Well, here we are, about a month and a half down the road of Healthcare Reform. And let's look at some of the more common complaints.
1) It's over a thousand pages long and nobody can read it in that time and it's not available for public review.
Okay, it's been running through committees (where the work actually gets done) for over a month and a half (started before July 4th), here is the House Bill (thanks to Jim Wright for the link). You will have had over a month to read it before the Senate takes it back up. Also, this is why representatives and senators have staff. It's what's called management and delegation. It would be like asking the President to read every piece of mail and email his office receives, or even that smaller percentage that gets a response (last numbers I saw was something like 8 people reading the mail, that's their full-time jobs).
My Congressman, Steven LaTourette sent me a nice email response and talked up his own bill, H.R. 956. I've not been able to find it on Thomas, so I've asked him for a link.
2) They're rushing into this.
See earlier comment of being at the month and a half stage and we've got at least another month to go. Two and a half months, while fast, is not unreasonable (considering we've been discussing this for a decade, or for those of you that haven't, the public has been engaged in this debate since it was brought up on the campaign trail over a year ago).
3) We're all going to be socialists.
Sorry, you don't understand the meaning of that word. Even if the "Public Option" ends up as last-man standing for personal insurance we are still very far from socialism. Under this new loose definition, we already are socialists and have been since the turn of the past century.
Now, if we're going to have a bill wherein all the doctors, nurses, etc are going to be government workers (as in Civil Employees where their paychecks are issued by the government) then we're talking socialism. Or if you want to argue that having everybody being insured will bring about equal access to resources for all individuals regardless of class, that is only a part of actual socialism and is more of a defining principle. Plus, then make the argument openly that you don't want people to have equal access to healthcare. Say it openly that some people shouldn't have access to medical care.
4) the "Death Panels"
If I have to dispute this idiocy once more, I think I'll institute my own eugenics program and eliminate people from the gene pool one at a time as they volunteer.
5) Rationing! and Cost!
These are actually related. One, there's nothing in these bills that I see as "rationing." This is one of those "OMG this could happen just after they start selling us Soylent Green." See this is also related to "OMG this is going to cost so much." Well, yes it will. The current numbers from the CBO peg it at about $1 Trillion over 10 years. Healthcare spending is currently $2.4 Trillion (or so) per year (here's a Kaiser Family Foundation primer, and it's expected to continue to rise and be over $3 trillion by 2012). So the government with this program, will cost a little less than 5% of the total healthcare costs (not really, because there's also Medicare and Medicaid to consider). However, we can save money on having many fewer uninsured (and underinsured) people in the system who leave hospitals and medical providers in such debt that 1) the government makes stipend payments to cover their cost (your tax dollars) on top of Medicaid payments and 2) why aspirin costs $15+ at the ER (which then costs you more in insurance premiums and in copays). So you're already paying this cost anyway.
6) We want our country back (and this is a commonly heard phrase these days)
This really isn't a complaint about the healthcare reform act, but a general feeling that people have lost something. I've been parsing this statement for the past week and have been unable to come to a conclusion about what the people are really saying here. I'm going to be generous and go with "they're upset that America wasn't as conservative as they thought it was." That's because when people answer, "Yes, I'm conservative" what they're saying (when you look at polls that actually, you know, ask more interesting questions) is that they are fiscally conservative. I would hazard a guess those wanting their country back are the social conservatives who are seeing the reigns of power slip from their hands. Again, that's the most polite interpretation. The second most polite interpretation is that their idiots who never understood civics and how their country was actually run. The others are less generous.