I've been caught up in the current policy debate over the Senate version of the health care reform bill. The arguments have been nasty on both sides throwing around words like denialists, stupid, moron, kool-aid drinker and so on. And there has been some good discussions over the points in the bill between Kos, Dr. Dean, and David Axlrod among others who take these things seriously. Unfortunately the debate has been missing the forest for the trees.
On the Daily Kos it seems that those who support the bill have the means to come up with the numbers to recommend crappy diaries that support their position or whine about others who don't agree with them. And by crappy diaries I mean ones that don't offer any debate on the merits of the policy but either resort to name calling or appeals to emotions. People know the bill sucks. Even the "villagers" support it - that should be a red flag.
Truth be told both versions of the bills are a change of the status quo. They change the status quo in that they both do something to the current system.
The difference is can you support such a huge give away to the corporate interests just so you can say "We won health care reform..." It seems many can. I can't support it for that reason.
Getting anything because it is "better than nothing" is a wimpy cop out especially when Democrats supposedly had a majority in the Congress and controlled the White House.
Back during the 2000 elections, Ralph Nader, running for the Green Party and darling of the left, said he was running as a 3rd party candidate because Republicans and Democrats were not that different. Both were bought and sold by the corporate interests in this country. The bank bail outs and now the health care reform debate puts the truth in Nader's words.
I wish I had a billion dollars sitting around and then maybe I could've gotten a bill that helps the most people rather than one that preserves the monopoly of the private insurance industry.
Supporters of the bill have said "we'll fix it in conference" or "we'll fix it in another bill" but since this go round was such a hassle and in the end a big sell out and based on the history of this Congress - remember the FISA fight - I highly doubt we will see anything better or fixed once the Senate bill is passed as the final version or worse the bill is watered down even more and the anti-choice language is left in.
Sure the status quo will be changed but can we really afford the price it will cost the people it is suppose to help?
What fustrates me the most is I don't see people acknowledging that the bill under consideration is bad policy and if the abortion language is taken out I'm afraid we are going to be back right at square one. Senator Reid might have to dump another load cash on Nebraska or to others if the abortion language stays in.
In full disclosure I do not have health insurance right now and I am disabled so one would think I would want any bill - I don't. I want a good one instead. I'd rather fight this issue once rather than have to fight it each time we need to "fix" what is bad in this bill.