Numbers Game: Is Health Care Reform Still Worth the (Lower) Costs?
EmailABC News’ Rick Klein reports: Maybe the finish line is so close they can see it from their houses. Maybe you can see it from the House. But the view is still different from the Senate.
Sixty senators get to be the 60th senator. Few of them really love — or still, as of Thursday morning, really know — what’s being produced. Fewer still believe the numbers are realistic.
And the Senate will be voting on something that won’t take effect until the midterm election year — the next one, as in, the one that comes in 2014.
Democrats have yet to align the political gains with the political risks over health care reform. Blown deadlines are bad enough — but lawmakers might like to think they’ve missed them for a reason. Lower costs don’t necessarily mean a bill that’s worth it. (And there are several ways to measure costs.)
What are we in this for, again? “Most of Washington seems to think a low [Congressional Budget Office] score is automatically a good CBO score. But a low CBO score means a bill that doesn’t involve a lot of federal outlays. And without a lot of federal outlays, you can’t insure as many people or provide them with as much protection,” The New Republic’s Jonathan Cohn writes.
As we’ve watched the ambitions of spring turn into the clamor of summer and the exasperation of fall, where have we gotten? Is it possible that by trying to do too much — expanding health insurance, for example, while simultaneously purporting to cut the deficit — that the bill winds up doing too little? (Cost controls, anyone?)
“Health-care reform is increasingly hostage to numbers that are disconnected from the reality of the bill and its purpose,” Ezra Klein writes at his Washington Post blog. “Compromising beneath $900 billion might be necessary, but it’s nothing to celebrate. It’s a concession, not an accomplishment.”
Health care is looking like a story of “missed connections,” Andrew Gelman, Nate Silver, and Daniel Lee write in a New York Times op-ed: “On the one hand, there is a disconnect between Mr. Obama and the electorate: the president — who had popularity ratings in the 60s when the health care debate began — has generally stayed in the background during health care negotiations, leaving the unpopular Congress to be the public face of the bill. On the other hand, there is a disconnect between the electorate and the 535 members of Congress, who seem to be so fixated on Mr. Obama’s standing in their states that they’ve paid little attention to what their constituents might want — or need.”
The big procedural picture: “Democrats in the Senate — the House is not the problem — need to have a long chat with themselves and decide whether they want to engage in an act of collective suicide,” E.J. Dionne Jr. writes in his column. “But it’s also time to start paying attention to how Republicans, with Machiavellian brilliance, have hit upon what might be called the Beltway-at-Rush-Hour Strategy, aimed at snarling legislative traffic to a standstill so Democrats have no hope of reaching the next exit.”
It’s big: “The battle over health care reform has entered one of its final — and most difficult — phases,” ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported on “Good Morning America” Thursday. “This is a massive bill — 2,074 pages — one of the biggest and most expensive bills ever to come before the Congress.”
Jubilant late Wednesday — and can that feeling last into the weekend? “Tonight begins the last leg of this journey we have been on for some time,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., per ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf and Huma Khan. “The finish line really is in sight.”
Or: “It’s going to be a holy war,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R- Utah.
Reid’s gambit, in pressing for a procedural vote Saturday: “The move quickly turned up the pressure on the last few wavering moderates to support the plan, which includes a sizable chunk of deficit cutting,” Politico’s Carrie Budoff Brown reports. “One holdout appeared to be Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, who faces a tough reelection fight next fall. On her way in to the briefing with Reid, Lincoln was asked how she will vote on the motion to proceed: ‘We’ll wait and see,’ she said.”
“The handful of moderate senators who will decide the question seemed likely to support opening the debate,” The Boston Globe’s Lisa Wangsness and Susan Milligan report. “But, in a testament to the tremendous political difficulty ahead for the president’s top domestic policy initiative, Reid spent more than an hour yesterday giving three moderate Democrat fence-sitters a special closed-door briefing on the bill, and administration officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, met separately with senators to sell it.”
Sounding like a yes, on Saturday, if not beyond that: “It is a motion to start debate on a bill and to try to improve it,” said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., per ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf.
Big guns: “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has recruited an all-star team of former senators — Vice President Joe Biden, Tom Daschle and Ken Salazar — to push healthcare reform over the finish line,” The Hill’s Alexander Bolton reports.
”Democratic leaders were jubilant that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined that the Senate bill would cut federal deficits by $130 billion over the next decade,” Shailagh Murray and Lori Montgomery report in The Washington Post. “Those projected reductions could prove critical in winning the support of three wavering moderate Democrats whose votes Reid (D-Nev.) must secure to bring the legislation to the floor before the Senate breaks for Thanksgiving. But Reid also stacked the bill with provisions sought by liberals, including a public insurance option, albeit a version with an opt-out clause for states.”
Meet the “botax”: “Senator Harry Reid’s health care bill included an array of new provisions that are being scrutinized on Wednesday night, but one particular tax proposal in particular already has attracted a buzz — a 5 percent levy on elective cosmetic procedures that was quickly dubbed the ‘botax,’ ” David M. Herszenhorn reports in The New York Time.s
Keith Hennessey: “It would apply to surgery performed beginning in 2010, so get your work done before the new year.”
Getting to the real finish line: “The two bills have differences on taxes, abortion coverage and a public-insurance plan and would require considerable work to reconcile if Congress hopes to pass some form of health care overhaul — the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s domestic agenda,” Greg Hitt and Janet Adamy report in The Wall Street Journal. “The $848 billion cost is below the $1.05 trillion cost of the health overhaul passed by the House this month, and the prospect of additional deficit reduction may raise chances fiscally conservative Democrats will back the package.”
President Obama is headed back to Washington — with just one storyline following him home.
ABC’s Jake Tapper lists the disappointments: “President Obama has spent a week in Asia, with high level meetings across four countries. But critics argue all that time and jet fuel has not been well-spent. The President leaves South Korea today with arguably little show for it.”
Said David Axelrod: “This not an immediate gratification business. I understand that Washington’s in the immediate gratification business.”
The New York Times’ Helene Cooper and Marvin Fackler: “With the novelty of a visit as America’s first black president having given way to the reality of having to plow through intractable issues like monetary policy (China), trade (Singapore, China, South Korea), security (Japan) and the 800-pound gorilla on the continent (China), Mr. Obama’s Asia trip has been, in many ways, a long, uphill slog. … Mr. Obama quickly discovered that popularity on the Asian streets did not necessarily translate into policy successes behind closed doors in the Kantei, the Japanese White House, let alone in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.”
“The Seoul stop was the last on a trip that has notably lacked concrete achievements but has seen Obama’s personal narrative on full display,” Anne E. Kornblut reports in The Washington Post. “But is his biography-as-diplomacy approach beginning to show its limits?”
Time’s Michael Scherer: “As Obama’s foreign policy ambitions move beyond the introductory phase, harder questions are coming to the fore: When does politeness lapse into passivity? When does seeking common ground erode the soil that anchors American priorities?”
In Afghanistan — Hamid Karzai has been sworn, possibly eliciting a more complicated reaction from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton than that other inauguration she attended in 2009.
ABC’s Martha Raddatz, from Kabul, on “GMA” Thursday: “President Karzai defended his government, calling corruption a ‘dangerous enemy’ that we will tackle seriously. But in a 90-minute session with Karzai last night, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had to do some serious arm-twisting, telling the Afghan president he must show measurable results.”
The AP’s Deb Riechmann: “U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday that the international community will support the embattled Afghan government, but expects it to build up the country’s defense forces, boost security and improve the lives of its impoverished people.”
“On the eve of Karzai’s inauguration, the mood in Afghanistan’s capital could hardly have been less celebratory. Fearing violence, most people hurried home early from work or school Wednesday,” the Los Angeles Times’ Laura King reports.
War strategy: “President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown have turned the focus of Afghan war planning toward an exit strategy, publicly declaring that the U.S. and its allies can’t send additional troops without a plan for getting them out,” The Wall Street Journal’s Peter Spiegel and Yochi J. Dreazen report. “The shift has unnerved some U.S. and foreign officials, who say that planning a pullout now — with or without a specific timetable — encourages the Taliban to wait out foreign forces and exacerbates fears in the region that the U.S. isn’t fully committed to their security.”
Jobs data gets a Capitol Hill airing Thursday, in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Opening the day: “More than 50,000 jobs, or one out of every 10 jobs the White House says were ‘saved or created’ by their economic stimulus plan, came from projects that reported spending no money yet, according to a government report obtained by ABC News,” Jonathan Karl and Matthew Jaffe report.
“The report by the Government Accountability Office analyzes the administration’s October 2009 report on jobs saved or created by the $787 billion stimulus program and finds a ‘range of significant reporting and processing problems that need to be addressed.’ ”
Jay Carney, Vice President Joe Biden’s spokesman: “Never before in history has a federal government program been this transparent and accountable. … Never. Not even close.”
Ed O’Keefe, of The Washington Post: “The Government Accountability Office found that almost 4,000 designated recipients who have not yet received stimulus funding reported creating or saving more than 58,000 jobs. Another 9,200 recipients reported no job creation, despite receiving a total of $965 million.”
From the opening statement of the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.: “This Administration continues to misread the economy, misunderstand the nature of economic growth, mislead the American people with faulty job claims, and miss the steps this country needs to take to get our economy back on track.”
A White House official, to Politico’s Mike Allen: “Time is on our side: as late reports coming in, new data will shows the jobs total climbing, and the numbers getting more reliable. In the end, the data debate is frustrating, but a side show: the American people care a lot more about our success in creating jobs than our precision in counting them.”
More fun with stimulus dollars: “There’s $1.5 million to fix a remote lighthouse on uninhabited Monomoy Island, off Cape Cod. Security measures to protect the Spirit of Boston party cruise ship from terrorist attacks will cost about $123,000. And the University of Massachusetts at Boston received nearly $95,000 to study pollen samples from the Viking era in Iceland,” The Boston Globe’s Jenn Abelson writes. “Massachusetts school districts … bought window blinds, photocopiers, and a cafeteria dishwasher, and the Patrick administration recently came under fire for proposing to use $9 million to build a pedestrian bridge connecting parking lots near Gillette Stadium in Foxborough.”
OK, so Sarah Palin can still draw a crowd: “Fans of the former Alaska governor started lining up at 9 p.m. [Tuesday] night and slept out all night long in sleeping bags and snow gear outside the Barnes and Noble store at Woodland Mall, which is the first stop on Palin’s book tour,” ABC’s Kate Snow reports. “At 7 a.m. [Wednesday] morning, bookstore staff began handing out orange wristbands to those who would be allowed to meet and greet Palin. Barnes and Noble staff tell ABC News they distributed all of their 1,000 wristbands for tonight’s event.”
Between 450 and 500 people were already in line in Fort Wayne, Ind., by 7 am ET Thursday, Snow reports. “If these first stops are any indication, Sarah Palin is still pretty popular,” she said on “GMA.”
Dave Murray, in the Grand Rapids Press: “Pulling away in a motorcoach emblazoned like the cover of her best-selling memoir ‘Going Rogue: An American Life,’ Palin capped a whirlwind tour-kickoff day that found about 1,000 people waiting hours to have their books signed. Nearly all arrived at the mall before the sun rose to obtain a wristband that entitled them stand on another hours-long line for a signature, a photo and a moment with a women who stirs deep passions on both sides of the aisle.”
“If Sarah Palin were running for president, this is where she’d come,” Politico’s Ben Smith writes. “And if she were running for president, she’d be doing about what she did Wednesday, under the watchful eyes a half-dozen capable advance hands, veterans of the White House and the McCain campaign, who herded the press and the public into even lines. She had a VIP list for key local conservatives, shuttling them discreetly to the front of the line. She had a few talking points, tailored for the local area, to deliver after she stepped down with a big smile from her big bus, handing baby Trig off to an aide after her four-inch heels hit the sidewalk outside a shopping mall Barnes & Nobles, where she held her first book signing.”
And @SarahPalinUSA got its first Tweet: “Michigan-thx 4 Going Rogue! Perfect tour kickoff w/Kid Rock tune praising Northern MI humming in backgrnd @ Barnes/Noble. Above expectations.”
Sen. John McCain breaks what’s been his (for the most part) silence on the book’s juicier tidbits: “There’s been a lot of dust flying around in the last few days and I just wanted to mention that I have the highest regard for Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace and the rest of the team … and I appreciated all the hard work and everything they did to help the campaign,” he told Reuters’ Steve Holland. “I think it’s just time to move on.”
The Washington Post indexed Palin’s book.
And so did, with a little more snark, Slate.com. (Sample entry: “diet: forced by Steve Schmidt to go on, 284; Steve Schmidt needs to go on , 285.”)
Next up in the DNC’s “call ‘em out series”: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “Our nation has been talking about comprehensive health insurance reform for nearly a century. And this time around, Congress has been debating it for almost 10 months. But Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said the whole process is going too fast, and he’s trying to bury reform under endless delays and distortions.”
Also from the annals of Democratic pushback: “Nearly half of the 30 organizations participating in a job fair [House Minority Whip Eric] Cantor is holding Monday in Culpeper were recipients of the stimulus,” Anita Kumar reports for The Washington Post. “The list includes a slew of government agencies and schools that have directly benefited from the package and may be using stimulus money to hire people (as the money was originally designed to do), including the Orange County public schools, the Transportation Security Administration and Virginia Department of Labor, and some companies that may have indirectly benefited such as Comcast and Terremark.”
Dick Morris, in Little Rock Thursday. From the press release, for the event coming from the 60 Plus Association: “Arkansans are rallying to express their strong concerns that they were represented poorly by their Congressmen and that they do not want the bill to pass in the Senate. The ‘Hands Off My Healthcare’ bus will be at each rally, and Dick Morris, political author and commentator, will be speaking at all Thursday, November 19 events.”
The Kicker:
“I like Michigan and it worked out demographically.” — Sarah Palin, on why she started her book tour in Grand Rapids.
“You’re never going to find the ‘evil empire’ on a map of the world.” — Sarah Palin, to ABC’s Barbara Walters, explaining how her use of the term “death panels” is similar to Ronald Reagan’s cold war use of the term “evil empire.”
For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/
Intern for the ABC News Political Unit:
The ABC News Political Unit is now seeking full-time spring 2010 interns in Washington, D.C.
The paid internship begins Monday, Jan. 4, 2010, and runs through Friday, June 4, 2010.
Political Unit interns attend political events and contribute to stories for the politics page of ABCNews.com. They also help ABC News by conducting research, maintaining our calendar of upcoming political events, and posting stories to ABCNews.com.
In order to apply, you MUST be either a graduate student or an undergraduate student who has completed his or her first year of college. The internship is NOT open to recent graduates.
You also must be able to work eight hours per day, Monday through Friday. Interns will be paid $8.50/hour.
If you write well, follow politics closely, and have some familiarity with web publishing, send a cover letter and resume to Teddy Davis, ABC News’ Deputy Political Director, at teddy.davis@abc.com, by Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009, with the subject line: “INTERN” in all caps.
Please indicate in both your cover letter and the body of your email your student status and the specific dates and hours of your availability.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
“Lower costs.”
LOL!!
Posted by: Mary | November 19, 2009, 8:49 am 8:49 am
That’s it. Here’s my credit card just run it.
Posted by: Freedom | November 19, 2009, 8:56 am 8:56 am
It better have a strong public option. When they talk about this bill I want republicans squealing. The louder they squeal the better the bill will be.
Posted by: rightbehind | November 19, 2009, 8:58 am 8:58 am
The Democrats Smoke and Mirrors campaign moves on,with the lies about the jobs saved and created by the Stimulus and now where they are going to add millions of uninsured to Health Care and cut cost.Common sense has left the Democratic party,2010 elections will be a disaster for them,none too soon I might add.
Posted by: Johnny L | November 19, 2009, 9:03 am 9:03 am
Tax now, get benefits later. What idiot would pay for a car for 3 years before driving it? The answer is an idiot who wouldn’t have to pay for it.
Posted by: david | November 19, 2009, 9:04 am 9:04 am
without tort reform,and an end to the ambulance chasing lawyers YOU WILL NEVER SEE AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE.
the lawyers sue for billions and we the idiots pay the bill to make them wealthy.
it is that simple
Posted by: rodney | November 19, 2009, 9:09 am 9:09 am
Turning our incredible healthcare system over to the cash for clunkers crowd will be devestating.
Of course we need reform, as in tort reform and allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines (which will DRASTICALLY reduce cost).
This bill is not about helping the uninsured, it is about liberals’ inherent belief that utopia lies on the other side of government control of its peope.
Why is it that liberals refuse to believe that America has the best medical schools in the world, the best hosptitals in the world, the best medical treatments/facilities in the world, and we have invented 90% of all life-saving drugs! A government takeover will cripple this country, and hinder medical advances for generations to come.
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 9:20 am 9:20 am
rodney you hit it right on the head
Posted by: natale from mass. | November 19, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am
“planning a pullout now — with or without a specific timetable — encourages the Taliban to wait out foreign forces and exacerbates fears in the region that the U.S. isn’t fully committed to their security”
I don’t agree. If the Taliban “waits out” the U.S. withdrawl, i.e. they stop planting I.E.D’s and attacking our troops, well, gee that’s kind of what we want, isn’t it? But since when has the Taliban shown the kind of self restraint to “wait out” a U.S. withdrawl? No, the attacks will continue, because the Taliban operate on instinct, not reason. And they will be destroyed. And the Afghans need to know we are NOT committed to their security, we are committed to OUR security, if they don’t want to be dominated by the brutal Taliban, then they need to raise their own army and fight for their country themselves.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
In the end, if you can’t afford to pay for it, or to buy health insurance, on your own, you will have limited access to care, and it will get worse every year.
As we continue to place the human animal into an urbanized, unhealthy environment, doing unhealthy kinds of work, the health problems will continue to grow, while the ability to pay for care, continues to fall.
The government simply cannot pay for all those who either cannot…..or will not….pay for themselves. It is a bankrupting proposition…….and China already has enough US debt to foreclose on the country.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | November 19, 2009, 9:27 am 9:27 am
“But is his biography-as-diplomacy approach beginning to show its limits?”
Oh please. Name one success of Bush Jr’s Belligerent Cowboy diplomacy with China, Singapore or Japan. Next you’ll be solemnly intoning about Obama’s continuing failure to bring peace to Middle East despite spending almost a week on it. I’ll be happy if China doesn’t ram one of our planes down to the ground and make us beg for the airmen back again.
Posted by: jhw539 | November 19, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am
Is the savings in medicare costs going to be pickup (payed for) by the states?
Posted by: Kevin Wilder | November 19, 2009, 9:34 am 9:34 am
reid held this bill from public view until he was forced to post it in a time frame which makes it impossible to read it all before any vote. This man and Polosi are crooks and are stealing the liberties we have fought for. Polosi siad she and her fellow dems take full credit for the bill. Does that mean I get to sue her and reid?? hope so.
Posted by: Jim Rod | November 19, 2009, 9:36 am 9:36 am
Turning our incredible healthcare system
Dave in KC | Nov 19, 2009 9:20:09 AM
The one that spends TWICE as much per person as every other first world nation? The one that has among the LOWEST life expectancy in the first world (despite having among the lowest smoking rates and even a literal act of Congress to prevent allowing a brain dead women to die)? The one that did NOT perform the first hand transplant, did not do the first face transplant, did not pioneer a cure for some forms of blindness (Osteo-Odonto-Keratoprosthesis)? The one that sees it’s own citizens flying to India for affordable surgery? The one whose small and large businesses alike are staggering under health care costs that have almost doubled in only tens years?
That incredibly healthcare system?
Posted by: jhw539 | November 19, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am
rodney
Texas and Missori has passed caps on malpractice awards and they still have higher costs than the national average. Caps on awards leads to lower malpractice premiums for doctors, but they do not pass those savings on to patients (would you?). So you can’t say tort reform will lower healthcare costs.
Furthermore, malpractice litigation accounts for only two percent of this nation’s $2.2 trillion health care costs.
You know what drives up health care costs even more: actual malpractice. When a baby isn’t cared for correctly at birth, the costs of caring for him in a nursing home the rest of his life outweigh whatever “savings” you incur by capping malpractice claims.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 9:43 am 9:43 am
THAT’S CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN !!!
(believe now and pay later, that is… or let our children pay.)
Posted by: Shane | November 19, 2009, 9:52 am 9:52 am
“The government simply cannot pay for all those who either cannot..”
When are people going to realize that the govt. pays for these people anyway? That’s why the budget forecasts include figures on the amount it will reduce the deficit. Those amounts are compared to the cost of DOING NOTHING. If we do nothing it will COST US MORE.
“without tort reform…”
“Of course we need reform, as in tort reform…”
Blame the Reps for that. If they had been willing to negotiate in good faith they could have made progress on this issue. But by refusing to vote for HC reform of any kind, in any way, they took the issue off the table.
Despite that the White House is starting a program to study arbitration and other conflict resolution methods to address the cost of malpractice without a blanket denial to the 100,000 Americans who are injured by medical mistakes every year.
If you want more than that then tell your Republicans in Congress to get off the dime and get it done the way anything in Washington gets done – compromise.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | November 19, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am
Our debt is so high(>$12T debt and >$106 unfunded liabilities) and the dollar so weak, that healthcare with push them over the cliff. Even Obama SAID the deficit needs to be reduced. So, why not reform ONLY the parts of healthcare that are not working such as medical malpractice?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am
jhw539
Yes, we do have the best hospitals, treatment centers, doctors, and medical schools in the world. I know that contradicts your party’s view of America, but it’s the truth. For every American on msnbc going to india for treatment, I will show 100,000 Indians coming to the USA for treatment.
Costs are high, I got it. And you think turning healthcare over to people like barney frank and nancy pelosi is going to lower them? How?
Costs have skyrocketed BECAUSE of gov’t intervention. Gov’t has prevented many citizens from going across state lines to purchase insurance, which has decreased competition drastically. (This raises costs, in case you were sleeping in econ 101).
We need tort reform because trial lawyers (overwhelmingly liberal) have pushed doctor’s malpractice insurance bills through the roof.
16,000 babies were born ILLEGALLY in Dallas alone. They have all been paid for by us. Have you ever thought that supporting people who don’t contribute to the system might raise the costs?
Liberals oppose even card-checking patients to prove citizenship!
I repeat, this bill is not about helping the uninsured and holding hands in harmony, it is about CONTROL of the people.
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am
Latest Rasmussen: 25% Strongly Favor the plan while 39% are Strongly Opposed.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am
“We need tort reform because trial lawyers (overwhelmingly liberal) have pushed doctor’s malpractice insurance bills through the roof.”
fact:
Malpractice litigation accounts for only two percent of this nation’s $2.2 trillion health care costs.
fact:
Texas and Missouri passed caps on malpractice awards several years ago and they still have higher costs than the national average. Yes, caps on malpractice awards lowered doctor’s premiums for malpractice insurance. No, these savings did not translate into lower healthcare costs.
Liberals = people who make decisions based on facts. Rightwingers = people who make decisions based on ideology.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 10:11 am 10:11 am
Obama….
The constant lying.
The childish whining.
The disgraceful bowing.
The staggering arrogance.
The poisonous radicalism.
The dangerous narcissism.
The astounding incompetence.
Obama wants to put as much of the private economy under government control as possible to create his nanny state utopia where he is the boy king.
Let’s continue to stand strong against Obama in every way and get Congress out of the hands of the insane Pelosi and Reid in 2010.
Obama is a smug, smirking con man. Nothing more.
Posted by: Jackson | November 19, 2009, 10:15 am 10:15 am
After Texas implemented medical malpractice reform, there are doctors in counties that never have had them or where it has been years since a doctor practiced there.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Amy in Maine | Nov 19, 2009 10:11:21 AM….You say fact. Where did you obtrain your information? What are the costs of “defensive medicine” practiced to avoid litigation?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am
“Yes, we do have the best hospitals, treatment centers, doctors, and medical schools in the world…”
But that doesn’t mean that we get the best results for our dollar. Don’t argue with me go to Johns Hopkins Medical School and look at their studies. They know more about medicine in the US than either of us combined a thousand times over.
“…turning healthcare over to people like barney frank and nancy pelosi is going to lower them?”
LOL What do you think that they are going to be looking over medical charts?!? HC reform is about turning decisions over to doctors, unless you think that you are better off under the tender mercies of the Board of Directors of Cigna, Aetna, etc. who are only in it for the money they can take from the sick and dying.
“Gov’t has prevented many citizens from going across state lines to purchase insurance….in case you were sleeping in econ 101..”
Just in case you were sleeping during Reality 101, let me tell you, that liberal Dems are your best chance of getting that changed because the Reps and the cons in the Dem party are against it.
“We need tort reform because… malpractice insurance bills through the roof.”
And can you show that patients have benefited one dollar in states that already passed tort reform? NO you can’t. Because somehow doctors never seem to get around to passing that saved money on to the patients.
“16,000 babies were born ILLEGALLY in Dallas alone. They have all been paid for by us…”
So we should tell those babies not to be born right? They are coming rather we have a HC system that is capable of meeting the challenge or not.
“Have you ever thought that supporting people who don’t contribute to the system might raise the costs?”
One more time for the learning-impaired WE PAY FOR THOSE PEOPLE ANYWAY. That’s why one of the keys to HC reform is requiring everyone to have some kind of insurance.
“Liberals oppose even card-checking patients to prove citizenship!”
You overlook the fact that illegals are not covered under HC reform in any of the versions under discussion.
“I repeat, this bill is… CONTROL of the people.”
Yes, sell the fear because the facts are not in your favor.
“Latest Rasmussen…”
Rasmussen couldn’t add 2 + 2 without asking the Republican leadership for the answer.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | November 19, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
Will government healthcae look anything like government housing? I don’t want any part of that.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am
I guess if the polls say what you want they’re true and unbiased? Which one would that be?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:29 am 10:29 am
The important question is not whether its in YOUR favor or MY favor. Is the healthcare in the best intersts of the majority of the people? A second question is what will the costs of Obamacare actually do to the economy (not what the politicians say it will do)?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:33 am 10:33 am
“What are the costs of “defensive medicine” practiced to avoid litigation?”
The CBO, which both parties use, says $54 billion over ten years, or an average of $5.4 billion a year. What’s that as a percentage of $2.2 trillion a year?
2-tenths of one percent
So not exactly a big part of the HC bill.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | November 19, 2009, 10:36 am 10:36 am
The Democrat Senate Health Bill cut out $250 Billion for doctor payments and will put it in a separate bill so that their bill would come in under $900 Billion; it is called “Bait and Switch” to fool the American people. The Senate Bill really costs over $1.2 Trillion. Investigate this Rick Klein and stop carrying the Democrat’s water as they try and screw over us Americans with this Health Reform Bill we do not want.
Posted by: Peter King | November 19, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Let’s just admit it. Obama and his Democratic party are a FLOP, doing nothing but spending money and time. Obama is on a worldwide vacation tour and his party hasn’t a clue of what to do to get people working again ( and I don’t believe they even care ). Every time he’s out of the country, Holder has some big announcment to make- just like it’s planned that way.
Posted by: heelbox | November 19, 2009, 10:40 am 10:40 am
ohbummer.
Posted by: gatorsnc | November 19, 2009, 10:46 am 10:46 am
“A second question is what will the costs of Obscurity actually do to the economy (not what the politicians say it will do)?”
You left out the third question – What are the costs of DOING NOTHING?
The average annual premium for employer-sponsored family health coverage has risen to four times the rate of inflation.
Nearly two-thirds of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were linked to medical expenses. Of those who filed for bankruptcy, nearly 80 percent had health insurance coverage.
In 2008, about 57 million Americans were in families that had problems paying medical bills, and nearly three-quarters had health insurance coverage.
Excess spending on health care primarily due to administrative costs for health insurance and additional outpatient services considered wasteful, added $650 billion to the nation’s health care bill in 2008 – or almost 25 percent of all national health care expenditures.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly 46 million Americans, or 18 percent of the population under the age of 65, were without health insurance in 2007, the latest Census data available.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | November 19, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am
So, if the CBO is saying healthcare will be $2.2 T, what will the actual cost be? In 1965, the forecast of Medicare in 1990 was $12 B; but, it was really $100B – off only by a factor 800+%. The cost today $500B.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am
“In 1965, the forecast of Medicare in 1990 was $12 B; but, it was really $100B… today $500B.”
Gee, maybe we need some kind of, oh, I don’t know….. reform, maybe?
Thanks for the stat. It helps to make the argument that we have to do something now.
Posted by: OB-Wan222 | November 19, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
And what of the $12,000,000,000,000 + national debt or $106,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities? These are only going to grow with Obamacare. We are at the financial precipice and this bill will probably push us over, along with increased taxes, insurance premiums and reduced Medicare coverage.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 11:15 am 11:15 am
It’s a solid bill that appears to be enough to get moderates like Nelson aboard. It stays below a trillion, ekes out serious savings and still includes a public option. This is a major achievement for Democrats and the White House…
Posted by: matt | November 19, 2009, 11:17 am 11:17 am
Question: If I have my own insurance coverage AND I move to another state (let’s say that I’m self-employed and work out of my house) – can I, with premium adjustments made for a different locale, keep my same health ins plan under present law/regulations AND what the Democrats are proposing?
Of course this isn’t a major inconvenience, but what if I have what are considered pre-existing conditions?
THEN my moving IS a big deal!
I honestly don’t know the answer to my question.
I do know that I can carry my auto insurance coverage any where. My life insurance, too.
What about health insurance? Has this sort of “portability” been considered?
I also know that this could be an argument for “the public option,” but I greatly fear that, based upon my 50 years of living, that “govt control” is not a panacea for consumers.
Thanks!
Posted by: Chet21 | November 19, 2009, 11:19 am 11:19 am
Texas passed tort reform in 2004.
Currently, the town with the highest healthcare costs in America, per capita, is McAllen, Texas.
I listened to this story about what a researcher found was the reason on public radio. (If you want reliable facts and in depth analysis, you have to go outside the mainestream media.)
McAllen, Texas has no more illegal immigrants than any other Texas town, the population isn’t any sicker or older, and malpractice insurance premiums are very low, so why are health care costs there the highest in the country?
The researcher said its because a system has evolved that gives doctors a financial incentive to order more tests and procedures. In McAllen Texas, for instance, there is a new doctor owned hospital, and doctors have invested in imaging centers. There is a culture in McAllen that views ordering more services as a legitimate revenue stream.
The system at the Mayo clinic in Minnesota is the opposite. Doctors are paid a salery. Minnesota has the lowest healthcare cost per capita and this is key: better outcomes. Another thing the researcher found was expensive healthcare does not translate into better health care.
I would post a link here, but ABC never let’s me add links in the comments.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
OB-WAN222: Medicare in 1990 was $12 B; but, it was really $100B… today $500B.”Gee, maybe we need some kind of, oh, I don’t know….. reform, maybe?Thanks for the stat. It helps to make the argument that we have to do something now………………………………………………………………………………………… Are you serious you just agreed that Government run Health Care is a bad thing. Fact: Medicare is Government run! You are a real genius. Fact: Medicare is not a catastrophic health insurance policy. It doesn’t pay for hospitalization longer than 150 days, and there is no cap on out of pocket expenses. “Medigap” insurance is often purchased to protect against huge medical bills not covered by Medicare. Fact: Medicare patients cannot pay cash for care. A 1997 law (the Balanced Budget Act, section 4507) forbids private contracts between patients and doctors. With few exceptions, Medicare recipients cannot pay cash for a Medicare-covered service that Medicare denies. Fact: We do need reform but not 1.2 trillion and over 2000 pages in reform! This is a transplant when all that is needed is some stitches.
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am
Medicare threatens patient privacy. The federal government requires home health agencies to regularly send private data on Medicare recipients. This is called the Outcomes Assessment Information System (OASIS) In addition, doctors and hospitals that make inadvertent errors in billing Medicare can be forced to hand over the patient’s entire medical record for investigation of fraud.
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 11:32 am 11:32 am
Medicare frequently denies payment. In 2001, 3.7 million appeals were filed for denial of payment by Medicare Part B. Despite a 2000 law requiring swift processing of appeals, a 2003 report by the General Accounting Office found significant delays in appeals processing.
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am
Medicare wastes taxpayer money. Over the past 7 years, almost $107 billion in improper payments have been made for services provided to recipients of the traditional fee-for-service Medicare program. CCHC calculated that the $13.3 billion loss in 2002 equals $36.4 million per day.
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am
We are so far in debt now we will likely never recover and our children will be paying, and our grandchildren. We have no voice anymore. I haven’t spoken to one person in favor of this healthcare bill, including any doctors! Don’t blame the lawyers, blame the juries, and the doctors who protect their own by failing to oust incompetent repeat-offenders.
Posted by: C. Autrey | November 19, 2009, 11:34 am 11:34 am
C. Autrey
The Senate healthcare reform bill would reduce the deficit by $127 billion, just over the first ten years it is in place.
The bill REDUCES the deficit. The bill REDUCES the deficit. $127 billion. Over the first ten years ALONE. These are the figures arrived at by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
“Democrats have yet to align the political gains with the political risks over health care reform.” – That’s funny, I thought they were supposed to be worried about what was best for the people, not what is best for their parties and their own political gains.
Posted by: Phil | November 19, 2009, 11:46 am 11:46 am
Gigantic treadmills in every metropolitan area are the solution to all our problems. Huge treadmills driving electric power generation turbines and powered by people is the route to clean renewable energy. It also solves the healthcare problems associated with lack of physical fitness and obesity. Everyone who takes their turn on the treadmills, along with a multitude of other “walkers”, receives free healthcare. The electricity generated could be sold inexpensively to US industry giving us an economic advantage over other nations and the proceeds used to fund free healthcare for all those who participate. Let our illegal residents sign up with their green cards to do their walks on the treadmills if they want free healthcare. We’ll need lots of treadmills which would provide jobs. More jobs through the building of power grids. Cost of insuring the uninsured is covered. Manufacturing would boom with our competitive edge on power. The immigrants would be contributing to their own support. Immigration, jobs, healthcare, economy, energy, global warming problems all solved.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | November 19, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
Amy, you’re simnply reading the democratic script. So, if the CBO is saying healthcare will be $2.2 T(and Reid says its under $1T?), what will the actual cost be? In 1965, the forecast of Medicare in 1990 was $12 B; but, it was really $100B – off only by a factor 800+%. The cost today $500B.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 11:54 am 11:54 am
Amy in Maine —- Health care costs and tort reform are apples and oranges. Tort reform is needed to find the money to actually pay for this bill. Health care costs are not addressed in this bill. Might as well call this bill “Government Subsidized Insurance Program”. It does nothing to lower health care costs.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 11:57 am 11:57 am
Amy in Maine | Nov 19, 2009 11:41:34 AM
Funny last week the the estimates were higher? this has no chance of reducing the debt anyone that believes that is an idiot or what people commonly refer to as Liberals.
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
“”"”"”The bill REDUCES the deficit. $127 billion. Over the first ten years ALONE. These are the figures arrived at by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.”"”"”
Posted by: Amy in Maine
Common sense test: We will pay $849 billion and reduce the deficit by $127 billion? Nope, doesn’t pass the test. Have you always believed the government estimates? I can give you MANY instances where they were wrong. Oh, how does this actually reduce “actual health care costs” again?
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
deanbob
The Senate healthcare reform bill would reduce the deficit by $127 billion, over the first ten years it is in place.
Of course, if Republicans get back into power after Obama, they will find a way to negate that deficit reduction, just as they passed a Medicare prescription plan they couldn’t pay for under Bush and lost billions of dollars in fraud to two ill-planned wars, destroying the surplus Clinton left. But let’s say Democrats hold onto power after Obama, THEN the CBO projections will hold: the Senate healthcare reform bill would reduce the deficit by $127 billion
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
I support a legislation that guarantees quality, safe and affordable healthcare to all US residents, including the choice of a public insurance plan…that will compete with private insurance plans to make insurance affordable. But it does not go far enough. Food, shelter and clothing are necessities of Life. Therefore, we must have government-owned and operated grocery stores to ensure quality, safe and affordable food for everyone. Only be creating government stores competing with private stores can we bring down prices. Of course, to guarantee that the government-owned stores can obtain food at low prices, it will need to own wholesale distributors. There are farm prices to worry about, so government-owned farms are necessary. Food and what we spend on it are too important to be left to places like Wal-Mart etc. and the like.
Now, what do we do about housing and clothing???????
Posted by: Lizzie | November 19, 2009, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm
Amy, how (specifically), is it going to save the amount you alege? What would it take for you to change your mind on the healthbill?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
btw, can any of the “i’m so glad to have a president who takes the time to analyze everything to death” people rationalize for me how/why obama initially wanted this thing crammed throught congress in 7 weeks prior to the summer recess? i’d really like an explanation of that one.
Posted by: davidfrat21 | November 19, 2009, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
Could you imagine the government housing competing with private housing?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
Amy in Maine, Love your creative acct., pay for it over 10 years, maybe get something back in 6 years. CBO does not agree with the WH figures, they get called in and all over sudden, the figures match the democrats. Rahm probably had to buy a lot of dead fish.
Posted by: Lizzie | November 19, 2009, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
brian | Nov 19, 2009 12:06:33 PM
………………………………..
Just another example of a Liberal with no facts and nothing but hate, fear, spin and hallucinations..Brian Liberal = No facts, Nothing but the party line talking points conceived of fantasy not reality. Profit hating, success hating, afraid of working for what they get, Anti Christian pro anything else, Abortion loving, Death penalty loving, Bigger Government, More Control, something for nothing, share the wealth (success) with those to lazy to accomplish it by themselves. Gun Right hating individuals that promise everything to everyone and accomplish absolutely nothing for anyone!
Posted by: nobama12 | November 19, 2009, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
check the market this am = waaaay down. insurance stocks being dumped – health care will pass.
Posted by: cjr | November 19, 2009, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
Reid should be kicked out of congress, what he and the liberals are doing is un-American. He has lost it – What the American people think no longer matters.
Obama will go down blaming pelosi and reid for losing the next election – never himself.
We are in trouble – we were all fooled
Posted by: a citizen | November 19, 2009, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
Of course the government can lower health care. Its called rationing,Just like the report they put out about women not getting mamograms till they reach 50. That means the 15% between 40-49 that have been diagnost as having breast cancer will likely die,but look at the money the government will save,on mamograms.
Posted by: strikerF | November 19, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
has anyone asked obama where the constitution grants congress the authority to mandate health insurance purchases? after all, he’s a constitutional law professor, isn’t he?
Posted by: davidfrat21 | November 19, 2009, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
WE CAN’T PASS THIS HEALTH BILL!!! —- 1) We can’t afford it! — We can’t pay for the entitlement plans we have now, we are raising the debt ceiling to $14T, our dollar is tanking from printing too much money! China OWNS us!! —- 2) This bill admittedly only decreases the uninsured in America from 30M to 18M!! — there has to be a cheaper way to insure 12M more people! —– 3) TAXES — there are a bunch of new taxes in this bill — taxing all Americans in a myriad of ways! —– 4) Government running healthcare is allowing the people who have not run a SINGLE program within budget to take over you right to medical care – SCARY!!
Posted by: HoosierValues | November 19, 2009, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
davidfrat21: did he actually pass that course??????? Don’t you know that he wants to rewrite the constitution to suit him.
Posted by: Lizzie | November 19, 2009, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm
With Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the VA, and the Dept.of Education being such runaway government success stories, why not believe our Blessed, Anointed President and his followers that this time government will do a great job? Seems reasonble to believe this now that Barack is Pres., right? What a joke.
Posted by: s | November 19, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
What else do you expect from Senator Reid who believes that Joseph Smith was a prophet. The same Joseph Smith that prophesied the following on May 18, 1843: “I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left for their wickedness.” (History of the Church, v5, p 394.) Reid wants to socialize America and undermine it’s democracy thereby and his belief in Joseph Smith is consistent with that aim.
Posted by: denn84116 | November 19, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
jhw539 – There you go again. Spouting half-truths mixed with nonsense and emotionally inflamed rhetoric. Can you just stop and conduct a civil debate based on relevant facts and information? You list medical accomplishments that were achieved elsewhere as though that somehow disproves that America has quality medical facilities for both care and research. “Twice the cost per person; the lowest life expectancy rates…” Where do you come up with this stuff? Spouting fabricated, vague statistical statements proves nothing beyond the fact that you are either incompetent, uneducated or simply trying to disrupt an otherwise informed discourse. Who do you work for? How many times will I have to ask you this question? Do you truly believe either what you say, or that this bill will in any way accomplish the things you seem to believe it will? I cannot see how this could be the case.
Posted by: War919 | November 19, 2009, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm
Amy in Maine – You said “The bill REDUCES the deficit. $127 billion. Over the first ten years ALONE. These are the figures arrived at by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.”
They must teach a different math in Maine. You are not reducing the deficit by $127 Billion when you are increasing it by $721 Billion ($848 Billion projected cost – $127 Billion projected savings) over the same 10 year period. Additionally these figures mean nothing as the CBO has only looked at the 10 years after the bill is passed (and they use the assumption it would go into effect this year). The bills (both House and Senate versions) begin collecting revenue for this piece of crap bill this year but don’t pay out anything until 2013 or 2014 (depending upon which bill is the final one). A true cost estimate of this would have been to look at the 10 years after they start paying and then you would see that your so called savings is zero and probably not savings but additional cost. Do the math, this bill does not reduce the $12 Trillion debt of the federal government, it increases it by over $700 Billion.
Posted by: Sandcrab 1613 | November 19, 2009, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm
“Twice the cost per person; the lowest life expectancy rates…” Where do you come up with this stuff? ”
Try the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) website, that will confirm that Americans consumed $7,290 of health services per person in 2007, almost two-and-a-half times more than the
OECD average of just under $3,000 per person.
You also need to keep in mind that they spend half as much while also managing to cover every citizen. If Europe can do it, why can’t we?
Posted by: gary | November 19, 2009, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
“”"”"”A true cost estimate of this would have been to look at the 10 years after they start paying and then you would see that your so called savings is zero and probably not savings but additional cost. Do the math, this bill does not reduce the $12 Trillion debt of the federal government, it increases it by over $700 Billion.”"”"”"
Posted by: Sandcrab 1613
I wonder if they took into account the increases in actual health care costs over the next 10 years? That will definitely affect insurance premiums (even the government subsidized ones’).
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 1:43 pm 1:43 pm
There seems to be some misinformation floating around. Wonder how that happened (holy war against health care, insurance lobby… and so on.)
Several papers including WSJ and NYT ran a letter to President Obama from 23 prominent health economists talking about the need for health care reform, and setting out the following priorities:(1) deficit neutrality, (2) an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans, (3) an independent Medicare commission, and (4) delivery system reforms.
While the House bill provides more universal coverage, the Senate Finance bill, and the newly unveiled Senate bill hit these priorities, while coming close to the House bill on universal coverage. I urge you to check out the letter, and a wide range of sources before jumping to seemingly false conclusions.
As for the cost of the health care reform bill, let’s put it in perspective. At $900 billion over 10 years, health-care reform seems pretty expensive–we ALL get that– but if recent trends hold steady, the federal government will be spending about $4 trillion a year come 2019. Health-care reform, at $108 billion in 2019, will represent 2.7 percent of that.
I’m very hopeful we will move forward with this, and it will improve even more amelioratively as needed.
Posted by: @Octavia | November 19, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm
“”"”If Europe can do it, why can’t we?”"”"
Posted by: gary
My father-in-law in Spain survived colon cancer (I couldn’t wait for the government health care time so I paid for privete). He was cancer free the last 7 years. He passed on October 5th under government provided health care of a bleeding ulcer. His cavities filled up and shut his organs down. He arrived at the hospital and they gave him a blood transfusion due to “something” in his blood. He wasn’t bleeding which should tell you it was internal. After 5 days at home he collapsed from a simple bleeding ulcer, fell into a coma for 8 days and died. How did they miss the ulcer? He was in and out of the hospital due to not having enough bed space the night he went in so they ran no tests. Been there in Spain (11 years),Italy (6 years) and Germany (1 year). Compare anything to government does to the private sector (except spend our money) and you should have your common sense answer.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
Sandcrab, you can get the real, actual math right from the CBO website (these numbers are from the House bill analysis). 427B in savings + 574B in additional tax revenue = 1,001B, minus the 891B cost gives you the deficit reduction figure.
“Over the 2010–2019 period, the net cost of the coverage expansions would be more than offset by the combination of other spending changes, which CBO estimates would save $427 billion, and receipts resulting from the income tax surcharge on high-income individuals and other provisions, which JCT and CBO estimate would increase federal revenues by $574 billion over that period.”
Posted by: gary | November 19, 2009, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
Ok, who should ensure that the citizens of this country are safe and protected?
Posted by: gus amaral | November 19, 2009, 1:51 pm 1:51 pm
davidfrat21
I once heard obama say that “other countries are not CONSTRAINED by a constitution”.
That says it all for me. He views the most important aspect of our nation’s existence as a hindrance to his progressive, utopian vision of the government running everyone’s lives.
Obama is a socialist. He loathes capitalism, but oddly enough he has seemed more then willing to live like a sultan ever since he and michelle have become millionaires.
Limousine liberals (and some republicans) are the reason Washington is so screwed up right now.
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
Sandcrab 1613
The initial outlay of $848 billion is offset by reductions in Medicare spending and tax increases on the wealthiest Americans, which will result in a reduction of the deficit by $127 billion over the first ten years.
The bill will make sure nearly everyone in this country has health insurance. Currently, under- and un-insured people drive up healthcare costs because they don’t seek care until they are much sicker. Insuring everyone will lower total costs by getting care for these people before they require more expensive interventions.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | November 19, 2009, 1:58 pm 1:58 pm
Well done Dave in KC, you managed to completely misinterpret what Obama said re constitutional restraints.
“We know that al Qaeda is not constrained by a constitution, or by allegiance to anything other than a hateful ideology and a determination to kill as many innocents as possible. But what makes the United States of America so special is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and our ideals not just when it’s easy, but when it’s hard; we’ve been called to serve in such a time.” (Applause.)
speech to FBI, April 28, 2009
Posted by: gary | November 19, 2009, 2:00 pm 2:00 pm
lfrichar
I have had similar experiences with europe’s “free” healthcare system. The hospitals were disgusting, the doctors were scarce, and the lines were horrendous. It was only when I came back to the United States did I begin to recover.
If these liberals would ever go visit some of these places they want this great country to emulate, they would realize that the United States is the LEADER OF THE WORLD in healthcare.
Best doctors, best hospitals, best medical schools, best treatment centers in the world.
We need tort reform and competition among insurance companies. We don’t barney frank and nancy pelosi deciding who gets care and who doesn’t.
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm
Well done Gary, you managed to once again gloss over obama’s anti-American views that he learned all those years in rev racist’s pews.
We are BLESSED with a constitution, not constrained by it.
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 2:06 pm 2:06 pm
Gary, Just who vetted them? I mean, that is a lofty sounding name, The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). I suppose that they have access to extremely accurate records relating to the amount/type and cost of health care which each of us receives. Oh wait, is there such a database? I know for a fact that there is not. Were do they get their statistics from? I suffer from a tendency to discount facts that come from organizations claiming to possess information to which I do not have access. Provide the sources for their claims, validate the process by which they arrive at those figures. I am intelligent enough to review the data myself and make a determination. Is that your only source of information on this subject? Do you accept at face value what they have told you or did you conduct research of your own to back it up? Where did they get the information from second and third world countries? You shout their determination as though you know it for truth, yet, have you done any of these things?
Posted by: war919 | November 19, 2009, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
“”"We need tort reform and competition among insurance companies. “”"”"
Posted by: Dave in KC
I am glad your story had a better ending than mine. Ever here of root cause analysis? Root cause for high insurance premiums?….high cost of health care. Root cause of high cost of health care?……Yet to be determined by our government. If they think this will solve high health care costs, they are sadly mistaken.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm
As a strong Democrat, I hope Congress finds its way toward a bill that is fair to eveyone; in that it won’t pay for abortion, won’t allow illegal aliens to benefit, and will stop insurance companies from profiting in the billions.
Posted by: Julie Rainwater | November 19, 2009, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm
If 30+million new people get healthcare, who’s going to treat them? How long does it take to get a Dr appt? Ave is 63 days in Mass. (the model for healthcare)?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm
Uh… yeah… right… ya betcha… cheaper… It’s only showing “cheaper” because they removed over $200B (billion) from the numbers reported HERE – that have to be paid for outside of this bill – as part of this intiative ($$ to the Docs). when you add just that $200B back in – this is no longer budget neutral now – is it. Smoke and mirror games they are playing.
I trust Reids numbers for this as much as a trust the WH numbers for how many jobs they created with the stimulus money. LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Posted by: clr | November 19, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
My nephew’s father in law left his home in Toronto for the US (Buffalo I think) for prostate surgery some years back.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:19 pm 2:19 pm
Are you all really falling for this? Do you really think the cost is a little over 900billion to give heath care to every American?? Have you looked at the numbers for Medicare and Medicaide and their supplements? Do you think the math adds up for over 300million people not counting the 30 to 40 million illeagals in this country?Are you happy to be threatened that you will go to jail if you do not buy into a government plan? Per Polosi her self from her mouth?? Then if you agree you are one of the suckered ones. If you have a concern you need to e-mail your representitive and tell them to back off and reconsider. Reid just posted the leagal jarganed bill with hundreds of leagal tounge twisters. Just in time for us not to have time to read it all. The Mayflower express needs to take these rhinos back to England.
Posted by: Jim Rod | November 19, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
“”"”won’t allow illegal aliens to benefit, and will stop insurance companies from profiting in the billions.”"”"”
Posted by: Julie Rainwater
Well, this is why immigration reform falls into this category. The illegals will continue to use our ER’ as their clinics and we pay immensely for it still. Also, Insurance companies run profits around 3-4%, nothing more, but the high cost of health care keeps the premiums high. IF illegals go to the ER, they should be treated and deported. If illegals wish to work here, they should be required to go home, apply for a labor card. If they have no criminal record, allow them to work and if they remain clean for 5 years, clear a path to citizenship. All the while, they are actually paying taxes and helping pay for reform.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
lfrichar | Nov 19, 2009 2:21:55 PM
If the healthcare bill dumps 30-40 M people on the system, who’s going to see them or take care of them? Most of us have to wait to see a Dr now?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
“”"”"Are you all really falling for this? Do you really think the cost is a little over 900billion to give heath care to every American?? “”"”"
Posted by: Jim Rod
NO! And BTW, this $900 billion is only to offer INSURANCE coverage only to 30 million and possible another 15 million through the public option (government estimate was only 5% of the public would take it). So, with 900B we are offering government subsidized insurance to approximately 45 million people. So what happens to those premiums as health care costs continue to rise? Hmmm, this is a bad bill.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
The politicians are not hearing us; we need to speak louder to them. Lincoln in Arkansas, Landrieu in Louisiana, and Nelson in Nebraska are sitting on the fence (and may be willing to persuaded).
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:30 pm 2:30 pm
“”"If the healthcare bill dumps 30-40 M people on the system, who’s going to see them or take care of them? Most of us have to wait to see a Dr now?”"”
Posted by: deanbob
Exactly! This is where cost analysis should be done in med schools. If we can lower some of those costs, add government incentives and attract more students, we all win. But, to lower costs for med students will mean smaller bonuses for the higher ups and instructors. The medical system needs to be analyzed as to where costs can be cut before true cost reform can take affect. A government subsidized insurance program doesn’t address that at all.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
Why are so many of these issues so obvious to some and (apparently) not to others?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
If these liberals would ever go visit some of these places they want this great country to emulate, they would realize that the United States is the LEADER OF THE WORLD in healthcare.
___
According to polls, the majority of Americans don’t agree with you on the best health care in the world thing (yes you can google that to verify)– and we certainly aren’t leading when it comes to access, affordability, equality and mortality. Most Pharma drugs are me-too drugs and most breakthroughs come from federally-funded research.
Moreover, this lib has received health care in Switzerland and France, and found both to be excellent. I also have friends who live in France who are quite happy with their health care.
Just sayin.’
Posted by: @Octavia | November 19, 2009, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm
Women, do you think the current administration has your best interests in mind when then put out the new breast cancer screening guidelines? Or was it just to save money?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
@Octavia | Nov 19, 2009 2:35:01 PM…..Have any of those friends been diagnosed with cancer?
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
If European health care is so bad, why does every European country have a longer life expectancy than we do?
“If the healthcare bill dumps 30-40 M people on the system, who’s going to see them or take care of them?”
The same doctors and nurses that are already seeing them. Unless you think none of the 40 million uninsured are currently using any medical facilities.
Posted by: gary | November 19, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
gary | Nov 19, 2009 2:43:04 PM
Because we have the highest “murder” rate in the world.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:44 pm 2:44 pm
“”"”"Most Pharma drugs are me-too drugs and most breakthroughs come from federally-funded research. “”"”"
Posted by: @Octavia
Do you think cost savings can be found in this area then? If the government pays for most breakthroughs, then why do we pay $25 for name brand and only $4 for generic? This is another area for cost analysis, pharmaceuticals. If you think the insurance companies are upset about this bill, let’s do real cost analysis on pharmaceuticals and medical procedures (scans, xrays, MRI’s, etc), then we will really sse people up in arms. That’s where the actual costs are!
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
@Octavia
Well, many of Americans also voted for an anti-American socialist back in nov. So it is not surprising to learn that many of Americans are not aware of how great our system is. As for the majority of them though not believing America’s system is the best, I think you are wrong.
What are you talking about “affordability, equality and mortality”. Have you seen the mortality rates of prostate cancer, breast cancer patients in the US compared to the rest of the world? Canadians are constanly coming here for treatment because the waiting lists are terrible.
I would agree that there are probably 10-15 million of Americans who want healthcare and simply can’t get it for themselves, and we should look for ways to cover them. But to turn our system over to washington because 5% of our citizens can’t get coverage would be a nightmare.
As for your french friends testimonies, my PERSONAL experience with free healthcare are what my opinions are based on.
Just sayin’
Posted by: Dave in KC | November 19, 2009, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
“I suffer from a tendency to discount facts that come from organizations claiming to possess information to which I do not have access”
This may be the funniest thing I’ve ever read.
Most private citizens do not have the time to access the information provided to the OECD by every democratic, free market economy country on Earth, or a $500 million dollar budget….
Posted by: gary | November 19, 2009, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
gary — Because we do have a large amount of fat, unhealthy lazy peole sitting around.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
gary | Nov 19, 2009 2:43:04 PM
Because we have the highest “murder” rate in the world.
____
I actually just saw a graph today putting us at second highest (with Poland at number one), but okay.
And no on the cancer. For many forms of cancer, if not all, we do have the best health care in the world– but not the best health insurance, yeah? I hope you can acknowledge that, because friends of my parents have had some tough times with pre-existing conditions and so on. And my dad loves Medicare for that reason. No more worries about pre-existing conditions nor recision.
Posted by: @Octavia | November 19, 2009, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm
@Octavia | Nov 19, 2009 2:52:54 PM….I don’t think there are any (sane) Americans who would not agree there are reforms necessary. And 1 good thing that Obama has done is brought this into the spotlight. I admit to being ignorant to most of the healthcare issues because a year ago.
Posted by: deanbob | November 19, 2009, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
OK. I get an MRI on my knee and that procedure costs $1000 and they bill the government insurance company $1400. Next year, that MRI is $1100 and they bill the government $1500. Sooner or later, as this cost rises, the government is going to have to raise their rates or subsidize right? How about we analyze WHY it costs $1000 in the first place? Should ALL MRI’s be the same, because I have seen them different? If we could lower that cost to $800, is that not going to help our insurance premiums? Has anyone else experienced 2 different rates for the very same procedure? I know I have.
Posted by: lfrichar | November 19, 2009, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
President Obama has two major faults. The first one is that he cannot see the forest from the trees when it comes to spending money. I’m not talking your typical liberal “tax and spend” Democrat. I’m seeing a man who really has no apparent sense of fiscal responsibility.
That said, we need health care reform which is at the top of the list in my opinion. In 2009, we finally had a political climate to gain some real reform and it got turned into an expensive (given our precarious financial times), and bloated political football. In short: Congress got very greedy. The Democrats looked to make this their major reform issue of the 21st century – a lofty ideal if it weren’t for the fact that we aren’t able to sustain that major a change without serious financial repercussions (especially since we elect to fight and escalate two wars and bail out every failing institution in this Great Recession).
This is therefore President Obama’s 2nd greatest fault – to be so greedy politically at a time when to pass any health care bill would be a landmark in history. He allows Congress to throw in everything but the kitchen sink, and Congress will at best “squeak” a bill out in it’s present form. I really don’t understand the rationale for doing it all at once, rather than incrementally – one advance at a time. If this bill passes – and I doubt that it will, we all have to wait until 2014 to see anything. Smaller incremental bits could have come in over the next 8 years – ending up with a finely tuned package that add up to real reform that we can live with.
Now we may end up with nothing because Congress is going to try to “bite off more than it can chew”. There is an element of reality that needs to come with the Presidency. It seems that our Senators and Congressmen do not have that reality in mind. A strong President could have guided legislation that would pass easily. Instead Obama has let the greedier Democrats put together a package that cannot stand up to a full vote – a true bipartisan majority. After all, we will have to live with this for many years to come. If it doesn’t pass, which is quite possible, we will have to live with that too. To me, that is unacceptable.
Posted by: JonF | November 19, 2009, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
President Obama has two major faults. The first one is that he cannot see the forest from the trees when it comes to spending money. I’m not talking your typical liberal “tax and spend” Democrat. I’m seeing a man who really has no apparent sense of fiscal responsibility.
That said, we need health care reform which is at the top of the list in my opinion. In 2009, we finally had a political climate to gain some real reform and it got turned into an expensive (given our precarious financial times), and bloated political football. In short: Congress got very greedy. The Democrats looked to make this their major reform issue of the 21st century – a lofty ideal if it weren’t for the fact that we aren’t able to sustain that major a change without serious financial repercussions (especially since we elect to fight and escalate two wars and bail out every failing institution in this Great Recession).
This is therefore President Obama’s 2nd greatest fault – to be so greedy politically at a time when to pass any health care bill would be a landmark in history. He allows Congress to throw in everything but the kitchen sink, and Congress will at best “squeak” a bill out in it’s present form. I really don’t understand the rationale for doing it all at once, rather than incrementally – one advance at a time. If this bill passes – and I doubt that it will, we all have to wait until 2014 to see anything. Smaller incremental bits could have come in over the next 8 years – ending up with a finely tuned package that add up to real reform that we can live with.
Now we may end up with nothing because Congress is going to try to “bite off more than it can chew”. There is an element of reality that needs to come with the Presidency. It seems that our Senators and Congressmen do not have that reality in mind. A strong President could have guided legislation that would pass easily. Instead Obama has let the greedier Democrats put together a package that cannot stand up to a full vote – a true bipartisan majority. After all, we will have to live with this for many years to come. If it doesn’t pass, which is quite possible, we will have to live with that too. To me, that is unacceptable.
Posted by: JonF | November 19, 2009, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
Tax Americans by the pound of overweightedness. Solve all our healthcare problems. More income for funding of the public option, incentive to be healthier for the citizens.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | November 19, 2009, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
This is another area for cost analysis, pharmaceuticals. If you think the insurance companies are upset about this bill, let’s do real cost analysis on pharmaceuticals and medical procedures (scans, xrays, MRI’s, etc), then we will really see people up in arms. That’s where the actual costs are!
Posted by: lfrichar | Nov 19, 2009 2:48:49 PM
—-
I agree with that.
Posted by: @Octavia | November 19, 2009, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
This healthcare bill is so scary that I’m sure they don’t know how dangerous it could be for the economy. Do we have to focus on it now though? Isn’t creating jobs and Afghanistan hard enough?
Posted by: Jordan Everwood | November 19, 2009, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm
It’s worth it for the people who will have health care that can’t afford it now. Can’t we do something noble for another without crying about the personal cost to us?
Posted by: Carrie Johnson | November 19, 2009, 10:00 pm 10:00 pm
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) released a merged version of the Senate comprehensive reform on 11/19/09, which Mike Oliphant whom manages Utah health insurance plans for http://www.benefitsmanager.net/utah-group-health-insurance.htm employers could get behind and support some of it (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or H.R. 3590). This should encourage the private sector health insurance carriers to form INSURANCE EXCHANGES which is what we have done here in Utah. They carry the risk and burden, not the tax payer.
Posted by: Mike | November 20, 2009, 11:39 am 11:39 am
We need tort reform more than we need health care reform. The current system abuses physicians and punishes patients with billions of dollars of unnecessary care which exposes them to risk. By the way, most patients injured by negligent care are never picked up by the system. Who can defend it? Take a guess.
Posted by: Michael Kirsch, M.D. | November 20, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm