so, we'll get an insurance plan that's barely worth having. Great. How are the feds gonna keep the insurance companies from jacking up the rates once everyone has to have a policy?

A skeptical Progressive.

Amen.

If the plan is to provide health care for everyone by subsidizing coverage, how is this no longer success for the left?

It'll cost more tax money than necessary, but I don't see giving a cut to private insurers as utterly negating the benefit to 45 million people.

The argument is almost entirely academic.

P.T.D.B.!

About 15 million of those people will become eligible for Medicaid, which is public insurance. Another 15 or so million will get private insurance.

It will also IMPROVE existing healthcare... at least for me. My husband covers our family with a good health insurance policy he gets through his work. Should he die, or retire, I'd have to go to the marketplace to buy insurance. I could likely afford to buy insurance, but I probably wouldn't be able to get coverage for pre-existing conditions. Reform will make that possible.

Skeptical Progressive:

Politically I am so far left I can tag a rightwingger w/o moving an inch...

I am all-in for this proposal. Three things tickle my heart immensly: the no cap clause, the pre-existing clause that will be toast, and the inability for companies to launch sick people. Oh and one more, my 22 year old can be re-covered by my wonderful plan till he's 26. That one alone will save me and my wife the anaxiety that he'd not be covered if, for some reason, he became ill and then be left-out in the morass that the likes of J. McCain and Bitch McConnell think is what he deserves. Not to mention the thousands of my hard earned $'s I would save because I'm not coughing up $500 a month for his COBRA. (the R in COBRA stands for reconcilliation fellas)

That's my 2 cents

The only argument that resonates with me is that passing whatever is on the table, and I among millions of others have no idea what the bill actually contains, is the nose of the camel. Making it better with reconciliation, future bills, or whatever, only becomes possible if there's something to fix. You can't fix it if there's nothing to fix.

Progressives, of which I am one, never had a chance of getting anything near what we wanted from this corrupt congress and weak president. It's a make or break issue now, and holding my nose I'll support it because it won't come around again in my lifetime.

I'm wondering, then, if 'reform' is so great, why do the R's fight it with every fiber of their being?

Is it philosophical? (help me out here, Stevio) Smaller government, individual responsibility?

Or is venal? They have been, and want to continue, to line their pockets with insurance company cash?

Or maybe it's what they learned at birth, silver spoon already in place:
I've got mine, screw the rest of you."

Skeptical

How about thousands of fewer people dying every day? That float your boat?

Yeah, I want it better too. And that may or may not happen if and when this passes. But it DEFINATELY will never, ever, ever happen in my lifetime if we do no pass this. Unless you think those lovely Rebpulicans are gonna pass a nice single player option for you.

Honestly - I am sorry if I sound snitty and obnoxious, but I'm one of those self insured people who is likely either to be dropped for some hangnail or have her rates raised 40% or whatever other whim CIGNA can dream up.

So when Steve says 'you get healthcare' it rings darn true to me.

I've been a proud progressive my entire life - but if we let this go down to defeat because we want perfection - well, I am done. You people are no better for what is important to my life that the bad guys. And you can all pound sand.

Absolutely! I am a radical socialist with street-fighting creds second to none but the heroic dead. But I am for passing this mangled legislation as quickly as possible. I remember the foot-in-the-door logic from as far back as Truman's executive order racially integrating the military (I was in the military at the time). Barring the material conditions for social revolution, we succeed by taking gradual steps, not failing leaps. Pass. The Damn. Bill.

Let's not forget that someday there *will* be a Republican president who will be able to gut the so-called reform simply by defunding the enforcement agencies that will regulate the private insurance companies. Just like they did with the EPA, SEC, and DOJ during the Cheney administration.

Consider this, all ye who say the bill's no good: If that were so, would the GOP be fighting so hard against it?

Read a history of the Spanish Civil War to see how thoroughly left-leaning groups can sabotage one another and inadvertently help the right.

Why does anyone think Republican administrations will protect medical consumers better than the environment? There is a reason why they play the games(sports analogy). Without a public option, the American public doesn't even have a team in the league.

Whew, sure am glad the Fed is going to regulate the banks. That Obama he sure shakes things up.

The GOP (now that they've been bought and paid for by corporate america) want to stay in office. Power corrupts...So Bitch McConnell doesn't have to worry that his constituents will turn on him. They have been kept from the truth effectively and pose no threat to his pocketed-lined handouts from the ones who rule: Corporate America.

Progressives MUST continue the fight. There are very powerful forces (MSMedia, corporations, etc.) that want it all and class warfare appears to be their MO. So, hang in there.

Just think: We ALL could be swearing at McCain and PALINaroundwithterrorists instead of Obama and Biden. That, in no small way, is enough for me right now. This is one difficult struggle. When's the last time Kucinich was "taken seriously"? How about Tom Delay? Sweet Baby Jesus! Wasn't that Delay smelling up the airways on Sunday? It sure as hell wasn't Dennis.

So. "They" have control of the message right now. Lets make some noise and see what happens.

Pass.The.Damn.Bill!!!

In the Spanish Civil War, it is my understanding that the Soviet backed commies were just promoting a different elite and had as little concern for the will of common people as the fascists. Hmmm, maybe there is a similarity here.

Amen buddy. Amen.

Some "insiders" say this huge CA Blue Cross increase is a BIG favor to Obama------to incite indignation----to get HCR passed !!!

It does look like there are just too many special interest "sins of coincidence" !!!

Children, ---do you really think those steely eye insurance execs had no idea of the impact of the announcement of that CA increase?

Wellpoint/Blue Cross WANTS AND DESIRES --DEM HCR----- MORE MONEY FOR THEM !!! Wellpoint has been well represented by DEMS---Part of Senate bill written by Wellpoint exec Liz Fowler (Baucus hired her), and Even Bayh's wife is on the board of Wellpoint, where she, a former mid level lawyer, has "earned" fees of $2M, $335K "earned" last year alone!!!

---and since Wellpoint could justify these increases ---- because of the adverse selection that happens in bad times with non-group HC --what would you do as BC exec ???---- DEM HCR is such a gigantic windfall for your insurance company-------if you had the opportunity to let something happen that would make you and your company billions and billions--and all you have to do is not stop it--- just let it happen, it's already planned, no trigger to pull, it's action by inaction-----and it will be of immeasurable help (until you ask him for a favor) to Obama to get his stalled HCR passed.

And the DEM pol's protests are so laughable because Blue Cross is obeying the law---since according CA law, BC is required to pay out a (measly) 70% of premiums, they can keep 30% for their CEO's new yacht and 30% of a larger number means bigger yachts for the CEO.

What is worrisome is that Wellpoint was sure that health care bill would pass when they calculated these increases last Dec/Jan.

BTW---there is nothing in the Senate bill that controls what insurance companies can charge, it will be just like now, as long as they spend the legislated percentage of premiums received...i.e.,they can charge a $100k yearly premiums per family as long as they spend $70k on premiums on somebody, but not necessarily on you though---get the picture, you silly optimistic consumer---

---and you might ask why the DEMS are not legislating that 85%-95% must be used for premiums----- other than the DEMS don't want to for reasons of re-election fundraising---the CBO said high percentages would be radical over-regulation of the health industry ---- And is this a weird argument or what?---- After DEMS/CBO have pushed radical(to some scholars) regulation that enforces radical mandated premiums---which may be unconstitutional, at least with this Supreme Court..

And like other euphemistically named consumer "protection" laws that DEMS have passed since 2006----such as the new lame credit card law, where Dowd/DEMS gave the banks months to raise rates, the special interests win, the consumers lose------and the health care bill will be the ultimate consumers nightmare, just like ERISA!!!

Oh and yes--true to form-- Sen. Feinstein is incensed---has drafted new law to regulate insurance company increases, but it has to pass, and it has less chance to pass than re-importation of drugs did------Feinstein (and Obama) initiate/support a lot of populist legislation they know cannot pass.

Again, this is all just Kabuki theatre with a wink wink from Obama and DEMs, their big contributors, PhRMA and the insurance companies ALWAYS win.

(Notice all the many harsh lectures for Wellpoint/Blue Cross from Obama and the DEMS----- OH THOSE HARSH LECTURES HURT SO MUCH, just ask the Wall Street bankers!!!.

And speaking of Wall Street bankers, what about the Goldman Sachs's timely report on the wisdom of investing in insurance companies---timing timing timing----from a major contributor of Obama, a major contributor who is in the middle of negotiating with the Obama admin about regulation of his empire !!!

If a similar set of "coincidences" of special interest involvement with pending legislation had occurred with Bush and the GOP controlled Congress, a lot you would be yelling CONSPIRACY !!!!

We must demand, and get, better health care legislation, from the Obama and our DEM congress, or the result could be ERISA-like (DEM) federal legislation with draconian lack of recourse !!! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERISA#Health_benefit_plans , look at ERISA preemption. The Senate bill makes no changes to basic ERISA law and lays groundwork for ERISA like denials for those covered under this HCR.

Let's not forget that someday there *will* be a Republican president who will be able to gut the so-called reform simply by defunding the enforcement agencies that will regulate the private insurance companies. Just like they did with the EPA, SEC, and DOJ during the Cheney administration.

Sure, they'll want to. But how much success have they had killing Medicare and privatizing Social Security?

Healthcare, like SS and the healthcare subset of Medicare, is extremely personal to most Americans in a way that environmental protections, banking and finance regulations, and judicial issues quite simply are not (though they should be). Once the nose of the camel is through the tent flap, it will be very, very politically difficult to roll things back.

John Owl -- time for a cold shower. Yikes.

I always wondered why progressive weren't running this country when by in large the electorate agrees with them on the issues. The health care debate has clearly showed me why they have a disporportional lack of influence in public policy right now. Progressives don't believe in the power and efficacy of incrementalism. They basically want to go from status quo to single payer, and anything short of that is a grave dissapointment. Conservatives too often compromise their values for political expediency, but progressives have the opposite problem. When did covering and subsidizing 40 million people and reigning in the insurance company become not good enough? Progressives better get on board with left-of-center incrementalist change, because if they walk away and let Obama fail, the next administration won't be to the left of Obama, but far, far, far to the right of him.

When the present effort fails -- and it must fail -- we'll just come back stronger, this time with single-payer.

Of course, that will be defeated, too, but it will be a much more righteous, perhaps even glorious, defeat than being defeated on this shit sandwich.

And is there anything in politics more satisfying that that? I don't think so,

I figure that in thirty years after two more defeats, the bill that gets defeated that time will create -- well, actually only call for the creation of, because that bill just got defeated, but you catch my drift -- an American National Health Service, staffed by civil servants, with bricks and mortar belonging to the state.

Now losing a vote on health care reform that sweeping -- I can't imagine how any defeat could be more righteous or more glorious than that one.

But losing that vote lies far in the future. We have to start small, by losing votes on less comprehensive plans now, and gradually increase the scale of the plans that we can't get passed.

Now people will carp, and say "What about the uninsured and uninsurable today?" That's just a lack of vision. Future HRC plans would of course also provide for a National Day of Commemoration for all the un- and underinsured who died in the meantime, in recognition of their completely avoidable suffering.

I'm sure they and their next-of-kin will realize the place their sacrifice will have played in our inexorable march towards a truly progressive solution to the problem of health care, and won't be resentful.

Do you think they'd like to be on a stamp? Or is something tasteful and not too showy on the Mall in Washington more appropriate?

I always wondered why progressive weren't running this country when by in large the electorate agrees with them on the issues. The health care debate has clearly showed me why they have a disporportional lack of influence in public policy right now.

Meh. There are plenty of progressives who understand that there are two battles to be won: one is policy and one is politics. It is perfectly possible to share the first category with the folks you're referring to without having much common ground on the second. Doesn't make our values "centrist" or "Repub lite" no matter how many understandably frustrated philosophymates make those accusations. You're hearing a minority of progressives making a great deal of noise right now.

because if they walk away and let Obama fail, the next administration won't be to the left of Obama, but far, far, far to the right of him.

The people you're speaking to are fundamentally incapable of understanding this. There's a kind of magical thinking going on that can't be penetrated at this point. Move on without them.

JOHN OWL--

tl;dr

This legislation is farther to the left than anything that has come up in at least a decade. To hear some "progressives" tell it, HCR is a corporatist stalking horse. It is not. Please stop doing the corporations and conservatives a favor by throwing a hissy fit over the public option and threatening to kill a massive move to the left over a few more inches of real estate.

If HCR passes, a public option could follow in a few years as a tweak to the system.

If HCR doesn't pass, Speaker Boehner won't even laugh when the topic is brought up.

The emotional needs of many progressives do not outweigh the tangible needs of 31 million Americans. Regardless of whether the insurance companies make a buck.

Five years ago, no one had ever heard the term "public option."

That's because the term hadn't been coined yet. But we had heard of Universal Health Care. And we had heard of Single Payer. And there had been talk of Medicare for All. And we had heard of using the power of numbers to force Pharma to the table when negotiating rates.

Pretending that we just suddenly discovered the wonders of government run health care is a bit disingenuous, don't you think?

Let's not forget that someday there *will* be a Republican president who will be able to gut the so-called reform simply by defunding the enforcement agencies that will regulate the private insurance companies.

One reason the R's don't like it, is that this very thing can be used against them. "The Republicans hat regulation, and will give the insurance companies a free hand. Do you want that?"

And seriously, pass the damn bill. Or are we planning to wait till Ralph Nader is president? That worked out real well for us back in 2000, maybe he should run again.

Ezra Klein is certainly a smart guy, but he's also a 26-year-old who grew up in the heart of Orange County, CA - and from what I've gathered, has never worked in the political realm about which he continually pontificates. Therefore, his lack of practical political experience undercuts his judgment about what constitutes good, smart and / or astute politics.

I really don't need any lectures from Klein about the history of progressive and liberal political virtues and shortcomings, any more than I should tolerate a Catholic preist's opinions about the inherent evils of birth control and safe sex practices.

What's in it for the Left? You have got to be freaking kidding me....

What's in it for the Left is legislation that can be wielded like a battle-axe into the very life-force of the running-amok Republican movement. You give several million of the lower-income teabagger class better access and affordability for healthcare---for themselves; for their children; for their aging parents---and you take several million votes away from the GOP. You take away their canvassers; you take away their phone-bank volunteers; you take away their envelope-stuffers, and their door-to-door solicitors, and the vast bulwark of the bodies who show up at their pathetic spew-slinging events.

You effectively cut off the body---and then watch the head die.

THAT is "what's in it for the Left."

I still don't get why people claim they don't know what's in the bill as though it's someone else's fault. The House and Senate bills were both posted online even before they were passed. Numerous short summaries and analyses are also available. One doesn't even have to read the entire bill, put "senate healthcare bill pdf" or "house healthcare bill pdf" or something similar to that into Google, then even just reading down the Table of Contents of each bill gives a very good sense of what's in the bill.

Do a "Ctrl+F" on the PDF files of the bills to immediately find the section of the bill that deals with whatever your *thing* is that you want to look up. If you have access to a computer to post on a blog, you have access to find out what's in the bills. /end rant

I hate to use a sports analogy, but essentially it is 3rd and 7, late in the game, just outside of field goal range, and passing this bill gets us the first down.

Not a touchdown, but moves us very much forward to win the game.

If we don't convert, we lose a lot more than the game.

I really don't need any lectures from Klein about the history of progressive and liberal political virtues and shortcomings, any more than I should tolerate a Catholic preist's opinions about the inherent evils of birth control and safe sex practices.

Donald, dude, Ezra may be a pup, but he's been a Democrat about as long as you have, hasn't he? Wasn't the majority of your self-vaunted political experience attained within the Republican Party of Hawaii?

"Now people will carp, and say "What about the uninsured and uninsurable today?" That's just a lack of vision"

No - that is a pile of more dead people. Shame on you.

Calibrate your irony meter, lb.

It's not just the awesome handle that makes me love old Davis.

Thanks, Steve.

Some years ago, I was working for single payer in Massachusetts. I'd love to see it here. But it's really disheartening to see so many fellow progressives lose sight of the incredible progress that this legislation will represent.

15 million more low-income Americans covered by Medicaid. Another 15 million working and middle class Americans with subsidized private insurance (which, by the way, seems to be good enough for a lot of the progressives complaining about it). No more financial ruin because of medical bills. No more loss of health insurance just because you lose your job and already have a "pre-existing condition."

This would be the greatest progressive social policy advancement in 45 years. We need to come to Jesus and get behind it.

And Human Rights activists have lost sight of the fact that just the fact Saddam Hussein was toppled makes the Iraq War a "huge victory" for human rights!

Geez.

What if you're not interested in scoring points so much as having a viable, workable, reform of health care, making useful heath services available to anyone? I can understand the desire to stick the label "Health Care Reform" on something that'll pass through Congress just to stick it to those Republicans, but wouldn't it be better to actually have Health Care Reform pass through Congress instead?

What about pleasing both groups? You could call it the Victory for Glenn Beck and The Tea Party Act, but have it actually introduce comprehensive health care for all. I like that one better, I like it better that way around, rather than a massive expansion of corporate power masquerading under a name progressives are attracted to.

Benen burbles:

The question is whether the left is prepared to match their intensity and volume.

I'm not moping. I think this may be a positive change, on balance, but not a sufficient one. But I will no longer be sending money to the folks who promised to create a public-sector competitor to the private health insurance con-men, only to fail to deliver when their corporate masters bribed them to break that promise. They earned my disdain fair and square.

If I am someday actually able to afford to provide health insurance for myself and my small business employees as a result of this change, I will stand and applaud. But it's hard to see how this bill is going to do that.

"Consider this, all ye who say the bill's no good: If that were so, would the GOP be fighting so hard against it?"

The GOP has become reflexively oppositional. They oppose anything and everything that the dems propose simply because. Yes a number of those things would benefit the GOP but are opposed anyway.

"The answer is pretty straightforward: they get health care reform."

Steve- At this point you are just blatantly lying to our faces with not even the slightest attempt to support the shit that's being spewed. There's no health care reform here. The president even admits that this bill is basically exactly what the republicans proposed 15 years ago. Which means that as the right has gone muchfurther right centrist dems have pushed the left to the right as well. This bill shovels a huge amount of money at the insurance companies- the worst actors in the entire health care system.

Why?

Because they turn around and give money to dem politicians.

Our great victory is a couple of unfunded regulations that you can't ssay with a straight face you think obama will even pretend to enforce (or maybe you;re more of sell out than I thought).

Oh and we slightly narrow the donut hole (we could have done better and without turning the US into the private ATM of the insurance companies).

The annual caps- bullshit.

The ban on recission- bullshit.

The cost controls- nonexistent.

The ban on precluding pre-existing conditions- self defeating. The insurance companies will be happy to take the money of people like me with chronic conditions but they'll price the "service" so high that we can't ever use it. Nor can we quit it because of idiots that insist on a mandate even without a non-profit option.

The left gets almost literally nothing while the right gets a shitload of goodies and the insurance companies become the most powerful industry on earth. SO yeah, fuck the dems that vote for this monstrosity, and fuck Obama for guaranteeing we ended up here by selling out the public option one day one. And lastly fuck you "moderate" apologists that turned this once in a generation chance for real reform into a circle jerk for the insurance companies because you didn't have the balls to actually fight, or didn't have the brains to know progressives wouldn't just accept being stabbed int he back, or because you just didn't have the heart to care about the millions of americans you screwed over- fuck all of you.

Enjoy november.

Kevin: “Passing what we have (with a few small tweaks via reconciliation) will help millions, put us on a path toward ever more serious healthcare reform, and give progressives their biggest victory in decades. But only if progressives stop moping and get behind it.”

Get behind a tax on the Middle-Class ?

Get behind a mandate with even higher penalties and no competition ?

Get behind no cost containment ?

Get behind no premium containment ?

Get behind no ban on denial of coverage for Americans with preexisting conditions until 2014 ?

Anybody who thinks this is victory is CRAZY.

The GOP has become reflexively oppositional. They oppose anything and everything that the dems propose simply because.

Oh. Just like you.

And lastly fuck you "moderate" apologists

We're no further to the right than you are and we're not apologizing for telling you to piss off. Can you afford to see a psychologist for that "chronic condition" of yours? I can't speak for anyone else here who's sick of your constant explosions, but I'd be willing to chip in to get you the mental health care you daily demonstrate you need.

Steve, just take a moment and watch Marcia Angell on Bill Moyers. That will give you a clear idea of what the "left" is seeing.

"Oh. Just like you."

You're an idiot. I support the exact same stuff I always supported. The problem is the dems have flipped from their promises to supporting the rightwing ideas. They've done it on gitmo, on rendition, on health care, on torture, on civilian trials, on FISA, on basically every issue.

But people like you apparently refuse to see that and prefer to blame those of us with a conscience.

"We're no further to the right than you are..."

IF you support this bill there are two options-
1) you're a right wing douchebag, OR
2) you're a left wing idiot.

If you say you're 2 and not 1 then fine, I believe you. In either case the underlying point remains. You've fucked us all, so fuck you in return.

By the way I have multiple sclerosis, the med I'm supposed to take to keep my immune system from going nuts and eating me cost 30-40 thousand a year. I'll be on them for the rest of my life if I'm lucky enough to have insurance. So yeah I get a little pissy about you idiots lying to me about the senate bill and telling me not to believe my lying eyes. Your douchebagness, or idiocy, may well directly lead to my being crippled by a degenerative condition, asshole. So forgive my little outbursts.

This isn't actually a game to some of us.

Yeah, fine PTDB already BUT it's a piece of shit bill which doesn't do anywhere enough of what it should have been done with a 60 seat Senate(it should have been done already), a Dem president and 40 some seat House majority. This puss-ey of a president is willing to go the mat for big banks, more war and Bernanke but when it comes to HCR for the average American this guy pulls the second coming of Jimmy Carter. The idjit actually tries to negotiate with the Repubs almost a year later. WTF? The maroon wasn't watching the Fin. Committee negotiations for nine f$%#ing months? The optics of begging these pricks is godawful.

"Steve, just take a moment and watch Marcia Angell on Bill Moyers. That will give you a clear idea of what the "left" is seeing."

Here's a link:
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/dr-marcia-angell-tells-bill-moyers-ob

and Susie Madrak says "Honestly, at this point, I don't even care whether or not this crappy healthcare bill passes. I see so many serious problems with it, and I simply do not have any trust in the integrity of the Obama administration and the commercially-sponsored Congress to fix them."

Dems have chosen to spurn (if not betray) progressives at every turn and cater to republicans at every turn. Take a guess which of those two is actually a swing voter group for the dems...

Gut the reforms, let your sworn enemies gut the reforms some more, THEN demand support from your nominal allies. Yeah, that'll get you a second term.

How, exactly, is reducing a median income family's premium -- let's say their take-home is $3500 per month -- from $1200 or $1500 a month for insurance that has a lifetime cap, could not be renewed if they have a big claim, and may increase by 35% next year, to $280 per month for insurance that has no lifetime cap, must be renewed regardless of claims history, and will not increase by more than that family's increase in income, a piece of shit. Please explain in clear and concise terms how that is a piece of shit for that family. Referring to how much better it should have been, or how some non-economist imagines the insurance company is going to come out ahead, is not a coherent answer.

They can come back immediately with a proposed public option bill. When properly understood, the ability to choose such a plan in competition with private plans is very, very, very popular. When the public option stands on its own, separated from the baggage that the entire bill (necessarily) carries, it will become better understood and will only grow in popularity.

Strong public support that can only be galvanized when it stands on its own is the best chance for us to get a public option at all, and one with the strength it ought to have. Not only that, but because its potential popularity is very, very high -- well into the 80s with strong promotion -- it's a chance for Democrats to take back the forward momentum for November. It's a fantastic opportunity to show the difference between a Democrat who will work for things that are good for the people, and Republicans who will pull out all stops to protect the mega-profits and mega-CEO salaries of the insurance companies. It's a huge issue to run on, whether it has just been passed or is still in debate.

"How, exactly, is reducing a median income family's premium -- let's say their take-home is $3500 per month -- from $1200 or $1500 a month for insurance that has a lifetime cap, could not be renewed if they have a big claim, and may increase by 35% next year, to $280 per month for insurance that has no lifetime cap, must be renewed regardless of claims history, and will not increase by more than that family's increase in income, a piece of shit."

It's not a piece of shit, what you describe however has nothing to do with what this bill actually does. The bill still lets there be lifetime caps, still allows recission, does nothing to control costs, and so on.

But don't worry- even though none of the regulations the supporters blindly believe in will ever be enforced you can bet your hoop that the requirement that all of us buy insurance we can't use will absolutely be given weight of law.

what you describe however has nothing to do with what this bill actually does

Oh, the irony....

You seriously think that Obama, Reid and Pelosi will try for the public option? Are you delusional? The reason this bill is a piece of shit is that the HHS sec. is allowed to make exceptions on the 85percent rule. Other reasons include is the rescission due to fraud. What constitutes fraud? If you forget the bad upper respiratory infection you had 2 yrs ago, is that considered fraud? Why is that even there? The only reason anybody would commit fraud would be on age so why not limit it to age? The state/regional exchanges should have been national. The state/regional means that if you are unfortunate enough to live in the South you will get crappier care then, say if you live in the northeast. There should have been importation of drugs allowed because the cost of drugs has exploded since part d.

It's a sensible argument, but Klein overstates the case by intimating that passing this, for progressives, would be "winning a war." The whole point the centrist Democrats are making is, "win this battle and come back to win the war at some unspecified time in the future (not that you can count on us to help you)."

In how many years, if ever, will the centercrats be willing to revisit health reform and improve on this compromise job?

This is a tempest in a teapot. The 2013 State of the Union Address will mention health care reform only briefly, in terms of aggle baggle oogle aggle baggle because it will be spoken in tongues by our Republican CinC (Commander in Christ).

Why is it so difficult to understand (e.g. Kucinich, et. al.) that this is just an important and necessary beachhead, not the ultimate reform? Undoubtedly this thing will be refined and molded in light of experience in the years ahead.

Undoubtedly this thing will be refined and molded in light of experience in the years ahead.

This is the lamest argument I continue to read from the PTDB crowd--exactly when are all the fixes going to be made? After we have a much smaller Dem majority or a Repub majority in 2011 and beyond? A public option added during an election year when most Dems are already afraid of their shadows?
There are some arguments to make in favor of this, but the notion that many substantial improvements will be made anytime in the coming years is simply insulting to our intelligence.
This kicks the can down the road for the next 5-10 years until we get real reform or the whole system collapses and we're relegated to third world status.

After we have a much smaller Dem majority or a Repub majority in 2011 and beyond?

Do you really not get that that Dem majority will be even smaller if no bill passes?

This kicks the can down the road for the next 5-10 years until we get real reform or the whole system collapses and we're relegated to third world status.

Do you think you can get a better bill passed between now and November with this Congress? If so, please explain in detail how you plan to do that. No platitudes. Action steps.