Obama’s Health Care Ads Fail Scrutiny and Honesty Tests

Typical. Well, didn’t he just lie about traveling “extensively” in Europe?

Who was it who said it’s scary when you realize the Mike Huckabee has traveled in Europe more than Obama?

Btw, all Obama has to do is produce his passport. But he won’t. Wonder why not.

How much traveling had Bush done before he was s-elected? Bill Clinton?

Based on my reading of Obama’s healthcare plan [off his website only, haven't read reviews]…his healthcare plan would indeed leave out a lot of people.

We ought to have a single-payer system similar to France’s, which is the best. Currently the US healthcare system is only slightly better than Slovenia’s.

Susan – it would be really interesting to see an online dialogue between a critic of Obama’s health care plan (such as yourself) and RJ Eskow, who works as a consultant on healthcare and health policy matters. He’s blogged about the whole “mandates” idea here:

http://sentineleffect.wordpress.com/2007/12/01/health-mandates-a-talk-with-obama-health-advisor-david-cutler/#more-143

As you know, I am not an Obama fan, but like Richard, I have a real problem with the mandates. He has also blogged about how the new system is working out (or not) in Massachusetts.

How far was closest liquor cabnet?

I’ll just repeat what I wrote over at Taylor Marsh’s, in case anyone has some counter-information to offer:

I checked the online white pages. There’s no Dr. Robert Mitchell listed in Ames, or anywhere close by. There are four “Robert Mitchell”s in the area, but none are predicated with a “Dr.”. None has an address in Ames. My guess is that there is no such person, but more looking would clearly be required to determine that.

Has the Obama campaign accepted responsibility for these ads? Since we’re reminding ourselves about dirty tricks here, let’s not forget that this could be one of them.

I don’t see any mention of this on the Obama websites. A quick scan shows no similar rhetoric, either.

It wouldn’t take a clever writer long to put together a call like that and blame it on someone else. In fact, it would take less research than I just did writing this.

I have problems with mandates, too, since I think that the end effect will be that it just turns the insurance industry into a protection racket – if you want health care, you pay an insurance company for the privilege. Or you do without. Or you become a “medical tourist”.

We tried offering a government-sponsored health insurance plan in WA – the insurance companies got that killed quickly. They’re still allowed, at least practically speaking, to refuse coverage to anyone. They’re also allowed to charge more for car insurance, which is already required here, to people with bad credit ratings. Whatever for? If the check bounces, you don’t have insurance. Yet the insurance companies get away with this crap.

This is exactly where we’ll end up with HillaryCare, because the only things that will disappear from the program are the parts the insurance companies don’t like. That means the government program, such as it is, will disappear. The requirements to cover everyone will disappear. They own Congress as thoroughly as any industry does these days. Why in the world would anyone in his right mind think it will end up any other way?

So if Krugman or anyone else wants to call Obama’s health care plan dishonest, then as far as I’m concerned he’d better address these issues. Otherwise, I’m just not going to be too damn impressed with his analysis.

That would sure make it difficult to “opt out”, wouldn’t it? We all pay taxes. Funny how that point gets overlooked when we’re discussing health care options.

Cujo – as we know, the insurance companies refuse to be left out of the loop. The only reason they tolerate Washington’s Basic Health Plan subsidy is because it means the state contracts directly with health plans to guarantee care. And hey, it only involves about 125,000 of those poor folks…

On the other hand, when you consider that we have a Democratic governor, a Democratic state House and state Senate, and a Democratic insurance commissioner who has been touting the “mandates” plan for almost two years now.. it kinda makes you wonder what the point is in being a Democrat.

Case in point: It was our control-freak House Speaker, Frank Chopp, who buckled under to the insurance industry 5 years ago by allowing legislation that pushed contractors’ bond and insurance premiums sky high — just because of a few bad apples.

I really wish voters would start asking some hard questions about the suddenly fashionable mandates policy, instead of buying into whatever campaigns feel like spinning about it. The citizens are truly acting like sheep on this one.

I may be an Edwards gal, but that doesn’t mean I like his mandates plan much either. I do, however, appreciate that he is not willing to play footsie with Big Pharma and the insurance companies like Clinton has promised to do.

The most important difference I’ve seen between Clinton’s plan and Edwards’ is that the latter puts off the mandates part until after costs have (perhaps magically) come down. The government plan part is supposed to be offered before mandates. So at least Edwards is trying to offer the insurance companies a carrot for behaving.

Of course, one can raise similar objections to this as to the Clinton plan, in that after the insurance companies are done with it there probably won’t be much left that helps the rest of us. And they still own Congress, which any plan would have to get past. But if a President Edwards stood firm and said that the bill would have that sequence or he wouldn’t sign it, at least we’d be no worse off than we are now.

Health insurance companies must be prohibited from profiting at the expense of the well-being and lives of “subscribers”. It’s a unethical business fueling itself on the literal and figurative blood of those forced to purchase policies.

But there is no reason that those companies can’t transition to other lines of business when the”market” dries up, as it would in a single payer healthcare model. By opening enrollment in age-band increments to Medicare, that industry would have time to ramp down on its traiditonal for-profit health insurance product lines and could retrain workers to become – gasp- healthcare providers. A reasonable transition might be to widen Medicare coverage to all with partial and total disability and to the age group of 50 and over. Then add children from birth to 23. Finally, add the remainder of the population.

Medicaid would still be state-administered and would cover public health programs.

There are many, many advantages to a single payer program. Eligibility and claims would have a single set of rules and regulations. Up to 30% of dollars currently spent on the paper chase related to insurance and multiple third party payers would be freed up to invest directly in health care, health care provider training and salaries and health care infrastructure.

This might also mitigate some of the unnecessary duplication of services, such as heart interventions, and would close some of the accessibility gaps in services – such as the beds and services to manage people who have multiple chronic diseases (congestive heart failure, chronic renal disease and diabetes is one example which uses lots of resources, is reimbursed very poorly and in which patients have difficult times managing the diseases without careful and close oversight and care).

None of the candidates’ proposals accomplish these goals, which is why I continue to support the HR676 program, Medicare For All, sponsored by John Conyers.

Our current system leaves people to fend for themselves, and that isn’t good for the public welfare, for the work force, and for a healthy society. We shoot ourselves by allowing people to go without health care. The free market model does not work and is not fully applicable in the provision of health care.

it’s the CARE part which makes an industrial, 20th century model of business irrelevant. It’s a model which squeezes the health care providers for every penny while investing in duplicate infrastructure and services which cater to a narrow range of services for highly reimbursed profit-centric health problems. It’s the factory-based, assembly line model of squeezing as many people (widgets) into too-short appointments, which assumes that people have easily diagnosed problems, are fully capable of instantly understanding and managing their diagnosed health problems, and can independently navigate the fragmented and gap-ridden health care non-system, system.

The very nature of being a paitnet puts people into a dependent and submissive position. At the time when they are most vulnerable and often least capable of acting independently (due to a lack of understanding about their health problems, a lack of ability to fully particiapte in determining their care, and a lack of being able to control their own health and health care deicisions), the assembly-line, free market abandons them to fend for themselves.

Well, that doesnt work, and we have the morbidity and mortality statistics to demonstrate that via being 37 out of 38 in quality of health cand healthcare in Western first world countries.

For an industry which values evidence, the evidence is overwhelmingly demonstrating the free-market failure to provide adequate quality, adeqate healthcare service access, and adequate CARE.

And because corporate profits and CEO gilded packages are entirely uncoupled from the corporate responsibility to its customers and society, the health insurance comapnies are raking in the dough, rolling in it and using it to influence government so that we the people are suffering and dying via policy that harms us as much as any bullet in a gun.

Just as we have a reasonable expectation of someone with the skills and resources respond within a reasonable time to fight a fire when we call 911, we must have a similar system which provides the equivalent when we see help for a health problem.

Although single payer healthcare is not socialism – no government owns and administers the health system – Medicare is simply a claims and reimbursement entity – fire response is socialized. it works very well, for the most part, and citizens are mostly satisfied with public fire prevention and control services.

It’s way past time that we apply those common good principles to health care.

I think you are a Hillary Cheerleader or anti-obama, I saw your post last week. otherwise I still think your National Security post are excellent and well respected.

Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. They spend a year or two in England.

Just what we don’t need: more unfunded mandates. If HillaryCare starts lookin’ certain, buy insurance stocks cause you know they’re going up. Interesting, not a word concerning medical privacy, only Ron Paul casts light on that topic. Hell, who cares if all your medical records are only one click away from being public record, employers & insurance companies won’t discriminate against you will they? Exactly what agency will puruse your finances to determine how much insurance you’re mandated to buy? What if you have any of a zillion problems known arbitrarily as pre-existing conditions? Looks like if you make peanuts & have no assets you get “free” health care, courtesy of everyone that’s not indigent or clever at hiding assets. This concept is being brought to you by the same folks that nail bite & predict boomers are gonna bankrupt medicare. Where’s the $$$$$$$$$$$$ coming from?

Where’s the $$$$$$$$$$$$ coming from?

Your wallet or our printing press in D.C.

I just looked over Ah nold’s California proposal. Aprox 2K a yr in “hidden tax”, a free ride for illeagles & lots of insurance cost hikes for anyone not “practicing a healthy life style.” Goodbye tobacco, alcohol, sky diving, motor cycling, etc. & anything that’s fun (with an exception, no doubt, for any politically correct behavior no matter it’s cost.) Who monitors everyone to insure they’re “practicing a healthy lifestyle”? How to survive: Invest in hair analysis tech & Jenny Craig. Get a guvment grant & open up a franchise fat farm.

Ah yes, all this brought to by the party of Ronnie RayGun, remember him? The guy that was gonna get the guvment off your back? Off your back & into your urine & DNA. Hillary is Republican lite & Edwards says he doesn’t care about the deficit. These people have so much money, they’re so above the fray. Let’s give them all the Bush the 41st test: how much is a gal of milk? a loaf of bread? etc Michelle Obama makes a good point, if Barack stays in the Senate for another 4 yrs he’ll be just like them.

Well, since it has to pass the voters _before_ it takes effect, I’m not going to worry about it yet. (BTW, what’s wrong with providing ‘illeagles’ with health care? Do you _want_ epidemics?)

_Ahnuld_ wouldn’t be able to get coverage if they turned down people for lifestyle choices: smoker, drives motorcycles, skis, heart problems ….

Accutane es tambi?n usada para tratar el acn? nodular recalcitrante grave (cierto tipo de acn? grave), cuando otros tratamientos, como los antibi?ticos, no han funcionado.
Comprar Accutane Farmacia
Comprar Isotretinoin Accutane online