Display:
I guess my question is: which healthcare reform?

There was a window there about a year ago where I think there was a real chance of getting Medicare for everyone.

I don't argue the current HCR will mean an improvement for millions. But it is still short of what was possible a year ago. And I believe the agreement with Big Pharma at the outset was an unnecessary concession that did a great deal to make the possible impossible.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman

by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 14th, 2010 at 04:42:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And I suspect that Obama genuinely failed to see what he could have achieved with his mandate.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman
by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Sun Mar 14th, 2010 at 04:48:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A popular mandate does not translate into congressional cooperation.  Hence, Reagan not being able to enact his agenda as easily as Bush II.  The right spent 30 years building the foundation that allowed Bush to act with impunity, by electing a congress that supported their agenda.  We need to keep working to do the same, not call our leaders sellouts with bad motives when they can't achieve what we want.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 14th, 2010 at 05:59:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
not call our leaders sellouts with bad motives when they can't achieve what we want.

If they try and fail, that's one thing. But I expect them to try.

In this regard, my disappointment with Obama goes beyond healthcare.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman

by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Mon Mar 15th, 2010 at 04:14:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I suspect that Obama genuinely failed to see what he could have achieved with his mandate.

That is the benign take. Another possibility is that he did see what could have been pushed through and was frightened at the prospect. Instead of seeing the insurance industry as a bunch of parasites on the body politic which we had an opportunity to eliminate or greatly weaken, he saw them as legitimate players whose interests had to be accommodated. I think this hypothesis better accounts for his pro-active give-aways.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Mar 14th, 2010 at 07:46:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think what was possible a year ago is one of the 'unknowables,' but I'm certainly not going to call Obama a Judas, assigning him traitor motives, because I think 'maybe' something was possible a year ago that's not now.

Every bit of evidence I can observe from my perspective shows he's working to getting health care.  This is a battle that's been waged for decades, for my whole lifetime anyway.  I've seen it go down in flames often enough, and heard people on the left even, as recently as 5 years ago, parroting the consensus that 'everyone knows' it was 'impossible' in the US.

So everything I've seen indicates to me that this is a huge battle and no easy task and that this president seems to being on the brink of accomplishing something that no other president has.  So why would I conclude that he's working against my interests and selling me out?  Why brush aside the 'millions' that will be helped?

Right now, private industry IS our health care system.  We've got NO significant public infrastructure.  I see the evidence that Obama acknowledges this problem by what's in the bill - funding for building clinics and paying for health care workers' education.

So I have no idea if a 'deal' with pharma was necessary, but I'm certainly not going to jump to the conclusion that Obama has sold us out and that this was his motive based on that.  For one thing, the drug-reimportation thing everyone's wailing about is really stupid policy -- why should we 're-import' drugs from Canada?  Why shouldn't we just get the regulations in place then work out our own discounts when the government actually has the bargaining power brought about by the bill when it passes?

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Mar 14th, 2010 at 04:59:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series