Roland Burris: 'Public option' deal-break

What a travesty to have this liar and thief in Congress representing Illinois!

Wonder if Burris will two face when the final vote is in on Obamacare

That is one of many reasons why, I hope Senator Burris re-thinks his present political career. I would hope that such an outstanding public-servant would reconsider his stated position of not running for the Senate seat, he now holds !! I think Illinois, and America, will be well-served if Senator Burris is elected junior Senator from Illinois. His position on the " public option " has been scored as a deficit-reducer, by the SBO. It will bring competition and affordability to the healthcare equation, something the Healthcare Insurers do not want discussed !! That is only one, of several reasons, why Senator Burris would have my support, financially and electorally, if he decides to run for Senator from Illinois !! Besides, his experience, already gained in that position, will serve him and Illinois, quite well !! A vote for Senator Burris would be a vote for the right candidate and for the experienced candidate.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Burris will have earned his feed if he can stick to this. Thanks for speaking out. More need to speak out for what the overwhelming majority of the public wants (shown in every poll). Politicians who do not respond to what their constituents and the nation as a whole want appear to be corrupt and will have to pay a price.

Don, you are totaly lost out there in la la land. Your post about this liar and thief proves it.

Burris is an honorable man who served many terms in public office in Illinois without any credible allegation of misconduct against him.

There obviously has to be some form of "public option" in any health bill, to prevent the insurance companies from reaping windfall profits.

Refreshing that Burris at least has the b---- to make this explicit.

FITZ,

I'm with you - I hope Burris changes his mind and runs also. It would be great to see him get his butt kicked. Heck, I'd even vote for Kirk just to make it happen.

No public option is just one reason not to vote for this dog of a bill.
No premium rate protection for 54 to 65 year old people is another. This group will pay 2 to 4 times the premiums as other groups. This, the last real reform left in the Baucus bill has been dropped.

And the clause that says women in this group can't be charged more than men is simply a good loophole to raise mens rates to match the women's rates, not reduce them.
In fact, the Baucus/Snowe job bill is not reform at all.

I hope Burris lives up to his promise. Who knows if he will?
Whatever, it's time to give the Dem leadership in the Senate and BHO a sharp slap in the face. They have been way too accommodating to the Rs and the insurance industry.

BHO should have been much more vocal much sooner regarding what he would sign and what he would not sign.

He still seems highly disengaged and noncommittal on the whole matter. What he will end up with is a Republican bill, not voted for by the Rs, with the Ds stamp all over it. And they still won't get OS's vote on the final version.

When in the end it proves to be a windfall profit enhancer for the private ins. industry the Rs can point the finger of blame at BHO and the Ds, while at the same time quietly congratulating themselves on a job well done for the insurance industry.

I hope Roland Burris follows through with his stance on the health-care bill. I'd rather have nothing than something that will, at the end of the day, hurt us financially as we are forced--using our own family money--to prop up the for-profit insurance industry while getting less from them. If Burris follows through with his no vote--if no PO--he might turn out to be one of the real patriots. And, if Burris follows through on his word it will, in some weird way, help Blagojevich look good--as though Blago knew what he was doing all along, and that he really did pick the right man for The People. No up or down judgment, just pointing out a perception.

CM, your criticisms are legitimate. The Baucus bill is trash. In addition to the points you made, the bill still leaves millions uninsured. I thought universal coverage, or at least something very close to it, was the point. I also agree that BO has been ambivalent. Not re health care reform in general, but specifically in re a public option. My understanding is that he favors it, but does not seem willing to fight for it.
------
A point we are going to disagree on is that in my opinion, you seem to have bought into the Dem rhetoric. They have been trying to sell this "good v. evil" war with the health insurance industry. BO at the forefront, as a knight in shining armor fighting the good fight. But peel back the rhetoric and look at what they are actually doing. As you pointed out, they are gift wrapping millions of new forced customers to private insurance. They are leaving the "enemy" the keys to the Cadillac. In light of that, do you think maybe this evil insurance company rhetoric is a bit hollow?
-------
As for claiming this is a GOP bill, that is a complete cop out. I don’t know how you can justify making that claim. The Dems control every committee, have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, a solid majority in the House, and the WH. They could ram through anything they wanted, up to and including a single payer system. They don't. They waffle. They blame a GOP opposition that doesn't have the power to stop them. Why? I can only think of three possibilities, and none of them are good. First, they lack the courage of their convictions. Second, they don't really believe in the principles they claim to stand for. Third, they are just as deeply in the pocket of insurance companies as Republicans. Personally, I think it is a little bit of all three.

HH
Thanks for the comment.
The Ds may be using OS as cover to avoid doing the heavy lifting they need to do. 'Gee, we had to please Olympia so it would be bipartisan.'

I predict Burris will eventually vote for ObamaCare!
After all, the President appoints US attorneys. And US attorneys will decide whether to prosecute Burris and all the other thieving friends of Obama/Blogo.
So if Burris wishes to stay out of the slammer, he'll cooperate.

To--This message not approved by the White House at 12:43 AM---Your scenario looks pretty negative and it looks like a threat to a US senator. It looks as though you believe that one of the most important votes in the history and lives of United States citizens should be binded due to a seperate legal issue, or issues. Are you suggesting that both the good and the bad in Northern Illinois twist arms? What? Is it in the water? I've had the same water. I think your comment is loopy, and a sad outlook for an important and unencumbered democratic process.