Would the Democrats been better served to introduce health care reform that

[alphabetsoup2]

addressed their specific issues? Democrats have weaved many messages around introduction of health care reform/legislation. On the hill, there is some that doubt reform in the current form the bills have, will receive enough support to pass in the Senate.

Would the Democrats, instead of preparing sweeping changes and what would could reasonably argue an essentially government take over of health care, been better served to directly, and narrowly, introduce legislation that gave people with pre-existing conditions a viable alternative, and, give adults (all children, on paper, have a viable health care option, even if poor), that cannot afford a plan, some form of insurance to suit their needs?

Is the scope of current reform a misguided attempt at reform?

 

[tribeca_belle]

The current proposals are rather modest when you actually look at what is being changed. A more piecemeal approach would only increase costs with each minor change without addressing the major problems.

 

[Grandma]

Misguided is an understatement. This present form is so full of pork and BS it is a disgrace to the people it professes to help. I am surely hoping the Senate can clean this bill up and take all people into consideration. As for the Democrats....I personally have vowed never to vote donkey again. 8 years of elephant compared to the many years of donkeys has proved to me beyond a shadow of a doubt...donkeys are hasses!

 

[justm399]

sorry but no one can reasonably argue the proposal is a government take over of health care. Now that would be sweeping change.

Democrats caved to much to republicans on this one.

 

[Randy F]

Liberals know exactly what they're doing. It has been said numerous times that the health care bill was not about health care and that is right. Had they have wanted to address problems with insurance companies and their greed they would have but this plan was not about fixing anything. It is part of Obama's reparations and vote buying scheme along with a complete bankrupting affect upon the country. A bankrupt USA leads to a world government and freedom and liberty be damned. Healthcare by Obama, Pelosi and Reid is worse than cancer and will kill many.

 

[hah]

the complexity of a 2000 page bill based on reform is what happens when special interest groups, insurance companies and corporations hold more sway in the government than the people this government is supposed to represent.

Simply put, there is a reason Vermont is ranked #1 in the country as being the healthiest place to live... its because Health insurance in the state is a guarantee to everyone that wants it but cant afford it. Private Insurers work side by side with the State sponsored Health Insurance plan to cover all socio-economic levels of the citizens of Vermont. State coverage is guaranteed to families making 200% of the national poverty level, and the health care they recieve is fair, balanced and the scope of it is expansive. Premiums are set for families that recieve state sponsered health care based on income, so realistically it isn't a "free ride" unless theyre under the poverty level.

Is it a perfect plan? No. Is it better than what most of the other ststes in the union offer? Yes. Are Vermonters healthier because of it? Yes...

 

[tott1]

yes if they had introduced and by now passed some parts of this so called reform which i and others are against because they can not explain to us how it will work at a nuts and bolts level, they could have made a difference and be showing us how correct reform could bring down costs and lower costs could increase the number of people covered. then with a small succsess to show the dems could make other changes in small enough packages that it would be possible to tell the voters we are doing this and it will cost x and the effect on you will be y then there is not so much fear and resentment against them.

 

[dwoodall]

They would have had far greater success, and acceptance. But the democrats have a history, which they themselves are aware of as well, and realize that they never hold power for long. Its like a bull in a china shop whenever they have control. They know their time is limited, so they have to make hay while they can.

 

[thegubmint]

The short answer is yes.

The longer answer is that your reasoning is basically the path that fiscal conservatives (not necessarily all, but most Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats) wanted to take. And expansion of SCHIP, the elimination (or at least amelioriation) of pre-existing condition rules, and tort reform would have been a good start on the reform that wouldn't cost a trillion dollars.

This behemoth currently in the works is ridiculous. Combined with the cap and trade, it will cause financial grief for generations to come.

 

[Valen]

First of all,,They don't like to waist time like republican who put us in a pointless war
that we are still trying to get out of.

If it does not work we will try it again.

As far as holding on to the office ..I have news for you,We are a different breed of
democrats and I think your bull shit sabotage stops with us.

The so called take over of heath care is a pack of lies,It is a take back the health
care from money grubbing pieces of crap.Doctors who are bought by pharmaceutical companies
to pump hurtfully chemicals into the public.
No curse only treatments that cause other medical issues.Idiots who prescribe anti depressants to kids. By the way the government is the voters.The ass holes have had power over medical.