<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Health Reform Now</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.mecep.org/2010/01/health-reform-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.mecep.org/2010/01/health-reform-now/</link>
	<description>From the State House to Your House, the Official Blog of the Maine Center for Economic Policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:38:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: united health care</title>
		<link>http://blog.mecep.org/2010/01/health-reform-now/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>united health care</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mecep.org/?p=17#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Can we drop the silly catchphrases? &quot;Big Government Takeover of Health Care&quot; is a little tired. Not to mention it provides ZERO information about the bill, one way or another. It may have held some sway when the public option was included (it isn&#039;t now, soooo...), but even then the soundbite contained ambiguities that cater to inaccuracy.  Republicans better know how to convince the &quot;Average Joe&quot; (read: politically infantile) onto their side of the line. The Dems do it to, but I dare say their constituency demands more substantial content than does the opposition.  Start over? So they can obstruct THIS bill for 9 months and claim the congress (funny, they are part of it)is do-nothing? That&#039;s classic carrot on a stick.  The whole debate has been how to fund the senate bill, not the provisions it ACTUALLY provides. Jeez. 6 years ago we would have passed it unfunded and the public wouldn&#039;t know squat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can we drop the silly catchphrases? &#8220;Big Government Takeover of Health Care&#8221; is a little tired. Not to mention it provides ZERO information about the bill, one way or another. It may have held some sway when the public option was included (it isn&#8217;t now, soooo&#8230;), but even then the soundbite contained ambiguities that cater to inaccuracy.  Republicans better know how to convince the &#8220;Average Joe&#8221; (read: politically infantile) onto their side of the line. The Dems do it to, but I dare say their constituency demands more substantial content than does the opposition.  Start over? So they can obstruct THIS bill for 9 months and claim the congress (funny, they are part of it)is do-nothing? That&#8217;s classic carrot on a stick.  The whole debate has been how to fund the senate bill, not the provisions it ACTUALLY provides. Jeez. 6 years ago we would have passed it unfunded and the public wouldn&#8217;t know squat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
