Washington Post reports that “Lacking unity on an alternative agenda to Obama's health-care plans, Republicans have instead focused on a strategy of rallying public opposition,” and that “The RNC started running ads blasting the Democratic proposals, and William Kristol, editor of the conservative magazine the Weekly Standard, implored Republicans to "go for the kill."’
Until this moment, it has been difficult to gauge the GOP’s recklessness in dealing with our nation’s healthcare. At long last, it is obvious that they have no sense of decency, no sense of their obligation to the American people.
The impact of fixing our healthcare cannot be overstated. It literally means saving lives, reducing bankruptcy and homelessness, dignity for people with disabilities, improving the quality of all our lives, removing healthcare costs from the equation of how to make a business profitable, and allowing people to use their talents in the most productive way rather than having to take a job solely for the healthcare benefits.
That the GOP would work to undermine these goals rather than to improve them is beyond acceptable behavior.
There is clearly considerable work to be done to create legislation that will carry enough votes to become law. There are not enough votes to pass the current proposals without some modification.
Utah’s Senators Hatch and Bennett have tried to work on this issue in the past, but now seem AWOL. Unfortunately, Bennett’s current electoral pandering to the far right of the Utah GOP has taken him out of the conversation to push what he has previously supported in his legislation with Senator Ron Wyden. And, unfortunately, Senator Hatch’s partner on healthcare matters, Senator Ted Kennedy, is not available due to his own health crisis.
Sadly, on this issue Congressmen Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz are simply in the Party of No. They have put ideology above finding a practical solution to a dire problem. For this reason alone, no one should reward them with a vote next election day.
Utah’s Congressman Jim Matheson and the coalition of House members called the Blue Dogs is making just such an attempt to create a mainstream proposal that can garner the required votes.
They presented ten changes to House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman:
- Provide affordability credits on a sliding scale from 100-300% of the federal poverty level
- Adjust the value and cost of subsidy levels
- Public option must negotiate rates with providers, provide greater clarity on opt-out, compete on a level playing field and be available only as a fallback
- Establish consumer-driven, state-based co-ops
- Create state-based exchanges with a federal fallback
- Maintain current state-federal partnership with Medicaid, while implementing reforms that increase its value and effectiveness
- Realign incentives to reward high quality, efficient health care; include value-based purchasing, value index, innovation center for Medicare and Medicaid and other delivery system reforms
- Increase small business exemption and adjust for inflation
- Address end-of-life care
- Effectively bend the cost curve, per the Congressional Budget Office
Beyond this list, Matheson said he has a number of additional ideas for reform that he will offer in committee. He has additional concerns about how health care reform will be paid for and he repeated his belief that whatever is adopted not increase the federal deficit.
These actions are heroic to find a solution that doesn’t up-end what Americans have come to expect from their healthcare system while moving to something better, and more sustainable.
Without the work of Matheson and the Blue Dogs, healthcare reform might very well fail. As long as they keep working on it, there is a good chance for passage of important legislation.

5 comments:
FISA, Bush budgets, pay-go, now this health care debate, Matheson's Blue Dogs are being just as obstructionist as the GOP, and just about as relevant in the debate (not at all). Jim needs a new caucus.
See it's their insurance company donors the Blue Dogs are really fretting over protecting, not ensuring rural small business has a fighting chance:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/21/01632/7279
Nate Silver has a great post on these Blue Dogs today.
Quoting:
"The bottom line is that the health care bill, among other things, is designed to help out the poor and the uninsured, and somehow or another will tax the rich in order to do so. I can understand if, say, Jason Altmire from PA-4 wants to vote against the health care bill. His district is suburban and pretty well off, and almost everyone there has health insurance. But Mike Ross of the Arkansas 4th, where almost 22 percent of the population is uninsured? This is a bill designed to help districts like his. And the same goes for most of the other Blue Dogs. A lot of the time, these guys are stuck in a tough spot between their party and their constituents. Here, those interests are mostly aligned. If a lot of the people on the top half of this list are voting against health care, first check the lobbying numbers, and then check to see if they’re still in office four years hence."
I would like to see their statement against Democratic senators of "partisan politics" when judge Miguel Estrada was denied a seat in the Court of Appeals by the Democrats.
___________________
Jessica
No Credit Checks instant Payday Loans
SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE
We were promised a full debate of the options; Obama, congress and the parties have avoided speaking about Single-Payer Health Care.
To learn more, I recommend the primers at Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) - and a Bill Moyers interview with Wendell Potter, a former CIGNA public relationships rep:
http://tinyurl.com/6txb9
http://tinyurl.com/ynv4xr
http://tinyurl.com/kvrak5
Post a Comment