If you think the House Bill is a good one then you must just be tired of the wait!

Read the two points below and honestly tell me this is a good bill!

If this is the best we can do then we suck!

And if you are in the "better than nothing" crowd then you should run for congress!

Also, cowards, if you are going to unrec then at least post why!

"A report issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office highlights faults both sides of the argument to create a public health-insurance plan.

The CBO said only six million Americans would enroll in the public plan proposed in the 1,990-page health bill unveiled by House Democrats, according to findings issued late Thursday. That undercuts foes' claims that such a plan would lead to a government takeover of the health-care system.

One reason, according to CBO director Douglas Elmendorf's report: the public plan "would typically have premiums that are somewhat higher than the average premiums for the private plans" offered alongside it. That suggests the House bill could fall short of one of its major goals -- lowering insurance costs -- and presents those who back a public plan with a fresh challenge."

A good post which raises legitimate concerns.

Carry on.

The "Shut up and fall in line" crowd is out in force tonight.

Lieberman---is that you?

Focus on the content forget about the recs. sheesh.... not to mention this op was garbage.

I am confident that we will get to a single payer system. I think I'll run for congress.

Enriching insurance companies at public expense makes single payer less likely, not more

Of course, I have never held public office in my entire life.

I think this bill is a very small step. The most important thing is getting a law that says a public option must actually exist. You can build on it from there. Social Security was kind of crappy when it started and covered a limited amount of people. "Tiring" of waiting? We have been waiting since the days of Truman, way before I was born.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21849473/CBO-House-Health-Care

As I carefully explained in other posts, the assumption they based this opinion on is fundamentally flawed. The report stated that since the prices would be negotiated just like private companies, even though administrative costs would be lower the plan would attract "less healthy people". This directly contradicts statements earlier in the report that state the providers participating in the exchange cannot turn down anyone who applies and cannot revoke coverage except in cases of fraud. Therefore, there is no reason to assume the "less healthy people" would be attracted to the PO over private companies. Indeed, the private providers may be cheaper, but only because of competitive pricing - which is the whole purpose of the PO.

There are also many positives in the report - such as



and



and, bottom line:



There are a lot of other good things in the report. I encourage you to read the whole thing.

So, yeah, I like it.

I'm happy with the exchanges, too. Are there things not to like. Yes. But if I were sitting in the House I'd have no trouble at all voting for the bill and talking it up to my constituents.

BREAKING: CBO Releases Numbers On House Health Care Bill : Reduce Deficit by $104 Billion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8722280&mesg_id=8722280

...so where did that reduction come from, it appears a large portion (72 billion) is due to this new long term care insurance, aka CLASS.

While that is something to celebrate, the plan would have people paying in over the 10 year budget window for something they will need in the future, naturally this will be all gains until people start drawing from the fund. For reference this is shown on page 26, Table 3 of the CBO report.

It reminded me of the SS Trust Fund that was pre-financed and helped to reduce the deficits, especially during the Clinton and Bush years...now some are saying the money is all gone and how will the general budget be able to afford paying back the 2.5 trillion. Fun with numbers I suppose.


Posted here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6896374&mesg_id=6903227

--improves either. The useful parts of this bill should be recycled as separate legislation. There is no reason in hell why having more primary physicians needs to be linked to mass impoverishment to support insurance companies.

Long way to go. Stop jumping off a cliff already

much as many of you wish otherwise. That is why I support this bill. I know what it's going to mean to so many people.

The public plan is still going to cost money and the only thing that will help people buy it is the same SUBSIDY that will help people buy insurance.

It's the SUBSIDY stupid.

Which is why that is what Joe Lieberman wants to kill.

The fine print says it gets slashed if deficit targets are not met.

<snip>

"Dean's reaction to the House bill was, "It's not the best we can do, but it's a very good start."

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/dean-house-health-bill/

--that I can't afford any more donations to them, given that they are supporting the removal of most of my discretionary income.

1. perhaps the CBO is estimating that the non-public plans will lower their premiums to compete with the public plan and that participants will spread themselves out among the private plans as well as the public plan. It's not that people aren't eligible because the restrictions are so tight, it that the CBO thinks most just won't join.

2. Yes the PO will have higher premiums. I think ANY PO would have higher overall premiums because you are insuring the worst risks, the very people who most need the public option. (And that's a good thing, it's those people who need insurance.) Does this figure include the possibility of gov't subsidized premiums? The OVERALL premium might be high but the portion of the premium that could be paid by the plan participant might be much lower.

Their very existence is a firm statement that the only care you deserve is what you can pay for. There are people who are worthy of good care, and then there is the disposable human garbage over 55 that can be forced to pay twice the going rates.

1. Why on earth do you care how many people choose the public option? I care about the number of currently uninsured people who would have access to healthcare. The CBO puts that number as something like 35 million. Many of those people would be going into Medicare or Medicaid. Of the rest, all would have a choice of public or private insurance. If all but 6 million choose private insurance, that's their business. It will be more or less the same insurance, as both will have to provide the standard benefit package defined by HHS.

2. The CBO predicts that private insurers will be able to offer the basic benefit package at a lower price than the public plan, even though the public plan is operated with no need to create shareholder profits, and without advertising and marketing expense. In other words, the CBO predicts that the public plan will be spectacularly successful in forcing private insurers to compete on price. I hope they're right, although I'm not that optimistic myself.

Actually, this is an exceptional bill, but sadly it's far stronger than anything which will reach President Obama's desk.

That means they are competing with the public plan.

for changing the system for the better that if even 1 person is allowed in to the Public Option, then it is a good bill.

Not only that but the bill is written so people in the PO can stay in it. So over time it will grow.

I don't unrecommend any posts because that's undemocratic

They can't explain what they disagree with in a post, that would be a difficult if not impossible task for them.

Given that, their only alternative is to unrecommend in leiu of honest and effective criticism.