No, we do not...

…have “universal health care.” We have done a very good thing in extending the ability to procure health insurance to people who were previously unable to do so, but we do not even have “universal health insurance” with this new legislation. Even according to supporters of the bill, some 12 million legal residents of this nation will be too poor to purchase insurance, even with the subsidies, and they will remain without access to decent health care.

To obtain actual health care, even those with insurance will still be subject to copays and deductibles. This “reform” does nothing about those other than cap them at about $5600/year, there are no subsidies to cover them, so some people will be purchasing health insurance which they will not be able to afford to use.

This bill will not “insure 32 million people.” I do not know the numbers, but it will allow some of those people to purchase insurance who want to do so but have not been able to, and it will force others to purchase insurance who have not done so because they don’t want to. That may be necessary, may even be a good thing, but let’s be honest about what reform actually does.

This bill will not “ensure that you have insurance if you lose your job.” It will ensure that you can purchase insurance if you lose your job, just when you have no money, because you just lost your job. Once again, this is a feature worth having, but let’s be honest about what it is.

I don't happen to believe that the "public option" would have been quite the panacea that it was touted to be, but leaving it out of this legislation was a craven act.

Democrats are cheering themselves about their “historic legislation” and their “great victory.” I am glad we did something, but I’m not applauding what we did. I am disgusted with the president and the legislators I voted for because they took a full year to cobble together a bill that benefits so few people in such a diluted manner. They had the mandate and the opportunity to do so much more, and they failed.