Health care for $2?!

Asia

Sri Lanka’s civil war ended last year, but the UN is investigating human rights violations that might have occurred during that time.

Europe

Oo la la! There’s a scandal in France that might include your favorite shampoo brand.

North America

Denied! A judge rules against the President.

South America

Thousands are displaced after floods ravage Brazil.

As if President Obama did not have enough troubles on his plate… US ally Israel is causing continued heartburn for the President. We are told there will be no peace in the world until there is peace in the Middle East… and the prospect for long term peace seems to be in pieces at the moment. What would you tell the President to do?

With all of the talk of health care reform flying about (seriously, check any news-related website) one issue is often glossed over: what changes will the health care reform bill actually generate?

Well, we at USDemocrazy have taken the noble task of rounding up wisdom from across the ‘net in order to enlighten you on the what the Democrats’ magnum opus will actually do when it is signed into law (most likely sometime today).

Our good friends (i.e. people whose blog we read) at Crooks and Liars have provided a great top ten list of immediate results. We won’t give you all of them (that’s what the link is for) but here are some highlights:

1. Adult children may remain as dependents on their parents’ policy until their 27th birthday

…

8. Requirement that all insurers must post their balance sheets on the Internet and fully disclose administrative costs, executive compensation packages, and benefit payments.

…

10. AND no more rescissions. Effective immediately, you can’t lose your insurance because you get sick.

For a longer and more in-depth look at the bill’s provisions, check out The Daily Beast’s list of things that are (and are not) in the bill.

Some of you out there may be more visual learners so we’re are happy to provide (well, actually just give you the links to) some great charts.

This LA Times chart is chock full of facts.  It can look overwhelming at first glance, but just take a moment to figure out what each section covers and you can learn a huge amount.

In case you prefer direct interaction the New York Times has given us a wonderfully dynamic chart on how the bill could affect you.  Select your current insurance status and be given a quick blurb on potential outcomes backed up by in-depth information.

Now one thing that is important to keep in mind is that all of these changes won’t happen at once.  Now if only someone would create a timeline of when key rules go into play… Wait a minute! Someone has!  The Washington Post has this WONDERFUL timeline letting you know what to expect when:

Starting…

Within a year

– Provides a $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug plan beneficiaries whose initial benefits run out.

And ending…

By 2019

– Expands health insurance coverage to 32 million people.

You know what the second best thing about the internet is (after USDemocrazy)?

The fact that for every piece of information, you find hundreds more are waiting to be uncovered.  Due to this fact PLEASE post any useful information on the bill you find.

Remember, we’re all in this together.

Courtesy of WikiCommons

We at USDemocrazy are kind of confused about most things… (Editor: what else is new?) But one thing we are not confused about is the utterly confusing nature of US health care. We are bewilderedly confused.

But for the simple folks out there like us, THERE IS HOPE!

After over a year of  health policy struggles, things in Washington are beginning to move… unfortunately we are not sure in what direction.

Last week, President Obama laid out his own detailed vision for health care. Check out the actual plan, right here, as linked by the WaPo.

And… on this coming Thursday, the president and the Republicans are going to have a big pow-wow to lock horns on health care.

Because we are so confusingly confused, we have surfed the web to try to figure out what’s all this means… here’s what we’ve learned…

The NY Times sets up the stakes:

Mr. Obama’s proposal is the opening act to a week of high drama around health care that will culminate on Thursday, when the president convenes Democrats and Republicans at an all-day televised health care “summit” at Blair House.

The WaPo tells us that the plan is a bit of a compromise:

…it attempts to merge the Senate legislation with its counterpart in the House in ways that would address some of the most controversial provisions in the stalled bill.

The WSJ says the price tag is a “middle ground” as well:

The new White House’s proposal would cost $950 billion over 10 years, more than the bill approved by the Senate but less than the House measure.

Politico gets into how the President is trying to bring some elements together:

For example, it vastly scales back the tax on “Cadillac” insurance plans, which will please liberal Democrats, but by leaving out the public option, hopes to win over moderates… At the same time, the president makes a run at Republicans by boosting measures to crack down on waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare.

Salon tells us that Senator Ben Nelson will be losing his special deal:

Perhaps most notably from a political perspective, this new proposal eliminates a special deal that Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson got for his state under which the federal government would have paid for growth in Nebraska’s Medicaid population.

In the end, the President is aiming to get around that pesky Republican filibuster:

“This package is designed to help us [use reconciliation] if the Republican party decides to filibuster health care reform,” said White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer. “That was certainly a factor that went in to how we put this proposal together.”

Mike Allen at Politico says we have a change in buzzwords:

“Reform is the new change,” a senior aide told POLITICO.

Expect the tomatoes to go flying this coming week. In the meantime, what do YOU think?

Did somebody say party? Image Courtesy of WikiCommons.

We at USDemocrazy love a good party.

But if someone was to invite us over for a rousing discussion of health care policy…hmmmm

We would probably be “busy” that night walking the dog. (Unless there was food. Never turn down food.)

But, alas, suppose the guy asking was the President of the United States!

You see, the Republicans in Congress just got such an invite via a TV interview before the big game Sunday (props to the Saints.) Come on over and discuss policy, President Obama says… and there will be food! Would you go?

Jeff Zeleny at the NYTimes gives us the 411…

President Obama said Sunday that he would convene a half-day bipartisan health care session at the White House to be televised live this month, a high-profile gambit that will allow Americans to watch as Democrats and Republicans try to break their political impasse.

Michael D. Shear at WaPo tries to help us make sense of it all…

The invitation to meet together on Feb. 25 — and to do so live in front of the American public — represents an effort by Obama to hit the reset button on the top domestic priority of his first year in office.

Charles Babington at TPM looks into the invitation…

Polls show that many Americans feel Obama and his congressional allies have not sought enough GOP input, although Democrats say Republicans have shown virtually no interest in seeking a realistic agreement

Conservative Pundit Michelle Malkin tells the GOP “Don’t Do It!”

Republicans should feel zero obligation to participate in yet another White House health care dog-and-pony show: Just say no.

Mcjoan at the DailyKos is asking why the President is even bothering?

A vain hope, if indeed he’s really thinking there’s Republican support out there to be had.

HuffPost reports that the summit will accelerate the reform process.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on Monday that President Obama is willing to “add various elements” to health care legislation suggested by Republican lawmakers during an upcoming bipartisan meeting on the topic.

So what do YOU think? Attend or stay at home?

Like making sausages… The health care reform may be getting messy again.

Got Wind? It could save on the energy bills.

If you thought Obama was inexperienced: Senator-elect Scott Brown was asked if he is considering a run for the White House.

drudge.com

Apparently this is a week for fist fights. Congressional staffer convicted for bathroom brawl (That has to be one the best headlines ever).

Calling in the heavy hitter… Religious right prays to God to smite the healthcare bill.

Santas, masks and scissor hands! All that and more on the BBC’s Odd Box.

Today, if President Obama had the choice of starin’ down “Mean Joe” Greene or  Senator Joe Lieberman …he might just pick the former.

These past two days the Senator from Connecticut has been playing hard ball in Washington over HEALTH CARE.

Senator Joe isn’t a fan of parts of the Democrats’ health care plan that is nearing a vote in Congress.

This is getting Democrats pretty cranky. That is because Joe Lieberman’s vote may be THE deciding vote in the Health Care debate. As a result if Joe says No…it ain’t going to go….

So Joe is taking out his surgeon’s scalpel and demanding some amputation to the Democrats’ bill.

But don’t take it from us, we’ve got the rundown of the experts on the subject:

First up comes the NYTimes:

Mr. Lieberman’s main demands: that they scrap a plan to let people buy into Medicare beginning at age 55, and scotch even a fallback version of a new government-run health-insurance plan, or public option.

The Daily Beast has an exclusive on how the Connecticut Senator went from the limited edition “Gore-Lieberman” Joe, to the man we know today:

Talking Points Memo picks up what another “Joe”-VP Joe Biden- is saying:

“I think Joe’s judgment is wrong on this,” Biden said…”I’m confident Joe is going to see the light” and vote for the final bill.”

Now let’s head to the Left. Huffington Post contributer John Neffinger explains “Why We Lost Healthcare,” mentioning Joe:

And in the end, conservative Democratic Senators (as well as Senator Lieberman) did not support the public option exactly because progressives had so noisily supported it.

And to the Right now y’all. Redstate’s Erick Erickson says that after the dust settled one man remained- Joe:

The Democrats have given Joe Lieberman everything he wanted. Joe will now vote for the bill.

But back to TPM. Christina Bellantoni says Dems have to be careful because Lieberman is a major player on many other issues as well:

As Democrats grow increasingly infuriated with Lieberman (I-CT) as he throws a wrench into the health care bill, the White House and Senate leadership can’t afford to kick sand in his face.

So what do YOU think… is Joe “mean”, “lean”  or acting “extreme”?

That is why we decided to interview the brilliant Dr Tom Schaller about some important trends in politics today.

In the first video above, we asked him tell us about the rare sighting of a moderate in Washington DC.

In the second, below he tells us about the challenges facing the Republicans in the 2012 Presidential elections (Yes, they will be here in NO TIME!).

Stayed tuned for more brilliant takes from Dr Schaller in the days ahead… including his insight to The Colbert Show!

Courtesy of the New York Times and the AP

In the course of our goofing around, wasting time, eating cake diligent research, we here at USDemocrazy constantly run into the word FILIBUSTER.

At first we thought it was a candy bar, we have since discovered that the filibuster is bitter-sweet. It can be both good and ,well a little annoying.

Basically the filibuster is a tactic used in the Senate to delay or prevent a vote on a particular bill.

Time for a bit of a history lesson…

The filibuster is made possible by Senate Rule XIX which allows any senator to “rise and address the Presiding Officer.”

Senators could speak for as long as they wanted as long as they stood (and stood and stood…). By standing and talking, a Senator can stop all Senate business including votes of pending bills.  This “Filibustering” kills a bill by never allowing allow a vote to take place.

But there is an escape hatch!

If 3/5 of the Senators (that’s 60) vote to silence the filibusteree- a process called cloture- then business can proceed as usual.

The word filibuster is derived from the Dutch word for pirate- vrijbuiter. Image Courtesty of Wikicommons

You can imagine in the good ol’ days of politickin,’ Senators would physically orate to their fellow statesmen for hours on end. Here’s some really great examples in the art of wasting time, courtesy the Daily Beast:

The Daily Beast Filibuster Gallery

Today, thankfully, a Senator need not stand up and talk Ad Nausium (that’s Latin for… till you get sick). Instead, He or she merely needs to state or invoke a filibuster to stop all votes on the Senate floor.

For more on the filibuster, check out these recourses at the NYTimes Topic, Article, and Slate Magazine.

So why do we care about filibusters right now? Currently the new Health Care Bill is on the floor of the senate and some people really don’t like it. The Wall Street Journal tells us that Senator Lieberman of Connecticut has already showed serious reserve over the bill:

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, speaking in that trademark sonorous baritone, utters a simple statement that translates into real trouble for Democratic leaders: “I’m going to be stubborn on this.”

Do we smell filibuster? Maybe. But right now it looks like those who endorse the bill may have the 3/5 they need to induce cloture. NPR tells us:

The latest Peril of Pauline melodrama featured Majority Leader Harry Reid’s struggling to amass the 60 votes needed to cut off a filibuster on the motion to consider the bill. Some said he “barely” made it; and it is true that 60 is the minimum. But it is also true that 60 was the maximum number Reid could have collected, given the Republicans’ uniform support for the filibuster.

So it would seem the filibuster is making its way back into the headlines. So what do YOU think of the filibuster. Is it bitter or sweet?