http://newsrackblog.com/2009/06/29/these-days-having-health-insurance-can-be-as-bad-as-not-having-it/ a citizen's journal by Thomas Nephew Fri, 18 May 2012 00:14:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://newsrackblog.com/2009/06/29/these-days-having-health-insurance-can-be-as-bad-as-not-having-it/#comment-5497 Thomas Nephew Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:19:13 +0000 http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2645#comment-5497 Makes sense! -- just like with the bailouts, torture, and cap and trade windfall rights to pour CO2 into the atmosphere, "be nice to the perps" is the North Star of the administration and party I worked to bring to power last November. No doubt the other guys would have been somehow worse, of course. That's the bipartisan genius ("bad" vs. "worse") that makes this such a great country and the envy of all the world. Makes sense! — just like with the bailouts, torture, and cap and trade windfall rights to pour CO2 into the atmosphere, “be nice to the perps” is the North Star of the administration and party I worked to bring to power last November. No doubt the other guys would have been somehow worse, of course. That’s the bipartisan genius (”bad” vs. “worse”) that makes this such a great country and the envy of all the world.

]]> http://newsrackblog.com/2009/06/29/these-days-having-health-insurance-can-be-as-bad-as-not-having-it/#comment-5496 RobertNAtl Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:54:24 +0000 http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2645#comment-5496 The so-called "public option" is obviously too radical, but I could support a compromise where the government gets to invest a total of a trillion dollars in selected private insurance companies, all in exchange for a 1% ownership stake in those companies. Obviously the government couldn't interfere in the management of those private insurance companies. I think if you coupled this approach with a decision that we then would not revisit the issue of health care for 30 years, we could get a bipartisan compromise that would attract the 2 or 3 Republican votes we would need for a truly bipartisan bill. The so-called “public option” is obviously too radical, but I could support a compromise where the government gets to invest a total of a trillion dollars in selected private insurance companies, all in exchange for a 1% ownership stake in those companies. Obviously the government couldn’t interfere in the management of those private insurance companies. I think if you coupled this approach with a decision that we then would not revisit the issue of health care for 30 years, we could get a bipartisan compromise that would attract the 2 or 3 Republican votes we would need for a truly bipartisan bill.

]]>