• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

We are aware of all internet traditions.

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.

This really is a full service blog.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

This blog will pay for itself.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Damn right I heard that as a threat.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Media / Kaplan v. Public Option, continued

Kaplan v. Public Option, continued

by DougJ|  October 30, 20095:56 pm| 83 Comments

This post is in: Media, Assholes

FacebookTweetEmail

David Broder inveighs against Harry Reid with a tone normally reserved for politicians who have had sexual relations with interns:

There is an air of desperate improvisation to Sen. Harry Reid’s scheme to pass a “public option” as part of health-care reform but at the same time provide an easy exemption for any state that objects to it. The warning flags ought to be flying for anyone who can count to three — let alone 60.

[….]

I’m not entirely convinced that the public option is as essential as liberals seem to think it is. But if they are right, I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

If a compromise is needed to get the bill to the Senate floor, far better to try Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe’s suggestion of a trigger mechanism that would activate a public option if private insurance policies at affordable rates were not broadly available.

If I am ever so senile that I believe that insurance companies wouldn’t find a way to rig a trigger mechanism, I want my feeding tubes removed.

Update. Commenter dmsilev makes an excellent point about one of Broder’s claims.

——————-

And there’s also this bit of history FAIL:

That issue was settled in the realm of economic policy during FDR’s second term, after enough new Supreme Court justices were seated to uphold the New Deal measures an earlier conservative majority had struck down. In the area of civil rights, Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress put an end to the doctrine of states’ rights. Are we now to reopen those issues to make it easier for this generation of Democrats to short-circuit the legislative process?

From the Wikipedia article on Medicaid:

Medicaid was created on July 30, 1965, through Title XIX of the Social Security Act. Each state administers its own Medicaid program while the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) monitors the state-run programs and establishes requirements for service delivery, quality, funding, and eligibility standards.

State participation in Medicaid is voluntary; however, all states have participated since 1982 when Arizona formed its Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) program. In some states Medicaid is subcontracted to private health insurance companies, while other states pay providers (i.e., doctors, clinics and hospitals) directly.

And there are a whole bunch of other programs (highway funding and education come to mind) which are run in a similar manner; states can opt out if they want, but then they don’t get the money.

-dms

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Open Thread
Next Post: Because I can »

Reader Interactions

83Comments

  1. 1.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    Just fucking watch us,

  2. 2.

    They Live By Night

    October 30, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    David Broder before his davids you.

  3. 3.

    dmsilev

    October 30, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    And there’s also this bit of history FAIL:

    That issue was settled in the realm of economic policy during FDR’s second term, after enough new Supreme Court justices were seated to uphold the New Deal measures an earlier conservative majority had struck down. In the area of civil rights, Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress put an end to the doctrine of states’ rights. Are we now to reopen those issues to make it easier for this generation of Democrats to short-circuit the legislative process?

    From the Wikipedia article on Medicaid:

    Medicaid was created on July 30, 1965, through Title XIX of the Social Security Act. Each state administers its own Medicaid program while the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) monitors the state-run programs and establishes requirements for service delivery, quality, funding, and eligibility standards.

    State participation in Medicaid is voluntary; however, all states have participated since 1982 when Arizona formed its Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) program. In some states Medicaid is subcontracted to private health insurance companies, while other states pay providers (i.e., doctors, clinics and hospitals) directly.

    And there are a whole bunch of other programs (highway funding and education come to mind) which are run in a similar manner; states can opt out if they want, but then they don’t get the money.

    -dms

  4. 4.

    Zam

    October 30, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    It doesn’t even have to be rigged, when the time comes to activate this trigger we are just gonna end up with the same debate as now on whether activation is really needed or wanted.

  5. 5.

    asdf

    October 30, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    Does anyone know anything about the temporary health insurance pool proposed in the House Bill? I would mean a lot to me if someone could tell me something about this. It looks like I am going to be OK with medical treatment but it’s costing me a fortune and I have no insurance.

    I may be a grumpy old man but I do a good deed every now and then. I like to think that the world is a little better because I am still here.

    The trouble with being sick is that one becomes a bit self centered. Sorry.

  6. 6.

    MattR

    October 30, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    States had the ability to opt out of the stimulus package too. Despite all the tough talk from GOP politicans, how many states actually followed through? I am almost positive that answer is less than one.

  7. 7.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    a way to rig a trigger mechanism,

    Door number 3 on Let’s Make a Death Panel.

  8. 8.

    Fulcanelli

    October 30, 2009 at 6:04 pm

    If I am ever so senile that I believe that insurance companies wouldn’t find a way to rig a trigger mechanism, I want my feeding tubes removed.

    That was a jewel, Doug. And %1000 true.

  9. 9.

    demkat620

    October 30, 2009 at 6:05 pm

    Well, what ever insurance plan Broder has, it must not have good mental health coverage cause he needs a med check.

  10. 10.

    Ash Can

    October 30, 2009 at 6:07 pm

    Once again David Broder demonstrates that he has no knowledge whatsoever of the world outside the Beltway cocktail-party circuit.

  11. 11.

    Jay B.

    October 30, 2009 at 6:07 pm

    But if they are right, I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    He’s not wrong.

    However, because of people like David Broder and the rest of his lazy, ignorant and/or malicious cohort, people don’t understand what’s at stake. So while idiots and liars were screaming about “death panels” at Town Hells, Broder was talking about processes and the politics of it — that “there’s discontent in the heartland” or some such fucking thing. He was giving credence to prissy assholes like Lieberman or lying old shitheels like Chuck Grassley while the reality never occurred to him: Democrats can pass a bill with the public option. He also never made an effort to put claims into perspective — are they LYING about “death panels”? Is there a truth here? Instead, he passed it along up the puke funnel.

    So, in a way, Reid is listening to the GOP. Conservatives don’t want it? OK. Sucks for states where 40% of the people do, but conservatives want to be heard. Broder wants his compromise. Here it is: Conservatives don’t give a flying shit about providing better health care, they (along with too many Democrats) only care about health care insurance profits. But if the GOP-led Legislatures want to opt-out of a cost-controlling insurance program, why NOT let them?

    Better still, the Galtian conservatives in states with the public option can ALSO choose to go totally private. For everyone but the decent people or the sick in Red States, it’s a good deal. It’s also politically hardball and smart. But whatever.

  12. 12.

    cleek

    October 30, 2009 at 6:08 pm

    Broder can suck my middle nut.

  13. 13.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 6:09 pm

    I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    Don’t worry your wrinkly little head David.

    The FEMA camps will have MASH units.

  14. 14.

    Quiddity

    October 30, 2009 at 6:13 pm

    Broder’s final sentence

    No one should be denied coverage options by virtue of where they live.

    But that’s exactly the situation for most of the people who live in the United States right now.

  15. 15.

    Rock

    October 30, 2009 at 6:13 pm

    And there are a whole bunch of other programs (highway funding and education come to mind) which are run in a similar manner; states can opt out if they want, but then they don’t get the money.

    I had conversation with a friend about the ability of the Federal government to influence State behavior by providing money in return for certain actions at the State level.

    He referred to the withholding of such funds at “trampling on jurisdiction”. I guess he thought that the states should get that money even if they didn’t participate? Or maybe he was going for the principled libertarian argument that the fed govt shouldn’t be able to collect and use money like that.

    In any case, I felt very tired and didn’t pursue the topic. He’s a very smart guy who I would have hoped would view things differently. If he’s that inherently hostile towards govt action to fix problems, I’m pretty sure we’re screwed as a country. Doug J was right when he said we had a good run.

  16. 16.

    gogol's wife

    October 30, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    @asdf:
    This was the most succinct description I could find: “Immediate Relief

    The House bill also provides immediate relief for people at the mercy of the insurance industry by setting up an interim high risk pool open to people who have been uninsured for at least a few months or who have been denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

    Though clearly not a long term solution, the high-risk pool, combined with the COBRA extensions mentioned above, would get people out from the trap the insurance industry has put them in until full reforms kick in.”

    You’re not being self-centered. Everyone in a wealthy, industrialized nation should have access to health care. It’s a moral disgrace that we’re in the situation we’re in.

  17. 17.

    Mark S.

    October 30, 2009 at 6:15 pm

    In the area of civil rights, Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress put an end to the doctrine of states’ rights.

    If it got past the WaPo fact checkers, it must be accurate, amirite?

  18. 18.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 6:15 pm

    @dmsilev:

    Nicely done. And then there’s the perennial fact that poor southern states pay the least income and other taxes, but get the most tax dollars per capita from the US general fund for all sorts of soshulist schemes.

    Sometimes the irony piles up so deep, you need wings to stay above it.

  19. 19.

    Rock

    October 30, 2009 at 6:17 pm

    By the way, I am touched by Broder’s concern that everyone have access to the same health-care options. I await his next column in which he endorses universal coverage.

  20. 20.

    Tonal Crow

    October 30, 2009 at 6:23 pm

    But if they are right, I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    Um, because no one will get it otherwise? Because people can choose where to live, and can vote with their feet, in an exercise of what’s usually called “freedom”? Because, um, we’re really, really, really skeptical of concern-trolling around here?

  21. 21.

    Mnemosyne

    October 30, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    So instead, no one should get health insurance reform! After all, if we can’t all completely agree on every aspect of it, we shouldn’t do it at all and let things stay the way they are. After all, it’s not like anyone Broder knows ever dies from lack of insurance or goes bankrupt from medical bills, so it’s clearly not a crisis for anyone.

  22. 22.

    asdf

    October 30, 2009 at 6:24 pm

    Thank you gogol’s wife, this is a difficult subject. Keeping up with it has been hard.

    Immediate Relief

    “The House bill also provides immediate relief for people at the mercy of the insurance industry by setting up an interim high risk pool open to people who have been uninsured for at least a few months or who have been denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

    Though clearly not a long term solution, the high-risk pool, combined with the COBRA extensions mentioned above, would get people out from the trap the insurance industry has put them in until full reforms kick in.”
    http://tinyurl.com/yzfr3v5

    OK, that may cost a lot. On the other hand, being what they call a “self-pay” isn’t cheap either.

    Thank you.

  23. 23.

    Steve V

    October 30, 2009 at 6:27 pm

    Yeah, “put an end to the doctrine of states’ rights,” WTF is he talking about? Broder really is an unapologetic Republican, isn’t he? Also, I think the Rehnquist court would disagree.

  24. 24.

    Zifnab

    October 30, 2009 at 6:29 pm

    Shorter David Broder: The public option is probably entirely unnecessary, and a giant waste of taxpayer dollars. But I may be wrong, and if I am, it’s important that the federal government drag me kicking and screaming into a system I will spit on with my dying breath.

  25. 25.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 6:30 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    To be more accurate,
    I should have said Red States get the most federal aid money, though the top ten includes several southern states.

  26. 26.

    Zifnab

    October 30, 2009 at 6:31 pm

    @Mnemosyne: Perhaps what David Broder is really saying is that he thinks states with conservative governors and legislators should vote out their politicians and replace them with liberals.

    David Broder – super secret fifth columnist left wing sympathizer.

  27. 27.

    eyelessgame

    October 30, 2009 at 6:32 pm

    It’s about as transparent concern-trolling as I’ve seen in some time.

  28. 28.

    MobiusKlein

    October 30, 2009 at 6:33 pm

    Shocked, I am Shocked that they are making sausage in that sausage factory.

    And the stuff that goes in, I may just faint.

  29. 29.

    Fulcanelli

    October 30, 2009 at 6:36 pm

    But if they are right, I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    “Bad Luck” Heh.

    In Blue States we call that a Freudian slip, David.

  30. 30.

    mistersnrub

    October 30, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    Christ, Wapo’s editorial page today is an abomination. This tripe from “the Dean,” Krauthammer asking “Is there anything Obama hasnt blamed Bush for?” and including a joke involving Stalin (get it? Obama’s a soshulist!) and “Axis of Evil” Gerson having a poutrage decrying Obama’s bitter, brittle tone. Liberal media hard at work!

  31. 31.

    Makewi

    October 30, 2009 at 6:43 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    Those figures in and of themselves, while interesting, don’t say what that federal money goes to. For example, I would imagine one reason that WV is so high up the list is because Byrd is one of the all time champs at bringing in federal dollars for his pork projects. I would think that states with large military installations and federal prisons would be impacted by the presence of those buildings as well.

  32. 32.

    gnomedad

    October 30, 2009 at 6:49 pm

    Coupla’ things here, perhaps somewhat OT. Insurance industry defenders say their profit percentages are low compared to other industries. I can’t find anything to contradict this. Is this a distortion?

    To me, vilification of the industry is beside the point. What we are seeing — small profits (if true) and unhappy customers — is exactly what I would expect to see in a competitive industry which is inadequately regulated relative to the problem it’s trying to address. Disparities in age, generics, and just plain luck diminish the uncertainty required to motivate people to participate in a risk pool. And competitive pressure forces companies to be nasty to their customers. We need to compel (sorry about that) lifelong participation in the risk pool which frankly redistributes resources from the young, healthy, and lucky to the old, sick, and unfortunate. And since there will always be technology that keeps people alive at phenomenal expense, any system will sometimes have to say “no”.

    OK, this is very broad and I’m not sure how the public option figures in getting from here to there.

  33. 33.

    Makewi

    October 30, 2009 at 6:50 pm

    @Makewi:

    One other aspect that will impact a states federal rake is the age of it’s population. A state that has an older population will get more federal funds in terms of both social security and medicaid, then a state that has a younger population.

  34. 34.

    jl

    October 30, 2009 at 6:52 pm

    Interesting that Broder can only conceive of an opt-out as being decided by state governments. I would not mind an opt-out if the decision was made by popular referendum. But Broder assumes it will be decided by GOP (note: GOP!) state governments unaccountable to the needs of the people who live in there states.

    If I were Reid, and this silly commentary keeps up, I would respond by packaging the strongest reform measures that could get passed by a Senate majority that could get past the Senate parlimentarian as being budget related for reconciliation, ram it through like pile driver by majority vote, then go on Fox News and tell them to ESAD.

  35. 35.

    Chad N Freude

    October 30, 2009 at 6:58 pm

    @Fulcanelli: Not a Freudian slip, rather a Broderian attempt at sarcasm I think.

  36. 36.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 7:02 pm

    @Makewi:

    The point is of per capita paid in and paid out for federal subsidy money. Throwing up one dem in one state isn’t much of a defense./ The ratio of receipt of federal dollars to that paid in is across the board higher for red states, and has been for a very long time. It includes medicaid and other social welfare programs and about every other thing states spend money on.

  37. 37.

    Violet

    October 30, 2009 at 7:03 pm

    Just drove home listening to NPR in the car. Heard E. J. Dionne and someone else blather about the upcoming elections. They spent a considerable amount of time discussing how the country is turning more conservative, there is a great conservative resurgence, and there’s serious pushback against Obama.

    Put those two in a blender with David Broder, and you’ve got the teabagger crowd’s wet dream.

  38. 38.

    Mark S.

    October 30, 2009 at 7:03 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    After all, if we can’t all completely agree on every aspect of it, we shouldn’t do it at all and let things stay the way they are.

    That’s why the Founders wisely put in a seventy vote requirement for health care reform.

    Also in the Constitution: a sixty vote requirement for any legislation except welfare reform and tax cuts.

    (Some of these provisions aren’t found in every copy of the Constitution)

  39. 39.

    Lev

    October 30, 2009 at 7:04 pm

    Ah, Mr. Broder. What might you have sounded like through the ages?

    1862: Mr. Lincoln is rapidly turning into a colossal failure. He cannot attract any support across the aisle for his policies! Even Jeff Davis is unmoved.

    1934: President Roosevelt needs to do one thing, and one thing only, to permanently win the support of Americans of all belief systems: make a speech with Herbert Hoover, pledging to work on an approach to fighting the depression together!

    I don’t know anyone who takes Broder seriously. He’s been writing the same column for forty years.

  40. 40.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    @Mark S.:

    Before it’s all said and done, the wingnuts are going to rue the day they used the Reconciliation Process to pass Welfare Reform in “96. No leg to stand on and all that.

  41. 41.

    Chad N Freude

    October 30, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    @Rock:

    He referred to the withholding of such funds at “trampling on jurisdiction”.

    I think your friend does not know what the word “jurisdiction” means.

  42. 42.

    Chad N Freude

    October 30, 2009 at 7:13 pm

    @Violet: This is disappointing. I’ve always liked Dionne, but lately he seems to have lost his ability to analyze what he observes (or observe what he’s analyzing). It could be the creeping dementia that seems to have infected NPR news.

  43. 43.

    Makewi

    October 30, 2009 at 7:15 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    It isn’t a defense at all. I’m just pointing out that demographics and federal instillation are valid reasons for the numbers to be so heavily skewed. For example, if conservatives tend to be an older demographic, then those states in which conservatives have highest numbers (e.g. the Red States) would tend to have higher federal spending because of social security and medicare.

    It’s interesting, but it isn’t telling.

  44. 44.

    joes527

    October 30, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    So … Has anyone looked at the possibility of a reverse trigger (ripcord?)

    The public option is going to take a long time to roll out. Why not pass a bill that starts that process, and if the insurance market meets some clear benchmarks, it slows down the roll out or stops it completely?

    It would seem harder to game that kind of trigger and the pressure would be on. If the public option completes its deployment — fine. If the insurance companies improve health care in America enough that we don’t need it — also fine.

    I’m not a fan of trigger or ripcord, but opt out + the compromises that are going to be made from here (you KNOW the bill ain’t getting any more progressive in the coming days) might not be even that good.

  45. 45.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 7:24 pm

    if conservatives tend to be an older demographic, then those states in which conservatives have highest numbers (e.g. the Red States) would tend to have higher federal spending because of social security and medicare.

    LOL, Nice try . Wingnut logic lives. So by taking a general stat of older folks being more conservative and blending it with the ratio of federal tax dollars paid in and received, then presto magic that explains red state soaking blue states for extra cash.

    First of all, voting patterns for old folks is not all that much more for repubs and there is no evidence the south is over populated with wingnut geezers. Funny troll.

  46. 46.

    Mark S.

    October 30, 2009 at 7:25 pm

    @Lev:

    42 BC: Caesar needs to reach out to his opponents in the Senate, particularly such moderates as Brutus and Cassius. What better way than appearing before them unarmed and without his bodyguards this March 15 in a spirit of bipartisanship and comity? It would go a long in healing the wounds of this Republic.

  47. 47.

    Svensker

    October 30, 2009 at 7:31 pm

    @Makewi:

    Shorter Makewi: My “facts” are better than your data.

  48. 48.

    Makewi

    October 30, 2009 at 7:32 pm

    @Svensker:

    Data alone doesn’t tell a story. I’m suggesting digging deeper for the larger picture. If that doesn’t appeal to you, then continue to just make shit up. No skin off my nose.

  49. 49.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    I’m suggesting digging deeper for the larger picture.

    You will find that pony some day, grasshopper.

  50. 50.

    freelancer

    October 30, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    Fuck. Makewi’s back.

    Have a good weekend guys and gals!

  51. 51.

    freelancer

    October 30, 2009 at 7:37 pm

    I think Makewi’s our own personal SnotBoogie.

  52. 52.

    Mark S.

    October 30, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    @freelancer:

    Did she ever leave?

  53. 53.

    Makewi

    October 30, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck:

    Ponies bite. I’ve seen the commercials. Tell you what, if I do find one you can have it.

  54. 54.

    slag

    October 30, 2009 at 7:48 pm

    @Jay B.: Actually, he is wrong. Opt-out is an ideal compromise. It makes an option available to all the states and gives a state’s constituents the opportunity to hold their representatives accountable should they refuse that option. Just like when McCain went on a tear protesting against the stimulus package, and then the Obama Administration said that he didn’t have to keep it if he didn’t want it. If memory serves, not only did Arizona take the money, McCain’s protest sputtered out. You think that is an anomaly?

  55. 55.

    Yutsano

    October 30, 2009 at 7:48 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck: Notice how she got the military = conservative angle in there too? Nice little irrelevant factoid in there since Washington and California both have very large military presences.

  56. 56.

    General Winfield Stuck

    October 30, 2009 at 7:54 pm

    @Yutsano:

    I missed that, and

    would tend to have higher federal spending because of social security and medicare.

    Which I’m pretty sure isn’t included as welfare or federal subsidies.

  57. 57.

    Yutsano

    October 30, 2009 at 8:10 pm

    @General Winfield Stuck: I realize this is all fish in a barrel but you’re correct in that federal outlays would not apply to either of those programs since they are separate from the general budget. Technically they’re not “federal spending” but their own extant programs. Let her dive for the dictionary for that word LOL.

  58. 58.

    jwb

    October 30, 2009 at 8:12 pm

    @Violet: That was Bobo, of course, who was speaking of the great conservative revival with Dionne. My thinking these days is that if it makes Bobo happy to believe in this great conservative reaction to Obama, let him believe it, since that’s just one more evidence that the conservatives have not come to terms with the last election.

  59. 59.

    Jay B.

    October 30, 2009 at 8:18 pm

    @slag:

    I think you’re right in that’s how it will probably play out. But not necessarily. And I think that within a VERY short amount of time every state will opt-in, but I do think there is a germ of truth in what Broder says — potentially, a minority of people in a conservative state will have to suffer. Thems the breaks, of course. But a better, comprehensive public option — or, of course, a single-payer system — would eliminate that potential problem without resorting to this kind of churning hairsplitting about opting in, who will oppose it, etc.

    But, of course, Broder doesn’t really want the public option at all or if he does, he hasn’t, to my knowledge, ever described what it is, what it does and how the various health care reform packages really work. So his concern is disingenuous. This idea that there will be potentially, a sliver of people who aren’t covered, is only a trojan horse to his real concern that ANY kind of public option will pass despite Joe Lieberman and Olympia Snowe’s concerns about partisanship in the process.

  60. 60.

    mak

    October 30, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    @gnomedad

    Coupla’ things here, perhaps somewhat OT. Insurance industry defenders say their profit percentages are low compared to other industries. I can’t find anything to contradict this. Is this a distortion?

    Coupla things back:
    First, re: the recent spate of disinfo claiming that health insurers are “low profit” enterprises: that depends on how you define “profits.” While they may disburse something like 3% of their revenue to their shareholders, that doesn’t mean that that’s what’s left over after they collect premiums and (not) pay claims. The 30% figure you may have seen bouncing around before the recent nonsense is closer to the truth. But because that 30% includes multi-million dollar bonuses for the highest executives, and little mini-versions of the same for the next few layers of bloodsucking parasites, not to mention investment losses in bad Wall Street Times (including the last few years), they are able, through magical accounting think, to claim with a straight face that their “profits” are in the low single digits.

    Second, … well, you’ve got the rest of it about right.

  61. 61.

    mak

    October 30, 2009 at 8:45 pm

    @ gnomedad

    And yes, to answer your question, it is a distortion. Sorry for the omission.

  62. 62.

    Mike in NC

    October 30, 2009 at 8:55 pm

    >Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress put an end to the doctrine of states’ rights.<

    I finally cracked “Nixonland” and LBJ basically said ‘screw states’ rights in favor of human rights’. GOP clowns and glibertarians have been having a hissy-fit ever since.

  63. 63.

    Mike in NC

    October 30, 2009 at 9:00 pm

    First of all, voting patterns for old folks is not all that much more for repubs and there is no evidence the south is over populated with wingnut geezers. Funny troll.

    Meh. Most of my neighbors would qualify. It’s the tried and true IGMFU rule.

  64. 64.

    gnomedad

    October 30, 2009 at 9:01 pm

    @mak:

    And yes, to answer your question, it is a distortion. Sorry for the omission.

    Um, I kinda worked that out. :) Thanks.

  65. 65.

    kay

    October 30, 2009 at 9:07 pm

    I just find the trigger idea laughable. Media and Congress killed health care reform 16 years ago, and they’ve barely revisited the issue since, unless it was to set up a huge, new, unfunded entitlement to the people in this country who have the best health care, senior citizens.

    Expanding S-CHIP was like pulling fucking teeth in Congress, and media fought it every step of the way. One would think covering children would be easy. It wasn’t. The media whined incessantly about something or other through the entire process, and it took years.

    The idea that they are going to spring into action and pull this magic trigger when “Americans can’t find affordable health insurance!” is just insulting.

    It took six months for Olympia Snowe to vote on a proposal. Yeah, she’ll be johnny on the spot on that trigger.

    No, they’re not going to be pulling any “trigger”.

    Congress and media have health insurance.

  66. 66.

    Yutsano

    October 30, 2009 at 9:11 pm

    @kay: I think if Olympia Snowe was going to be allowed to float the idea for a trigger she therefore had to detail exactly when and at what levels he trigger would be pulled. To just throw out the term and then refuse to define it (as far as I know she has never given any specifics about what levels the trigger would be pulled at) is dishonest at best, But if she believes in a trigger so bad, I think the Democrats should call her bluff: she can have it, but the price is if it’s pulled single-payer/Medicare for All goes into effect immediately. None of this half-assed shit if there has to be something that keeps it from going into effect right away.

  67. 67.

    Sly

    October 30, 2009 at 9:11 pm

    Any honest trigger is unnecessary, given the current state of market concentration. And I’m talking in terms of five or fewer companies controlling greater than 50% of the market, or the equivalent. No state can currently meet that standard under the most commonly used index, not even the states with low levels of concentration like Florida and New York.

    The administration may be pushing for a trigger, as some people claim, as more of a political gambit than anything else. “The Republicans wanted a trigger, so we’re giving them one. If they don’t vote for the bill then they’re just playing politics and don’t want the warm and gooey feelings you get when being bipartisan.” But the practical implications of it would be the same as if the trigger didn’t exist at all. And it’s far less messy than the other futile grasp at bipartisanship known as the opt-out. People like Broder don’t care about the details, unless it’s obvious that middle and low income people aren’t getting fucked by government-backed kleptomaniacs.

    Or Obama has been a secret insurance company shill from the beginning, which is far less likely.

  68. 68.

    kay

    October 30, 2009 at 9:26 pm

    @Yutsano:

    Olympia Snowe might like the trigger-we-never-pull idea on fiscal conservatism grounds.
    People won’t be able to find affordable health insurance, and she’ll be collecting “no insurance penalties” from them while they’re searching in vain. It’s a win-win.
    What’s the incentive for Congressional trigger-pulling? Angry emails?
    Have private health insurers not had the last 16 years to come up with an affordable, quality product? If they were going to do that, I would think they would have, by now.

  69. 69.

    sleeping dog

    October 30, 2009 at 9:51 pm

    One of the problems with work in modern America is that there are too many jobs that can be carried out when the worker is too physically and mentally decrepit to function effectively. Being a columnist for the Washington Post is very high on that list.

    When my senile old dog would begin obsessively barking at something like her reflection in a door glass, I’d lead her away to one of her favorite corners where she’d lay down and sleep. Isn’t it about time someone at the Post led Broder away?

  70. 70.

    kay

    October 30, 2009 at 9:55 pm

    I think this might be a good sign if conservatives like Broder plan on making a “liberals said don’t believe in state’s rights!” argument to kill health care reform.

    I just don’t see the “liberals are hypocrites on state’s rights” argument gaining much “traction”.

    Just very, very weak, Mr. Broder.

  71. 71.

    tc125231

    October 30, 2009 at 11:06 pm

    However, because of people like David Broder and the rest of his lazy, ignorant and/or malicious cohort, people don’t understand what’s at stake. So while idiots and liars were screaming about “death panels” at Town Hells, Broder was talking about processes and the politics of it—that “there’s discontent in the heartland” or some such fucking thing. He was giving credence to prissy assholes like Lieberman or lying old shitheels like Chuck Grassley while the reality never occurred to him: Democrats can pass a bill with the public option.

    Well said. What a worthless gob o’ shite.

  72. 72.

    Jennifer

    October 30, 2009 at 11:25 pm

    But if they are right, I don’t see how they can justify abandoning it for an uncertain number of people who have the bad luck to live in states with conservative governors and legislatures.

    Gee, Broderalla, I’d worry about that if I had no clue to the internal workings of most red states. You are correct in your analysis that conservative state legislators and governors don’t give two shits about the welfare of their states’ citizens, and that they are remarkably adept at refusing to address their concerns while slavishly catering to the most powerful business interests in their states. Unfortunately for the conservative state legislators and governors, in this particular case, allowing their states to continue as privatized markets with no mechanism for cost control will put them into contact with the third rail of red state politics: JOBS. As in, states that fail to allow competition and as a result have higher average coverage costs won’t attract them. Your average red state legislature will have to lose out on 2 – 3 factory relocations at most before they’ll come around. There may be a crazy holdout somewhere in the country – wherever it is that people go to Galt – but if the public option helps to control costs, within 2 or 3 years there won’t be more than one or two states opting out. Red states are federal welfare states for a good reason – the people who live in them don’t make much money. If you fuck up a factory relocation that’s going to bring jobs paying higher wages – or even just jobs, period – those rednecks will vote your ass out in a minute.

    If Broder ever stopped to think about anything before writing it down, this might have occured to him.

  73. 73.

    LD50

    October 30, 2009 at 11:34 pm

    @Makewi:

    I’m suggesting digging deeper for the larger picture.

    Don’t let your finger get stuck up there.

  74. 74.

    Jess

    October 30, 2009 at 11:58 pm

    Picked up a back issue (from early Sep.) of Rolling Stone today and found Matt Taibbi’s scathing analysis of what we can expect from the HCR, and now I’m really depressed. He makes a very convincing argument that if it’s not a single-payer system, it’ll be a big steaming pile of fail. He rips the Dems and Obama for their vain attempts to simultaneously help health care consumers AND the insurance industry, says they’re mutually exclusive goals and it’ll all come back to bite them (Dems), and us, in the ass. Great. Just when I was feeling good about the movement towards the public option. Someone please tell me there’s a light at the end of the tunnel.

  75. 75.

    danimal

    October 31, 2009 at 12:00 am

    “No one should be denied coverage options by virtue of where they live.”

    Broder’s last sentence shows how fundamentally unserious his argument is. Unless he is in favor of universal coverage (and supporting Nixon’s health care reform plan doesn’t really count anymore), he is just blowing smoke.

    Every American is denied coverage options by virtue of where they live. It’s a big part of the problem. Nobody wants to do solve the problem via the opt-out compromise, but the overall problem is so grand that this concession looks tolerable for the present.

  76. 76.

    Something Fabulous

    October 31, 2009 at 12:35 am

    @cleek: Goodness. Out of how many??

  77. 77.

    Chuck Butcher

    October 31, 2009 at 2:25 am

    No shit:

    CNN Programing advertisement –

    Black Men In America

    Barack Obama is the historic first black president …
    But is he doing enough?

    WTF, over?

  78. 78.

    Chuck Butcher

    October 31, 2009 at 2:29 am

    @Chuck Butcher:

    That was followed almost directly by {R} Gov Ahnuld says 13K teacher’s jobs were gone w/o stimulus – what does Mike Pence {ID-R} have to say about that, but first what about HealthInc Reform & H1N1 for Gitmo? Yes the Admin says jobs saved but what do {R} Govs say?

  79. 79.

    Chuck Butcher

    October 31, 2009 at 3:00 am

    @Chuck Butcher: Keeeripes Pence (IN-R), ID is my neighbor.

  80. 80.

    Nick

    October 31, 2009 at 4:22 am

    @Jess:

    Try not reading Matt Taibbi, it helps

  81. 81.

    The Other Steve

    October 31, 2009 at 10:19 am

    David Broder doesn’t like Opt-Out because it’s pragmatic.

  82. 82.

    Fair Economist

    October 31, 2009 at 11:38 am

    If Broder ever stopped to think about anything before writing it down, this might have occured to him.

    It probably did. Broder isn’t trying to improve the reform, he’s trying to worsen or block it. If a divisive liberal reform gets passed and ends up the most successful reform of a generation, his little bipartisanship fetish gets a lot of egg on its metaphorical face. His problem is that conservative arguments against the current proposal are getting weaker and weaker as the locomotive for passage builds up steam* and so he’s forced to increasingly weak and now downright ludicrous arguments against it.

    *With similar bills in both houses so close to passage, with only Dem support, there aren’t many options to stop it. Delays have run out, there’s no need for bipartisanship, and there’s not much quibbling left over the details. To stop it some Dem will have to get out on the track and say “I will stop a 50-year goal of my party to improve one of the worst problems in American society”. They may stop it, but the locomotive of public disapproval and Democratic voter fury will run them down and destroy their career. Even Bayh and Nelson start looking wobbly on re-election. And if it’s a Senator they may get run down only to see the train go through via the reconciliation track.

  83. 83.

    Paul Burke - Author Journey Home

    November 2, 2009 at 1:00 pm

    The fact remains that big insurance by refusing care to patients and reimbursement to doctors over typos has ticked everyone off. They have a monopoly over the whole process and a well financed lobby team (including Lieberman’s wife) and representatives on both sides of the isle.

    A friend of mine recently laid off just he and his spouse is paying $2,500.00 dollars a month for his COBRA. Health insurance costs more than his mortgage. Anyone taking up the insurance industry’s cause doesn’t know what they are talking about.

    If you think the insurance companies are going to voluntarily lower their cost while having a monopoly over the process – you are being disingenuous …Over 60% of all US bankruptcies are attributable to medical problems. Most victims are middle class, well educated and have health insurance – (The American Journal of Medicine)

    The insurance companies and their representatives in Congress would love to perpetuate a business model that is crippling our overall economy – a bunch of great Americans aren’t they?

    90% of the wealth concentrated in 1% of the population is no way to run a country but a heck of a way to establish a royalty ruling class. Yacht sales can not sustain 350 million people. I’m for the public option, competition and a level playing field or break up the big insurers like we did to AT&T.

    Paul Burke
    Author-Journey Home

    This article from the LA Times is Tremendous!

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Recent Comments

  • Andrya on Medium Cool – Agatha Christie & Dorothy Sayers, Part III (Mar 26, 2023 @ 8:51pm)
  • Quinerly on Sunday Evening Open Thread: The GOP, Now A Full-Scale Mafia (Mar 26, 2023 @ 8:48pm)
  • Dan B on Sunday Evening Open Thread: The GOP, Now A Full-Scale Mafia (Mar 26, 2023 @ 8:48pm)
  • stinger on Medium Cool – Agatha Christie & Dorothy Sayers, Part III (Mar 26, 2023 @ 8:48pm)
  • Feathers on Medium Cool – Agatha Christie & Dorothy Sayers, Part III (Mar 26, 2023 @ 8:47pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!