What do you guys think about the whole Healthcare debate?

[anvi]

The public option was specifically designed for people of little means--not everyone would have been eligible for it, as it had a means-tested income cap.  In its initial version, it was slated to reimburse doctors at Medicare rates, and when Senate Democrats objected, some percentage was added onto the Medicare compensation rates to placate them.  But, in the end, hospitals and doctors were still not satisfied with the adjustment, so the Senate Dems killed it. 

And more, the same Senate Dems held the bill hostage to ensure they got both extra goodies for themselves and a number of other provisions changed, both to protect themselves from their constituencies and for patronage.  Pelosi did a "skillful" job of wrestling the Blue Dogs to the ground to get the bill the House lefties wanted, but, given the numbers in the other chamber, Reid had far less control of the Senate Dems, and by the time they were done with the legislation, they'd made an incoherent hash of it.  The president, who has no idea how to write sound, coherent health care legislation, was merely at the mercy of this whole process.

The way that bunch handled the health care reform bill was the reason I eventually stepped out of the exit door of the Democratic party.  I'm a strong advocate of wholesale structural reform to our health care system, open to anything that can get everyone covered, hold down cost inflation and improves efficiency, and yes, I do believe ideas from both sides of the aisle as well as ideas from other systems are necessary to achieve all these things.  But the way those guys made a mess of a golden opportunity was profoundly disappointing.

[anvi]

I agree with those of you who say above that some progress is better than none.  If we are going to spend upwards to 20% of our GDP in health care, than I'd at least prefer to have everyone, or nearly everyone, covered.  Rationing procedures in specific circumstances is in my view a great deal more humane and sensible than rationing whole cross-sections of people out of the system entirely, and then having to pay extra for it anyway when those who are uncovered use the emergency room for care.  That's why, despite its evident unpopularity, I stand by insurance mandates.  But tort reform, tackling the problem of rampant over-testing, standard minimum package plans, record automization, and, in my view, though controversial in this country, a non-profit insurance industry, among other things, have to be part of a long-term and effective fix.  We are fast, fast reaching the threshold when incremental solutions will be useless; you can't put out an oncoming firestorm with a few cupfuls of water.