Agree 100%, although it is just Monday morning I am already sick of the quotes from the repubs about how bad the bill is and how it must be stopped.
They love the bill we have had for the past many years, no money - OK you die.

I hate to say it but why would Klein be right? Does anyone think he has bothered to read the bill? It would be very good policy. For that reason, you can expect that its not in the bill. Klein probably means something like "the provision (I would like)..."

aimai

Why must we persist in the lie that the democrats in the US senate have something coherent to offer in the way of health care insurance reform ? The democrats are a bunch of 'girly men', as the governator might put it. It's always compromise, compromise, compromise, mixed with much hand-wringing. I don't believe they'd be able to carry it off if they had eighty democrats in the senate. What we'll get is a song and dance about a monumental achievement with no substance other than to make the so-called health insurance industry richer, all in the name of making Obama look good, but the weight will fall on the backs of the middle class, as usual.

I would also like to see access to the attending physician for Congress be limited to people members who sign a statement saying that "nationalized health care care be pretty good if it's done right."

I agree that this would be excellent politics for the reasons mentioned.

That's why I know that the Democrats won't do it. Making a political point--no matter how salient or timely--is much less important than not rocking the boat that is the Senate's smarmy, self-important club. That just wouldn't do.

I think the senate ought to be paid in food stamps and medicaid stickers. In Lamar Alexander's case, he should wear the medicaid stickers on his forehead on the senate floor.

But the senators should not be allowed to eat what they purchase with the food stamps -- that can go to their families. Senators should have a diet defined by what is available thru the WIC program. Special K cereal, MinuteMaid orange juice -- you know, that shit.

Steve: Forget Sen. Schmoe. Adopt the late
Al Capp's Senator from Dogpatch -- Sen. Jack S. Fogbound for your examples. Campaign slogan: There's no Jack S. like our Jack S.!

HaHaHaHaHa.

No way the "moderates" vote for the bill if it has that in it. They are voting what's good for them, not what's good for us.

I hope that Joe Klien is correct. If he is, it will once again prove the old adage that "Sometimes, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn."

We have millions of folks who have healthcare plans that are subsidized by tax-payers.

All those who have good health benefits through public employment already should be exempt from
even debating the merits of a public option (since they kind of have a partial public option already).

Would this amendment do away with FEHB for Federal employees altogether? I recall one amendment, proposed by Republicans as a poison pill, that would do just that.

If so, I certainly wouldn't support it. I have FEHB and I like it, though it's not "gold-plated". And I support health-care reform. But I'm not certain that the state-based exchanges will be as good as FEHB, and I really don't like Congress playing politics with Federal employee benefits.

And as far as this amendment getting Congressional incentives right, remember: members of Congress are rich. For the most part, they can self-insure. They don't have a personal stake in the quality of their health insurance.

I think Joe K is pulling our leg, is simply mistaken, or has something else in mind. I saw no mention of this alleged "requires" provision in the WaPo article linked from his blog. The provision would also go against "if you like your current plan you can keep it".

I expect we'll eventually find out that Klein has "neither the time nor the expertise" to have read the bill, much less understood it. (My belief is that his columns are dictated, since The Google's very brainy and scientific user interface has proven to be so far beyond him as to give serious doubt that he can read. Or type.)

Personally I would prefer the Fantastic Five-thirty-five required to draw lots each New Years' Day to see which of them will get no coverage at all, which will get the worst of the worst, and so on, so that they can proportionately represent us. If 15% of us have no health insurance at all, require 80 senators and congresscritters to go bare-ass too, and let their colleagues who have drawn the Cadillac policies instead watch as they enjoy the free benefits of trying to care for chronic conditions in a crowded ER, and consider the one in seven odds they themselves will face in the next drawing, and the next, and the next ...

Page 156:

(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EX5
CHANGE.—
6 (i) REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding
7 any other provision of law, after the effec8
tive date of this subtitle, the only health
9 plans that the Federal Government may
10 make available to Members of Congress
11 and congressional staff with respect to
12 their service as a Member of Congress or
13 congressional staff shall be health plans
14 that are—
15 (I) created under this Act (or an
16 amendment made by this Act); or
17 (II) offered through an Exchange
18 established under this Act (or an
19 amendment made by this Act).

Brock: yes, senators are rich and don't worry about such things, but their staff, the people who do the heavy lifting, by and large aren't.

I can't believe the number of posters who haven't looked at the legislation. It's on-line.

Steve, you above all, should at least browse it.

The proposed section is on page 156.

I, too, can't believe it took until the 14th comment to hear from someone who actually looked at the bill, which is readily available online and searchable by anyone with full Adobe. It just now took me all of 30 seconds to find the relevant section.

If bloggers want to be treated like real journalists, they should learn how to do basic reporting.

I'm so mad at Senator Schmoe right now!

I can't believe the number of posters who haven't looked at the legislation.

Good point. But then not everyone reads every comment either...
;-)

In fairness Tom, I was still typing (trying to include the link) when you posted. (Thanks for posting it by the way!)

Damn my hunt and peck typing skills!

"Klein's item is the first I've heard of this"

My CPA notified me about this a few weeks ago. Gives me a good feeling that he's up to date - and then some - on current legislation!

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) released a merged version of the Senate comprehensive reform on 11/19/09, which Mike Oliphant whom manages Utah health insurance plans for http://www.benefitsmanager.net/selecthealth.html employers could get behind and support some of it (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or H.R. 3590). This should encourage the private sector health insurance carriers to form INSURANCE EXCHANGES which is what we have done here in Utah. They carry the risk and burden, not the tax payer. See more about this at www.utahhealthplans.info

The law as written on page 156 leads me to believe that after passage of this bill, any new congresscritters and staff will have to enroll in the new plan and not those who currently are serving and enrolled in the FEHBP. They would be covered under "any other provision of law", prior to the effective date.

Gridlock, I figured it was probably something like that. Couldn't resist a good-natured dig, though...