Hillarysworld

While the politicos in MSM applaud the President for his "hands off" approach, I feel it was a real mistake on his part to not give it clearer direction. Result is two chambers with drastically different and polarized approaches to the bill, and a very contentious reconciliation ahead. Meanwhile, neither side is happy, both bills are seriously flawed in regard to abortion provision, and neither caters well to the lowest income classes where it is meant to do the real reform. Instead, both bills will increase market size for existing insurance companies; one introducing the government into that market (and therefore perhaps some competition) and the other simply leaving it to the existing insurance companies. One is more punitive and implements a year sooner; the other phases in much softer penalty fees and has a greater chance of succeeding.

If there is indeed reconciliation, there are elements in both that can work together, BUT what is really needed - cross-border competition of insurance companies - continues to be missing. If that is introduced, I feel there may be a good solution from the Congress, provided the lowest income levels get major subsidies and local health clinics to help with their health issues. That indeed may result in lowering the overall cost of healthcare on the economy.

Meanwhile, the WH has certainly lost luster, deservedly so.  It is a leadership role, and it takes leadership!!!!

-- Edited by Sanders on Sunday 27th of December 2009 11:24:41 AM

There is still a chance that it will not pass... but I do not recall seeing a set of reform bills get to this stage and not pass something.

The reason it may struggle is the departure between the two chambers. But the President is so far vested that he will drive them to convergence.

Besides, there has been so much commitment already, that for it to not pass will make each of them eat their own health care platform in the next election. i.e., an elected politician would not want a record of "I voted for it first and then voted against it" when they run to be re-elected. Instead, they would want to crow on having passed something great (however it is that they package as great).

With that in mind, we have to give really serious input on what tweaking it needs at this stage. JMHO.

Meanwhile, the WH has certainly lost luster, deservedly so. It is a leadership role, and it takes leadership!!!!

if he doesn't run then we can have the rel President Hillary !!!!!!