Beachchick's Comments (12951)

“This is a very important point you make. Whether we like it or not, the Senate has decided against government run health care (single payer or public option) in favor of reforming the private health care system. The Senate legislation is setting the foundation for potentially regulating the insurance industry as a public utility, such as the Swiss and Netherlands (I believe) have. It is setting a number of conditions upon which the insurance industry must operate and compete, one of which is achievement of a minimum medical loss ratio (i.e., the percent of insurance company revenue which must be applied to beneficiaries) in order to be included in the insurance exchange. Under the current Senate bill, insurers must hit an 80% ratio for individual and small business markets and 85% for large business. From what Sen Bill Nelson showed the other night, these are pretty much the levels that the market leaders in those three segments have achieved while everyone else falls short. Most were in the 70-79% range, one (Coventry) was as low as 66% for the individual market. To reach the level of performance of Canada and many European countries with universal health care, the ratios should be in the ~90-92% range, meaning $0.90-0.92 of every $1 is spent on benefits.”

“who elected CBO god anyway?”

“Guess again, dearie.

Medical loss ratio is what you're talking about and the insurance companies have already figured out how to get around the restrictions in this bill. Former CIGNA executive and current whistleblower Wendell Potter will explain it all to you as he did last night on Keith Olbermann:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd6GTgUlNWs”

“won't happen...”

“The facts are the facts. BRIBERY is the order of the day. Should I make a citizen's arrest?

I'm sure I have been involved in more social and political activism than you have -- so naf off.”

“I think you are missing my point. Sanders knew his amendment was defeated before he ever introduced it. That was not the point.

The point was, by simply introducing it, it makes that much easier to pass in the future. At least that is how the thinking goes.”

“We're talking about the amendment that appeased Sanders into supporting the bill. His state was given millions.”

“I aware of that, and I feel that it was a mistake to withdrawal it.

Why did he withdrawal it ? The real reason, of course, is that Bernie was getting his arm twisted by the spineless Democratic leadership, a group of sheep who seem only interested in perfecting the not-so-fine art of losing.

When Bernie took the floor to announce his decision to pull his amendment he was “outraged,” and then spilled forth with some fine rhetoric about all the ills of our political system, the obstructive nature of the Republicans, and then some more outrage piled upon the outrage.

But it was Bernie’s – and only Bernie’s – decision to kill his initiative and, as a result, the “historic” moment that he had been promoting. So, sorry, if there was outrage to be had, it should have been spread evenly amongst the childish Republicans and Bernie-the-quitter”

“You are thinking of a different amendment.”

“Heh, perfect Bc! (Not to worry, it's all in the brain, hahahahahahaha!)”

“It's not my fault nobody else is reporting on this story.”

“Are you spending Christmas in the Cayman Islands tooting up?”

“No public option? No Medicare buy-in? A MANDATE to purchase from the soulless vampires? No support for states who'd like to try single payer? No real cost controls? An end to new drugs ever going generic or facing price competition? No change in the exemption to anti-trust laws for the soulless vampires?

The real saboteurs weren't sitting on the right side of the aisle. They were invited to the table by Obama, and they're eating their fill - at the expense of the American people and their health.”

“Yes they did! Good on the Democratic Party for their hard work.”

“Yes, I know.”

“Saltines and milk.”