Pelosi: We Will Have a Public Option in House Bill, We Have the Votes to Do It

[spanishaustralian]

pelosi is a real socialist. thats for sure.

[joshatkins94]

i hope you're joking. a public option is a VERY moderate proposal. single payer is center left, not socialist. but hey, no single payer, no public option, so reform, important, but limited, reform.

[wotrabbitfish]

WHAT ABOUT THE FREEDOM TO NOT HAVE ANY BLOODY INSURANCE IF I DON'T WANT TO???

And this from the same generation that burned their draft cards.

[YuksOnMe]

and then when you get sick and go to the emergency room, the general public winds up picking up your tab at triple the cost. Pretty irresponsible of you.

[wotrabbitfish]

Not at all, old chap, my plan is to have the insurance moguls, the political elite, & the rich doctors themselves - the very bastards who have been shamelessly exploiting the general public for decades - foot the bill for free universal care.

[maskedphrogg]

What Pelosi is talking about codifies that as Law. Did you miss the part where she says at 2:00 you will be purchasing from the same industry that exists now? Did you miss the part where there is a fine if you abrogate the Will Purchase clause? You obviously missed the concept that the fine is significantly less than paying a premium. The Bill Pelosi is backing gives incentive to not carry insurance until you need it. The fines collected are not near enough to cover the expense.

[jeffmagic32]

does this woman seem competent to remake the US healthcare system?

[dkkght46]

As long as the nation is obsessed with different kind of politics, is no one going to remark on what a great country it is where a mentally retarded woman can become Speaker of the house?

If Nancy has much more reconstructive surgery her eyebrows will become her hairline.

Pelosi "We are calling it competitive option now and we are no longer calling me Speaker of the House, we will call me "The Queen" do you understand?"

Call it what you wish it still smells like what it is. Bull****

[hawkerdoo]

She is nothing more than a sleezy pile of shit. Lie after lie. 2010 will silence her.

[PersonalJesus348]

medicare.. just give it to all of us

[maskedphrogg]

Hey Pelosi, what happened to the freedom of paying out of pocket? What is with all this you will buy either private insurance or government (mislabeled public) insurance?

[joshatkins94]

that's what happens with a public option: you would pay through your premium. NO entitlement program. NO government dependency. just CHOICE AND COMPETITION.

[maskedphrogg]

You have an odd notion of choice and competition. The Bill Pelosi is proposing gives incentive to not carry Insurance until you need it. There is no clause to remove Federally enforced limits on inter-State sales. Currently Insurance providers must incorporate in each State separately in order to sell in a State. She was quite clear that this Gov mandated system will remain intact. With fines being so much less than premiums it behooves one to not carry and just pay a fine until Ins is needed.

[joshatkins94]

Pelosi will pass the Senate bill, which includes an individual mandate. The other viable alternative was the moderate public option, which was dropped to appease the insurance special interests. A public option would have been paid in full by its users, through premiums.

[maskedphrogg]

For your edification and enlightenment Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House. This discussion is in regards to the House Bill. There are 434 other Representatives from the various States that also get a vote. To your apparent chagrin Pelosi cannot do this alone.

Your enthusiasm for this horrid piece of Legislation is only surpassed by your ignorance of the structure of US government.

Here, let me get you started. There are two Houses of Congress, a President, and Judiciary.

[joshatkins94]

I'm talking about the current situation, not the previously passed House bill which _did_ include a public option. The _current_ discussion is about the House passing the Senate bill, which the Senate has already passed, then passing a reconciliation fix in the Senate.

[joshatkins94]

The reason of course that I am talking about the Senate bill is that the previous House bill is history, and will not become law (Pelosi is not "proposing" the old bill, so I'm not sure what you're talking about).

[maskedphrogg]

What your not sure about is which group are Senators and which group are Members of the House of Representatives.

Nancy Pelosi is a Member of the House.

Claiming she even has the capacity to "pass the Senate Bill" is ludicrous. She very well may propose or give vocal and written word support for a Senate Bill and it's objectives. But she she doesn't even get a vote let alone have the authority by any means to pass Senate legislation.

This debate is getting tiresome. How 'bout U troll elsewhere.

[joshatkins94]

It's a wonderful irony that you're suggesting I don't know the three branches of government, that I don't know of the separation of powers, and the differences between the Senate and the House, while simultaneously demonstrating complete ignorance for the current efforts to pass fixes to the Senate bill in the House, making it ready for a reconciliation vote in the Senate.

[joshatkins94]

Since you seem to have missed the last few months in the health care debate, CNN sums it up this way:

"The House is expected to vote this week on the roughly $875 billion bill passed by the Senate in December. After the bill is signed into law, the House would then vote on a package of "fixes" proposed by President Obama."

"This debate is getting tiresome. How 'bout U troll elsewhere."

Oh, the irony.

[maskedphrogg]

@joshatkins94

No kind sir, it is you that is ignoring the part of the debate that disagrees with your opinion.

Have no fear Congressman Kucinich has now jumped the shark is proclaiming Health Care to be a Civil Right.

Rec'd an email from his organisation today, I'm subbed to his Re-elect org maillist, and it had that very Headline. _Health Care is a Civil Right_

With Kucinich joining the gang Pelosi's goals will be that much easier to achieve. Stay tuned, we're watching the Fall of a Republic.

[joshatkins94]

Before you call me a socialist communist fascist, here's the link:

bit . ly / b9lYeT

(remove the spaces)

[maskedphrogg]

@joshatkins94

Sorry, I don't do ad-hominem

nor do I visit obscured URLs

[joshatkins94]

It's not an "obscure URL", it's a URI abbreviation (like TinyURL, you know?). Anyway, you didn't like the abbreviated version, so here's the full one:

edition . cnn . com / 2010 / POLITICS / 03 / 17 / health.care.undecided / index.html

(remove spaces. I previously abbreviated it to make posting in comments easier)

[maskedphrogg]

@joshatkins94

Call it whatever you want. Like the debate on government mandated and overseen Health Care this is another is a growing stream of concepts you simply don't understand or refuse to be honest about.

You missed go-dot-to, and the inevitable link to goatse(.)cx back when goatse was still live.

Here's a clue, if you're going to make a claim be prepared to defend it. I'm not going to cave in and accept your sources as the only ones available. I choose to think for myself.

[joshatkins94]

"Stay tuned, we're watching the Fall of a Republic."

Not really, just a mediocre movement towards where ***every single other CAPITALIST country** is with regard to healthcare - universal healthcare. I will not respond to accusations of communism/socialist/fascism/et­c anymore because it is too absurd and ridiculous to have to discuss.

[maskedphrogg]

You are spending too much time in front of a mirror admiring yourself. You claimed you were about to be called those terms before it ever happened, and when it didn't happen you now claim it did despite the public record it did not.

When you're ready to discuss these subjects in a civil manner and quit pretending you've been insulted in ways that clearly did not happen then do please rejoin us. I've had more intelligent conversations with a brick wall than the pseudo-debate I just had with you.

[doink1422]

well spoken. i love her she look sexy smart

[fishhead06]

"A robust public option." Yes! If full, publicly-funded universal insurance is not possible, I guess we could settle for this. Don't forget - this is what Obama ran on. And he won big.

[Mauhadeeb28]

Look at this woman..... She is trying to make it sound as if those opposed to "her" health care reform bill are simply against "all" health care reform... I do not appreciate the twisting of words. 95% of America agrees in that reform is necessary, what the opposition doesn't like is the type of reform that is being proposed.

This woman is clearly not fit for the position of speak of the House of "Representatives".

Who in the hell is she really representing? Because it isn't you and I.....

[fishhead06]

How would you change it?

[Mauhadeeb28]

The health bill? easily. Allow insurance businesses to compete across state lines, stop taxing all businesses and individuals to pay for medicare/medicaid so that money could be spent on personal investment and savings towards health care, get rid of the F.D.I.C. so flagrant governmental spending will cease(this includes all pork filled bills that remodel hotels, spas, yacht clubs, pointless construction etc..), stop bailing out failed businesses and using tax dollars to pay back lobbyists. done

[robinvan1983]

you do know what happens then right? State insurances will buy out or merge together and monopolise insurance business so that you have like 4 or 5 insurance companies dictating if you are insured or not. And without medicare and medicaid.. a lot of elderly won't get covered because of socalled "pre-conditions"

[Mauhadeeb28]

You are suggesting that it would become like a monopoly..... How is what the government doing any different? If they own the health care industry, isn't that pretty much the same thing but even larger in scale?

[greyflcn]

Well more than that, States lose their ability to regulate the minimum quality, and access to insurance in their state.

For instance, 8 states allow domestic violence to count as a pre-existing condition.

Or the usual contriversial one, arbortion.

Or even that many states mandate cancer screenings

But more realistic reason this will never happen. There is no federal law keeping these state restrictions in place. It's because state governments get tax revenue from business inside their state

[Mauhadeeb28]

If the states didn't have to get "federal stimulus" and were forced to start making better financial decisions or suffer the economical consequences, they would have no choice but to allow open market competition. If states don't have to worry about making fiscal mistakes because the Federal gov will bail them out, why would they ever need to change? Get the federal government out of State pockets and that would help immensely.

[greyflcn]

re: Mauhadeeb28

If all the insurance companies moved to Maine, (for instance)

Then 49 states would no longer get corporate tax revenue from these HMO's that goes towards their general fund.

Why would that be in a state government's best interest?

[Mauhadeeb28]

Since this is as you put "(for instance): I would question what Maine is doing so well, that every insurance company left the 49 other states to compete in such a small market. And I would in turn question the other 49 states as to what they did so wrong that insurance companies could no longer profit in those states(which the only reason for them leaving is due to zero demand)

[greyflcn]

re: Mauhadeeb

Well it's less about "not profit" and more about "can profit the most"

And the reason for instance, would be that this is the state with the most pro-corporate, anti-consumer legal structure.

And for non-medical insurance, this is practically exactly what has happened.

As a company which banks liabilities, if they can legally ignore those liabilities, that more "profit".

And considering insurance is intangible, the legal structure is practically the only reason they would have.

[Mauhadeeb28]

That doesn't make any sense "Pro-corporate, anti-consumer" How can a corporation be anti consumer when they wouldn't exist without the consumer? Corporations can not exist without people paying for a service. If all insurance companies moved to one state, it is because that state is allowing all the insurance companies to compete with each other without interference. I could only imagine how cheap insurance would be in that state.

Your argument doesn't follow how a free market works.

[greyflcn]

re: Maudadeeb28

Simple.

The legal structure which makes it hardest for an individual to sue a company for damages.

And in the case of medical insurance, that would include states which make it easiest to drop a customers coverage once they get sick.

Or to avoid covering them all together if they are likely to become sick.

Whatever allows the company to avoid actually spending it's fees on treating sick people.

[Mauhadeeb28]

I can definitely agree on the legal structure.... Even as a conservative I agree there needs to be some reform in that area.

"easiest to drop a customers coverage once they get sick."

Are we not questioning why the consumers are still giving money to these companies if they know that they will be drop when sick? Why even sign up? Just save the money and pay cash. So, simple indeed. Don't buy the insurance that drops you when you get sick.

[greyflcn]

Easy answer there.

Because the individual consumer doesn't have leverage when it comes to the price of limited/higheconomiesofscale life saving procedures.

greyfalcon. net/ healthcare2

It's effectively the same as saying "Why don't we only have private firemen". Like in ancient Greece, where the firemen would use it as extortion to buy your house off of you, and you would have the choice of losing everything you own, or receiving almost nothing for it.

The prices just don't match the costs.

[Mauhadeeb28]

So what your are speaking of is corruption of the system.... And somehow the biggest monopolizer on the planet, the federal gov, will run it better?

If you have more money you should be able to buy higher priced procedures..... But if the government has control, their will be no money for either.... Is it worth allowing 2 people to die in the name of 'fairness' than letting the one which has the money to try new experimental procedures the possibility off living?

[Mauhadeeb28]

So those fat rich pricks are always being the guinnea pigs for new testing and medicines. If we take that money, put it in the hands of congressmen and expect to have it used for the sake of individual health, we are not paying attention to what history is trying to tell us. And that is that more government = less individual choice = they decide how, what, when, where and if you are treated.

On top of all of that, it is completely unaffordable right now in every sense of the word.

[frostwolf1]

It's not like the insurance companies that do drop people out of convenience get their name plastered all over the place, and there are a LOT of companies that do that. The choice isn't always there to make, and if it is the consumer might not even be aware of it.

[Mauhadeeb28]

To think corporations are anti-consumer is ridiculous.... Without consumers they can not exist, that is until corrupted politicians(Clinton, Pelosi, Bush, Emannuel, and on and on) except campaign and kickbacks as favors for setting policies that limits competition.

[oldtownkid]

You can buy car insurance from anywhere in the country, however, how much you will pay depends on where you live. Ins Co's do not want to reduce premiums, it goes against their nature. The only means that seems effective in making them reduce cost is real competition, like a public option. Drop the memorized right-wing talking points and just do the math !

[Waranle]

i agree with ya. Do the damn math, or watch foxshit to tell you the crap

[Mauhadeeb28]

What math? You mean the equation that shows that we can not afford universal health care? Or the one that shows the amount of money wasted on pointless exams and tests so Doctors won't be targeted by frivolous lawsuits? The legislation that is coming out of our congress, as a whole, is unaffordable and unconstitutional. You can take bits and peices from them that make sense, but not one bill wholly proposed is worthwhile.

[Mauhadeeb28]

I would prefer more money in the hands of the citizen to decide for themselves how they should spend it. If someone doesn't buy insurance and gets injured it is that persons responsibility to take care of themselves. If they do not budget for future emergencies they should suffer the consequences for their actions. If they were taxed less, they would have more money to put away in savings for such an event.

That is the only math that makes sense to me, my friend.

[robinvan1983]

that doesn't really work cause insurance companies just keep raising their insurance costs... same thing with bail out money... it doesn't work unless something is changed in the system

[Mauhadeeb28]

Exactly. My version of change would include a reduction of federal financial over site of these corporations. Remember, if taxes were dramatically cut, and individuals had more pocket money to pay doctors and specialists directly, the insurance rates would have to plummet do to lack of demand.

[robinvan1983]

you have the same problem... insurance companies can still raise their costs and stop insuring people with "pre-conditions"

[Mauhadeeb28]

Apparently you didn't understand my last comment. If people were paying cash for services they wouldn't need insurance.... and remember, insurance, whether through the government or through privateers, will always require more money for the service than is necessary i.e. private needs extra for profit and the government needs extra for all the waste and corruption that will follow.

But still, if the profits drop, the insurance corps will have to lessen restriction to stay in business.

[oldtownkid]

In order to have "more money in the hands of citizens" the abuses that Ins Co's are perpetrating right now must be stop. And the "consequences paid by the uninsured for failing to budget", we, the insured, pay for those expenses. What you say would be possible only in a world where the profits of Wall St sharks was not attached to denying healthcare to the people of the U.S.

[Mauhadeeb28]

I do agree with you that wall street is a ridiculous institution, but thinking that legislation is the answer to free market woes is beyond insidious.

We how do we pay for the uninsured? you mean through subsidized hospital payments? Wouldn't the middle class have more money if they weren't being ass raped by taxes?(Especially our small businesses)

And what abuses are you referring to?

[robinvan1983]

what kind of reform do you want then? that public option deal what she mentioned is pritty sweet

[Mauhadeeb28]

I would prefer more money in the hands of the citizen to decide for themselves how they should spend it. If someone doesn't buy insurance and gets injured it is that persons responsibility to take care of themselves. If they do not budget for future emergencies they should suffer the consequences for their actions. If they were taxed less, they would have more money to put away in savings for such an event.

[Pleblian]

Ok so let me get this straight.

You have the votes to pass a HC reform bill, you just don't know what form it's going to take?

So hows this changed since last month?

[Tusktanium]

Dems are going down in 2010.

[balanceseeker]

If it takes the dems going down in 2010 to do the right thing, then so be it.

[dundura123]

EXACTLY...it happens in every country when they past HC reform...you have to do it for the team...

[budkin]

HELL YES!!!

[martinaoe2]

Look the Gov is broke... if the gov goes broke what happens?

Bring home the bases around the world.. 1 trillian saved.

[10thAngel]

A goverment can't really go broke, the only possibilty for such to happen is that no one invest in the country and if the unemployment skyrocket to levels beyond control. A clear example of a country falling apart would be Zimbabwe:

70% unemployment

Rampant inflation.

and yet STILL their country sorta "work" and has not totaly collapsed. It will take ALLOT more then this financial crisis to bring USA or any other stable western country down.

[integral]

I know it's a struggle, justy, but think before posting silly shite like this.

Please.

[santasxgirlfriend]

oooh nancy has her party beads on- she must be getting ready to celebrate!

[SanieClaws]

Lies & Madness!

"If you like what you have, you can keep it." ... if you can still afford it! Introducing a new tax for public healthcare, like public education...will leave fewer and fewer of YOUR money to freely purchase what you truly wish. And all of congress supports this "option" for which paying is NOT OPTIONAL? It will not be "competitive" because it is funded regardless. This law imprisons an otherwise free person for refusing health insurance.

Live for Freedom and Responsibility!

[IIIJHUSSLEIII]

"Main Street HASN'T seen positive TARP effects" .... LMAO!!!

NO SHIT Pelosi!!!! Barack Obama, George Bush, Israel, and the Federal Reserve stole TRLLiONS of Dollars from the American people!!

You guys better start buying some Gold,Silver, and FOOD while you still can because our Dollar is DONE! Don't be surprised if you wake and see riots across America! Don't say I didn't warn you...

[aznfootwork]

I don't know why people hate Pelosi. Well, i know why they hate her. But look at what a strong leader she is. Can you ever imagine Harry Reid doing this? That fucking spineless pussy. Pelosi knows how to LEAD like a LEADER. We need someone in the senate who will PUSH for the public option. Not some wishy-washy little BITCH from Nevada.

[IIIJHUSSLEIII]

aznfootwork.. PLZ!

The only thing Nancy Pelosi is good at is getting BOTOX!! lmao!! :)

[integral]

Just for future reference3, IIIJHUSS, when you make a lame joke and then provide the laugh track yourself

you make yourself look like a major dork.

[IIIJHUSSLEIII]

Maybe.... I am? :)

[jamesmaseobrown]

Vote for the Public Option NOW ! ! !

[mavaddat]

America has no problem with single-payer socialization of war.

"Everyone has to pay for killing Iraqis? Ok, sure. We have no choice? Ok, fine."

Just don't ask them to pay for the health of fellow Americans!! It's anti-American!

[junkforkaryn]

go get 'em speaker pelosi!! republicans don't even need to exist other than for the interviewer to have something to talk about. i love it.