Writing on the Washington State Insurance Commissioner’s official blog, Rich Roesler explains what yesterday’s passage of federal health care reform means for us here in Washington state:
The health care reform bill passed by the U.S. House Sunday will cut the number of uninsured in Washington state by more than 500,000, provide better coverage to those with insurance, and save $500 million in uncompensated care – health care that’s delivered in Washington state but not directly paid for.
Which makes it hard to explain why Republicans Dave Reichert, Doc Hasting and Cathy McMorris-Rodgers would vote against it. Unless, of course, their votes were purely ideological and/or political.
Yep!
Just read on Reuters that we are one of the eleven states that have signed on to the lawsuit claiming this is unconstitutional.
So…if our Attorney General is successful (pray jebus that he’s not) health care reform for WA won’t amount to jack. The list includes, in part, Alabama, Floria, Texas, and us! How embarrassing, and a total waste of our taxpayer dollars. ugh.
for those of you who think this will make health care less expensive, I have some oceanfront property in Montana to sell you…..
It means the stock market is up 35 points (last time I checked) and I’ve made $425 today (over $50 an hour) without getting out of bed.
Health care reform passed yesterday.
Capitalism did NOT collapse today.
I find that interesting.
@3
You musta been fool to buy it in the first place.
@3 I would guess it’ll have a stimulating effect on the economy by creating a slew of new jobs in the health care and insurance industries to serve 32 million new customers.
@2 Well, that’s a good reason not to re-elect McKenna as attorney general, or elect him governor, isn’t it? He’s out of step with Washington voters.
The “constitutionalists” won’t get anywhere with arguments about backroom deal-making. Courts never look at how legislation was passed, only at the legislation itself, and there’s nothing in this bill that hasn’t already passed judicial muster.
@2: Our wingnut AG is challenging the individual mandate.
And that is actually not a bad thing per se — as long as there is no public option (medicare expansion / buy in).
IMO it’s the major flaw in this bill: you’re forced to buy crappy corporate private insurance because there is no public choice.
@3 – although the bill will make health insurance more affordable for some, and it will make insurance available for many who can’t get it at all now, I agree that cost control is still to be worked on. I think the President/Congress did the right thing in addressing coverage first with some cost control measures, but more now will have to be done.
Note that even if this bill hadn’t passed, cost control would still have been a must-address issue. The government pays something like 45% of all health care outlays in the USA right now. We can’t go on with costs rising at current rates without bankrupting the country. I personally think a single payer system is the most direct path to controlling costs, but smarter minds may come up with other solutions that allow us to address the real costs, which are the doctors, hospitals, drug companies, device companies, etc. There is no way around it – we can’t have medical care comprising 100% of the budget.
@3: Only a fool would believe the current system where rates are going up 30-50% this year alone (and inflation is neglible) is in any way worthwhile or sustainable.
You have not only bought swampland in florida – but you are building your fantasy house on it.
Fool!
Just one more reason why he lost the last election:
“Republican Senator John McCain said Monday morning that Democrats have not heard the last of the health care debate, and said he was repulsed by “all this euphoria going on….”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35.....are_reform
In other words: “You kids quite your partying and get offa my lawn!!!!! Yes, it’s ALL my lawn!!!!”
McKenna must be planning on running for some office in the near future, and has to shore up his wingnut credentials in order to do some quick fundraising.
It’s convenient to him that the health care legislation passes after the conclusion of the general assembly, so they can’t do much to reign him in. Of course, if they are still in special session to deal with the budget deficit, they could start with de-funding his office from any efforts related to challenging the health care bill. While they are at it, they could reduce his salary proportionately, too.
Personally, I think this gets us only half way to the goal. But that’s better than spending the next twenty years with politicians fretting about how health care reform is “another third rail” which politicians dare not touch.
McKenna just lost any election he ever attempts in Washington state outside of the republican party primary.
There goes his carefully cultivated “moderate” BS – he is a republican trogolodite, period.
Hope this dooms Reichert too!
rhp6033, are you being disingenuous?
If it’s a secret that McKenna’s running for Governor in 2012, it’s the worst-kept one in history.
That he wants to join the wingnut AGs in (mostly) wingnut states in their ridiculous lawsuit is a mark of his true colors. His bland-nerd disguise has been able to deflect attention from his inner-wingnut, even better than Rossi’s smarmy-salesman act did.
Speaking of true colors, Dave Reichert’s floor speech against HCR yesterday was red-meat reactionary. He even played to the teabaggers in the galleries. He sure didn’t look like the “moderate” he pretends to be.
@9 The problem is certain other goals of the bill — affordable premiums, no pre-existing condition discrimination — don’t work without universal coverage.
@17: I know.
But it is fucking galling to have to buy insurance from sociopathic corporations.
This whole business suffers from the assumption to preserve private insurance. Access to a public choice makes all of it unnecessary. And I’m saying that as a user of Fed BCBS (as are most Feds and Retirees). My family would have welcomed a public choice.
This won’t really be finished until it’s illegal to profit as a non-value added middleman from sick people.
@16
I think McKenna just doomed his bid to be Governor. I can’t see Inslee not using this to beat him over the head and show what a conservative dick McKenna is. It’s even more offensive as we have a tradition of the AG acting as council for the state rather than using their office for political axe grinding.
As for Reichart, I hope Suzan DelBene is smart enough to use that wingnutty speech on the house floor against him. Being anti-choice, anti-health care reform, and sounding like a teabagger aren’t going to go over well in the 8th if it becomes widely known.
@18
Medicare for all!
N @ 16: I didn’t mean to be ” disingenuous”. I just haven’t kept up on the political rumor-mill of who is running for which office. His actions make it pretty clear he’s running for SOMETHING, but whether it was for governor or Patty Murray’s Senate Seat, of maybe even for Dave Reichart’s House seat, I wasn’t prepared to speculate.
But by these actions, I would guess he’s preparing to run for a House seat in one of the more Red districts in the state.
Yeah, but if you ignore the benefits, if doesn’t look so
good, does it?
12 rhp
Yes, the man who ran on a platform of “Country First” now says that Republicans will refuse to work with Democrats, becuase….um, what was that again that was supposed to be “first?”
3 MR
Gee, Max, I guess you’ll just have to hold on to that winner you bought.
*index finger making circles toward temple*
3 max
Yeah, that CBO is staffed with idiots, and you’re a genius!
If you’re looking for a good stock pick, Vick’s would be the one to buy. Glenn Beck is about to cry a river about how much he loves this country.
Why would you be against the lawsuit? If the bill, which became law, is constitutional, then you have nothing to worry about. But, the majority of Americans support a lawsuit to challege the healthcare law. 49% to 37%, with 14% undecided. Do you only support lawsuits when they challenge the constitutionality of conservative bills/laws? Hypocrites!