Key Senator Rolls Out Sweeping Universal Health Care Plan

Washington Post:

Two of the Senate's most influential leaders are working separately behind the scenes on legislation that would dramatically alter the way Americans get health care, hoping their early efforts -- including the release today of a position paper -- will push President-elect Barack Obama to move rapidly on the issue and spare the incoming administration some of the missteps that killed Bill Clinton's health reform initiative in 1994.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is unveiling a 104-page blueprint today that serves as the opening move in a fierce competition in the Senate to frame the debate. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who is battling a life-threatening brain cancer, has directed aides over the past several months to convene negotiating sessions with a diverse group of stakeholders, including physicians, patient advocates, small-business owners and insurers. He intends to have legislation drafted by Inauguration Day.

Read the whole story: Washington Post

Comments

[rollingdivision]

Giving politicians control over life or death health care decisions for all citizens.

[truthynesslover]

I trust them more than insurance companies,they dont profit from not treating me or keeping my drugs the most expensive in the world.ever been to france or canada?Both are democracies,if its soooo bad how come they havent voted it away?

[rollingdivision]

Really, we can sue insurance companies, insurance company executives can go to prison for fraud and denial of needed services can be judged to be fraud, we can go to another insurance company, we can lie and say we are going to pay for denied treatment and sort the money out later, we can pay for denied treatment ourselves, we can force insurance companies to honor many of our preferences. Can't do any of that under politician controlled health care.

[killmenow]

Politicians are our representatives. It's like saying that WE the people have control over life or death health care decisions for all citizens. The private insurance companies do NOT represent the citizens of the nation. Get involved with the political process. It is immoral to assume that the marketplace will make decisions that benefit your life and death decisions. We have ample evidence that it does not, so WAKE UP and stop listening to the right-wing propaganda echo chamber and do your own research and make contact with your politicians. They are there to serve YOU, not to control you. Corporations want you to distrust your government entirely and to assume that government is against your interests. Don't allow yourself to be manipulated like that. You do not take a pledge of allegiance to the flag, vote and consider yourself a citizen in order to have corporations make decisions for you. It IS your government that makes decisions as YOUR representative.

[rollingdivision]

You think when politicians make decisions for you you haven't lost any freedom of choice. So 435 slugs in congress will have ultimate complete say so on every life or death medical decision from everyone in the whole country. Hey, maybe we can be like the UK or Canada where politicians intervene to get favored supporters additional care which is usually denied. Looking back over the last eight years and seeing the mess politicians have made of things why would anyone want politicians to make medical decisions for them and their loved ones?

[SunshineDaydream]

what in the world are you talking about, rollingdivision? do you honestly believe that an oncologist will be calling your congressman to see if they will cover the radiation you need in order to survive? lmao

[thepoliticalcat]

What, as opposed to the insurance company bean-counters? That's worked really well, since they tend to come down on the side of death if it will save the company a few pennies that they can then put towards buying more expensive artwork for the executive offices. Insurance company employees don't answer to the people. Politicians do.

[obmark]

What a piece of work! Platitudes. No argument. No evidence. Empty assertions only. Is ignorance truly bliss?

[Zeje]

You prefer insurance middlemen having control over your life and death? My insurance company refused to authorize a CT scan -- and I have cancer of the liver. The company rejected my doctor's request twice -- and finally, the third time, they said yes. My insurance company also refused to pay for my oral chemo. My doctor advised me to go to Canada, so that I could be treated.

[tedbear]

There doesn't need to be any insurance companies involved at all.

We need ALL HEALTHCARE TO BE UNDER THE DHEW, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. MEDICARE IS STILL WORKING BECAUSE SSA HAS HANDLED IT SINCE THE 60'S AND THAT IS WHO SHOULD HANDLE ANY UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE PLAN.

THERE WILL BE THE SAME OLD CORRPUTION IF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE ANY POWER IN THIS.

WRITE OR CALL YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES IN THE HOUSE.

[grizhead63]

Second that motion. Dont let the Insurance industry or their lobbyists get near it.

[truthynesslover]

With the 30% overhead the insurance companies take we could cover everyone.W­hy dont we just cover everyone under medicaid?You dont see the retirees complaining do you?Why do you think republicans dont touch that and s.s./becau­se IT WORKS!

[SanityForOnce]

I think your caps lock button is stuck.

You might want to clean your keyboard to fix that little problem. ;-)

[BassMent]

You are definitely on the right track, tedbear.

The 800-lb gorilla in the healthcare debate room is that our system is profit-based. It makes perfect sense for doctors and other health care providers (i.e., the ones that actually make us well) to be handsomely compensated for their work... they work very hard and should be rewarded for it.

But our healthcare system does not reward them as it does in many other countries (e.g., much of Europe). Instead, a huge chunk of the money that you and/or your employer pay into the system every year goes to line the pockets of bureaucrats, bean counters and, of course, stockholders and other investors. As long as our system's primary driver is to generate profits for these entities, the actual care of Americans is a second-place consideration that will forever be compromised by the need to control costs (and thereby keep investors happily buying up shares).

When it comes to matters of life and death, for a profit-driven business to place a price on a human soul is simply corrupt. It's amoral, and it's a national disgrace. Get the profiteers OUT of health care, and we might have a chance.

Clearly, this is not the focus of Baucus' proposal.

[ScarletKnight1307]

This is a capitalist country
and we revel in our capitalist solutions and skeptical at government solutions
fine enough said government can't do anything right? Right?

here is the problem with Market based solutions in terms of health care

When your car breaks down you might look for a deal

when you buy a house you may make a low bid

when your life is on the line you don't do that

now there is couple of ways to look at this

we have universal health care through emergency rooms but that's not very cost effective

we can put government/private heath care solution to cover everybody and bring down costs by computerizing and centralizing health records. Do something about malpractice insurance and claims to keep health care down. We have to do something about medicare

If we don't put forth some marked based in conjunction with Government subsidies then
we will have single payer Insurance i think in 10 years.

[jacqmac]

Good! The sooner the better for single payer UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!! First of all--not too many single payer systems are TOTALLY 'free'. Canadians pay a small amount--VERY small compared to what we pay and so do the Brits. I'm not sure about the French-but they have a 'doctor on call' service that is really quite good! Think about it. DOCTORS--making HOUSE CALLS--in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT!! Wow!! Really revolutionary!
However---I don't want ANY MAJOR PLAYERS in the 'HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY' at THIS TABLE.
Why? Key word is INDUSTRY!! Once someone takes a notion that a company HAS TO make a PROFIT--then the needs of the CONSUMER go right out the window. Look at SUV's!! They were PROFITABLE--people were buying them--until GAS hit $4-$5 a GALLON and now GM needs money!!
There needs to be absolutely STRICT OVERSIGHT of these private companies IF they ARE allowed at the table. For starters--the marriage between Big Pharma and the insurers needs to be ANNULLED!
Middlemen all OVER the system need to be totally ELIMINATED!
Medicare FOR ALL!! And that is JUST FOR STARTERS!!

[Zeje]

You don't get health care through the emergency room -- no emergency room is going to give you chemotherapy if you have cancer.

[obmark]

Actually, ours is a mixed economy. If it were a truly capitalist economy, we'd all be screwed.

[truthynesslover]

the republican party is supposed to be the m.b.a. party{we can all see how well they handled the "free market"}so can one of them tell me how u.s. companies are supposed to compete with every other industialised nation that has universal coverage?Doesnt it make business "cents" to take that burden off the u.s. companies?

[Raster]

Will thr USA finally really become a member of the civilized Western community of democracies, almost 40 years after Canada became the last Western country to implement National Heath Care? I'll believe it when I see it actually made law and implemented. But I won't be expecting it any time soon and I fully expect to die before seeing it.

[grizhead63]

The USA would have had National Health Care 40 years ago had it not been for GOP Trickle Down, Soak the Middle Class strategy. Health Care is a basic human right, not just a basic Republican Congressional right. Never, never put these boysin charge of the USA again.

[DavidATolucaLake]

Canada has it
Germany has it
The U.K. has it
Etc.

But the United States cant figure it out? America needs it too.

[EllisWyatt]

Socialized medicine

1. Long lines
2. Long waits for MRI's, surgeries, etc.
3. Shortage of doctors

[chirps]

Okay, Rush, if you say so.

[nuglet304]

yeah, well right now some people don't have any hope whatsoever, so your point is lost on them.

[rhettisha]

Un-Socialized medicine:

1. No lines because most people can't afford to got to the doctor.
2. Short waits for MRI's and surgeries, because no one can afford them.
3. Shortage of funds to pay doctors,

[grizhead63]

GOWP (Grand Old WhiteParty):
1. Privatize Social Security-Let Wall Street run it
2. Religionize Education-Let the Church run it
3. Let the Health Insurance Industry run health care for all Americans

[truthynesslover]

U.s. medicine;

1.long lines
2..long waits for m.r.i.s,su­rgeries etc.
3.shortage of doctors

when was the last time you had a doctors appointment and didnt wait for hours?
How long does it take you to see a specialist?
ever been to an emergency room?
japan and germany and have none of these problems and france still has house calls {when was the last time a doctor made a house call in the u.s.?}ther­e are different plans for different countries. we should learn from the best of them and impliment it.

[BlueZoo]

HA! I'll believe this when the Congress as a whole adopts a universal healthcare plan for THEMSELVES rather than the gold-standard they enjoy today at the taxpayer's expense! Until that time, they can take their plan and stuff it!

[fivecard]

I don't get this comment. What do you mean Congress should adopt universal health care for themselves?

Members of Congress already have government health insurance. They're federal employees. It's provided to them by the government. And it's a pretty robust package, too, since the government has a lot of buying power and thus a lot of leverage with the participating insurers.

What Obama wants to do is enable ordinary citizens to buy into this same plan if they want to. These would be people who can't get better insurance or a better deal elsewhere (say, through their current employer). Bringing aboard 50 million or so citizens would drive costs down even more.

How is this a bad thing? I don't get the argument.

[CanuckDemocrat]

I am Canadian. We have universal health care here (by law). It is far from being a perfect system, but health care is a human RIGHT, not a privilege for the wealthy. The United States is the richest and most powerful nation on earth, yet 1 in 6 people go without health care because they cannot afford it. That is a crime against humanity. Period. Profit should not EVER be part of the health care equation, otherwise you get exactly what you have now in the US.

If you put universal health care to a nationwide referendum, who here doubts that it would pass by a huge majority? I laugh whenever I hear the argument against "socialized" medicine. Do we drive on roads paid for by taxes? Do we get electricity from grids subsidized by taxes? Do we get drinking water from plants run with tax money? The answer is obvious, and conveniently forgotten by the right wing who now use it as their favorite scare tactic.

Put this to a national referendum. The people will have their vote. It's too important to get bogged down in Congress and diluted by special interests. The question should be simple.

Do you support the creation of a single payer universal health care system in the US?
We all know the outcome.

[truthynesslover]

We also have the insurance companies who spend billions scaring the american public{especially those who have never been outside the u.s.to see how far behing we are}into voting for a system that works against them and is the most expensive in the world.We also have alot of ignorant people{see Sarah palin and republican voters}.

[BassMent]

Yeah, you don't hear these people whining about how we have "socialized fire fighting" or "socialized law enforcemen­t."

[ProudLiberalDan]

Don't forget socialized bailouts for coporate incompetence , corruption and malfeasance. The least American people deserve is universal health care.

We have socialism for the rich and powerful. Why not have universal health care for everyone else?

[jacqmac]

We did put this issue to a National Referendum. That Referendum was held on NOVEMBER 4, 2008!
And, unfortunately, the GO(W)P just didn't get the message!! Hooray for Teddy Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and Max Baucus! At least they are DOING SOMETHING so that we at least have the opportunity of 'catching up' to nations like Canada, Britain, Germany, France, Norway, Sweden, ad infinitum!
We're not trying to amend the Constitution all we want is HEALTH CARE without being forced into bankruptcy! I've signed on to dividedwefail---we NEED TO MOVE ON THIS ISSUE NOW--not two years from now!!

[chirps]

I just paid two hundred and fifty bucks to have a simple tooth extraction. Insane! I took up no more than ten minutes of the dentists’ time, had one x-ray (no film, just an enlarged image on a computer monitor) and some anesthesia. Two hundred and fifty bucks represents a weeks worth of wages to many people in this country and it’s sickening to have to fork over such an amount for such a quick and simple procedure. If anyone wonders what drives such exorbitance, it’s necessary to understand that American dentists have determined that their pay scale should be on par with that of the already very well paid medical doctors.

Instead of supporting such greed, I’d recommend to those requiring any significant dental work that they go to a border town in Mexico and visit a dentist there. My brother-in-law went there and had extensive work done on his front teeth - someplace near Yuma, Arizona - and now he’s got the smile to prove it. The price tag for all this was less than seven grand. Such work would have cost many times that here in the good old USA. I should also mention that the Mexican dentist who did the work was Harvard educated and his office up to date.

[MossyOak]

My nephew is a doctor in Austria. In writing to me after the election he said:

Income for doctors is not the same like in the US, that’s the price we are willing to pay for having a great medical service for everyone and we are happy to treat everybody no matter how much they earn.

[villagertwist]

No sure how your comment relates...­but have you ever seen the state of the "European mouth." Pretty dreadful. Service for all results in mediocre dental care.

[villagertwist]

Harvard's dental school is not one of the top dental schools in the country and you have absolutely no idea of how up to date the Mexican dentist's office was....you just assume so.

Becoming a dentist is as costly as medical school and most graduate with a huge debt that has to paid off.

The cost of running any medical office is extremely high, not to mention insurance costs.

You are not only paying for time, you are paying for knowledge and skill that took years of training and lots of cash to get.

Since you know where to get cheaper dental care, go there and get it. I don't believe anyone lassoed you into your dentist's office and from your attitude I don't think he'd miss you as a patient. If you had cost questions, you should have asked them. If you weren't satisfied with the answers, you should have gone elsewhere.

[chirps]

Blah, blah, blah. Keep going, but don't ever mention the "G" word, right? The “G” word doesn't exist in American medicine, does it? No sir, we done got us a system chuck full of concerned humanitarians, right? Blah, blah, blah.

[truthynesslover]

My husband has a p.h.d. in mathmatics he would love to make what a dentist does.

[Zeje]

I need dental care -- and I can't afford to go to a dentist. My husband just cancelled his dental appointment. We just can't afford it. We are, in fact, looking into going to Mexico for dental care. I have friends who did so and they are quite pleased. Our insurance does not pay for dental work.

[chirps]

Twister, one more thing, the tooth was giving me a lot of pain and I didn't feel like traipsing from dental office to dental office seeking a bargain, I just wanted the pain gone. Get it?

[MossyOak]

1) America's deplorable state of medical care starts with health insurance companies. What do they do exactly anyway but take money from us and dole it out only when they can't find a loophole? Get rid of them and HC costs will drop dramatically.

2) Legalized drug use in this country is a national disgrace. Rein in the pharmaceutical industries from getting half the population (especially children) hooked on prescriptions they don't need that cause side effects requiring yet more drugs, and HC costs would once again plummet.

3) Undo the tangled web of organic certification so that farmers who want to convert to chemical-free, sustainable growing methods can do so without fighting for years with the Department of Agriculture, allowing chemical free food to flow into the marketplace. The D of A actually makes this process more difficult on purpose!

[BlueZoo]

Your second point resonates with me. I'm appalled drug companies advertise their products now. Physicians have patients lining up requesting these drugs and the patients have no idea if these are good for them or not. Our kids are being inundated with the idea that there's a pill for anything and everything. It's no wonder the biggest addictions among young people today are prescription pills from their parents' medicine cabinets! It's a disgrace!

[bthechangeyouseek]

I wanted to respond, because your ideas are typical to most people who don't understand insurance coverage.

HC companies, negotiate lower rates with providers and facilities. Without someone negotiating a set rate and establishing a contract, providers would be free to charge what they want. Some would be fair, while others would gouge the public. We need someone to negotiate these fees. The interesting aspect of fees is all providers do not have the same fees for the same services. It's based on costs in a geographic area, scarcity of medical treatment, and other factors.

In defense of many families, there are a lot of kids who need medication today. Why? Maybe our poor quality of water too many chemicals. Maybe it's the polluted environment, who knows. One thing is for sure, kids/teens who truly need medications for mental health, have a much better life because of them. I think much can be done with the drug companies, but I think we need to start with the FDA. The FDA established the basis for drug companies.

Many of our long term government agencies have been doing things the same for years. And are not interested in change. I think it's time to review these government agencies and restructure them for the future. Not what's always been done. They no longer work for the people, but for whomever has the most dollars in lobbying their cause.

[LemonMeringue]

Universal single-payer health care.

Everything else is just a bandaid on a broken system.

Get rid of insurance companies. There is no room in the system for the profiteers and the waste of money on paperwork and labor.

The only people really frightened of universal single-payer health care are the ones profiting off the broken system we have now.

NADER AND KUCINICH - read their thoughts on health care. They got it right.

[majorteddy]

I think you are right. Insurance companies are just sucking off the system and are unnecessary.

[InspiredByTruth]

Mandating health "insurance" is a windfall for the INSURANCE COMPANIES, and will skyrocket the costs of such a program. We need universal healthCARE not health insurance.

[hollybork]

Universal healthcare is the civil rights issue of our age. The American people have spoken loud and clear on this issue. We will have it. Let's make sure we all participate, support the effort, discuss it thoroughly and get the best plan we can get. That means the financial hit of any such implementation does not fall disproportionately on the medical profession in order to heel to the knee of the insurance lobby. The insurers drain about 30% from our health care dollar. They need to be thrust out of the middle of it. Then the country must find a way to attain economies of scale and best negotiated price on medications, and implement a single payer direct benefit plan that covers everyone.

[dilz0882]

I disagree. Gay rights is the civil rights issue of this time. That's much more fundamental than regulating insurance companies and government-assisted health care. Would you have called Medicare a civil rights issue for the elderly?

[PartyPartyParty]

When Social Security and Medicare were established, they were indeed considered a civil rights issue. And so is universal health care. Just think: if we had universal health care in this country, no one could be denied health care because of lack of insurance, income or their marital status. In other words, it wouldn't matter who you were sleeping with or married to: you'd have guaranteed access to affordable care. Sounds like an important human rights issue to me.

[gallstones]

Unless you have no health insurance and can't pay out of pocket. How many gays are without access to health care? Why can't we accomplish both?

[Zeje]

Health care is more important. You won't die if you don't get married. You die if you don't have health care.

[JohnFromCensornati]

Harry and Louise can't be far behind.

[vegancheesenut]

You betcha!!! Here we go again.....­.....

[karela]

I strongly agree that we need healthcare for all Americans, but I don't appreciate Baucus pushing himself forward like this. Teddy Kennedy has been working steadily all during his down time and all during his career on this and he has worked in concert with Obama. This smacks to me very much of a political move on the part of Baucus to push his career forward. If he really wanted to help, he could have offered his thoughts to Senator Kennedy who chairs the committee in charge of this. I think Ted Kennedy has earned the right to respect and it strikes me as hugely disrespectful to try to barge in and steal the show during the last half of the ninth inning when you weren't there for the rest of the game. If Baucus has good ideas, I want to hear them, but I want to hear them when he's standing beside Ted and Ted is introducing him. This was meant to be the crowning achievment of Ted Kennedy before he dies and I for one don't appreciate the grand standing. Let's hear what Barack and Ted have to say.

[nuglet304]

actually, i read an article this morning about hillary and her desire to push universal health care. but she specifically noted that, while it is a priority issue for her, she didn't want to overshadow the work being done by senators baucus and kennedy. apparently, this is something BOTH men have been working on for some time.

[PartyPartyParty]

As far as I'm concerned, the more Senators working on universal health care bills, the better.

[gallstones]

karela, is anything of what you say true? Can you provide credible evidence to support your claims? I won't be convinced without it.

You are from Massachusetts aren't you?

One last thing, paragraphs and white space are your friend.

[nancy50]

Karela, frankly I'm a little tired of political egos. The time to act is long overdue, we need to get this done. It appears from recent news articles, it is Hillary that Kennedy and his staff iare trying to marginalize, not Baucus. I think Kennedy needs to put his ego away and have all hands on deck to accomplish a greater goal. I could care less about the Kennedy family legacy, I'm more concerned about the good of the country.

I agree Kennedy has done some good work in his many years in the Senate, but he also has some character flaws. Cheating scandal in college, extramarital affairs, alcoholism, Kopechne, not being a good loser when he lost by a MUCH bigger margin than Hillary lost to Obama, not campaigning for Carter and helping to ensure 12 years of Republican rule.

The Baucus plan sounds alot like the Clinton Health Plan, and I'm pleased to hear that she's a big enough person to offer any help that is needed and not mind that once again a woman does the work and a man will get the credit.