Stuck in a groove
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Political Waves
Dec 7, 2009, 3:27:23 PM12/7/09
to politic...@googlegroups.com
It's Pearl Harbor Day, the Day of Infamy -- Digby tells us why there's an echo in here.
Waaaaay back when, I told you that what we were experiencing ... Dubby shenanigans, worsening day by day ... was not 'business as usual.' I wasn't trying to convince you; you wouldn't have been reading me if you didn't resonate to the energy shifts. I was attempting, in my own way, to add weight to the collective truth that had a chance to wrench control out of the hands of the insane.
My frustrations today have to do with that same problem -- that we still think there is some portion of our daily lives that has an imprint of 'business as usual.' The public has some frightening reality going for them, at long last, but so far we haven't been able to crack the impervious bubble of bullshit that informs the political world. They think they MAKE truth -- pffffft!
There are examples everywhere. Take Sara Palin, for example -- there are butterflies flitting through Miss Sara's brain and when they flap too hard, her mouth opens and something falls out. It is her Truth Of Moment ... it may or may not make sense and you can be sure it will change, perhaps within the same [exquisitely long] sentence. Sara has yet to have a Moment of Truth.
Waaaaay back when, I told you that what we were experiencing ... Dubby shenanigans, worsening day by day ... was not 'business as usual.' I wasn't trying to convince you; you wouldn't have been reading me if you didn't resonate to the energy shifts. I was attempting, in my own way, to add weight to the collective truth that had a chance to wrench control out of the hands of the insane.
My frustrations today have to do with that same problem -- that we still think there is some portion of our daily lives that has an imprint of 'business as usual.' The public has some frightening reality going for them, at long last, but so far we haven't been able to crack the impervious bubble of bullshit that informs the political world. They think they MAKE truth -- pffffft!
There are examples everywhere. Take Sara Palin, for example -- there are butterflies flitting through Miss Sara's brain and when they flap too hard, her mouth opens and something falls out. It is her Truth Of Moment ... it may or may not make sense and you can be sure it will change, perhaps within the same [exquisitely long] sentence. Sara has yet to have a Moment of Truth.
She is applauded for being One Of Us -- may God/dess take me now if that be so. Nowhere in my wildest imagination can I picture myself winking and waving, fracturing the language with random, disconnected word pictures while holding a drooling toddler under one arm. Even my neighbors in the Pea Patch are a bit better wrapped than that. That last, that use of her child to prop up her bona fides -- cynical and reprehensible. Sara is the face of the Republican future.
Then there's Joe Lieberman, a real piece of work. I appreciated this tongue-in-cheek ad that tagged him for what he is, a narcissistic pitchman for his business concerns. See -- pushback doesn't have to be mean-spirited ... it just needs to tell the truth. The absurdity that the ad is a 'personal' attack is crap; the political is personal, especially if you're using your influence to blow smoke up the nations bum for a nice, tidy paycheck. Joe is not just a turn-coat, he's a poster boy for old paradigm notions of 'business as usual.' Joe hands us our betrayals with a smile, his mentality that of a mobster ... "It ain't personal, it's just business" ... as the gun is pressed against our collective ribs.
Business As Usual is a thing of the past ... nothing is as usual. It's been slowly morphing into this current Cat In The Hat mentality since Reagan announced Morning in America. We deserve it, of course, for not calling bullshit. Still ... how long can we coast on the fumes of truthiness?
I know its comforting to grab a bit of security from the thought that the basic things don't change, wrap it around your neck to warm you. But frankly, I don't think we can afford it anymore. What's going on now in WaDC is like a needle stuck in the groove of an old LP. It's making me tear my hair out. On a political level, if not a personal one, we are dealing with very new territory -- and What We've Always Done will get us zilch. Which, of course, won't spoil the day in the halls of Congress -- the largest 'business' of them all.
Today we'll see how we can all offer up our first born to protect the insurance industry -- keep their coffers flush and their yacht's harbored. This afternoon, the Senate will be discussing abortion in their bill ... ummm, hear that skip in the LP? Settling into a groove? Over and over, all these many decades? If these last years were only about punching holes in our mythology regarding government standing taller than cronyism and lobbying, then the Swiss Cheese we're peering though is the result. Government has become money collecting and influence peddling with, for too many elitist elected, not even a hint of public interest.
We've got a handful of days ... less than 1000 ... to see the illusions shimmer and vanish. That's the process we're in right now. It's what we've called for -- it's what we need. This ain't Business As Usual. God/dess is laughing, at the LP and the cheese and my falling tufts of hair ... and wondering when we'll get the joke.
Good reads, starting with a break-down by MoveOn you may have already read; good info, though. Then what the AFL-CIO has to say, the most recent scam that endangers the Public Option, and then Digby gives us interesting news about a Medicare extension.
Jude
Then there's Joe Lieberman, a real piece of work. I appreciated this tongue-in-cheek ad that tagged him for what he is, a narcissistic pitchman for his business concerns. See -- pushback doesn't have to be mean-spirited ... it just needs to tell the truth. The absurdity that the ad is a 'personal' attack is crap; the political is personal, especially if you're using your influence to blow smoke up the nations bum for a nice, tidy paycheck. Joe is not just a turn-coat, he's a poster boy for old paradigm notions of 'business as usual.' Joe hands us our betrayals with a smile, his mentality that of a mobster ... "It ain't personal, it's just business" ... as the gun is pressed against our collective ribs.
Business As Usual is a thing of the past ... nothing is as usual. It's been slowly morphing into this current Cat In The Hat mentality since Reagan announced Morning in America. We deserve it, of course, for not calling bullshit. Still ... how long can we coast on the fumes of truthiness?
I know its comforting to grab a bit of security from the thought that the basic things don't change, wrap it around your neck to warm you. But frankly, I don't think we can afford it anymore. What's going on now in WaDC is like a needle stuck in the groove of an old LP. It's making me tear my hair out. On a political level, if not a personal one, we are dealing with very new territory -- and What We've Always Done will get us zilch. Which, of course, won't spoil the day in the halls of Congress -- the largest 'business' of them all.
Today we'll see how we can all offer up our first born to protect the insurance industry -- keep their coffers flush and their yacht's harbored. This afternoon, the Senate will be discussing abortion in their bill ... ummm, hear that skip in the LP? Settling into a groove? Over and over, all these many decades? If these last years were only about punching holes in our mythology regarding government standing taller than cronyism and lobbying, then the Swiss Cheese we're peering though is the result. Government has become money collecting and influence peddling with, for too many elitist elected, not even a hint of public interest.
We've got a handful of days ... less than 1000 ... to see the illusions shimmer and vanish. That's the process we're in right now. It's what we've called for -- it's what we need. This ain't Business As Usual. God/dess is laughing, at the LP and the cheese and my falling tufts of hair ... and wondering when we'll get the joke.
Good reads, starting with a break-down by MoveOn you may have already read; good info, though. Then what the AFL-CIO has to say, the most recent scam that endangers the Public Option, and then Digby gives us interesting news about a Medicare extension.
Jude
from MoveOn.org
The health care debate has so many moving parts that it's hard for anybody
to keep them straight. So we decided to put together an overview of where
we're at--both good and bad--and what we're all going to need to keep
fighting for.
Neither of these bills is close to perfect. But we're entering the home
stretch where we risk losing a lot of what's good in these bills and where
we have a huge opportunity to strengthen the parts that need work.
Here's where we are:
The House of Representatives passed their bill last month. The Senate is
aiming to pass its version before Christmas.
Overall, both pieces of legislation would do four major things:
* Create a "Health Insurance Exchange." The bills create a one-stop
marketplace where people can choose from various insurance plans,
including the public option. The details aren't set yet, but initially
the Exchange would likely be open to the self-employed, people without
insurance at work, and small businesses. The key with the Exchange is
that it brings "the bargaining power and scale that's generally
accessible only to large employers" to individuals--and with that,
lower costs and better options.
* Provide insurance to over 30 million more people. The House bill would
expand coverage to 36 million people by 2019. The Senate bill extends
coverage to 31 million.
* Outlaw discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and gender.
Insurance companies will have to stop denying coverage to people with
"pre-existing conditions." And they won't be allowed to charge women
more than men for the same coverage.
The health care debate has so many moving parts that it's hard for anybody
to keep them straight. So we decided to put together an overview of where
we're at--both good and bad--and what we're all going to need to keep
fighting for.
Neither of these bills is close to perfect. But we're entering the home
stretch where we risk losing a lot of what's good in these bills and where
we have a huge opportunity to strengthen the parts that need work.
Here's where we are:
The House of Representatives passed their bill last month. The Senate is
aiming to pass its version before Christmas.
Overall, both pieces of legislation would do four major things:
* Create a "Health Insurance Exchange." The bills create a one-stop
marketplace where people can choose from various insurance plans,
including the public option. The details aren't set yet, but initially
the Exchange would likely be open to the self-employed, people without
insurance at work, and small businesses. The key with the Exchange is
that it brings "the bargaining power and scale that's generally
accessible only to large employers" to individuals--and with that,
lower costs and better options.
* Provide insurance to over 30 million more people. The House bill would
expand coverage to 36 million people by 2019. The Senate bill extends
coverage to 31 million.
* Outlaw discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and gender.
Insurance companies will have to stop denying coverage to people with
"pre-existing conditions." And they won't be allowed to charge women
more than men for the same coverage.
* Eliminate coverage limits and price-gouging. The bills differ on some
details, but in general would place limits on how much people have to
pay for health care beyond their premiums. They both cap out-of-pocket
costs and ban insurance companies from setting limits on how much
health care they'll cover for a person each year.
Of course, the devil is in the details, and much in these bills still
needs work.
Here's what still needs to be fixed:
* Both bills leave millions uninsured. The House bill leaves 18 million
without insurance in 2019; the Senate bill, 24 million. Neither comes
close to the vision for universal coverage so many of us fought for
for years. We'll all need to fight to continue to expand coverage in
the bills this year, and in the years to come.
* The Senate public option is weak, and conservatives are pushing to
make it weaker. The public option is a core piece of reform that will
create real accountability and competition for private insurance--and
that's why it's at the center of such a huge fight. While the House
bill creates a national public option, the Senate lets states opt out,
denying their residents access to it. Plus, conservatives are working
to weaken it even more. We're all going to have to fight hard for the
strongest version possible.
* Many reforms don't start quickly enough. While some pieces of reform
go into effect right away, the larger structural changes are not
scheduled to go into effect until 2013 (House bill) or 2014 (Senate
bill). This includes the Exchange, the public option, and
subsidies--the major ways coverage will be expanded.
* Required insurance could still be too expensive for many. Both bills
require virtually all Americans to have insurance. But the caps on how
much we're expected to pay are way too high, and the subsidies are way
too low. Many progressives are working to fix this, but it's going to
be a significant fight.
* Reproductive rights are severely restricted in the House bill. An
egregious anti-choice amendment in the bill virtually prohibits anyone
purchasing insurance in the Exchange from buying a plan that covers
abortion--even if paid for with their own money. We need to make sure
the final bill doesn't include this rollback of reproductive
rights.
* The Senate bill could discriminate against lower income workers. The
current Senate legislation retains a version of what's called the
"free rider" provision, which essentially penalizes employers for
hiring lower income workers. This provision needs to be fixed before
the bill is finalized.
There's a lot going on in these bills, and we're all going to need to be
vigilant to ensure the good pieces end up in the final bill, and the bad
ones are fixed. It's going to be a rocky ride. But if we fight together,
we'll come out stronger in the end... ++
Public option likely to be removed from healthcare overhaul
John Byrne, Raw Story
Monday, December 7th, 2009
Chances for a so-called "public option" -- under which the government would set up competitors to private health insurers -- appear to be dimming.
With recent hard-edged comments by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who avers that he will vote to filibuster any bill that contains a public-run health insurer, moderates have been meeting to hammer out a deal. And a new alternative, according to Politico, has emerged.
Under the Democrats' new plan, the government would create a national health insurance plan similar to those offered federal employees. It would replace the so-called "opt-out" version of the public option advocated by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).
“Seems to me it would be in lieu of the public option,” Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) -- a public option opponent and former insurance executive -- is quoted as saying. He added that Reid’s “opt-out” idea “is no longer being talked about.”
The plan would be run by the Office of Personnel Management, which currently manages the federal plan offered to members of Congress. All of the insurance plans would be offered by not-for-profit private healthcare companies.
A Democratic aide quoted by Politico suggested that the new proposal could be used to sway progressives, who might be "tricked" into believing that a government plan run by private companies was a public option.
“The proposal under consideration can be said to provide access to the same type of insurance plans that members of Congress and federal employees get. People think of that as government health insurance; progressives could portray this in the same vein,” a Democratic Senate aide was quoted as saying. “But moderates can simultaneously point to the fact that the government isn’t the payer and say competition was enhanced without growing the government.”
Even so, the opt-out public option probably wouldn't have been a public option after all, even though it would have been more damaging to insurance company's bottom lines. In October, the Washington Post reported that the public option was likely to be managed by private insurers.
"The public option would effectively be just another insurance plan offered on the open market," the paper said. "It would likely be administered by a private insurance provider, charging premiums and copayments like any other policy.
In an early estimate of the House bill, the Congressional Budget Office forecast that fewer than 12 million people would buy insurance through the government plan." ++
AFL-CIO Makes Biggest Push Yet To Kill Portions Of Senate Health Care Bill
HuffPo
As the debate over health care reform enters its final weeks, the AFL-CIO is launching its largest lobbying effort to date, dispatching 175 labor leaders to Capitol Hill and pouring $1.5 million into a new ad campaign to fight key aspects of the Senate's legislation.
In what an aide is calling "the largest fly-in we have done since the health care campaign began," the union conglomerate is blitzing both House and Senate offices this week, demanding a public option for insurance coverage, a requirement that employers cover insurance for their workers and a pay-for system that does not rely on taxing high-end health care benefits. The Senate seems poised to oppose the AFL-CIO on all three of these fronts -- setting up, what will likely be, an intense set of negotiations with the House should the legislation come to conference committee.
The targets of the AFL-CIO's newest effort include lawmakers from at least 16 states, an aide says. Labor leaders will be flying in from Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia, Maryland, Florida, Missouri, California, Nevada, Maryland, Nebraska, Texas and Virginia.
"There's the straight-up policy angle that we believe the House version is better public policy, to have the very rich pay instead of working families," said Eddie Vale, spokesman for the AFL-CIO. "But we will also be making the political argument. Democrats campaigned during the election saying, 'We're going to protect workers from having their benefits taxed.' If they don't come through on their campaign promises, [that] is going to depress their base and hurt them in 2010."
In addition to the in-office visits, the AFL-CIO, which has been one of the most forceful progressive players in the health care debate, is also taking to the airwaves. The group is putting $1.5 million behind a new television ad campaign. The spot, which is airing both nationally and in Delaware, Indiana, North Dakota and Virginia, goes after the Senate for "taxing worker's health care benefits."
[open link to] Watch the ad: ++
Yes We Should
digby, Hullabaloo
Monday, December 07, 2009
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/yes-we-should-by-digby-from-personal.html
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/yes-we-should-by-digby-from-personal.html
From a personal perspective, this would be a godsend:
Senate Democrats are discussing the idea of expanding Medicare by lowering the age at which the elderly could enter the government-run insurance program, Democratic sources on the Hill tell the Huffington Post.
The proposal would lower the age of eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 55, though an age limit of 60 has also been suggested. Crucial details -- such as the timing of the implementation of such a reform -- were not provided due to the sensitivity and ongoing nature of the deliberations. A high-ranking Democratic source off the Hill confirmed that such discussions are taking place.
The huge group of baby boomers in my age group (the second wave) are facing an unbelievable squeeze and the latest versions of the public option aren't going to help us much, especially in high cost states, unless we are really doing badly financially. I ran the numbers for myself and the reforms will probably end up costing me more, although my coverage will hopefully be better. Allowing me to buy into Medicare at 55 would be a huge relief.
As a good progressive I'm not basing my support for the public option on my own personal situation. But I do worry about the political ramifications with respect to this huge demographic between 50 and 65 that's likely to have very mixed results in this health care reform just as they are dealing with aging parents, college aged kids, lower pensions, loss of housing equity, insecure employment and deteriorating health. If they are nervous about health care reform it's going to cost the Democrats. The seniors are already falling away.
This would go a long way to alleviating their concerns. ++
"I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... I'm asking you to believe in yours."
~ Barack Obama
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages