"Support for Healthcare Plan Falls to All Time Low"

[Professor S]

Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% now oppose the plan.

Half the survey was conducted before the Senate voted late Saturday to begin debate on its version of the legislation. Support for the plan was slightly lower in the half of the survey conducted after the Senate vote.

Prior to this, support for the plan had never fallen below 41%. Last week, support for the plan was at 47%. Two weeks ago, the effort was supported by 45% of voters.

As has been the case for months, Democrats favor the plan while Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party are opposed. The latest numbers show support from 73% of those in the president’s party. The plan is opposed by 83% of Republicans and 70% of unaffiliated voters.

Source: www.rasmussenreports.com

[Szymon]

What's your position on the current system and the proposed plan?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Szymon

What's your position on the current system and the proposed plan?

LOL! Is this a real question?

In case it is, I apologize but I've been a vocal dissenter here for quite a while. Please read this thread if you desire a more thorough explanation of my stance on the subject. Just ignore my and The Game's quibbling over semantics:

http://www.gametavern.net/forums/sho...ghlight=public

In any case, I'd like the discussion, if any, to concentrate on the news item quoted above and not delve back into an argument on the merits (we've done that to death). Just the public opinion, please.

[Fox 6]

Originally Posted by Professor S

LOL! Is this a real question?

In case it is, I apologize but I've been a vocal dissenter here for quite a while. Please read this thread if you desire a more thorough explanation of my stance on the subject. Just ignore my and The Game's quibbling over semantics:

http://www.gametavern.net/forums/sho...ghlight=public

In any case, I'd like the discussion, if any, to concentrate on the news item quoted above and not delve back into an argument on the merits (we've done that to death). Just the public opinion, please.

Szymon hasnt really been around here for a while, so try not to make a scene there prof.

Also, would you say that the current plan does need to change, be it anything (as long as its better)?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Fox 6

Szymon hasnt really been around here for a while, so try not to make a scene there prof.

My apology was sincere. I wasn't sure if he was pulling my leg knowing the epic threads surrounding this topic. I meant no offense and I'm sorry if any was taken.

Also, would you say that the current plan does need to change, be it anything (as long as its better)?

The current plan doesn't need to change, it needs to be blown up and then have them try again. The current plan is such an ungodly mess of half-hearted compromises and brazen vote purchases/ear marks that it has been tainted to the point of being a legislative plague if passed. I'd prefer a purely socialist endeavor over this hot mess of a plan. If it actually passes in it's current form, or God forbid is tainted further, it will be a vote that costs legislators their jobs.

As for my point of view, I am generally a fan of John McCain's proposed healthcare reforms.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Fox 6

Szymon hasnt really been around here for a while, so try not to make a scene there prof.

Speaking of this, welcome back Szymon! Where have you been?

[Szymon]

I've spent hours and hours reading all sorts of arguments, and some of them sounded really well thought out and completely feasible. Both the Democrats and Republicans are capable of producing fantastic results, assuming the opposing political faction and ideology were non-existent. As long as the people are this evenly divided, there will always be squabbling, sabotage, filibustering and political stalemate. From what I understand, bad regulatory decisions and seemingly boundless corruption have ruined your current health insurance. Can anyone explain to me why insurance companies cannot operate out of state? I only just heard of this today. I think regulations like these, that restrict the options for people to find better health insurance is a huge problem.

I believe a lightly regulated free market option is ideal, but getting to that stage is probably impossible. Moving from where you are now, going to a socialist system might not be that bad. In my experience, the system we have up here is pretty good, but like the Professor says, each system will be unique to their government. A few greedy senators could easily ruin any sort of socialistic health insurance programs just as well as they've ruined the current capitalistic program.

Ultimately it's my opinion that until you get a program that the entire nation can get behind and support that you'll continue to have poor health insurance due to concessions to an opposing political faction in order to get a bill through and because any sort of sabotage or filibustering done in an attempt to stop a bill will leave it warped.

[Szymon]

Originally Posted by Bond

Speaking of this, welcome back Szymon! Where have you been?

Trundling through Internet, slowly making my rounds and discovering what it has to offer and what I want from it and from life. I've discovered that I'm comfortable here.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Szymon

Can anyone explain to me why insurance companies cannot operate out of state? I only just heard of this today. I think regulations like these, that restrict the options for people to find better health insurance is a huge problem.

The reason why simply breaking this boundary isn't so simple, is because there are a lot of state laws that requlate health insurance companies as-is. So what will end up happening if this limitation is simply dropped, is that health insurance companies will go to states that have the most appealing laws to them (or even worse, go over seas), and sell packages that may be considered illegal by the other state's laws 'Across state lines'.

Its not illegal for a company, even now, to exist in more then one state. Its just illegal to sell a plan across state lines due to the different variations in laws from state to state.

There's no easy fix for this, that's for sure.

[Szymon]

Why not make these laws regulated federally?

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Szymon

Why not make these laws regulated federally?

That would be ideal, but then we'd be back at seat #1 where people are complaining about the Fed taking power away from the states. I personally wouldn't mind this change, but don't hold your breath for it to be the politically popular move.

[Combine 017]

Originally Posted by Professor S

As for my point of view, I am generally a fan of John McCain's proposed healthcare reforms.

I thought you said "John McClain" for a second, which would be way cooler.

[Professor S]

Washington (CNN) -- Independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Tuesday he would join a Republican filibuster to block the final vote on any health care bill that has a government-run public health insurance option.

Lieberman's vote is crucial to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's hopes of passing a health care bill that includes the controversial public option. Reid announced Monday he would send to the full Senate a health care bill that has a public option but also allows states to opt out of that provision.

Lieberman said he would support a vote to launch debate on the health care bill but would oppose a motion to end debate if the public option remains in the legislation. Democrats would need 60 votes in the 100-member Senate to close debate on the bill, and the Democratic caucus has 60 members, including Lieberman.

"I can't see a way in which I can vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated and run insurance company," the Connecticut senator said. "It's just asking for trouble."

Also Tuesday, two other conservative-leaning Democratic senators, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, said they would decide how to vote once they see the final bill.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/...are/index.html

[BreakABone]

Not so much on the issue, but how the hell does Liberman still have a political career? The man can't seem to stand on one leg before hopping to the other foot.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

Not so much on the issue, but how the hell does Liberman still have a political career? The man can't seem to stand on one leg before hopping to the other foot.

Actually, I'd say he's one of the most consistent politicians going today. His stance on issues remains largely the same as it's ever been. He was against Bill Clinton's public healthcare plan as well.

He hasn't moved to the right... the Dems have moved to the left.