Lieberman Lies About the Public Option

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Cigna) announced today he would filibuster the health care bill because it contains a public option compromise.

Why does he want to do this? I don't know (*cough* -- Aetna -- *cough* *cough*) exactly. But we do know his stated reasons are lies.

Politico reports:

"We're trying to do too much at once," Lieberman said. "To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don't think we need it now."

Lieberman added that he'd vote against a public option plan "even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line."

Lie #1: "trouble ... for the national debt." The public option has been deemed a cost-saver by the Congressional Budget Office, $110B for the strongest proposed plan, $25B for the weaker plan (that is in the Senate bill).

Lie #2: "it still creates a whole new government entitlement program". An entitlement program is a government program that people of a certain criteria have a legally enforceable right to get benefits from, meaning the government has to find the funds one way or another. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are entitlement programs.

The public option simply is not an entitlement program. It would be a choice alongside private plans in a health insurance "exchange" or marketplace. And it would be "self-sustaining," funded primarily by the premiums of its customers, just like with private insurance.

Government subsidies would help those who couldn't affordable the premiums. But that is true with any of the plans in the health insurance exchange, public or private.

If Lieberman really wants the bill to cost even less money, he would crusade against the amount of subsidies proposed.

Sure, he would look even more heartless and cruel, but at least he wouldn't be a liar.

Originally posted at OurFuture.org

 

Follow Bill Scher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billscher

Comments

[CanadianBeef]

When did "entitlement" become a negative word? I do think that people are entitled to health care, just as they are entitled to certain freedoms. Citizenship ought to be worth something. Lieberman knows the price of everything but the value of nothing, to borrow an old saying.

[deke4]

deke44. The whole health care option has been nothing more than a dog and pony show. Barney Frank had it perfectly right when he questioned the status quo insurance supporter. Barney asked such pointed and pertinent questions such as could the insurance supporter tell us the number of people in France that had to go bankrupt because of medical bills? in Germany? in Sweden? The insurance supporter said "I will have to provide you with those numbers later". Barney said you don't need to provide the numbers because the number is zero.

[MikaS]

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/28/lieberman-cloture-votes/

[RightsGuy]

Contact Senator Joe Leiberman and tell him what you think.

1. WEB FORMS are here:

http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm?regarding=issue

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/mail/?id=688&lvl=C&chamber=S

2. CALL AND FAX him here:

Washington, D.C. Office:
706 Hart Senate Office Building,
District of Columbia 20510-0703
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Hartford, CT Office:
1 Constitution Plaza, 7th Floor
Hartford, Connecticut 06103
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

[ManassasMan]

When one considers the number of national insurance companies headquartered in Connecticut, aren't you just SHOCKED, SHOCKED!! at Leiberman's decision to take their side ?

[blizb]

After a gracious and bipartisan welcome back to the Democratic Party he shows no loyalty.

He is letting his personal feelings interfere with doing the right thing for the American people.

His political career and his corporate sponsors take precedent over the American people.

Insurance companies have let their own greed spiral out of control just like the Banks and Wall Street and the American people know it, when are the politicians going to quit playing and quit using their own greed against us?

[Mikeeee]

he has never shown loyalty to the American people.

[Subterfuge]

"Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Cigna)"

I almost burst out laughing in the office....

[MikaS]

Wellpoint

Annual Revenue - $61.3 billion
Net Profit - 2.5 billion
Wellpoint CEO: Angela Braley
Braley's salary: $9.8 million/year
In 2009, Wellpoint has spent 752 families' yearly premiums on lobbying. ($9,529,747.00)
The average payment to a Wellpoint lobbyist would cover 49 individual yearly premiums. ($232,000.00)
Wellpoint currently employs 33 lobbying groups in Wahsington, DC.
986 people pay a year's worth of premiums so Wellpoint can hire lobbying firms.
~In this decade alone, Wellpoint spent $101,170,939.00 lobbying congress.

United Health Group

United Health Group CEO: Stephen Hemsley
Hemsley's Salary: $3.2 million/year
Total value of Stephen Hemsley stock options: $744,232,068.00
A few years ago, one in every seven hundred dollars spent on health care in the U.S. went to pay him. Every day of 2009, Stephen Hemsley has earned $819,363.10
Stephen Hemsley has earned $102,741.68 an hour in 2009.
United Health spent over $12.6 million since 2007 to lobby against health care reform.
This could cover the average health care cost of 992 families of four for one year.

(part 1)

[MikaS]

Cigna

The CEO of Cigna is Edward Hanway.
In 2008:
Annual revenue: $29.1 Billion
Net Income: $292 Million CEO Salary: $12.2 Million
Hanway's 5-year compensation: $120.5 Million
$120.5 Million would cover the yearly out-of-pocket health care costs for the population of Providence,RI.

The three largest insurance companies saved $300,000,000 in the last five years by dumping the sick.
~U.S. worker's out-of-pocket expenses have risen 93% since 2000.~
~Profits have risen 438% for the top 10 insurance companies in the same time.

Information obtained in films here:

http://sickforprofit.com/

Call Senator Lieberman @ [phone] and tell him that we need a strong public option at the very least.

[MikaS]

FLASHBACK: Lieberman pledged support for universal health insurance in 2006 campaign.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/27/797737/-FLASHBACK:-Lieberman-pledged-support-for-health-reform

[angelrubes]

Great posts! Thank you for that.

[LBA7895]

YOU CAN ALWAYS TEL LWHEN JOE LEIBERMAN IS LYING: HIS LIPS ARE MOVING!

[LBA7895]

SOMEBODY
PLEASE
EXPLAIN
TO
ME
WHY
CONGRESS
DOESN'T
SIMPLY
OFFER
MEDICARE
TO
ANYONE
WHO
WANTS
TO
JOIN;
AND
CHARGE
AN
ACTUARIALLY
RESONABLE
MONTHLY
PREMIUM
TO
THOSE
UNDER
65
??????????­??????????­??????????­????

[Austintatious]

there's not enough money in it for big business and our elected representatives

[EbonBear]

Because 75% of Democrats and 100% of Republicans are wholly-owned subsidiaries of big business.

[RightsGuy]

Here's why:

Quoted from:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/bill-moyers-single-payer-plan-health-ca

Howie Klein has a rundown of all the money that the people who are blocking real reform in health care have received from the health care industry.

Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $4,026,933)

Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $2,833,731)

Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $2,758,468)

And when you just go right to Big Insurance, the non-presidential candidates who got the biggest legalized bribes were the 7 senators who have been tasked with the job of killing single-payer:

Ben Nelson (DLC-NE- $1,196,799)

Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $1,184,113)


Joe Lieberman (DLC- CT- $1,036,302)


Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $1,035,530)

Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $981,400)

Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $929,207)

Chuck Grassley (R-IA- $884,724)

[KevinSchmidtSterlingVa]

It looks like representational democracy is not working very well.

Perhaps now is the time for a more direct approach. WE THE PEOPLE can write the bills ourselves using a collaborative, general consensus approach. Our representatives could then be reduced to advisers and figure heads.

[Whitley2009]

I have a problem with the terminology being used with the proposed health care plan.

1. The Republicans keep screaming that the plan will require new TAXES.

2. If all American citizens are paying PREMIUMS into their plan, and receiving PRODUCTS and SERVICES in return, where will the tax burden increase? The premiums will simply be adjusted to meet the expenses. This is not rocket science.

3. By bringing our citizens into their INSURANCE POOL, we will eliminate paying for medical care for uninsured people using tax dollars.

4. You must, of course, also work to bring medical services and product costs down to reasonable levels. For example, an MRI of the cervical neck in Tokyo is about $90, the same procedure in Los Angeles is $1200.

It's a CALCULUS of expense versus benefits, but one that is not insurmountable. Why do the Democrats let the Republicans get away with this misrepresentation?

[rcozad]

All of your arguments and facts are correct, well done! The answer to your question that you raise is:The democrats have been caught flat footed they collectively thought that the moral good of their position would be recognized and embraced by everyone. The role of government in this case would be seen as protection and empowerment of the people , Journalists would be aware that the opposition was using false and misleading political arguments devoid of any facts and expose them as frauds! Death Panels? PLEASE! It took four months for the democrats to wake up to the fact that the moral position they were proposing was not being properly framed and the money mill was able to totally compromise the congress and sway a very poorly informed public. Add to this a President that is far to cautious to take risky positions and you have the recipe for the disaster that is currently taking place.

[dawlishgal]

It is baffling why the moral arguments weren't used....I can think of two good ones.....first, it is immoral not to consider health care a basic human right. All other civilized societies do. Second, it ought to be considered immoral to profiteer on other people's misery. The insurance companies provide no reliable services....all they do is take your money and administer their plans so that they can keep at least 1/3 of it as profit, no matter how many policy holders they have to cheat in order to do it.

Why are these companies being given a second chance....look at the advantage they took of the public trust when they were basically given exemption from anti-trust suits? And the way they try to cheat policy holders with big legitimate large claims just because they know they can get away with it. They have used up whatever resevoir of good will that insurance had when people felt protected by having it. Now people not only have to worry about illness, but about being cheated by their insurers.

Believe me, my family has been down the road with cheating insurance companies...when my husband became disabled, two of the biggest health, life and disability insurers tried to cheat us. My husband's employer stopped them from getting away with it, but we haven't trusted insurance companies since then.

[NeoStar9]

Lieberman doesn't give a damn about the national debt. He's a neocon when it comes to war and has been for a very long time. Guess what wars cost money and you receive not tangible return on that money either. It simply goes out the door. All Republicans are like this. This is why any time they say they are concerned about the national debt they are lying at the top of their lungs. They are for spending money when there is no return but always against spending money where you would actually see a direct benefit and would lead to or would have a return of the money and more. That is called investing which they have always been against.

What he is doing is representing the insurance companies pure and simply. He's pretty much said as much. He'd rather line his pockets and say to hell with everyone else.Which makes no sense from a logical stand point. By doing this he's showing those in his state what and who are important to him and it isn't the people that voted for him. Come next election he won't win if he runs again and he'll lose any power he had to influence anything. What Dem is going to listen to him if he turns into a lobbyist after the screw job he pulled here? Why would Republicans bother with him when they have so many others talking to them?

[NeoStar9]

If he is not running again that makes what he's doing all the more horrible. He's hurting himself at the same time which makes what he's doing not make any sense at all. All the campaign money means nothing if you turn off the voters time and time again and he's done that. So why is he really doing this is what I'd like to know because I see no actual benefit from this. Unless he thinks people in his state are extremely stupid that they'll forget and vote for him anyway no matter what he does. Don't think that's the case and if it isn't he's the one that has become extremely stupid in his old age

Or he's just doing this to spit in President Obama's face for hell of it and that's what he wants.

[ThinkCreeps]

`Lieberman Lies About the Public Option'

And everything else: at least he's consistent

[PhilipTaylor]

Lieberman Said he Wants Universal Coverage - Watch Video (Link):

L!eberman L1ES about Public Option:

#1: "trouble ... for the national debt." But deemed by CBO to save $25B to $110B

#2: "it..creates a whole new government entitlement program". But People pay for it!

Except for coverage of very P00R which would happen under any Universal Coverage Plan like he says he wants -Video Evidence:

http://www.dailykostv.com/w/001887/

[dawlishgal]

We are already paying for a lot of coverage of the indigent via state and local taxes. Several states, maybe more, but for sure CT, NY and MN) , also have put a surtax on health care (either doctors and dentists or hospital expenses that include doctors), which puts the burden of paying for the care of the poor onto the backs of the sick.

How did so many legislatures come to think this is a good idea? And what does it say about our society that forces the sick pay for the care of the indigent? Obviously, the sicker one is, the less energy is available to protest injustices. The able-bodied complain a lot, in the silly belief that they will never need society's help with anything. I suppose that is to be expected, but for elected officials to go along with this immoral scheme puts a whole new perspective on the concept of filthy politics.

When we lived in CT, hearings were being held about the surtax, and people testified that they lost their homes when a family member became very sick and had to undergo a lengthy hospitalization. These people had health insurance, but some health care plans refused to pay the surtaxes. I can't imagine any other county allowing a situation like this to be regarded as a solution to the problem of health care for everybody.