PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Republicans Central ideas are already in Senate Health Care bill


dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:32 PM
Interesting read and this something several of us were discussing yesterday. I made the point that if the Republicans got everything they wanted they still wouldn't vote for it. It appears according to this piece to be the case.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/five_compronises_in_health_car.html

The six Republican ideas already in the health-care reform bill

At this point, I don't think it's well understood how many of the GOP's central health-care policy ideas have already been included as compromises in the health-care bill. But one good way is to look at the GOP's "Solutions for America (http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare)" homepage, which lays out its health-care plan in some detail. It has four planks. All of them -- yes, you read that right -- are in the Senate health-care bill.

(1) "Let families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines." This is a long-running debate between liberals and conservatives. Currently, states regulate insurers. Liberals feel that's too weak and allows for too much variation, and they want federal regulation of insurers. Conservatives feel that states over-regulate insurers, and they want insurers to be able to cluster in the state with the least regulation and offer policies nationwide, much as credit card companies do today.

To the surprise and dismay of many liberals, the Senate health-care bill included a compromise with the conservative vision for insurance regulation. The relevant policy is in Section 1333, which allows the formation of interstate compacts. Under this provision, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, and Idaho (for instance) could agree to allow insurers based in any of those states to sell plans in all of them. This prevents a race to the bottom, as Idaho has to be comfortable with Arizona's regulations, and the policies have to have a minimum level of benefits (something that even Rep. Paul Ryan believes), but it's a lot closer to the conservative ideal.

(2) "Allow individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do." This is the very purpose of the exchanges, as defined in Section 1312. Insurers are required to pool the risk of all the small businesses and individuals in the new markets rather than treating them as small, single units. That gives the newly pooled consumers bargaining power akin to that of a massive corporation or labor union, just as conservatives want. It also gives insurers reason to compete aggressively for their business, which is key to the conservative vision. Finally, empowering the exchanges to use prudential purchasing (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/too_much_hostage-taking.html) maximizes the power and leverage that consumers will now enjoy.

(3) "Give states the tools to create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs." Section 1302 of the Senate bill does this directly. The provision is entitled "the Waiver for State Innovation," and it gives states the power to junk the whole of the health-care plan -- that means the individual mandate, the Medicaid expansion, all of it -- if they can do it better and cheaper.

(4) "End junk lawsuits." It's not entirely clear what this means, as most malpractice lawsuits actually aren't junk lawsuits. The evidence on this is pretty clear: The malpractice problem is on operating tables, not in court rooms (http://www.slate.com/id/2145400/). Which isn't to deny that our current system is broken for patients and doctors alike. The Senate bill proposes to deal with this in Section 6801, which encourages states to develop new malpractice systems and suggests that Congress fund the most promising experiments. This compromise makes a lot of sense given the GOP's already-expressed preference for letting states "create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs," but since what the Republicans actually want is a national system capping damages, I can see how this compromise wouldn't be to their liking.

(5) To stop there, however, does the conservative vision a disservice. The solutions the GOP has on its Web site are not solutions at all, because Republicans don't want to be in the position of offering an alternative bill. But when Republicans are feeling bolder -- as they were in Bush's 2007 State of the Union, or John McCain's plan -- they generally take aim at one of the worst distortions in the health-care market: The tax break for employer-sponsored insurance. Bush capped it. McCain repealed it altogether. Democrats usually reject, and attack, both approaches.

Not this year, though. Senate Democrats initially attempted to cap the exclusion, which is what Bush proposed in 2007. There was no Republican support for the move, and Democrats backed off from the proposal. They quickly replaced it, however, with the excise tax, which does virtually the same thing. The excise tax only applies to employer-sponsored insurance above a certain price point, and it essentially erases the preferential tax treatment for every dollar above its threshold.

(6) And finally, we shouldn't forget the compromises that have been the most painful for Democrats, and the most substantive. This is a private-market plan. Not only is single-payer off the table, but at this point, so too is the public option. The thing that liberals want most in the world has been compromised away.

On Sunday, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell responded (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/elections_matter.html) to Barack Obama's summit invitation by demanding Obama scrap the health-care reform bill entirely. This is the context for that demand. What they want isn't a bill that incorporates their ideas. They've already got that. What they want is no bill at all. And that's a hard position for the White House to compromise with.

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 12:37 PM
So are these 6 things "everything they wanted"?

BigRedChief
02-10-2010, 12:39 PM
That is pretty wild that the Senate bill already has all of their proposals in it but they still won't for it?

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 12:39 PM
It still cracks me up you've said you don't like the current senate bill but keep trying to point blame at republicans.

If anything, they're on your side?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:39 PM
So are these 6 things "everything they wanted"?

So far yes. They have no health care bill.

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 12:39 PM
So are these 6 things "everything they wanted"?

No. But its a fun spin job.

Go Dirk Go

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:40 PM
It still cracks me up you've said you don't like the current senate bill but keep trying to point blame at republicans.

If anything, they're on your side?

To be honest I had no idea all of these provisions were in the bill. You learn something new everyday.

wild1
02-10-2010, 12:41 PM
That is pretty wild that the Senate bill already has all of their proposals in it but they still won't for it?

Is it hard to believe that 6 things you like coupled with hundreds you don't like would add up to a "no" vote?

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 12:44 PM
Gotta read between the lines

BigRedChief
02-10-2010, 12:45 PM
Is it hard to believe that 6 things you like coupled with hundreds you don't like would add up to a "no" vote?wellll that where the bi-partisan approach comes in. Bi-partisan doesn't mean you get everything you want and then its a done deal.

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 12:45 PM
That is pretty wild that the Senate bill already has all of their proposals in it but they still won't for it?

Search the article for 'tort reform' and get back to us.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:45 PM
It still cracks me up you've said you don't like the current senate bill but keep trying to point blame at republicans.

If anything, they're on your side?

And just to add I know there is no chance in hell for Medicare for all I have accepted that.

I also know when they start talking about immigration reform it won't be anything close to what I would support.

That is just the way it goes sometimes.

ChiTown
02-10-2010, 12:46 PM
Is it hard to believe that 6 things you like coupled with hundreds you don't like would add up to a "no" vote?

:clap:

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:46 PM
Search the article for 'tort reform' and get back to us.

#4 is medical malpractice is that what you mean?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:47 PM
Is it hard to believe that 6 things you like coupled with hundreds you don't like would add up to a "no" vote?

Thanks Kotter

ChiTown
02-10-2010, 12:48 PM
Thanks Kotter

I thought the theory that kotter=wild1 was already debunked. No?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 12:49 PM
I thought the theory that kotter=wild1 was already debunked. No?

Quit trying to ruin all the fun :)

ChiTown
02-10-2010, 12:52 PM
Quit trying to ruin all the fun :)

my bad......

wild1
02-10-2010, 12:55 PM
Thanks Kotter

You're welcome Kotter.

RJ
02-10-2010, 01:02 PM
What i can't figure out is.....if all of you are Kotter, why can't you get along with each other?

Kotter must have some serious issues.

wild1
02-10-2010, 01:03 PM
What i can't figure out is.....if all of you are Kotter, why can't you get along with each other?

Kotter must have some serious issues.

Sounds like something a Kotter would say. :hmmm:

RJ
02-10-2010, 01:07 PM
Sounds like something a Kotter would say. :hmmm:


I'm a Kotter he's a Kotter she's a Kotter we're a Kotter wouldn't you like to be a Kotter too?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 01:10 PM
You're welcome Kotter.

LMAO No problem.

In all seriousness though your point that they oppose anything that the Dems propose but want everything they propose is not compromise.

Can you name me 6 things that Republicans have compromised in the Senate health care bill?

I will be anxiously waiting...

wild1
02-10-2010, 01:11 PM
I'm a Kotter he's a Kotter she's a Kotter we're a Kotter wouldn't you like to be a Kotter too?

No... He seems like kind of a self-loather.

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 01:25 PM
#4 is medical malpractice is that what you mean?


You do understand that tort reform as asked for by the republicans and what your article describes is in the senate bill are two different things right? Two different in like even your article admits it can see why repulicans wouldn't want to compromise?

So even the article's headline is a lie.

Chief Faithful
02-10-2010, 01:39 PM
LMAO No problem.

In all seriousness though your point that they oppose anything that the Dems propose but want everything they propose is not compromise.

Can you name me 6 things that Republicans have compromised in the Senate health care bill?

I will be anxiously waiting...

So the Bill is 2700 pages long and you want Republicans to compromise because they received token consideration on 6 concepts? And those concepts barely resemble what the Republicans requested.

Those entries are more of an insult than compromise.

Royal Fanatic
02-10-2010, 01:46 PM
So the Bill is 2700 pages long and you want Republicans to compromise because they received token consideration on 6 concepts? And those concepts barely resemble what the Republicans requested.

Those entries are more of an insult than compromise.
The OP left out the one thing the Republicans really want: get rid of the 2700 page monstrosity of a health care bill and start the fuck over.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 01:49 PM
You do understand that tort reform as asked for by the republicans and what your article describes is in the senate bill are two different things right? Two different in like even your article admits it can see why repulicans wouldn't want to compromise?

So even the article's headline is a lie.

Fair enough. I am for tort reform but not caps

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 01:49 PM
Let me sweep the Nebraska Deal, the louisiana deal, the Union Deal and the the special interests deals over hear in the corner. Never mind this cut in Medicare. Oh and the tax increases? Nothing to look at there.

Now let Dirk dance.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 01:50 PM
So the Bill is 2700 pages long and you want Republicans to compromise because they received token consideration on 6 concepts? And those concepts barely resemble what the Republicans requested.

Those entries are more of an insult than compromise.

Token? 5 of these are their central components of what they believe in. Add in tort reform then they get pretty much what they wanted.

So what are the going to give in return?

I am still waiting for my list.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 01:52 PM
Let me sweep the Nebraska Deal, the louisiana deal, the Union Deal and the the special interests deals over hear in the corner. Never mind this cut in Medicare. Oh and the tax increases? Nothing to look at there.

Now let Dirk dance.

Funny you couldn't even give me 1 thing you agree with the Dems about on health care.

BigRedChief
02-10-2010, 01:53 PM
Token? 5 of these are their central components of what they believe in. Add in tort reform then they get pretty much what they wanted.

So what are the going to give in return?

I am still waiting for my list.
Me too. just what are the Republicans willing to give?

ChiTown
02-10-2010, 01:59 PM
Me too. just what are the Republicans willing to give?

Well, for one, they (Rep's) are conceding the fact that no matter how much "input" they are granted, the Dem's will say (to the American People) that "the 'Party of No' have offered nothing, as usual, and that, while their ideas were considered, they (Dem's) have decided to move forward with their own plan (yet again).":D

Politics - a circular cluster**** of Biblical proportions.

Chief Faithful
02-10-2010, 02:08 PM
Token? 5 of these are their central components of what they believe in. Add in tort reform then they get pretty much what they wanted.

So what are the going to give in return?

I am still waiting for my list.

They are 5 items in name only not substance. Your list is the same, nothing.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 02:11 PM
They are 5 items in name only not substance. Your list is the same, nothing.

Not substance? They are in the freaking bill. What else do you want?

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 02:16 PM
I gave you cross state lines yesterday.

BigRedChief
02-10-2010, 02:24 PM
I gave you cross state lines yesterday.thats a republican idea. Name me one Dem idea? or better yet 6 ideas?

wild1
02-10-2010, 02:28 PM
Not substance? They are in the freaking bill. What else do you want?

You guys are embarrassing yourselves in this thread.

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 02:31 PM
I cannot think of 6 things that dems want i agree with. screw them and their stupid force through bill and tactics.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 02:32 PM
I gave you cross state lines yesterday.

That is not a Dem idea and then you tried to say that Pelosi supports it. I asked for a link and got crickets. Typical.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 02:33 PM
I cannot think of 6 things that dems want i agree with. screw them and their stupid force through bill and tactics.

Why didn't you just say that in the beginning? At least we know where you stand and that nothing will please you.

Chief Faithful
02-10-2010, 02:37 PM
Can anyone give one reason it is politically prudent for Republicans to support the bill in its current form?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 02:41 PM
Can anyone give one reason it is politically prudent for Republicans to support the bill in its current form?

New ABC News Poll

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/Poll1.gif

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/Poll2.gif

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 02:43 PM
Can anyone give one reason it is politically prudent for Republicans to support the bill in its current form?

There isn't any. This silly article's intent is to confuse the issue by making the republicans seem totally irresponsible because there are certain pieces of the senate bill that kind of sort of relate to republican ideas but not really.

And even when several CP lib members are already on record they don't like the current bill they want to point a finger at republicans for not supporting it.

KC Dan
02-10-2010, 02:46 PM
New ABC News Poll
hahaha, wasn't ABC News the one that did the Health Care Discussion special in the White House?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 02:50 PM
hahaha, wasn't ABC News the one that did the Health Care Discussion special in the White House?

He asked a question. I answered it. That is more than most people do on here.

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 02:58 PM
Can anyone give one reason it is politically prudent for Republicans to support the bill in its current form?

In its current form...None.

Republicans have been asking to be involved in the process since it began with no outreach other than words and no invovement. To do as Dirk is trying to, to spin this as a Republican foul up is the ultimate in political foolishness.

Every Republican leader has said over and over that HC needs attention and needs to be fixed. There is bipartisan agreement on that. No one has said do nothing. ABC knows that but they ran the poll to attempt to spin it that way.

Its the crap solutions created by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid the dems cannot even sell to themselves that is the problem.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 03:01 PM
In its current form...None.

Republicans have been asking to be involved in the process since it began with no outreach other than words and no invovement. To do as Dirk is trying to, to spin this as a Republican foul up is the ultimate in political foolishness.

Every Republican leader has said over and over that HC needs attention and needs to be fixed. There is bipartisan agreement on that. No one has said do nothing. ABC knows that but they ran the poll to attempt to spin it that way.

Its the crap solutions created by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid the dems cannot even sell to themselves that is the problem.

Everything is spin when it doesn't fit your viewpoint.

I could say 99.9% of the threads you start are all spin and no facts. That is probably why everyone ignores them.

petegz28
02-10-2010, 03:02 PM
Just because these things were in it doesn't meant the other tons of shit that was in it didn't make it bad.

KC Dan
02-10-2010, 03:03 PM
He asked a question. I answered it. That is more than most people do on here.true

HonestChieffan
02-10-2010, 03:05 PM
Everything is spin when it doesn't fit your viewpoint.

I could say 99.9% of the threads you start are all spin and no facts. That is probably why everyone ignores them.

Dance Nancy, Dance

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 03:07 PM
Just because these things were in it doesn't meant the other tons of shit that was in it didn't make it bad.

That is fine pete but what is the other side willing to give up. That is the only way it is going to work when both sides give and get a little. I have asked for a small list and no one can give me one maybe you can.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 03:09 PM
Dance Nancy, Dance

You should go start another thread so people can ignore it. you do such a good job at it already.

petegz28
02-10-2010, 03:47 PM
That is fine pete but what is the other side willing to give up. That is the only way it is going to work when both sides give and get a little. I have asked for a small list and no one can give me one maybe you can.

Well fuck, we don't know because the Dems want to keep the Repubs out of the discussion. You have to understand that the 6 things you pointed out in the OP was also desired by a lot of moderate and conservative Dems. So the more important question is, what are the Blue Dogs and moderate Dems willing to give up?

I mean seriously, if you wanted $ 1million and someone said they would give it to you but you have to divorce your wife, disown your kids and cut off your left arm, would you do it?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 03:49 PM
I mean seriously, if you wanted $ 1million and someone said they would give it to you but you have to divorce your wife, disown your kids and cut off your left arm, would you do it?

Shit I would be single, rich and still have my right hand to jerk off. That is a win. :D

petegz28
02-10-2010, 03:52 PM
Just to add, I think there could have been headway made on a "private exchage", pre-existing conditions and the inability to drop customers once they get sick. But some Dems wanted to insist on a Public Option. Some wanted to insist on mandated coverage, etc, etc. I mean fuck, dirk, the House Dems and Senate Dems can't even agree on shit so why does it matter what the Repubs think?

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 04:00 PM
Just to add, I think there could have been headway made on a "private exchage", pre-existing conditions and the inability to drop customers once they get sick. But some Dems wanted to insist on a Public Option. Some wanted to insist on mandated coverage, etc, etc. I mean fuck, dirk, the House Dems and Senate Dems can't even agree on shit so why does it matter what the Repubs think?

That is true. Listen I don't want people misunderstanding me, I think the Dem Leadership is about as clueless as they come. They couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper sack.

As far as Obama goes I agree with Bill O Reilly when he says his biggest problem was he couldn't or can't sell this thing because it is too convoluted and the regular folk don't understand all of it.

petegz28
02-10-2010, 04:07 PM
That is true. Listen I don't want people misunderstanding me, I think the Dem Leadership is about as clueless as they come. They couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper sack.

As far as Obama goes I agree with Bill O Reilly when he says his biggest problem was he couldn't or can't sell this thing because it is too convoluted and the regular folk don't understand all of it.

Well, I agree and disagree. It is too convoluted but Congress made it that way. On the other hand, I think people understand plenty. People are more astute politicaly during hard times like we have now. They are paying attention. They see what the health care bill was and see through the BS from Obama, Pelosi and Reid when they tell us to just shut up and trust them.

dirk digler
02-10-2010, 04:12 PM
Well, I agree and disagree. It is too convoluted but Congress made it that way. On the other hand, I think people understand plenty. People are more astute politicaly during hard times like we have now. They are paying attention. They see what the health care bill was and see through the BS from Obama, Pelosi and Reid when they tell us to just shut up and trust them.

That is true as well. O'Reilly was talking about the media culture last night and how everything is so instantaneous now that in the past what POTUS or Congress did might never get reported or months later. People get their news from so many different places and fast now it is unbelievable.

petegz28
02-10-2010, 04:15 PM
That is true as well. O'Reilly was talking about the media culture last night and how everything is so instantaneous now that in the past what POTUS or Congress did might never get reported or months later. People get their news from so many different places and fast now it is unbelievable.

Yea, I watched that and he has a point. The problem is Congress hasn't figured it out yet.

BigRedChief
02-10-2010, 05:47 PM
So the Republicans are not willing to compromise on a single thing? Nothing? Is that correct?

RINGLEADER
02-10-2010, 05:53 PM
This is a stupid thread.

I don't care if it has everything the GOP wants if it also includes provisions that allow the government to set reimbursement levels, have control over minimum standards, or forces people who don't want something into having to purchase it (why liberals don't seem to understand why that's a very bad thing continues to escape me).

This whole topic is like saying everyone should enjoy fruit punch flavored weed killer since it only has 1% poison in it.

It's a variant on the ridiculous auto insurance comparison or the claims by Dems that the bill lowers the deficit. More games from people who can't concede their ideas aren't wanted by the vast majority of the American people. More games from the same corrupt lot the hid behind closed doors to carve out exclusions for the unions, Dem states, and others.

Ask yourself this: if the bill is such a great thing, why are all the Dem interest groups demanding to be excluded from it?

mlyonsd
02-10-2010, 06:16 PM
This is a stupid thread.

I don't care if it has everything the GOP wants if it also includes provisions that allow the government to set reimbursement levels, have control over minimum standards, or forces people who don't want something into having to purchase it (why liberals don't seem to understand why that's a very bad thing continues to escape me).

This whole topic is like saying everyone should enjoy fruit punch flavored weed killer since it only has 1% poison in it.

It's a variant on the ridiculous auto insurance comparison or the claims by Dems that the bill lowers the deficit. More games from people who can't concede their ideas aren't wanted by the vast majority of the American people. More games from the same corrupt lot the hid behind closed doors to carve out exclusions for the unions, Dem states, and others.

Ask yourself this: if the bill is such a great thing, why are all the Dem interest groups demanding to be excluded from it?

Bing...f'ing bingo.

BigRedChief
02-11-2010, 07:34 AM
So the Republicans are not willing to compromise on a single thing? Nothing? Is that correct?Is this correct? Nada thing?

petegz28
02-11-2010, 07:51 AM
Is this correct? Nada thing?

Who knows? You have to invite them to the discussions for that to happen, don't you? If you were not inviting me to the table then WTF would I give into anything you want?

BigRedChief
02-11-2010, 08:03 AM
Who knows? You have to invite them to the discussions for that to happen, don't you? If you were not inviting me to the table then WTF would I give into anything you want?I'm trying a little experiment here at Chiefsplanet. You can post your opinion there. Everyones at the table there.