The Opt-Out Provision

After all of this time, a new wrinkle in the health care reform fight has come up in the last couple of days. It's called the "opt-out" provision. It would allow individual states to turn down the public option for their residents. I believe this is being considered because it would allow blue dog "Democrats" cover to vote for a public option, on the grounds that, if people in their states really don't want free medical care, they can turn it down.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Obviously, if it would give Dems the couple of extra votes to push through a real public option, it's got something going for it. And if braindead morons like Bobby Jindal and Mark Sanford want to deny their residents medical care, that reduces the cost of a public option for the rest of us. Don't forget- the states (that would be the Republican ones) that are the most against the public option are, in general, the poorest and the ones with the most uninsured people.

I hate to see the country divided up like this, but hey, if we want it and they don't, let 'em die.

What do you think?

Comments

JoMala "Truth 101" Kelly said…
The right is betting their BS will defeat this thing. I had good luck calling bluffs against evil management types when I was a union bargaining committeeman. Call their bluff then stick it to their ignorant selves when their states residents come crying for free public option health care. Give the bill to the state and tell them to raise taxes and pay it.
October 8, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's Okay, Never Mind

Image
The woman in this picture, equipped with the weapons and ammunition shown, was found outside a National guard base. She is apparently a big Glenn Beck fan, and believed that the base was a FEMA concentration camp. Think she's the only one out there? You just know this sort of thing is not going to end well.
Read more

If a Tree Falls In the Woods

Image
 And nobody hears it, is it really running for President at all? First of all, a note about my absence lately:  My wife got me to sign up for an account at Threads, which is sort of like X without the assholes.  I've spent a little time establishing myself there, and I have to say, I do like the relatively immediate exchange of views, but I don't mean to give up my blog- there are still so many things that can't be dealt with in a couple hundred words, so, perhaps to your dismay, I am back. So, what motivated the above question is the fact that the Sunday New York Times today had seven articles about Trump, and absolutely zero about Kamala Harris.   The Republicans have a problem with Harris, in that virtually everyone who sees her likes her and immediately understands how qualified she is to be President.  They have tried mightily the last month to find some way to smear her, but have been spectacularly unsuccessful- the tactics of character assassination ...
Read more

Wingnuts Slightly Annoyed about that $83 Million

Image
How can you look like a decrepit old geezer and an out of control two year old at the same time? I thought it might be nice to look in on wingnut world to see how they are taking yesterday's $83 million dollar Trump legal loss.  You kind of know that they will decide it shouldn't affect their opinion of him in any way, but it might be helpful to see just how the Republican party has trained them to reject any fact they don't like.  Not that surprisingly, a lot of the usual wingnut suspects didn't touch this loss at all, preferring to just ignore anything that interferes with their hateful daydreams, but here are a few excerpts from an article at Gateway Pundit, along with a sample of the hundreds of comments it received.  Enjoy.  Or not. "Trump attorney Alina Habba WENT OFF after the crooked New York City court slapped President Trump with an $83 million judgment for speaking out against the disgusting lies of a crazed woman who said he lured her into a Bergdorf Go...
Read more