The Trigger is a Lie
The trigger is a lie. And anyone who advocates the trigger is a liar.
Did you know that the 2003 Medicare prescription drug legislation had a trigger? Well, drug costs have continued to rise significantly ever since then - and guess what, it turns out the public provision in there has never been triggered. Why? Because there's a million ways to rig the system so that nothing ever gets triggered. In fact, that's the whole point of the trigger.
Sen. Rockefeller points out that if a trigger passes, the insurance companies can jack up their premiums before the trigger provision is officially enacted. That would lead to two great results for them: 1. The trigger is harder to reach later because the starting price just got moved up so much. So they don't have to raise premiums as much down the road because they raise them now. 2. They immediately blame the Democrats for the higher premiums because they'll say that health care reform left them no choice but to raise all of your premiums dramatically, thereby making any real reform later that much harder.
Also, did you know that the trigger would only apply state by state? So, only states that met the trigger requirements could start their own version of the public option, which would be infinitely less effective because they wouldn't have the leverage of a nationwide plan to bring down costs. This is a joke. No one who knows the real details of this thinks this a real way to achieve a public option.
And on top of all of this, there aren't going to be any automatic triggers. What does that even mean? Of course, there will be disagreements about whether the insurance companies actually met the different standards or if they didn't. And how will they resolve those differences of interpretation? They'll have to re-litigate and re-legislate this whole thing. So, they'd just have this same old debate again five years down the road. Except it will state by state and by that time the insurance companies will have even more money to lobby against it and buy more politicians on the state and national level.
Besides which, premiums went up by 119% in the last ten years alone, let alone the enormous increase over the last forty years. That's what "triggered" this reform effort in the first place. So, as Young Turks contributor Malcolm Fleschner has pointed out, what they're really asking for is the trigger of a trigger. As one congressional aide pointed out to Huffington Post, "The American people pulled the 'trigger' last November." How many more triggers do we have to pull?
As Malcolm also pointed out, imagine if we had triggers in the real world. Imagine if your husband has been cheating on you for the last twenty years, and when you ask him about it he requests that you apply a trigger and wait five more years before you do anything about it. And if he's still cheating on you through all of those five years, then you can trigger a divorce. Who would agree to that nonsense? It's an obvious trick, right? So why would we agree to it when it's our lives and well-being on the line in this health care fight?
Unfortunately, it now appears that the jokers who are pushing hardest for this are the people inside the Obama White House. Do they think we're stupid? In their non-denial denials, they keep saying that the president said in a speech a couple of months ago that he kind of likes the public option. Wow, I'm really impressed.
Right now, Harry Reid looks stronger and more progressive than the president who promised us real change. That is so sad. This isn't about appeasing your base, this is about whether you're a liar or not. Did you mean any of that talk about change or did you think it was a cute campaign slogan to deceive people with? Are you just a sad, regular old politician? And one with not much nerve, where Harry Reid makes you look like a wimp by comparison?
Some will complain that is too harsh. But think about it, if they're pushing for the trigger as every press report indicates and as Rahm Emanuel has said many times in public, then they know they're lying. You think they don't know that the trigger is a joke? Are they that unsavvy? No, of course, they know. They think you're too unsavvy to recognize the cute political games they're playing. To realize that they're lying about supporting the public option. And if that's the case, we elected the wrong guy. As one of our viewers pointed out, if you wanted incremental change, then Hillary Clinton might have been much better in delivering it. And she might have been more honest about it.
Follow Cenk Uygur on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I wonder how many working people realize that they are paying for two health care insurances. You pay a private insurance company for your healthcare while you are still young and low risk. And you pay FICA payroll taxes for retirement healthcare, when the private insurance companies drop you for being to high risk.
If only we could combine these two payments into ONE single payer system, there would be plenty of revenue to support comprehensive coverage for all and in accordance to income and ability to pay.
I dare say that 90 % of all working people would pay less for comprehensive coverage than they do now. That is a good thing and when those savings are spent on other goods and services it would also have a positive impact on the economy. Any patch work compromise will surely end in failure.
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/we-cant-reform-health-car_b_337615.html?page=3&show_comment_id=33778248#comment_33778248&cp
A major requirement for 'universal health care' (or whatever it ends up being called')
is to stop screwing people over medical expenses. With a so-called 'trigger' it will
mean, obviously, that a whole lot of people will be screwed, under the law, before
the 'trigger point' is reached. This is not progress.
If you screw this up, Demos, you will reap the whirlwind.
Thank you, Cenk. Great post!
The President was clearly a fraud during his campaign last year, merely a typical politician who said whatever he had to say to win the election. I don't agree that Hillary Clinton would have been better, but we would have known what we were getting.
As you said in a prior article, this kabuki theater is all about who gets that campaign cash from the insurance industry, not about actually reforming health care. I am sure that Joe LIEberman has been promised a king's ransom in campaign cash to filibuster health care reform.
It probably never occurred to Obama and Emanuel that progressives would actually (finally) stand up for themselves.
To find out now he's trying to kill the public option at the last minute with a trigger confirms what a few brave souls on the left have said from the beginning.
At no point did the President have the courage or character to draw a line in the sand in the public option. It now seems what the administration wants is a mandate with no public option -- the exact opposite of his campaign promise -- a public option with no mandate.
His speeches are meaningless because speeches are just words.
At least I supported Kucinich, a genuine progressive. I may not have picked a winner, but at least I picked someone who is the real deal.
Boy, are you right on the mark.
If Harry Reid's leadership appears bold and decisive compared to what's coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. then the White House and by extension the American people have a big problem.
Passing health reform is a process. Obama needs something, anything to pass in the Senate. The real negotiating will take place in the conference committee with the House. It's at that point that Obama needs to lead. If Harry Reid can get a public option through the Senate that is a major plus. But if the bill fails then the whole process could fail. I don't think Obama is willing to take that chance. That is why he is not pushing hard right now. He needs something to pass.
A little off topic but still about health insurance option, A congressmen from Texas, Republican district, He put up a poll on his web-site for HR 3200, a virtual vote he called it, in which he goes into the Republican talking points about it costing 1.5 trillion, it will raise taxes, etc, etc, etc, Over two thousand of his constituents voted and get this 90% favored HR 3200. Knowing this he still will vote nay when it comes up. So much for his constituents.
A good Republican never lets reason or reality stand in the way of bad legislation.
Yes Cenk, the president is pushing for fake reform, trying to fool all of us hard working people who elected him and sent him money to help bring about change. The only change I see is he is parsing his words now like a true politician. It is a game with words having trick meanings while trying to say they are reforming health care. He is just like all politicians wanting those campaigne contributions from big business while crying out they are the problem. A very dissatisfied voter for change.
Opt outs for the states, and the so called trigger just gut reform. Why bother to put this bill up for a vote, it does nothing for the general public and everything for the companies fighting against reform.
I doubt Hillary Clinton, the heart of the DLC, would have brought any more change at all. I don't know if she would have been better or worse in any way, but it's an interesting question. The only difference would have been Rahm's job title.
The Cabinet is jammed with Clintonites. The economic team is Clintonite and ex-mega-corporate inside players. As soon as those names started coming forward, I knew we weren't going to really get that much change.
And on that note (but completely off the topic), when is he going to grow a pair and start demanding that some of his appointees get approved?! I fail to see the value in getting whooped by a bunch of toddlers in the minority party. If it's for campaign reasons (to reinforce "party of no"), realize that the Rs will certainly proclaim that all the appointees are connected to known terrorists (or whatever c.r.a.z.y list of excuses they can manage), so that strategy won't be too much of a clear benefit to Ds running in evenly split districts/states.
The question goes back to: Why doesn't Obama support strongly a public option? As President of a majority government, he should have led the debate to the public option but he just squandered the golden opportunity to achieve the mandate from voters who voted this majority government.
See Cenk's prior article.
This kabuki theatre was all a scam to trade a mandate for everyone to buy overpriced for-profit insurance at extortion level rates with no public option to lower costs in exchange for a bucket load of campaign cash from the industry, and to keep Republicans from getting that cash.
This whole process has been a giant civics lesson in how politics ACTUALLY works in America. It has very little to do with voting and the will of the people.
Cenk you're my hero. Keep up the good fight!
Cenk, thanks so much for explaining this ! Well done, sir !
All legislation should have some sort of trigger. So that if it doesn't work, we don't continue doing it.
Cenk keep fighting the good fight.
Triggers are a trap being set by a GOPer(Snowe) and a corporate puppet(Rahm), both of whom's masters have a lot of interest in the status quo being kept.
We need to fight these wolves in sheep's clothing and stand for true change and nothing less!
Cenk, you have outdone even your own usual superbly clear insight this time.
Well said my friend. I hope someone in the Presidents circle brings this post to his attention.
He needs to read it and to know that your words speak for a whole lot of voters who both he and the Democratic party needed to attain the power they have today and will need again to retain it and build on it tomorrow.
We are extremely well informed, plugged in, and pay extremely close attention.
Yeah, I'm with you, enough. I thought we made that crystal clear last November fourth?
Thanks Cenk, keep up the great and important work you do.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
