"Finish the Kitchen"
As told by E.J. Dionne, this is a brilliant extended metaphor for why Democrats need to pass healthcare reform. It's about Rep. Jay Inslee (D–Wash.), who lost his House seat after the failure of healthcare reform in 1994 and then won it back four years later:
He recounted all the grief he and his family went through while work on their kitchen renovation dragged on and on and on. "During that time, I had blood lust against my contractor," Inslee said. "Six months went by, and he was still arguing with the plumber. Eight months went by, and there were still wires hanging down everywhere, and he was having trouble with the building inspector."
But eventually, the job got done. "And now I love that kitchen," Inslee recalls saying. "I bake bread in that kitchen. My wife cooks great meals in that kitchen. The contractor's now a buddy of mine, and I've had beers with him in that kitchen."
Inslee looked at his colleagues and declared: "We've got to finish the kitchen." His point was that Americans won't experience any of the benefits of health-care reform until Congress puts a new system in place.
I called Inslee about his kitchen oration after Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.) told me it was one of the turning points in calming Democrats' nerves. "Now," Wu says, "people run into him in the hallway, smile and say, 'Finish the kitchen.' "
Anyone who's ever had any contracting work done understands this sentiment instantly. Likewise, everybody hates the legislative process while it's underway. But once healthcare reform becomes law, the storm will begin to blow over and everyone will start to focus instead on the real, concrete benefits of the bill and the people who made them into reality. And just to remind of you what those benefits are, here's the nickel summary again:
- Insurers have to take all comers. They can't turn you down for a preexisting condition or cut you off after you get sick or lose your job.
- Community rating. Within a few broad classes, everyone gets charged the same amount for insurance.
- A significant expansion of Medicaid.
- Subsidies for low and middle income workers that keeps premium costs under 10% of income.
- Limits on ER charges to low-income uninsured emergency patients.
- Mandates minimum levels of coverage.
- Caps on out-of-pocket expenses.
- A broad range of cost-containment measures.
- A dedicated revenue stream to support all this.
Pass the bill. And the sooner the better. It's time to have a real accomplishment under our belts, not a bunch of exposed sheetrock and arguments over when it's going to be finished.
Comments
Keep it up. Reform won't
Keep it up. Reform won't happen without continuing pressure. Another decade or more is FAR too long to wait for another chance at reform. People like me and my family will nearly immediately benefit from the expansion of coverage offered by this bill, namely the elimination of preexisting condition discrimination. Pass the damn bill.
Contractors
My favorite New Yorker cartoon of all time: two Romans walk down the street, and one says to the other, "My contractor said it would be built in a day."
Don't forget taxes for 4
Don't forget taxes for 4 years but no benefits! Don't forget being forced to buy insurance even if you don't want or need it! Anyway, it's still not going to happen. The fat lady's already on the tour bus and heading for the next town. I gotta admit though, it's getting rather amusing watching continually urge them to do something they have no interest in doing.
You really should consider
You really should consider working up some new material. We've seen this stuff too many times to laugh any more.
Uh, Another Brad,
who doesn't want or need insurance? That one's really got me stumped. The only people I can think of are the very wealthy who can pay for even catastrophic medical charges out of their piggy banks. Possibly the very poor don't want insurance because they get emergency care anyway and don't have sufficient wages to be garnered for emergency room visits. But the very poor will be subsidized under this bill for the full cost, or almost the full cost, of insurance. So it's a benefit to them after all, allowing them to get preventive care on a regular basis as well as hospitalization, etc. I don't like this bill, but it's not because I don't think people want or need it.
The Little Pet
Nepeta, I ask this of you because I know you have a Heart: Please let me speak here.
This is for my Friends. All Others, please turn away.
I have some sad news.
The Little Thing I thought was a thing which I called the writing device has died. Its life ceased by sickness which, with its last breath of life, it called "Trojan Horse". It was small and weak when it was dying but I could still hear its little voice as it screamed its anger at me because, I believe, it thought I had done something to it to cause its death.
Later I asked someone and they told me "Trojan Horse" is something similar to "Greek Horse", the false idol which caused the destruction of my ancient home. Why do they call the ancient idol "Trojan Horse" instead of "Greek Horse"? Is this some sort of mean method of insult they use to taunt and degrade those who have come before them? What is the meaning?
But to continue: When the poor, weak, Little Thing died I tried in vain to revive it. I set it in my lap and stroked it as you would a cat or puppy and spoke soothing words to it as I massaged it with my fingers again and again and again. I tried with all my might and everything I possess to make its tiny little heart beat again. I failed. I sat blank-faced in the darkness.
Finally, when I realized I could not revive it, I began to cry in the darkness. And I also realized that, once again I was alone in the darkness, crying. At first I did not understand why I was weeping over a Little Thing. I wondered, what has happened? Then, I began to remember when I first acquired The Little Thing, which I now would rather call My Little Pet. At that time, I let it sit alone for six months and did not touch it. Now I understand I was actually being cruel and neglecting Little Pet, and I am ashamed.
But then six months ago out of loneliness and boredom, I began to play with Little Pet and it responded to me and began to make me smile and want to live again. It led me to this place and showed me how to meet new Friends. It led me to The Googe and I realized I could learn again. It began to show me how to speak as others do so as not to appear stupid in front of others. It also educated me, by teaching me that, although so much time has passed, there are still Evil People, big and small, everywhere, and I must be cautious.
Little Pet was my companion, guide and teacher and gave me joy and so much so that I could not sleep and stayed awake through the night sending missives to this place, The Mother Jones, and waiting for others to return theirs' to me. After realizing these things, I felt stupid and ashamed and now, again, I feel very, very lonely and sad. Too late, I have realized I loved Little Pet.
When I stopped weeping, after about one hour, I realized I would have to give it a burial, whether in the ground or on a bier or with Fire. It is not only a tool but it had a life as well and deserved Respect and even Honor, even though I stupidly gave it none. Now I repent and try to redeem myself.
But I know that I can not bury my Little Pet because It was a living creature not really just a thing, and after that It will travel to the next world outside this place and to enter into the next place it will have to have a Name to announce itself with and to be Honored by. But I was so simple in my mind and experience, I neglected to give it a name. But I owe It much and do not want to dishonor It anymore. I want to honor my Little Pet, even if only at Its death. It helped me to find my new Friends and to find Knowledge and, in a way, It even protected me from Evil Ones.
Please help me. I am in such a state of grief, I can not think. I can barely see through my teary, wet, misty eyes right now. What Name should I give It so it has a Beautiful Name to announce when It enters the next place, which I am certain will be a better and more valuable and more desirable place than the one I am in now?
New Friends, Please forgive me and please help me.
(Especially to you, Nepeta. Thank You for allowing this interruption)
Right! It's just like the
Right! It's just like the time I decided to invest my retirement in Enron. I had some bad results, but I've stuck with the strategy and I just have five more years to retirement. I can't quit now, because then I'll have wasted all my money. I have contemplated diversifying into pets.com
Inslee sounds a lot like my
Inslee sounds a lot like my gardener.
As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.
In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.
Finish the kitchen.
Is there a TV upstairs? I like to watch.
Do you know Raphael?
now get this, honky...
You go tell Rafael that I ain't taking no jive from no Western Union messenger.
Some factual issues
Jay Inslee did not win his seat back in Congress. Inslee lost the 4th District in generally Republican Eastern Washington to Doc Hastings (whom Inslee narrowly defeated two years earlier in the Democratic tide of 1992). The largest issue in the 1994 race was Inslee's support for the assault weapons ban -- insufficient support for gun rights is the kiss of death in Eastern Washington.
Four years later successfully won the 1st District in generally Democratic Western Washington by defeating Republican Rick White (who had unseated now-Senator Maria Cantwell in 1994). Inslee was able to overcome the carpet bagger label because Rick White was too conservative for the district, outrage over the impeachment of Bill Clinton, and a third party paleo-conservative candidate.
no carpetbagging required
Inslee was able to overcome the "carpetbagger label" because he grew up in that district, where he was a popular high school sports star, and his parents still lived in the district in the house he grew up in.
I know this because I voted for him in 1992 and 1994 and moved across the state coincidentally in 1996. I was at the news conference when he announced his campaign, with Maria Cantwell by his side, in 1998.
Go, Jay, Finish the Kitchen!!
Jay was also helped out in
Jay was also helped out in winning the 1st district, in that Rick White had won the seat running as a expert on "family" and promptly went through an ugly divorce. Typical Republican hipocrit; still Jay deserved to win on his own merits.
Re eastern Washington, when they voted Tom Foley out in 1994, they were surprised that their new guy didn't get to be Speaker of the House.
I was at the District
I was at the District convention in '92. A bunch of Democrats were sitting around for hours and no one had brought food. Then Inslee showed up with sandwiches. He won handily over a pretty awesome guy, though I can no longer remember his opponent's name.
BTW, Foley for Nethercutt, and anyone for Doc Hastings have got to be some of the stupidest trades in electoral history.
Can we do the bathroom next?
Can we do the bathroom next? Have you seen it? It's disgusting!
Pass the damn bill (Nancy)
Pass the damn bill (Nancy) and at the same time pass the amending bill that makes the changes the House wants (with a good chance of majority Senate acceptance) for majority reconciliation vote in Senate. That way, the House members are on record for what they voted for, and the House can put all the pressure on the Senate (and any recalcitrant members of the administration staff). The changes you want will all be popular changes, and continuing public pressure will force the majority to live up to their public commitments.
Just do it. You're a bunch of adults, and an independent body, and you have the perfect right to do what you want without the President's permission and without prior commitment from the Senate majority. If you show the strength to stand up on your own two feet without waiting for hand-holding that may never come, it will only enhance your image of toughness and courage and work to your political advantage. And remember: the people on both sides who think they are so adamant against the Senate bill do not know what's actually in it. Everything they've heard about a "government takeover" or "a sell-out to the insurance industry" comes second or third hand from people with an ax to grind. Starting with a dedicated explanation by the President as he signs of what's actually in it and why, and what's not in it and why not -- probably a 10-15 minute segment -- there will be 9 months for Americans to learn they need to thank the Democrats and despise the Republicans.
But, but, but...
It won't be a perfect kitchen! The plumber is getting paid too much! Let's eat worms until it looks like Martha Stewart's kitchen!
the kitchen was designed to prepare worms for Americans
The kitchen as health insurance reform would not be designed by or for the users, but by and for the cabinet makers, appliance manufacturers, plumbers and electricians. The kitchen was designed to prepare worms to be fed to the people who have to pay for it.
One more bullet point
I think the "must allow adult children up to 27 yrs. old to stay on parents' policy" feature deserves to be on your list.
There's a good number of well-insured parents with kids recently (or soon to be) out of college who'll get a lot of comfort from that. That's is a demographic that might not otherwise see anything in the bill for them, but likely to get vocal if they see it slipping away...
"adult children"?? "up to 27
"adult children"??
"up to 27 years old"??
Eeew.
Have you read anything about the state of our colleges?
The description "adult children" is an apt one.
I'm rather amazed that the
I'm rather amazed that the contractor/kitchen analogy would take off, considering how easy it is to take it in a very different direction.
How about a contractor who comes to remodel a kitchen and the project goes several times over budget, damaging personal finances beyond repair, and sucking away a good portion of one's retirement? How about that kitchen has all sorts of defects, with shorting appliances and cabinets that never fit, plumbing that leaks, and structural defects that can't pass inspection? How about law suits over the work that go on endlessly, and turn out badly for the homeowner, because the contractor goes out of business? How about one regrets the day that one ever signed up the contractor to do the job, because one's life was forever altered for the worse?
Do you and Mr. Pollyanna Dionne really believe that such things simply don't occur -- when we all know that they do -- and all we need to do is clap our hands loud enough and things simply must turn out great?
Quoting yourself...
"...And with that pent up demand, and, hopefully, political leaders on the left who are savvy enough and courageous enough to tap into that demand, a genuinely good (not perfect) bill might be brought into being."
Might? Hopefully? If that's not the definition of hopey, changey, pollyanna thinking, I don't know what is. If you're the pot, it's not a good idea to call the kettle black.
I'm just amazed at your preoccupation with political calculations and the fortunes of Democrats and your apparent unconcern for the lives of real people.
And with this bill we see the
And with this bill we see the biggest triumph in history for the theory of ideological diversion. What does US society want: health CARE not health INSURANCE. Yet by creating this massively detailed debate about the minutiae of health INSURANCE the money classes have been able to completely avoid any discussion of the actual issue of health CARE. At the end of the day, is there any damn thing in this bill that actually addresses the primary problem with US healthcare --- that it costs twice as much as the rest of the civilized world and delivers half as much? No there is not --- there are a few hopeful provisions that have pretty much zero relationship to the real problems. Meanwhile, if this bill passes the US embraces the toxic tarball of dealing with health insurers for the rest of our lives. Yeah yeah, I've seen all the happy talk about how the bill secretly means that insurers will become bankrupt over the next twenty years --- yeah right.
Meanwhile the rest of the world has perfectly sensible models for how to handle healthcare which the US can't use because economics works differently in America or something.
I'm sorry, supporting this bill show the fine political judgement that had people like Kevin Drum cheering on the idea to attack Afghanistan with both barrels on 9/12. How well did that work out --- handling what should have been a police matter via the military? This bill sucks, and with luck the Dem's political incompetence will be to our advantage if they can't pass it.
You sound an awful lot like
You sound an awful lot like my insurance company, which just notified their individually insured (that's me!) that rates are being hiked 30-39%. Here's what Anthem Blue Cross California replied when Cali & fed raised a stink:
"We regret the impact this has on our members," it said of its rate hikes. "It highlights why we need sustainable healthcare reform to manage the steadily rising costs of hospitals, drugs and doctors. As such, it is important to go back to the beginning and get healthcare reform done right."
Yeah. right. Pardon me if I don't trust these bleeders, who somehow neglected to pass on to their "members" any of the record breaking profits their parent company made last quarter.
So. Pass the health insurance reform bill we've got.
And then fix the cost issues.
Here's where the quote came
Here's where the quote came from:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-fi-anthem-obama9-2010feb09,0,4...
It's pretty clear this action
It's pretty clear this action is an attempt to blackmail congress & I think we should call their bluff.
How does that follow?
You don't trust health insurers; therefore, the bill passed by their minions in the Senate must become law? Your gullibility is ridiculous.
Not at all.
She's not gullible, she's not ridiculous; she just sees an improvement in her situation from passing this bill. Is that a problem? Can you not grasp the notion that you can find this bill underwhelming, that health insurance companies are hateful, yet that this bill will actually improve health insurance and health care for actual, real human beings? More than one thing can be true at the same time.
"More than one thing can be true at the same time."
Yeah, the Republocrats could be pissing on us AND it could be raining.
You dance with the healthcare
You dance with the healthcare that brung you.
Just for the record, I wonder what kind of insurance you have.
I'm individually insured. That's in the minority in our current insurance system. I've got no power & no group to bond with to get power. I actually cried when I first heard of this 39% hike and didn't open the letter for almost a week.
I won't bore you with details of how shitty our self-employed business is doing now AND how, even before the hike, our insurance takes almost half of our current income. (BTW, that half doesn't include actually getting medical care, which, with high deductible blah blah)
I want a collective exchange. I want friends who've lost their jobs & their insurance & can't get insurance or now can't afford the insurance they can get to have insurance. I want a little piece of mind.
People are mixing up two issues. Health insurance & cost. Of course they're related, but -- come on.
Just for the record, I wonder what kind of insurance you have.
Diet and excercise, and the county ER.
The current and likely "reforms" are actually anti-reforms: they will make the situation worse. Subsequent legislative and regulatory fine tuning will most likely be even more corrupted than the far more publicized legislative process that produced the current and likely bills. This is not even close to anything worth supporting.
Yeah, but I bet his kitchen
Yeah, but I bet his kitchen plans did not take over 2000 pages. Seriously, how do you think you are going to pass something beneficial to the consumer that is this long. Go back to the drawing board. This is a failure.
Long things bad, short
Long things bad, short good.
Proposed bil: Kill everyone.
Short and sweet.
Should it fit on the palm of your hand?
Ask the Goddess Sarah about simplifying it for you.
Sorry but no. It is a bad
Sorry but no. It is a bad bill. Everyone knows the details, and a huge majority of voters is firmly opposed. We will not someday understand that we were wrong. We already understand that the Democrats want to steal from one struggling middle class person to subsidize another middle class person because they are too corrupt to pass anything that costs insurance companies or pharmaceutical companies anything. We already know that elitists like Kevin are happy with an arrangement like this because they know best how we should spend our money. Just shut up already. Come back and ask again when you have a plan that is funded fairly.
Pass the bill. Most
Pass the bill. Most Americans support the features in it - the others wouldn't support a Democratic proposal if you paid them. And I'm convinced that the ones who just flip the whole effort off are still healthy. That will change, it always does, and then they'll need more than the current system is willing to afford them.
The assumption that the bill
The assumption that the bill will be fixed later strikes me as unrealistic in one key sense.
One of the problems people have with the bill (people from the left) is that it was customized to favor Big Pharma and the other corporate healthcare players. This means that the cost-controls are weak (no public option) and that the bill will become part of the real long-term cost-inflation problem which everyone admits we already have (I don't mean the phony Pete Peterson deficit crisis.)
So fixing the bill will require confronting the big interests sometime down the road -- what we have failed to do now.
This is my point: I don't remember things ever moving in that direction. As far as I know the characteristic pattern is for a bill to be passed, and then to be amended to death afterwards by corporate interests in subsequent years. In other words, if you don't win these battles in the beginning, you don't win them later either.
Yes, bills are often improved later on. But are they ever improved in a way opposed by the corporate interests that wrote the problems in at the beginning? It's my feeling that they aren't, but I might be convinced.
For a long time the Democratic party has had a corporate liberal wing which holds that these battles are unnecessary -- it can be win-win, corporations benefit and the people do to. (Not just the DLC, this goes all the way back to the immediate post-WWII era). This plan worked for awhile, but it stopped working 20-30 years ago and no one in the Democratic machine wants to change anything in it bucks there's tons of money in it. (Obama got the Wall Street $$$ in 2008).
I'd probably vote for the bill when the chips were down if I thought that it was better than nothing as it stood. I wouldn't vote for it in the expectation of major later improvements, though, because the Democrats seem too lame to do anything. (Obama is still reaching out to the Republicans. Can someone explain that to me).
I think you're certainly
I think you're certainly right as to the general tendencies of legislation to be "fixed" in the direction of corporate interests.
Of course, the situation in this case would be far worse, I think: the legislation has every good prospect of becoming an albatross around the neck of Democrats and reform in general. If it fails to curtail costs as advertised -- and almost certainly it will so fail -- how will that failure possibly be turned in the eye of the public into a reason to go further along the path of reform, rather than to dismantle what will be seen as a Frankenstein monster? What kind of credibility will the so-called left have after pushing this POS into the world and claiming it's going to solve our problems?
The idea that we can just "fix the problems" later has always struck me as a simply breathtaking leap. If we can't "fix the problems" in advance, today, when every political force is as favorable to reform as it might possibly be -- after an historic election and an overwhelming demand for change against right wing policies -- how can we possibly expect to do so when things turn sour politically, and the "reform" package itself starts to fail?
At least if we don't pass the bill, the pent up need for reform continues to build up, and government regulation and law is seen as the potential solution, and not itself part of the problem.
And with that pent up demand, and, hopefully, political leaders on the left who are savvy enough and courageous enough to tap into that demand, a genuinely good (not perfect) bill might be brought into being.
The fantasy continues.
1) Kill this bill
2) Magic happens
3) The right bill passes
You find it a "breathtaking leap" to think problems can be fixed later. But apparently it's logical that "pent up demand" and my favorite, "political leaders on the left who are savvy enough and courageous enough", will somehow make a entirely different and better bill happen later. Incremental change requires a breathtaking leap, but a complete and total restructuring of the health care and health insurance industries is a reasonable expectation?
Look, after, "...after an historic election and an overwhelming demand for change against right wing policies..." all we got was this bill, with all its faults. Right? But later, when the unspecified magic happens, when all those yet-to-be-found, savvy and courageous progressive leaders channel the will of the pent up masses, we'll get real progress?
Meanwhile, back on planet earth, real people will not coverage they would if this bill passes, real people will get sick, real people will die. I'm sure they will be grateful to know they are part of creating pent up demand.
Yeah, nothing will ever happen...
...unless you suck for a good, long time.
If you always take what they give you, what are they going to give you?
The only reason a good bill is not possible is that so many people are willing to settle for a bad one.
This list is incomplete and
This list is incomplete and unacceptable to real progressives because it has no limits on profiteering by insurance companies and other industries, and thus no limit on total costs. There is a provision for a "dedicated revenue stream" but no restrictions on where it will come from - what would prevent Congress from getting the money from another regressive payroll tax?
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
