Obama won’t give up his lost health crusade
Barack Obama as Indiana Jones? Allow me to explain.
At the end of the trilogy starring Harrison Ford (let’s pretend moviegoers were never subjected to “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”), the swashbuckling archaeologist discovers the holy grail of holy grails: the actual cup of Christ.
But things go badly wrong and Jones soon finds himself suspended over a bottomless chasm, with one arm reaching desperately for the grail. The other is being held tenuously by his father, who wisely counsels him: “Let it go.”
If only the elder Jones could pay a visit to the White House.
Today is the big “bipartisan” health care meeting at which President Obama has agreed to hear Republicans’ ideas if they will just sign on to his latest health proposal, which is all of three days old and has yet to be scrutinized by the usual independent agents.
That’s the upshot of the meeting, anyway. Ever since Obama smoked a disorganized House Republican caucus at their televised debate in Baltimore last month, the administration has longed for a chance to repeat that very public schooling and regain the political high ground on health care.
Oh, the president claims to have included some conservative ideas in his plan. And it’s true that some of the lesser, unobjectionable ones are in there. For instance, the White House cites the “use of technology for real-time data review” as one GOP idea it’s adopted.
The alternative, one supposes, is to review data in real time without using technology.
Just kidding. But do data reviews, or tougher penalties for Medicare/Medicaid fraudsters, or “mechanisms to improve quality,” really qualify as meeting the GOP halfway?
Are these really compromises from Democrats? Ones that merit the support of Republicans — not to mention the majority of Americans who oppose Democrats’ various health proposals — for such sea changes as letting Washington bureaucrats control the prices of private health insurance plans, as Obama now wants to do?
The annals of price controls are, after all, littered with tales of success. Just ask Richard Nixon. Or Mikhail Gorbachev.
Like Indiana Jones’ outstretched arm, President Obama’s summit is a last attempt to grasp the oh-so-close liberal dream of a middle-class health entitlement. The public option is not listed in the plan, but its creation will be a fait accompli once private insurance plans are transformed into utilities whose every move requires Washington’s approval.
Competition will decrease once the feds can dictate what insurers have to cover and force their premiums into the narrow band between a government cap and unprofitability.
Americans might not trust insurance executives any more than they do politicians and bureaucrats, but the execs’ standing will fall even further once they have to answer for the decisions that politicians and bureaucrats make.
Liberals still carping that Obama abandoned the public option either understand this and are just posturing, or they’re blinded by ideology.
Even if the latest health overhaul goes down in flames — and there are legitimate questions about whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi can muster a majority for Obama’s proposal — health reform is not going to disappear for 15 years as it did after Bill Clinton’s reform failure. Should Republicans regain power, they can’t ignore this issue. GOP leaders appear to understand this.
A truly bipartisan approach would be to start from scratch and begin with the handful of smaller items that most people agree on, before moving on to more contentious measures.
It’s the left’s denial of this reality that has turned its “Last Crusade” into a “Temple of Doom.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
149 comments Add your comment
Hannity is Always Wrong
February 24th, 2010
9:39 pm
Bipartisanship? Who needs bipartisanship after eight years of the 51% President. The Republicans LOST. Their job is to help the President govern the country, not to obstruct every single thing he says. Republicans can ignore anything except tax cuts for the wealthy and gutting every federal regulatory agency they can get their greedy hands on. In fact, they do ignore anything except tax cuts for the wealthy and gutting every federal regulatory agency they can get their greedy hands on. Oh yeah – and flag waving – lots and lots of flag waving. Now that’s leadership.
Ed
February 24th, 2010
9:40 pm
Obama, just let it go! The people can’t even comprehend the amount of debt we are taking on, and we’ve got to stop the spending. I know it must be enjoyable to spend other people’s money, but just understand all this debt has to be paid sometime in the future. The government just needs to get out of the way and let free enterprise work, which of course liberals don’t believe will happen.
StJ
February 24th, 2010
10:12 pm
“Free enterprise” is blasphemy to Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and their ilk. The real objective here is *government control* and the resultant lock on power it will create. After all, who’s going to bite the hand that feeds them by voting against the people who are giving them more entitlements? (Especially in a climate where jobs are scarce, and jobs with good pay and benefits are scarcer still, for those who even want to work in the first place.)
This is the most anti-business, anti-freedom administration ever to assume power in the history of this country…bar none.
LA
February 24th, 2010
10:29 pm
“Barack Obama as Indiana Jones?”
But Indiana Jones actually had experience.
LA
February 24th, 2010
10:31 pm
Patients ‘routinely neglected’ at NHS hospital where hundreds died in squalor
Not a single official has been disciplined over the worst-ever NHS hospital scandal, it emerged last night.
Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253438/Mid-Staffordshire-NHS-hospital-routinely-neglected-patients.html#ixzz0gW0vXvwf
LA
February 24th, 2010
10:32 pm
More socialist government health care……
Stafford Hospital caused ‘unimaginable suffering’
Patients were routinely neglected or left “sobbing and humiliated” by staff at an NHS trust where at least 400 deaths have been linked to appalling care.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article7039285.ece
LA
February 24th, 2010
10:32 pm
Pa. abortion doctor’s license suspended after raid
Federal agents raided a clinic where abortions are performed and found “deplorable and unsanitary” conditions, including blood on the floor and parts of aborted fetuses in jars, according to the state agency that shut it down and suspended the license of the doctor in charge.
In the order suspending Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s license, the Pennsylvania Department of State’s Board of Medicine said investigators found numerous health and safety risks at Gosnell’s abortion and pain-management clinic, including a preoperative and recovery area that consisted of several recliners grouped together.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100224/D9E28RNO0.html
LA
February 24th, 2010
10:34 pm
Kyle, is it just me or do you also think that Obama is committing suicide for the democrat party?
The American People
February 24th, 2010
10:58 pm
Obama is awful! Down with Dems in 2K10!!
Allen
February 24th, 2010
11:33 pm
Kyle, I simply don’t understand how the portrayal of Democrats as hanging from a cliff squares with legislative reality. At this time, the House can simply pass the Senate bill into law. The door is wide open. (Whether the Dems can walk through is an open question)
The unpopularity of the bill seems to be a large concern for you. It appears, then, that you have an argument against representative government. When public support turned against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or polls showed that people would prefer the Bush tax cuts be devoted to deficit reduction, should the Congress have acquiesced? Public opinion is important, but I would deem this position radical.
And I’m not sure I’d grant the premise (reform = unpopular) as quite so axiomatic in the first place.
Audrey in Georgia
February 25th, 2010
12:24 am
Start over and start from scratch is what slow learners, quitters and republicans want.
Democrats stay in the game, stay the course and keep fighting to get health care reform done.
Joel Edge
February 25th, 2010
6:23 am
I was under the impression that the legal requirement for everyone to buy insurance would lower the costs. Why the price controls?
Independent
February 25th, 2010
6:38 am
Hannity is always wrong…there was an unfortunate death at Seaworld due to a killer whale. In your narrow world of Dems and Obama, perhaps you should propose a federal agency for Animal Trainers and Wild Species Held in Captivity. You could regulate which animals can be held captive and the training of the trainers. You could unionize both the animals and the trainers. All government is good, bigger government is better, complete government control is best.
Gerald West
February 25th, 2010
7:04 am
Kyle, your article demonstrates the muddled thinking that clouds every attempt to bring reason and order to the American health care mess. Much of the muddle is deliberately and expensively induced by the special interest lobbies and Fox-style media propagandists. Some of the muddle is political partisanship. Some of the muddle is just the natural reluctance of people to change the status quo. Your article, replete with metaphors and petty partisanship, contributes to rather than clarifies the muddle.
Consider the basics! The US is the only developed country that does not have universal health care. We are first in health care costs (16% GDP vs 9% in France, 7% in the UK, for example). We are dead last, way down with the developing countries, in results measured by life expectancy and child mortality. Studies and rankings of overall health care and comparisons among various population segments confirm our last-place ranking in results.
Consider why the US pays too much for too little results! The administrative costs of health care are 30-50% for private health insurers and their networks, 6% for Medicare and HMOs.
The obvious solution is to relieve private insurers of their role as burdensome middlemen between patients and health care providers, and relegate them to the health care duties for which they are qualified: offering supplementary insurance coverage to those who can afford it, and performing the clerical functions of eligibility confirmation and claims processing under competitively bid contracts to health care enablers like Medicare.
Most of the muddled thinking is due to the mistaken, deliberately fostered, notion that insurers provide health care in a competitive market. Health care insurers do not provide health care: doctors, nurses, medical technicians, clinics, and hospitals provide health care. Blue Cross and United Health Care couldn’t cure a hang nail between them. Health care insurers ration health care according to ability to pay, health history, procedure pre-approval, claims rejections, and lifetime limits. They limit choice of providers by setting up networks of preferred providers. There is no competitive market for health care rationing because it is a service that no one wishes to pay for; economists refer to the situation as “market failure”.
When everyone has health care coverage there is no need for rationing. The services of insurance companies can be moved from health care decision-making to health care clerical functions. Patients can then choose freely between competing health care providers in a free market.
Don’t blame President Obama for the muddle in health care: he has no legislative powers, and no human should be expected to reform the dysfunctional Congress. The President started the health care attempt with the right objectives: coverage for everyone and a public option as the timid first step toward removing the front-end obstructions (insurance providers) between Americans and health care providers. The House and Senate drafts of health care legislation are hopeless tomes of more than 1,000 pages each, which Congressmen and the President will never bother to read. The Republican “proposals” protect the interests of the culprits in the unsustainable health care mess.
There is a way to address health care without getting bound up in fractious partisanship and 1,000+ page laws. A mere 5 pages of legislation enabled the best health care system in the world, bar none; unfortunately, it’s in French!
Keep up the good fight!
February 25th, 2010
7:44 am
Really an inane piece of writing. “Competition will decrease once the feds can dictate what insurers have to cover and force their premiums into the narrow band between a government cap and unprofitability.” Competition in an industry that is exempt from antitrust laws? Go slow while insurance companies are raising rates 70% or more? Go slow while people are subjected to insurance company death panels or denied coverage? Go slow while Americans have no coverage? The Repugs have had months to have some input not to achieve their delay goals for their perceived political gains at the expense of the majority of Americans who want reform and the public option. Not even worth my time to address what i cannot believe is from your ignorance and therefore must be either stupidity or intent to deceive and misinform. Shame on you!
Morrus
February 25th, 2010
8:08 am
Vote out the incumbents and start over
John
February 25th, 2010
8:11 am
Kyle:
Two points:
The Obama Administration appears to be hell-bent in giving up democrat majorities in Congress.
By allowing Congress to write this terribly flawed health care reform legislation and then having republicans successfully demonize any form of health care reform, moderate democrats will most likely face a beating this fall that will possible give back control of Congress to republicans.
So…..after finally conceding that republicans were winning the political debate on health care reform, how did the administration respond in relation to helping democats in Congress? By jumping on a couple of other “real winners” for moderate democrats in Congress – repeal of “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” and continuing to give republicans more political play in relation to court appearances and rights of terrorists.
If republicans can take back Congress this fall (or even come close)the Administration will have no one to blame other than itself, the Speaker and Majority Leader.
The other point – with republicans sensing “blood in the water” over the winning issue of denying health care reform, who in their right mind would expect them to give up this winning issue by actually working with democrats on this issue? Who are these idiots advising President Obama and why is he listening to them?
Don’t get me wrong – with the takeover of the republican party by the radical right wing fringe, they no longer offer a viable alternative for me. I also understand that both sides’ first priority is winning elections rather than helping our Grand Republic.
Even the inept Bush Administration had a smarter game plan when first elected. After being appointed by the Supreme Court and losing the popular vote, the Bush Administration picked a winning bipartisan issue (education) coming out of the gate. Say what you will about No Child Left Behind, the legislation gave President Bush an opportunity to at least begin with some sort of bipartisan reality – something the Obama Adminstration either cares little about or is inept in achieving.
Mr. Helper
February 25th, 2010
8:15 am
I think President Obama would start making better decisions if he would get back together with his former lover and drug-use partner Larry Sinclair.
Matt the Brave
February 25th, 2010
8:16 am
I’m so sick and tired of stupid democraps saying that the Republicans need to help the president. By that logic, why didn’t you help Bush II? Or for that matter, Bush I or Reagan? Oh, but that’s right, you have no logic. You just get led around by your leash by whatever the ghost of Ted Kennedy says and you believe it as your gospel because anyone who might be a Christian certainly would be so stupid that they wouldn’t believe in something that would lead our country into turmoil and hatred.
Horrible Horrace
February 25th, 2010
8:41 am
Help Barry? Help him what exactly? No one wants to be associated with failure.
cranky old man
February 25th, 2010
8:44 am
I understand the Republicans’ desire to leave everything to the free market, as it usually proves to be a more efficient system. But health care doesn’t quite fit the mold. Competition only works to reduce costs and create better products if companies have an incentive to grab every customer they possibly can. But that is not true in health care. The incentives are all screwed up.
Health insurers DO want as many HEALTHY customers as they can grab, but they do everything they legally (and sometimes illegally) can get away with to avoid insuring unhealthy customers. And, given that their primary mission is to turn a profit, you can’t really expect them to act differently. Part of the blame goes to consumers, who will typically avoid buying health insurance while they are healthy, and then complain bitterly when they become sick and it’s too late to buy into the system. But you can’t put all the blame on them either, because many of them cannot possibly afford the outrageously high premiums, especially when they are young and healthy and at the lower end of their earning potential. Many others had insurance through their employers, but lost it when they lost their jobs. Still others paid into the system for years while they were healthy, only to see their premiums jump to unaffordable levels when they became sick.
Presidential Material
February 25th, 2010
8:44 am
Grading Kyle: C+
It’s very popular to use movie references in essays now. The trick is to pick the right one. Otherwise, your piece goes all Police Academy 6, like this critique just just did. (D’oh!)
Obama’s insistance on escorting this dead horse into another round of hearings is more like “Weekend at Bernies”. (are those prescription sun glasses?)
‘muff said.
JF McNamara
February 25th, 2010
8:46 am
Matt the Brave,
Legislation got passed when both Bushes and Reagan were in office. The Democrats held the house during I believe all but two years of Bush 2. Am I missing how they didn’t help? They just didn’t give Carte Blanche to Republicans. Republicans shouldn’t give Carte Blanche either, but all Republicans shouldn’t be against everything since most have moderate constituencies. What they are doing is just playing Partisan games and its not productive.
This is probably good for the country. The Republicans hold a propaganda edge, and the President needs to address some of the pure dumb ideas that Republican hold. Negotiation on both sides might mean this is not a lost cause and American can win in the end.
Peadawg
February 25th, 2010
8:50 am
“heir job is to help the President govern the country, not to obstruct every single thing he says. ”
waaaah the wepublicans did this the wepublicans did that. The Democrats have had a year w/ enough votes to pass this and they didn’t. I know taking responsibility is hard for you Democrats….
Horrible Horrace
February 25th, 2010
8:55 am
Pelosi and crew appear not to have enough votes for passage. LOL.
Obobo just keeps wasting our time instead of governing the Country.
Barry should resign.
jmoss
February 25th, 2010
9:00 am
I’m a conservative, and I disagree on how the previous health care plans have been devised in secret. I’m even more disappointed that the republican party has no real plan. As a small business owner, I need the government to provide the public option so that I don’t have to pay for it. It’s not my responsibility from what I can tell. We’re calling Obama a socialist out of one side of our mouth and fighting for Social Security and Medicare (which are socialist programs to me). I don’t trust any of these guys.
Citizen of the World
February 25th, 2010
9:13 am
I wish the AJC had some mechanism like the the online New York Times whereby blog readers could “recommend” a certain post. I’d recommend Gerald West @ 7:04. Everything he said was right on.
LibraryJim
February 25th, 2010
9:14 am
Jmoss, why do you say the Republicans have no real plan? From what I see they have 70 bills they have been trying to introduce, only to be shut out of the process.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
9:16 am
Allen, it’s not as simple as the House simply passing the Senate bill. The House bill passed 220-215. Since then, one “yes” vote has died (Murtha), one has resigned (Wexler), and another (Abercrombie) reportedly will resign Sunday to run for governor of Hawaii. So they’re at 217-215. The only Republican to vote for the House bill, Joseph Cao, says he won’t vote for the Senate bill. So it’s 216-216.
So it all depends on people changing their votes. Right now, it appears the people most likely to switch are the 10-12 anti-abortion Democrats for whom Rep. Bart Stupak claims to speak. And he’s indicating they won’t support the Senate bill. So Pelosi has to find at least 10-12 “no” votes who like the Senate version better.
Could that happen? I suppose so. But it seems an awfully risky tack for Obama to take at this point, because if the House were to vote down the Senate bill or just fail to take it up, that would be a huge blow. Thus, my hanging above the abyss metaphor.
As for my being against representative government: Certainly not. But the government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed, and after a months-long debate with as much or more public input as there’s ever been, it’s clear there is no consent for the present course of action on health care.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:23 am
“Democrats stay in the game, stay the course and keep fighting to get health care reform done’
YES!!!!! Please stay the course democrats! Do the EXACT opposite of what America wants!
YES WE CAN….oh wait….hey where’s everyone going?
Tyler Durden
February 25th, 2010
9:24 am
Wow. Hard to even justify reading Kyle anymmore. Apart from the odd departure (which is refeshing but oh too seldom), you just regurgitate GOP talking points and deflect any attempt at real debate from posters. If we wanted another angle from the echo chamber, why not just stick with Wooten?
Once again: if you get your news from Fox or someone talking on the radio, it’s not facts: it’s hyperbole for entertainment. And if your heroes can’t survive an encounter with ANYONE outside of their political persuasion (AKA actually debate and defend their points in public), then are they really heroes?
As usual: the GOP will never let a fact get in the way of ideology…
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
9:25 am
I’m sorry, Gerald West, but it’s not “obvious” to me that the solution for spending more on health care with lesser outcomes is to insulate patients further from the cost of health care.
And I’d like you to point to even one person — much less a constituency representing “most of the muddled thinking” — who thinks health insurance is the same thing as health care.
“When everyone has health coverage there is no need for rationing.” Huh? You just talked about the distinction between coverage and care…now you’re saying that adding coverage — i.e. increasing demand — on its own will result in endless supply?
There will always be rationing of any scarce resource; the question is, who does the rationing? Letting a public bureaucracy make the decisions doesn’t strike me as an improvement over letting a private one do the job. What we have to do is put people in the position to make their own choices about which health care they choose and at what price, so that they “ration” their health care the same way they ration their groceries, their housing, their clothing, etc.
That’s the debate no one in Washington seems to want to have. But I will give Republicans credit for being somewhat closer to the mark than Democrats have been so far.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:26 am
CNN=the DUMBEST group of so-called journalist in cable news.
CNN Poll: Health care provisions popular but overall bills unpopular
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/24/cnn-poll-health-care-provisions-popular-but-overall-bills-unpopular/?fbid=YoEQphL_7Rm
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:26 am
“If we wanted another angle from the echo chamber, why not just stick with Wooten?”
Wooten is retiring.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
9:27 am
Yes, and it’s oh-so-original, Tyler, to brand opinions you don’t like as regurgitation from Fox News and right-wing talking points.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:29 am
What America will look like if democrats and unions get their way..
Greek Police, Protesters Clash in Nationwide Strike
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=auLLhrWZiKi8
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:31 am
Tyler Durden
If you don’t like Kyle, you have Cynthia Tucker and Jay Bookman (both spew democrat talking points).
If you hate FOX NEWS so much then please tune in to ABC, PBS, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and NBC. All democrat talking points for you.
hank
February 25th, 2010
9:34 am
we need to stay the course and implement a health care surge…..its done wonders in the middle east.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:38 am
Poor unions can’t catch a break! GREAT!!!!!
View of Unions ‘Plummeted’ Since 07
http://biggovernment.com/bjacobson/2010/02/24/view-of-unions-plummeted-since-07/
Horrible Horrace
February 25th, 2010
9:40 am
I hate unions.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:42 am
Horrible Horrace
So do I and the majority of America does as well.
LA
February 25th, 2010
9:44 am
I was watching Morning Joe earlier and Bernie “the socialist” Sanders was on talking about how the GOP is obstructing what America wants…….all while Joe had a poll OVERWHELMINGLY showing the public’s disdain for government health care. Anyway, Joe interrupted him and said that the democrat party has total control. Bernie Sanders brushed it aside and continued to blame the GOP.
Bottom line: Democrats, like Rahm Emanuel said, are RETARDED!
CJ
February 25th, 2010
9:51 am
“…letting Washington bureaucrats control the prices of private health insurance plans, as Obama now wants to do…Competition will decrease once the feds can dictate what insurers have to cover and force their premiums into the narrow band between a government cap and unprofitability.”
For the record, there are no price controls or government caps in the Senate bill, the House bill, or Obama’s proposal.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
9:55 am
For the record, CJ, the president proposes to let a federal agency review insurance premium increases with the ability to reject them if it wishes. Call it what you want, but that’s a de facto price control.
M Lassiter
February 25th, 2010
10:02 am
Scott Brown comes from a state with a system of public health that works
Look to Massachsettes and please stop with the petty and juvenile personal attacks on President Obama
He can only lead the country part of the way. The elected leaders must do their jobs. The American people must stop being HUGE consumers of everything and get smarter.
The people who only cheer when he fails are rooting for the country to fail
LA
February 25th, 2010
10:07 am
“Scott Brown comes from a state with a system of public health that works”
Yep, and that state is on the verge of bankruptcy.
“Look to Massachsettes and please stop with the petty and juvenile personal attacks on President Obama”
What personal attacks?
“He can only lead the country part of the way.”
He hasn’t led the country anywhere.
“The American people must stop being HUGE consumers of everything and get smarter.”
Sure thing there Castro!
“The people who only cheer when he fails are rooting for the country to fail”
Guess you missed the last 8 years, huh?
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
10:12 am
M Lassiter: As long as your definition of “works” includes costing far more money than expected, then I suppose you’re right.
For all the talk about how the Republicans have distorted what the Democrats want to do, the biggest lie of all in this debate has been that the right wants the status quo on health care. That’s not reflected in the opinion polls, in the writings of conservative thinkers, or even in the statement of most (maybe not all) elected Republicans. What we don’t want is the specific plan that Democrats have offered.
If that’s what you call rooting for the president or the country to fail, then I guess Americans have been rooting for failure off and on for more than two centuries.
Fix-It
February 25th, 2010
10:12 am
I am really getting sick of this, lack of healthcare debate. The dimacrats have a super majority and they can’t pass it? Cut your losses and do what you should do and foster the creation of jobs. Guess what most people with jobs have healthcare, so it becomes a non issue. Why not adopt a new way of thinking, do NOT spend any money that we don’t have, spend less and pay off our debt. That will make the US dollar strong and us with it….Sounds pretty simple, how come these Harvard and Princeton grads can’t even balance a check book… losers…
Daedalus
February 25th, 2010
10:22 am
Hey — why bother with health care reform?
The market is working just fine. Health insurance companies are enjoying nice profits, paying their executives millions each year, and are still raising rates. So what if more americans lose health care coverage? The health insurers will simply raise their rates on the rest of us to keep their profit levels steady. Kyle certainly won’t object — because its corporate profits (and dividends to stockholders) that matter, not whether ordinary americans can afford it.
Now Kyle will say that health care profit margins are slim (5-7%) of course what he will never admit is that part of their cost of doing business is intensive lobbying to protect their ability to deny health insurance to americans who need it and only insure the healthy. Now that’s a free market solution the GOP loves.
No wonder the GOP doesn’t want to do anything about health care.
CJ
February 25th, 2010
10:33 am
Kyle,
First of all, price controls and “defacto” price controls are two different things. Price controls are a fact. “Defacto” price controls are an opinion. You’re an editorial writer, so it’s appropriate to give your opinion. But you presented your opinion as fact, and that is always inappropriate–even in an editorial piece.
Every state currently has the authority to review premium increases with the ability to reject them if they wish. But for some not-so-mysterious reason state insurance commissioners aren’t doing their jobs (they take gifts and contributions from the companies they regulate). Premiums in states all over the country are rising in excess of 30 percent while insurers are making record profits far in excess of the kind of profits that are typically seen in mature industries. In short, they’re gouging us. So Obama proposes the following:
“Improving insurance protections for consumers and creating a new Health Insurance Rate Authority to provide Federal assistance and oversight to States in conducting reviews of unreasonable rate increases and other unfair practices of insurance plans.“
Jefferson
February 25th, 2010
10:33 am
All it takes is 51 in the senate.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
10:43 am
Sorry, CJ, but when the government tells private companies what they can and can’t charge, and what is “unreasonable” or “unfair,” inevitably injecting politics into a nonpolitical matter, that is a price control. You can try to split hairs here, but the result is the same. I won’t concede that that’s my “opinion” just because the president decided to dress it up a certain way.
RJ
February 25th, 2010
10:52 am
You, know if these idiots in DC were halfway intelligent, this whole helathcare bill would be written and passed in less than an hour:
1. Everyone that doesn’t have health care, make your monthly payments to the government.
2. Government buys a low premium health insurance option from some private insurer in bulk so they get it at a lower rate. (which insurer would depend on who gave the best rate, you know, free market and everything)
3. People without Health insurance no longer get treated.
Done and done. What’s so hard about this? Back in the day I thought the democrat economic strategy was to provide services in bulk so they were cheaper (tradeoff being the people not using it got slightly screwed). Apparantly this has been warped beyond belief.
Horrible Horrace
February 25th, 2010
10:56 am
Barry is wasting the taxpayers money with this beating of a dead horse.
Minister James
February 25th, 2010
11:00 am
Cheney’s getting taken care of by tax payer dollars and he’s never fought for his country. Go figure.
LA
February 25th, 2010
11:10 am
“No wonder the GOP doesn’t want to do anything about health care.”
Yet it’s the Democrats who have full control………….
LA
February 25th, 2010
11:12 am
“So what if more americans lose health care coverage?”
People are losing their health insurance BECAUSE THEY ARE LOSING THEIR JOBS!!!!!!!
Geez, democrats are really clueless.
There are over 300 million people in this country. 45 million are “uninsured.” 20 million of them are illegal aliens and should not be here in the first place. 10 million of those people are people who probably chose not to buy health insurance.
Democrats=the party of ignorance.
Jess
February 25th, 2010
11:14 am
I’m watching the summit and my first impression is that Obama should have left Harry and Nancy at home. They truely are whinners.
During this entire year, the thing I disliked the most in the discussions, is the term “health care reform”. I believe if the Dems. had simply said they want a plan to cover those who cannot afford to be covered, or who have a pre-existing conditions, and given a real estimate of the cost, and then followed this with a plan to reduce health cost, they may have gotten somewhere.
Instead, the entire debate was staged with a backdrop of “health care in America is broken” and reform of the entire industry is needed. At this point, the 60% to 70% of Americans who have good coverage, and who are happy with that coverage, turned their backs.
I think that conservatives and liberals understood from the day Obama was elected that something would happen in the health car system. I do not think they were prepared to hear that the entire system was to be torn apart, and reformed in a way they did not understand. Furthermore, I do not think the stealth way in which it was initally attempted was recieved well, and I know of no one at this time who puts any credibility in the cost figures we are hearing.
LA
February 25th, 2010
11:15 am
“Sorry, CJ, but when the government tells private companies what they can and can’t charge, and what is “unreasonable” or “unfair,” inevitably injecting politics into a nonpolitical matter, that is a price control”
BINGO!
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
11:17 am
Well said, Jess.
LA
February 25th, 2010
11:17 am
“I do not think they were prepared to hear that the entire system was to be torn apart, and reformed in a way they did not understand.”
Oh really? I mean, he said it several times before and after he became president.
Tuesday 20 January 2009
We will remake America, vows President Obama
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/20/obama-inauguration-speech-ceremony
LA
February 25th, 2010
11:19 am
“I’m watching the summit and my first impression is that Obama should have left Harry and Nancy at home.”
Why? Harry and Nancy are exact replicas of what he believes.
DawgDad
February 25th, 2010
11:34 am
First, I would like to thank the American public for pressuring conservative Dems and Republicans into forestalling this rush to life-threatening tyranny paid for with MY blood, sweat, and tears. Continued diligence in applying pressure is demanded; the tyrants will not cease efforts to steal our individual liberties until they are convincingly defeated.
It amazes me so many memebers of the pro-abortion crowd SO adamant about government not interfering with their “right to choose” are avidly supporting or promoting government-controlled health care. I was certainly suspicious of their mental capacity all along, but this state of affairs confirms any doubt.
It’s long past time for conservatives and moderate Democrats of all stripes to re-focus government on protecting of our individual liberties across the board (for the moderate Dem’s, I would include the right [but not mandate] to organize and unionize). Most Americans would agree it is far better for humanity to err on the side of too much personal liberty than too little. There’s much more common ground to be staked out in this regard than the leftists would like you to believe.
cranky old man
February 25th, 2010
12:24 pm
Do you all realize that by being the only wealthy country on the planet to NOT have some form of price controls on drugs, we are effectively subsidizing pharmaceutical research for the entire planet? If I’m a drug manufacturer and I develop a new drug, I’m going to want to get my R&D money back during the 10-20 years my patent is protected from generic copying. Let’s say I calculate that I would need to charge $40 per pill to achieve that. Now let’s say Europe, Japan, Canada, India, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, etc. have price controls that only allow me to charge $20 per pill. That means my only remaining cash cow is the U.S., and I’ve got to charge Americans $80-$100 per pill to make up the difference.
Jefferson
February 25th, 2010
12:31 pm
Why wait? Somebody do something. Get the thumb out of the butt.
Andy
February 25th, 2010
12:37 pm
I agree with Gerald West. That being said, I don’t think we will ever reduce the cost curve until this country actively pursues a mission of everyone getting more fit than what they are now.
Insurance is supposed to pay for the rare sickness, but if everyone is getting sick a lot, it will not matter what kind of reform takes place; costs will continue to rise.
Healthy and fit people get sick less often and with less severity than those who are not fit. All of our government policies should oriented towards Americans becoming fitter. That would include subsidies on corn production, which just gives food companies a cheap ingredient(high fructose corn syrup) to put in their products. Just eliminating this one subsidy would go along ways towards reducing obesity and cancer.
In case you aren’t aware of it, high sugar uptake in cells is now being used as a marker for detecting cancer cells.
Getting fit would cost far less than many of the current proposals.
LA
February 25th, 2010
12:43 pm
Mccain just PISSED off Obama. Cantor is going off on him as well.
SWEEEEEEEEEEEET!
Jefferson
February 25th, 2010
12:49 pm
Cantor is a dweeb, John is just old and tired.
No More Progressives!
February 25th, 2010
12:51 pm
Allen
February 24th, 2010
11:33 pm
Kyle, I simply don’t understand how the portrayal of Democrats as hanging from a cliff squares with legislative reality. At this time, the House can simply pass the Senate bill into law.
Then why don’t they?
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
12:51 pm
I’d definitely go along with stopping corn subsidies, Andy — for any number of reasons.
No More Progressives!
February 25th, 2010
12:54 pm
M Lassiter
February 25th, 2010
10:02 am
Scott Brown comes from a state with a system of public health that works
Look to Massachsettes and please stop with the petty and juvenile personal attacks on President Obama.
Ask someone from Mass. what they think of RomneyCare. It’s a disaster.
LA
February 25th, 2010
12:55 pm
“Cantor is a dweeb, John is just old and tired.”
And they both pissed Obamao off!
Banned By Cindy
February 25th, 2010
12:57 pm
Kyle be pwning Gerald and CJ.
Nothing worse than these government bed wetters. Let folks pay for their health maintenance like the good it is, and buy insurance against catastrophic illness as insurance coverage is intended for.
Any one see the U.N.’s global warming as imminent catastrophic crisis video with children crying “HELP ME” as a heat wave of death descended upon them. What a bunch of freaking bed wetters.
If it wasn’t for respect for private property, it’s enough to grab their spectacles and shove ‘em up their azzes.
LA
February 25th, 2010
12:57 pm
“Ask someone from Mass. what they think of RomneyCare. It’s a disaster.”
Yep, and it’s why Romney will NOT be the nominee in 2012.
No More Progressives!
February 25th, 2010
12:57 pm
And while were at it Kyle, let’s stop AMTRAK subsidies as well.
MPercy
February 25th, 2010
1:03 pm
MLassiter@10:02
The Massachusetts HC reform is facing large overruns and medical costs are rising there faster than they are in the rest of the country. I would hardly consider that a successful system.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/health/policy/16mass.html
Thanks to new taxes and fees imposed last year, the health plan’s jittery finances have stabilized for the moment. But government and industry officials agree that the plan will not be sustainable over the next 5 to 10 years if they do not take significant steps to arrest the growth of health spending.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/02/mass_healthcare_reform_is_failing_us/
Spending for the Commonwealth Care subsidized program has doubled, from $630 million in 2007 to an estimated $1.3 billion for 2009, which is not sustainable.
http://www.boston.com/business/healthcare/articles/2009/09/16/health_insurers_plan_10_rise_in_rates/
The state’s major health insurers plan to raise premiums by about 10 percent next year, prompting many employers to reduce benefits and shift additional costs to workers. Increases will range from 7 to 12 percent, capping a decade of consecutive double-digit premium increases, according to a Globe survey of the state’s top health insurers.
Seriously
February 25th, 2010
1:05 pm
Cloosed door deals, lobbyist, bribes, ignoring the public. Not the change he promised.
MPercy
February 25th, 2010
1:11 pm
CJ@10:33 am
Care to provide any proof of these “gouging” profit levels? Last I checked the big insurers were making about 4% profit and ranked well down the list of profit margin levels by industry.
According to Fortune magazine, “Health Care: Insurance and Managed Care” made about 2.2% profit in 2009, while “Health Care: Medical Facilities” gouged people for 2.4% profit margins. Pharma, OTOH clocked in at 19.3%.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2009/performers/industries/profits/
Get Real
February 25th, 2010
1:12 pm
Obama is to America what Bernie Madoff was to investors! Raping them of their money and enjoying the high life!
Gerald West
February 25th, 2010
1:17 pm
Kyle, before you close out health care I’d like to respond to some of the remarks you made about my initial comments.
First, the idea that covering everyone will result in higher overall health care costs is wrong. All people in the US, insured or not, already get needed health care. Those without coverage get their medical care in the emergency rooms. Their health care costs, as well as the considerable costs of futile collection measures, are passed on to those of us that have coverage.
The point of universal coverage is to eliminate the financial burden that middlemen (insurance providers) impose on everyone. A large part of that burden is placed on the health care providers who have to get pre-approvals, submit and track claims forms, waste time dealing with provider networks and fee discounts, etc. Universal coverage makes a valuable resource less scarce.
A glance at the comments columns shows clearly that most people confuse health insurance with health care. Just look at all the rants against government-controlled health care. In the on-going debates, no one is proposing government health care! I have Medicare. My son has United Healthcare coverage through his employer. We use the same doctors, same hospitals, same clinics. My primary-care physician direct my medical care, not the government. My son has lots of hassles over claims and pre-approvals, and his coverage is subject to termination if he changes employment.
Medicare is not government health care, it’s government-enabled health care by private providers in a competitive market. For my son, United Heathcare is not health care coverage he chose in the free market: his employer chose it. Certainly, any person with common sense would choose Medicare over United HC if there was a choice; especially so if he had to pay out-of-pocket a fair cost-based premium for Medicare coverage instead of the larger premium for poorer, uncertain coverage from United HC.
What is all this hysteria over government medical programs? Medicare, VA Healthcare, and TriCare
are the most satisfactory and efficient health care systems in the country.
LA
February 25th, 2010
1:25 pm
Right now there are a LOT of people who owe Rush Limbaugh an apology for saying that he wants Obama and his policies to fail.
BPJ
February 25th, 2010
1:37 pm
I liked the way the president put it: we could have less expensive food or drugs if we did away with all regulations and inspections in that area. But no one is proposing that. So we, Democrats and Republicans, accept that some regulations and government intervention are worth the added cost. (I would add bank regulation as another example.)
If we accept the argument so far, then the proper debate is about PARTICULAR regulations, with their benefits and costs. Mr. Wingfield, can you Republicans agree to stop automatically assuming that a Democratic proposal is a bad idea simply because it is “government regulation” and may add to costs? Can you agree that the proper debate is a cost/benefit analysis? This Democrat will agree, for my part, that we should not endorse a regulatory proposal simply because it would bring some benefit. We must consider the costs, and alternative proposals.
That is the kind of discussion Pres. Obama is trying to have; he thinks that, as with food and drugs, once the debate shifts from generalized knee-jerk opposition to “Washington regulation”, and focuses on costs v. benefits, he can often, though not always, win that debate. The problem with some of the Republican proposals is that they would basically lower costs for healthy people (as long as they don’t get sick), and raise costs (often to unaffordable levels) for older, sicker people.
Nevertheless, I think this meeting so far today has established some common ground, and that the Democrats’ proposals do not amount to a “government takeover of healthcare”. It is not British-style national health service; it is not Canadian-style single payer; it relies on private insurers (along with Medicare and Medicaid), private hospitals and doctors in private practice. It does regulate insurance companies. But if that’s your definition of “socialism”, then you might want to think about the fact that every state regulates insurance companies. A leading GOP candidate for governor. John Oxendine, has been regulating them for years (although not very much, given his contributor base in that industry).
So let’s not say that ANY Washington regulation of insurance companies is “socialism”. The GOP proposals include some of that. We may disagree about specifics of which regulations are needed, but let’s keep the debate on that level, not the “regulation-is-always-bad” (or good) theme.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
1:37 pm
I appreciate your reply, Gerald. Here’s how I respond:
– Yes, there are costs to be cut by moving people out of ER-only care (which is how I summarize the problem you described). But it’s also true that giving them access to more health care will probably lead to their consuming more health care. That’s surely a good thing for their health, but it’s far from clear it will lead to a net cost reduction. (If we don’t increase the number of doctors working in the U.S. today, a shortage of care is going to lead to higher costs for everyone.)
– The reason people talk about government-run health care is because they think government will control health care *decisions*. I don’t think anyone at this point thinks doctors and nurses will be going on the government payroll (although that is the case in Britain).
– You’re right about the lack of a free market in health insurance. That’s why I and lot of other conservatives favor legislation that would make plans more portable, in part by shifting tax credits to individuals, not to companies. That requires government fixing one of its own mistakes, not a market failure.
– If Medicare, etc. are the most efficient systems in the country, why is it widely estimated that 10% of its expenses are fraudulent? I guarantee you that private insurers, which make single-digit profit margins, would not ignore that kind of fraud. Why do the Democrats’ plans include cutting half a trillion dollars in waste, abuse and fraud from Medicare if that program is so efficient?
They may be satisfactory, because patients are insulated from the costs of their care. Guess what: That’s the same reason so many people with private insurance are satisfied, too.
Obamayourmomma
February 25th, 2010
1:37 pm
I say let the dems pass health care with 51 votes. I would love to watch the Republicans win back the White House and both houses over the next 2 years. Question, if someone told you that if you point a gun to your head and pull the trigger, you will die would you do it? People with common sense would say no. The democratic party is controlled by people with no common sense and tons of arrogance. Thank GOD! Pass it jerkies, I dare ya’!
Jess
February 25th, 2010
1:44 pm
Gerald West,
I disagree that health care cost would not go up if everyone were insured because they are going to emergency rooms now. People will use the system much more when they have coverage. This was the case when medicaid was first introduced, as well as when medicare was introduced. A more current example is Massachusettes where cost have doubled since the implementation of their universal program with very little change in population.
As far as the Medicare vs. private insurance debate, of course Medicare is easier and less hassle than private. But the debate is not about coverage or ease of use, it’s about cost. We cannot afford to offer everyone in the country a Medicare program. I also think it might be interesting to get your views after the dems. remove $500 billion from the program.
scrappy
February 25th, 2010
1:45 pm
Doesn’t the government already set price controls, defacto or otherwise? Price gouging is not allowed, monopolies are not allowed… why do we not want to not allow health insurance companies (&drug companies) to do the same?
I also agree with Gerald, much of the muddle are very confused, I would think many are on this post site, based on their responses. A person may be smart, but people together (mob) are often quite unintelligent and do not listen to reason.
Jess
February 25th, 2010
1:55 pm
Andy,
Getting fit is a good idea, as long as it’s not mandated. However, by far the biggest reason for increasing health care cost is technology. Sophisticated test which one had to schedule and drive for miles to recieve, are available on every corner now. Because of their availability, and doctors fears of malpractice suits, tests that not so long ago were used sparingly, are now used routinely.
The results have been an improvement in diagnostics, and earlier detection of deadly diseases. This is really one of the trade-offs Americans will have to make. Regardless of whether the government pays, or an insurance co. pays, if you want to continue to have new products which save lives and improve health, costs will continue to go up.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
2:00 pm
scrappy: Laws barring monopolies (except by the government, of course…) are far different from a bureaucracy rejecting a specific price for a specific service by a specific company.
Intown
February 25th, 2010
2:04 pm
When the Republicans win … America suffers. Enjoy 30% higher premiums folks.
LA
February 25th, 2010
2:04 pm
“Medicare, VA Healthcare, and TriCare
are the most satisfactory and efficient health care systems in the country.”
For one, they’re going broke. Government funded programs get their money from taxpayers who make money in the private sector.
Like the saying goes: Socialism is great until you run out of other people’s money.
BPJ
February 25th, 2010
2:07 pm
LA, now I’m confused – Republicans have been casting themselves as defenders of Medicare.
lmno
February 25th, 2010
2:13 pm
I love the analogy since the cup that fell in the movie had just been used to heal the hero’s dying father. And that the newly healed father says to “let it go”. Hell, he was already saved and cured anyway.
This whole thing is ridiculous. Everyone should have healthcare accessible and cheap available anytime they need it regardless of income.
I am not poor and have health insurance. That does not make my health emergency more important that a poor person’s. I want reform. I want for no one to die because they didn’t have enough money.
LA
February 25th, 2010
2:17 pm
“Republicans have been casting themselves as defenders of Medicare.”
Yeah, what’s your point?
Blue
February 25th, 2010
2:18 pm
MPercy: I would appreciate it if you wouldn’t supply facts that disprove CJ’s rants. I would hate to see his/her head explode.
Steve
February 25th, 2010
2:21 pm
Why havnt the repubs. not given an alternative to the healthcare debate? They just keep on whining about how obamas plan is bad. Also, there is no “health care reform” without a public option.
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
2:30 pm
As has been covered on this blog innumerable times before, Steve, Republicans have offered many alternatives on health care. Here is one list of 70 health-care bills that Republicans have filed in the last 13 months: http://tr.im/PNdI
(I have not read through the entire list and won’t vouch for any of the bills, but this should put to rest that all the GOP has done on health care is say “no.” As I wrote earlier today, that is the biggest lie of all this debate.)
Steve
February 25th, 2010
2:37 pm
Judging from what i quickly read through those healthcare plans look good. They look very good actually. Why are they not being considered?
LA
February 25th, 2010
2:37 pm
“Why havnt the repubs. not given an alternative to the healthcare debate? ”
They have and democrats ignore their plan.
“They just keep on whining about how obamas plan is bad.”
Most of America hates the democrat plan.
“Also, there is no “health care reform” without a public option.”
That’s not reform. It’s government mandated control. 45 million are supposedly uninsured, unemployment is high and yet….Obama keeps talking about how people are losing their health insurance.
Bottom line: Tort reform, letting people get insurance across state lines, getting government out of the way……
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
2:39 pm
Heckuva question, Steve.
Linda
February 25th, 2010
2:49 pm
When the health care debate stated a yr. ago, 85% of Americans had health insurance & 95% of them were happy with their plans. The only answer was a complete overhaul of the best health care system in the world. The Dems created a crisis, an urgency, victims & bad guys. I never saw the people who were reported to be dying in the streets. Insurance companies, whose profits are around 3% & rated #30 or so in industry earnings, were demonized.
Tort reform was off the table since trial lawyers are the #1 contributor to Dems. Selling insurance across state lines to make it more competitive isn’t acceptable. The bills have always been more about control & power than reform.
AARP received govt. $ & sold out the elderly to support the bills. Unions & states were given preferential treatment. Dem obstructionists were bribed.
Doors were closed & locked. Senators were held hostage in anticipation of a blizzard on Xmas Eve Eve.
According to the CBO, the “reform” will raise the fed. deficit. It will cost the states billions of dollars they don’t have. Many Americans believe premiums will increase & that the cost of the bill could be over $2 trillion.
The 2 bills cover about 4500 pages & create dozens of new govt. agencies & bureaus.
Dem/Ind/Rep Americans are angry & have expressed themselves at Tea Parties, Town Hall meetings & marches & in emails, calls & letters. The Dems & their acolyte alphabet media made fun of, insulted & otherwise ignored them.
The pres.’s approval rating is in the 40’s & Congress’s is 10%. Only 23% of Americans favor the bill & the huge majority want it scrapped. Liberals blame the American people for a lack of understanding. For the last yr., liberals have demonstrated that they believe their constituents are too ignorant to know what they want & need. Only the DC Dems know what’s best & decide who is deserving & how our tax dollars (&China’s $) are to be spent. We’re the problem & they & bigger govt. are the solution. We’re to see their competence & sense of compassion, decency & purpose.
Cramming this bill down our throats that only 23% of Americans favor by a mere 51% majority that insures a complete govt. take-over of our private health care, another 1/6 of our economy, as a preamble to total socialized medicine, which is their goal, is soft tyranny.
The reason the Dems/Liberals/Progressives want total govt. socialized medicine is the same reason the Americans/taxpayers/voters do not.
BPJ
February 25th, 2010
2:50 pm
The GOP plans have been discussed extensively at today’s summit. The problem with the Republican proposals is that they would basically lower costs for healthy people (as long as they don’t get sick), and raise costs (often to unaffordable levels) for older, sicker people. There has been detailed, documented discussion of this over at the New Republic:
http://www.tnr.com/article/health-care/fairness-doctrine
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-treatment/why-the-gop-cant-solve-health-care
For reform
February 25th, 2010
2:54 pm
Why do republicans keep bring this moral issue of health care reform back to politics. It is a moral issue and something needs to be passed. The skyrocketing cost of health care will break the economy and me. We finally after 8 years have a leader as President rather than a rich oil tycoon. During the last 8 years the rich got richer and the middle class got poorer. Obama’s administration is not afraid to stay the course of their beliefs. I can tell from the comments that we are in Georgia where people refuse to listen with an open mind set.
Old guy
February 25th, 2010
3:09 pm
I am on Medicare and SS, not because I chose to be on them but because I was forced to pay for them for 45 years. SS is going broke because LBJ (I am a Vietnam vet) and the Demos stole the money from the trust fund to fund the Viet war. Don’t lecture us on taking “benefits” as Conservatives when we were robbed at gunpoint (by the Gov) to pay their way.
I have only confidence that the Gov will drain us all if it can!!!
Jess
February 25th, 2010
3:19 pm
For reform,
The people in Massachusettes apparently refused to listen as well. Either that or they listened and didn’t like what they heard.
Just because you attach the word moral to an issue, it doesn’t come without a price. I’m reading a book now by a Harvard economist. He contends the US government is currently bankrupt. He has seen no one who could demonstrate how our government could meet it’s current obligations, including entitlements, service on our debts, and essential govt. services even in the mid or long term. This is a definition of bankrupt.
Repubs. I think understand this. Dems. either do not or do not care. At the core this is a financial issue.
CJ
February 25th, 2010
3:23 pm
“…the US government is currently bankrupt….Repubs. I think understand this.”
Repubs had the White House and Congress, turned surpluses into deficits and nearly doubled the national debt in record time.
Repubs got us into this mess. Why anybody would take them seriously on budget matters baffles me.
Linda
February 25th, 2010
3:26 pm
CJ@3:23, Why do you think Reps “got us into this mess?”
Allen
February 25th, 2010
3:32 pm
For those convinced that health care reform is unpopular: a fair number of respondents have objections to the bill because it is insufficiently liberal for their tastes (no public option, etc). Further, the component parts of the bill consistently poll well.
People are more attuned to politics than policy, and an endless partisan debate covered through a media that fetishizes conflict has not been kind to reform’s image. And it’s certainly not that the Democrats were blameless here.
Jess
February 25th, 2010
3:34 pm
CJ,
This argument is getting stale. Had Obama come into office and shown even a glimmer of fiscal dicipline, you may could hang onto to this story a little longer. Fact is he has driven us further into debt, and much faster in one year than Bush did in eight. And yet he is still throwing huge spending proposals at us every time we turn around.
This will all have to end one day. You do understand this I hope.
Jess
February 25th, 2010
3:36 pm
Linda@ 2:49
Very good post. You have captured the essence of this entire debate.
Allen
February 25th, 2010
3:40 pm
Kyle, though the math in the House may seem daunting, I think it’s premature to be counting votes. I simply meant that, politics aside, the Democrats are in the legislative red zone (to stay with the trend of making fun analogies).
Kyle Wingfield
February 25th, 2010
3:45 pm
They might have been there at one time, Allen, but they keep getting 15-yard penalties…
Swede Atlanta
February 25th, 2010
3:46 pm
I have no doubt health care reform will pass this year. I suspect it will prevent the worst abuses of the health insurance companies, e.g. pre-existing conditions, dropping people because they get sick, etc.
That the Republicans and Democrats can agree on. But as I have listened to the debate today, unless the Democrats pass a comprehensive package through Reconciliation, the situation under the Republican “go slow” approach will get worse and worse.
Without covering millions of uninsured Americans whose premiums would go to spread risk out over more individuals, premiums will go up. You have heard Anthem Blue Cross say their rates are going up 39% because healthy people are dropping out. So once we make insurance companies actually cover sick people, they will say well the costs have gone up so I am going to raise rates 50%.
At the same time those uninsured will continue to be subsidized by those of us with insurance so premiums will continue to go up as the uninsured get care in the most expensive place possible, the emergency room.
At the end of the day without a comprehensive approach the entire deck of cards collapses on itself. The 95% of people polled and responding (not 95% of the American people – there is a big distinction) that some posters have referred to that love their current coverage will see their coverage reduced, co-pays and out of pocket increase and see premiums skyrocket.
You either tackle this from a comprehensive perspective (which yes may take thousands of pages to document) or the situation will just continue to get worse.
Jefferson
February 25th, 2010
3:52 pm
1 insurance company, that is the solution.
lmno
February 25th, 2010
3:52 pm
I want a single payer system.
Blackberry Cobbler
February 25th, 2010
4:01 pm
51% may have voted for Obama…………………. BUT, that was a year and a half ago AND is irrelevant to this debate.
The MAJORITY of America is AGAINST the Presidents/Democrats health plan. PERIOD.
So what are we suppose to do, bend over and take it like a man just because Obama won the election. This is stupid, ignorant, and hardly insightful thinking.
The majority of Americans including some who voted for Obama don’t want this!!
Some of you folks posting on here leave little doubt about how much common sense you have.
For reform
February 25th, 2010
4:02 pm
Jess, I seem to recall that when Bush passed the bank bailout bill there was no money then but the Bush bailout seemed to be ok. Is this not spending money we don’t have. I think both parties are guilty of this. If we don’t insure the uninsured the Healthcare cost are going to go up because of uninsured being forced to use the ER. I think that people need to stop bashing the Commander and Chief of the United States and start working as elected officials. I’m done.
Linda
February 25th, 2010
4:07 pm
Health insurance is not insurance.
Auto insurance is insurance. It does not cover tires, tuneups or brakes. It covers losses, accidents, theft, etc.
If health insurance covered only illnesses, accidents, etc., the costs would plummet. We should pay for all routine doctor visits, tests & medicine. Americans would be incentivised to shop for health care services as we do for other products & services. We would finally know the costs of care. We would learn that we can obtain lab work up to 80% cheaper. We would question the necessity of tests. We would ask for itemized statements. We would seek estimates.
The overhead for general practitioners would decrease (passed partially on to patients) since insurance paperwork would decrease.
Anyone who can afford to drive a car could afford health care insurance.
Swede Atlanta
February 25th, 2010
4:12 pm
Blackberry Cobbler
There are two problems with attaching any value to current polls:
(1) Misinformation about what is even on the table
(2) Polls are designed to give the results the pollsters want
(1) Misinformation
Between the 24/7 misinformation cycle, stirred up wingnuts who are just angry period (they might need a laxative) and an environment of strong partisanship, the American people don’t know what is even on the table.
People think there is a proposal to nationalize healthcare. Wrong!
People think there is a proposal for death panels. Wrong! Oh wait they exist today at your friendly local private insurance company
People think they will be forced to a public option. Wrong!
I could go on and on. Those opposed to ANY reform have been much more effective in lying and spreading fear and those who advocate sensible reform. I have to hand it to them they have been successful.
But just because the American people believe something doesn’t make it so.
(2) Polls
I have read numerous polls that claim XX% of Americans favor(or oppose) YY.
Then I go to the poll and read the questions and it becomes very clear that the poll results don’t correspond to the “headlines”. The results of polls are significantly affected by the types of questions that are asked and how they are asked.
For example, are you in favor of a government run health care plan? is very different from are you in favor of a public option that individuals could choose to participate in as an alternative to private health insurance?
If you ask the first question many people would say no because implied in the question is that they would be forced to participate and would lose what they have now. The second question is actually asking a relevant question as a public option, if offered, would be just that.
So I put absolutely no value in polls on this topic because most Americans don’t have a clue what is actually proposed and two polls are notoriously misleading.
CJ
February 25th, 2010
4:21 pm
I’d bet money that the folks on this blog complaining about deficits under Obama were silent about deficits under the GOP.
Obama deliberately ran up the deficit via the stimulus–as he should have–to fill hole in the economy created by rapidly falling demand in the private sector. On the other hand, Bush and the Republicans had the benefit of a relatively stable economy during all but the first half of his Bush’s term, but they ran up record deficits anyway. They did it via a tax cut that was nearly twice the cost of the Obama’s HCR proposal, adding half-trillion Medicare entitlement without paying for it, large increases in agricultural subsidies (welfare for millionaires) without paying for them, and a misbegotten war in Iraq. Yet they have to gall to complain about deficits under Obama while simultaneously voting against pay-as-you-go legislation and blocking a vote on a deficit reduction commission—two long term deficit reduction measures that they supported until Dems put gave them a chance to vote on it.
Despite rhetoric to the contrary, the GOP is no more fiscally conservative than the Soviet Union was. And if recent history and recent votes don’t convince you of that, then nothing will.
Blackberry Cobbler
February 25th, 2010
4:22 pm
Whatever, Suede.
You obviously just pick and choose what polls you believe and don’t believe just to suit your own beliefs.
Whatever.
Another old man
February 25th, 2010
4:26 pm
It’s bad enough that our elected don’t give a rat’s what happens to us, it seems we don’t either. I never thought I’d live to see a day when Americans would want to deny health coverage for others. Back in the 60’s I thought I was putting my life on the line for my fellow Americans, you jerks won’t even pony up a few bucks for others.
S.R.
February 25th, 2010
4:30 pm
The people who take care of themselves by working and buying health insurance are against this mess called “reform.” The losers who don’t work, don’t pay taxes and want everyone to take care of them are the only ones who want it.
Swede Atlanta
February 25th, 2010
4:31 pm
Blackberry Cobbler
Absolutely I pick and choose polls. Given the thousands of “polls” that are quoted I don’t have enough days in a lifetime to review the results of every one. But I have looked at at least 20-25 polls from various organizations over the past 9 months about health care. I have taken them from left-leaning polling organizations to the far right.
And consistent in my findings is that the questions from either extreme are skewed to get the result they want. Poll questions from what I considered to be fairly reliable and arguably neutral sources were somewhat better but the headlines promoted by these companies, both for and against health care reform, didn’t match up with the results of their questions.
So I have become very skeptical of polls. I could construct and conduct two polls asking the same participants and come to completely different results based on the way I ask the questions.
Swede Atlanta
February 25th, 2010
4:44 pm
S.R.
You are either misinformed or you are intentionally misleading people (my parents taught me that was lying).
I take care of myself and have good health insurance through my employer. I have paid income taxes since my first full-time job over 30 years ago. I have worked without interruption for those 30 years. So don’t make generalizataion
And I want reform for any number of reasons
- It is morally reprehensible that we live in one of the most wealthy nations on earth and we cannot find a way to make health care affordable for everyone. Sending them to the emergency room is not the same as providing them with health care
- We cannot continue to subsidize people who do not have insurance through higher premiums and higher costs (the costs of the uninsured are passed to us in our premiums and the fees charged by providers)
- We cannot continue to have tens of millions of Americans getting health care through the most expensive channel available – the emergency room. Not only is it the most expensive place but by the time they go to the hospital emergency room the cost of treatment has skyrocketed
- We cannot afford to have and I consider it morally reprehensible to have insurance companies refuse coverage based on pre-existing conditions and dropping people because they get sick
- We need to cover as many Americans as possible to spread the risk over a larger pool and long-term reduce insurance costs
I know that despite having worked hard and saved I am but one step removed from financial ruin. If I were to be laid off and lose my health insurance I could not obtain affordable insurance based on a genetic heart defect. If I didn’t have insurance and contracted cancer or needed some other major surgery or treatment I would have to declare bankruptcy, lose my home or both.
That’s why I want reform.
Allen
February 25th, 2010
4:47 pm
Kyle, I think we may be talking past one another. My point is that the biggest obstacle to reform was mustering 60 Senate votes. The remaining obstacles are relatively small.
All that remains is for the House to pass the Senate bill. If changes are insisted upon, many could be made through reconciliation, requiring only a majority in the Senate.
After the election of Scott Brown, I think conservatives have indulged in hubris and paid surprisingly little attention to this simple reality. It goes without saying that the Democrats may not succeed. But they are tantalizingly close.
It’s like a basketball game where after a buzzer beater, the crowd rushed the floor and the team broke out the champagne in the locker room…only to be called back to the floor and realize that the other team never left and has a decent chance to win. (Nice 15-yd penalty comeback, though)
Linda
February 25th, 2010
5:00 pm
Swede@3:46, Do the auto insurance companies abuse Americans for pre-existing driving records & dropping people because they are accident-prone? Do hazard insurance companies abuse us for pre-existing hazardous conditions in our homes & dropping us because we’re accident-prone? What about life & credit life insurance companies? Is this not how ALL insurance companies have always operated?
@4:12, You said there’s “misinformation” & implied the polls are biased, called angry Americans “stirred up wingnuts,” needing a laxative & not knowing “what is even on the table.”
Thank you for proving what I wrote @ 2:49 when I said, “Liberals blame the American people for lack of understanding. For the last year, liberals have demonstrated that they believe their constituents are too ignorant to know what they want & need…” These wingnuts you demonize are Americans/Dems/Inds/Reps/taxpayers/voters & they might be smarter than the Liberals think.
CJ
February 25th, 2010
5:00 pm
A local friend just wrote the following on Facebook:
“[Name Here] is dreading her impending surgery bill after receiving a letter from her insurance company telling her that they won’t pay their bit on last month’s endoscopy because they determined that an anesthesiologist wasn’t necessary because the gastroenterologist could have told the nurse how to monitor the anesthesia – y’know…, because he had nothing better to do during the procedure.”
Food for thought to those who, foolishly, like their insurance company.
LA
February 25th, 2010
5:27 pm
Obama lost the debate.
He has just proven himself to be a one-term president.
Tort Reform
February 25th, 2010
5:28 pm
I always get a good laugh when a partisan pundit talks about “tort reform” as an alternative to a public option. Tort reform is such an impossibly complicated can of worms that it simply does not belong in the discussion of rx reform at all.
Tort reform? The very idea is so immature, and involves such a simpleton’s view of risk assessment and law and the actuarial tables and everything, that it makes me laugh hysterically like Tracy Morgan thought it up. There are too many strings attached and it would involve too many other legal matters and too many other industries across the board that no compromise is even possible. It is categorically impossible to enact any tort reform. Tort reform is a non sequitur response to the discussion. It’s total obsfucation pure and simple.
Tort reform? Comedy gold! I’ve got milk coming out of my nose! (Who do I sue?)
LA
February 25th, 2010
5:28 pm
“Food for thought to those who, foolishly, like their insurance company.”
Nothing like a good sob story like the one where the democrat senator told the GOP how she knew of someone who had to wear her sisters used dentures.
Tort Reform
February 25th, 2010
5:29 pm
LA has proven himself to be a 50 comment per day troll! He should be president. We’d never get rid of him.
bwa
LA
February 25th, 2010
5:38 pm
“LA has proven himself to be a 50 comment per day troll!”
So because you don’t agree with me, I’m a troll?
redneckbluedog
February 25th, 2010
5:39 pm
Lost…? Really….? We’ll see about that. Dems are in a tight spot…do nothing or ram it through…what is the most politically expedient at this point…?
JD
February 25th, 2010
5:43 pm
CJ,
You are soooo wrong.
I have never found a Brit, and this includes many, who favors the system in England over the current system in the US. Rationing, denial of care for elders versus the younger and virtually every distateful element of health care is present in England.
If truly there is 15% of the population without health care then the solution is to provide care for the 15% – not implode the entire system, as the Dems propose. The 15% includes illegal aliens and they should not be covered. Even at 10% there is not sufficient medical personnel to care for another 25 to 30 million people. There are many means to control costs without the intervention of government.
Just as the current economic mess is purely a result of government meddling in the economy, the primary factor in health costs is also a result of government meddling.
So CJ, where are the Doctors and Nurses going to be found to provide this additional care? Will the US then be like England where there is effectively no professional nursing care and few Doctors who actually speak English?
All of this Liberal propaganda sounds just fine until the nuts and bolts part of the plan reveal that the Obama proposal is just a lunge for power by making more and more voters dependent upon government, and the dollars make no sense. The entire claimed savings in the Senate plan, over the first and second ten years, is essentially derived from the Medicare “savings” estimate. Congress has been making such claims for as long as I remember and yet the waste is still 100’s of millions of dollars. Why is this Congress, and any future Congress, any more adept at eliminating waste than in the past? They are not!
If all of the other developed countries have such wonderful plans why do their citizens come to the US for care? Answer: Because the US has the best care – even the uninsured have better care than those in your fantasy land of “other developed countries”.
Liberals know no truth and practice no truth – this entire Health Care/Health Insurance (pick your liberal terminolgy of the moment) Reform is founded upon lies and misrepresentations. Man up Liberals, or woman up if appropriate, and acknowledge you are nothing more than government groupies. You all hate the US for the abundance, the success, the military might, the brave men and women who gave you the right to dissent, the freedom and all that has made the US the greatest country in the world.
Liberals were taken in by a charlatan – and if you do not recognize this now you have no cognitive power – and are unable to admit the POTUS is a failure at every step and his lust for bigger government and more power in DC will destroy the Democrat Party.
Linda
February 25th, 2010
5:59 pm
Tort@5:28, As long as we have new mommies suing OBGYNs for stretch marks, we have problems in our health care system.
Linda
February 25th, 2010
6:08 pm
JD@5:43, Do you think the Dem health care insurance reform bill has much to do with health, care, insurance or reform? I’m having trouble finding much relevance.
“…will destroy the Democrat Party” along with America.
Jess
February 25th, 2010
6:39 pm
JD,
I lived and worked in London for three years. Actually they do not have to move to have the American system of health care. A large number of Brits have private health insurance, and most of the better employers in England offer this as a benefit just as they do here. Almost anyone who has the means is in the private system.
The national system, although adequate for minor care, or emergency care, is horrible if you require advanced tests such as MRIs or if you need non life threatening surgery. My neighbor waited 6 months for an MRI to tell her she had a torn cartledge in her knee, and then 9 months for surgery to repair it.
No More Progressives!
February 26th, 2010
9:25 am
Tyler Durden
February 25th, 2010
9:24 am
“Wow. Hard to even justify reading Kyle anymmore. Apart from the odd departure (which is refeshing but oh too seldom), you just regurgitate GOP talking points and deflect any attempt at real debate from posters. If we wanted another angle from the echo chamber, why not just stick with Wooten?
Once again: if you get your news from Fox or someone talking on the radio, it’s not facts: it’s hyperbole for entertainment.”
One would logically wonder why Tyler bothers to read Kyle. Tyler, it seems, has never listened to any of the news outlets he decries (Fox, Rush et al) but adopts the lefty party line that they’re all liars, entertainers, boorish bullies, etc.
Which brings into question the empirical accuracy of Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Chris Mathews. Do you really want to go there, Tyler?
I thought not.
No More Progressives!
February 26th, 2010
9:29 am
LA
February 25th, 2010
5:27 pm
Obama lost the debate.
He has just proven himself to be a one-term president.
I would say that the debate was a little lacking, and Obama bored everybody to tears with his sophmoric, boring lecture.
And yes, a one-termer for sure.
What’s the unemployment rate today, anyone???
LA
February 26th, 2010
9:46 am
“What’s the unemployment rate today, anyone???’
Real unemployment is about 18%.
More bad news for the democrat party.
CNN Poll: Majority says government a threat to citizens’ rights
A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans, according to a new national poll.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/26/cnn-poll-majority-says-government-a-threat-to-citizens-rights/?fbid=YoEQphL_7Rm
LA
February 26th, 2010
9:48 am
No More Progressives!
If you take a peak at Bookman’s blog, there is a particular person who actually wrote that Republicans committed mass suicide yesterday…….then she proceeds to copy and paste a partisan article from HuffPost.
Liberals=delusional.
No More Progressives!
February 26th, 2010
9:49 am
Here, Tyler. This is a clip of the infamous radio host Ed Schultz, advocating that “we rip Dick Cheney’s heart out…”
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2010/02/msnbc-talker-lets-rip-out-cheneys-heart.html
Such class on the left………………………………
No More Progressives!
February 26th, 2010
9:51 am
I read that, LA. It served as my morning amusement.
Bookman is a hoot, isn’t he? I’m surprised he hasn’t applied for a job at MSLSD.
Maybe he has.
LA
February 26th, 2010
9:58 am
No More Progressives!
I’m more surprised that Cynthia Tucker hasn’t had her new boss, Chris Matthews, bring Bookman on his low rated tv show.
Oh, you should also post the Ed Shultz “voters should cheat to win in Mass” sound bite.
Liberals always claim that conservatives are racists, nazis and liars yet they lie, have members of the KKK in their party AND support communism.
Hmmmmmmmmmm
John
February 26th, 2010
9:58 am
If you think that the health insurance market place will solve health care without inferference from representatives of the public, think Toyota. THere is a respected company that most people had faith in, but now even Republicans are asking for government oversight.
LA
February 26th, 2010
10:18 am
“but now even Republicans are asking for government oversight.”
You got evidence of this?
Jefferson
February 26th, 2010
10:28 am
Are you sure his crusade is lost ??
No More Progressives!
February 26th, 2010
11:01 am
LA
February 26th, 2010
9:58 am
I’m more surprised that Cynthia Tucker hasn’t had her new boss, Chris Matthews, bring Bookman on his low rated tv show.
Misery does love company.
How many viewers does Mathews have now? 127? Really gettin’ up there!
Cutty
February 28th, 2010
4:04 am
Enough red meat for the homers Wingfield??I’ve yet to read an article that explains why bipartisanship is so important NOW. Wasn’t a very big deal pretty to Obama stepping in office, and reconciliation was a ‘tool’ of the Senate when the GOP was in the majority. Don’t see how its different now. Republicans have the sheep fighting against their own interest.
Here in Georgia (a little closer since all politics is local), the citizenry who ship their kids off to Georiga Universities will be paying higher tuition, for larger class sizes, fewer classes, and overall less service. Bit I guess if Sonny and Cagle are in charge everything is ok.