Ablogination

What motivation Jane Hampster, of Firedog Lake fame, has in lying about the Reconciliation bill (HR 4872) is anyone’s guess, but lie she does and not very well mind you….

Well, Plain Jane has thoughtfully created and outline of what she dreams is in and out of the House Reconciliation health care legislation. It’s amusing, I’ll give her that.
Maybe she’s still pissed off about Hillary losing the election, who knows? Maybe political copulating with NeoCon traitor, Grover Norquist, rotted her brain. Sure, Rahm needs to go, but you don’t team up with a Neocon for anything. Such is treasonous to the people.

But we find Hamster doing all she can at the moment to hand the Tea Bag Fags and the Republican minority victory. I guess her long heralded Liberalism takes a back seat to her long winded hatred for Obama.

No, the legislation is not perfect. But anyone too stupid to see that the opportunity for Single Payer was squandered long ago shouldn’t vent their frustration by doing all they can to support the enemy. But that’s exactly what Hamsher is doing with her lie and half-truth filled “Fact Sheet”.

On Hamster’s “Myth & Truth” scale, let’s examine Item One….

Hamsher crows:

The bill is neither universal health care nor universal health insurance.

Per the CBO:

* Total uninsured in 2019 with no bill: 54 million
* Total uninsured in 2019 with Senate bill: 24 million (44%)

Anyone who would list extending coverage to 30 Million people as a negative is either a Republican or smoking crack. Hen pecking the term “Universal” is a little silly in the face of 30 Million people getting coverage. Again, it’s not Single Payer unfortunately. But we don’t need Hamster to tell us that. We will work with what we have, but as Liberals, we will not provide ammunition to the Right Wing.

In Item 2 Hamsher sites, for some reason, that Insurance Companies “don’t hate this bill". They have no choice but to support it. But at the same time, there must be a reason the Blue Dog Insurance whores are fighting it so hard. Lip service to the administration, money to the NO votes. That’s how they roll.

In Item 3 Hamsher again picks nits and manipulates semantics, yet offers nothing to support her numbers. She claims that the legislation will not “significantly” lower premiums.
To people living on the edge, unlike Hamser, any savings is “significant". She fails to mention subsidies.
The tax credits for premiums are higher for individuals and families with incomes between 250% and 400% of the federal poverty level, individuals taking home less than $41,500 or a family of three bringing in less than $70,400. This legislation also cuts the sharing burden for individuals and families with incomes in the 100% and 250% FPL range.

In Item 4 we find pure horse shit. $5,243 to completely insure a husband, wife and two kids is far less than many such households pay today.

In Item 5 plain Jane says something about Massachusetts that has absolutely nothing to do with this legislation.

In Item 6 we find more crap as any attention to the Public Option is omitted. In Item 9 we see why…

Skipping ahead to Item 9 we see Hamster’s most blatant lie yet. I guess in her haste to rip the legislation she failed to read it.

This bill does not bring down costs and leaves out nearly every key cost control measure, including:

* Public Option ($25-$110 billion)
* Medicare buy-in
* Drug reimportation ($19 billion)
* Medicare drug price negotiation ($300 billion)
* Shorter pathway to generic biologics ($71 billion)

Reading the legislation, we find that on Page 4, 3-B under Insurance Reforms the Public Option is indeed included.
The Presence of the Public Option eliminates many of the hardships Hamser alludes to. But since she either lied or failed to notice it, it screws her argument up from top to bottom.

In Item 10 she says something about Big Companies then focuses on Wal-Mart for some unknown reason. It occurs to me that there are more big companies than Wal-Mart in this country. Hamser was just trying to fill space on her really neat chart I guess.

It goes on and on. Hamser never bothers to mention any positive aspects of the legislation which makes her assessment that much more blind. She never mentions amendments to come or other add-ons sure to find their way into the bill the President signs.
She never mentions that this legislation will freeze Medicare Advantage payments in 2011. Or that primary care physicians dealing with Medicaid will be paid up to 100% of Medicare beginning in 2013.

But hey, if you can completely miss the fact that the Public Option, our prize, is there then I guess it doesn’t matter what you turn a blind eye to.

Of course this legislation isn’t perfect. It’s not Single Payer. But it is what we have and there will be nothing better right now.
All in all, it’s good to criticize and dissect this bill. It is not good to join the ranks of the Tea Party and those who want nothing more than to see us fail here so that we can fail again in November and 2012. And that’s exactly what Hamser is doing.

Maybe she got a little more Norquist in her than anyone knows.