From huffington post.
The Senate health care bill is so compromised, some progressives argue, that it would be better to try to kill it than fight for its passage.
In light of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision to give in to Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and agree to scrap a Medicare compromise, and with the public option already off the table, many ardent supporters of health care reform are giving up on the legislation.
While I have been fortunate to have been part of a company that offers a good health care plan. However many of my friends and acquaintances in the tech sector have not been as lucky. Many of them work on contract jobs, hired through recruiters, which generally do not provide any health care. With the removal of the public option and the attempted compromise of dropping Medicare to 55, it pretty much leaves all the young professionals just starting out with pretty much nothing unless they get in with a company that will offer some form of healthcare.
So here is my question to our current senators. Why? While I understand that seniority and position are important in a debate of this magnitude, why are we removing ways to include people. The senate seems to spend more of its time debating ways to remove people and services from the health care bill.
While I have been a democrat for only 9 years, I joined because I started to see that there were problems that the market was not addressing. I voted for Obama hoping that this problem with health care would at least provide insurance for those that would be hard pressed to buy it on their own.
So I again ask if they were so committed to the Public Option, why it was removed to appease Republicans who are no closer to voting for it than when we began this journey. Mostly this is frustration talking. I’m really hoping that someone can provide me with a legitimate reason why something this watered down took this long and all that “leadership” was squandered.