After Brightly Colored Chart Failed To Win Waxman-Markey Fight, GOP Brings It To The Battle Over Health Reform
After a brightly colored chart failed to kill the Waxman-Markey bill, House Republicans are scrapping doubling down on the idea. They've created a new one to demonstrate just how complicated the Democrats' health care reform bill is.
Just as in the case of the Waxman-Markey chart, though, this doesn't actually explain anything. And it ironically begs the question of whether Republicans secretly want a simpler, single payer system to replace more complex reform proposals.
Responding to this latest attack with tongue in cheek, a House aide sends over a different chart--circulating among Democratic staffers--which gives the GOP's alternative health care proposal similar treatment.
As I noted yesterday, the House Republican plan chimes in at four pages and accomplishes key reform goals via a bit of hocus pocus.



















Y'know what I'd really like...a similar chart of our current system, and what someone has to go through with their healthcare.
No, wait--not a similar chart, because as you say, that chart doesn't actually describe anything. I want a flowchart with all the diamond boxes and all the NO options pointing to "Tough it out" or "Borrow $30,000 from retirement" or "Die" boxes.
July 15, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
That would be a really educational chart. Great idea.
July 15, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ask, and ye shall receive...
http://www.tnr.com/yourhealthcaresystem.html
July 15, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Possible irony alert:
Be interesting to see how Democartic Senator Specter votes this time.
July 15, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh...very pretty. I like the pastels, though not as bright as the republican chart.
Think we could get Congressman "Bone-Head" to redo his in pastels ??
C
July 15, 2009 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, well that's good, but I'm thinking something more like: Are you sick? --Yes--> Does your insurance company feel like paying for it? --No--> Does your wallet contain $30,000? --No--> Tell St. Peter we said "Hi"
July 15, 2009 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinking any Jackson Pollock painting should suffice.
July 16, 2009 2:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the Republicans don't like complex health systems, then they should support single payer or socialized medicine. Neither requires a chart to understand. Here's a chart showing the path of money in my preferred socialized system:
Rich people --> Government --> Doctors
See, very simple. Here's a chart showing the provision of health care in the same system:
Doctors --> Patients
Even a Republican should be able to understand that. Maybe.
July 15, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's interesting that, under the GNOP plan, there appears to be no money going to providers.
Well, that ought to get the AMA to sit up and take notice!
PEACE
July 15, 2009 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Republican Party: They may not have ideas, but they have Visio.
July 15, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or,
"The Republican Party - They may not have vision, but they have Visio."
July 15, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I propose the following design for a commercial airliner:
-wings
-engines
-a cockpit
-a cabin
Since my specification is so simple, it will undoubtedly work perfectly.
July 15, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
ha. indeed.
July 15, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whoops! You forgot "gas tank"! FAIL.
(I'm not knocking you, just the Republican's simplistic BS chart)
July 15, 2009 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
AAAARRRRGHHHHHH!!!!
no, it does NOT "beg the question." sorry, pet peeve of mine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question#Modern_usage
July 15, 2009 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nova Voter...rather than providing a link to a wildly verbose passage on Wikipedia that makes the otherwise laughable flow chart imminently readable, you might offer a concise remedial lesson on the usage and your pet peeve...
July 15, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
AGREE
July 16, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you.
July 15, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pet peeve: people who can't explain themselves.
July 15, 2009 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
My idiot congresswoman just sent me this chart in an email. She says she'll be offering amednments in the labor and education committee today and tomorrow but doesn't expect any to pass. I called her office to tell her to offer an amendment with a public option for medical malpractice insurance. That's as big a travesty as health insurance. a monopoly in most states (like HI) there's no correlation between actual malpractice claims and the price. Give docs a public choice and watch rates drop from six figures to about $10,000 a year.
July 15, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Return the favor by emailing her the New Republic's chart of the current system: http://www.tnr.com/yourhealthcaresystem.html. My thanks to Steaming Pile.
July 15, 2009 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get "We are sorry, the page you requested cannot be displayed." Is it behind their firewall?
July 15, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Extra dot at the end of the URL.
July 15, 2009 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone know anything about some provision in the bill the thugs are worried about which proposes that this health care legislation will cover abortions??
I am anxiously awaitng a response from anyone here at tpm - since so many of you are so knowledgeable on this subject
Thanks
July 15, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Using my amazing skills with the firefox "find" function, I have checked the house bill and found it does not contain the word "abort", and that all forms of the word "pregnant", "pregnancy" and I think all appearances of "terminate" or "termination" occurred in non-abortion related contexts.
This said, if there is a public option, it will cover abortions. That is just something health insurance providers do.
July 15, 2009 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a bogus argument that Chris Matthews brought up yesterday on his show. I was pretty pissed to hear him make such a big deal about it.
You could tell he was trying to get the republicans to use that as an argument to kill this. He brought it up over and over and over and over until I changed the station.
July 15, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you both, Mcc and Wilson. I heard Matthews going on and on about this and that is what made me curious. Thank you again. Wilson, Since you were watching Matthews yesterday did you notice he was intimating thst Sotomayor might be "hooded" and not the person she seemed to be - as if she was giving pat answers but this is not really her stance. I almost went through the roof.
This is the most qualified judge to be nominated to the bench in years. She has more experience than any of the others had when they were nominated.
I despise Chris Matthews. You notice he said that after he had said goodbye to Lawrence O'Donnell who would never have let him get away with it.
Thanks again to mcc and Wilson
July 15, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans are using Hyde amendment;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment
July 16, 2009 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know this may come as a surprise, but apparently Republicans are not really all that serious about governing. They all wanna be little Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks and play little games like this.
July 15, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Conservatives must be failed artists. They love to use color and splash it with no particular effect - sort of reminds me of when my son was in kindergarten....
July 15, 2009 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the House Republican "Plan" chart is missing one important component, the trapezoidally shaped figure which contains the words "And then a miracle occurs". Because those of you who don't have insurance are going to need a miracle to get better if the House Republicans have their way.
July 15, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who knew Frank Luntz knew how to use Adobe Illustrator?
Republicans do everything they can to hide the truth. Unfortunately for them they forget that the under-50 crowd is now visually sophisticated to know deceptive crap when they see it. The over-50 crowd, well... we just won't read it because the types too small.
July 15, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm 49 and can read the chart just fine. Expect I will when I'm 50+ also.
July 15, 2009 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have to watch this clip of Tom arnold and Sean Hannity debating issues like Sotomayor, Health care, Sarah Palin, etc. Arnold does quite well.
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2185
July 15, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
funny - i'm a business analyst -- even as obfuscated as it is, doesn't really strike me as that complicated for something of this scale...
=)
July 15, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking the exact same thing. I mean, its not pretty, and I try to clean it up a bit before giving it to my boss, but I've created things that were more 'complicated' than this. I think the staffer needs to be introduced to a less offensive color pallet.
July 15, 2009 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing I can clearly interpret from this chart: the pictured "Health Care Provider" is not a Republican.
July 15, 2009 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans seem to think that if anything is the least bit complicated it's impossible both to understand and solve. This says far more about Republicans than about either the problems or the solutions.
July 15, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any bets the House 'pubs used a pirated copy of Visio for their presentation?
PEACE
July 15, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
If only the Repubs spent as much time seriously thinking about health care as they spent on making their chart, maybe we could get somewhere. Then again...
July 15, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would like to direct you all to this link. This is a must see. It is a speech from the 60s from a man named Tommy Douglas. Apparently Douglas is one of the most beloved Canadians.
Watch the clip and tell me if you enjoyed it as much as I did and apparently lots of others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxGyPTndqms&feature=related
July 15, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean double or nothing, not double down. You double down from a position of strength, when you have 11 and the dealer shows 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6. The reason is because with these cards showing the odds are dramatically in your favor, which is rare in a casino. You go double or nothing when you got nothing to lose. And even if you win, you only get back to nothing, so you still have nothing.
July 15, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course what ever bill comes out it will depend on whether or not the Democratic Progressive Caucus will go for it.
C
July 15, 2009 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only is this chart less complicated than the org chart of most decent sized US companies (especially those with multiple vertically integrated subsidiaries and holding companies), it includes a bunch of double dipping/purposeful confusion. In no small part this is done by listing both agencies and the programs they administer For example, the CMS box above S-Chip, Medicaid and Medicare refers to the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (yes, its a weird acronym). CMS is the administrator of these programs, yet the box shows no relationship and basically triples the lines necessary to explain the situation. Lame.
July 15, 2009 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Classic example of how dumb the GOP folk think the public are.
Despite the likelihood that they've made things appear worse than they really are: to any rational human being, for a country as large as America, that is not complicated in the least.
Then again to these people Obama is a terrorist sleeper - so once again the GOP base has been accommodated.
As with the Bush years, they really seem to think that they don't represent anyone in the public who is not a member of their party or who doesn't share their political view.
July 16, 2009 2:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now, if single payer hadn't been taken off the table, imagine what that chart would look like.
I don't have the graphix skillz, but I imagine it would involve, oh, about three or four boxes.
But of course that's not on the table.
July 16, 2009 2:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
One thing that really burns me up is when I hear conservatives and Republicans ask why we are "rushing healthcare reform."
I saw some dipshit post that on CNN's site today. The fact is, we are not rushing anything, we have postponed healthcare reform for far too long and now have a true catastrophe for many Americans.
As for the GOP's cartoon chart, nice try.
SG
July 16, 2009 2:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ive heard this nonsense as well (Cornyn). I guess they've settled on this terminology so that they can say that all those years they were in power, the weren't ignoring health care reform they were slowly, thoughtfully considering it. Or maybe they're preparing the debate to begin coining Democratic Senators as "Activist" Senators.
July 16, 2009 7:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
That would be 1 page of "republican healthcare plan" per every 4 years since hillarycare. THAT IS THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION!
July 16, 2009 9:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a chart of the way our broken healthcare system works today.
http://www.tnr.com/yourhealthcaresystem.html
July 16, 2009 5:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
This chart is just a retread of the chart Dole used in 94 to respond to the SoU. GOP can't even come up with new ideas for propaganda.
July 16, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Their recycling out of concern for the environment.
July 16, 2009 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Green Old Party, eh?
July 16, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Just as in the case of the Waxman-Markey chart, though, this doesn't actually explain anything. And it ironically begs the question of whether Republicans secretly want a simpler, single payer system to replace more complex reform proposals."
Okay, read above and glimpsed the chart littered with question marks... OUCH! My stomach hurts... fell off the chair... am still cracking up. You should email above to Republicans R Us... they'd start foaming at the mouth. Sheesh... talk about chimp-baiting. Priceless.
July 16, 2009 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
They should make "IRS" bigger and scarier,
July 16, 2009 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Addendum:
Chimp-baiting (pronounced chimp + baiting): whenever you can get an elected member of the Republican party to start foaming at the mouth.
July 16, 2009 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink