Commenter:Jay With his majority in congress if it was going to pass it would be there. This man has no leadership and November is coming.
Commenter:Matthew W. Krall President Obama is the only president I can remember in my 57 year life that is doing exactly what he said he would during his campaign and more, duplexed by a failing economy that was a result of a republican led congress with no oversight for the future. We have been promised health care for a decade and it's time to do it and do it right. I can't understand the opposition to this other than the people who oppose it already have health care and are afraid of new taxes. With a 40% increase in the cost of living over the past 8 years think about what your paying in taxes for that!!
Commenter:Leah Bipartisan support? No. Will a bill pass? Yes. The country will benefit once this bill is put in to law and the Republicans will be on the wrong side of history as they were with the Social Security Act of 1936 and the Medicare Act in the mid-'60s.
Commenter:Mika Cagle I think obama could care less about the well being nor the best interest of the American people.From coast to coast, all across the country america has made it known what we think of obama's absurd ideas he commonly refers to as a workable plan, yet completely devoid of any itelligent thought. The man is a disgrace and an embarrasment.
Commenter:Thor Question: "Do you think Obama's health reform summit will lead to a bipartisan reform bill?"
Since the Obama HC reform summit was bipartisan, there was always a small chance to discuss and find a negotiated HC compromise solution. But, unfortunately neither party came to the summit actually positioned to negotiate HC reform.
BOTH sides are deadlocked at the summit starting gate. One side spend a year sitting by themselves writing a 2400 page incoherent HC Reform Bill and said "here's our starting point". The other side was totally ignored for a year, and now sees their options as either sign onto these 2400 pages, or to shut-up and walk away.
BOTH sides in the HC debate are very poorly positioned to begin any honest open negotiations on a bipartisan compromised HC Reform Bill.
Answer: NO... IMO neither side came to the HC summit prepared to negotiate as the summit was not fertile ground for true bipartisan discussion. The deadlock is partly to blame on BOTH sides using ideology and emotion to ignore the other viewpoint. You don't have to agree with that other position, but you do have to understand and acknowledge it. When either party is willing to do that, negotiations are not possible.
Commenter:Mke Flinn Get the economy moving, bring jobs back home, create new jobs, get people working and they will be able to get health care from their employer. Open up competition within the health care industry. Any new big bureacracy just means piling on more debt that we cant afford and fraud and waste which has been born out by Medicare's problems.
Commenter:Delwin D Fandrich No. There will be no "bipartisan" agreement on health care. But let's not just blame President Obama. Most people in congress--both the Senate and the House and both Democrat and Republican--are too heavily indebted to the lobbyists and insurance companies. We all know what must be done but political courage is lacking. As a nation we are now beyond a government "of the people, by the people and for the people" has become a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations. Until politicians are prohibited from accepting money in any form and for any purpose from corporations and special interests nothing will change.
Commenter:John Bollinger, PE, CEM The Health Reform Summit shall help promote better understanding, but that is not enough to change the fundamental problem of vested interests. The livelihood and re-election of the Senators & Congress-people are too dependent upon the election contribution & indirect support by the health related large corporations.
1. Best for now would be for the Obama administration to support passage of substantial health care reform by means of "reconciliation" with over 50% vote. The simplest and best application is probably lowering the Medicare age limit, such as to 50 year old to start with.
2. Otherwise, only a very modest reform can take place, which is certainly better than nothing. In particular, removing the 'existing conditions" penalty by health insurance companies, would be most valuable, for initial progress.
3. For comprehensive, long-term progress, the systemic problems in our governance must change in 2 major ways. First, the electoral process must be changed to remove the undue financial control by large corporations. Publicly funded elections are one of the best remedies. Also we must demand the requirement for a Run-Off Vote if candidate does not achieve 50% of vote. This would help break the monopoly of the two (faced) party government.
Second, independent media (such as Public & Public Access TV) must be supported sufficiently to be able to survive & grow, so that the electorate will not be manipulated by the centrally owned mass media.
Commenter:William Beers the president's health care summit did exactly what he intended it to d. It was meant to get democrats comfortable with the idea of using the reconcilliation option. It was never intended for a bipartisan effort of solving the health care reform. He chooses to ignore the fact (CNN poll) that the majority of Americans don't want this bill. They would rather that congress scrap this bill and start over. The false claims by the congressional leaders that this would reduce costs is summed up in a statement by the CBO "you can't spend the same dollars twice." Another fact that they ignore is that it does cut $500 billion from medicare.CNBC cited the biggest holder of US government debt is actually inside the United States. The Federal Reserve system of banks and other US intragovernmental holdings account for a stunning $5.127 trillion in US Treasury debt. This is the most recent number available (Sept 2009), and is at an all-time high, rising in every reporting period since 2007. About a decade ago, the total government holdings were "only" $2.5 trillion. This is money that the federal government borrowed from Social Security Trust Fund.
Commenter:Marion Pocker It will not lead to a successful bipartisan health reform bill as long as Republicans continue to believe that it is more important to maintain Republican solidarity than it is to fix a broken health care system that will - sooner than we think -break the bank on the backs of the poor and disenfranchised - people who as a general rule are of little interest to well-off Republicans.
Commenter:Faith Gagne I watched nearly the entire health care summit on my computer. I greatly admire the President's efforts to bring the Republicans into the formula. It is not the first time he has tried, but the stubborn, obstructionist 'Party of No' seems committed to gridlock. The summit clearly showed this to be true. I believe that the Republican's do not want the present administration to take credit for the enormous benefits health care reform will bring to the American people, and they are also acting on behalf of their insurance lobbyists. I do a slow burn when the Republicans constantly beat the drum that the American public does not want the health care reform bill, because I know that is not true. I'm praying that the reform bill is enacted soon with or without the Republicans.
And I also want the public option.
Commenter:Laura I would like to hear some constructive ideas from the Republican members of Congress.
So far, I have heard nothing positive from them.
Only negative to everything our President has proposed.
Commenter:Sue Obama is a major disappointment! His polocies are not focused on changing the Federal Government as promised. Rather, we get EARMARKS, Backroom deals, more unfunded mandates, a doubling of the deficit (ie Federal Spending increases}, and complete disregard for the voters in VA, NJ, and MA. He is the first President I do not trust. I do not believe a word he says. The Congressmn who called him a liar was right.
Commenter:Hugh Sansom Bipartisan reform? Yes! I think that moderate Democrats and Liberals will be able reach a compromise.
The Republicans? Well, they have nothing to do with "republic" or "can." They oppose things they have previously supported. They promise support and then withdraw it. Republicans are voting down measures, then going back to their constituents and taking credit for the very things they voted against. They are barely capable of uttering even one true statement.
The GOP is hellbent on a strategy of bait and switch and then taking credit. There can be no compromise with a GOP that views compromise as weakness. The party has sold whatever is left when you've already sold your soul. (Most Democrats have only just sold their souls -- Max Baucus being an example of a Republican-style sell-everything Democrat and Dennis Kucinich or Alan Grayson being examples of some of the few non-Oligarch-owned human beings left in Congress.)