I am one of these folks who was thrilled by Obama’s victory a year ago. I truly thought that with a Democratic President, a super majority in the Senate, a public option would finally compete with private plans. I was savoring the not-so-far -away day, I mistakenly thought, I would opt out of a private plan and join the public option. I guess not. It looks like for the Democrats, without a super majority of 92 senators in the Senate – 60 real ones (the Barney Frank type), 30 from the South plus Nelson and Lieberman– nothing serious can happen. During the State of the Union address,the President nicely invited the other side of the aisle to let lim know if they had a better plan to cover the uninsured and reduce the deficit at the same time. Good luck.
Now, check this interesting predicament in the supposedly very democrat New York State. By my 2001 divorce agreement,I am responsible for $2,000 of unreimbursed medical expenses per year for my two girls. With my employer, I have comprehensive health insurance that covers dental and vision expenses for the family. Accessorily I am complying with New York State law, which mandated via medical support order (New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules 5241) that I take health insurance for my children. But ex-wife does not want to use my health insurance, threatens the health providers to take her business elsewhere if they bill me instead of her and fill insurance forms. Twice a year on average, she takes me to court for unreimbursed medical expenses that could be reimbursed by my insurance. So far, Manhattan family court’s ruling has taken latitude in its interpretation of New York State law: I have to provide an insurance for my kids but ex-wife can use it only if she pleases. The outcome is the wildest dream come through for the Republicans and private health insurance companies: a mandate to have insurance and a legal denial of benefits. No “medical losses” in insurance companies terminology. 100 % profits.
That’s the problem with democrats. They are sloppy lawmakers, they are sloppy enforcing the law. Perhaps because they don’t know really what they are: republicans.