iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

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

Huffingtion Post/AP   First Posted: 08/01/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:30 PM ET

(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.

"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.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

(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...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5,820
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (70 total)
02:09 PM on 07/03/2009
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?
10:11 PM on 07/02/2009
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.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:10 PM on 07/02/2009
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.
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
06:17 PM on 07/02/2009
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.
10:34 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...
photo
Lemmy
There Are Americans, then there are Liberals . .
01:00 PM on 07/02/2009
And at the end, the director yelled, "Cut! That's a wrap!"
01:40 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
01:01 AM on 07/02/2009
On the road again, Wanna have a burger in Denver.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vanmungo
12:40 AM on 07/02/2009
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/
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
01:02 AM on 07/02/2009
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!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vanmungo
01:10 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vanmungo
01:23 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
01:20 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...
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Michele Swenson
12:32 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Carolab
Just another hostage of the poopy heads
12:37 AM on 07/02/2009
Excellent post.
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
01:04 AM on 07/02/2009
Very good comment. Thank you.
12:29 AM on 07/02/2009
This guy ever stop his campaign mode............?
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
01:04 AM on 07/02/2009
Got hate?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
american2008
01:10 AM on 07/02/2009
You talking about Cheney? Yes, he seems to be out of control the past few months!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Carolab
Just another hostage of the poopy heads
12:24 AM on 07/02/2009
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!
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
01:14 AM on 07/02/2009
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
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Carolab
Just another hostage of the poopy heads
01:33 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
01:26 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/
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Carolab
Just another hostage of the poopy heads
01:30 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
photo
wonketteRAWKS
Hypocrisy is prevalent in BOTH parties!
12:10 AM on 07/02/2009
Now, was she being used as a prop?
photo
Roses
In a gentle way, you can shake the world.
01:16 AM on 07/02/2009
No one really knows, but I do know that I don't care!
12:10 AM on 07/02/2009
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/
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Weirdwriter
12:18 AM on 07/02/2009
Copied. Thanks. Fanned!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Carolab
Just another hostage of the poopy heads
12:21 AM on 07/02/2009
Good work, KQuark! If everyone took just 5-10 minutes to do what you are saying we could get somewhere!
12:02 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Weirdwriter
12:12 AM on 07/02/2009
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.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:35 AM on 07/02/2009
Bernie Sanders is an open socialist.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
ErnestineBass
No longer a cog in The Machine.
01:07 AM on 07/02/2009
OMG...SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCIALISM!!!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
american2008
01:14 AM on 07/02/2009
So what, your father is an open necrophiliac!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ScapeGoat
Facts are stubborn things. Science Rocks!
11:41 PM on 07/01/2009
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!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vanmungo
11:38 PM on 07/01/2009
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
11:46 PM on 07/01/2009
It's a pleasure to read your sensible, well-informed comment.

Agreed.
11:48 PM on 07/01/2009
Bernie Sanders was on Countdown tonight and said he's for the public option.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vanmungo
12:01 AM on 07/02/2009
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.