Pat Oliphant for October 21, 2009

Another very razor sharp toon from Oliphant. Put the public option back in!

“Put the public option back in! ”

NO, NO, NO. Leave it out…………..forever.

No, put it back in and keep it there. A well run, low cost public option will force the insurance companies to actually compete for your business. Companies that want to stay in business will lower their prices and offer better policies. It’s not as if they don’t have copious fat to trim. Just look at executive saleries.

If you don’t want to use the public option, then don’t. That’s why it’s called an option.

Uh-oh. Scott’s back off the anit-paranoia meds again.

“….funded by a bankrupt thuggish government …..” No, George W Bush’s administration is over.

What instrument , is she playing ?

Clarinet or oboe?

Earth to Scott, There is no public option paid for by the government!!! Get this straight. The public option on every bill is premium supported. A subsidy will be available to the working porr. Otherwise, the public option has to stand on its own. It is so stupid that the opposition continues to paint this as a government funded plan. NEVER WAS!! NEVER WILL BE!!!! My Medicare is paid for by the monthly contributions paid by me and my employers over my life time.

If Medicare is going broke, it is because “W” borrowed all that money for his personal war. Then, he added Part D, which was not funded. THAT MEANS THAT ALL OF THE MEDICARE PRESCRIPTIONS ARE BEING PAID WITH IOUs!

All of this is designed to make Medicare go broke. I am tired of the GOP’s constant attack on Medicare. What “W” and the GOP have done to Medicare is criminal. They all should be in prison!!!

BTW. Scott, did you watch Frontline’s “The Warning?” Or do you even know which channel is PBS. You need a big helping of unvarnished truth!!

Let’s put public option in and use it as the foundation for universal single payer.

I don’t care about “fair competition.” I’d love to see the health insurance companies put out of business. They have been killing people for years.

Obviously, striper, you haven’t paid attention to the numerous stories about people denied claims, dropped from coverage, etc. Thousands of people have died as a direct result.

Start paying attention to the news, okay?

Since the “uninsurable poor” are already being taken care of in the emergency rooms your health insurance premiums are higher to cover them now. With a public option, they could get basic insurance and go to private doctors, get preventive care and also lower the health insurance premiums who would no longer have to cover them. BUT - knowing how the insurance companies LOVE their profits they may not lower all their premiums anyway.

BTW, here is something interesting about the Baucus bill, from people who supposedly did read it….

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/10/07/cbo-new-baucus/

And here is what the same people said about the House bill: http://edlabor.house.gov/newsroom/2009/07/cbo-scores-confirms-deficit-ne.shtml

Now, compare that with the healthcare industry saying they’d need, oh, a couple of thousand dollars more per year per household in the next few years. What was I supposed to be scared of again?

Thanks Anyol’tomcat . : )

<<< Hee hee, and why should Crunky have all the fun?

single payer all the way!

Sen. Harkin guaranteed that the public option will be in the bill.

The mouthpiece is too small or incorrectly drawn to be a Clarinet .

it’s just a musical pipe, as in the Pied Piper

striper, you don’t automatically get Social Security, BTW. The amount of social security a recipient receives is based upon his/her lifetime earnings, and the age at which it begins is now up to 67 for younger workers. (at least I think it’s still 67, could have gone higher by now)

@ Striper: I’m not happy with some of the cost cuts, although there is probably some fat that could be trimmed.

However, neither bill has anything to do with that. More on this shortly.

/practices his almighty Google-Fu

As for the 21% cut (or rather, as far as I can tell, the lack of increase compared to private providers), it’s not related to the bill: it is planned in Medicare. In fact, it would be due to the SGR, a measure binding inflation to the increase in doctor’s premiums (passed in the 90s, incidentally, by the Gingrich Congress), which has been put on one-year moratorium year after year . In fact, the articles I read stated that the House Bill would actually annul this provision and thus prevent the “cut” from taking place. Otherwise, this “cut” will take place unless the moratorium is extended… and as you can see at the below article, it might not be due to deficit concerns.

So the whole thing is already there, and will not be created by the House bill, nor the Baucus one. It has been there for a while due to concerns about deficits, which according to CBO neither bill would increase. Now, I do think that even in the current economic conditions decoupling is a good idea, but apparently I don’t get to vote on it.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/21/democrats-lose-vote-to-stop-steep-physician-payment-cuts/?iref=werecommend

Wow, the fear mongering runs rampant! The taxpayers would never end up paying for a public option. You bet it will work on its own. Just look at how well the banking and mortgage industries are doing!

right instrument…..wrong bleeep

Doesn’t the Declaration of Independence say I have a right to LIFE, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of HAPPINESS?

Shouldn’t life include healthcare? Cause I know for a fact I don’t have any because I can’t afford it.

I had it once paying $180 a month, but then it got too expensive and my hours were cut.

stripy, do you expect us to believe that wasn’t cut and paste?

Jase….”No, put it back in and keep it there. A well run, low cost public option will force the insurance companies to actually compete for your business….” With due respect, the problem is….a well run, low cost public option…..(!??) You must first convince me that something from the government will fall into those two parameters before I jump on that bandwagon….One need to look no further than the postal service…and THAT my friend is infinitely less complicated than our health system!

crunkbot that was out of line….

”However back when Clinton was the president he allowed people to get a certain amount of the social security they paid in and opt out of the system.”

Does anyone here know what Striper is referring to here? Or could you add add’l info striper?

John, I used to occasionally work with my local post office as part of my job and know the local post master through her daughter. What part of the USPS is a mess? Is it the whopping 3 to 5 days it takes them to deliver a letter 1/2 way across the country to my mother, or the massive 44 cents they charge to deliver it? Besides, we’re not talking about the entire health care industry, only insurance.

United Health Group makes about $4 billion a year in /profit/. That’s after the exorbitant executive salaries and bonuses. Former CEO William McGuire was forced to repay over $460 million in back dated stock options. His golden parachute is expected to earn him another $1 billion or so. UHG payed out a $350 million to settle class action lawsuits filed by the AMA and others for failing to pay out benefits. All that, and they refused to cover a healthy 2 y/o girl on the grounds she was underweight and a picky eater.

I’ll take the public option, thank you.

… river to drown? No, buried under a mountain of debt.

jase, appreciated your info about UHG. I believe they’re one of the worst with abusive practices.