politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Notwithstanding, while I like Obama overall, but Obama gave us the boondoggle of a Republican plan that gave billions to insurance companies to screw over working Americans with high deductible bullshit that made us pay thousands for the privilege of paying thousands to see a doctor and still bankrupting us when we get sick. We were cockblocked by shitty Democrats who refused to get actual universal coverage by giving us a public option and prevented actual sweeping change like the New Deal from even getting a chance.
The original bill was identical to German public option healthcare until an independent Joe Leiberman refused to vote for it leading to the watered down version.
Are you saying Republicans have been running Germany for decades?
Wow, that's a bit of not understanding things there.
One, it wasn't just that independent asshole Joe Liberman, though he was a major problem, that tanked the public option. You had Democrats like short conservative Democrats like Kent Conrad and Blanche Lincoln that simply did not like a public option and refused to vote for healthcare reform with a public option in it. And honestly the public option wasn't even ideal, M4A would have been better but conservative Democrats would openly bitch and revolt when that's even mentioned and Obama couldn't even get something as paltry as the public option passed within his party is not exactly what is be bragging about.
Two, the public option that was proposed by the ACA was significantly different from the German system. The public option proposed by the ACA was going to be funded by the premiums alone, just run by the government to hopefully offer a better deal to help keep other health insurers in check with a larger base and negotiating power and it wasn't mandatory like the German GKV and based on income. To say the public option in the ACA was identical to the GKV is completely ridiculous and stupid to even say.
Man, get your facts straight there buddy.
According to HuffPost:
So you fell for a hit piece.
As for Lincoln, her own website declared she was pro-public-option, but she made public statements otherwise and she had been acting very conservative in her last year in congress so it's difficult to say how she would have voted if the original bill ever came to vote.
But we will never know because of Leiberman being a guaranteed "No" not beholden to the party for his attempt at reelection.
Regardless, it's easy to see the GOP are the enemy even if 1 or 2 out of 60 DNC are only better 97 out of 100 votes.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/report-lincoln-won-t-support-public-option
We know exactly how she would have voted when she was publicly saying she stood with Liberman even with the already watered down public option proposed by the ACA.
As for Conrad, you literally quoted him saying he won't vote for a government run plan but supports a government run plan. You've got to be as dense as a fruitcake to think that this guy supported a public government run option especially when his actions show the direct opposite of supporting it. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/conrad-settles-into-familiar-role-hard-to-see-how-a-public-option-gets-the-votes
That's not falling for a hit piece, that's called a shitty conservative taking out both sides of their mouths while killing a moderate proposal of a public option.
Also, let's get back to your ludicrous claim that the original public option was just like Germany current plan.
The word preclude means "to make impossible" meaning Conrad's spokesperson's statement "previous comments do not rule out Public Option".
I can't tell if you're misleading others or misled yourself.
And as for that quote of Lincoln, her campaign website still said otherwise. Keep in mind that during all of this there was a large organized campaign to change her mind including billboards and calls to action wherein people were urged to contact her office, she actually changed her stance multiple times throughout. Her major complaints were about deficit which were easily dismissed as the bill did not increase deficit at all.