Compromise doesn’t mean compromising the essence of policy, all know it !!

1. As regards a make-believe scheme, the source of funding coming from a middle class is utterly against the commitment of Democratic party.

2. No cost-competitive advantage of the insurer-friendly scheme does not clear the grave concern about the unsustainable cost of overall health care program in the long run. Baucus scheme Doesn’t Bend Cost Curve Enough, Experts Say.

The scheme proposes a “fake” alternative, nonprofit insurance cooperatives — and it places so many “restrictions” on these cooperatives that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, they “seem unlikely to establish a significant market presence in many areas of the country.”

3. Even with some benefit for primary practitioners, the baseless scheme does not come with fundamental payment reform, or a pay for value reimbursement formula. It means that the insurer-friendly scheme is not cleaning up the concerns over a quality issue and $9trillion of deficit over the next decade.

((Here is some of CBO analysis : While the costs of the financial bailouts and economic stimulus bills are staggering, they are only a fraction of the coming costs from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that each year Medicaid will expand by 7 percent, Medicare by 6 percent, and Social Security by 5 percent. These programs face a 75-year shortfall of $43 trillion–60 times greater than the gross cost of the $700 billion TARP financial bailout)).

4. For Medicare & Medicaid system to survive from the most wasteful structure on earth, enough savings by way of fundamental changes need to be secured, in return, the savings thereof suffice to meet the goal of well-planned public option.

((Even with far less visits to docs, which average a half or a third of them in any other free states, Americans pay roughly twice as much per person right now)).

5. For the record, prior to nation-wide deployment of reform, The State Of “Yes We Can”, Minnesota influenced by Mayo clinic spends “20 percent” less per patient than the national average and 31 percent less than in the highest cost state. It highlights that no substantial tax raise is needed at least for sure.

((The $583 billion of revenue package, and the astronomical savings of public option aside, “20%” of $923.5bn (the combined Medicare and Medicaid cost per year, as of July) represents around $184.7bn per year and 1.847trillion over the next decade, and this patient-centered value alone could be sufficient to meet the goal of public option)).

6. In brief, the long-awaited and most hopeful health care plan is to meet these criterias : Affordability, Quality, and A Check function against runaway premiums thereof.

Clearly enough, due largely to its lower overhead cost, purchasing power and fundamental payment reform, the well-planned public option would be doing moore than the fabricated scheme by THE INDUSTRY in these aforementioned regards.

Now is the moment to turn page to contemporary energy and financial upgrades glossed over in 8 years.

Thank You !