual bills being discussed. We can't trust that voices of sanity will prevail. We have to understand the issues well enough to be able to talk to family members, to people on the street, to our neighbors - to be able to understand and explain the actual issues in our own words.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
well, right now we have a problem
because there isn't "A PLAN".
there are lots of different competing ideas about what the plan should be.
So thanks to rahm emmanuel and his blue dogs making sure a bill didn't pass before recess, no one has anything concrete to talk about.
sestak's town hall went better than expected, but as his own staff said to me, it's difficult to talk about a THING when that THING doesn't exactly exist yet.
I liked most of what i heard, but was not too psyched about a national health care system based on the massachusetts plan. A LOT of my friends live in MA (I was a resident from 1993-1998) and i don't know one single person who likes Mitt Romneycare.
Sestak was real specific
that he was talking about the House bill his committee produced, which is a strong public option with the health insurance exchange - basically what progressives broadly speaking support.
Correct me if I am wrong but something very close to that could likely pass the House tommorrow if it went to a vote. Its the Senate where things get a lot more murky from my understanding.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
I also think it's helpful to expose the lies & nonsense
that the Teabaggers are distributing at these events. I wish the media would cover that.
I saved the flyers that the gentleman who didn't want to talk to me had been distributing before he suddenly dropped them and decided to leave for some reason.
When I get to a scanner, I'll post them online.
It's worth noting that one of the two flyers directs questions to a bogus website for what is presumably a bogus group.
If the facts in the flyer were reliable, wouldn't someone want to take credit for them?
If they were really interested in building a grassroots movement, wouldn't they want interested parties directed to a real site where they could find out more about and perhaps join the group?
WE know these guys and their arguments are bogus, but I think a lot of people at home -- people who may honestly share some qualms about changing health care -- don't know just how ridiculous are most of the Health Care Haters' arguments at these events.
Collect and document the BS on the web
dispute the B.S. in detail. Over time our fact checks will start to drown out the B.S. in google rankings. Start naming names on the most ridiculous lie-tellers till they are forced to step into the light and show how crazy they are or STFU.
Of course I wish I thought of this last night.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
it depends on what you mean by competition
in australia ,the public ins is free,and private insurance costs 165 bucks a month ( i wish someone would do a study on all the reasons why australian health care costs are so low that ins cos charge only 165 a month). if both plans were equal in quality then there would be no competition and all private ins cos would go out of business and australia would be stuck with the british system,ie why would you pay 165 bucks for something that you could get for free if the quality was identical. so obviously the private plan in aust ,in terms of doctor choice ,length of wait time,quality of hospital room etc is better so consumers have a real choice, ie get a good plan for free or a great one for 165 a month.a great plan for free and a great plan for 165 a month is not competion. in this country , maybe i'm wrong here , but it seems its being sold as the public plan will be every bit as good as private ins but with lower premiums,therefore why bother paying for private ins? do the majority of americans want to have the no competition english system ?
Its cheaper because free is decent and acceptable
And to "upsell" more premium coverage there are stark limits on what the market will bear before people will just say "screw it, I'll stick with the default". Again, you are just making the case for why the Obama plan and/or the House plan delivers the best results for consumers. It puts a sharp limit on cost and gives private insurance and the industry itself a real incentive to get smarter about keeping down costs. It gives people who can afford it the flexibility to choose a more premium level of coverage but leaves nobody out in the cold. Adequate but affordable dramatically shifts the way competition incentivizes controlling costs both for the Toyota Tercels and the Lexus models. Small businesses I bet are probably not raped in comparison to big businesses in terms of costs, as is the case in the current U.S. system. And it doesn't have the high level of costs associated with systems like the U.S. that leave millions of Americans out in the cold, till the most expensive "coverage of last resort" kicks in and ends up inflating everybody's costs.
Basically everything you are saying here might be a partial criticism of single-payer but is a stunning endorsement of the flexiblity in the plan thats on the table. I'm curious why you would even think you are offering it as a point of contention. If your description holds up, its one of the best arguments for the benefit of the public option plan I've heard.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
there will be a pretty nice dinner there, too, fyi
It's my church, so not quite of the hue described above, tho that's not entirely wrong. It's a pretty diverse place.
Anyway, there's going to be some nice food, I hear. I'll probably miss it, but you kids have fun.
---
This Too Will Pass, for the guts in your cerebrum.
Thank you Philly and Erie
for Standing up for health care reform.
Tonight PA stood for health care reform. In Erie all but a few of 110 people supported reform at a Town Hall with Rep. Dahlkemper. And in Philadelphia, it was 700 to 20 in favor at a Town Hall with Rep. Sestak. Thank you PA —and thanks to the organizers from HCAN and its partners —including ACORN AFCSME, MOVE ON, PENN ACTION, Philly for Change PUP SEIU, UFCW—who brought people out.
Kind of funny
Yet, I don't recall all the "protesters" during the Bush years being called crazies, racists and nazi's...
I find it truly puzzling how the left, which is always for the "community" and the rights of the poor and the individuals are the least tolerable of any type of dissent..
As a foreign born naturalized citizen, I think Americans need to experience gov. control and oppression, whether by this make belief health care reform, or cap and trade, card check, etc...Unfortunately, it is the only way people are going to learn what it is that you had and lost...
You haven't the slightest clue on how truly precious what you so disgustingly take for granted really is...
Sad but inevitable...
I'm not silencing the racist crazies
I'm just calling them out for what they are. They can espouse whatever screwed up distorted view of reality they want, but I'm going to my damendest to make sure their craziness does not derail a discussion of the actual facts. That's stopping the crazies from in effect silencing the rest of us non-crazies, whether we like any of the plans being discussed or have another alternate (but rational) plan.
If you tell fear-mongering lies and act like the boy who called wolf, you should not be surprised when people start saying you are not a credible reflection of how most of America feels.
People like this are crazies.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
no they were just arrested
for wearing tee-shirts: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-07-23-bush-protesters_x.htm
please. this is such tired nonsense that "the left" is intolerant of dissent.
"the left" didn't wiretap the quakers (or anyone else for that matter).
it's not "the left" that shows up at public forums carrying assault rifles: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/18/768652/-MORE-armed-people,-bigge...
so please. spare me the crocodile tears.
more of that RW "tolerance for dissent"
arrested for wearing "no bush" tee-shirts: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/17/3243
secret service removes people from bush rally for wrong bumper sticker: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/4325807/detail.html
we can play THIS game all day.
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/000618.html: indian woman harrassed at Bush rally for wrong bumper sticker. this one has some LOVELY commentary from the "not racist at all" right wing.
these must be aberrations.
oops, wait: http://www.disinfo.com/archive/pages/news/id2883/pg1/index.html. coupel arrested in florida for having a sign.
and that's just the arrests. Maybe i should do a search of quotes from limbaugh, beck, hannity, coulter and the rest of the right's leading pundits: I'm sure i won't find anything calling lefties "crazies, racists and nazi's".
Oh wait, oops: http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/038...
Uh-oh, this is tricker than i thought. here are some favorite ann Coulter quotes compiled by "right wing news": http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/coulter.php
"Liberals become indignant when you question their patriotism, but simultaneously work overtime to give terrorists a cushion for the next attack and laugh at dumb Americans who love their country and hate the enemy."
"We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too. Otherwise they will turn out to be outright traitors."
Yes, a bastion of tolerance: that's the right wing.