Skip to main content

View Diary: A tale of two 'keep your health insurance' bills (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Landrieu's bill is a better one and (9+ / 0-)

    if Obama had to sign it, it would be a minor setback to getting rid of the cancer of junk insurance.

    I would much rather see if Democrats could weather this storm and get this country of junk insurance once and for all.

    I agree with President Obama, our country's journey is not yet complete. We must continue the work that our forebearers at Seneca Falls started, and put the Equal Rights Amendment into our Constitution.

    by pistolSO on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 08:42:42 AM PST

    •  So would I (10+ / 0-)

      but this is a politically decent option putting Republicans on the spot about whether they're protecting consumers or insurance companies.

      "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. [...] There would be no place to hide."--Frank Church

      by Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 08:51:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If "putting Republicans on the spot" (6+ / 0-)

        Had ever, in the history of this congress actually worked to either amend their behavior, or produce compromise, I'd go along with this reasoning.  But Republicans DON'T CARE.  They just go looking for another "spot".  Otherwise we wouldn't even be having the hypocritical sight of Republicans who opposed the law (ACA) that prohibits insurance companies from randomly canceling policies, now demanding a law that prohibits insurance companies from randomly canceling policies.
        Democrats really should give up the idea that Republicans can be "put on the spot", or shamed into working with the Democrats.  It simply never works.
        "Never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time, and annoys the pig". -Robert Heinlein.

        •  hear, hear (0+ / 0-)

          Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

          by greenbastard on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 09:55:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  B-b-but THIS time, everyone will see what mean (0+ / 0-)

          jackasses they are, loudly announce "Not voting RePug again" and RePugs will see the error of their ways - apologizing for all past misdeeds...

          This echos digby who today pointed out the error of Dem/Liberal habitual premature celebrating.

          Retired Pie Warrior. Substance over Sh*t Flinging (as best as I am able). Sarcasm for - and derision of - True Believers / Entitlement "Reformers" / NSA cheerleaders (yes, significant overlap) still available 24/7, you betcha!

          by JVolvo on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 03:34:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  So would Charles Pierce (6+ / 0-)

      From this morning:

      f the Democratic party, through its elected leaders, bails on the health-care law even so far as go out of its way to let people keep their lousy insurance plans that do not come up to the Affordable Care Act's specifications, that's pretty much the ballgame. There will be barbering and compromising until hell won't have it and, eventually, the only thing left will be the Medicaid expansion, and we all know the vast influence that poor and lower middle class people have over the political process. (And, as Steve M shrewdly notes, the Democrats will get blamed for the deleterious effects of any changes now anyway.)

      "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

      by Demi Moaned on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 08:59:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's the problem to look out for (7+ / 0-)

        scope creep.

        If this works to put Republicans on the spot over protecting insurers over consumers, good. If it helps highlight that insurers are screwing people over to get them in more expensive plans, good.

        If it's the start of an eroding of the laws protections, bad.

        I'm liking the politics here, not liking the policy.

        "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. [...] There would be no place to hide."--Frank Church

        by Joan McCarter on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 09:06:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, that's *THE* problem (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sotiredofusernames, Victor Ward

          You can't look at this in isolation. If this bill passes, the law is basically toast. If we're going to get an emergency fix passed because people are getting cancellations, just wait until the insurers have to jack up premiums because of the fix.

          You can't fix one problem that's going to create a bigger one.

          This whole thing is yet another unforced error from the Obama team involving being chickenshit.

          Obama also campaigned on a plan without an individual mandate. That was the only substantive policy difference between him and Hillary (despite what people believed) and he didn't intervene to restore that promise.

          This is madness.

      •  All the ACA bashers here should read that (7+ / 0-)

        I don't give a shit if Obama's now a big fat liar because some people can't keep their junk insurance, the alternative is far, far worse.
        The alternative is, and always was, no matter how hard Obama should have tried for single payer or the public option, the old system-where we all really were at the mercy of the insurance companies.
        And I really believe that some supposed progressives here would prefer that we had no incremental reform at all without their single payer or public option pony.  

      •  We know how reasonable those House Republicans (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Demi Moaned

        can be, always open to compromise, looking to improve rather than...... wait a minute.  (hitting head with mallet).  That was close.  No way, man!  Obama tolerated 5+ years of that crap.  Fool me once.....

    •  Isn't it worse, actually? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mcmom

      Under the Upton bill, insurers don't have to keep offering the plans they are cancelling.  These plans have fewer benefits but also fewer up front costs.  Their actuarial models, and the basis for which they price the plans in the exchanges, require young and healthy people to buy more expensive plans, with the help of subsidies.  Put another way: under the Upton bill, the cancelled plans stay cancelled.  The Landrieu bill keeps the cancelled plans in place, in effect placing a mandate on insurers to offer substandard and uneconomical plans, and then, for patients who opt into them, revoking the subsidies that in effect pay for the community rating.  

      I guess from their point of view, if people just don't enroll, that means the insurers are 100% out of pocket, versus whatever the difference in premium between the cancelled and compliant plans, but don't don't give the insurers an out: as long as they're looking at fewer enrollees because of the website problems, they have the incentive to (a) lobby state governments to set up exchanges, and (b) use their marketing muscle to get people signed up.  

      A lot depends, as well, on how long these bills are in effect for.  If it's just transitional, well, the insurers can't submit premiums for another year, at which point it's moot.  If it is a permanent change then, yes, this creates the very adverse selection problem the ACA depends on avoiding.

      The obvious fix for the website issue is simply to withhold collecting the mandate penalty until the website is up and running.  Not repeal the mandate, just not enforce it.  And pass a one-time exception to federal procurement rules.  Treating this like a function of political will is silly and over the long term, the reaction risks being worse than the problem.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Wed Nov 13, 2013 at 09:33:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site