What did you do last Saturday night? Head out for dinner and a movie? Take in a show? Hit the clubs? Get cozy on the couch with your main squeeze? Well, here's what the U.S. House of Representatives did: they passed an "historic" health care bill which will put the kibosh on any genuine, equitable, sensible health care reform for many and many a year.

Couldn't they have just had a cookout -- or a key party -- instead? We would've all been better off.

Of course, the House bill, bad as it is, will be mangled beyond all recognition in that elitist abattoir known as the Senate, where no doubt even the few milder-than-milquetoast ameliorations that survived the corporate bludgeoning in the House will be cast aside. But for now, this is how, in the words of Barack Obama, our Democratic solons "answered the call of history": with a bill that places an onerous financial burden and threat of punishment on those least able to bear it, while stripping millions of the most vulnerable women in society from access to completely legal medical procedures easily available to the middle-class and the rich, and delivering to the corrupt, cruel and price-gouging insurance companies "50 million new consumers, many of them subsidized by the taxpayers," in the gushing words of Nancy Pelosi, who shepherded the bill through the House -- and who was responsible for stripping abortion coverage from poor women by greenlighting the single allowed amendment to the bill.

(So, we get the first woman Speaker of the House, and what happens? The House kicks poor women in the guts -- literally. What next? Our first African-American president repealing the Civil Rights Act?)

But let's turn to Arthur Silber, who has a few choice words about these world-historical developments:

The lies begin with the name itself. The bill is titled: Affordable Health Care for America Act.

In fact, the bill's primary purpose has absolutely nothing to do with providing "affordable health care." The purpose is to extract as much money as possible from "ordinary" Americans -- and to do so at the point of a gun (what do you think those financial penalties and even possible prison time are, if not a gun pointing directly at your head?) -- and shovel it directly to already-engorged insurance companies. Americans will be forced to buy insurance, which as we all know, many of us through deeply painful personal experience, has nothing whatsoever to do with health care. And Americans will be forced to spend money for largely useless insurance -- which insurance will often be entirely useless just when they need it most critically -- in amounts that may devastate them and their families.

But Silber, for one, is not surprised by any of this. As he notes:

In the NY Times story about the House passage of this detestable bill, we read this utterance from the awful Steny Hoyer:

“We did what we promised the American people we would do,” said Representative Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland and the majority leader...

On this occasion, Hoyer is entirely correct.

If you listened carefully to what almost every politician said during the last election campaign -- and I emphatically include what Obama and all leading Democrats said -- and if you understood what they were saying, they told you over and over again that they would fuck you in an endless variety of ways, until almost every last drop of your blood and almost every dollar you possess were gone. In their infinite kindness, they won't kill you, for they hope to extract still more from you, as your life and hope slowly ebb away.

They've kept their promise. They've fucked you yet again, just as they said they would.

And they are very far from done.

Too strong? Too true. Look at this prophecy from David Swanson, written just a few days ago (also cited by Silber in this other, excellent piece):

At first the "public option" was to be a massive but less-than-universal healthcare plan that would prove so efficient and effective that over several years the public would all opt into it. It was a backdoor to a civilized system of Medicare for all. Now what's left of it? Now it's a public option for 2 percent of Americans, and in some states 0 percent, to be run by private corporations, with prices set to avoid any efficiency or competition for the wasteful health insurance companies.

Is that better than nothing? No, it's worse, because this pathetic scam of a healthcare plan is plastered like lipstick on a pig to a bailout for the health insurance corporations. (Sure, the bill contains some reforms to the insurance corporations' practices, but that's like trying to reform piranhas.) And when the healthcare crisis continues to worsen in the coming years, the blame will be placed on the nearly nonexistent public option, thus justifying making things even worse, if possible....

Now, enough House Democrats have publicly committed to voting No on any bill this bad, that it could not pass. On July 30th, 57 of them signed a letter saying that any bill without a public option based on Medicare rates would be unacceptable. And therefore, this bill would be dead, and we could go into round 2 with a stronger demand for a bill that might actually save a significant number of lives .... Sadly, these people's word is as trustworthy as the promises of a health insurance company. (And when they prove that yet again, you can forget about progressive legislation or action on any issue in the months and years to come.)

And thus it came to pass on Saturday night, exactly as Swanson foretold. The 57 public-option stalwarts folded like a concertina; almost all of the few Democrats who ended up opposing the bill were so-called Blue Dogs, who resolutely oppose any public option at all. But as Swanson noted, by this time, the only thing that mattered to most "progressives" -- certainly the "serious ones," the ones who want to be "inside the tent," with liaisons with White House staffers, etc. -- was passing passing any bill at all:

So-called citizens' groups, now actually taking their directives from the very people they pretend to lobby, are so obsessed with passing any sort of bill, that the content of the bill is virtually irrelevant. I say virtually, because the collective decision is that it must contain something or other that can be mislabeled a "public option." Other than that, it could sentence millions of Americans to death, and it would still be fine and dandy. And that is exactly what it does.

And why is a bill better than no bill? Why is a bill that funds absolutely useless parasites like health insurance companies at the expense of our grandchildren's unearned pay better than nothing? Why -- when blocking a bill would almost guarantee a better debate in round 2 -- is it more important to pass the bill and close off the opportunity for valuable reform?

Why is this bad bill better than no bill, to those who pushed it and passed it? Because, as Silber points out, a bad bill is the intended result of the whole exercise:

Given the nature of the corporatist system that now throttles every aspect of life in the U.S., that is how the system works. That's how it's set up, and that's its purpose. The fact that insurance companies will reap huge rewards on the backs of "ordinary" taxpaying Americans is not a regrettable byproduct of an allegedly good but imperfect effort at reform, or a flaw that will be fixed at some unspecified future date. And as already powerful and wealthy interests become more powerful and wealthy, the State will also increase its already massive power over all our lives still more. None of that is incidental: it's the point.

Well, the lipsticked pig has been set loose now. He'll be skittering and squealing around the Senate floor next, under the whiphand of master swineherd (and corporate bagman extraordinaire) Harry Reid, who makes Nancy Pelosi look like Robert LaFollette.  Lord have mercy, we ain't seen half of how ugly this thing is gonna get.

II.
But what should we do? Sit down on the ground and weep salt tears of despair? Silber thinks otherwise. In yet another new post (the man is cooking with gas these days) -- Tribalism and the Destructive Politics of Demonization (I): The Largely Unrecognized Possibility for a New Coalition--  he sets out the beginnings of a powerful, practical approach that holds out a wide promise of -- dare one say it? -- hope and change, in the genuine sense of those much-degraded words. I'm not going to excerpt it here, because it should be read in full. I will only urge you to repair thither forthwith, read, and consider.

Comments (25)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Truth Excavator said:

... An emerging libertarian/conservative and progressive coalition is the only hope the country has left, and Silber is on the money for recognizing that there is common ground, and a real possibility for honest political change. Neither side is going to agree on every single issue, and that is probably a good thing. Large coalitions are inherently dynamic and don't hold up 'follow the party line' rhetoric to scare away potential newcomers. It is what democracy is all about - dialogue and compromise on small issues, but an alliance on big ones like the issuance of money, foreign policy, etc. Both sides can find common ground in ending spending for war, ending torture and spying, bringing back Americans' civil liberties, ending NAFTA and corporate welfare, and other life-changing issues. It will take intelligent and brilliant leadership to bring this coalition into being. It was very discouraging to see progressives belittle Ron Paul's campaign a year ago, even when Dr. Paul showed maturity by bringing a coalition together, consisting of Nader and McKinney, outlining an agreement that called for a change in monetary policy, end to foreign wars, and re-institution of civil liberties. And it is also discouraging to see republicans once again be fooled by Fox News and the republican machine. But, let's put that aside. There is a rising independent majority - whose views are largely unrepresented in the mainstream media and in Washington, and the political emergence of this new political class can reshape America's discourse and politics forever. I am glad Silber is on the ball on this development, he is by far one of the most mature and intelligent commentators writing today, on anything of practical importance.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 08, 2009 | url
Votes: +11

vastleft said:

	No one could have anticipated http://vastleft.blogspot.com/2...order.html
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Sean O'Neil said:

	... It's not about "sides" no matter what Truth Excavator suggests. Continuing to focus on "sides" is an indirect way of continuing tribalism. Why would one call one's self a "truth excavator" while offering posts that continue tribalistic division? Is tribalism the only truth?
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009
Votes: +3

Sean O'Neil said:

	... EVERYONE set their sights far too low. "Medicare for all"??? What a joke. Medicare sucks ass. Medicare is corrupt, bloated, inefficient. These are the same troubles the whole health care system is suffering -- corrupt, bloated, inefficient. So why would people be aiming so low? Because they are trained to aim low. Trained by masters of subtle manipulation, like Truth Excavator.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009
Votes: -3

vastleft said:

If by inefficient you mean operating with 1/10th the overhead of private insurance Sean, Socialized medicine would be the most cost-effective, but that "corrupt, bloated, inefficient" program is extremely popular with the public and would have been a simple, clear step in real progress. If socialized medicine were what you were proposing, I certainly wouldn't bash and marginalize you the way our "public option" hipsters did to "Medicare for All" advocates. Or is your agenda something altogether different?

report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Truth Excavator said:

... I'm pretty sure you misunderstood the point I was making. If you haven't noticed, Americans have different values, so it is dishonest to pretend that there aren't legitimate cultural divisions in the country. I want to bridge these divisions, but you first have to acknowledge that they exist and that there is nothing wrong if you have millions who believe in Christianity and want the bible to be taught in school, and people who don't. But these cultural sides must come together and organize politically for the benefit of the country, at the federal level, and then they can decide what they want done for their separate states on cultural and educational matters. They can even secede if they want to, some states won't have any choice, the states will be too financially burdened to continue their relationship with Washington, but all that is beside the point. I am not suggesting anything. So, please, don't be an ass.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Sean O'Neil said:

... vastleft, you can't complain about corruption in government while lauding government's efficiency. cherry-picked statistics don't support your argument. the simple truth is that Medicare is used as a reference only because people want to expand on what exists, rather than fix the problems in what exists. it's very obvious we have the $$$$ to spend on a real program of French-styled health care, but many would prefer to ignore that, and instead continue expanding an already bureaucratized system. bully for you, you want a big paternalist government. bully for you, and for Obama too. hooray for a leviathan govt. Truth Excavator, don't call ME an ass while you make your shape-shifting arguments that continue divisive partisanship.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009
Votes: -2

Sean O'Neil said:

	... who asked us if Medicare is the best we can do? who asked me? who asked you?
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009
Votes: -1

Truth Excavator said:

	Sean... what shape-shifting arguments are you talking about? Geez, I might stop commenting here just because of your stupidity.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

vastleft said:

Again, Sean, what is your agenda? Indeed, my "cherry-picked" stat about the most obvious measure of relative efficiency between Medicare and commercial insurance can't measure up to your well-documented "Medicare is corrupt, bloated, inefficient." And your argument that I can't simultaneously complain that some government initiatives are bad and others are not-so-bad is ironclad. Given that, you're clearly the go-to guy on this. So, what would you like to see happen with health-care reform?

report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +4

Michael A said:

	Follow the money Obama on the campaign trail received from the following: Health Sector:$20,163,933 Health Insurance:$1,548,651 Pharmaceutical :$2,156,590 Health Pro:$12,109,983 Hospitals:$2,881,138 Nursing Homes: $244,190 Pelosi received from the following: Health Sector:$1,289,850 Health Insurance:$201,250 Pharmaceutical:$233,700 Health Pro:$769,150 Hospitals:$177,300 Nursing Homes:$43,500
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Michael A said:

Came across this comment from a reliable source The public option, whatever it is, will be a fig leaf to cover up what is essentially a Federally enforced purchase of an inferior product, which does not guarantee excellent health care but does guarantee excellent profits for insurance companies. We're being made to pay corporations for our very existence on this earth. I think there will be more bills along these lines. For those who are indigent or uninsurable, the government (ie, our taxes) will pay the insurance companies. And it's the middle class and working classes who really pay the taxes in this country, not the wealthy, and it is these classes that will be paying the taxes to support the public option for indigent and uninsurable. So in the end, the full cost of healthcare for everyone is being carried by the middle and working classes who will also have to pay the insurance companies. Since healthcare must be "self-sustaining" (i.e., not cause debt, unlike wars and Wall Street bailouts), it has to be paid for up front. Much of that is coming from US, the taxpayer, and some is coming from Medicare cuts, even though the Democrats are not really talking about that. My gut instinct is that Medicare will eventually be transferred to this new system, so that we will be paying insurance companies until we die. And the health insurance company death panels will continue to exist. ...This health care scheme involves: 1. Mandates, especially for the young (18-30 year olds) who don't get sick much. Their premiums will support the the care of everyone else: the old, those with pre-existing conditions, and the like. Wait until those young Obama voters who call me an "Obama hater" realize that they will have to spend their own money buying insurance, unless their employer carries it for them. 2. Taxes on the middle and working classes for a "public option" so that the hospitals don't lose so much money to charity cases. 3. No real cost controls. The public option is not real competition since most Americans won't be eligible for it. The key is the mandates. Without them, the whole scheme falls apart. Without the buy-in of the young and healthy, insurance companies can't afford (so they say) to insure older and sicker people and still make a profit. This is why Obama had to be either misinformed or lying when he said no mandates (except on children) and no new taxes if you make under $250K. This is not healthcare reform, and it is not merely rearranging chairs on the Titanic. It is making us all pay for tickets on the Titanic, and then saying that we're all saved.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 09, 2009 | url
Votes: +2

Sean O'Neil said:

gimme a break, Tooth Excoriator oh what a whiny little obfuscator. anyone can comment here, even those who come here with a Pwog-Weasel agenda. whether you post as "ice" or "Ovid" or "Truth Excavator" or some other monniker, you can post freely. Chris Floyd doesn't ride herd on comments, so feel free to post as you wish, as you will, as is your wont. my opinions should mean as little to you as yours mean to me. they shouldn't stop you from posting nonsense. they haven't thus far.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 10, 2009
Votes: -1

Sean O'Neil said:

	Michael A knows what's up on the end result of health care "reform" good comments Michael.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 10, 2009
Votes: +0

Sean O'Neil said:

to vastleft 1) nobody is obliged to have a "plan" that is superior to what you argue, vastleft. not even I am so obliged. 2) however, I have said here at least 5 times that we need a French or Canadian plan, at the very least. you are free to say medicare is that plan, and I am free to disagree completely with you when you say that. 3) the point of discussion is to point out flaws and work from a well-understood problem TOWARD a solution. you would invert this process and demand full blown solutions while people still can't figure out the problem. the fact that you argue for Medicare shows you don't comprehend the problem, and would prefer to compound it by spreading the problem wider and further and deeper. that sounds to me like amplifying a problem, not fixing it.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 10, 2009
Votes: +0

radegan said:

... I'll fix it all for you - just mandate that insurance companies pay out in claims the same percentage of premiums they paid out in 1995, it's almost 10% average and all it bought us was more profits and more warm and fuzzy ads. And then get rid of the law that stopped us from access to Canadian pharmacies to fill prescriptions. Those two simple actions will do ten times as much for the average Joe. No, instead they want to jail you for not buying a policy. Now are they planning to jail the insurer for not paying off on claims too? There, you know all you need to know. Oh, yeah, I read the new plan will force you to keep your vaccinations up to date to access any health care. Got your load of mercury yet? Did you see the US Govt finally admitted mercury fillings are bad for you and may cause mental problems...duh? Didn't see that? I only saw it in a British paper - can't have our citizens reading that while debating whether to take a little more mercury in your vaccine. (If you saw the German government vaccination story you know that adjuvants are not needed at all. They just help stretch supplies, like you do with cattle vaccinations.)

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +0

Cathy Hanna said:

... Some good comments here, and I agree alot with Michael and Sean. Half the time I'm confused by all the debating on this issue. I have a funny feeling that mainstream media is portraying it in a way that it is confusing. I here people calling Obama a socialist sometimes. This doesn't add up to the facts behind the coming health bill, though. He and the rest of the politicians are backing forced (mandatory) coverage, where we have to buy our insurance from one of these illicit insurance companies, many of which have been responsible for denying people needed medical help and has contributed to actual HUMAN BEINGS dying because of it. I am now 50 with no health coverage. I'm actually quite healthy, luckily. but at my age this could change quickly. A year ago I lost a decent paying job because of 'cutbacks'. Since then I began working for a seasonal employer (agriculture) because its all I could find. No insurance and low wage. But have managed. Next week this job ends, so back to unemployment and little prospect for job until next "season". Truly saddened by what has happened in U.S. but I saw this coming. I am now looking to move overseas, possibly apply for college to get a masters degree. I have no idea what else to do. Am a big anti-war activist and now they are talking about a "draft" in which my 17 year old son is in danger of. I never thought at my age I would be looking to leave my homeland or considering college again. But where I live the economy, other than agriculture, has been pretty much devastated. And as we all know you cannot make decent living off agriculture seasonal work. Any suggestions would be welcome. I am at end of my tethers trying to figure it all out. Is this Karma for all the bloodletting we have done overseas? Sometimes I wonder. What is very sad is it is the people of conscience who will, along with all those that believed the stupid lies of politicians and banksters, be the ones who pay the price. The orchestrators of these deceptive lies and shams most assuredly already have their life boats prepared.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +1

Les Visible said:

	What can I say? Beautifully done Chris, as usual.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009 | url
Votes: +0

robertsgt40 said:

At Some Point... At some point all will be affected by this usurption of individual rights/freedoms. There will be no group/tribe to join that will solve the problem. All will have to draw their own "line in the sand". In a year I will be getting Social Security. I will not partake in any healthcare brokered by the feds(I can't afford healthcare now). I will take appropriate actions if any attempt is make to get my ss funds. That is my line in the sand

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +0

maggie said:

Are they serious? What about those who can't find a job due to health issues they already have? What about those who can't even pay rent or buy groceries? What about those who have already staggering medical bills, who's going to help them with those? This is too little, too late, and too obvious. The only intent that congress and the senate have is to bleed the rest of us dry. After all, they don't really have to care, do they? They've already got medical coverage and WE pay for it one way or another. Too one sided, too unfair, their "let them eat cake" moment. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +0

t quigly said:

	what's in a name? "The lies begin with the name itself." Stop repeating their orwellian-speak of 'health-care'. The title of this bill is the Insurance Company CEOs Care bill - ICCC - pronounced ICK !!
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +0

Nom A Mouse said:

	Has anyone knitted together the Insurance ties to commerical real estate and the bailout? My memory is that the Insurance firms covered themselves via investments in commercial real estate. Has anyone bothered to dig up via various public filings the g;e of exposure to commercial real estate the insurance firms have and if the projected losses in real estate will be covered by the mandates?
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: +0

The Happy Holistic said:

The time for COALITION is NOW! Yes! We are long past due for a coalition of freedom-lovers of all political stripes who are ready to rise up against the corporate-government monopoly that OWNS both parties. We have much common ground: End the Fed and issuance of private money, NAFTA/GATT, Wall Street Bailouts, Mandated private health insurance, and expensive wars of empire. We need to re-direct that ones to building this country back up: infrastructure, smart manufacturing, and new energy development. We need to cut out the middlemen parasites, the bankers. Its time for an "Uprising", just like the anthem sung by the rock group MUSE. We need to unify on what we can agree with and fight the power. The other issues we have differences on can wait until we have taken the country back.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

The Happy Holistic said:

Sean: Go back and read Truth Excavator's first post You call for an end to partisanship and divide. That's exactly what Truth was calling for: UNITY - on the major issues we can agree on. And I'm sorry but there are two sides that matter: those in power and those not, which includes about 80% of the country. The elites use divide and counquer strategies to take our eyes off the real picture of what's going on. Don't fall for it. They may own the media and the politicians, but we have the numbers. All we have to do is unify and we could shake them off our backs. There's nothing partisan about what Truth has posted.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

Chris Floyd said:

	... To "Gridley": Your "i am the witness" bullshit is not welcome here. The site you recommend is a belching forth of some of the most putrid -- and pig-ignorant -- racism and hate of the past century. No comment that links to that site will be published here.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 11, 2009
Votes: -2