Current Article

Barack’s Hypocrisy on Health Care

By Larry Johnson on June 28, 2009 at 12:40 PM in Current Affairs

You’ve heard of NIMBY? (i.e., Not In My Back Yard). Meet the cousin, NIIIMK (i.e., Not If It Is My Kid). So Barack Obama is trying to sell a Health Care plan that, at the end of the day, will leave families in the position of being told by a government bureaucrat that they can’t get care for a loved one because it is “experimental” or “too costly.”

Here’s a video snippet from Barack’s ABC sponsored Health Care Infomercial:

Now let’s give Barack credit for an honest answer.

He wants the best for his family. I think the traditional conservative argument against universal health care is delusional. If you are a conservative and serve in the U.S. military then you use and rely on government funded health care. If you retired from the miliary or the CIA or the FBI, etc. then you rely on government funded health care. If you are a Federal government employee then you rely on government funded health care.

So don’t tell me that U.S. Government funded health care is pernicious or bad. We have a great health care system if you happen to work for the U.S. Government. You have choice. You can determine how much choice you want in your program depending on who you choose as your provider.

I do not pretend that there is a simple answer to the issue of providing health insurance for all Americans. Although I consider myself a fiscal conservative I think that every American does have a right to healthcare. You should not be at the mercy of an insurance company deciding whether or not you are an appropriate risk to ensure. Your ability to receive healthcare should not be a function of how much money you have. My son, for example, was born premature and suffered a massive brain hemorrhage at birth. He survived but has that “medical scar” on his records. If we had not worked for the Federal Government we could not have afforded to buy the insurance and probably would have been rejected for coverage.

Unfortunately as the healthcare debate unfolds it appears that Barack Obama wants to continue a system that provides special favors for the wealthy and well-connected while leaving the child born to a single-mother who is not financially well-off at the mercy of a government bureaucrat. What do you think?

Ladydawnelle

Aw, I’m so happy your son recovered!! That whole “period” must have just been horrendous for you and your wife & family.

I keep hearing more pros and more cons for BOTH sides and personally like you had military health coverage for a while and now am on disability (in between I had NOTHING which is why MY particular illness COULD have been prevented with annual FULL physicals)

sigh oh well

EVERYONE should have free preventative screenings for EVERYthing – forewarned is forearmed!
Paying for the follow-up should be something fair yet NOT a give away. jmo.
NomNomNom

http://careandwashingofthebrain.blogspot.com/2009/06/soooee-sooeee-calling-all-porkers.html
Congress just awarded itself 3.7 billion dollars to pay for their “expenses”: that would be 6.9 million apiece. That’s a lot of healthcare ~~we’ll never see~~.
I’m thinking a vote against anyone in office is sounding very good.
WMCB

I think that all the congresspersons, and all the govt employees who are so opposed to national health insurance should put their money where their mouth is. Why are they not burning their govt insurance cards on the steps of the Capitol, and DEMANDING that they all be allowed to buy a nifty market-based plan like everyone else?

Those poor, poor congresspersons. Being forced to accept an inefficient, bureaucratic health coverage that “gets between them and their doctor”! It’s horrible!

Let’s start a petition to free these poor elected officials from the “evils of socialized medicine” that they are being forced to endure.

Linda Anselmi

Well said WMCB.

WMCB

See, all these bogus “objections” only serve to muddy the waters (which is what they want.) We need to clear that mud away, and get down to their REAL objections.

If the objection is that they really don’t think everyone should have healthcare, then at least be intellectually honest and say that. If they want it to happen, but don’t want to pay for other people’s care out of their pocket, then SAY that. Be honest. Because then we can have a genuine conversation about it.

But you can’t debate the issue, or put it to the American people for them to decide, if all you are doing is spouting bogus crap to scare people.
Ellen D

Eric Massa is the only one in Congress that I know of to turn down the Congressional Plan until the whole country gets the same coverage.

He says he often eats lunch alone.

to77

this entire line of reasoning is ridiculous.

yeah government provided insurance for government employees is quality insurance but there is no way to provide that level of medical care for the entire country. There are 1.8 million civilian federal employees. we are talking about covering 300 million people. The CBO estimates $1.2 trillion as a starting point to cover only people up to 150% of the poverty line. (that’s less then 50 million people) And the benefits are not comparable to federal employee plans.

It would be great if everybody in america could have the “cadillac” plan that fed employees have. Heck while we are at it why dont we buy brand new Cadillacs for every American. Let’s build brand new mansions for everyone too! Let’s provide filet mignon and champagne for every family in America every Saturday night. Reality is we dont have the money to provide that level of care. period.

Our debt is spiraling out of control, the dollar is weakening by the day, we are increasing our dependency on Chinese and foreign loans, and inflation is picking up steam and people think we can afford to provide federal level coverage universally. it is fantasy

Sammie

I think there is a big difference between the health insurance coverage provided for Congress and for medicaid patients. The last time I brought one of my children to the pediatrician, I overheard the office staff trying to redirect the mother of a child covered by medicaid to a walk-in-clinic in another town. Apparently, this particular pediatric office doesn’t accept medicaid patients, and I can’t help but wonder why. Perhaps the reimbursement levels aren’t adequate, or perhaps there are other reasons.

Now, I do believe that a government run single payer system could work well and save us money, but I also fear a poorly designed or executed program could prove to be a nightmare. I’m not sure if I trust the present group in office (and that includes all of our elected officials), to put a good program in place. Will they make decisions with the best interests of their constituents in mind, or will they be unduly influenced by the health insurance lobby?

No matter what happens, I’m sure those in Congress will continue to enjoy better health coverage than most of their constituents.

Wisewoman

Sammie & Others. Be very careful of what you ask for in a single payer medicaid/medicare type system. I always had good health insurance for myself and for my family. As a federal employee I chose the Blue Cross family plan. My husband worked in private industry and he chose the Aetna family plan. A few years ago both of us had to leave our jobs early for health reasons. I maintained my Blue Cross health plan for myself only by paying a monthly fee. If you were able to compare reimbursement rates from both the private and medicare plan you would be stunned.
1. A specialist for thyroid problems and possible surgery recently billed $324 for a recent visit. Medicare approved the bill for only $94 of that amount. They paid at 80% rate for a payment of $75. Blue Cross paid $19 for the balance of the $94. For the services they rendered there is no way the cost could possible be this low.

2. My primary care physician charges $75 per doctor’s visit. Medicare reimburses at a rate of about $45 which is less than what a hairdresser charges for a wash, perm, cut, and style. This is absolutely crazy. The government is setting the price for services in the medicare program and it is far less than what private health insurances pay. I know this for a fact because I can compare the two since I have survived some real health issues. This is the danger that no one can be fully aware of until its too late to pull back.

elise

We’ve had the same primary physician for seven years and, although he did the initial physical exam, I haven’t seen him since except for passing him in the hallway of the clinic.

The PA refills my prescriptions and sends me to every specialist she can think of if I have some complaint. The specialists order every test conceivable, but a couple of years ago I was very ill, went to the emergency room (the one where the primary is supposed to have privileges) and had to see the in-house physician.

This doctor ordered every test she could think of and decided I had congestive heart failure due to cardiac arrhythmia. I also had pneumonia due to the fluid building up around my heart. A cardiologist and pneumonlogist consulted and after three days they finally listened to what my husband and I had been trying to tell them from the time we entered the ER.

I have Graves Disease and it took them three days of repeating this problem before they decided to check my thyroid level which was “through the roof” which was causing my heart rate to increase.

I had been trying for close to three years to see an endocrinologist. There are only three in this city and the first one we tried changed her office after I made an appointment and no longer accepted our ins. The second one moved out of town before we could even make an appointment and the third one was so booked, we weren’t able to see him before everything went to hell.

During this time neither the PA or the primary suggested this disease could be dangerous. The doctor in the hospital ordered a cat scan and I was injected with iodine. Because of the iodine, I was unable to begin the ablation therapy for several months and had to be on an iodine free diet for a month. I had two thyroid scans which would not have been necessary if the doctors in the hospital had listened to us or if there had been a database with the information or if they had allowed me to see my primary care.

I had a “thyroid storm” after the ablation therapy and went back to the ER because my heart was fibrillating. They wanted to order another cat scan and my husband made a huge scene and ended up screaming at the doctor before they listened to what we were trying to tell them. He hadn’t even bothered to check the records at the hospital.

We had to go on COLB after my husbands office changed the ins coverage. It was expensive and we’re still arguing with them and the hospital since they didn’t pay anything on the second hospital visit. The hospital is threatening to to sue us for the money. While I normally appreciate irony, I’m ready to tear this hospital down brick by brick.

There are so many problems with health care in this country and I just have this feeling the Dems are just trying to pass anything without understanding what’s really happening out here in the hinterlands. I don’t believe Obama is really interested in the details and that’s where you find the devil.
sandi78

But, that $45 reimbursement for the doctor is for about ten minutes of his time, maybe. Make that into an hourly rate and it’s a pretty decent $270. At your doctor’s billing rate, that’s $450 AN HOUR. If you’re lucky and get fifteen minutes of your doctor’s time, then the hourly would work out at $180 (or $300). Still not too shabby. It’s really disingenuous to compare the cost of a hairdo (and do people still have perms?) with a visit to the doctor.

mary

Right on! They’re not members of the 50-million strong-one-step-from-bankruptcy uninsured!

Hillary Clinton was a true pioneer back in ’93 and had sent a team of researchers to Ottawa to study the superior Canadian healthcare system. They spend 8% of Canada’s GNp on healthcare vs 17.5 of U.S.
Infant mortality rates are far above the American standard beside Albania(!) and women’s preventive medicine is preached and practiced. No Canadian ever goes to bed thinking they will go bankrupt if they can’t pay their medical bills! 62% of American bankruptcies are result of inability to pay medical bills. Healthcare is a Human Right, not a bloddy privilege, Obummer! That’s the message he needs to hear, this timid Empty Suit full of words words words. Send Barack to Canada to see the difference. You don’t have to be a civil servant to have great care.
It’s incredible but guess who was voted as ‘The most Popular Canadian of All Time’ last year? A pop idol? Nope. A hockey idol like Gretzky? Nope.
The Winner was a dead politician, former leader of the third party (only way for people to get things done in government!) Tommy Douglas. He’s an icon for young and old and if any political jerk tries t mess around with this LifeSaving healtchcare for all people, he/she’d be kicked out of their job in a jiffy.
Canadians are incredulous upon discovering that 62% of American bankruptices are the result of people not being able to pay off their….medical bills!

My advice to Obummer is to…GET HILLARY’S ADVICE! And send some researchers to Canada and start XEROXING….or Barry’s without a job next year.

Heather

I think Michelle got paid a lot of money to make sure that children on Medicaid like the boy who got his face ripped off by a pitbull are turned away from upperclass hospitals such as U of C.

Sammie

I read that story a few days ago. At first, it didn’t seem like such a big deal for a patient suffering from a minor ailment to ride a bus to a different facility, BUT in the case you mentioned, the bus ride was an hour long and the injury was significant. Could you imagine sitting in the emergency room for hours until someone could see you only to be told to take your injured child on an hour bus ride, and then sitting in another waiting room?

Chicago Joe

You have to understand the context. U of C is an elitist school, institution, etc. By virtue of its location, in the heart of Hyde Park, and the South Side, it is located in what might be viewed as geographically undesirable from a patient mix perspective. SO many who find themselves there are not able to pay their bills. Michelle’s charade, now headed by Obama pal, Eric Whitaker, who bombed as the head of the state’s public health, was meant to be a cosmeticized patient dump. Of course, under the auspices of “better care,” but not really. How is care in the community “better” than that at a world class institution?

Chicago Joe

Sorry, just read comment directly below which explains nicely.

PamFlorida

The following article foreshadows the reality of Obamacare.

Michelle Obama’s Patient-Dumping Scheme

March 02, 2009
By David Catron

The First Lady helped create a notorious program that dumped poor patients on community hospitals, yet the national media ignore the story. Imagine if her husband were a Republican.

The University of Chicago Medical Center has received a good deal of justly opprobrious press over its policy of “redirecting” low-income patients to community hospitals while reserving its own beds for well-heeled patients requiring highly profitable procedures. Substantial coverage was given to a recent indictment of the program by the American College of Emergency Physicians. ACEP’s president, Dr. Nick Jouriles, released a statement suggesting that the initiative comes “dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,’ a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act, and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick’ wealthy patients over poor.”

Oddly absent from most of the unflattering press coverage of UCMC’s patient-dumping scheme is any mention of the role our new First Lady played in devising the program. A laudable exception has been the Chicago Sun-Times, which reported last August that “Michelle Obama — currently on unpaid leave from her $317,000-a-year job as a vice president of the prestigious hospital — helped create the program.”

On the rare occasions when other “news” media have bothered to connect the Urban Health Initiative to its glamorous creator, they have attempted to whitewash this tawdry program. Typical of such disingenuous coverage was a story in the Washington Post, which described it as “an innovative program to steer the patients to existing neighborhood clinics.”

But no amount of journalistic lipstick can hide the reality that Mrs. Obama’s initiative is a patient-dumping scheme. Such “cherry-picking,” as Dr. Jouriles accurately describes it, was, at one time, fairly common. Prestigious institutions like the University of Chicago Medical Center routinely “dumped” Medicaid, uninsured and other unprofitable patients on less mercenary community hospitals. Many patients suffered needlessly, and more than a few actually died, as the result of this practice. So, in 1986, President Reagan signed the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act (EMTALA) into law. EMTALA made such “redirection” illegal, but many high profile hospitals still chafed at being forced to treat poor patients. Enter Michelle Obama, UCMC’s “Vice President for Community and External Affairs.”

Mrs. Obama first hatched the UCMC program as the “South Side Health Collaborative,” which featured a gang of “counselors” whose job it was to “advise” low-income patients that they would be better off at other hospitals and clinics. The program was so successful in getting rid of unwanted patients that she expanded it, gave it a new name, and hired none other than David Axelrod to sell the program to the public. According to the Sun-Times, “Obama’s wife and Valerie Jarrett, an Obama friend and adviser who chairs the medical center’s board, backed the Axelrod firm’s hiring.” Axelrod helped the future First Lady formulate a public relations campaign in which the “Urban Health Initiative” was represented as a boon to the community actuated by the purest of altruistic motives.

The resultant PR campaign was a study in Orwellian audacity. Chicago’s inner city residents soon began hearing that UCMC’s patient dumping program would “dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents” and that the medical center was generously willing to provide “a ride on a shuttle bus to other centers.” Likewise, the people who ran the community hospitals to which these unwanted patients were being shuttled began to read claims in local media to the effect that the Urban Health Initiative was good for them as well. Dr. Eric Whitaker, the Blagojevich crony who succeeded Mrs. Obama as Director of the program, repeatedly assured gullible reporters that the financial impact on these hospitals would be positive: “The initiative actually is improving their bottom lines.” The CFOs of those hospitals were no doubt relieved to learn that treating Medicaid and uninsured patients is profitable.

But you just can’t please some people. In one of the few frank passages of the Post article, we discover that many members of UCMC’s medical staff believe the program is nothing more than an “attempt to ensure that the hospital retains only affluent patients with insurance.” And another association of emergency physicians has joined ACEP in denouncing the Urban Health Initiative. The Chicago Tribune reports that Dr. Larry Weiss, president of the American Academy of Emergency Medicine is unhappy about UCMC’s failure to consult its own ER physicians before initiating the program: “Not including emergency-room physicians … would be analogous to changing the way surgery is performed in an operating room without involving any surgeons.” Dr. Whitaker assures us, however, that such critics are merely “opposed to change.”

Presumably, he would be similarly dismissive of Angela Adams, who brought her son to the medical center’s ER after his lip had been partially torn off by a pit bull. As the Tribune puts it, “Instead of rushing Dontae into surgery … the hospital’s staff began pressing her about insurance.” Unfortunately for Dontae, he was covered by Medicaid. So, all he got from the UCMC emergency department was a shot, some antibiotics, and instructions to “follow up with Cook County.” Angela had to take her son across town to John Stroger Hospital, where he was immediately admitted for reconstructive surgery. Like doctors Jouriles and Weiss, Angela is having trouble seeing the community benefit of the Urban Health Initiative.

Meanwhile, the program’s parents, Michelle Obama and David Axelrod, have moved to Washington. As the First Lady and the President’s closest advisor, they wield enormous power. Indeed, they may be the most powerful people in the Obama Administration, aside from the President himself. If these two characters were willing to betray their Chicago neighbors — the South Side’s most vulnerable citizens — with a disgraceful program like the Urban Health Initiative, what sort of mischief will they devise for the hapless denizens of flyover country?

Come to think of it, isn’t Obamacare being sold to us in pretty much the same way the Urban Health Initiative was sold to Chicago?

Animal Control

Nice comment, and thanks.
Diana L. C.

Very interesting!
NoBamaNoWay

heh. surprise, surprise. sure is a good thing hillary’s not president, right……?
alphaBeach

thanks – very eye opening, but not surprising…. we need to call the emperor on his wardrobe.
Naomi

absolute garbage. my partner works at UC Hospitals – what you are saying is a totally one-sided viewpoint from a reporter. stop reaching for stuff to slam Michelle and Obama with – you are simply NOT reporting the entire situation at all.

Boxer Mum 06

Naomi we’re all eyes – tell us the other half of the story.

Lily

I think the basic, fundamental problem with contemporary health care is that it is almost totally driven by the profit motive and greed. It was not always that way, even in my lifetime. Maybe people should ban together and try to promote health cooperatives and non-profit health care and insurance. Little pockets of non-profit do exist, but I never hear much about it and it doesn’t appear that any government policies are promoting non-profit care. That kind of change, of course, would take some leadership from the medical profession, which I think was one of the first groups to sell its soul to greed and profit.

Ellen D

Hospitals should never be run for profit.
I’d like to know what underhanded sleight-of-hand allowed the ones that were non-profit to be sold to large health corporations.
I understood that type of transaction was not legal, but then, I am not an expert in corruption loopholes.

Animal Control

Hypocrisy

We’ll be seeing alot more of this word during Obama’s administration.
Ellen D

Larry, I think most of us here are fiscal conservatives but a lot of people don’t understand what it is to live in a country with universal coverage. the closest here is the government coverage given seniors, government employees, and veterans.
It is totally unfair that this is not extended to everyone.
Unfortunately, unless someone has experienced full government coverage as you and I have, you can fall prey to the lies put out there by the insurance companies.

sandi78

I agree.

I grew up in the UK, in Edinburgh, and moved here when I was 27. I’ve lived here for a long time now. I can compare both systems. Here, the doctors’ offices are nicely decorated and the hospitals are like hotels in some cases. There, the doctors’ offices are a bit more basic and in the hospital you may have to share a room with three others, rather than just one other. Also, the hospitals don’t have bedside phones, but now that everyone has mobiles that isn’t such a big deal.

In both countries, the standard of medical care is excellent, but only in one is it readily available to everyone with no follow-up bill. Make no mistake, it’s not free, it’s paid for in your taxes, but when you need it, it’s there and you can count on it.

pm317

will leave families in the position of being told by a government bureaucrat that they can’t get care for a loved one because it is “experimental” or “too costly.”

Or, in his grandmother’s case, she was dying anyway in a couple of months, why bother with the hip replacement. Cold as an ice cube..

Peggy Sue

Pm, from a “logical” viewpoint you’re right. But when loved ones are involved logic goes out the window.

I had to make a decision regarding my mother’s care. She was in a nursing home suffering from dementia. She was fragile and elderly. She fell and broke her hip [or her hip broke and she fell]. I got the call from the attending physician about what way to go. If I declined the hip surgery, she would have been bedridden and in pain. Yet, her physical condition did not ensure a positive outcome.

I went for the surgery. She died a week later. There are no easy answers when it comes to end of life issues. And anyone who pretends they have the answers is doing just that–pretending. But I agree as a society we’re going to be forced into making decisions that may not go down easily.

I still ponder the wisdom of my own personal decision. Logically it makes no sense. But my mother was my mother. I went with my heart and the doctor’s advice. Was it right or wrong? I still don’t know.

oowawa

Feelings in heart + doctor’s opinion = the right decision. “Bedridden and in pain” does not sound to me like a viable option when there is a chance of help.

Chicago Joe

Here is a pretty good explanation of what evidence-based medicine is, and is the type of definition that is used when teaching health care professionals about the topic.

The most common definition of EBM is taken from Dr. David Sackett. EBM is “the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient. It means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research.” (Sackett D, 1996)

EBM is the integration of clinical expertise, patient values, and the best evidence into the decision making process for patient care. Clinical expertise refers to the clinician’s cumulated experience, education and clinical skills. The patient brings to the encounter his or her own personal and unique concerns, expectations, and values. The best evidence is usually found in clinically relevant research that has been conducted using sound methodology. (Sackett D, 2002)

You will note, however, that Obama is trying to sell this while ignoring the concept of patient values as being essential to the process. In other words, if I am your doctor, I share the best known evidence with you (if there is some—and you would be shocked to realize how often this is not the case), and then we discuss what your would prefer and whether the merits of each choice might be. In Obamacare, the “board” which no doubt will be Acorn-leaning leftists, will tell you what you shall do. I will leave to your imagination the kinds of decisions they might make.

But folks, looks like we are on the precipice of the proverbial slippery slope. Larry’s son (God bless him) might have had some decisions made on his behalf that were based on evidence, rather than on values.

Peggy Sue

And that’s a very scary proposition, Joe. Had a board decided the efficacy in my son’s case, from his lack of response to initial treatment, he would have most likely died or spent his life in a nursing home. Even his physicians and rehab therapists were doubtful in the beginning.

But because of the continued treatments, his own fierce will and a bit of pixie dust, he had a good recovery and managed to recover 90% of his physical and cognitive ability.

It’s a crap shoot with head injury and a number of catastrophic situations–it can turn out well or turn gruesome in an eyeblink. We don’t know enough yet, medically, to call the absolute endgame for each and every patient, even with the best medical advice at our elbows.

But to giveup for economic reasons alone with some preconceived mumbo-jumbo formula is immoral in my mind.

We either respect life. Or we don’t. But there’s no escaping the decisions coming down the road. Ain’t going to be easy.

elise

In situation where there is a choice between two different methods of treatment and one of the choices is the preferred method, the second choice economic, there should be no question the wealthy and the poor should be treated equally.

If a wealthy patient is hospitalized for a procedure and may stay in the hospital for four days to recover, but a poor patient is allowed twenty four hours, the system needs to change. The insurance companies and medicare should not be making the decisions.

I’m sorry about your mother, Peggy Sue. There is always some feeling of quilt after a loved one dies and it’s worse when you have to made the decision. You did what you thought best.

Peggy Sue

Thanks, Elise. Appreciate the post.

I’m still torn by the decision because in addition to my mother being my mother, I knew her unlike the attending physician. I knew she positively hated the situation she was in, the limited quality of life. She was an artist. She could no longer draw or paint or sculpt. She was an avid reader, but she could no longer concentrate on a page of text. She was fiercely independent and still had moments of clarity. And in those moments, she wanted to go home, her home, though she was completely incapable of taking care of herself. And besides, my sister and I had sold the family home, not for the money but because we were both living out-of-state and knew the end was coming. She’d refused to move in with either one of us.

I made the decision. But it did not sit easy because I knew my mother for who and what she was.

My point is that these decisions are never easy or formula driven. And I absolutely agree with you that economics should never drive the ultimate decisions we make for loved ones or anyone else.

We make the hard choices. We live with them and right or wrong, those decisions are ours to make. I’ll be damned if I would ever trust a governmental board to dictate which way I had to go.

Ethical questions are never easy and rarely clear cut, regardless of what fundamentalists would have us believe. But when it comes to family members, it’s always personal and involves our own private values and beliefs.

I still don’t know whether my decision was correct. But it was definitely mine to make, not the government or an insurance clerk.

elise

My father caught the flu which turned into pneumonia and he had a respiratory arrest and went into a coma. He didn’t leave a living will so my sister and I had to make the decision the take him off life-support.

He had good ins which gave us the time to have several conversations with the doctor in order to understand if there was a possibility of recovery before we made the decision. I’m still bothered by what we did and my sister died two years later still a young woman and and I know it was a weight she carried until her death.

I went to grief therapy after my sister died and I found every one in the group felt some kind of guilt. It is part of grief and even though discussing it with others who had similar experiences helped, I still feel overwhelmed at times. I can’t even imagine how horrible it would be to not have the right to make the choice due to financial considerations.

I don’t have any faith in our congress or Obama to understand and do what is right for the public. I’m afraid if a health care bill is passed in a hurry to satisfy political ambitions, we may have some unpleasant surprises.

Hillary said universal health care will work only if it is mandated for everyone and I believe that is true, but given the evidence so far, Obama will almost certainly made compromises so he can claim later he should be given credit if it works and blame congress if it doesn’t.

Peggy Sue

Thanks for that, oowawa. In my heart of hearts, I think you’re right. At least I’ve talked myself into that side of the argument.

These are not easy decisions to make for someone else, even a mother.

pm317

I was not saying it was my PoV. I was stating that is what 0bama would say about his grandmother and her broken hip.

Peggy Sue

My apologies, pm. I obviously misread your post.

TeakWoodKite

1) provide basic care to all US persons and get them out of the ER.

2) Provide some affordable form of critical care plans to all Americans.

3) Provide some framework for incentives to increase R&D in medical advances.

4) Require ANY insurance company to pay on demand the full amount of services rendered and get them out of any ability to manipulate “defined coverage”.

5) My doctor does not deliver babies due to the cost of mal-pratice insurance. So somewhere in this, tort reform is needed to allow doctors to be doctors. Except in cases of gross negligence or the like, doctors should not be exposed to running all kinds of test to rule out being sued instead of ruling out any medical conditions.

The CBO estimate of over a trillion dollars is contrasted with any offset in savings. Why not?

elise

Teak, I believe you are right. The threat of malpractice suits has a negative effect on the way doctors make decisions.

don tufts

why is it in all of this discussion no one remebers what hillary proposed,that is opening up the federal plan to us all on a sliding scale basis.if its good enough for congress it should be good enough for us all or there should be no fereral plan at all.
Peggy Sue

Larry, I think you’re right on the mark with your comments. I, too, believe that our health care system took a turn to the dark side when health care became limited or managed by those [insurance, pharmeceutical companies, hospitals, etc]for whom the “bottom line” is the major concern. My husband is an accountant/finanical person but medicine does not belong in the hands of number crunchers.

My family and I have not had the benefit of a government program, but we have experienced treatment when a catastrophic injury was involved. I have absolutely no complaint about the doctors and medical team who turned a grim, nearly fatal injury into a recovery for our 19-year old son.

But don’t get me started on the hell that our insurance company put us through from day 1. There’s no reason anyone should have to plead, beg and haggle for necessary treatments after you’ve payed obscene premiums for 25 years. I don’t know what patients do when they have no medical advocate. I guess they shrivel up and die.

And that’s a disgrace in a country that gives daily lipservice to the dignity of the individual and the worth of every human life.

We need real health care reform. Not illusions or bandaid fixes.
Craig Della Penna

As part of my “Easy Answers to Complex Questions” I’ve written the following to all my representatives:

Dear Congressperson/Senator Foghorn (his/her name):

I am a voter in your district/state and I want you to understand:

1.) If it’s not single payer, it’s not healthcare reform.

2.) To make this easy for you, just take off the age restriction on Medicare, wait five years, adjust as necessary.

3.) Most important: I am very incensed about this and I absolutely will remember how you vote on this issue come your next election.

Sincerely,
Chester Q. Fordyce (your name)
TeakWoodKite

Some interesting stats at FiveThirtyEight regarding Healthcare PAcs contributions to Senators and Public opinon or single payer options
Onofre’s arm

I think that the popular acceptance of the preposterous notion that healthcare is a right is the driving force behind the rapid increase of healthcare costs. It is the reason used by government to intrude in a private enterprise. It has the potential of either enslaving healthcare providers, or driving them out of the discipline. It is contrary to the basic principles upon which this country was founded. It is found nowhere in the Constitution. It is Marxist in nature, and violates the social contract that is far better protected by the principles of free market capitalism. And it is the destructive belief of an ever growing sector that has been brainwashed to the point that they expect all of their needs to be supplied by others. That’s what I think Mr. Johnson.

TeakWoodKite

Onofre’s arm, While I respect your position, I would ask you; it might not be a right as you state but is not a moral imperative?

I do mean in any religious context, just as a human being caring about the survival of mankind.
Craig Della Penna

Unfortunately free market capitalism has created the current debacle in healthcare.
Laissez faire capitalists always forget that little or no government regulation means endless versions of Enron’s, Bernie Madoff’s and TARP’s – that is a neverending supply of thieves, conmen and swindlers.
Empirical evidence shows that, while the free market may be more efficient at management of costs through the efficiency of denial of benefits, the free market is better by orders of magnitude at outright theft.
Government provision of heathcare benefits is not intrusion of government into the ‘rights’ of private enterprise – rather it is the inevitable result of private enterprise proving it is utterly incapable of providing those services.

MBC

Private Enterprise provides damn good insurance to federal employees. The government pays the premiums, everyone is automatically covered in the program (no pre-existing clauses in the FEP plans) and they reimburse providers sufficiently. Not like Medicare or Medicaid that reimburses providers below cost, therefore limiting the number of providers willing to participate and denies coverage far more often than any commercial insurance I am familiar with and I am familiar with hundreds of plans nationwide.

Craig Della Penna

If that were the case and it was a truly competitive marketplace, those insurance companies would long since have offered that plan with its reimbursement schedules and non-exclusion of pre-existing conditions to every one – and they would have completely cornered the market.
Since we do not see this you merely reinforce my argument that greed and outright theft will always cripple private healthcare offerings to the point of uselessness.
As long as the profit motive rules healthcare we will have a useless, broken system.
I’m sorry but the logic is inescapable.
Fredster

And don’t forget the employees pay their share of the premiums also! How much that share is depends on the plan you take and whether you are taking single or family coverage.

Fredster

OH! And don’t forget all of the deductibles, co-pays and the rest that go with it.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Three-Basic-Parenting-Styles&id=744499 Northwest rain

Survival of the fittest.

Or a cast system — where the upper cast are well cared for, provided for, have jobs waiting for them after attending Harvard etc.

The lower cast — fend for themselves, they have no health insurance — their sole purpose is to serve the upper cast. Schools educate the lower cast children to serve their superiors.

———————–

Or we could move into the 21st Century and use a health care system that has worked for decades.

In the military there is health care system — you went clinic and were always seen by a doctor. The clinics were close, for complicated or serious cases there are the larger often combined services (military branches) hospitals. This system works — and the government has a lot of experience running this sort of community based health care. NEVER ever did my parents have to pull out their wallet to pay for anything. Our medical files were at the clinic. Emergency care was available and transport to the hospital was provided.

The clinics are a the core of this system — and I do believe that the Canadians also have local neighborhood clinics where you can get care and referrals if needed. My Canadian friends have nothing but good to say about their health care system. Nearly ALL Canadians are familiar with the US health care system — because so many have close family and friends living in the US or they themselves have lived in the US. NOT a single Canadian would trade THEIR health care system for what the US has.

——————

Something has got to change or we will be living in a future with a strict cast system — and only the upper cast will have access to “modern” medicine.

All bow down to KING 0blabblah.
TeakWoodKite

“The President has advised me that it would not be in my best interest to press ahead with what he called ‘a witch hunt,’” Conyers said. “He says enemies of the Party would use evidence from my hearings to fan the flames of seditious resistance to the legitimacy of his administration.”

I apologize for being slightly OT, but it relates to how BO is more like Bush everyday that goes by.

Now think how pressure is being applied to bO’s health care. SICK.

WTF?

TeakWoodKite

Satire from another website sorry for posting this comment above as I can’t confirm it.
Craig Della Penna

Can you give me the source article for that quote, I hadn’t heard it – it’s really explosive in its implications: those words could have been uttered by the Iranian Ayatollah.

Thanx

TeakWoodKite

I left the author a request for the source as I am feeling a little bit…suckered..

NomNomNom

John Semmens at Arizona Conservative: satire, not for real.

TeakWoodKite

Busted. Lol. Good Satire though…got me.

NomNomNom

it didn’t sound too implausible to me either!

bayareavoter

We need a health care system. The Obama team does not want to repeat Hillary’s experience during Bill’s first term.

BUT the idea that this complex issue should be forced thru on a manufactured timetable and not well-thought out is preposterous. It’s going to cost billions (trillions?) of $$. Isn’t it worthy of real analysis instead of the way the idiots in Congress do everything?

And as one of the people who gets health benefits thru my husband’s job I resent the fact that the life choices he made to stay in that job in order to get benefits for his family will now result in higher taxes (read as a decrease in pay, actually) in order to pay for the uninsured.

Some of those uninsured (like some of my friends and brothers) made other life choices and left good paying jobs with benefits to have a more independent lifestyles. Why should we pay more taxes to fund their health care? EVERYONE should be required to pay more taxes in order to pay for healthcare. It’s not going to be free but I think everyone needs to pay (sliding scale?).
bayareavoter

please free my comment from the spam filter…
MBC

Larry, there is a BIG difference between the FEP (Federal Employee Program) healthcare that government employees receive (best care out there, provided by commercial insurance companies like Blue Cross/Blue Shield) and government insurance, like Medicare, Medicaid, VA and Champ VA. BIG, big difference. The plan that Hillary promoted was for each of to be able to buy into plans like FEP. For those of us that were not Medicare or Medicaid eligible, but still could not afford it, it would be subsidized, much like Medicare Part D is subsidized for those who cannot afford either the premiumns, co-pays, or co-insurance. Do NOT get fooled by BO’s plans for healthcare coverage.
MBC

Mine too!
mountainaires

I grew up as a military dependent, and spent the greater portion of my adult life either as active duty or as a military spouse, now a military retiree: Give me government funded healthcare like the military provides any day. My in-laws are also retired military and in their later years benefitted from Tricare for Life.

There’s no better system anywhere. If we could duplicate it, everyone in this country would be covered, and receive excellent health care.

Are there flaws, occasional malpractice, or mistakes? You bet. But on the whole, over my entire lifetime, I’ve never had one complaint. I’ve had every health care benefit I needed; so did my mother, who died from cancer at the age of 41, in 1971. So, have my in-laws, who’ve had the benefit of the military system’s Tricare for Life.

So, you bet those “conservatives” in Congress, the military and all government funded health care systems. Let’s see you give up what you’ve got before you try to take it away from the rest of us, with your hypocritical lies about “socialized medicine” and “government funded health care.”

Thanks for pointing it out so eloquently Larry. That’s always been my argument too. Give me government funded healthcare anyday.

I do believe that if we weren’t wasting so much money bailing out corporations, countries, governments or “allies” like Israel, we could probably afford to provide at least a minimum of basic decent health care to every citizen in this country.

And no, I’m sorry, but I don’t believe illegal immigrants should receive government-funded healthcare; I’m a hard-nosed asshole about that, and I can’t be bothered to apologize for my belief that citizens deserve more than illegal immigrants. It’s simply basic common sense.

Peggy Sue

Mountainaires said:

“And no, I’m sorry, but I don’t believe illegal immigrants should receive government-funded healthcare; I’m a hard-nosed asshole about that, and I can’t be bothered to apologize for my belief that citizens deserve more than illegal immigrants. It’s simply basic common sense.”

Well then, we’re both assholes, Mountainaires, because I absolutely agree.

US citizens come first and foremost. If we were a country of unlimited wealth, then maybe, just maybe we could talk about freebies for all.

But unicorns exist only in myth and children’s picture books.

Health care reform means reforming alot of things. I can empathsize with foreign workers seeking a better life. But there’s a limit, and handing out social service goodies, including health care falls into that category, particularly when we have US citizens unable to tap decent health care.

There was a documentary last year featuring the group of doctors and dentists who go to third world countries to provide free medical care. The went to the US Coal Belt, West Virginia specifically, and were mobbed by people seeking help.

Americans, US citizens to the one, desperate for help.

That should make us feel all ashamed. When fellow citizens cannot get decent medical care, can’t afford to take their kids to the God damn dentist, and then, we cry tears over illegal immigrants?

Please!

We need to save ourselves before we save the world. Otherwise, everything will be lost and we won’t be of help to anyone.

TeakWoodKite

So if a “illegal alien is missing fingers from an accident suffered “on the job”, you would deny them care as a human being?

Peggy Sue

No, of course, not, Teakwood. In an emergency situation, giving aid is the only decent, humane thing to do. But do you really think that any society can afford to open its health care system to anyone lucky enough to sneak across the border for anything and everything?

One third of the uninsured people in this country are illegal immigrants. I’m sorry but native born and naturalized citizens should be at the front of the line for regular health care benefits.

We’re bankrupt as a nation–broke, insolvent. All the “happy talk” that the Obama folks want to put out is an absolute sham.

Again, I reiterate: we have to save ourselves first before we can save the world.
Animal Control

I’m glad that the framers of the Constitution and Jefferson decided to use the words “people and person” and not “citizen” when guaranteeing/fighting for our rights.

susan

Although I have always been a supporter of some form of health care for all, I am hesistant to trust this administration to implement it fairly(to say nothing of the current congress!). I currently have a wonderful health plan (knock on wood!) fully paid by my employer (and believe me, I’m sure I paying for it in the form of less than stellar raises each year), and I am almost hoping healthcare is put on a back burner until the U.S. economy is more stable (and we have a more trustworthy pres & congress (of course, will that every happen?)
http://deleted Aaron Kramer

Don’t fool yourselves into believing that single payer is the answer. The day the government is in full control is the day the people will receive care based on their worth to society. If you have the right job you will be covered. if you belong to correct social group or political party your needs will be meet. The rest of the pleabeians will will left to take a pill instead of a surgical procedure. They will not get a test in order to accurately diagnose the problem they will be told that the test is only accurate when you belong to the privileged class. (Rich, Union member, government employee, Democrat or just politically connected)

Real questions will arise about whether it is cost effective to save a premature child or allow a malnourished women to carry a child to term. The science and statistics will say that it isn’t justifiable.

Whether a 48 year old unemployed women with breast cancer is worth saving? Should drug addicts be made infertile in order to ensure that they don’t burden society with expensive future addicts? Should we apply this to their children. just remember how Pelosi said the condoms were stimulus because “It keeps the poor from burdening the system in the future with unsupported children.” If a republican said this we still be listening to the commentary on this.

When you attempt to appeal the decisions, of the government sponsored health care system, with government appointed Appeal Board, you always be denied! The science and statistics will say that it isn’t justifiable. The government will lower costs be allowing people to die. At least today when you lose a request with your healthcare provider, you can use the court system, appeal to the political apparatus or god forbid the media for help. When the government is in charge all of these previously named options will actively work against you.

We currently provide health care for our entire population using 17% of the nations income. Now without a doubt it is expensive and inefficient but do we really want to spend another 10% of our income to provide more services without evidence of the effectiveness. Once the government is paying for the care,even though we will be paying for it with our tax dollars, it is only a matter of time before they mandate caloric intake and exercise. This will become a fight about freedom of choice, LIBERTY. If you combine the restrictions from Global Warming and health care you have a recipe that can and will lead to complete and total government control of everything we do.

We should move to force insurance companies to pay benefits that the are contractually obliged to pay. We should also realize that doctors and lawyers are also part of the problem. Over billing and legal claims both drive up costs and compensation. I want everyone to have access to health care but I don’t want to force people to get it. Why should a healthy person be forced to pay for someone else? This is inherently unAmerican and coercive to say the least. Why don’t we stop insurance companies from barring doctors from offering their service to the noninsured for the same price as the insured. The insurance company pays x% of the billed rate why isn’t the cost just the billed rate?

Many questions but Obama’s plan actually will make the insurance companies a bundle because it provide 50 million new customers. One last thing remember the insurance companies have lots of employees if we just put them out of business I think we might need to consider what the real employment consequences will be. ( I am not trying to subsidize the insurance industry) Obama infomercial failed miserably which is why there has been no coverage of it on the MSM for the last 5 days.

Fredster

We currently provide health care for our entire population using 17% of the nations income

No we don’t provide health care for our entire population.

http://deleted Aaron Kramer

yes we do it is provided at a high cost but no is turned away from a hospital due to a lack of funds. they might not have access to a GP but they do access to care. This does not mean I think we shouldn’t have more clinics and alternative options. Look at the clinics opening in CVS’ and Walgreens, these re great examples of what can be done to offer cheaper alternatives.

elise

“Why should a healthy person be forced to pay for someone else?”

Because anyone who lives long enough will eventually need health care.

We live in a beautiful old home (120 yrs old) and it certainly needs more maintenance than newer homes, but that doesn’t mean we should tear it down. When you get older, even you will need more maintenance and unless you are very wealthy, you will need Medicare.

If you are now a twenty something, you probably don’t have any need for ins, but in another twenty five years you will. What you will pay in health care cost now, will insure you will not face a situation in the future where you are denied the help you need for lack of funds. It could be one of the best investments you will ever make because one catastrophic event can wipe you out.

I don’t trust this congress or president to come up with a workable solution, but remember it was Richard Nixon who pushed HMOs and PPOs which were possibly the biggest disasters in the history of health care.

http://deleted Aaron Kramer

So should your neighbor pay to keep up your 120 year old home? Should you build a middle class family a new spacious home because they will live there for 30 yrs? I agree that older people MIGHT need more care but you are assuming that they will. Your logic is the basis for a ponzi scheme where incoming money pays outing benefits. This concept hasn’t worked well with medicare and medicaid. This is also a program that equates to generational theft. Additionally they want to means test benefits, so that those who pay the lions share for the program will have no access to it. What a Joke! One last point on this topic if this idea is so preferred why do so many poor and rich people from countries(think Mexico and UK) immigrate to the US and endanger their lives through inadequate health care? The answers is that the get the care they need.

Once the government takes of service and can spend any additional money its saves in health care, many people will watch older homes being knocked down. Obama has stated many times that he will ration health care to the elderly and the old home you want to preserve will fade away. Watch the movie Logan’s Run because this is what our future looks like. Obama also thinks we need more General practitioners not specialists. When you think about this position you realize his goal is only to help those who will recover in the future not the chronically or terminally ill.

But again I ask you the most important question is where is the LIBERTY and FREEDOM in this situation. Why are so many people happy with the government FORCING its citizens to engage in a certain type of behavior? Our founding fathers were wisely very wary of government and the idea that government is the solution to every problem we face, is an answer that has been tried and has failed through out history.

elise

We have very good neighbors, Kramer and they do help up with repairs. They are wonderful people and we are lucky.

For the health care, get back with me in twenty or thirty years or when you are over fifty.

Boxer Mum 06

“Why should a healthy person be forced to pay for someone else?”

Agreed Elise and lets not also forget that ‘healthy’ is a relative term that can change instantly.

What about the whole step outside and get hit by a bus saying. It’s true! You can be a healthy person one minute and then something tragic changes your life forever.
MBC

It was Kaiser that created the HMO model. From a patient’s financial perspective, it offers unlimited care and is a less expensive option thatn a PPO or Indemnity plan. It may be managed and you may have to use in-network providers, but there is no lifetime maximum, there are no co-pays and co-insurance and most providers now participate with just about every HMO out there.

Up

Your comment is a bunch of BS. The governments of every single industrial country on the planet do a far better job at providing healthcare to their citizens than the private sector does in the U.S.

http://www.healthinlife.com TeakWoodKite

Busted. Lol. Good Satire though…got me.
BTW I love your blog!
TeakWoodKite

Mr.Johnson, Does BO think living in a hut without healthcare is “the best” for his family?
jdona

My husband is 100% disabled service connected Vietnam Vet.He is currently being treated at the local VA Hospital for lung cancer. The care he has received is second to none. As his wife, I get my health insurance through ChampVA through the VA Health Care system. Its pretty straightforward, I pay 25%, they pay 75%, up to an out of pocket deductible of $3000 a year, after the deductible is met, which is usually one surgery, everything is paid at 100% for the remainder of the year. For awhile, I carried other health insurance through work, in addition to this, and I was with Blue Cross/Blue Shield, now Anthemn, and between the two, ChampVa is the better. I can’t say anything bad about either the VA hospital or my coverage through ChampVA. Compared to private insurance that I have had, it is superior, not to mention I don’t have deductions for it from my paycheck. It is a benefit my husband earned in the USMC in 1966-1969. Like any other hospital, your care is only as good as the doctors and nurses, and in our area, the VA hospital, at least in Oncology, are outstanding, if overworked. And I can choose any doctor, and any hospital I want, there is no mandate that says I can only go to HCA or Carillion, etc. The only downside is that Walgreens pharmacy will not take ChampVA. So I suppose if they are examples of government health care, I would approve.
alphaBeach

I think the class/caste dynamics are going to be the end of healthcare for those who don’t have jobs/spouses/etc.

I’m currently unemployed (since November!)and have a “high deductible” plan that has its merits, (fairly low premiums, prescription coverage, can see doc for $30) but if I ever need to find $5k for that emergency or diagnostic that isn’t covered, i’m screwed. (I have a family history of cancer and am due a screening I cannot afford at this time.) I used to see my credit cards as that last resort, but I’ve joined the crowd of those who have been cut off due to the credit crisis and marginal payment history. (all recent…a year ago, i had perfect credit.)

it’s also a state-based plan: i cannot use it if i decide to take a contract in another state, so i feel kind of trapped. and now that they “know” my medical issues, i would NEVER be accepted by underwriting. they would simply reject me if i reapplied. i know this because they tried to the first time, but i was persistant and pesky, and prevailed. they assume most folks will get tired and cave in so they don’t have to accept people or pay benefits out.

we are becoming slaves to the upper caste. I am highly educated, professional, savvy. but still, i struggle. I think I may represent a large portion of our population.

i’m still behind the radical move of single payer: EVERYONE pays in, everyone participates. based on income/ability to pay. EFF the insurance companies. they have poisoned the playing field. health care should not be about risk/underwriting/profit. I feel it is a right, not a privelege.
Peggy Sue

There’s an excellent article picked up at Drudge Report regarding Obama’s wishy-washy stance on Health Care and Climate Control. Although they [Financial Times.com]in London cut Obama more slack than I would, I think the analyses reads with a ring of real truth. The article is entitled, “Obama is Choosing to be Weak.”

Drudge link:

http://www.drudgereport.com

Center column, eighth item down.

Why do we need to rely on the foreign press for honest, decent reporting and/or analysis? Oh, that’s right–we have a “free” press.
BARB

from CNSnews.com:

The CEA’s claim that there are “46 million uninsured Americans” is false because, according to the Census Bureau, 9.7 million of the approximately 46 million uninsured people in the United States are not American citizens. In other words, about 21 percent of the uninsured in this country are citizens of other nations who are living here.

According to “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States,” a Census Bureau report published in August 2008, there were 45.6 million persons in the United States who did not have health insurance in 2007, the latest year for which figures are available. However, the report states that 9.7 million of these uninsured persons were not U.S. citizens.

Animal Control

Thre’s that word “Citizen” again.

Patience

Can anyone tell me if people covered only by Medicare and/or Medicaid are counted as uninsured?

BTW, since when does being uninsured mean that medical care is always denied? Hospitals treat people every day who have no insurance. Sometimes those people qualify for Medicaid but haven’t applied for it, so the hospital does it on their behalf and the eligibility is retroactive.

It’s middle-class/working-class folks who don’t qualify for Medicaid who get stuck. I feel any reform should specifically address this and leave the rest alone, for now at least.

I watched Michael Moore’s Sicko recently and had to laugh when he seemed to imply the French health care system routinely sends ailing people to recuperate on the Riviera while on paid leave from their employers. The film seemed so slanted it achieved the opposite of its goal and turned me off to the idea of expanding the role of government into health care.

And like susan stated above, while I’ve felt something could and should be done about healthcare, I have doubts that a government of spendthrift, one-party rule will come up with the best compromise.

Up

The U.S. government does a very good job at many many things. You are a complete idiot if you do not think so. Continually bashing the government is complete BS.

The government in every other industrial country on the planet does a better job in providing healthcare than what private industry does in the U.S. It is not even close.

Go do some research and educate yourself.

Patience

I’m not an idealogue who thinks the government is always inferior to the private sector. In fact, what I said was I feel there’s a greater role than now exists for government in healthcare, for those in need.

But I’ll say this. I’m happy with my private health coverage which I pay for myself. I consider it my responsibilty to do this and have been willing to do without other things to be able to fit the expense into my budget. I don’t want this to change and there are other people like me.

I feel those in need of help should be the priority, not a sweeping transformation that necessarily involves working and middle-class people like myself who are willing and able to pay for private care and don’t want to deal with any more red tape, delays, and layers of authorization when it comes to treatment.

You’re wrong — I’ve already educated myself when it comes to healthcare. The figures used for those considered uninsured aren’t as black and white as some people claim. Some are already eligible for Medicaid. Some are illegal aliens. Some are healthy young adults who’d rather spend money on things other than health insurance. Some are unemployed who, when employed again are insured again.

At a time when the Federal deficit is so high, it’s irresponsible to rush into a sweeping and costly reform of healthcare that may not meet the goal of reducing costs effectively and satisfactorily.

Surfered

Health insurance premiums for small business has gone up 10% per year for the last 5 years. That rate exceeds increases in revenue growth and salary. It is unsustainable because, eventually, 100% of income will go for health insurance.

According to their annual reports, the eight largest health insurance companies spent $30 billion last year on “selling, general & administrative expenses.” Not one dollar of that money went to health care.

The cost of health care in the U. S. is twice per capita than most of the industrialized world, yet according to the CIA World Book Of Facts,
Surfered

Got cut off on my previous comment…

Police and fire departmens are non-profit as is the military and the defense industry seems to be doing well financially, so don’t tell me the health care industry will collapse if a “public option” health insurance is offered.

According to the Kaiser Foundation, the U. S. spent $5,711 per capita on health costs in 2008. This was about double what the rest of the industrialized world spends. And yet, we’re not number one in health care. The CIA World Book of Facts reports that we’re 44th in infant mortality, behind Cuba and tied with Slovakia and Poland. We’re ranked 50th in life expectancy, just ahead of Albania and just behind Portugal.

Of course these are averages and they’re brought down by those without health insurance. Since they can’t afford preventive care like colonoscopies, they show up in emergency rooms after the disease has progressed and treatment is now more expensive. Of course, the rest of us pay for this through taxes for public hospitals.

Because of rising insurance costs, businesses are cutting back on health coverage for employees. Co-pays and deductibles are increased, but the premiums keep climbing. Our exporting businesses must compete with foreign companies whose employees are provided health care by their governments.

I pay $600 per month for health insurance and I have a high deductible. The eight largest health insurance companies reported $30 billion last year in “selling, general & administrative costs”. Not one dollar of this amount went to health care. Their overhead is 20-30%. Medicare’s overhead is 1-2%.

It’s time for public option insurance and if I pay anything less than $600 a month for it, I won’t care whether it’s called a tax or a premium.
Patience

I was doing a search about drug side effects recently and was surprised to read some Brits’ feedback. As one example, a person who had a peptic ulcer mentioned having to wait at least a year before surgery would be scheduled. This was stated matter-of-factly, not in a complaining tone. And this is what bothers me. Would people in the US be happy with such a health care system?
Mike

We need a much better health care plan. It will take us awhile to get it. The politicians sure won’t help us get there, right now.
Joe

Single payer health care is the very best way to go. If we could call our senators, and let them know this.
Up

Larry,

I think you are premature in your critism. You have no actual plan yet to critize

He is smartly and strategically holding his cards close to his vest to keep conservatives and interest groups guessing and make it more difficult for them to critize and lobby.

However, every day Obama and the adminstration is talking more and more about a strong public option.
mary

Back in the early 90s, while traveling from Ottawa, I met a fellow who was doing research for Hillary Clinton’s healthcare initiative and was apparently enamored with the Canadian universal health care system. I did not, and never will, blame this smart man! Canada has had a single-payer government run National Health Care legislated back in l965 thanks to the push and efforts of a third party (best way to push for reform) whose leader was Tommy Douglas. Hard for anyone to believe that just last year Canadians voted as their “most famous Canadian” the late Tommy Douglas.
Canadians treasure their healthcare and they would bring down any government that threaten to mess around with this clockwork system that is efficient and compassionate. It is agreed by conservatives and liberals in Canada that government has and should play a key role in ensuring the wellbeing of ALL its citizens. That’s why Canada is so far ahead of the United States in terms of children mortality rates, women’s preventive medicine and cost-effective schemes. Hillary Clinton’s researcher was impressed and I only wish Obama would get some ‘education’ from this fellow rather than listen to the lackeys and neanderthals adorning congress and senate who couldn’t give a passing bowel movement about the wellbeing of their 50-million uninsured fellow citizens whose healthcare is a disaster. The middleman insurers should have no place in this equation.
Canada spends only 8% of its GDP on health while the States spend 17.5% for a system that is ineffectively Dickensian and causes 65% of bankruptices for its citizens! Shame on Obama for caving in to the interests of Insurer-Banksters….once again.
Hillary Clinton was a True Pioneer for healthcare for all Americans in ’93. The neanderthals burned her at the stake to thank her for her innovative and compassionate efforts to bring to Americans a less barbaric system of healthcare not run by crooked insurers.
Then she was vilified by the Obamathugs…
WEll, let them now enjoy Obummer’s No-Care. It’s obvious that this Empty Suit is unqualified to make the FDR-inspired radical changes to bring about ral change to those who most need it. Just words….