Insist on a single payer national health care plan.

Accept nothing less.

And remember, two-thirds of America wants such a plan for all US citizens and their dependent children.

We are the Majority. Not Big Pharma or Big Insurance.
If a "public" plan is funded by taxpayer dollars, where are the savings? And since not all citizens pay taxes, will those who do be subsidizing those who don't?
Cantwell is a coward. The so-called "co-op plan" is a weakling crumb tossed out by the insurance companies to water down voter's demands for a full public option. Maria Cantwell gets campaign funds from insurance companies and will do their bidding long before she addresses ours.
By "public plan"
you mean
"Government run taxpayer subsidized plan";
Keep at it, Eli. The co-op plan is NOT a public option. It won't be publically accountable and if Group Health is the example, it won't be affordable.
Hammer away! We can't let them off the hook on this one.
@2 - you mean like the corporate tax deductions right now? that kind of subsidy?

Yeah, I read your balance sheets and your SEC filings. It's subsidized for private insurance right NOW.
Wow, Cantwell is starting to sound like she'd make a great fucking Republican.

What the fuck is her problem? I think I'll call too.

Any chance she has any serious competition in the next primary?
Cantwell is in a very important position to ensure that we get real health care reform. Instead of providing leadership, I honestly see her undermining the process, caving to corporate interests in a way that I doubt her constituents would support. It's painful to think that a supposedly "liberal" Democrat from Seattle might undermine Obama on health care reform.
If Maria Cantwell had been a senator in the 1930s, she would have advocated that Social Security be an optional pension investment program administered by non-profit organizations under the control of the individual states.
In Tuesday's NY Times, David Brooks had a pretty fine column, Vince Lombardi Politics, arguing that winning is the only thing for the Obama administration, that Obama only cares about getting legislation passed, no matter how neutered that legislation is. Brooks is a conservative, but it's essentially a liberal critique.

Actually, I wanted to mention that column not so much for the column itself but for a comment that showed up on the forum for that column. It's by one Stefan in Maryland and it really speaks to my greatest fear about a Cantwellian compromise on health care. Here's the key passage:
A weak public plan is precisely what Republicans want - it will discredit public health insurance because it will not have been given the teeth to do what it was supposed to do: command formidable market and bargaining power to force private companies to slash the cost of insurance and drugs in order to compete and stay in business. So a weak plan will pass, costs will stay high, it will be a huge failure, and the republicans will say "see, I told you so," they will come back into power and declare an end to it, setting back healthcare reform for at least a generation.

I'm afraid that the Cantwell/Nelson/Conrad wing of the Democratic Party is so wedded to certain corporations' interests that they're willing to put those interests ahead of the future electoral success of the Democratic Party. Now if only we can make Maria Cantwell herself pay that electoral price.
This merits a primary fight. We're a top two State and a Democrat will win so I want an actual progressive calling her on this BS. She is a moral being--she can recognize right from wrong--and someone needs to shame her into doing the right thing. Support a public plan. Screw Big Pharma. Screw the Insurance Companies. Screw the AMA. Help people.
Madison is no longer jealous of you, Seattle.…
Who is going to fund this public plan? Taxpayers, but nobody says how. The budget office keeps putting out huge costs attached to this plan. Figure out how to pay for it. Until then a public plan won't work.
The budget office puts out huge costs, but are not including the savings (E-R visits, public health costs, medical crises) created by providing health care to everyone, nor are they comparing anything like Single Payer plans. It is NOT about taxes. It's got to be looked at in terms of per captita spending. You or your employer (which means less money for you) are paying. We are paying more than $5,000 per capita (and that is a low estimate) to not provide healthcare to everyone. Germany, Japan, France, Canada (the list goes on) spend less than $3,000 per capita to provide health care for everyone.

If you think there is any role for health insurance as a money making operation, then I would ask you to give up your water, electricity, police and fire department.
Greatest comment: If Maria Cantwell had been a senator in the 1930s, she would have advocated that Social Security be an optional pension investment program administered by non-profit organizations under the control of the individual states.
Posted by cressona on July 1, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Sending this to Cantwell via her website right now! Thanks 'cressona'!

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.