Obama Takes Health Care Pitch To Annandale, Virginia (VIDEO)

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Obama Takes Health Care Pitch To Annandale, Virginia (VIDEO) stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

Huffingtion Post/AP
First Posted: 07- 1-09 08:55 AM   |   Updated: 08- 1-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

(AP) ANNANDALE, Va. — President Barack Obama hugged a cancer patient Wednesday at an emotional forum before a supportive audience and vowed to bring greater efficiency and accessibility to the nation's health care system.

Debby Smith, 53, of Appalachia, Va., a volunteer for Obama's political operation, fought tears as she told the president of her kidney cancer and her inability to obtain health insurance or hold a job. Obama embraced her and called her "exhibit A" in what he said was an unsustainable system that is too expensive and complex for millions of Americans.

"We are going to try to find ways to help you immediately," he told Smith as hundreds looked on at a community college forum _ and countless others watched on television. But the nation's long-term needs require a greater emphasis on preventive care and "cost-effective care," he said.

Smith obtained her ticket through the White House. Aides said she was a volunteer for Organizing for America, Obama's political operation within the Democratic National Committee. Among the other questioners were a member of the Service Employees International Union and a person with Health Care for America Now, which recently organized a Capitol Hill rally for overhauling health care.

Also questioning the president _ via the Internet _ was Republican Rep. Michael Burgess of Texas, an obstetrician.

Obama aides said half the tickets were distributed through the community college, with the balance handled through the White House.

The president said the best way to drive down health care costs is to persuade doctors and hospitals to emphasize quality of care over the quantity of procedures.

Health experts have long criticized formulas that tie Medicare payments to tests and other services that may not always be the best way to treat a patient. Obama said the formulas must change as part of his bid to overhaul U.S. health care delivery.

Story continues below
advertisement

"The biggest thing we can do to hold down costs is to change the incentives of a health care system that automatically equates expensive care with better care," the president said. He said the formula system drives up costs "but doesn't make you better."

Obama did not make specific recommendations for changing the incentive formulas. Nor did he offer new proposals or details for other tough issues, such as whether to limit medical malpractice awards or to tax employer-subsidized health care benefits.

He repeatedly said the current health care system is not acceptable and must be overhauled this year. He urged the audience, which included people following on Facebook and YouTube, to reject critics who say his plans are too costly or a step toward socialized medicine.

Obama gave a nearly 20-minute introduction and answered seven questions.

Obama said a government-run "single-payer" health care system works well in some countries. But it is not appropriate in the United States, he said, because so many people get insurance through their employers working with private companies.

But he again called for a government-run "public option" to compete with private insurers, a plan that many Republicans oppose.

Obama said the public option would provide "competition and choice" and "keep insurers honest."

Obama also said his health care plan would benefit small businesses and people who are self-employed, by giving them more leverage in dealing with insurance companies. He would do it through a health care exchange for employers who have too few workers to get a good health insurance package, and for people who are self-employed.

Obama said they would be able to look at the plans available and join with others in the same situation. They would become part of a "big pool" with the leverage to drive down costs, he said.

When a man from Texas said limits on awards from medical malpractice lawsuits would bring down health care costs, the president replied, "I don't like the idea of an artificial cap" on such awards for injuries suffered. He also said there is little evidence that various states' efforts to limit such awards have uniformly brought down costs.

Obama said, however, that he is working with the American Medical Association to explore ways to reduce liability for doctors and hospitals "when they've done nothing wrong." He offered no specifics.

Congress will return to debating health care when it returns Monday from a one-week recess. Obama's agenda calls for reducing delivery costs even as insurance coverage is extended to virtually all Americans.

Obama says the government will not borrow money to carry out the plans, but many Republicans are dubious if not outright hostile to his proposals.

(AP) ANNANDALE, Va. — President Barack Obama hugged a cancer patient Wednesday at an emotional forum before a supportive audience and vowed to bring greater efficiency and accessibility to the n...
(AP) ANNANDALE, Va. — President Barack Obama hugged a cancer patient Wednesday at an emotional forum before a supportive audience and vowed to bring greater efficiency and accessibility to the n...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
5820
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (70 pages total)

If this woman can't afford to go to the doctor, then who diagnosed her new tumor?

Don't we already cover people who are truly poor through Medicaid?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 07/03/2009

One way to cut costs is to stop paying for tests and treatments that don't make a difference. We all want the ultimate care for our loved ones, even if it does not statistically make a difference in the outcome, because we all hold out a glimmer of hope. When such an attitude is expanded to the general population the health system becomes bankrupt. For us to make an effective change some party is going to have to manage doling out health dollars and every sector of the population, including seniors, will have to be subject to the tough rules.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 PM on 07/02/2009
- sparky73 I'm a Fan of sparky73 23 fans permalink
photo

I have an idea to control cost. How about we provide free education to medical students who show they can excel in the field then put salary limits of $100,000 on their income. While doing that, we impose caps on how much $$$$ someone can sue a doctor for malpractice. Then that would keep insurance premiums down as well costs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:10 PM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

How about forgiving a percentage of student loans across the board?
I know when I graduated, I was not saddled with student debt because university was probably 1/5 the cost as now.
I don't think that malpractice suits are quite the problem that some make them out to be. How about putting a cap on malpractice premiums and who can be sued? Maybe greater oversight of doctors and medical personnel? I know that the states are supposed to provide oversight but sometimes are strapped for cash for this service.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:17 PM on 07/02/2009

So it is okay for lawyers, politicians, business people to make over $100,000 but not those responsible for our lives...not those who in many cases work 7 days a week and come into the hospital in the middle of the night on a regular basis....not those who often spend ten year in training after college...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 PM on 07/02/2009
- CJWebber I'm a Fan of CJWebber 22 fans permalink

A limit of $100,000? Are you kidding?

After 10 years of education costing hundreds of thousands, you would cap their salary at $100,000? You want to attract only idi0ts to the field?

Back to the drawing board. That idea is worthless.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 07/03/2009
- Lemmy I'm a Fan of Lemmy 19 fans permalink

And at the end, the director yelled, "Cut! That's a wrap!"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 07/02/2009
- argonaut50 I'm a Fan of argonaut50 2 fans permalink

Obama is turning out to be just another elitist politician. In response to the first question about Single payer universal health care he said that "it would be too disruptive" and it needed to be "uniquely American". This is Washington speak for 'we are going to protect the insurance companies at all costs', so forget about a solution that will actually give americans the same level of health care that the President and Congress enjoy. When are these guys going to stop talking down to us. The do not deserve our respect until they can actually do what is right. I couldn't vote for McCain but I am really feeling like I am the victim of a bait and switch with Obama. Seriously disappointed so far.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:40 AM on 07/02/2009
- mergina I'm a Fan of mergina 81 fans permalink
photo

On the road again, Wanna have a burger in Denver.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 AM on 07/02/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

Here's a summary of the top 20 recipients of campaign contributions—or policy investments—from the HMOs and Big Pharma for the 2008 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics: (See http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=H&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U

Notice that Obama leaves McCain in the dust!

Read it and weep if you've been gulled into believing that ANY mainstream Democrat is proposing ANY real reform--including this "public option" sham that will apply a thin cosmetic veneer to a broken system and leave the HMO greedheads in charge:

Obama, Barack (D) $19,578,158
McCain, John (R) $7,418,423
Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $6,630,985
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $1,354,535
Baucus, Max (D-MT) $1,161,175
Cornyn, John (R-TX) $961,719
Coleman, Norm (R-MN) $898,328
Paul, Ron (R-TX) $874,444
Pallone, Frank Jr (D-NJ) $845,445
Rangel, Charles B (D-NY) $827,549
Specter, Arlen (R-PA) $718,398
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $713,709
Smith, Gordon H (R-OR) $713,013
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $676,949
Harkin, Tom (D-IA) $673,048
Collins, Susan M (R-ME) $659,019
Dingell, John D (D-MI) $573,736
Udall, Mark (D-CO) $560,115
Landrieu, Mary L (D-LA) $556,918
Price, Tom (R-GA) $529,851
(See http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=H&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U)

For more information about the only real, proven reform—nonprofit, single-payer Medicare for all—see the following sites:

http://www.healthcare-now.org
www.pnhp.org
www.singlepayeraction.org
http://www­.1payer.ne­t/
http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 AM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

These are very, very misleading figures. I appreciate links, but not weasely, misleading, semi-lying links.

The reason these numbers are so misleading, is HOW they count the money. It is a count of many small donors. In their count, I am a "big" money donor. Probably alot of other nurses, music therapists, phlebotomists, therapists, and aides as well are "big" money donors because they donated to Obama's campaign!

If you read the fine print down at the bottom, the numbers contain the quiet little phrase......
"The numbers on this page are based on contributions from PACs and individuals giving $200 or more. All donations took place during the 1989-2010 election cycle and were released by the Federal Election Commission."


Of course, if anyone paid attention to that it would not confirm all our fears, and spark our righteous indignation!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 07/02/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

I'm afraid you're quite wrong about this. What you are referring to is "bundling."

According to The Chicago Tribune, "Under current campaign-finance rules, an individual lobbyist is limited to writing a personal check for a maximum of $2,300. But that’s where the bundling starts. A lobbyist can collect check after check from other individuals and deliver the entire bundle to a candidate for office. Sometimes those stacks contain $20,000, $100,000 or even $250,000. As the rules stand today, lobbyists have to only report their own contributions – not the money they’ve raised from others. These lobbyists are delivering millions in bundled contributions to the very politicians from whom they are seeking favorable votes or legislation. That shouldn’t remain a secret. The public has a right to know.

"It is no coincidence that the best bundlers are often granted the greatest access, and access is power in Washington. When the bundlers are lobbyists, we must require full disclosure because they and their clients have a financial stake in the outcome of specific legislation. That gets in the way of public officials doing the business of the people – all of the people, not just a few." (http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/may/21/opinion/chi-42f3tq7may21)

The figures I posted come from the most reputable campaign-finance reporting group in the country. Your counterpoints are complete falsehoods and distortions, predictable parroting of corporate propaganda from the K street sharpies who pollute our political system with their legalized bribes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 AM on 07/02/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

By the way, Roses, you've posted these very same falsehoods and distortions before, even though I have documented the practice of bundling and have explained it to you before. If you persist, I will report you for abuse.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:23 AM on 07/02/2009

" There will be no cap on malpractice as part of my savings plan"

http://abajournal.com/news/trial_lawyers_shift_from_edwards_to_obama/

Yap...money talks ...BS walks...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:20 AM on 07/02/2009
- nogimmicks I'm a Fan of nogimmicks 28 fans permalink

Thanks for the sobering facts. Obama is just a talented lawyer working for the rich clients, just like Tony Blair was.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 PM on 07/02/2009
- Michele Swenson - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Michele Swenson 12 fans permalink

At the health care Town Hall meeting in Virginia today Pres. Obama attributed uncompensated health care to the uninsured, "which adds $1,000 to the health costs of each U.S. family." However, uncompensated medical costs is also attributable to the underinsured whose numbers have increased over a decade, as insurers have sold slimmer benefit policies and passed on more costs to policy holders.

The American Hospital Association TrendWatch Reports reveal that out-of-pocket health costs rose 70% from 1995-2005, creating more underinsured; simultaneously, uncompensated medical care rose 65%. The increase of underinsured is the elephant in the room, coincident with increasing numbers carrying catastrophic coverage. Consumer Reports (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/08/cu_insurance.html) revealed that 24 percent of Americans in 2007 had skeletal health insurance (the underinsured). A Colorado study revealed in 2008 that over 36% are underinsured.

For-profit health insurances will always shift costs to policy holders to protect their bottom lines regardless of attempted regulation. Providing different levels of coverage in anticipation of what health care any one person might need is at best a game of chance. Underwriting should be eliminated, and administration simplified to provide everyone access to the care they need.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

Excellent post.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 AM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

Very good comment. Thank you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 AM on 07/02/2009

This guy ever stop his campaign mode............?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 AM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

Got hate?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 AM on 07/02/2009
photo

You talking about Cheney? Yes, he seems to be out of control the past few months!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 AM on 07/02/2009

Snake Oil salesmen NEVER tire of their gig.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 07/02/2009

look it cost alot to run for a 2nd term

http://abajournal.com/news/trial_lawyers_shift_from_edwards_to_obama/

yap...there well will NO CHANGE on malpractice reform...

A hug is a cure.. BELIEVE!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:23 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

I read a lot of double-talk in his comments. And patent falsehoods like: "The biggest thing we can do to hold down costs is to change the incentives of a health care system that automatically equates expensive care with better care," the president said. He said the formula system drives up costs "but doesn't make you better."

If anything, I would say doctors are reluctant to recommend more tests, etc. and you have to do battle to get them to prescribe more expensive and more effective medications!

It's the administrative costs, not the costs of the "care" itself that is the problem here!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 AM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

That's really kind of splitting hairs.
I think that "care" takes into account as a whole, that service that is strictly "medical" and also that service that would be defined as bookkeeping.

I also don't think that statement is a falsehood. Some do mistakenly equate cost of care and quality of care, unfortunately.

http://cthealth.server101.com/the_case_for_universal_health_care_in_the_united_states.htm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

Point taken. But the way I parse it is he is saying that getting more expensive treatment is not necessarily getting better treatment. I took him to mean that doctors do not always prescribe more thorough diagnosis and treatment protocols out of limits set by insurance companies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:33 AM on 07/02/2009

You are wrong doctors are our enemies!!! Get rid of them!!!!

If we have more malpractice lawyers, the people will be safer and heathier

That is why he is not putting a cap on malpractice...

P.S. has nothing to do with this.... http://abajournal.com/news/trial_lawyers_shift_from_edwards_to_obama/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

Doctors are into "self-pres­ervation", you know. They limit care so they don't have to do battle with insurance companies.

And as for lawsuits, an awful lot of what goes wrong is due to the hospital's mistakes, not the physician's. Physicians, however, are fearful of being sued but other doctors stand up for them so it's hard to take them on. Hospitals get sued more often -- and have high-priced legal eagles to keep them out of hot water or simply settle. And THAT drives up the cost of care for everyone else.

I speak from personal experience.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:30 AM on 07/02/2009
photo

Now, was she being used as a prop?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 07/02/2009
- Roses I'm a Fan of Roses 39 fans permalink
photo

No one really knows, but I do know that I don't care!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:16 AM on 07/02/2009
- KQuark I'm a Fan of KQuark 265 fans permalink
photo

Everyone must fight for public healthcare if they want it passed.

Stop whining and fight.

Last call to sign Dr. Dean's petition.

http://standwithdrdean.com/

Contact the white house and the congress with emails and phone calls.

http://standwithdrdean.com/where_congress_stands?chamber=&party=&state=&hc_status=&commit=Filter

Sign Bernie Sanders' single payer petition.

http://sanders.senate.gov/petitions/index.cfm?uid=7fd59f2e-88e1-477a-8eaf-762a5b050809

Sign Durbin's, Leahy's and Schumer's petition for a public plan.

http://ga3.org/campaign/healthpetition?source=hc_ty

Send faxes to push single payer with the white house, relavent committees and now your own congress people with HealthJustice's free faxes. You can actually customize your faxes to say whatever you want now.

http://www­.1payer.ne­t/action-a­lerts/send­-a-free-ef­ax-to-poli­cymakers.h­tml

http://ga1.org/campaign/singlepayer

If you can be there this Thursday in Washington to fight for healthcare reform.

http://www­.1payer.ne­t/rally/vo­lunteers/a­dd

Healthcare stories.

http://stories.barackobama.com/healthcare

Progressive change campaing committee.

http://boldprogressives.org/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 07/02/2009
- Weirdwriter I'm a Fan of Weirdwriter 332 fans permalink
photo

Copied. Thanks. Fanned!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

Good work, KQuark! If everyone took just 5-10 minutes to do what you are saying we could get somewhere!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 AM on 07/02/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

Please cite which bill currently offered in Congress corresponds to your conception of "public healthcare­"--details­, please, with specific provisions. Or are you just flinging around a vague term that has no correlate in any specific bill proposed by anyone in Congress?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:25 AM on 07/02/2009

Here's a pretty comprehensive list of the various bills in the Senate to date:

http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/5900

Click on the graphs to enlarge.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

New Dem health plan has public option, lower cost

WASHINGTON " Democrats on a key Senate Committee outlined a revised and far less costly health care plan Wednesday night that includes a government-run insurance option and an annual fee on employers who do not offer coverage to their workers.


The plan carries a 10-year price tag of slightly over $600 billion, and would lead toward an estimated 97 percent of all Americans having coverage, according to the Congressional Budget Office, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy and Chris Dodd said in a letter to other members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The AP obtained a copy.

By contrast, an earlier, incomplete proposal carried a price tag of roughly $1 trillion and would have left millions uninsured, CBO analysts said in mid-June.

The letter indicated the cost and coverage improvements resulted from two changes. The first calls for a government-run health insurance option to compete with private coverage plans, an option that has drawn intense opposition from Republicans.

Three committees in the House have been at work for weeks on a plan expected to come to a vote by the end of July.

http://blog.taragana.com/n/revised-democratic-health-care-plan-has-public-option-lower-cost-annual-employer-fee-97353/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 AM on 07/02/2009

I wonder if the people so passionate about universal healthcare even have a job, healthcare, or have ever owned a business..­...hhmmmmm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 AM on 07/02/2009
- Ohsherri I'm a Fan of Ohsherri 102 fans permalink
photo

Yes they do!
That would be ALL of Canada...
ALL of Australia...
ALL of Taiwan...
And Great Britain...and I'm pretty sure Norway.

Isn't that great! :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 07/02/2009
photo

Why, you think only well to do people should live? I know hundreds of people the past 20 years that have paid between 50,000 and 100,000 in insurance during their adult lives and when they actually needed it after a job loss etc. were denied. So, cut your compassionate Christian attitude and get lost!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:13 AM on 07/02/2009
- Ohsherri I'm a Fan of Ohsherri 102 fans permalink
photo

By the way...if you really cared about small-business and jobs, you
would listen to the "EMPLOYERS" in America who would love
to have Universal Healthcare coverage for their employees.
If you've ever owned a business...which YOU clearly have not...
you would see the benefit this would be to the economy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:17 AM on 07/02/2009
- KQuark I'm a Fan of KQuark 265 fans permalink
photo

Anyone catch Bernie Sanders on Countdown. Of course he would like single payer like many of us. But he supports a strong public option as well. He sounds allot more positive about it passing than people here for sure.

He said the HELP committee is coming out with a public option in the Senate. He does not know what the Finance committee will end up with but probably not the public option.

The house will likely come up with a bill that has a public option.

He said it's going to be hard for Dems in the Senate to join a Republican filibuster with 60 votes. He said like I said earlier that we probably only need a simple majority to voted for the public option in the final bill in the Senate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 AM on 07/02/2009
- Weirdwriter I'm a Fan of Weirdwriter 332 fans permalink
photo

I'd go for a public option. Congress has its heels dug in over the single-payer. Plan B is much harder to oppose and will do what needs to be done, if we don't let it get watered-down.

The health insurance industry is already screaming to stop it. That's good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:12 AM on 07/02/2009

Bernie Sanders is an open socialist.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 AM on 07/02/2009

OMG...SOOO­OOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOCIAL­ISM!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:07 AM on 07/02/2009
photo

So what, your father is an open necrophiliac!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 07/02/2009
- Ohsherri I'm a Fan of Ohsherri 102 fans permalink
photo

(sigh)....this from a "tea-bagger"...oh lawrdy!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 AM on 07/02/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

And you are an open nematode. So what's your point?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:32 AM on 07/02/2009
- ScapeGoat I'm a Fan of ScapeGoat 9 fans permalink
photo

Repgublicant's complain that the government can't run anything correctly and only private business can.
Then the Repuglicant's say that if there is a public health insurance policy, it will drive private insurance out of business.
So which is it?
Is the government so inept that it can't run anything?
or, is it efficient enough to run a health care insurance policy so well that it will drive private insurance out of business?
You can't have it both ways!
Except, of course, unless you are a hypocrite!
GOP- Goofy Old Paranoids. The party of no .. no sense that is!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:41 PM on 07/01/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

Health-care reform is need to (1) curtail skyrocketing costs and (2) expand coverage to everyone. The public option would accomplish neither. Unlike Medicare and VA, it is not single payer with a single risk pool and the attendant bargaining power over prices, so no cost control; unlike them, it does not pool resources and automatically cover EVERYONE in a given cohort with no premiums and deductibles.

It is just another HMO--an enfeebled and hamstrung HMO designed to foster a superficial impression of reform: it is barred from accepting public funds (after an initial infusion), and will have to charge premiums and deductibles.

Why would anyone propose such a doomed farce if serious reform were his/her chief obejctive? The answer? Serious reform is NOT their chief objective of the Dems who peddle this snake oil. Then what is? Keeping the HMOs in business at all costs. Why? The health-related corporations have donated hundreds of millions to Congresspeople of both parties--in 2008 alone, $90 million to the Dems and $76 million to the Repubs. In brief, Congress is a wholly owned subsidiary of the HMOs and Big Pharma.

Do the math. Think critically. Wean yourself from the narcotic of MSM corporate narrative about the public option sham. The ugly reality will then come into focus.

For further analysis:

http://www.commondreams.org/print/43440

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php#public-option

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 PM on 07/01/2009
photo

It's a pleasure to read your sensible, well-informed comment.

Agreed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 07/01/2009
- KQuark I'm a Fan of KQuark 265 fans permalink
photo

Bernie Sanders was on Countdown tonight and said he's for the public option.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:48 PM on 07/01/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

Bernie Sanders has introduced a single-payer bill--S703--in the Senate. He would accept a public option as second best; but he has not specified WHICH public option.

This "public option" term has become a mythical symbol--it means pretty much what people want it to mean. What do YOU mean by it? Can you specify a bill introduced in Congress that conforms to your conception of how it should function?

Please provide specifics on what you think this public option is or should be.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 07/02/2009
- KQuark I'm a Fan of KQuark 265 fans permalink
photo

Here's some numbers for you.

Facts about what a public option would save.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2009/Jun/Fork-in-the-Road.aspx

Bottom line.

With no universal healthcare costs will rise 6.5%
With only private universal healthcare costs will rise 5.8%
With universal healthcare with public option costs will rise 5.6%
With universal healthcaer with public option and Medicare limits costs will rise 5.2%

If you don't think 1.3% is much it's about $2 trillion dollars over 10 years.

It's a no brainer that we should have a public option that manages costs for providers like Medicare.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 PM on 07/01/2009
- vanmungo I'm a Fan of vanmungo 67 fans permalink

Which public option? How would it operate? The Commonwealth Fund study doesn't tell us. Moreover, the study did NOT evaluate the cost savings of a single-payer plan. Ever wonder why? This Commonwealth Fund study was undertaken by The Lewin Group, a consulting group that is owned by UnitedHealth--you guessed it, an HMO!

Public expansions of health-care that leave the system mostly in private hands have been tried in several states, and in each case, they have failed to contain costs or expand coverage. By contrast, nonprofit single-payer systems have a HALF CENTURY of PROVEN SUCCESS in ALL THE REST OF THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD: half the U.S. per capita costs with BETTER health outcomes.

Stop swallowing bought-and-paid-for corporate propaganda, and acquaint yourself with the facts. The World Health Organization's rankings of global health systems--which places the U.S. 37th in the world and dead last among industrialized nations--would be a good place to start:

http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/whr00_annex_en.pdf

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 PM on 07/01/2009
- KQuark I'm a Fan of KQuark 265 fans permalink
photo

vam

Yes it does.

It says public option 1 would be weaker and only cut provider costs a little.

The public option 2 would charge Medicare rates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 07/02/2009

Why is tort reform not on the table? Why the president keep saying there will be no cap on attorneys' fee?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:27 AM on 07/02/2009
- Carolab I'm a Fan of Carolab 344 fans permalink
photo

Indeed he is. He has been from the start.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:41 AM on 07/02/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (70 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect