By Kristina Wong

Mar 15, 2010 8:44pm

Our Interview with President Obama

We went to Strongsville, Ohio, today and grabbed the president for a few questions. Here’s our World News story:

Following is a transcript of our chat, which followed a speech in which he detailed the plight of Natoma Canfield, a breast cancer survivor whose struggles with high insurance premiums we’ve discussed before.

TAPPER: What would the bill do for Natoma?

OBAMA: Well what would have happened is that Natoma would have been able to be part of this exchange, this marketplace that gave her a choice of plans just like members of Congress have but, because she’d be a part of a million people who are in a pool, her rates would be lowered and so you wouldn’t have seen her being put into a choice where she’s got to chose between her house or her healthcare. And that’s true for self employed, for small businesses, for individuals all across the country.

JAKE: But if the bill, let’s say the bill passes this week and it becomes the law of the land, how does it affect her?

OBAMA: Well what would happen now, is obviously with a preexisting condition, she’d have even more trouble getting health insurance now, in fact she probably couldn’t even get the old policy, even if she was willing to pay for it at these higher rates. But now because of the rules insurance companies would have to take people with preexisting conditions and that would help folks, obviously, in Natoma’s position.

JAKE: one last question, there are a lot of Americans who are very afraid of this bill and they’re represented by members of Congress who are worried about voting for it. What’s your message to members of Congress and the American people?

OBAMA: You know I think, if you look at the healthcare summit we held—seven hours of discussions with Republican colleagues—I think what it came down to was that a lot of the misinformation about death panels and ‘this was a government takeover of healthcare’ turned out not to be true. What it true is that this is a philosophical disagreement because some who are opposed to this bill think that if we de-regulate the insurance companies, that that will reduce rates.

There’s no evidence that that would, in fact, happen. And so what we’ve said is number one, let’s tighten up some of the restrictions on insurance company practices; number two, lets allow folks like Natoma, self-employed individuals, small businesses to be able to pool so that they have better purchasing power and, number three, let’s start implementing some of these cost containment strategies, eliminating waste, fraud and abuse in government programs; working with doctors and hospitals to improve how they deliver services; better healthcare at lower costs. And if we do those things, it’s not going to solve every problem.

For most people who already have health insurance, they’re not going to see much of a change except they’ll have more protection in the insurance they already have. But for millions of Americans, they’ll be in a more secure position and the federal government and state governments are going to be in a position where they are not running these huge, outside multi-billion-dollar deficits over and over again each year that add up to an unsustainable debt we’ll be imposing on future generations.

JAKE: How do you guard against unintended consequences that –all of the sudden there will be thirty-one million more people who are covered by health insurance—there are a lot of questions about whether or not the infrastructure can take all those new people who —

OBAMA: –well, the infrastructure couldn’t take it right away, which is why this is all being phased in. The question is, if we don’t start now, then it won’t be in place three, four, five years from now and then we’ll be waiting another decade or another fifteen years or another twenty years to actually take on this problem.

Look, this is not a problem I chose. This is a problem that is there and is affecting every aspect of American life. And if we don’t tackle it now in a serious way, not only are you going to see folks like Natoma get in a tougher and tougher spot, but what you’re also going to find is a federal government that can’t pay its bills on Medicare and Medicaid. You’re going to see companies who are dropping healthcare and we’ve already seen more and more companies getting rid of their healthcare and we’re going to be burdened in terms of competitiveness in a way that’s going to affect our ability to grow the number of jobs that we need to give everybody a change for the American dream.

These insurance reforms would start right away. But getting in place a system that works over time, including making sure we get more primary care physicians, more nurses into the system, working with hospitals and doctors to reduce medical error rates that drive up cost. All those things are going to be changes that happen year after year over a period of time, but we’ve got to start now. If we don’t start now it’s going to be too late.

JAKE: thank you sir. Do you have the vote?

OBAMA: I believe we are going to get the votes, we’re going to make this happen.

We’ll have more from the interview on Nightline and Good Morning America.

-jpt

User Comments

You know when Obama is lying? when he opens his mouth

Posted by: few | March 15, 2010, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm

so much for “the time for talking is over.” it’s just begun.

Posted by: kelli | March 15, 2010, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm

I think few is right:-)
mls

Posted by: Chris William | March 16, 2010, 12:38 am 12:38 am

OBAMA: I believe we are going to get the votes, we’re going to make this happen.
If you do “make this happen” in spite of
the vast majority of Americans
opposing this Senate Bill you will get
your wish and be a one-term President!
Not a good one-term president but a
stubborn and foolish one!
You were not elected to be a dictator!
Your job is not to be our parent and
do what you think is good for us it’s
to follow the will of the people.
Scrap this unconstitutional bill and
start over with Republican participation
from day 1!

Posted by: reaganfan | March 16, 2010, 12:42 am 12:42 am

If you do “make this happen” in spite of
the vast majority of Americans
opposing this Senate Bill
__________________________________
Nonsense. It is not a ‘vast’ majority at all.
The MOST RECENT poll is the Associated Press/GfK poll which shows support and oppose VERY close at 41% and 43%.
You might see that as a ‘vast’ majority, but I’d say you’re lying or misleading people.

Posted by: tierra | March 16, 2010, 1:08 am 1:08 am

The majority of Americans think that this bill stinks badly and yet the president would rather pass it than fix it. Really disappointing!
No matter how much they spin it…it’s a loser.

Posted by: wow | March 16, 2010, 2:58 am 2:58 am

I AM EAGER FOR CONGRESS TO PASS THIS BILL SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT’S IN IT!! IDIOTS!!!

Posted by: Manitu | March 16, 2010, 5:51 am 5:51 am

The argument is made that not passing a bill will create an aura of failure around the administration and the Democrats, hurting them much more than passing a bill with a bare majority in the face of public opinion.
Possibly moderate and conservative Democrats in districts taken by either Bush or McCain, the calculus is different. Those members, who are probably the key to assembling a majority, are probably thinking that they’re in some trouble either way considering the general anti-Democrat mood, but that helping to make sure no bill is passed will earn them more credit in their home districts than standing idly by while it passes.
The search for votes will almost always include favors paid for by taxpayers, and “reconciliation” is a process almost guaranteed to produce polarization rather than reconciliation.
But here’s a good bet: The Democratic Party will never be the same. Democrats have been arguing with each other about what kind of country this is, and what kind of party they should be. Will America move even more toward a “European style” welfare state?

Posted by: bl | March 16, 2010, 6:50 am 6:50 am

I AM EAGER FOR CONGRESS TO PASS THIS BILL SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT’S IN IT!! IDIOTS!!!
Posted by: Manitu | Mar 16, 2010 5:51:29 AM
_______________________________________
Agreed. If you just read the press and watch the TV, you’d have no idea at all whats really in it.
The reporting will be somewhat better afterwords.

Posted by: Flash Override | March 16, 2010, 6:52 am 6:52 am

An interview with the “president?”
Thanks, but there’s absolutely NOTHING that he has to say that would be of the least bit of interest to me… unless, of course, he’s announcing his resignation, effective immediately.
He’s a LIAR!!!

Posted by: Seriously__Fed__Up | March 16, 2010, 6:57 am 6:57 am

tierra,
You probably read it, but decided since it didn’t support your liberal viewpoint, you ignored it.
Did you notice how many were STRONGLY opposed vice those who were STRONGLY in favor? The small percentage of people STRONGLY in favor was IDENTICAL to the percentage of deadbeats we have in this country who want a FREE health care system at the expense of the much LARGER percentage of those who were STRONGLY OPPOSED.

Posted by: Seriously__Fed__Up | March 16, 2010, 7:01 am 7:01 am

I have never seen a Congress so aggressively pursuing a collective retirement… and their retirement date comes in just 231 more days!!!

Posted by: Seriously__Fed__Up | March 16, 2010, 7:06 am 7:06 am

She is eligible for financial aid and she is not going to lose her house. She is right now receiving the best of care. Barack Obama is a liar.

Posted by: drjohn | March 16, 2010, 7:20 am 7:20 am

“These insurance reforms would start right away.”
In 2014.

Posted by: drjohn | March 16, 2010, 7:21 am 7:21 am

“we’re going to be burdened in terms of competitiveness in a way that’s going to affect our ability to grow the number of jobs that we need to give everybody a change for the American dream.”
adding financial burdens to companies does not make them grow. Obama wouldn’t know the first thing about a business because he’s never worked a day in his life. A high deductible MSA plan would have been the answer for Canfield.
Also, under Obamacare with mammograms becoming regular after at the age of 50, Canfield would be dead by now.

Posted by: drjohn | March 16, 2010, 7:24 am 7:24 am

Sorry Jake, I couldn’t bring myself to read or look at the interview.
Mr. President NoBo has a hard time uttering truthful statements and I’m so disillusioned with the man that right now that I’m not interested in what he has to say.

Posted by: Noz | March 16, 2010, 8:43 am 8:43 am

Pay taxes for three or four years and then the benifits are going to kick in, but after you pay all those taxes and the insurance premiums that you will be required by law to pay it will be repealed and you don’t get any refunds on taxes or premiums BRILLIENT PLAN to fleece the tax payers.

Posted by: earl | March 16, 2010, 9:05 am 9:05 am

These insurance reforms would start right away.”
In 2014.
Posted by: drjohn | Mar 16, 2010 7:21:15 AM
Actually,this is misinformation. Many of the insurance protections or “reforms” start right away– those pertaining to recision, to denial of coverage based pre-existing conditions for young people, and so on. The exchanges will be up in 2014 for the reason the president acknowledged– infrastructure, phasing it in responsibly.
Thanks for catching the President after the speech, Jake, with some decent questions. Unlike others, I always like hearing from him directly, enjoyed the summit and so on. He has a good comprehensive grasp of the issues, and I’m glad he’s pushing forward (and hopeful he WILL get the votes and we’ll be able to continue to press for further improvements to those in the bill and proposal.)

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 9:20 am 9:20 am

Natoma is precisely the reason why we need a Single Payer System in the US. Now THAT would be a government takeover of Health Care and it would be about time.
Medicare for all.

Posted by: Norg | March 16, 2010, 9:28 am 9:28 am

Medicare for all.
Posted by: Norg
—
Let’s do it. Let’s ensure everyone has quality healthcare. Let’s ensure that my daughters, his daughters, yours (if you have any) recieve the exact same care.
Not “similar”, EXACT – no less, no more.
And let’s use a sliding scale that pays the bills according to one’s net worth.
Now THAT would be a government takeover of Health Care and it would be about time.

Posted by: smartlillena | March 16, 2010, 10:36 am 10:36 am

Okay, here’s a list of the benefits and reforms that do kick in immediately, as a follow up to my prior post (via TPM):
Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;
Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;
Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;
Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;
Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;
Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs;
Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;
Require plans to cover an enrollee’s dependent children until age 26;
Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;
Relief on the Donut Hole.

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 10:49 am 10:49 am

Hey smartlillena, while we’re at it let’s have the government offer a college education for everyone. The same exact quality too, no less no more.
And hey, when they start offering trips into outer-space I think everyone should have the same right to go as everyone else so let’s have the government be proactive and set up a system so that everyone can travel into space. The trips would have to be the exact same length and quality, no more no less.
Also, shouldn’t the government insure that everyone can have a baby?
Sure, let’s make sure in vitro fertilization is available to everyone. Well maybe not Octo-mom. What’s more important than having a baby?
Now you have me thinking, what about compensation? Shouldn’t everyone earn the same amount of money? If we all work 40 hour weeks we should all be paid the exact same, no more no less.
Cmon you Slacker Obama, get on these issues right away or I might die and not get the same benefits of life that everyone else is getting.

Posted by: Noz | March 16, 2010, 11:09 am 11:09 am

Yes, all the things progressive mama lists are things that are cost controls for others.
How will those new “benefits” affect premiums?
There is no free money falling from the sky.

Posted by: MayBee | March 16, 2010, 11:51 am 11:51 am

did anyone notice that Obama doesn’t have tight, cogent talking points here? well, it’s obvious…etc, etc. to sell have any chance of selling this thing–whatever it is, excactly–he can’t just hem and haw. It’s painful, really, to watch him.
Time to go to work now and start paying for this monstrosity.

Posted by: kelli | March 16, 2010, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm

(and hopeful he WILL get the votes and we’ll be able to continue to press for further improvements to those in the bill and proposal.)
Posted by: progressive mama |
Gotta love the outside-the-box thinking of the desperate progressive mind.
Traditionally, you would improve the bill and that would get you more votes. Problem for progressives is that what they call improvements, the majority of Americans are opposed to. So the irony is that a Progressive improvement makes the bill LESS likely to pass. That’s why they want to pass it now and “improve” it later.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | March 16, 2010, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm

Wrong Again tierra:
57 Percent is a vast Majority and that’s
just one poll.
Many others show 60-70 percent of
Americans opposed to the Senate Bill.
The key here is the Senate Bill!
Most of us are not opposed to
Healthcare Reform but we are opposed
to this bill!
By the way I don’t think the AP is
an unbiased source!

Posted by: reaganfan | March 16, 2010, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm

Speaking of desperate minds, FL, I smiled at this observation by Josh Marshall at TPM regarding the sound bites coming from the Right: “”All liquored up on sake” … “a suicide run” … bizarre invocations of assassination. Threats of civil (or perhaps not so civil) disobedience against new Health Care laws. The Republican rhetoric sure is heating up as momentum gathers for a final vote on Health Care Reform. But there’s no missing that it’s the intensity of desperation. ” (Josh Marshall, TPM)
As to the rest, I agree that “traditionally” you would improve the bill first if you didn’t have a lot of morons in Congress and you were inside the traditionalist box. But since I’m not a traditonalist and I am pragmatic, you deal with what you have, and work to improve that as you go. I’ll be working to elect people with good ideas, nimble minds, and so on, who can think outside rigid ideology and are more worried about people over windfall profits and what their sugar daddy special interests need– and I’ll be pressing for improvements– always– on a number of fronts including health CARE reform (particularly access, medical errors, health delivery reform, portability of coverage, curbing medical inflation, universal coverage versus near universal coverage)– but I don’t believe for one second that Republicans or conserva- or centrist Dems will ever truly engage on the subject without loads of undue pain and suffering first. They’ve proven it time and again. So, ultimately, yes, absolutely, my position is that we need to pass the legislation which is good and has some GREAT things in it, and press for further improvements once the reforms and structure are in place, and the pilot programs are testing ideas to get at medical inflation.
Onward :^)

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 1:16 pm 1:16 pm

A consumer advocacy group has a good post up at the Health Affairs blog (Steve Findlay and Lynn Quincy)refuting many of the most persistent anti- health reform myths, distortions and lies.
They write: “What should happen, from the perspective of a consumer advocacy organization, is abundantly clear: Congress should pass legislation this year to begin dramatically improving health care access, delivery, payment, and cost management in the United States.
What drives our position is the widely recognized and urgent need of individual consumers and families, the economy, and public health for this reform….”
they also make a couple of good points related to comments here:
“The biggest argument against incrementalism or slowing down now is the cost crisis. We simply don’t have the luxury as a society to put off comprehensive reforms for another decade, if we are to try to prevent health care spending from overwhelming the budgets of families as well as of the federal and state governments.”
And
“” While we support more aggressive measures and believe they may be needed in the future, the legislation takes important steps to constrain costs. It launches dozens of initiatives and pilot projects to test ideas, old and new, for prodding doctors and hospitals to become more efficient and for paying them on the basis of the quality of care they deliver, not the quantity. It targets nursing home, home health, and pharmaceutical costs as well—in measured ways that seek to avoid marketplace disruptions. Today the plain fact is that while government and private payers are trying many good ideas for constraining cost growth (paying for quality, paying for performance, bundled payments, and the like), no one knows for sure what is going to work best. This legislation sets us on a clear path to find out.”
Worth reading as there’s much more.

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm

I’ll be working to elect people with good ideas, nimble minds, and so on, who can think outside rigid ideology and are more worried about people over windfall profits and what their sugar daddy special interests need…
Posted by: progressive mama |
I’m sure you will. Care to cite a few examples in the Senate or House that meet your ideals?

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | March 16, 2010, 1:47 pm 1:47 pm

Care to cite a few examples in the Senate or House that meet your ideals?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Mar 16, 2010 1:47:15 PM
After health care reform passes, sure, and in the fall maybe I’ll tell you about people in various districts I send money to or campaign for — however, this week I’m about health care reform and that’s a tangent.
So, toward that end– the health care reform end– Nate Silver has a very cool-strange-interesting post up about predicting outcomes and negotiating strategy, and what choices progressives in Congress had (Progressives’ Strategic Choices on Health Care Likely Made Little Difference). Worth a read. (I say “cool-strange-interesting” because it took quite some time for me to wrap my head around it. LOL. )

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | March 16, 2010, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm

What I want to waste time on is up to me.
Posted by: progressive mama |
Yes pm. That’s called freedom. When the government decides what you waste time on that’s called progressive.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | March 16, 2010, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm

Natoma could have qualified for Medicare. Yet another government program that didn’t seem to work.

Posted by: DaveMN | March 16, 2010, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

When the government decides what you waste time on that’s called progressive.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Mar 16, 2010 3:39:24 PM
When the corporations and special interests decide what you waste time on that’s called American Republicanism and faux conservatism. LOL.
Keep getting it wrong FL. The American Right has very little credibility on “freedom. ” LOL, LOL, LOL.

Posted by: progressive mama | March 16, 2010, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm

Top

Our Interview with President Obama

Related Videos

Leave a Reply