Go Home

Due to a recent server outage, our video archives are currently unavailable. We are working as fast as we can to remedy this. Thanks for your understanding.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (1491)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (7025)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

Rachel Maddow talks to Rep. Anthony Weiner, who threw down the gauntlet on health care reform, and forced the Republicans to vote on an amendment abolishing Medicare.

Rachel reports on the battle going on between those in Congress who are representing the interests of the insurance companies, and those representing the interests of their constituents.

Maddow: As for the many, many cries against a publicly funded insurance plan, well Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York is all over it. Congressman Weiner has cast himself as the health care version of Clarence the Angel, forcing everyone in Congress to think what life would be like without a very popular, already existing publicly funded health insurance plan.

Congressman Weiner introduced an amendment tonight that would eliminate Medicare. Of course Mr. Weiner didn't actually want Medicare to be eliminated. But he did want to force every conservative on the House Energy and Commerce Committee to have to go on the record that their position on the government run health plan upon which forty three million voters rely. In other words, really Republicans? You're against government funded health care? Care to go on the real record with that? Care to vote to kill Medicare?

Rep. Weiner goes on to explain why his amendment went down in flames and that the Republicans just hate any government run health care, unless it's Medicare and they are forced to say whether they'd really want to get rid of it. He then tells Rachel about a very bold move he's going to make on health care reform.

Weiner: But it does lead us to the next logical step where I need my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to start to come to, and that is not why have a public option, but why have a private option at all? If we know for example that the one experiment we have is very successful in publicly funded health care through Medicare, why do we even need the insurance companies? What constructive role are they playing?

We know they're taking tens of billions of dollars each year and putting it into profits that should be going into health care, so tomorrow I'm going to be taking the next step and offering a true single payer health care plan, and I wanted people today to start to think about, "hey maybe that's the way we do it". It's simpler, and we know that it works.

All I can say is amen brother. I think the Democrats have been wrong not to push for single payer and make the Republicans and Blue Dogs walk back from that. The Republicans are going to try to kill any reform whether it's single payer, or even the compromised position of a public option. I think getting a decent public option in place would lead to single payer, but I don't understand why they started there. If Congressman Weiner is willing to get enough of them on board with him to fight for single payer, and try to get some real reform passed, I'm with him. I guess we'll be finding out how this plays with the leadership shortly.

Full transcript below the fold.

MADDOW: The health care battle going on now in Congress is not fundamentally now a battle between Democrats and Republicans. It more closely approximates a battle between liberals and conservatives, which in today's politics looks a lot like battle between those who represent corporate interests and those who represent a way more populist anti-corporate line.

In this health care fight, conservatives have cast their lot with the insurance and pharmaceutical and other corporate medical companies whose, even if the U.S. health care system is really failing a lot of the rest of the country, it suits those companies just fine, thank you very much.

Republican Senator Jon Kyl, for example, offered this vigorous defense of the health insurance industry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JON KYL (R), ARIZONA: The health insurance industry is the most regulated or one of the most regulated industries in the America. They don't need to be kept honest by a competitor from the government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: They don't need to be kept honest? They're fine.

Here's the main political battle line on health care reform: Should the government provide some competition to the health insurance companies to try to lower costs for the people, or not? Conservatives have, in large numbers, chosen: or not-siding with insurance companies to say that everything's pretty much fine the way it is now.

Today, liberals in Congress loudly positioned themselves against that point of view, starting with the top Democrat in Congress, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Insurance companies are out there in full force, carpet bombing, shock and awe against the public option. These are initiatives that are very important in this legislation, and they are to correct what the insurance companies have done to America and to the health of our people over the years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: Speaker Pelosi used even stronger language after that press conference, telling reporters, quote, "It is somewhat immoral what they are doing. Of course, they have been immoral all along how they have treated the people they insure. They are the villains in this. They have been part of the problem in a major way. The public has to know that."

This attempt to make the insurance companies, the corporate interest in health care system the villain in this fight, was foreshadowed by President Obama yesterday, during a town hall event in Raleigh, North Carolina.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: We have a system today that works well for the insurance industry, but it doesn't always work well for you. What we need, and what we will have when we pass these reforms are health insurance consumer protections to make sure that those who have insurance are treated fairly and insurance company are held accountable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: Lest you think it's mere coincidence that Democrats are now putting the insurance companies right in the political crosshairs, standing up against the interests in Washington who are alive with those corporate interests, members of Congress' progressive caucus came out in force today with a message that definitely sounds familiar to you by now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where is the accountability for the insurance companies?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right now, it's about insurance companies and what they need.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't understand what the insurers are afraid of. They're afraid of the competition. The insurers believe in the market, we believe in the market.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Private insurance companies have had decades to provide meaningful reform to our system. They have failed, and Congress must now act boldly in order to save lives.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: So, that's the liberal answer to the conservative argument that the health system is fine the way it is and the insurance industry, by the way, is awesome.

As for the many, many cries against a publicly-funded insurance plan, well, Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York is all over it. Congressman Weiner has cast himself as the health care version of Clarence the Angel, forcing everyone in Congress to think about what life would be like without a very popular, already existing, publicly funded health insurance plan. Congressman Weiner introduced an amendment tonight that would eliminate Medicare.

Of course, Mr. Weiner didn't actually want Medicare to be eliminated but he did want to force every conservative on the House Energy and Commerce Committee to have to go on the record with their position on the government-run health plan upon which 43 million American voters rely.

In other words, really, Republicans? You're against government-funded health care? Care to go on the real record with that? Care to vote to kill Medicare?

Congressman Anthony Weiner joins us now. He has just stepped outside the hearing room in Congress to join us.

Congressman, thank you so much for coming on the show.

REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D-NY), NAT'L. HEALTH CARE ACT CO-SPONSOR: Thank you, Rachel.

MADDOW: How did the vote go in your amendment?

WEINER: Well, for some reason, I guess Republicans don't like publicly funded, publicly administered health plans except for Medicare, and, I guess, except for the Veterans Administration and except for the health care that our military gets from the Department of Defense. The fact of the matter is, what we've learned is that government administered health care works pretty darn well. It's got lower overhead and people like it.

So, when my Republican colleagues pound the drum and pound the podium about how they hate government-run health care, I guess they haven't looked at what they get.

MADDOW: When you where deciding about what to do with this amendment, deciding what your role was going to be in health care, what you could do in this committee, did the Medicare idea come to you because you knew it would be an embarrassment? Did you think that any Republicans would actually vote against Medicare?

WEINER: Well, I did. And you should make note that this is the 44th anniversary to the day of the creation of Medicare. But it does lead us to the next logical step where I need colleagues on both sides of the aisle to start to come to. And that is not why have a public option, but why have a private option at all.

If we know, for example, the one experiment we have is very successful, the publicly funded health care through Medicare, why do we even need insurance companies? What constructive role are they playing? We know they're taking tens of billions of dollars each year and putting it into profits that should be going into health care.

So, tomorrow, I'm going to be taking the next step in offering a true single-payer health care plan, and I want people today to start to think about, "Hey, maybe that's the way we do it. It's simpler and we know that it's works."

MADDOW: Why do you think that single-payer hasn't been a prominent option in the table thus far in the health care debate?

WEINER: I think, to some degree, we, on the left, have been a little bit afraid of our own shadow here and we also forgot one thing from the '93-94 debates about health care. You know, people understand the things they have. They want this debate to be simple in the terms that they get.

People understand Medicare. They know their parents have it, their grandparents, they themselves have it. They know that it's sufficient and they know it's not perfect. They know there are gaps that need to be filled but they also know they'd much rather have government or their congressmen be able to call and make those changes than wait on an 800 number or go by shares of stock in order to influence policy.

But right now, we've got a cumbersome plan that is hanging by the thread because it's built on the foundation of private insurance which a lot of people don't like.

MADDOW: When you look at the opposition to moving forward on health care reform, not only just opposition to an idea like single-payer, but opposition to the very idea of significantly changing the system we've got now at all, that opposition is coming not just from Republicans but from conservative Democrats as well.

Do you think it's an ideological liberal conservative split or do you think this is about the influence of the insurance industry and other industries that profit from the system being the way they are now on members of Congress?

WEINER: Well, invariably, in rooms like the one behind me, status quo is probably the most powerful force in Washington. That's particularly true. And that status quo benefits a large industry like the insurance industry.

You know, this notion-and even President Obama says it sometimes, that people like their insurance policy. No, they don't like their insurance policy. I don't know anyone who wakes up in the morning and says, "Boy, I can't wait to dial the 800 number from my local insurance company."

I think what people realize, though, is that, frankly, it's there. And the lobbyists around here work very hard to keep it there. And that's a considerable force.

But there is something of a right/left divide here. I mean, mostly of the problems we have in the Democratic Caucus come from the right side. And, look, they're getting leaned on pretty hard and they're doing what they think is right. But I think it's wrong for the country.

MADDOW: Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York-it was a bold move today in the committee. Thanks very much for joining us to talk about it. Appreciate it.

WEINER: My pleasure. Thank you.

(Originally published Jul 31, 2009 7:15am)

Share This Post

Link To This Post


51 Comments
Floridiot's picture

Good for Weiner, he burned them

KWillow's picture

Weiner should put forth a bill denying Gov't health care to all Congress Persons until All Americans have it too.

moonsha's picture

The Coburn amendment would force members of Congress to use in Coburn's words "ObamaCare." Senator Coburn also said, "Let's demonstrate leadership -- and confidence in the system -- by requiring that every member of Congress go into it."

Obviously, many members of Congress -- who are used to a generous and flexible set of health benefits -- have no intention of letting the Coburn mandate become law. They will undoubtedly try to strip it from the bill at some point, in a conference committee between the two houses if necessary. But for now it is embedded in the bill and any overt attempt to remove it would be met with howls of public outrage.

"We know they're taking tens of billions of dollars each year and putting it into profits that should be going into health care..."

This should be highlighted over and over. "We'd love for you to have your heart operation Madam, but the CEOs all want new yachts."


far left loon >.<

gump's picture

the names unfortunate but he's book smart. This is the same "Support our troops" resolutions the right pulled for eight years.

Karma's a bitch.


is intended to be a factual statement

There is enough $$$$ in the system right now to pay for single payer.
Read it again and think about it. There is enough money being spent on health care insurance right now to pay for single payer.

MountainMan23's picture

31% of private health insurance policy payments - $400 BILLION per year - go to administrative costs.

Medicare administrative costs are 3-4% of the overall cost of Medicare - one tenth of the private insurer's.

Replacing all American health care with a Medicare-like system would save $360 BILLION a YEAR.

That's $3.6 TRILLION over ten years.


When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?

Not soon enough!

Please, please tell me you have links citing those numbers. Those would be EXCELLENT for a healthcare argument I'm having with a republican 'friend'.

JUst add up all the insurance companies' profits, and that's the money spent on healthcare that doesn't provide healthcare.


far left loon >.<

neverbeenfooled's picture

Actually, there is more than just the profits, there are the exorbitant slaaries and other percs that are written off as expenses.

MountainMan23's picture

Dave Lindorff - The Simple Answer to America’s Health Care Crisis: Medicare for All

.. As long as the health insurance industry is permitted to be the primary paymaster, the cost of medical care will continue to soar, not least because the insurance industry is so concerned about minimizing its own outlays that it is forcing the system to devote nearly 30% of every health care dollar spent to administrative costs (compared to 3-4 percent for Medicare, and even less for single-payer systems like Canada’s). That’s true whether there is a so-called “public option” government-run health insurance plan or not. Note that 30 percent of America’s $2.5-trillion health care bill per year is $750 billion a year, a sum which does absolutely nothing to make a single person more healthy or less ill. ..

But read the rest of the article too .. he does the math on an entire Medicare-like system for all Americans.

Here's the link to the original article at Lindorff's site:
The Simple Answer to America’s Health Care Crisis: Medicare for All


When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?

Not soon enough!

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

They reran it tonight.

Only he quoted the insurance industry spending 20% of the dollar on administrative costs vs 3% administrative costs for Medicare:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/index-flash...


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

I did some looking, and found that the New England Journal of Medicine put forth the number of 31%:

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349...

that is after all what would 'happen'. Or so the GOP talking points would have non-thinking folks believe. And a government committee of experts would decide what you get for coverage, never mind now its a committe of experts working for the insurance companies who decide what u get for coverage. that little detail always seems to escape the view of GOPers and Baucus/Nelson alike. but they know it, they just dont want most folks to.

KWillow's picture

Let them get jobs as phony magicians pulling sick rabbits out of battered old hats. Its what they deserve. As for the "innocent" employees who loose jobs, they'll at least have Public Health Care, and the stimulus it provides to our economy will help them find jobs in no time.

Susan J.'s picture

can get jobs administrating the public plan, and the CEOs can teach at Texas Tech with Gonzo... or run the Bush library.

The first thing I would note is that Medicare is a dumping ground for people over 65 and the disable, people who the private insurers wouldn't want to insure.

The second thing I note is that the clip is correct, the dichotomy is corporate/non corporate, rather than a Democrat/Republican dichotomy. It's clear who's had the upper hand, those who's first priority was to protect corporate profits. I don't think there is a Democrat/Republican dichotomy in economic matters.

The third thing I would note is that the best way to forestall rationing is to adapt a system that limits administrative overhead and allows the highest percentage of health care dollars spent to actually be used in providing care.

The forth thing I would note is, during the enactment of Medicare, Part D, "Congress and the Bush Administration decided to specifically prohibit the Medicare program from bargaining with pharmaceutical companies to secure lower drug prices. This controversial decision took the responsibility for moderating drug prices away from the Medicare program and, instead, placed it in the hands of private drug plans." I have to wonder how much the public option is going to be hobbled.

I think we have this respite from economic collapse, due to the enormous deficit spending currently taken place. We have this window to get our economic house in order. I think at the end of the day, we better get our health costs in line with best in class, namely the other industrial countries, because I don't think that mortgaging our futures is a viable long term strategy.

Notice that "single payer" or any comparison of foreign systems is off the table, and that getting costs in line with "best in class" isn't occurring. That why, to me, this reform so far has been a farce. We also need a system that best positions our companies to participate in free trade, since all the geniuses thinks free trade is a bright idea. I just doesn't look like our lobbied government of influence peddlers is up to the task.

constituent's picture

first i want to say you make some good points. as you are suggesting the system of health care/insurance is NOT "free market". their business model is built on consolidation, a "too big to fail or be pushed around" if you will. the same thing the health care insurance industry is crying about is what they use as a business model to price fix and ration services. they develop an UNfair advantage. this is what they claim the public option will have an UNfair advantage. therefore prices rise and will continue to rise. this has been going on for many years especially the last 15-20 years. you make a good point about medicare D specifically regarding the non-bid portion of the legislation. you can bet that Pharma will do this again. ONE of the reasons why, is because other countries have been bidding for years and now CHINA is going to a universal health care system. the u.s. is one of the very few countries left without competitive bidding where special interests have the most power. we are in some respects subsidizing for the bidding/pricing that other countries are getting.

NoBuddy's picture

Most large corporations are self insured, because, once you have a large number of people, it makes no economic sense to pay insurance premiums. (My employer is self insured, which is why I'm familiar with the concept). So, if, as a nation, we decide to insure everyone, for the same exact reasons business self insure, so should we as a nation.

I haven't heard that concept addressed in the health care debate, why self insurance makes sense for business and not for the country. That's because the "reform" is concerned with preserving corporate profits, not in cost reform.

I'm all for corporate profits, if the corporation provides a value added service that is worth the profit they take. I don't see it in health insurance. I also think that a component of medical research is lacking due to the emphasis on enhancing shareholder value, and that is research into cures. Rather, the emphasis is in maintenance regimes that provide recurring revenues. We're not going to break the inflation in health care without some cures. Government supported research is needed for cures.

MountainMan23's picture

At about 6:25 of this clip Thom Hartmann points out that it is a CRIME (a literal CRIME - not a figure of speech) to insure primary care by a for-profit company in all but one of the nearly 40 industrialized nations that have universal care.

The whole clip is worth watching.

Thom Hartmann: Healthcare Meltdown


When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?

Not soon enough!

toiboi's picture

thom does a great job w/this - he is, as always, 'spot on'

and yes: The whole clip is worth watching.

(btw; he recently said that congress critters should-like the nascar drivers- wear jackets w/their sponsors'/contributors' patches )

FilthyHarry's picture

Listening to a repub congressperson talking about how bad socialized medicine would be, and how terrible a public option would be, and then says that yes, repubs support reforms to bring down the price of healthcare. My question is, how can repubs trumpet the private system while at the same time call for reforms of that system because costs are too high? Aren't they in effect admitting the private system is broken if they support reforming it? How can you believe in a free market system AND believe costs are too high?

Pure bullshit.

They are bankrupt, morally and idealistically. That's how they can simultaneously hold two directly contradicting thoughts in their head and pretend it's normal, as if everyone does it. It's not. It's the sign of mental illness that is Conservatism. You can pretty much sum up a neocon by these traits: hypocrisy, corruption, hate, racism, intolerance, and greed.

constituent's picture

ask republicans if they want their money back they paid into the system or do they want medicare. i'll bet a large majority will say they will take medicare. the moral issues regarding this have been gone over inside and out. i believe people need to focus on the economic necessity. reducing/slowing the COST of health care is going to be important for a strong long lasting economic recovery out of this recession. Wages continue to do down but OVERhead goes up. this crisis is creating a large number of uninsured and vulnerable under insured.......it's becoming systemic. this is not a fxxking handout.

KWillow's picture

Cancel their Gov' insurance and let them buy their own. I know! Maybe the Blue Dogs & Repugs can form a Co-Op! Then everything will be daisies and bunnies and unicorns and rainbows.

...countdown until Repubs start trumpeting that a Dem tried to KILL MEDICARE!!!11!

NoBuddy's picture

Didn't you hear. From the parallel reality, we are going to murder euthanize all those elderly people. With all of them dead, they'll be no need for Medicare !!!

jwazzz's picture

A Democrat with balls - what a concept. Let's hope it's contagious.

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Q's picture

hmmm--if more Dems had to have testicular transplants, would their provider cover the cost if it was out-of-network, would there be a co-pay for cojones, or would they deny it because being spineless was a pre-existing condition?

cmhmd's picture

When I talk to people about transformation of the health care system, I remind them of this quote by JFK,

"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too."

Now, the Apollo program cost about $145 Billion in today's dollars and switching to a single payer system or a German style Social health Insurance Program would actually SAVE us money over the same ten year horizon, and yet no one seems to have the political courage to call BS on this mind numbingly stupid kabuki dance we keep performing.

As the Brits used to have displayed during the Blitz, "COURAGE!"

Clemdog's picture

Big Ups to Rep Weiner (and Sen. Bernie Sanders) for showing some guts and representing the American Taxpayers. Hey Blue Dogs and Repugs and the insurance and big pharma horses you rode in on - shove the public option up your collective asses. The only public option we want is the single payer system. There is a voter mandate out there, to the tune of 70%+ of voters who favor the single payer system and we the people are sick of you voicing your ignorance above the voice of the American people who know you are simply full of shit, but have the bully pulpit. Well screw you, I'm sick of being nice.

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

You trying to make more money for proctologists?


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Clemdog's picture

..I'd be willing to see a few proctologists afford that new whatever if they could help those with head-stuck-up-ass-syndrome - like "blue dog dumbshits", any neocon et. al., to remove said asses from said bungs.

constituent's picture
.

.

Mike in Milwaukee's picture

You are a true patriot and a man of the people!!!!!!

Edwin's picture

I didn't see him going over no falls in a kayak!!


far left loon >.<

Capt. Bat Guano's picture
[Comment Deleted By Administration For Violation Of Terms Of Service]

Generally speaking I don't trust anyone making over 150K a year.

Capt. Bat Guano's picture
.

I'm sorry, I just get so worked up and only certain words can properly convey my depth of emotion on specific issues.


Generally speaking I don't trust anyone making over 150K a year.

wilder5121's picture

Weiner reminds me of Jimmy Stewart as Mr. Smith. A real and patriotic American fighting the monsters who've taken over America.

Gives you faith again. Very inspiring. Wish ALL Democrats had his intestinal fortitude.


"Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face?" - General Jack D. Ripper

RickinSF's picture

...I wonder how the Democrats will exact their revenge for this.

jelbees's picture

I was talking to my neighbor the other day and they had to drop their supplmentary insurance. They are retired living on ss and a retirement pension. Their insurance became to expsenive for them to carry. So all they have now is medicare.

This is an actual Facebook posting from a friend of mine:

"Ask yourself this question...If you are in serious accident or in desperate need of medical attention and say a bum or a person that does nothin for society is there before you with no insurance. the bum will get the care you need before you do. I understand a lot of other countries use this but I just don't see it working in the U.S. Your wife's grandma probably can get social sercurity something we won't have the benefit of. Anyways hope all is well just thought I would throw my two cents in on that topic."

He was responding to a comment I posted regarding the "evils" of "socialized medicine" (Medicare, being sarcastic) and why it should be made available to everyone.

I think the biggest hurdle that Congressman Weiner and others will face is how to counter the relentless campaign of lies and misinformation spread by the corporatists in government with the help of their mouthpiece the mainstream media, as evidenced by my dear buddy in his insightful Facebook post.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to cast my vote for Anthony Weiner as the next President of the United States.

toiboi's picture

rep weiner is doing it for the people and the nation. what we need is health care (not insurance bailouts). he shows govt's role in health (medicare, va, military) as positive and replicable. (just extend medicare to all americans, all ages.)

perfect: he exposes their phony excuses and that his colleagues aren't interested in proof or improved health care delivery. just dancing for their big $ backers and selling everyone else down the river.

i'll try to call rep w's office tomorrow to say: "keep up the good work"

(be great if this got momentum...)

Great going, Rep. Weiner. Grab em by the balls and squeeze. It's not "torture", it's "Enhanced Persuasion"

Tully's picture
[Comment Deleted By Administration For Violation Of Terms Of Service]
syllee me's picture

Congratulations to Rep. Weiner . . .but whodathunk???? when we won the election in November 2008???. ..that its not just the Republicans but the DOGS IN THE HOUSE???? Aye Caramba Watusi!!!!!

They should be fed to the DOGS because quite frankly I don't see so much the damage from the minority on this issue. Yes they can squak and be drama queens etc., but I see the slowing down possibly killing healthcare reform bill being decapitated from the weasels under the banner of the Democratic Party itself.

I have to hand it to the Republicans. ..when BUSH/CHENEY escorted this country over the cliff, REPUBLICANS STUCK together as they STUCK IT to the American People.

Now that we have this opportunity to rise up from the ashes and push America into a new path . . YES WE CAN!!!we have the house LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WE HAVE THE Senate AMERICA AND IF THATS NOT ENOUGH WE HAVE blooming PRESIDENCY YAHOOOOOOOOOO!!!
. ..and what comes lurking out of the shadows???!!BLUEDOGS!!! BLUEDOGS?????!!!!!!!!THEY SHOULD BE FED TO THE DOGS!!!!!

This comment comes to you, by the way, from a citizen with excellent insurace for me and mine . . .My husband retired military me a beneficiary . ..granddaughter we are raising qualifies for Medicaid . . .Hmmmmmm. ..should I fear that the DOGS WILL SHOOT DOWN OUR MILITARY AND MEDICAID COVERAGE . ..???? wewy wewy scawy. ..!!!!

ut uh, the republicans and their bluedog bretheren are gonna get him

exfl's picture

Since republicans love Medicare, and everyone who survives to 65 will get it, the simplest public option would be to incrementally open up Medicare to younger persons to "buy in" with their own money, with a subsidy if low income, or with an employer contribution. Initially start only with persons 55+ (who find it most difficult to find private insurance) and persons with pre-existing conditions. When that is running smoothly begin lowering the age eligibility. All these people will end up in Medicare anyhow, so the sooner they start getting preventive and primary care, the cheaper for Medicare in the long run!

Mark C.'s picture

Rep. weiner has always been an honest broker in Washington, a rarity these days. I hope he runs for governor of NY, my home state, next year.

Comments are closed on this entry