A Not So Modest Proposal

[erehwon2]

As it stands, all federal employees are provided with
healthcare benefits, no questions asked.

This applies to legislators and all.

Let's join the teabaggers and say "not on my dime,
buddy", and let's see how many of them change their tune
in, say, a 5-year period where they have to get their
healthcare like the rest of us mere mortals. 

Right now, we pay their insurance, for fuck's sake.

These goddamn vampires are worse than useless if they can't
figure out a simple thing like this: single payer first,
public option if we must.

Congress enjoys socialized healthcare, let's hear what they
have to say after CIGNA turns them down for a bottle of
aspirin.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Aragorn]

2. what?

You don't think a landslide of an election result would do it?

[dysfunctional press]

3. nope.

it would require a change in the law.

and that would require the action of congress to vote themselves out of healthcare.

i can't believe the number of people here who consistently seem to think that it's a realistic option.

it isn't.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. Get your facts straight before you post.

All Federal employees are OFFERED health insurance with a good sized employee contribution required. Many unions have better than the Feds.

Soon it will be open season for Federal Employees. Google it. Its not the gravy train you make it out to be.

[erehwon2]

6. My facts are straight

I wish only the best for the rank and file federal employees,
who have what amounts to a public option, but for the most
part don't have high-end 6-figure salaries like the
congresscritters. 

The point here is that legislators should be storming the
barricades to sign up for exactly the same deal they choose to
foist on the public, and should occasionally be reminded that
they, too, are part and parcel of this same public. 

[Riley18]

5. Every senator who voted against healthcare benefits should have to pay for their own.

It seems hypocritical for any senator who rejected the public option to then go ahead and use tax money for their own care.

[erehwon2]

7. Well said, Riley

I guess that should have been the OP. Unlike union rules, the employer's share of the legislators' healthcare comes directly from taxes, id est they already have "socialized" healthcare and have the cheek to debate against it for the rest of us.

What I don't understand at all is that the townballers slash villagers seem to have no problems with subsidizing "socialized" healthcare for their masters, are anti-union, and generally vote against their own interests on a regular basis. Money for the wealthy, flags and war for the rest of us slobs. I just don't get it.

There are great healthcare models out there in the ROW (that's "rest-of-world" for those who haven't been in a multinational yet) that could very easily be implemented in the US of A.

While I strongly support a single-payer system, a public option can work, see Germany, Switzerland and co where insurance is a given, tightly regulated, choice is free, and nobody gets left behind (pardon the phrase). It was the result of a debate they had in the 1880's, for heavan's sake. Isn't it time we at least joined the 19th century?