Obama ‘Very Satisfied’ With House, Senate Health Care Bills
ABC News' Sunlen Miller reports:
Although President Obama would liked to have seen the final health care bill include a public option, he is overall “very satisfied” that both the House and Senate bills have 95 percent of what he wanted in there, or as he put it, “nine-tenths” of a loaf, he told PBS' Jim Lehrer.
“Look, I’ve been in favor of the public option,” he told Lehrer this afternoon. “I think the more choice, the more competition we have, the better. On the other hand, I think that the exchange itself, the system that we’re setting up that forces insurance companies to essentially bid for three million or four million or five million people’s business, that in and of itself is going to have a disciplining effect.“
But President Obama said although he would have liked to see a public option as one of the elements in the final bill, it should not be a deal-breaker.
“Would I like one of those options to be the public option? Yes. Do I think that it makes sense, as some have argued, that without the public option we dump all these other extraordinary reforms and we say to the 30 million people who don’t have coverage, you know, 'Sorry. We didn’t get exactly what we wanted’? I don’t think that makes sense.”
While he said he is “never completely satisfied,” he added that he is still “very satisfied” by both the House and Senate bills and would sign either of them into law.
“I think, right now, that the Senate and the House bills – if you look at their overlap, the 95 percent that they agree on – if that bill was presented to me … I would sign it.”
The president predicted that the upcoming reconciliation process between the House and Senate bill will be easier than many people think.
“I actually think that reconciling them is not going to be as difficult as some people may anticipate,” he said, adding that he plans to have a hands-on role in the reconciliation process.
“I’ll be rolling up my sleeves and spending some time before the full Congress even gets into session because the American people need it now,” Obama said. “I intend to work as hard as I have to work, especially after coming this far over the course of the year, to make sure that we finally close the deal.”
The president called the 60-vote filibuster rule that has been employed on the health care debate frustrating – yet praised Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., for working though the procedure.
“I am very frustrated," he said. "I think that right now that’s the way things are operating. And we’ve had to make sure that we fight through those issues. I think Harry Reid has done a very good job grinding it out. But as somebody who served in the Senate, who values the traditions of the Senate, who thinks that institution has been the world’s greatest deliberative body, to see the filibuster rule, which imposes a 60-vote supermajority on legislation – to see that invoked on every single piece of legislation during the course of this year is unheard of.“
President Obama said that if used “prudently," the filibuster is not harmful to democracy.
“It’s not being used prudently right now,” Obama said. “And my hope would be that whether a senator is in the majority or is in the minority, that they’re starting to get a sense, after looking at this year, that this can’t be the way that government runs.”
-Sunlen Miller
Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Of course he is. He’ll sign whatever shows up on his desk.
Then if something goes worse than anticipated, he’ll say he didn’t craft the bill.
Posted by: MayBee | December 23, 2009, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
Of course he is. He’ll sign whatever shows up on his desk.
Then if something goes worse than anticipated, he’ll say he didn’t craft the bill.
Posted by: MayBee | Dec 23, 2009 6:24:38 PM
Totally agree with you MayBee. Maybe he should win a Nobel Prize for passing the blame. Now THAT one, he would deserve.
Posted by: Shoe | December 23, 2009, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm
“I am very frustrated,” he said.”
Yeah, well you should come talk to some of us who will be directly impacted by this disastrous legislation (unless you and your Dem buddies in Congress want to same up for the same plan to which your constituents will be subjected).
Barry: As a constitutional lawyer, on what grounds would you argue this legislation is constitutional? Better ready your answer because lawsuits are coming.
Isn’t it a sign of a bad piece of legislation when:
- Senate voting is done on a purely partisan basis
- All but 1 Republican Representatives (and dozens of Democrats) vote against House version of Obamacare
- The constitutionality of the legislation (on several levels) is questioned
- Voting is rushed through during weekend and 1 AM votes (even though bulk of benefits are not slated to be realized until 2014…but taxes will start in 2010)
- Economics of ‘benefits’ and ‘savings’ are compared to the accounting practices of Enron and the Ponzi Scheme of Bernie Madoff
- A consistent majority of Americans oppose this legislation and would prefer no action on healthcare vs. this legislation
Maybe our elected “representatives” will reflect on this legislation on the points above while home for the holidays and will realize a degree of intellectual clarity and honestly apparently not available in D.C. (and if that doesn’t do it, hopefully they will receive an earful from outraged constituents opposed to this ruinous and off-target legislation). We can only hope.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 23, 2009, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm
You mean like when liberals say this bill needs to pass or thousands will die? That kind of fear mongering?
Posted by: Mary |
Exactly.
And certainly NOT the kind that points out that the Democrats are perfectly willing to let tens of thousands continue to die until 2014 at which time they will cut that number roughly in half.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 23, 2009, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm
Posted by: tjp612 | Dec 23, 2009 7:43:01 PM
Mind if I steal that post?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 23, 2009, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
At this point, including the proposed tax on security trades, there is 19 taxes that will be implemented at this time to pay for this boondoggle bill that is ONLY an insurance reform. Nothing in this bill addresses the rising cost of healthcare for ALL Americans. Nothing addresses the shortage of medical staff necessary to take on more patients. Nothing addresses the defensive medicine practiced by doctors fearing lawsuits. Nothing addresses the lack of competition within states to buy insurance that dollar wise varies a lot from state to state.
The only thing this bill can say with any certainty is that at a tremendous cost to most Americans, potentially more Americans will get subsidized health care. Those that do not want to buy insurance, which btw, like it or not there are millions, will now be forced or go to jail. However this is only half job since millions of Americans still will fall through the cracks and either not qualify for those subsidies or not be able to afford insurance that is offered to them.
So more taxes for EVERYBODY, lesser care due to doctor shortage, and worst of all increasing our long-term debt by committing to entitlements we simply can’t fund.
Posted by: Susan | December 23, 2009, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm
So now we know…
“CHANGE” =
More Debt.
More Taxes.
More Welfare.
More Regulation.
More Government.
More Wasteful Spending.
More Corruption.
Thanks, Mr. President.
Posted by: Chuck | December 23, 2009, 7:54 pm 7:54 pm
Just got word on CMS payments for next – Medicare won’t be paying its bills to providers in January.
It is simply impossible to continue running a medical business under these conditions. There is NO RESERVE. There will be INADEQUATE CASH FLOW.
You cannot schedule staff even a week or 2 in advance with INADEQUATE PAYROLL FUNDING.
Monday December 28 we cut hours, we cut benefits and we cut schedules.
I only want to point out this is what to expect from the EXISTING PUBLIC OPTION.
Posted by: steed | December 23, 2009, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
Well this year sure has been a “change
we can believe in”. Our country has
gone down the sewer with this poor
excuse of leadership in Washington,
including all parties. Term limits…
lets consider.
Posted by: wis134 | December 23, 2009, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm
Obama will sign any bill.
It has always been about him and his legacy.
He talks about it all the time–the presidents that tried and failed.
What an ego.
Posted by: millie | December 23, 2009, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm
“Every one gets cuts in Medicare Advantage, except you 3 counties in Florida!”
Typical Liberal “That make sense, this is great reform!”
Posted by: Huh? | December 23, 2009, 8:44 pm 8:44 pm
This bill will be the end of the Obama Administration, and the end of Democratic rule for many years.
As the parts of this bill start to kick in, there will be wide-spread dissatisfaction.
It won’t do enough for those that want it. It will be a big negative impact on those that don’t.
Posted by: tj | December 23, 2009, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
Obama and the Democrats are patting themselves on the back about their health care being bill how it’s a right for all Americans.
But this bill is a requirement by the government!
Obama campaigned against mandates and taxes on health care. Now he will sign a bill that allows both.
DeMint suggested the failure to get HC would be Obama’s Waterloo.
I think signing ObamaCare will be his Waterloo.
Posted by: millie | December 23, 2009, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
You mean like when liberals say this bill needs to pass or thousands will die? That kind of fear mongering?
_____________________________________
Thousands ARE dying. And if you Republican right wingers have got any magic want start waving it.
Posted by: tierra | December 23, 2009, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm
All this amounts to is a bailout for the only industry in the world that gets free advertising with every newscast. All senators an congressmen who voted for this bill will be voted out of office in the next election because your constituents explicitly told you they did NOT want this. If this for profit industry can’t make it with all their freebies, they deserve to go under. The medical profession is the #1 killer in the world. When they go under the death rate will decline as it did in the 70′s when hospitals closed. The medical profession and all who participate in it are immoral, unethical and criminal and so are all legislators who voted for this medical/union bill.
Posted by: Chloris Erlandson | December 23, 2009, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
“Thousands ARE dying.”
Thousands of people WITH health insurance die every year as well.
BTW, we’d have fewer deaths if Americans weren’t so fat and lazy, regardless of health insurance.
Posted by: Mary | December 23, 2009, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
“When people don’t spend their own money, they don’t care what health care costs.
One solution is health saving accounts, or HSAs, in which people spend their own money for routine treatment (HSAs provide insurance for catastrophic health problems). Since Whole Foods adopted that policy in 2003, costs haven’t risen — and employees say they are happy with their coverage.
The country of Singapore is another success story. Singaporeans have universal healthcare, but their system is unique in that it runs on, essentially, the HSA model.
The WHO says that 64 percent of all medical spending in Singapore comes from individuals spending their own money at the doctor’s office. In the US it’s 13 percent. In France, where the government pays for just about everything, it’s 7 percent.
The result? Economist Scott Sumner says:
1. Singapore health care costs only half as much as European health care.
2. Singapore has universal coverage.
3. Singaporeans live much longer than Europeans.
Some of that may be because of differences in culture and crime rates. But Singapore also beats its Asian neighbors that have government-run health care: Singaporeans spend half as much as Japanese, yet have virtually the same life span.
If we do want universal care, more HSAs would be better than Congress’ 2,000 pages of micromanagement.”
- John Stossel
——
For the past two years, I have used a high-deductible/HSA plan that has a $2,400 yearly family deductible. After that I pay 20% co-insurance until I reach $7,000 in expenses (stop-loss), after which everything is covered 100%. All co-payments are made with pretax money (you can save over $5,000 per year in that account and it rolls over).
I’m way more careful about how I spend my money with this plan. If everyone had an HSA, the healthcare system would be transformed overnight.
Only one problem with this approach from Washington’s perspective. It gives consumers power over their money instead of politicians.
Posted by: Mary | December 23, 2009, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
The United States health care system is currently one of the most expensive per capita in the world – and yet millions upon millions go uninsured, thousands die from lack of health insurance and thousands more go bankrupt due to health care costs and the failure of their insurance.
Posted by: tierra | December 23, 2009, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
and yet millions upon millions go uninsured, thousands die from lack of health insurance
Posted by: tierra | Dec 23, 2009 10:58:41 PM
And the 30 million will still be uninsured until 2013 or later. Thousands more will die because of the failure of the Democrats and this President to solve that problem.
What hypocrites the Democrats are for using these uninsured figures to force this legislation with no intention of helping these poor people for at least another 3 years. It’s disgusting and yet the President is “very satisfied.” I hope the thousands that will die waiting are satisfied…
Posted by: Live! From D.C.! It's Saturday Night! | December 23, 2009, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm
What hypocrites the Democrats are for using these uninsured figures to force this legislation with no intention of helping these poor people for at least another 3 years.
_________________________________
Oh sure, its the Democrats planning to kill people for 3 years.
Posted by: tierra | December 23, 2009, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
tierra wrote:
“Oh sure, its the Democrats planning to kill people for 3 years. ”
.
Maybe its too difficult for you to understand. Under this legislation, the “taxing” starts immediately. The “benefits” (that would be the things that according to you would keep people from dying), don’t start for several years.
.
You see, thats because the desperate communists pushing this legislation can’t make the books balance, so they have to collect taxes for several years before the “benefits” start flowing.
.
So, if as you say “Thousands ARE dying”, then they will continue to for several more years.
Posted by: gk | December 24, 2009, 12:06 am 12:06 am
You see, thats because the desperate communists pushing this legislation can’t make the books balance
___________________________________
Make up your mind – are these communists or in the pocket of the health insurance industry and Wall Street? Capitalist pigs or commies? Make up your mind . .. .
p.s – Bush bankrupt the country and left it in a complete economic crash; do you not have any idea what this has meant in terms of ‘the books balancing’? Guess Bush was a commie out to destroy the country too, since he made no effort to balance the books . .
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 12:23 am 12:23 am
p.s – Bush bankrupt the country and left it in a complete economic crash; do you not have any idea what this has meant in terms of ‘the books balancing’? Guess Bush was a commie out to destroy the country too, since he made no effort to balance the books . .
______________________________________
Seems fairly straight forward to me given your comments.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 1:09 am 1:09 am
The United States health care system is currently one of the most expensive per capita in the world – and yet millions upon millions go uninsured, thousands die from lack of health insurance and thousands more go bankrupt due to health care costs and the failure of their insurance.
Posted by: tierra |
And the Democrats are hell bent on passing a law that ensures the misery and pain and suffering continues for four more years…at which time they will cut the misery in half.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 1:12 am 1:12 am
Oh sure, its the Democrats planning to kill people for 3 years.
Posted by: tierra |
It’s four years in the senate bill. The one that got unanimous support from the Democrats.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 1:16 am 1:16 am
I’m way more careful about how I spend my money with this plan. If everyone had an HSA, the healthcare system would be transformed overnight.
Only one problem with this approach from Washington’s perspective. It gives consumers power over their money instead of politicians.
Posted by: Mary |
I would love to have access to a plan like yours.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 1:18 am 1:18 am
It’s four years in the senate bill. The one that got unanimous support from the Democrats.
______________________________________
Why is that Foghorn? Do you know?
Can you give me a link to this information?
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 1:41 am 1:41 am
Health insurance is not health care. Being sold out to the big health insurance companies is not democracy or what the democratic majority should be doing. Both are what we are getting.
Funded health savings accounts and dumping insurance companies is a good solution. One pays for what one gets and that power in the hands of consumers drives down prices.
This plan is a complete sell out of the American people. We want health care and not health insurance bureaucracies deciding what care we get – and taking a huge cut off the top.
Posted by: welldirected | December 24, 2009, 1:53 am 1:53 am
Health savings accounts and people paying for what they get out of those accounts also gets around the abortion debacle. It also handles the “death panel” issues however one sees them. Each person decides what treatment they get and pays for it out of their own HSA account – end of story.
Thos with no resources (also known as the uninsured) have government funded HSA accounts. How difficult is that?
Posted by: welldirected | December 24, 2009, 2:06 am 2:06 am
Who the heck has hundreds of thousands of dollars in a health savings account to protect them from bankruptcy if one of their family goes down with any kind of major disease or car accident?
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 2:12 am 2:12 am
Or tens of thousands of dollars for that matter.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 2:12 am 2:12 am
Who the heck has hundreds of thousands of dollars in a health savings account to protect them from bankruptcy if one of their family goes down with any kind of major disease or car accident?
Posted by: tierra | Dec 24, 2009 2:12:06 AM
I believe what you would do is buy catastrophic care insurance which is what younger people would want to do among others. I realize you don’t care to reason this all out. It’s easier just to rely on the govt rather than try to work out free market solutions.
Posted by: Think | December 24, 2009, 8:18 am 8:18 am
“Who the heck has hundreds of thousands of dollars in a health savings account to protect them from bankruptcy if one of their family goes down with any kind of major disease or car accident?”
I clearly mentioned stop-loss in my post. After I reach $7,000 in expenses for a year, the insurance company picks up 100% of the expenses. There’s a $2 million lifetime cap. That’s what prevents bankruptcy from a major disease or car accident. HSAs work and they make you much wiser about how you spend your healthcare dollars.
I’ll demonstrate one of the root causes of high healthcare costs: consumer ignorance. I talked to a friend on Medicare recently who got what she thought was a very inexpensive test done (“just because”). It actually cost Medicare $1,700. My insurance company would have allowed this test for a negotiated rate of $1,200, BUT it would have been out of my pocket. Would my friend have paid $1,200 for this test if the cost were out of her pocket? HECK NO!! Result: Taxpayers took a hit for a meaningless test.
In economics they say that the demand for “free” (or perceived to be free) services is INFINITE. That’s what drives up costs and creates rationing in countries with universal healthcare.
Posted by: Mary | December 24, 2009, 8:30 am 8:30 am
Posted by: Mary | Dec 24, 2009 8:30:23 AM
tierra hasn’t thought beyond the term “universal health care” and has no interest in solving this problem in a free enterprise environment. This is foreign to tierra. Insurance companies are evil and unfair and the govt is fair and compassionate because the govt treats everyone the same – and that’s not going to change for tierra.
But you are right to continue to push back against it.
The Republicans kicked this can too far down the road and we will all pay for it. They won’t because they are exempt. Lesson learned for all of us. Research your representatives and how they have performed. Then act accordingly – no matter what the party affiliation is.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 24, 2009, 8:57 am 8:57 am
Health care is a universal human right, recognized as such by the vast majority of mankind.
Posted by: Flash Override | December 24, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
Health care is a universal human right, recognized as such by the vast majority of mankind.
Posted by: Flash Override | Dec 24, 2009 10:08:13 AM
Except Congress, who just passed legislation postponing health care for 30 million Americans until 2013 or later. Inhumane treatment of 30 million people living in the US – after all the blustering. How many will die waiting for health care until 2013?
Or don’t you care?
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 24, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
But you are right to continue to push back against it.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It’s Sat Night! | Dec 24, 2009 8:57:09 AM
Clarifying: “it” being govt run health care as opposed to free market solutions to help the uninsured.
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 24, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Or don’t you care? Posted by: Live! From DC! It’s Sat Night! | Dec 24, 2009 10:21:33 AM
We care. It’s the Republicans, insurance lobbyists, oil lobbyists helping the obstructionist cause, astroturfers,and conservaDems who don’t seem to care– they’d rather be naysayers, propose caucus-backed plans that don’t address the issue at all, or negotiate out the public option, or make weak accusations designed to distract rather than move forward and take on the challenge.
…
Only after the last tree has fallen
Only after the last river has been poisoned
Only after the last fish has been cut
Only then will we realize that money cannot be eaten.
Posted by: There is no Planet B | December 24, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am
Individual control and choice on health care solves the abortion problem, gets the bureaucrats out your hospital room, and reduces costs.
People are not thinking clearly if they believe this plan where at least 20% of the money goes to bureaucrats in huge insurance companies is going to reduce costs – or make anything in health care better. I am very surprised that Democrats are willing to hand us over to the big business insurance companies.
The future is getting your treatment like flu shots at the drug store. That works. Paying for insurance so that one can get the flu shot at Mayo clinic does not.
Posted by: welldirected | December 24, 2009, 11:24 am 11:24 am
Healthcare is a responsibility, not a right.
Want better healthcare? Work hard, get a good job, save money for a rainy day. Take personal responsibility to live your life in way to minimize preventable maladies such as adult diabetes, high blood pressure, etc.
BTW – there is a great article in the WSJ today (search “online wsj, Dr. Scott Gottlieb What Doctors and Patients Have to Lose Under ObamaCare”. Excerpt:
“…It all starts with the sweeping power that the Senate bill gives to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The agency will be given the authority to unilaterally write new rules on when medical devices and drugs can be used, and how they should be priced. In particular, the Obama team wants to give the agency the power to decide when a cheaper medical option will suffice for a given problem and, in turn, when Medicare only has to pay for the least costly alternative.
The government has already sought to acquire this same power administratively. But on Tuesday the Obama Justice department got swatted down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in what the judges described in their opinion as an attempt by Mr. Obama’s legal team to “end-run around the statute [Medicare].”
Hays v. Sebelius involved a patient who said Medicare unfairly denied her a prescribed treatment for her serious lung disease. Medicare decided instead to pay for a different drug that bureaucrats argued was a suitable but cheaper alternative.
Now the Obama team will use murky provisions embedded in the Senate bill to subtly attain in law those powers they couldn’t more artfully acquire in court. In fact, the bill lets Medicare seek almost any restrictive payment authority it wants from a Medicare Commission established for the purposes of cost control.
The Senate health-care bill also exempts Medicare’s actions from judicial review, taking away the right of patients to sue the government. Unlike existing Medicare coverage laws, patients won’t have the ability to appeal any of the decisions of this new Medicare Commission.
Ironically, private health insurers must comply with new patient appeals rights under the Senate bill. The government has exempted itself from the same sort of protections.
=============================
Life under ObamaCare is going to be great, isn’t it? At least today if denied coverage, option exists to take legal action. Provisions within ObamaCare will not allow legal recourse. Read the balance of the article – It also discusses the influence ObamaCare will exert over physicians. It’s not good.
If this legislation passes, at least the Obamabots (outside of select favored constituencies such as unions (did you see the deal the longshorement received?), federal employees, and, of course, the political class) will have to live this consequences of this disastrous legislation.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 24, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am
“I am very surprised that Democrats are willing to hand us over to the big business insurance companies.”
Well, only selected (crony) insurance companies. Others will be driven out of business.
BTW – This legislation also creates 100+ new govt. bureaucracies standing between Americans and their physicians.
Great job, Dems.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 24, 2009, 11:31 am 11:31 am
I realize you don’t care to reason this all out. It’s easier just to rely on the govt rather than try to work out free market solutions.
___________________________________
We’ve seen the excellent results of ‘free market’ – millions upon millions without health care, per capita costs for health care highest in the world and double most other western nations, thousands of people going bankrupt due to medical costs and insurance company loopholes.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 11:40 am 11:40 am
BTW – This legislation also creates 100+ new govt. bureaucracies standing between Americans and their physicians.
_____________________________________
Nonsense.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 11:42 am 11:42 am
“BTW – This legislation also creates 100+ new govt. bureaucracies standing between Americans and their physicians.”
111 actually. From Pelosi’s bill:
1. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 111(d), p. 61
2 Grant program for wellness programs to small employers (Section 112, p. 62)
3. Grant program for State health access programs (Section 114, p. 72)
4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 115, p. 76)
5. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 223, p. 111)
6. Health Choices Administration (Section 241, p. 131)
7. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 244, p. 138)
8. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 155)
9. Program for technical assistance to employees of small businesses buying Exchange coverage (Section 305(h), p. 191)
10. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Commissioner (Section 306(b), p. 194)
11. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 307, p. 195)
12. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 308, p. 197)
13. Grant program for health insurance cooperatives (Section 310, p. 206)
14. “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321, p. 211)
15. Ombudsman for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 321(d), p. 213)
16. Account for receipts and disbursements for “Public Health Insurance Option” (Section 322(b), p. 215)
17. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191 (b), p. 589)
18. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for “culturally and linguistically appropriate services” (Section 1222, p. 617)
19. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 648)
20. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicare (Section 1301, p. 653)
21. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 672)
22. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302(d), p. 681)
23. Independence at home demonstration program (Section 1312, p. 718)
24. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p. 734)
25. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p. 738)
26. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section 1401(a), p. 753)
27. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 784)
28. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 786)
29. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1413(a)(3), p. 796)
30. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 1413(b)(3), p. 804)
31. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 859)
32. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 933)
33. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 978)
34. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section 1647, p. 1000)
35. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 1058)
36. Accountable Care Organization pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1730A, p. 1073)
37. Nursing facility supplemental payment program (Section 1745, p. 1106)
38. Demonstration program for Medicaid coverage to stabilize emergency medical conditions in institutions for mental diseases (Section 1787, p. 1149)
39. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p. 1162)
40. “Identifiable office or program” within CMS to “provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles” (Section 1905, p. 1191)
41. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 1907, p. 1198)
42. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 1214)
43. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 1224)
44. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings (Section 2214, p. 1236)
45. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p. 1240)
46. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 1253)
47. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 1254)
48. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p. 1258)
49. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section 2252, p. 1272)
50. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment (Section 2261, p. 1275)
51. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 1286)
52. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1295)
53. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 1301)
54. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research (Section 2301, p. 1305)
55. Grant program for research and demonstration projects related to wellness incentives (Section 2301, p. 1305)
56. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services (Section 2301, p. 1308)
57. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p. 1313)
58. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 1322)
59. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 1330)
60. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 1352)
61. Grant program for nurse-managed health centers (Section 2512, p. 1361)
62. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section 2521, p. 1372)
63. Grant program for interdisciplinary mental and behavioral health training (Section 2522, p. 1382)
64. “No Child Left Unimmunized Against Influenza” demonstration grant program (Section 2524, p. 1391)
65. Healthy Teen Initiative grant program regarding teen pregnancy (Section 2526, p. 1398)
66. Grant program for interdisciplinary training, education, and services for individuals with autism (Section 2527(a), p. 1402)
67. University centers for excellence in developmental disabilities education (Section 2527(b), p. 1410)
68. Grant program to implement medication therapy management services (Section 2528, p. 1412)
69. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors in underserved communities (Section 2530, p. 1422)
70. Grant program for State alternative medical liability laws (Section 2531, p. 1431)
71. Grant program to develop infant mortality programs (Section 2532, p. 1433)
72. Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions (Section 2533, p. 1437)
73. Grant program for community-based collaborative care (Section 2534, p. 1440)
74. Grant program for community-based overweight and obesity prevention (Section 2535, p. 1457)
75. Grant program for reducing the student-to-school nurse ratio in primary and secondary schools (Section 2536, p. 1462)
76. Demonstration project of grants to medical-legal partnerships (Section 2537, p. 1464)
77. Center for Emergency Care under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (Section 2552, p. 1478)
78. Council for Emergency Care (Section 2552, p 1479)
79. Grant program to support demonstration programs that design and implement regionalized emergency care systems (Section 2553, p. 1480)
80. Grant program to assist veterans who wish to become emergency medical technicians upon discharge (Section 2554, p. 1487)
81. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 2562, p. 1494)
82. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2571, p. 1501)
83. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 2581, p. 1597)
84. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 2581, p. 1598)
85. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 2581, p. 1602)
86. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1610)
87. National Women’s Health Information Center (Section 2588, p. 1611)
88. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1614)
89. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health and Gender-Based Research (Section 2588, p. 1617)
90. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1618)
91. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 2588, p. 1621)
92. Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 2589(a)(2), p. 1624)
93. Grant program for national health workforce online training (Section 2591, p. 1629)
94. Grant program to disseminate best practices on implementing health workforce investment programs (Section 2591, p. 1632)
95. Demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (Section 3101, p. 1717)
96. Demonstration program for substance abuse counselor educational curricula (Section 3101, p. 1719)
97. Program of Indian community education on mental illness (Section 3101, p. 1722)
98. Intergovernmental Task Force on Indian environmental and nuclear hazards (Section 3101, p. 1754)
99. Office of Indian Men’s Health (Section 3101, p. 1765)
100.Indian Health facilities appropriation advisory board (Section 3101, p. 1774)
101.Indian Health facilities needs assessment workgroup (Section 3101, p. 1775)
102.Indian Health Service tribal facilities joint venture demonstration projects (Section 3101, p. 1809)
103.Urban youth treatment center demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1873)
104.Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for diabetes prevention (Section 3101, p. 1874)
105.Grants to Urban Indian Organizations for health IT adoption (Section 3101, p. 1877)
106.Mental health technician training program (Section 3101, p. 1898)
107.Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (Section 3101, p. 1909)
108.Program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims and perpetrators (Section 3101, p. 1925)
109.Program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (Section 3101, p. 1927)
110.Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1966)
111.Committee for the Establishment of the Native American Health and Wellness Foundation (Section 3103, p. 1968)
Posted by: Mary | December 24, 2009, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
Posted by: Mary | Dec 24, 2009 12:32:08 PM
Wow! Thanks for posting this, nice work.
There is no dispute that passage of ObamaCare will create jobs…Entitlement-laden government jobs that do not contribute to economic growth.
Posted by: tjp612 | December 24, 2009, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
“We’ve seen the excellent results of ‘free market’ – millions upon millions without health care, per capita costs for health care highest in the world and double most other western nations, thousands of people going bankrupt due to medical costs and insurance company loopholes.”
We don’t have a free market. There are hundreds of insurance plans in the US. I only have access to a handful in my state. Why? FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS preventing interstate sales of insurance.
Incidentally, more than half of the current “market” is Medicare/Medicaid. As those programs grew larger and larger (and payments to doctors got lower and lower), healthcare costs skyrocketed as those costs were PASSED ALONG to private insurers and their customers. Government intervention and regulations have made healthcare MORE, not less expensive. Don’t believe me? Just ask your doctor.
Posted by: Mary | December 24, 2009, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
We’ve seen the excellent results of ‘free market’
Posted by: tierra |
Yes we have. Lasik surgery.
Only a fool or a tool would argue that our present system of health insurance in this country is a free market.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Healthcare is a responsibility, not a right.
Want better healthcare? Work hard, get a good job, save money for a rainy day. Take personal responsibility to live your life in way to minimize preventable maladies such as adult diabetes, high blood pressure, etc.
—
And then when you get cancer despite exercising daily and eating right probably because you live in a polluted world that Republicans don’t want anything to fix and your insurance company drops you because Republicans care more about deregulation and profit than people, and you run out of the money you saved because another bubble burst and Republicans and conservaDems didn’t want to regulate Wall Street, and you go bankrupt, and your kids have to drop out of college… then what?
Health care is a human right and a human responsiblity. Its about providing for the general welfare, compassion, doing the right thing, community,goodwill.
…When the last tree is cut down, the last river poisoned, and the last fish caught, will we realize that we can’t eat money?
Posted by: There is no Planet B | December 24, 2009, 2:04 pm 2:04 pm
Mary .. .
How does the “Retiree Reserve Trust Fund” stand “between Americans and their physician”?
Or how does the “Grant program to prepare secondary school students for careers in health professions” stand “between Americans and their physician”?
Nice list . . . but that’s about it.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm
Posted by: AZ | Dec 24, 2009 4:15:37 PM
Yes, exactly . ..
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 4:56 pm 4:56 pm
how do we define a bureaucracy standing between a patient and their doctor?
Posted by: AZ
Best case is just like they do today. You do know that medicare denies claims just like insurance companies, only more often, don’t you?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 4:59 pm 4:59 pm
“Best case is just like they do today. You do know that medicare denies claims just like insurance companies, only more often, don’t you?”
I say, I say I believe ya done missed my point boy. And by the by there’s a thing whats called a Red Herring amongst us liberals you might wanna acclimate yourself with should ya be intendin that intellectual honesty thang I was talkin earlier.
I never said anything about any claims process, and it was not specfically a part of the conversation here. As such Medicare was never suggested or implied as devoid of the need for retooling or a panacea for getting all Americans health care. What I did do was pose a rhetorical question used to illustrate what I see as a disparity in the notion of the “100 new bearucracies between patients and doctors” line as presented here. I then used examples given by the individual in this conversation that were intended as evidence to the claim, and suggested that they are not in fact examples of the implied circumstances (a government run hinderance to the delivering of care) which I was not alone in noticing, as evidenced by the comments.
So this begs the follow up question: If your response is in any measure indicative of the view from your side of the issue, given the fact that you did not address the issues specific in this part of the continuing national debate but (it could be argued) chose to continue with the same type of re-framing of the context of the conversation to both avoid the issue and create the illusion of the moral/intellectual high ground based on what could be described as “good ol fashion common sense” how do you intend to be taken seriously? More important to me is why, given this, should I care when those that fail in this way to contribute substantively to the convo at hand are barred by the current political majority from participating when it comes to the legislative process?
Posted by: AZ | December 24, 2009, 10:17 pm 10:17 pm
yes Neslon is a crook and so are the rest of the dirt bags that go for the pork. Dodd has been around for 30 years and gets only 100 million. We do you still are a sick dummy. He gets life time and you go for the crumbs.
Well send the 100million back and do not vote for this bill.
This is not what our founding fathers wanted and wrote about.
Jodi, thanks for tacking some action I am proud of you and your efforts.
God Bless you and The state of Conn.
Posted by: Viagra Online | December 25, 2009, 6:15 am 6:15 am
We should sue because this is very wrong. This is the problem with the senate and congress, they only care about their own states or districts, never the nation as a whole because they only care about being re-elected and Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson is an absolute loser who has no shame for pulling this stubnt. He is a political extortionist and Obama is no better for giving in to such unethical behavior.
Posted by: Acquisto Cialis | December 25, 2009, 6:59 am 6:59 am
Flash Override wrote:
“Health care is a universal human right, recognized as such by the vast majority of mankind. ”
No, actually ‘control of health care is a government right’, recognized as such by the vast majority of mankind.
The vast majority also recognizes that you can live without a Bill of Rights also.
Posted by: Joe White | December 26, 2009, 1:38 am 1:38 am
This article has great reference value, thank you very much for sharing, I would like to reproduced your article, so that more people would see it. Thanks for this article..
Posted by: Levitra | September 27, 2010, 8:03 am 8:03 am