The 5 key Strategy Questions the White House is Considering on Health Care

I hope those aren’t the questions. Because universal coverage isn’t the final goal, the final goal is a market structure that will drive US spending on health care down to inline with all the other first world nations. The US could *save* $1 trillion a year if we spent the same per capita on healthcare as the other first world countries. $1 Trillion PER YEAR in the private or public pocket is HUGE. How to save that money is the goal of reform. Universal coverage and a public option are just the two clear ways that every other first world nation has used to achieve that incredible cost savings.
As a sidenote, referring to the cost as $700 billion without giving the timeframe is atrociously poor reporting. I believe you mean $700 billion over ten years – not $700 billion a year, nor $700 billion to fund it in perpetuity.

The President and Congress would do a disservice to all to drop the public option and movement towards Universal Care for the sake of special interest money, re-election self-preservation and a party seemingly dedicated to obstructionism relying on lies, fear and a worked-up radical fringe.
The Public Option is -wanted- by a majority of Americans. And President Obama and the Democratic majorities were voted in by people wanting REAL change, not business as usual in Washington. The Public Option -is- the compromise.
It’s bad enough that the health care reform debate came to the table without the Single Payer option even being on the buffet to discuss. After all, many who are distrusting of govt would lose steam or perhaps even find reassurance in knowing that all government officials, including the Congress, would have the exact same plan and healthcare realities as they.
There is not near enough attention being paid to examining the realities of for-profit insurance within this system.
US Insurance CEO’s average a 11.9 MILLION salary. Their profits are up 400% from 2.4 B in 2000 to 12.7 in 2007 – while those Americans without insurance grew 19% during that same period. In the Clinton era (remember that, when we were regularly shown pictures of the insurance/HMO company CEO’s gated luxurious compound estates?), 5 cents on every health care dollar went to profits. That number has risen to TWENTY CENTS per healthcare dollar. 31 cents including overhead and administrative costs, apparently. In Canada, it’s 1.5 cents.
Not to mention the extraordinary amounts of money that pharmaceutical and insurance industry lobbists are pouring into our “representative process” and advertisements. Money that could and should be going to healthcare needs.
The WhiteHouse reports that insurance companies denied healthcare coverage due to for Pre-Existing Conditions to 12,600,000 citizens within the past 3 years. For those who are allowed to get that insurance, the premiums are higher – often impossibly so.
Co-ops were tried in 30′s-40′s and FAILED. The funding was cut off.They don’t affect Insurance pricing, % of GDP or consumer price. Co-ops that become actual competition (e.g. BC/BS) are bought up & run by Insurance Industry to keep prices steady and preserve the status-quo.
Then look to the Grassley ad airing now, in which a Republican points out that people -want- a public option, including Republicans. He also points out the nearly 3 million dollars Grassley has received from insurance lobbiests and asks whose side the senator is on.
Where are the comparisons to Social Security and Medicare obstructionism? Where are the highlights on the for-profit interests driving our healthcare system, creating a situation in which the American citizen is a causality of competition instead of a benefactor of it when it comes to health care in the US?
I personally know of US citizens on disability who have to buy their medications in Canada (for a fourth the cost) because they can’t afford them in the US and were having to choose which essential medication they would refill month by month. Far more US citizens go to Canada or Mexico for their healthcare than the other way around. Medical-related bankruptcies are an epidemic. We all know this system is inherently broken and people are suffering. Medical professionals included in that number.
I can’t say it better than two Republicans said it just yesterday.
Bob Lupton, in an article entitled ‘Republicans Want Health-Care Reform Too!’, stated the following: ” I am coming to believe what the rest of the modern world has concluded — that health care is a basic human right. To be last in line of industrialized nations to provide medical treatment for all our citizens is not something I am proud of….Do I like what Obama is proposing? Actually, I do!”
John Bohrer wrote “The tide is about to turn in the debate over health care reform. The lies and the screaming that captured the discussion in August have a lot of Republicans thinking they’ve got the Democrats right where they want ‘em. They are wrong. And they are wrong because their castle is built upon a pile of sand… a pile of crazy, crazy sand…. David Brooks points to Obama losing support among independents, supposedly frightened of debt tied to his health care reform. What Brooks does not acknowledge is that they’re not so much opposed to reform as they are confused as to what it will do. It’s hard not to be confused with so many lies being so carelessly tossed around… But once the din dies down, and the conversation moves on to the why and the what behind the opposition, Republicans are in for a rude awakening. Because people want change — not a restoration. And here the Republican Party is utterly unprepared. Their alternatives are lousy….Nor, as Tanenhaus suggested, have they pushed the lunatics and extremists away from the debate; if anything, they’ve pushed them to the front.”
If TRUE reform does not happen which SERVES the American people, it only breeds MORE distrust in the government – on the left and in the middle. Is the American system of democracy broken? Should we trust it to work for us, the people?
There is a lot of talk about a 1 trillion dollar figure. According to Weiner, we could save a trillion in 10 years just by reducing costs 10%. The question is whether the politicans have the will to do what it takes to get there.
And one cannot help but look at the media’s responsibility in this as well. By and large, our news coverage of this has looked like the worst of the very bad reality tv shows and highlighted mentalities and activities that shame us.
The industrialized world is filled with great examples to draw from as to what works. Where is the American spirit to learn from those models and tweak what does not work about them so we can take pride in saying truthfully that the US does it best?
We need our President and Congress to set the bar and insist on nothing less.
This is not a political game show of strategy. It is people’s lives we are talking about here. People who need help yesterday and live in true fear. And the American people are watching.

What in the world is going on? The problem for the prez is how do we communicate this to the public?
The public’s problem is how do we communicate with a government that instead of serving us keeps trying to sell us more government?
Now HE has enlisted the AFL-CIO and the AARP to try to sell us.
All the more reason to back off and drop membership in both AFL-CIO and AARP!

We should first of all admit that the people who put together the current plan did a terrible. A plan like John Mackey’s of Wholefoods fame, is a much better plan that actually reduces costs by increasing competition. Further it reduces costs by cutting the insurance paid by doctors for malpractice.
None of the proposals put forward by congress actually reduce the cost of procedures. They mainly reduce costs by encouraging old people not to get treatment.

It’s simply a question of taking control of the dialogue on reform. The downward spiral will continue as long as the conservative myths get more traction than the White House talking points/the facts.

George,
It seems to me the White House has to ask itself “What is the proper role for government in health care?”
To many Americans, that role should be one of providing a safety net, not attempting to gain complete control as in the overreaching House bill HR 3200.
Obama needs to scale back.. simplify…
Democrats and Republicans alike can agree no one should lose their home or face bankruptcy due to costs of an unforeseen illness.
Let the government underwrite the costs of catastrophic illnesses so no American is ever put in this situation.
Americans can then purchase gap insurance that would cover anything up to the catastrophic amount (let’s say $5000-$10,000). Private insurers could provide cheap gap coverage knowing they would not have high risks. Everyone wins.
Lower income Americans can be subsidized for premiums for the gap insurance on a sliding scale.
So there. We have covered every American while drastically lowering premium costs across the board. All without creating an onerous government plan and extra bureaucracies.
You might want to pass this idea on to your buds at the White House.

Oh please, George.
Obama will give up the public option AND the mandates, and pass a bare-bones “Healthcare Bill” just to say he did. Then he’ll move on, quickly.
The left won’t like it, but Obama knows they have nowhere else to go. He’ll cut them loose as quickly as possible, just to save his own butt in 2012, and to preserve his “brand,” as his staff calls it.
It’s who he is, and who he’s always been. All the rest is noise.

Jerry J | Sep 2, 2009 1:13:45 PM – Good post. I have been proposing the same thing, but not getting traction. The primary change to what you said is to set the $5-10,000 to a percent of income of the person. Also, I would probably set a limit of $50,000 per year for what Insuance company will pay per person. After that, the insurance company and government will each pay 50%. That way the insurance company still have to monitor costs and government can just audit to be sure insurance companies are not cheating all of us. These are just variations on the basic concept you are proposing.

Save the sick from the profit sharks!
Make Healthcare and Pharmaceutical industries not-for-profit.
Posted by: Robert | Sep 2, 2009 1:42:53 Sorry Robert he already made a deal with the pharma not to reduce cost.

The people will not stand for the plan set forth. Period.

John Mackey’s reform plan is to deny anyone who is sick any access to real healthcare. They would be stripped of consumer protections and lose access to group health plans and be left to the mercy of insurance companies. But, it’s OK. They can shop at whole foods and magically be cured! Let then eat organic cake!
If the white house throws away the public option, they will get crushed in the midterms. The base will stay home and not give money or time. They do not realize how important the pubic option is most Democrats. We are tired of our leaders betraying us. If dems continue to act like republicans, then there is no reason to vote for Democrats.
Triangulation is a stupid strategy. Good po.icy is good politics. Democrars won the election. It’s time for them to act like winners.

Rick McDaniel – Which plan are you referring to? Also, none of these plans come from the President. He is doing the opposite of what Clinton did, he is letting Congress work out a plan. However, it is time for him to step forward and indicate what he likes and dislikes about each plan to narrow the focus of discussion. And the bill needs to be much smaller. It is too easy to hid things in 1000 page bill.

If the WH thinks they can give up the public option and keep their base, they don’t have advisors that have a clue about Obama’s base. He appealed to people with a message of change and his two main campaign issues were ending the War and health care reform with health care for all Americans similar to what people in Congress have. The only way to lower costs and provide that kind coverage is through a public plan. His core supporters were activists. Activists are not your typical voters. They will drop him like a hot potatoe is he betrays them and drops the public option. It doesn’t matter if they have no place to go right now, they will sit out until they re-group. If the WH does not know this, they are not nearly as smart as they think. The beltway pundits have lost touch with Americans. Americas pay for healthcare every single month out of their paychecks or checking books. They know the cost are rising, the benefits are shrinking and the private market are shafting them. They expect Obama to offer up a government plan that works for them. Medicare, SCHIP and Tri-Care all work. Blue Cross, Aetna, Wellpoint, US Healthcare don’t work for the consumer, only the insurance executives.

First Require all in public office to retire under social securitysystem move all the funds in any other government angency to that system.
Second Require all sentators to pay out of pocket thier own health insurance at current market rates.
Require all funding of political campeigns to be done no earlier than 3 months prior to the primary election and no funding accepted after the general election till the next 3 months before primary eleciton. any excess funds left over be donated to the general fund of that level of government in total to help cover the debts of that level of government with no deep pockets of money held back for future elections.
Keep Politics Honest.. or Return em to honesty.

My parents are on Medicare with supplemental coverage…I want there stuff to stay the same! They have good coverage and get the care they need. I only hope a similar program exists in the future. Their standard of care is excellent. I would like to have their coverage NOW as an option for myself. I am employed so that is not an option. I do have ‘decent’ employer sponsored coverage. I have had no coverage to COBRA since I have been laid off in 2002. I have experienced the entire range of the problem. This is an INSURANCE initiative. I do not understand why everyone is saying it is SOCIALIZING the program. I think Japan does well, France does well, and Canada does well…why can we not learn from their mistakes? Personally, I would like to see a cafeteria plan where all folks are given a certain tax break and can pick and choose from maybe 20 options…if they want other things than the basic, it comes from their own pocket. I would love to see everyone get to the facts and stop the bloody spin to upset and not EDUCATE people on the options. Everyone is going for the sound byte and the gut reaction…no one is being anything CLOSE to impartial and educational and this includes the MEDIA as well. Sell your insurance shares as this cash cow should be going away and that is NOT a bad thing in my opinion.

There are certain improvements that no one (other than possibly the insurance companies) could disagree on:
1)Insurance to be obtainable even with pre-existing conditions at the same premium as everyone else
2)insurance even if you lose your job
3)subsidy to those that don’t have insurance
The rest can be continually worked out but the above seems not only possible, but something that should be done.
As far as the government deciding on your plan or what your plan covers, this should not be within the scope of the government.

You’re not so sharp, George, Rhodes or no Rhodes. The Obama administration is not going to give up the public option. You want to appear hip and in the know, but you’re talking to the wrong people.

I hope you are wrong about the death of the public option. If we had wanted someone smart, hard working and part of the old Democratic traditional order (i.e. compromise until you become ineffective) we would have voted for Hillary Clinton. We voted for and supported President Obama because we wanted dynamic leadership and real change. To make health insurance mandatory and not provide for a public option to introduce real competition is giving yet another windfall to the insurance companies that have already enjoyed record profits. It will be a real disappointment.

Obama’s inexperience is showing. Like the two 20th century presidents whose only prior experience was as a U.S. senator, Warren G. Harding and John F. Kennedy, he lacks executive experience and judgment. The U.S. presidency is not a good place for on-the-job training. Obama’s presidency is hampered by the serious rifts within his own party between his fellow leftists and the more conservative Democrats, by the substantial and growing number of voters who identify themselves as independents and by the Republicans, who are becoming re-energized and will likely carry the day in the 2010 elections.

The key problem is that over 85% of illness and disease is caused by life-style choices. Eat only fresh fruit and vegetables, and watch your body heal naturally. Why should my tax dollars fund your disease care, when you most likely caused it?
As an example, if you accidentally torch your house because the power went out, your insurance company may refuse to pay, since you caused the fire.
Similarly, if you destroy your body with drugs (pushed or prescribed), cigarettes, alcohol, sugar, coffee, meat to the point that it starts the suicidal death process, why should I pay to extend your life by 12 weeks for $50,000?

But xargaw, even Teddy Kennedy’s “public option” was outsourced to private insurance companies like Blue Cross & Aetna.
George was very careful NOT to explain that to people who thought otherwise.

Texas passed to toughest tort reform int he nation in 2003. Result: malpractice insurance premiums came way down. Amount of savings passed on to consumers: $0. Not one dime went to citizens.

If no public option, insurance reform will bring increased premiums for everyone currently insured.The insurance companies will sieze the opportunity to boost profits and blame the Governmant intervention.
This will be a political disaster for the Democrats.

1 – What is “death with dignity” for the public option?
Or, what is “I’m saving a big push for the public option until Baucus stops holding this thing hostage w/ repubican stooges.
2 – How do you get the price tag down, likely down to about $700 billion? At that cost the most unpopular tax increases will not be necessary.
Or, George wants to protect millionaires! The tax hikes are only on the rich, and we don’t care about them. They constantly take our money. Wake up, George.
3 – Can you still make a convincing case that the country is on a path to universal coverage?
Good.
4 – Can these kinds of compromises attract any Republican votes beyond Olympia Snowe? If not, can they survive the procedural and political hurdles of the reconciliation process?
Republican? Helpful? Not in the same sentence, George, without a negative.
5 – And finally, how do you communicate all of this to the public?
Good.

The sad truth is that President Oback has talked too much about his suggested healthcare plan. He will accomplish little with a speech to a joint session of Congress, where members are now pretty much committed, pro or con. So far as the public is concerned, the president has sounded too many promissory notes on this issue; he erred early in assuming voters were so eager for healthcare they would buy anything offered them. Now he and the country will pay the price.

I agree they are the wrong questions. Everyone is assuming that universal coverage also means comprehensive coverage. A very bad idea to start with. A public option might be palatable if it provided universal coverage with defined benefits and a fixed cost. Chose the benefits with the most ‘Bang for the buck’ and fix the cost. Let a regulated insurance industry pick up any individually desired benefits in competition with the public option. That would control costs give personal choice and might allow a superior system to evolve.

Sounds like a “Hail Mary” pass on the part of the White House.

As usual the media elite weighs in with virtually nothing insightful on the question at hand.
I would say #5 is the only question GS got right.
Death with dignity for the public option? I don’t think so — more like how to sell it to the handful of Congress members we need to bring along to get er done.

I surely don’t care for the Mr. Stephanopolous’ “fait accompli” death announcement on the public option. Why is it so hard for George to see beyond a beltway where real people are sick and dying at the hands of corporations? I have good health care. Most of the people I know have it. But I still want EVERYONE to have it. It’s got to be looked upon as a right, not a privilege. Media personalities like Mr. Stephanopolous who seem dazzled by pseudointellectuals like George Will have lost track of who owns the airwaves over which they broadcast. GS has left no voice for the people, jsut the pundits.

The fact that step one is to kill the public option and step two is to bring down cost is utterly backwards– the public option is what keeps the long-term costs of health insurance down, otherwise the whole thing is a big present to the insurance industry.

For all of you who voted Mr. Obama and the Democrat majority into Congress…
Go immediately to the White House web site (phone, snail mail)and to your Rep’s website (etc) — and tell them:
We do not want a country run by OPINION POLLS. We prefer ELECTIONS!
We went to the polls [only ones that count] last November and we ALREADY gave you all we really can… our VOTE. Do not be looking for that 2010 or 2012 vote, please do your job in THIS term you have been given.
Also — are you folks really stupid? Do you actually think that ALL (or any but a small minority) those “protesters” are from YOUR district?
NO! They are not… they did not vote for you, they never will… they CAN’T!
******
Let us who ARE in the [D] districts say:
We want health care reform that works.
1) Lower insurance costs (public option/synonym of choice is good … or damn well tell us why and what is better). No mandates to buy without and option/choice for lower cost!!!
2) The same plan as Congress, yes — but go further and not the the same “type” — the actual same plan, just expand the federal worker Health Exchange now in effect to include ALL… no “ruling class” (this would even please conservatives a great deal).
3) Lowering of actual procedure/office visit/surgeries/ etc. cost. — Lowering the cost of an aspirin in a hospital from $9 to $0.90 could be a base line schematic… no we don’t want doctors or hospitals to go broke … but we don’t want to either. Let’s be fair and make the cost BE based on actual value.
4) Some form of malpractice insurance reform. Take the enormous profit from the insurance companies and the lawyers, but do not leave those that do suffer from negligence and preventable error with no recourse.
5)The “protesters” yell… “let insurance be sold across state lines”. Please remind them that this is called “Interstate Commerce” and it is regulated by the Federal government. If you folks don’t want the feds in your meds… this is NOT the answer. (that ought to show how the Republican plan is not remotely well thought out … and the ignorance of those who buy it is merely a tool for the “NO” that only wants to defeat a political opponent, not serve the American people)
6) Let’s be sure that those who can’t afford health care can have a means to receive it other than going to the Emergency Room. Subsidies here are not nearly as costly to the general public as they are in our increasing insurance premiums – **that lower our wages when they are absorbed by our employers** — if you could just stress this, you’d be ahead of the misinformation game.
7) Need more doctors? Okay, give them an incentive to serve by contributing MONEY to their schooling for a matched contribution from them in SERVICE to community.
********
There’s more, of course. I sure don’t have all the answers, you have some too, I am certain.
PLEASE JUST CONTACT THE PRESIDENT AND YOUR CONGRESS PEOPLE NOW!
It is OUR country, we need to let our voice be heard.
Thank you

“You promised a public option and you have the majority necessary to do it. Why are you short changing the people who elected you Mr. Obama?”
Posted by: cahnaz | Sep 2, 2009 5:07:24 PM
*****
Unfortunately, cahnaz… this isn’t exactly true.
In order to get the majority in Congress in 2006/08 — this means the ability to hold the Speaker, Chairs-of-Committees, etc. LEADERSHIP posts (the POWER position, to put it bluntly)– there was a push to get “Blue Dog Democrats” elected in the more conservative districts where voters swing from Republican to Democrat without regard for party affiliation, just ideology.
It is these “blue dogs” that are standing against the ability of Mr. Obama to work with a true majority. He is not a King, he can’t force Congress to do what he wants.
We can hope the Democrats that do not fully support Mr. Obama (and the will of the MAJORITY of American voters as per Nov 2008 VOTES) will come to their senses… but that is not for certain. It is likely these Representatives will be soundly defeated come 2010 should we NOT get meaningful health care reform and while I really don’t want Republicans to gain seats… I’d have to say at this point … what’s the difference?

Stephanie2009: FYI, Obama NEVER wanted “Congress and the American people looking objectively at what works and what doesn’t work in other countries”.
He told Congress that he wanted health care reform railroaded through in less than 5 months, so it could be signed BY August. That means: No time to research other health care systems; no time for open serious public debate. Instead, Obama and Pelosi were going to push through the left-wing dream they always had: A so-called “public option” designed to undercut the private insurance market and leave us with a Canadian-style single-payer system by default. There are alternatives to single-payer, you know; Switzerland and the Netherlands have more free-market oriented programs. But that wasn’t what Obama and Pelosi EVER had in mind.
The Democrats ONLY started crying for a “real debate” after the American public stopped Obama’s railroad dead in its tracks. (The only time the Dems EVER start whining about “debates,” “teachable moments,” and “dialogues” is when they get caught with their pants down on something.)
Where were YOU 5 months ago? Were you telling Pelosi to slow down and look at other health care systems in other countries? Or were YOU perfectly happy to allow the Obama/Pelosi railroad to just go charging along with a bill that none of us would have a chance to read before it was passed?
I’ll bet it’s the latter.

Please take Death with Dignity off the table. It’s too scary and personal a thought for most people and is going to drive moderates away.

If the White House drops the public option, Obama will lose his base. It is really that simple. Those of us who support a public option account for 77% of the American public. We are perplexed that a coalition of right-wing Republicans, crack pots and wealthy corporate sponsors, might be able to override the will of the overwhelming majority of Americans. Sen. DeMint was right. This is Obama’s Waterloo. If he doesn’t fight like mad for the public option, people like me will vote for him in 2012, but that will be about it. There is no way I will—as I did in 2007 and 2008—max out my monetary contribution, phone bank, knock on doors, and essentially dedicate a year of my life to a President who folds on the most seminal issue of the day. I am not willing to campaign for a coward.

We really need a viable third party in the US. This crap is tiresome and divisive.

It is really sad if they ditch the public option, which seems to have been the plan from the start.
If so, it is the final proof that Obama lied to his base to get into power, and is a sellout to corporate interests.
If he sells out it, we’ll vote him and the rest of the Corporate Dems out.
It’s pathetic, really.. the Republicans don’t abandon their base. And the triangulation strategy used by Bill Clinton didn’t exactly work — he kept accomodating Republicans and they still impeached him.
Democrats need to learn to actually have some spine and values, and stop selling out.
I for one, will not vote for or support a single Democrat if they sell out the average American once again.

There is no “bringing down costs for healthcare” in America as long as America has a profit driven healthcare access, that remains dependent upon private, corporate “largesse” to “do the right thing”. They have had the monopoly for a century and neither they nor anyone in Congress mandated that they effect the most simple, the most humane, changes in business practice that might have mitigated the crisis in which we find ourselves, and we all know what those changes are. Changes that could have been implemented if not by self imposed mandates, surely by the all powerful Congress. If that is what will try to be passed off as “healthcare reform” now, I am not impressed.
Addressing the “donut hole” in Medicare Plan D to reduce the cost to beneficiaries to 50% of drug costs while they are in the hole instead of the 100% they now pay, also does not impress me. This “gap gimmick” never should have been written into this exalted plan because for most Seniors, approximately 6 months of the year finds them in the same fix they were in before there was a Plan D. This is a perfect example of the art of comprimising and settling for “better than nothing” and it created a new product line for private insurance, who cannot afford to cover 12 months of coverage but the Senior citizen can?
$700 billion dollars will not be needed without a Public Option. Neither will unpopular tax increases for ANYthing else that comes up be they bailouts for industry, banks, mortgages, clunker cars, climate change, or pay raises for Congress. If we subsidize their health coverage at all, that needs to stop. No Public Option means “every man for himself”.
There is no “death with dignity” for the Public Option. It either remains the central tenet of healthcare reform that embraces the “notion” of healthcare as a Right and not a Privilege in America, or it is removed from the books and healthcare access in America remains for the privileged. We will then need to define who those “privileged” are and they should not include Congress and retired Presidents and Vice Presidents.
Forget the whole idea of Universal Coverage. It is thrown out with the Public Option. I, for one, will not agree to subsidizing private insurance companies to provide affordable healthcare coverage to my fellow citizens. Been there and done that with Medicare Plan D and with Medicare Advantage Programs that cover you while you are not sick and toss you back into Standard Medicare when you get sick, or need Hospice, which is inevitable when you are over 65 yrs of age. This is a case when “words matter”. There is nothing pretty in saying we have Universal Coverage when we do not, I don’t care how much lipstick you put on that pig.
Don’t even bother your little heads about figuring out how to communicate all of this to the public. Your priority seems to be in attracting Republican votes, votes from people who did not put you in office, who do not want you to stay there, who have never before been committed to any civil, social rights issue, and who would really, if you gave them every consideration, eliminate Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security. You can address the hurdle of keeping your seats in Congress and the White House later. Furthermore, if you have not and are not listening to the public now, why are you concerned with communicating to us when it is done? This is the least of your worries, as it does not seem to be a factor in your consideration now.
At the end of the day, it is not Granma who needs to be worried about Death Panels. It is the working middle class and the working poor who has taxes witheld to subsidize everyone else who enjoys the “Public Options” such as Medicare, Medicaid, VA,TriCare/Champus, Indian Health, Public Health, Congress, the White House, and the indigent who are without eligibility for these other “Public Options” and who pays our own way, too, or tries to, with less and less ability, since all of those other responsibilites come out of our paychecks first. Some of those with their “Public Options” enjoy “Combos” with the extra added component of Single Payor, Universal Care.
And for the Silent Churches who maintain that “it is not the government’s responsibility to provide healthcare” but it is the good works of charity that should, through the grace of God, tend to our fellow man, or who obsess with the Johnny One Note concern of tax subsidized abortion, throwing the baby out with the water, literally, my friends, be advised that this working middle class and working poor cannot be counted upon to subsidize you and YOUR good works, either, for much longer.
What an absolute waste of money, support, energy, trust, belief, HOPE, on the part of us and Kudos to those who win with fear, slander, lies, distortion, sedition, insults, malfeasonance, and shady dealings. Believe me, this end result does not make all that cacophony and ugliness all summer worth it. None of it was necessary, after all. I’ve got mine, 2 years on Medicare and plenty of out of pocket to supplement it, and am of the age that I do not choose to live forever in this kind of society. As soon as I am vulnerable and dependent upon someone else to do the right thing for me when I no longer can, and there is progressive decline in my health, I will go quietly into the night. I care about those who still have years ahead of them.

Seriously, since when did the radical right care about deficits? Cheney said “deficits don’t matter”. Bush and Reagan spent more moneny than any democratic adminsitration. It’s so hypocritacl to that’s it fine to spend a trillion dollars nation building in Iraq, but if we want to help the middle class get health care then its time to flip out about spending? This is madness.

Obama’s message to Congress only needs one statement – “I will veto any health care/insurance bill that does not include the requirement that all members of Congress, anyone that works for them, all Cabinet members, their staff, and all Whitehouse staff be automatically switched to the proposed coverage option(s) included in the bill.”
Obama promised his plan would offer the same coverage enjoyed by Congress and all other Federal employees. If he does not keep this promise the public will reject the plan … and Obama!!!

Why allow for-profit health insurance in the first place? Some (all?) other countries ended that when they instituted universal coverage. Then maybe you don’t need the public option, that has been demagogued to death. Oh, that’s right, the Republicans will just find something else to incite the vulnerable low info voters with. Or how about this: just copy whatever Germany or France are doing. Seems to work fine for both of those countries.

1. President Barack Obama repeatedly tells us that one reason national health care is needed is that we can no longer afford to pay for Medicare and Medicaid. But if Medicare and Medicaid are fiscally insolvent and gradually bankrupting our society, why is a government takeover of medical care for the rest of society a good idea? What large-scale government program has not eventually spiraled out of control, let alone stayed within its projected budget? Why should anyone believe that nationalizing health care would create the first major government program to “pay for itself,” let alone get smaller rather than larger over time? Why not simply see how the Democrats can reform Medicare and Medicaid before nationalizing much of the rest of health care?
2. President Obama reiterated “no insurance company will be allowed to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing medical condition.” This is an oft-repeated goal of the president’s and the Democrats’ health care plan. But if any individual can buy health insurance at any time, why would anyone buy health insurance while healthy? Why would I not simply wait until I got sick or injured to buy the insurance? If auto insurance were purchasable once one got into an accident, why would anyone purchase auto insurance before an accident? Will the Democrats next demand that life insurance companies sell life insurance to the terminally ill? The whole point of insurance is that the healthy buy it and thereby provide the funds to pay for the sick. Demanding that insurance companies provide insurance to everyone at any time spells the end of the concept of insurance. And if the answer is that the government will now make it illegal not to buy insurance, how will that be enforced? How will the government check on 300 million people?
3. No one denies that in order to come close to staying within its budget health care will be rationed. But what is the moral justification of having the state decide what medical care to ration?
4. According to Dr. David Gratzer, health care specialist at the Manhattan Institute, “While 20 years ago pharmaceuticals were largely developed in Europe, European price controls made drug development an American enterprise. Fifteen of the 20 top-selling drugs worldwide this year were birthed in the United States.” Given how many lives — in America and throughout the world – American pharmaceutical companies save, and given how expensive it is to develop any new drug, will the price controls on drugs envisaged in the Democrats’ bill improve or impair Americans’ health?
5. Do you really believe that private insurance could survive a “public option”? Or is this really a cover for the ideal of single-payer medical care? How could a private insurance company survive a “public option” given that private companies have to show a profit and government agencies do not have to – and given that a private enterprise must raise its own money to be solvent and a government option has access to others’ money — i.e., taxes?
6. Why will hospitals, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies do nearly as superb a job as they now do if their reimbursement from the government will be severely cut? Haven’t the laws of human behavior and common sense been repealed here in arguing that while doctors, hospitals and drug companies will make significantly less money they will continue to provide the same level of uniquely excellent care?
7. Given how many needless procedures are ordered to avoid medical lawsuits and how much money doctors spend on medical malpractice insurance, shouldn’t any meaningful “reform” of health care provide some remedy for frivolous malpractice lawsuits?
8. Given how weak the U.S. economy is, given how weak the U.S. dollar is, and given how much in debt the U.S. is in, why would anyone seek to have the U.S. spend another trillion dollars? Even if all the other questions here had legitimate answers, wouldn’t the state of the U.S. economy alone argue against national health care at this time?
9. Contrary to the assertion of President Obama — “we spend much more on health care than any other nation but aren’t any healthier for it” — we are healthier. We wait far less time for procedures and surgeries. Our life expectancy with virtually any major disease is longer. And if you do not count deaths from violent crime and automobile accidents, we also have the longest life expectancy. Do you think a government takeover of American medicine will enable this medical excellence to continue?

What kind of health care reform is it that omits reforming the way we consumers accept responsibility for our own health? Obesity is so rampant that people don’t even consider themselves obese because everyone else is; they are oblivious to the need to take care of our own health first and then to expect that our society will take care of us when our efforts fail us. We should tax sugar and other “empty calories” to bring attention to this issue and to pay for those who are too indulgent to face his/her individual repsonsibility.
And what about tort reform? I don’t think anyone out of the health care field can have any idea at the cost of defensive medicine. Again, the public must assume responsiblity and understand that medicine is an art and not a science. As a society we cannot afford to case diseased possibilities that the same chance of occurance as getting hit by a car leaving the doctors office.

Please answer me this, George. Tell me the names of the Democrats who would not only oppose the public plan but would dare fillibuster a mainstream Democratic plan. The public plan does not add to cost, it would actually bend the curve down. So what would be a Democrat’s rationale for fillibustering it other than for Conservative ideology and/or pure politics. It should be much easier to call out these handful of Democrats than to rain in the majority of Democrats who actually want the the public option. Can you see any Democrat being reelected if they actually fillibuster a mainstream democratic idea? If Massachussets ends up nominating a replacement, than you have your 60. What we need is a vote for cloture and I would dare any Democrat to vote against it. Dropping the public option certainly has nothing to do with cost.

We have wasted the month of August with the screaming and howling of a group of bitter people who have taken over the town hall meetings because they want to put an end to anything the President proposes.
They use scare tactics and use words like “socialism”, communism and facism, without knowing what they are talking about.
Unfortunately, they have drowned out any kind of civil, rational discussion on the subject.
Our forefathers did not form the basis of our democratic form of government by screaming and shouting at one another. We cannot go forward with sensible healthcare or any other needed reforms unless we stop the shouting and start to respect all viewpoints; especially that of our elected president!

I have just sent e-mails to Hatch and Enzi asking them to reconsider and work with the democrats to get this bill passed with a public option.I also told them I had switched parties because the GOP had lost it’s way and last year had no real viable candidate running for president and after McCain made his biggest mistake it just fortified my thoughts on the GOP.I think we are all in this together and if the GOP is acting anything like M Steele they are lost forever.To make fun of a young person whom had lost a parent due to non adequate insurance was Low even for the GOP. I sure hope they show this man the door and hope he is not the true voice of the GOP, nor should rush or Hannity or palin be.Don’t think the e-mail will do much good but I have been e-mailing the opposition to let them know how I feel.

President Obama needs to champion and get a vote on a public option healthcare bill as the vast majority of Americans want, using reconciliation if necessary. Period.
Insurance CEO’s profits are up 400% from $2.4 Billion in 2000 to $12.7 billion in 2007.
Health care reform will drive down costs and save you money and be fully paid for over 10 years, not adding a single penny to the deficit.
70% of the American public wants a public option.
62% of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were linked to medical expenses, nearly 80 percent had health insurance.
Canada, Belgium, Germany, Italy, France, Switzerland, Holland, England and every other western country spend, AT THE MOST, 11% of their GDP on healthcare, many much less. The U.S. spends over 16% of its GDP on health care and does not cover 47 million people.
In other western countries, medical outcomes for children and adults are far superior to that of the U.S. The World Health Organization ranks the US health care system 37th in the world.
And when we hear the lie that we have the best healthcare in the world, you’re being manipulated by the rich who know Americans love their country and will defend it.
Come on, President Obama, a one-term courageous President is much better than a one-term sellout.
America is too fine a nation to ignore our problems, and we are strong enough to talk this out with each other.

Let me repeat–NO public option. Government is too big now. No government healthcare. No government telling us what to do or not do with our healthcare. Nothing to discuss here. Unless it’s how these cowardly incompetent socialists and marxists want to take over our country and control all of us, which will NEVER happen. What part of NO don’t they get?

According to you, you have them dropping the Public Option and STILL having to go through reconciliation? Either you have that wrong or this country is really nuts. The system is going down the tubes and nothing can get passed with 60 votes?
Should we just all walk into the oceans on either coast? We really need about ten independent members that can bring sanity to the Senate. People not tied to ideology or money.

How many of you have actually dealt with government bureaucrats? I have and it was a nightmare. I do not want any bureaucrat involved in my healthcare!!!

It is time to “out” the sick, symbiotic connection between Right Wing media and the GOP that has GOP members of Congress cowed by, and obsequiously towing the line of lies and misrepresentations spewed by the clique of hate-filled, anti-Obama, regain-GOP- control of Congress and the White House at any price. The Dem- controlled Congress has only one choice to avoid being shown to be totally gutless (and clueless) in the face of the Right Wing/GOP open intent to overturn the election of 2008. If the Blue Dogs fail to join the rest of the Democrats in Congress in steamrolling the GOP and passing an openly Democratic health care insurance reform plan — to include a vibrant public health care option, and make it work == they will be ensuring a GOP win in 2010 that will tie the Obama administration in knots for the rest of his term, and possibly give the White House back to the GOP in 2012. Act like FDR Dems and make this Congress the most effective force for progressive change since the New Deal.

An assumption that because a majority of citizens want health care reform, they must want “your” particular health plan with the universal option is arrogant.
If politicians are worried that by supporting the bill, they won’t get re-elected…….seems to me that the “majority” of the people in the area they represent DON’T want the plan currently out there (whatever the reason – costs, administration, coverage of illegals, they like their current plan, etc)
Why not take an area of health care (tort reform?)- address it, make some changes, show results…..then build on those successes? The idea that there needs to be immediate, sweeping changes with the fantasy that there will be no additional costs to the taxpayer is absurd.

Mr. President
With all the misinformation about health care being shoveled by our national media, I thought I’d give you a citizen’s two cents worth. For full disclosure, I will tell you that I did not vote for you & I have employer subsidized health care. I have a college degree in electrical engineering.
I’ll itemize the main problems I see with health care reform:
1)There is no perceived “honest” outlet for the public to get information on health care. The national media has become thoroughly biased one way or the other & cannot be trusted to offer only the facts without a slant.
2)Our elected leadership seems to operate in a vacuum, with no concept of what it takes to survive in the real world, thanks to outsourcing, unstable cost of living, shrinking budgets (ours), and no true voice in what rules are laid down upon us.
3)Those of us who do have some form of health insurance are hesitant to embrace change in this system – better the devil you know. I know something has to be done to reduce cost, improve services & coverage, but I don’t want to be the only one paying the bill!
4)You can say all that you want that I can keep my current coverage, but the fact of the matter is that if the public option is cheaper for my employer, I’ll be on the new program.
Here’s what you need to do to sell a public option: mandate that every government employee (including you & yours) will have to accept this program along with the American public, EVERYONE. You can’t make the sacrifice all on the public side – share it with us. If it is to be universal coverage, MAKE IT UNIVERSAL. Please write the bill in 8th grade English, not lawyer’s gibberish so that everyone can read & understand it. Tort reform must be part of this bill!
I’m an independent voter, but I know for a fact that if you take this approach, you’ll get no support from the Republicans. Here is what I think: if you truly believe that this is necessary for the future of our country, DO IT. Use your influence, persuasion, coercion or even reconciliation, BUT DO IT. If what is put in place is unsuccessful, God help us all, but if it works Democrats will rule Washington for the next 100 years.

When the President ran against Senator Clinton, he stated that he was not looking for mandatory coverage, but rather affordable insurance for everyone. His repeated line was that if we make it affordable, people would get it.
We need to focus on improving the system:
- Covering more people
- Driving prices down.
Co-Ops are a good method of doing this. Perhaps a public option would be less, but it would also put people out of work.
I say work on the CO-OP and sharing models to lower prices. Add tort reform to appease the more conservative side of the house. Place incentives for digitizing things. Make it work with a moderate approach. Sometimes you need to compromise to make progress.

Stephanie2009 puts it best: The polls show that the US public wants lower prices, better coverage, and a chance that a medical catastrophe won’t lead to bankruptcy. As a Canadian, I see our Medicare that does cover everyone as one of the Great Things that fulfils all of those qualities. Moreover, so do most Canadians, and we do it with an overhead cost of about 1%, and for a per capita spending that is 30% UNDER the wastefulness of the US non-system.