Are you happy about some of the Blue Dog compromises?
1) Cost: The Democrats were able to cut the cost of the bill by 0 billion over ten years. Much of the savings will come from shaving low income subsidies.
2) Small Businesses: The Blue Dogs also wanted to change the requirements on small businesses. Those businesses with a payroll of 0,000 or less will be exempt from the requirements
3) Public Option: Some in Congress worry that a government program will be unfair because doctors may be tied to the Medicare fee structure. The change in the plan will allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services negotiate rates for the public option.
4) State Co-ops: The party leaders also agreed to allow for optional state health care co-operatives in addition to a government run health insurance plan (public option).
http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=20090729_health_care_reform_blue_dog_deal.htm
Filed under: Dog Insurance
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Lol. Nationalized health care is going to be a reality and soon. Their concessions just cemented it.
1) Cost. A $10 billion dollar a year reduction in cost sounds skimpy.
And where are the reductions in cost from actually making medical care more affordable? Is anyone attacking this problem, or will health care costs be allowed to go from 16.% of GDP to 20 percent in a few years?
2) Small Business. I’m all for removing the requirement forcing employers to pay for health insurance. Our economy would be so much better off if health insurance hadn’t been tied to employment to begin with.
3) Public Option. Another news report says that the blue dogs want to do away with the public option. I don’t think that’s a good move. There needs to be something that can be used to bring actual health care costs down. I’m not sure whether the negotiation of rates by the Secretary of Health and Human services is such a good idea.
4) State Co-ops. This sounds like some variation on a non-profit insurance company. The Blue Cross Companies were non-profit until management made them for profit. There is a book entitled Blue Cross, What Went Wrong? It’s a bit dated but can give some background.
Even when they were non-profit, who got to see their financial statements? Non-profits have much less surveillance than ordinary corporations do, and we have seen that even they are not well regulated.
They’re not MY reps! We send REPUBLICANS to Congress here in Wyoming!
Republican from before she was born… and PROUD of it.
nope – a compromise that comes as a result of a BRIBE… is not a compromise it’s a CAVE.
(or a compromising of your principles)
As long as we get it passed right away, we can always come back and fix these problems after the republicans lose more seats and the blue dogs are voted out.
I am not going to be happy until the bill is not passed and even better if obama would be impeached.
No.
I had hoped they’d just vote against it rather than compromise on flawed legislation.
Yes. I like them.
Those are improvements in the bill and that is better for every American.
The governement is ALREADY involved in the health care industry. Ever heard of Medicare and Medicaid?
No I’m not happy. I want the government to stay out of it. They just need to make the obvious reforms that should have been made years ago. They all know what they are but won’t touch them. We need term limits.
Yes, this is a start and maybe the final bill will be something we can be proud of and will really help people.*
they should change the name to blue ball less dogs….obama put the magic on them….
The compromises are good ones. This improves the bill.
I think some of those changes were on my list (although my list went further.) HOWEVER the basic issues, that they are saying they will pay for 2/3 of covering tens of millions more people by cutting funds from an already bankrupt medicare, and that they are even further institutionalizing medicine by committtee and paperwork, and insurance companies and big pharma which will drive cost up, not down, still make it absolutely unacceptable.
There is only one way to cover more people with funds not adequate for those already covered, for example: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124692973435303415.html
They should go with individual, portable, rolloverable, health savings accounts and tax credits. If they want a preexisting condition/catestrophic care policy as a separate thing, that is fine, but it should be separate, not mess up options for all of the rest of us.