GOP senators say 'no' to public plan

Posted: Monday, June 08, 2009 1:19 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: White House, Congress, Republicans, Economy, Barack Obama

From NBC's Ken Strickland
In a letter President Obama, key Senate Republicans say they're unwilling to support one of Obama's pillars for health-care reform: a public/government insurance program to compete against private plans. The letter was signed by all but one of the Republicans on the powerful Finance Committee, one of the panels writing the health-care bill. (The one Finance Republican who didn't sign: Olympia Snowe.)

Citing the looming financial crisis for Medicare and Medicaid, the senators said that "creating a brand new government program will not only worsen our long term financial outlook but also negatively impact American families who enjoy the private coverage of their choice."

Video: How difficult will it be for Republicans and Democrats to agree on the health care bill? CNBC Chief Washington Correspondent John Harwood talks to NBC's Natalie Morales.

The Republicans told the president that a public option "would result in 119.1 million Americans losing their private coverage. This would run contrary to your pledge to the American families about allowing them to keep the coverage of their choice."

Another side effect Republicans fear is that the massive shift to a government plan would force private insurers out of business. "Washington-run programs undermine market-based competition through their ability to impose price controls and shift costs to other purchasers," the senators wrote. "Forcing free market plans to compete with these government-run programs would create an unlevel playing field and inevitably doom true competition."

Democratic leaders have not finalized the contours of what a public/government program would entail. In fact, there are several versions of a "public option" being discussed by committee members.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Geez what a surprise, the dopes of nope say no to single payer health care. They're just a bunch of bleeding hearts trying to suck up to the private insurance ripoff conartists so they'll keep getting all those big lobbying bucks.

What a lie that having single payer health care would mean 119.1 million Americans would lose their private health care insurance. As always these liars try to scare people into believing their disgusting overexaggerations. Even though so many are insured by private health insurance, medical bills are the reason that 60% of those claiming bankruptcy have to even when they are insured privately. This just proves what a miserable failure private health insurance is.

Single Payer Health Care Now!
Go Lakers!

Eric, Salinas, CA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:30 PM)

This public option will destroy our economy and lower the quality of care. Some people at the very bottom of our economy might get a benefit. Of course the rich will always get great health care. The middle class will once again get hosed. If you want to see what public healthcare looks like, take a look at infant mortality rates and cancer survival rates in England and Canada. Also see how public healthcare is bankrupting their economies.

We need to fix our current system. It can be fixed if politicians break their alliance with the insurance industry. The reason we're in this mess is that elected officials have been on the take for so long.

DG, Houston, TX (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:31 PM)

FR: "Their primary concern is that a government program available to all Americans would be cheaper, and as a result Republicans say, employers would drop their more expensive plans and put their employees on the government plan."

So they're against it because it would save businesses money?

What happened to being pro-business (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:31 PM)

Democratic leaders have not finalized the contours of what a public/government program would entail. In fact, there are several versions of a "public option" being discussed by committee members.
----------------------------------------------

So the republicans say NO with out knowing what the public option proposal wold be.

Way2go - partyofno

Partyofno Strikes Again (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:33 PM)

For every person's insurance which is dumped by an empliyer, a tax of $1,000 per month for 10 years per person should be levied against that employer. This would help to pay for that employee's insurance.

The GOP are fools if they keep thinking that the American people are going to be snookered into thinking the way the right wing thinks about healthcare for all.........

The GOP is Done (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:34 PM)

I didn’t see this one coming… snark meter set at 100%!

In the previous thread on sticking points and flip flops our President was diced and shredded by the opposition for his willingness to at least be open & listen…

Then we get the usual status quo from the pity party of NO… no ideas… no compromise…no alternative… just the usual standard operating procedure from the bunch of losers!!!

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:35 PM)

So the republicans are more interested in protecting private insurance companies than they are giving Americans a choice... Nothing new there.

Ben, Peoria, IL (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:36 PM)

Why should the President care what the Republicans think? They are going to vote no, no matter how much the plan leans in their direction. It is enough of a stretch to get the blue dogs on board without worrying about the party of "no".

Sara Bee, Tallahassee, FL (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:37 PM)

Stick with it!

The media will not be able to ignore this issue-it is too big to go uncovered. No amount of personality puff pieces or 'inside the White House' interactive games will make this issue go away-like GM, the public hates it, and will not forget what Obama is trying to ram down our collective throats.

it is a great big gift tied up in a red ribbon for the GOP in 2010.

no joe, no bo,nj (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:37 PM)

Wow, the GOP say no to something. Imagine that.

Who'd've thunk it? (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:37 PM)

So, let's boil this down: what the signatories are afraid of is that for-profit insurance companies will be out-competed and go out of business.

CA Indy (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:37 PM)

Without a Puublic Plan THERE IS NO HEALTH REFORM !!

THAT'S WHY Health Care legislation SHOULD NOT BE BI-PARTISAN

If we have a Public Plan, that plan will be cheaper and force down Health care costs
The Republicans DON'T WANT to lower profits for health Insurance companies

According to the Washington Monthly, Obama offered Tort Reform as a compromise to the Republicans
He asked them to offer their compormis.....
\THEY HAD NO COMPROMISE

Republicans are trying to prevent Reform

Let's see how Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson and Arlen Specter vote
I hope they DON'T SELL OUT the American People

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:38 PM)

The GOP said NO?

I can't believe it.

lol

Why is it more important to protect the health care INDUSTRY as we know it than to protect the millions of Americans without health care?

Why are the health insurance companies so important?

If the health insurance companies cannot provide affordable health care, then what purpose are they serving?

Why are health insurance companies more important to the GOP than car manufacturers?

Nashville_fan (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:40 PM)

The republicans claim to be champions of small business, yet they whine here about a small business having the option - not being forced - to choose a cheaper health plan for their employees that will still provide coverage for employees but also improves the businesses' profitability. The only ones that would really be hurt are the insurance companies, but of course they make bigger campaign contributions. To get health care to all who cannot afford it now, the only real option to a government-supported plan is for the government to subsidize private insurance, which of course the insurance companies would love. The money goes to them, not to actual health care.

Charlie Tallahassee Fla (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:40 PM)

Hmm, they're all for competition . . . except when it's real competition that will force the insurance industry to actually treat the customer right and fairly.

More fun and games from the G'No'Pers. Yawn.

Matthew, Houston, TX (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:40 PM)

Why would COMPETITION force Health Insurance companies out of business ??

RED HERRING

Private companies have a 31% administrative cost:
For bureaucracy, CEO salaries and PROFITS

Come On, COMPETE

Private Insurance companies RATION Health Care
They tell you What is Covered

NO BI-PARTISANSHIP !!

Let's get a Democratic plan !!

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:41 PM)

119.1 million people will not LOSE their private coverage. They will CHOOSE the public plan because it is cheaper. That is like saying satellite tv service has resulted in millions of people losing cable tv. They did not lose cable tv, they abondoned it by choosing a different service they like better.

How about some reporting and not just parroting.

http://jwalkerreport.blogspot.com/2009/06/senator-grassley-lies-about-public.html

Jon (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:41 PM)

A wealthy constituency and no empathy for the poor and uninsured. The GOP will never change.

Reno Will (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:43 PM)

I'm shocked! The party of NO, not wanting everyone to have an affordable health plan! Get a clue or get out of the way!

Dawgman, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:43 PM)

On one hand, the GOP keeps telling us that "public health insurance will be awful, just atrocious." On the other hand, they're saying "...And the private sector won't be able to compete with this awful public option." That says a lot about how satisfied people are with our current healthcare scenario.

CJ, Kalispell MT (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:43 PM)

I'm shocked! The party of NO, not wanting everyone to have an affordable health plan! Get a clue or get out of the way!

Dawgman, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:43 PM)

Exactly, someone is going to have to address Medicare and Medicaid. Social Security is the relatively easy one to fix of the 3.

Cicero (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:44 PM)

Hah, I thought Rethuglicans were supposed to favor competition. Not this crowd apparently. Then again, considering how much the GOP gets in campaign contributions from the major health insurance companies and Big Pharma, I guess this should come as no surprise.

Note to Rethuglican Senators: President Obama and the Democrats in Congress are already compromising by not going for a single-payer system. Stop obstructing progress and start offering constructive ideas on how to make a government health care plan work for all of the Americans currently uninsured.

We need the GOP to put aside partisan politics for a change, and begin saying something else besides "No" to everything President Obama proposes. Geez, at least suggest a reasonable alternative for solving the problem, cutting costs, or figuring out a way to pay for what clearly needs to be done. In short, earn your paychecks for a change.

Philimus, Cleveland, Ohio (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:44 PM)

To everyone saying that they would not vote for President Obama to be re-elected if he signs on to a plan that taxes employer benefits I have two questions:

1. How can you make this declaration without any information about how the plan would be structured and what you would get in return for your money?

2. How do you propose that we pay for healthcare?

It is easy to attack someone else's plan, but it is a lot more difficult to create a solution. President Obama is open to SOLUTIONS. If someone has a better way to do this, now would be the time to speak up, no?

Or we can just keep the status quo and hope we don't get sick.

Nashville_fan (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:46 PM)

And who is surprised?

Can you imagine if we were trying to enact Social Secuirty now?????

NO! MORE NO and NO!!!!! And guess what? NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

****************

And what is so amazing to me that Republicans DO NOT THINK THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR CAN COMPPETE WITH A PUBLIC PLAN. What they are doing is talking out of BOTH sides of their mouths. On one hand government is no good on the other it will be TOO Good!

As a business woman myself I know that a little creative thinking goes a long way. The private sector, if it wants to compete is going to have to offer better treatment at a good price. So they won't make trillions, they will still do well enoough.

Where is the compromise here.

I think Republicans are getting lazier and greedier by the minute!

SO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! is IT!!

Andrea, New York City (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:46 PM)

Strange, a public plan being offered didn't destroy the private plans available in Australian, why would it destroy ours? It would simply make them competitative. It would have choices for everyone. If can afford private, you go private, you cannot, you go public. Same for businesses. I know many small restuarant owners who would love to offer insurance to their workers but they cannot afford it. What is wrong with offering a public plan for them? Make it somehow related to profit. Like, Microsoft would not have the option for public plans but that mom and pop restuarant would have the option.

Julie, Palm Desert, CA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:48 PM)

The GOPer losers are in the pocket of the insurance industry and they are putting their re-election campaigns ahead of the public interest. Not a surprise as this is their normal, "Me first" postion.

It is time to get serious and get health care passed. GOPers, get on board, get out of they way or get run over!

Change is marching forward!

Ed, FW, TX (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:49 PM)

So the GOP is afraid that the Insurance companies will have to face a bit of competition. Someone please explain to me what the problem with this is, PLEASE.

Sounds like the same old GOP, Party of the Rich. And the righties will respond something like, "we must not anger the rich, otherwise they'll punish us by taking away their inferior products and forcing us to pay taxes."

http://jawillie.blog.com

jawillie, Philadelphia, PA. (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:54 PM)

There's no such thing as a free lunch and there's no such thing as free govt. health care. Notice how people are getting more tuned off by Obama and the democrats trying to jam more government down our throats.

Real America (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:55 PM)

[Their primary concern is that a government program available to all Americans would be cheaper, and as a result Republicans say, employers would drop their more expensive plans and put their employees on the government plan.]
--This is one instance when it is right for GOP legislators to stick to their guns against a public health option. Public health is a subsidy that will drive private options out of business (closer to the single pay, which is not consistent with American tradition--nor do we want the problems, yes there are problems, that go with a single-payer system). Say that I am forced to pay for a chuck of your health insurance. Even if it is more costly overall, your portion to buy it will be cheaper. Now I know that you are not a financially savvy liberal, but even you would take the cheaper, subsidized public option over the private option that you had to pay for completely.

Let's look to the auto industry. Other governments subsidize their manufacturing sector, we do not. Who is winning? The ones receiving a subsidy.

I have looked at this issue, and I would advocate requiring health insurance, but do it in a way that promotes individual ownership and competition. Whether health care is a right or a privilege is moot. People so blinded by partisan rhetoric don't see the third, forth, etc. ways. Health care in my view, is a responsibility.

Nicholas: Minnesota (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:55 PM)

You have to have a public plan to compete with the insurance industry, if the insurance industry doesn't want to compete we will all be better off without them anyway, if no one has a choice other than the current insurance industries plan what's the incentive for the insurance industry to play fair? There ain't any, that puts us back where we are now, and frankly who cares if the minority Republican party approves of a government run public plan, after the shambles they have made of our country they should just sit down and shut-up, nobody is interested in what they think, Republican congressmen should show some integrity and fade quietly away, they are not welcome here anymore.

mk (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:57 PM)

I like my private insurance and will not trust our government with my health care. Why? Because the US government either runs or oversees the following "hugely successful ventures":

The US Post Office. This dinosaur has developed inefficiency to the an art form. Remember their overnight mail debacle? They finally had to turn to Fed Ex to get their mail through on time.

Veterans Administration: No explanation needed.

FEMA: Ignorance in action

AMTRAK $23 Billion lost since 1990. Operates under the guise of a railroad but is really an outrageuosly
expensive jobs program for the politically connected (the management) and unionized employees (the workers).

Fanny Mae & Freddie Mac. Formerly "implied government guaranteed lenders" and now "absolutely government guaranteed lenders". These two laughable entities were believed by most financial observers to be at the epicenter of the meltdown. They were the first card placed down in the house of cards that set off the current recession when that house collapsed.
There are many more examples of how government has mismanaged their responsibilities. And now Obama and his associates want to be given the very serious responsibility of ultimately running our health care system. Why on earth would any sane person let their most important issue, their health, be managed by the buffoons that operate the US government?

Paul (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:59 PM)

Thanks, Rep. Snowe, for at least intelligently weighing options instead of just saying "no". We cannot ask for more than prudent consideration. Can you tell the clunkheads in the GOP that this is how you negotiate for the best possible package for the American people - can you get through to them? If not, oh well, just let them keep clunking along and over the cliff.

JJ Young, Cary, NC (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:00 PM)

[You don't want government rationing health care ?
Insurance Companies are RATIONING your health care, right now.
MSierra, SF]
--The difference dear or sir is that with a private insurer, I can change. Under a single payer/government insurer, I can not.

I don't like the system as we have it now. Reform is needed, just not through the march to liberalism or socialism (always cautions of using that word, but in this case, I think it is fair and appropriate). How can the greatest country on Earth not come up with a plan that is intelligent and uniquely American? Seriously?

Nicholas: Minnesota (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:01 PM)

Democratic leaders have not finalized the contours of what a public/government program would entail. In fact, there are several versions of a "public option" being discussed by committee members.

Am I surprised that the G NOp will say no...is everyone else surprised that the GOP will say no? So what's any different? They had eight years to attempt to fix what is wrong with health care just as they had with being concerned with the Bush spending.

I am so geting tired of the BS...we sit here and debate issues that aren't debatable. We must have health care reform, Medicare and Medicaid needs fixing. They only way to fix that is to reform health care.

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:04 PM)

Republicans are trying to prevent Reform MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:38 PM)
----------------------------------------------
What, like tort reform, product liability reform, medical malpractice reform, lawsuit caps? The kind of reform the second largest PAC contributors to the Democratic Party are resisting??

Robert Underdunk Terwilliger, Springfield, USA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:07 PM)

for those who think that Obama's telflon presidency makes him invulnerable-Gallup has an interesting poll.

His overall approval rating, those who personally like him, remains high, (67%). That's dwn from 78% on inauguration day, but in all fairness, who really expected it to stay that high?

His numbers on other issues have dropped, but he maintains a net positive reading; i.e., the eonomy,where 55% approve of his handling, (down from 59%).

This number is somewhat deceptive, however, in light of the numbers in regard to the budget deficit, (46%approve, 48%disapprove), and a more startling 45% approval, 51% disapproval rating on controlling federal spending.

Still think that this health care plan has a chance?

this is Gallup, which polls 'adults' rather than registered voters or the more relevant likely voters. When Gallup gets negatives, you an bet that the momentum is building against whatever president they are polling on.

no joe,n bo,nj (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:10 PM)

So let me get this straight. First of all the naysayers believe that Americans "enjoy" their current coverage? I think you would be hard-pressed to find more than 538 Americans who "enjoy" their current coverage (yes Senators, that means you). The denizens of the Grand Old Party (G.O.P. has morphed to N.O.P.!) then go on to oppose the President's plan because it would be cheaper? How exactly is cheaper health care a problem for anyone except for corporate fatcats, their lobbyists and the politicians who love them? Can they really be that stupid? Yes they can!

Doron, Sebastopol, CA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:14 PM)

Nashville Fan--a healthcare plan could be paid for out of general tax revenues, out of higher corporate taxes, from savings and efficiencies (as candidate Obama suggested) and I'm sure there are many other ways BESIDES taxing the benefits that some already receive on a tax free basis. Let's remember that they might also subject the benefit to employment taxes as well as income tax, putting a further burden on the employer. The problem is that people who have benefits may like to see them extended to those who don't but they don't feel that they should be the ones to pay for them.

The Obama team has been so savvy to date that I'm having a hard time believing they would suggest this & really mean it.

Steeler Fan Pittsburgh, PA (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:14 PM)

Their primary concern is that a government program available to all Americans would be cheaper, and as a result Republicans say, employers would drop their more expensive plans and put their employees on the government plan. They also fear people would take their own initiative and shift their coverage to the public option.
----------------------------------------------------

People generally will pick the best option. We deserve the freedom to do so. The Dem's want to level the playing field, and the health insurance lobby wants status quo.

We see who's on the side of americans.

It despicable to profit off of health. It's like asking for people to hand the police a check when they report to a robbery call. Or one to the fire dept. when they put out your scorched house.

Patriot Midwest U.S.A. (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:14 PM)

I like my private insurance and will not trust our government with my health care. Why? Because the US government either runs or oversees the following "hugely successful ventures":
Paul

So the rest be damned...right? What do you think that the 'government" has been doing? Wasn't it John McCain that sugested that all insurance companies be deregulated and be allowed to operate from stste to state...no holes bared?

Insurance companies are big business and they are lobbying the Senators in their states to not back health care reform. Whay is that? They won't be able to keep those high as Premiums up.

I want to see government sponsored health care, there are more that can't afford it verses those that can. I am not selfish...So you don't need it now...but what "if" you need it later. Nothing is a sure thing these days...is it?

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:15 PM)

MSierra,

Evidence please, which national insurer (United, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana, Cigna) has an administrative cost ratio of 31%? Please enlighten me. That would mean after paying out 70-80+% in medical claims, plus your 31% in administrative expenses, that they all are losing money big time.

Go to business school and learn some basic health economics.

Obama, One and Done/Atlanta (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:16 PM)

Geez, at least suggest a reasonable alternative for solving the problem, cutting costs, or figuring out a way to pay for what clearly needs to be done. Philimus, Cleveland, Ohio (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 1:44 PM)
------------------------------------------------------

Phlilimus, I do not hear a peep from the Dems about capping medical lawsuits in this country. I wonder why? The Trial Lawyers Association, who is the second largest PAC contributor to the DNC after the Trade Unions, claims lawsuits only contribute a small fraction to the cost of healthcare. Really? Ask your doctor and dentist at your next visit what percentage of their pretax income they spend on malpractice insurance. You could raise your family on the amount spent! Don’t worry, you pay for it already. Let's have “the government” or “the rich” pay for it instead.

St. Eleutherius of Nicomedia (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:16 PM)

This doesn't surprise me. The GOP has been in the back pocket of insurance companies and big business (including GM, Chrysler) for years and it has nothing to do with free market. Grassley should know since Iowa is home to some pretty big insurance firms who help elect him every six years. Republicans complain about unions supporting democrats but they have their own Corporate union lining their pockets.

Reading earlier comments on health care and noticed a recurring theme even from the left--we want health care (insert roads, bridges, schools) but we are not willing to pay for it; don't tax me, tax that guy behind the tree. Just sayin'.

Chuck, WA--good question. No, I don't think about the color of Pres Obama's skin and never really did. The only time is when the media brings it up and when the extreme right hate mongers make me worry about his safety.

Nashville fan--your comment about America awakening was right. Sometimes it tax a president like Bush 43 to remind us that elections and every vote counts.

Jody, Iowa (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:18 PM)

Why change now. Republican party has no desire to be of help to any administration other than the RNC party. They have no solutions, no new ideas, & no new blood, just the same old white group way of thinking. Really sad, that they would sell the country down the tubes just to cater to a really small group of bad leaders. This country is no longer willing to watch these guys continue to get rich & powerful & not do anyhting to help the average American. Keep up the good work.

Greg, SF, Ca. (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:18 PM)

Paul, and others who trumpet "private enterprise is the only answer", how is it that the US' privately run healthcare system is the most expensive in the WORLD; and average at best in terms of quality?

Isn't "the market" supposed to drive down costs and increase efficiencies? What happened to that whole idea? Could it be that these private companies are more interested in increasing profits than delivering affordable, quality healthcare?

Just askin'......

Sure Pauly........ (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:53 PM)

The GOP says "NO" to a public payer health plan? Fine. It takes only 51 votes to pass the legislation. Who needs the Party of "No" anyway. They have offered nothing of substance to resolve any issue facing the United States either in the last eight years or now.

Why should we expect more from them after hearing the ugly hatred from the mouths of Conservative talk show hosts that the GOP elected official bow before.

Mike Groshong (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:57 PM)

I would like a public option offered and would see how it measured against my current insurance. I would also be willing to have my existing insurance taxed at the reasonable rate I have heard mentioned. I say if the republicans in congress vote no for the AMerican people's wants (single payer, public insurance) and stand up for the wants of the greedy insurance industry, then fine, they all need to give up their posh free insurance and get individual policies - then when they lose their jobs, they will have no insurance (but can pay triple that amount for a COBRA extension) and perhaps get an inkling what it is like in the real world.

mary dale, iowa (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 2:59 PM)

Big Pharma and the big Insurance Companies are pulling the strings of the 'rocket scientists' who make up the GOP. What a shock! But that the GOP would admit that the government could produce a cheaper cost for insurance than insurance companies, and that is bad because WHY? Haven't we been talking about the runaway cost of health care and the GOP dares to say NO again? Quite unbelievable.

Debra, Austin (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 3:04 PM)

WOW what a surprise that the Republicans would balk at actually fixing something. Was anyone really thinking the GOP was going to learn from its mistakes? Its so telling also that so many idiots in this country think that a government run insurance is "nationalized medicine". How stupid can people be? We already have something comparable. Its called medicare. DUH! Its not socialized medicine. SO THE BUFFOONS IN THE GOVRNMENT WON'T BE RUNNING HEALTHCARE!! At least not any more than they do RIGHT NOW! They'll be providing insurance. BIG DEAL!!

shawn, mobile, alabama (Sent Monday, June 08, 2009 3:11 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1956616