To pay for the changes, the legislation includes more than $400 billion in higher taxes over a decade, roughly half of it from a new Medicare payroll tax on individuals with incomes over $200,000 and couples over $250,000.
I’m not happy about the vote, obviously. I imagine that I’ll spend the next decade shaking my head and saying “I told you so” as various pro-bill friends whinge
— about the health insurance they’re forced to buy that doesn’t really cover what they need–so they’re forced to be out of pocket X dollars a month that they just can’t afford.
–about how much harder it is to get in to see the doctor.
–about how much more difficult it is to get basic tests run.
–about how the hospital kicks you out 12 hours after you deliver your baby.
–about how you have to carry your ADULT child on your health plan until he/she is 26 years old. TWENTY-SIX.
–about how your tax refund gets smaller every year. You used to be able to count on it to buy a TV or a Stereo. Five years from now you’ll be lucky if you can use it to pay one month of the mandated insurance premium.
–about how the government is letting Mr. Scary Example die a horrible, lingering death because they won’t approve some insurance charge for some treatment or another.
–about how long you have to wait to have basic surgery.
In short, what seems like a victory now to those of you who yearned for passage of this bill will in due time sink in as the very costly loss that it actually is.
Just Another Pretty Farce 
The bad thing is, instead of people realizing that a bad system is in place, they will try to “fix” it with more money, more regulations, in the same way they do all gov’t programs.
The bill really could have been something that would have benefited everyone. Too many attempts to appease the unappeaseable have left it a broken mess.
And that was the primary goal of the opponents; to do everything in their power to prevent a functional bill from passing so that they can later point at the bill THEY broke and shriek about how broken it is.
dolphin, what do you think were the key differences between the first and final versions of the bill that render it useless?
Actually that was probably a dumb question, I presume it is the public option to which you were referring.
Yeah, and of course I think there are things that could have been different even in the original bill to make things better. For one, I despise the mandatory insurance requirement. I think a public option would certainly make that a little more palatable but I’d still rather not see it there. So far as I can tell requiring mandatory insurance be purchased from private providers runs dangerously close to explicit corporate government (we’re essentially paying a tax to insurance companies).
I think a public option would have reduced many of the concerns Coble outlines above. Long waits may not have been reduced with a public option but considering that waits are generally much shorter for most procedures for most people in countries with a single-payer system, a public option would be a step in the right direction. And I think it’s physically impossible for them to kick you out of the hospital sooner than they do now unless doctors are going to start operating on you while you drive home. Just had a friend have her gall bladder out and it was outpatient and TheBoyfriend™’s brother was in this accident this weekend and was sent home yesterday. The only way hospital stays could get shorter is if they start turning you away at the door.
I can tell you that my mom would have loved to have been allowed keep me on her insurance until age 26. It would have saved her quite a bit of money since she covered my insurance while I was in school prior to me getting a job. I think many parents would like to have that option available to them, and if not, it’s not like they’re required to use it. It’s just the insurance companies who have to offer it.
I know there’s dispute about whether the “paid-for” program really is, but whether we see tax returns diminish remains to be seen.
And I’m not sure it makes a terribly big difference to me whether the government or an insurance company is letting Mr. Scary Example die. People regularly die because insurance companies won’t cover certain things. That’s part of what this bill is supposed to prevent. But as far as I’m aware, this bill doesn’t tell insurance companies what they CAN’T cover only that there are certain things they MUST.
I think so of the regulation in this bill is positive, but particularly without a public option, I think we’re still stuck in the same old system of having to be able to buy your right to life and that kind of barely disguised eugenics program just isn’t something that I’m prepared to accept.
Yikes! Just saw the pic. Hope he is doing well.