Moderate Democrats are quitting on Obamacare

[American]

Moderate Democrats are quitting on Obamacare

The landmark health-reform law passed in 2010 has never been very popular and always highly partisan, but a new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that a group of once loyal Democrats has been steadily turning against Obamacare: Democrats who are ideologically moderate or conservative.

Just after the law was passed in 2010, fully 74 percent of moderate and conservative Democrats supported the federal law making changes to the health-care system. But just 46 percent express support in the new poll, down 11 points in the past year. Liberal Democrats, by contrast, have continued to support the law at very high levels – 78 percent in the latest survey. Among the public at large, 42 percent support and 49 percent oppose the law, retreating from an even split at 47 percent apiece last July.
The shift among the Democratic party’s large swath in the ideological middle– most Democrats in this poll, 57 percent, identify as moderate or conservative – is driving an overall drop in party support for the legislation

This law is junk, we always knew, Dems are getting to know it, and Obama has already admitted it (with the delayed implementation to 2015).

 

[Morality Games]

Moderate Democrats are quitting on Obamacare



This law is junk, we always knew, Dems are getting to know it, and Obama has already admitted it (with the delayed implementation to 2015).

Even if it was junk, nobody enjoys the moral credibility to resist it. The inequities of health care in the United States have been starving for resolution for decades. Pretty much any effort at that, no matter how pitiful or harmful, is justifiable, and any resistance, no matter how wise or restrained, is not.

As it is, the bad points of the law are exaggerated and the resistance is not wise or restrained.

 

[Sisyphus]

Moderate Democrats are quitting on Obamacare



This law is junk, we always knew, Dems are getting to know it, and Obama has already admitted it (with the delayed implementation to 2015).

Great news. I thought it was just me and others of Bernie Saunders' ilk that thought a system modeled after MA's healthcare (aka Romneycare) which itself was a scheme first cooked up by the conservative "think" tank, Heritage Group, was pure junk. Maybe we'll begin demanding real reforms.

Fingers crossed.

 

[iliveonramen]

I agree..repeal and replace with universal healthcare.

 

[Morrigi]

Not sure if trolling or just insane.

 

[head of joaquin]

I agree..repeal and replace with universal healthcare.

That's exactly what we need. No other system works in a modern economy. Somehow I don't think the OP wants this to be the conclusion, however.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Even if it was junk, nobody enjoys the moral credibility to resist it. The inequities of health care in the United States have been starving for resolution for decades. Pretty much any effort at that, no matter how pitiful or harmful, is justifiable, and any resistance, no matter how wise or restrained, is not.

As it is, the bad points of the law are exaggerated and the resistance is not wise or restrained.

Another liberal "feel good, but it doesn't work" scheme to separate tax payers and consumers forced to purchase it from more of their pay check. What kind of logic is that? Make tax payers and consumers pay exorbitant fees for health care coverage that's "junk?"

That's the result of the "let's pass it so we can find out what's in it" mentality. It was idiotic then, and it's idiotic now.

 

[Morality Games]

Another liberal "feel good, but it doesn't work" scheme to separate tax payers and consumers forced to purchase it from more of their pay check. What kind of logic is that? Make tax payers and consumers pay exorbitant fees for health care coverage that's "junk?"

That's the result of the "let's pass it so we can find out what's in it" mentality. It was idiotic then, and it's idiotic now.

... you go find someone to have that argument with. It has nothing to do with what I said.

 

[tererun]

I agree..repeal and replace with universal healthcare.

It is what wwe were promised before the republicans took advantage of spineless blob Obama.

 

[American]

Great news. I thought it was just me and others of Bernie Saunders' ilk that thought a system modeled after MA's healthcare (aka Romneycare) which itself was a scheme first cooked up by the conservative "think" tank, Heritage Group, was pure junk. Maybe we'll begin demanding real reforms.

Fingers crossed.

Did you write your representatives when they voted for it? I did.

 

[American]

Even if it was junk, nobody enjoys the moral credibility to resist it. The inequities of health care in the United States have been starving for resolution for decades. Pretty much any effort at that, no matter how pitiful or harmful, is justifiable, and any resistance, no matter how wise or restrained, is not.

As it is, the bad points of the law are exaggerated and the resistance is not wise or restrained.

You need to calm down before you have a stroke.

 

[Sisyphus]

Did you write your representatives when they voted for it? I did.

Yes; also both of my senators and the White House, urging strongly that Medicare be extended to all age groups, or failing that, that they fight to the death for a Public Option, which Private Insurers feared knowing that once people see that Public trumps Private, the market would flock to the Public Option, purely by choice, since it would of course be optional.

If Public is worse, why fear it? Are you seeing?

 

[head of joaquin]

Yes; also both of my senators and the White House, urging strongly that Medicare be extended to all age groups, or failing that, that they fight to the death for a Public Option, which Private Insurers feared knowing that once people see that Public trumps Private, the market would flock to the Public Option, purely by choice, since it would of course be optional.

If Public is worse, why fear it? Are you seeing?

I don't think this is the response American wants to hear. I think he desperately hoped people want to go back to our failed for-profit system which is the most expensive in the world, yet can't even provide basic health care for 50M citizens without sending them to the emergency room.

This is what conservatives do -- the solution they prefer to their failed policies is those some failed policies, cubed.

 

[Middleground]

You need to calm down before you have a stroke.

If there was universal healthcare, he'd have a lot less worry.

Tell me, American... what do you think is so great about the system you have now?

 

[JayGatsby]

If a libertarian or conservative were given a million reasons why a UHC system was better than our current system they would still reject it and call it just a socialist scheme to steal their money and give it to the "takers", the average conservative is just gonna buy in to the scare tactics of the insurance industry when they start lobbying against it, that is if we ever do try to pass a system like so many other major countries have.

 

[Morality Games]

You need to calm down before you have a stroke.

If in thirty years the right-wing can't provide a direction or resolution to the inequities of health care practice in the United States that doesn't involve empty tough guy posturing, then they don't deserve further input into the process through which reform is provided. You either have vision, direction, and leadership, or you don't.

Not sure why that is such a radical idea when something like it is a moral norm in every other aspect of human existence. Historically, if a commanding officers failed consistently, they tendered their resignations or accepted demotion.

This notion Americans have that there should be no deadline to pushing an agenda is the sort of factionalism the Founding Fathers feared would grind the republic into ruin. At a certain point, you should quietly withdraw your agenda from the national discourse and find new causes to pursue.

 

[upsideguy]

I agree..repeal and replace with universal healthcare.

While I agree, that won't happen. Universal healthcare can only come with Obamacare as a foundation.

 

[upsideguy]

You need to calm down before you have a stroke.

... that would be bad, as a stroke under the most expensive and one of the least efficient healthcare systems in the world could lead to personal bankruptcy (1/2 of all bankruptcies in the US are from medical bills.... Medical Bills Are the Biggest Cause of US Bankruptcies: Study) ... which could lead to heart attack.

Nothing worse than having your number come up in the reverse lottery that is the American healthcare system.

 

[cpwill]

If there was universal healthcare, he'd have a lot less worry.

Tell me, American... what do you think is so great about the system you have now?

It offers the highest quality care to the sick out there, and is responsible for the vast majority of medical innovation, bringing the future hope of curing Downs Syndrome, AIDs, etc.

Mind you, we have lots of problems. We have massive third-party-interference that distorts our ability to effectively reduce costs. The solution to that is not more third party interference.

We live in a nation with universal healthcare - Japan. My wife just had a baby a couple of months ago. We were told that we could have our child at an American hospital or, if we couldn't get there in time, a Japanese hospital. We asked what the difference was. "Well, for starters, with a Japanese hospital, you won't get any pain medication - its too expensive and so they don't give out pain meds during birth".

Every mother is now free to ask themselves whether or not they think that a blanket denial of pain meds during birth is indicative of a system that has allocated resources to where people want them.

 

[Middleground]

It offers the highest quality care to the sick out there, and is responsible for the vast majority of medical innovation, bringing the future hope of curing Downs Syndrome, AIDs, etc.

Mind you, we have lots of problems. We have massive third-party-interference that distorts our ability to effectively reduce costs. The solution to that is not more third party interference.

We live in a nation with universal healthcare - Japan. My wife just had a baby a couple of months ago. We were told that we could have our child at an American hospital or, if we couldn't get there in time, a Japanese hospital. We asked what the difference was. "Well, for starters, with a Japanese hospital, you won't get any pain medication - its too expensive and so they don't give out pain meds during birth".

Every mother is now free to ask themselves whether or not they think that a blanket denial of pain meds during birth is indicative of a system that has allocated resources to where people want them.

We have universal healthcare in Canada, and no woman will be denied pain meds while giving birth. I am quite surprised that is the case in Japan. I'll have to ask my boyfriend who lived there for 5 years.

In any event, if the option is to pay out of pocket, I am sure pain meds would be much cheaper than having to pay to the whole birth. I wonder how much that costs? $10,000-$15,000?

 

[VanceMack]

Republicans are making a huge mistake fighting against Obamacare. They SHOULD be pressing for it to continue as written. They should NOT allow the president to usurp the constitution and violate the law. He promoted that pisec of **** legislation, democrats passed it without knowing what is in it, and now that it is about to be implemented he is ****ting bricks because he and the democrats KNOW it is going to have a huge negative impact on business, employment, the economy overall, individuals lives, etc. They should be forced to swallow that **** sandwich they made and then deal with the consequences. As it is, they will fight it, maybe even win, and the democrats will blame everything on them.

 

[cpwill]

We have universal healthcare in Canada, and no woman will be denied pain meds while giving birth. I am quite surprised that is the case in Japan. I'll have to ask my boyfriend who lived there for 5 years.

:shrug: feel free to. We were amazed too, so we went and asked some friends of ours who had just delivered locally.

In any event, if the option is to pay out of pocket, I am sure pain meds would be much cheaper than having to pay to the whole birth. I wonder how much that costs? $10,000-$15,000?

:shrug: it was about $10K five years ago when my government health insurance tried to deny coverage for it. Ah, good ole Tricare. Excellent healthcare... so long as your problem can be solved with a Motrin pill.

 

[Middleground]

:shrug: feel free to. We were amazed too, so we went and asked some friends of ours who had just delivered locally.

I am wondering if it has anything to do with Japanese culture.

 

[cpwill]

I am wondering if it has anything to do with Japanese culture.

Perhaps, but it's not that much of an outlier. Expensive treatments that aren't "necessary" get trimmed when you start rationing, as all UHC systems have to do (some more than others), and the decisions aren't being made by the patients.

The British system, for example, has those who come in with lung cancer assigned a specialist... who takes long enough to see that a good enough portion of patients go ahead and conveniently either die or move beyond saving, thus producing significant cost savings to the system. Hooray!

That is why your Supreme Court struck down the part of your UHC law that forbade use of private medical facilities. "Access to a waiting list is not access to healthcare", I believe, was the verdict.

 

[Middleground]

Perhaps, but it's not that much of an outlier. Expensive treatments that aren't "necessary" get trimmed when you start rationing, as all UHC systems have to do (some more than others), and the decisions aren't being made by the patients.

The British system, for example, has those who come in with lung cancer assigned a specialist... who takes long enough to see that a good enough portion of patients go ahead and conveniently either die or move beyond saving, thus producing significant cost savings to the system. Hooray!

That is why your Supreme Court struck down the part of your UHC law that forbade use of private medical facilities. "Access to a waiting list is not access to healthcare", I believe, was the verdict.

I can't speak for other countries, but I can assure you that a patient in Canada with lung cancer will be taken care of with the highest amount of urgency and care, no matter the initial prognosis. However, the guy who needs the knee replacement might have to wait a bit longer. And our Supreme Court made the right decision... I truly believe that for profit healthcare is a human rights violation.