Stephen Lynch Pulls a Mitt Romney on Health Care Reform

This guy reminds me of someone I know…

Lynch now supports a public option at the state level, while opposing it at the national level. Because, you know, bringing the negotiating power of the federal government to bear against the insurance companies would bring costs down too much, or something. Cost containment was supposedly his reason for voting against Obamacare, yet he opposes any serious effort to contain costs.

For anyone who’s curious about his vote “from the left”, here’s an article from Politico about what Lynch really thought about health care reform in 2009.



Discuss

8 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. I am throwing the challenge flag on this post

    Lynch supported, voted yes in other words, for the House version of ACA, which included a public option. Seamusromney ( Mitt never ate dog by the way) states that Mt. Lynch opposed the public option at the national level. This is an outright lie, is it not? Did the final version of ACA include a public option b/c that is the version Mr. Lynch voted against and Mr. Markey supported.

    It’s now wonder Mr. Markey supported the final version of Obamacare. We were told by the Belway Boys Obamacare would not add to the deficit. I am sure Mr. Markey, living in the bubble of Chevy Chase, MD for 36 years, believed it, just like he believed NAFTA and GATT would be beneficial to the mfg. sector of the U.S. (lost millions of good jobs in the process).

    We find out a couple days ago that the GAO confirmed that Obamacare will add $6.2 trillion to the national debt. Yet. Obama said he would not sign any bill that adds to the deficit. And Markey believed it!

    “The alternative scenario, which incorporates the more realistic “alternative projections” suggested by CBO, the CMS trustees, and the chief Medicare actuary, is even more dire. Under this scenario, the “primary deficit” increases by 0.7 percent of GDP over the 75-year period. The GAO does not put a dollar value on that figure, but Senate Budget Committee staff has calculated, and GAO has confirmed, that it would amount to a $6.2 trillion increase in the federal deficit. ”

    Mr. Markey reminds me of Capt. Smith of the RMS Titanic who famously said “The worse is over, the iceberg is behind us now”. I have the same, sinking feeling about Ed Markey’s past votes.

    • Surprised Dan

      That a genuine working dude like yourself would like the Kerry and Romney esque flip flopper in Lynch, from the Politico article linked to above

      A longtime advocate of labor interests, Lynch wasn’t even invited to the state’s leading labor breakfast this weekend because of his skepticism towards the proposed public option component of health insurance legislation.

      So we gather from here a few salient facts your post above ignores

      a) Lynch opposed the public option

      Always has, always will, until yesterday when he supports it ‘at the state level’ where as a Senator he has ZERO influence so its just a useless talking point. It also ignores the overwhelming public policy consensus that only a public option at the federal level will contain costs. It already exists and is popular for veterans, the poor, and the elderly, why not let everyone opt into Medicare or Medicaid if they so choose?

      b) Voted against the ACA

      In both forms, his statement prior to the vote that he was against the public option seems to contradict his statement later that he voted against ACA because it lacked a public option. Thats just common sense. He also opposed ACA alternatively because it was ‘too expensive’ and over the non existent threat that it would fund abortion, which he has also gone from opposing to now supporting. Wonder if the new Stephen Lynch would support federal funds for abortion and a public option while he’s at it? Because you know he is the more authentic candidate.

      Markey strongly supported single payer his entire career, voted for a public option, and voted for ACA without a public option since expanding Medicaid and universal coverage are still great goals and the perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of the good. That shows he is a pure and pragmatic leader and a legislator mature enough to deliver for Massachusetts. Lynch like a weather vane will follow the polls and fail to articulate a consistent position.

      • Public Option is not the same as Single Payer

        Public options, supported by Lynch, “would create a federal health care plan, something like Medicare, but for persons under age 65. Individuals and small businesses would be able to buy such a plan just as they would purchase a health care plan from a private insurance company.”

        Single payer would eliminate the private health insurance companies. “Like Medicare, the government would act as the insurer; doctors and hospitals would operate privately, receiving payments from public funds under such a nationalized health insurance system.”

        The two are different, Lynch is against a national single payer h/c system.

        http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/public-option-vs-single-payer/

        • Ok

          How does that answer my charge that Lynch was against the public option before he voted against the ACA, and then supported it after he voted against the ACA and invented that as a reason for his vote. Or in a simpler way-that he was against it before he was for it.

          Lastly how does this square with Markey also supporting a public option? If you like Medicaid wouldn’t you want it expanded under the ACA? Your critiques aren’t adding up.

        • Lynch said he was against the public option

          Then and now, at the national level. It’s in both articles.

        • No, see, it's like this

          Lynch really, really, really loves the Tenth Amendment. He loves it like Romeo loves Juliet. Like Brad loves Angelina. Like Tom loves L. Ron Hubbard. And as much as he really liked the public option, he just couldn’t go along with it because it would break his favorite amendment’s heart.

    • I'm callin' it

      “Mitt never ate dog by the way”

      Defending Mitt and attacking Obama? And we’re supposed to think you want the best for the Democratic Party? Suuuuure….

      sabutai   @   Fri 1 Mar 6:46 PM

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Wed 22 Oct 11:25 AM