Obama Plans to Reform Economy, Not Just Health Insurance

Let's go back, just for a minute, to a time before screaming teabaggers, before Republicans decided to kill health insurance reform as a means to politically destroy this country's first African-American president.

Try and remember what it was like before discussion of health insurance reform raised voices, a time when instead it raised concern. Recollect Aug. 7, 2007, during the Democratic primaries, when then-60-year-old retired and disabled steelworker Steve Skvara stood at a microphone during a political debate and told his story with tears in his eyes and a catch in his throat.

He'd worked more than 30 years at LTV Steel in East Chicago, Ind., and assumed like many who earned pensions and retiree health coverage that those benefits were guaranteed. But then LTV went bankrupt and ditched its obligations. Skvara told the candidates:

"Every day of my life, I sit at the kitchen table across from the woman who devoted 36 years of her life to my family and I can't afford her health care. What's wrong with America, and what will you do to change it?"

Skvara asked that question two years ago when 45 million Americans lacked health insurance. Now 46.3 million are without it.

And yet, teabaggers and Republicans are bent on preventing reform. They want to ensure only one thing - that another million Americans suffer no health coverage two years from now.
President Obama invoked Skvara's name at the AFL-CIO convention in Pittsburgh on Sept. 15 in a speech about the middle class.

Mostly Skvara is a symbol of health insurance failure. But to Obama, he's an emblem of something much bigger. It is a struggle of economic philosophies. For the past 20 years, the winning view has been that government should give breaks to big corporations and rich individuals. Obama told the AFL-CIO he believes in something different -- an economy built on a vibrant and wide middle class.

Here's what he said:

"For over half a century, the success of America has been built on the success of our middle class. It was the creation of the middle class that lifted this nation up in the wake of a great depression. It was the expansion of the middle class that opened the doors of opportunity to millions more. It was a strong middle class that powered American industries, propelled America's economy, and made the 20th Century the first American Century.

And the fundamental test of our time is whether we will heed this lesson; whether we will let America become a nation of the very rich and the very poor, of the haves and the have nots; or whether we will remain true to the promise of this country and build a future where the success of all of us is build on the success of each of us."

Because of the extraordinary cost of health care in this country, insurance is a middle class issue. Health insurance can make or break a family - place it firmly in the middle class if an employer provides a good plan or bankrupt it if a family loses coverage during a serious illness.

Obama said as much to the AFL-CIO: "We'll grow our middle class by finally providing quality, affordable health insurance in this country."

Just this week, the Kaiser Family Foundation released a report showing premiums for family coverage rose 130 percent over the past decade. They now average $13,375, which is about the same as the entire annual take-home pay of a minimum wage worker.

Coverage is not affordable. The price of it is pushing families down the economic ladder. Look what it did to Skvara. He had been a middle class steelworker and remained in the middle class after retirement. But he moved toward poverty after the LTV bankruptcy cost his wife her health insurance coverage. Loss of health insurance and the ensuing medical bills robs families of their life savings, their homes, everything until they're bankrupt.

Skvara asked the candidates what was wrong with America and what would they do to fix it. Obama's plan for fixing health insurance would forbid dropping or denying coverage because a person is sick or has a pre-existing condition.

He wants the public option to provide competition so that rates are affordable. That public option would cover Skvara's wife - at a reasonable cost. So he could remain in the middle class and not find himself asking heartbreaking questions at public meetings.

The teabaggers are apoplectic because this isn't just about health care. This is about the values of a government.

The Obama administration fails to fawn over the affluent.

Instead, Obama talked of downtrodden workers in the former Jones & Laughlin Steel mill in Aliquippa. Bosses there fired a dozen workers shortly after the National Labor Relations Act passed in 1935. The workers, mostly union organizers, challenged the dismissals all the way the U.S. Supreme Court, securing a landmark win that not only got them their jobs back, but also affirmed the constitutionality of the labor law that led to the burgeoning of union organizing, and the growth of America's large, stable middle class.

To win that case, Obama told the AFL-CIO convention, workers of different ethnicities and faiths had to work together and stick together. That will be necessary to win this struggle to reform health insurance as well. But that reform is only the first part of Obama's plan for the middle class:

"We will make possible the dreams of middle class families and make real the promise of the United States of America."

That's worth fighting for.

Comments

[seawolf77]

Because of the extraordinary cost of health care in this country, insurance is a middle class issue. Health insurance can make or break a family - place it firmly in the middle class if an employer provides a good plan or bankrupt it if a family loses coverage during a serious illness

That is the best argument I have heard yet to take the profit motive out of this business and sell it as good staedy work where you help people. Put the government in the business of training doctors, dentists, and nurses. Why not? Accountants are responsible for all the looting. Give me a bear market for an auditor any day of the week. Use the military experience to further amplify gains. We have state schools and private schools. Why not state doctors and private doctors. It's all perception. The democrats have not successfully painted the frustrated American. That guy on the ferry in "Disclosure".

[stack]

Yes. Why not government doctors? Supposedly we've got the best military in the world -- and that's a government-run organization, right? Apparently our government can run a rather large operation (no pun intended) pretty well.

[Dr Kelly Sennholz]

Doctors voted for change with a 57% to 41% margin with 87% of doctors voting (physician's practice journal). Interestingly, Obama did the best with 65 and older physicians. These extremely conservative individuals have asked for change. They are on the front line. They see the issues daily. The AMA endorsed this health care change. Change, we must.

[Nathan Scott]

And therein lies the problem with Obama's whole agenda. Change is an amorphous impossible to pare down term.

I want change away from the government running 50% of the medical profession. I want the government to stop giving handouts, special regulations, and other favors to their favorite lobbyist current clients. I want people to have incentives to go out and pick the best insurance policies, the best prices, and the best service. I want hospitals to advertise their satisfaction ratings and low prices.

This is not the left's vision of change, and they are using what ever slandering they can to silence their opponents, from faux charges of racism, to claims that anyone opposing government domination of industry must be a shill for the rich. Unfortunately calling the 60% of the nation that isn't all that happy about Obama's "change" idiot's that just don't "understand" doesn't work well in elections. 2010 will be an interesting year, for Republicans, and hopefully Independents.

[calfacon]

Without Wall Street Reform, healthcare Reform ain't gonna happen.

Especially, considering Wall Street Banks and Funds hold these percentages of shares in Health Insurance Cos - from http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/ownership/institutional.asp?ric=WLP

United 86.03%
WellPoint 89.03%
Aetna 91.80%
CIGNA Corp. 84.91%
Coventry Health 92.87%
Health Net Inc. 100.59% ???
Humana 88.88%
AMERIGroup 108%

[seanseamour]

The health care "market" is a "supply driven" (read "side") care system spiraling out of control, a self replicating offer of technology and product renewal for ever lessening added value other than boosting revenue and profits for the shareholder's benefit, as the purpose of the corporation should be. Herein lays a fundamental contradiction with the Hippocratic Oath where the deliverer of health care is responsible to the patient.

[T4]

Do you guys actually believe this twisted logic? Ask how much money this guy makes as a union leader. Millions. The cause of health issues are the lifestyle choices of our expanding and aging population, specifically the increase in obesity as an example. The cause of rising costs in medical services is system overuse and docs, hosp and drug selling and billing for unnecessary, unneeded and fraudlent practices. We have no understanding of real costs because it's subsidized for most people. Instead of bellyaching about insurance (another issue) ask why it costs so much in the first place and why do I need this treatment. To lower costs we need to take better care of ourselves - that is the first step and then junk this ridiculous health care legislation and figure out what, if anything we really want to do and what we are really willing to pay to do it.

[stack]

Leo Gerard's income is available on the National Labor Relations Board web site. It is less than $200,000 a year. He is the lowest paid leader of a major union in the USA. Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Nonpartay]

Well, I work for a doctor, and you would be amazed at how much this system costs our office. The money has to come from somewhere. If you have insurance companies denying payments for no good reason, which they do all the time, you have to hire someone to call them and fight with them. We have extra staff in the doctor's office I work in just to handle all the calling and confirming of coverage that goes on. Patients' insurance companies have to be called several times before they even come in to make sure they're actually covered. Otherwise, we are stiffed for the visit. This doesn't stop the insurance companies, however, from denying claims they said they would pay.

You sound like you're just prejudiced against what this government is trying to do. Believe me, ANYTHING would be better than what we have now. Having the government pay for all of it would be better. At least then the doctors would get paid. Medi-Cal pays without fuss, and the patient doesn't have to pay anything. Not so with the private insurance companies, who have jacked up co-pays and then hassle the doctors' offices.

[Nathan Scott]

"Consider the case of Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d. 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981), for example. In this case three rape victims sued the Washington, D.C., government because of negligence on the part of the police. The case brought out the following facts (Evers 1994: 7): Two of the three female roommates were upstairs in their apartment when they heard men break in and attack the third. They made repeated calls to the police for help. After about thirty minutes, their roommate's screams had stopped and they assumed the police had arrived. They went downstairs where, for the next fourteen hours, they were help captive, raped, robbed, beaten, and forced to commit sexual acts upon one another and to submit to the sexual demands of the criminals. It seems that the police had lost track of the repeated calls for assistance. Yet, the District of Columbia's highest court absolved the police and the city of any liability, stating that the police do not have a legal responsibility to provide personal protection to individuals. This ruling is completely consistent with a number of court rulings and statute law from several states. But imagine what a jury would award to a plaintiff in a civil case for negligence on the part of a private security firm that resulted in harms such as this."

You think it sucks that people are occasionally forced to litigate? Imagine a system where you lack this basic right.

[Nonpartay]

(cont.) Our office doesn't do procedures or tests that are unnecessary. To accuse doctors of this just shows me you have a certain prejudice against them or you believe the hype from the right that this is all about fraud and frivolous lawsuits. The doctor I work for has never been sued. That doesn't make his costs come down, so what makes you think preventing patients from being compensated for medical errors will do so? Most lawsuits occur because patients have medical costs they can't pay, so just making sure their treatments are paid for by the companies that insure them will bring down the number of lawsuits.

[ResidualSelfImage]

The only way to revive the economy is to renegotiate bad trade deals and bring back manufacturing.
Obama wont do either.

[stack]

Obama did take a first step toward making trade more fair by imposing those tariffs on imported tires from China. Bush never had the guts to do that.

[mamalisa38]

For profit health insurance is immoral. The only way to maximize profits, and that's what Wall Street demands, is to raise premiums and deductibles and deny claims. Let's not forget the salaries of the drug and health insurance CEO's, $285 million in 2008 for the top twenty.

PER HOUR PAY FOR DRUG AND HEALTH INSURANCE EXECUTIVES:

Miles White - Abbott - $17,395
Fred Hassan - Schering-Plough - $15,677
Bill Weldon - Johnson & Johnson - $13,022
Ron Williams - Aetna - $12,656
H. Edward Hanway CIGNA - $6,373 - also getting a $73 million retirement package
Angela Braly - WellPoint - $5,127

For Americans to continue paying billions of dollars a year for obscene salaries, bonuses, perks and profits is unconscionable.

I never thought our elected officials would work so hard to defeat something that would help every single American. But, then again, why wouldn't they? The collect millions of dollars from these companies. We arrest street walkers for taking far less than these clowns do.

Shame on ALL of them for putting money before the lives of their fellow human beings.

[Nathan Scott]

So the companies who were able to provide the most value for the lowest cost, and thus the most profits grew larger and gained market share? And the people responsible for that growth were paid well? This sounds like a positive to me.

[ideasmatter]

Except, these executives aren't rewarded for providing the most value for the lowest cost, they are rewarded for providing the most profit for the shareholders -- and that by denying claims whenever they can and denying coverage to the most vulnerable. If they were providing the most value for the lowest cost, our premiums wouldn't be increasing at the rates they have, and as a nation we wouldn't be paying 16% of our GDP to health care, while every other advanced nation pays 11% or less.

If they their product is so cost-effective, why are they so afraid of a public option?

[T4]

Define morality - I need to be clear. Mcdonalds sells artery clogging, obesity growing products wich you and your famile probably eat and they are moral. And then when you omplain about blood pressure and cholesterol I'm supposed to pay for you as a taxpayer? and that's moral. But it's immmoral for someone to say - no problem - i'll cover your risk- here's the price and that's immoral. What's immoral is that you don;t take responsibility for our lifestyle actions. Read this bill - it does not do anyhting you want - nothing. It does not every american -it does not provide better care. Quit buying into drivel and work toward something that makes sense.

[stack]

I run every morning. My weight is correct. I never eat at MickyD's. I don't have high blood pressure or diabetes. But genetics are a strange thing. I could get cancer tomorrow. And I believe it is morally wrong for a company to profit from my illness -- particularly when they are profiting by denying me coverage after collecting my premiums for years.

[Nonpartay]

Morality is caring more about other people than yourself. It means at the very least wishing for other people what you would wish for yourself. We have a system that promotes obesity and then makes money off of it by promoting the drugs that are used to treat related diseases. Seems to me the whole system we have is immoral since it puts profits above the health and welfare of the people. So, if the government doesn't step in to fix these issues, it is not doing its constitutionally mandated job of promoting the general welfare, not to mention insuring domestic tranquility.

You seem to think there is a bill. There is not. There are five proposed bills, and nothing has been decided yet. But one thing's for sure, we can't continue with the system as it is and anyone who thinks we can is not paying attention or simply doesn't care enough about his or her fellow citizens to give a damn.

I personally believe, and I could be wrong, that part of our medical problems is the system itself that makes life in this country so unsure, so aggravating, so unfair, that people are just unhappy. Apparently, we only believe in the pursuit of happiness, not the achievement of it. But happy people are healthier, and healthy people are happier. If we can get this huge problem under control, it'll go a long way towards achieving happiness and prosperity we all want for everyone.

[Cautious]

"And yet, teabaggers and Republicans are bent on preventing reform. They want to ensure only one thing - that another million Americans suffer no health coverage two years from now."

I'd like to toss out a subject for conversation that will hopefully move us beyond this us-them thinking and hopefully educate this whole discussion and bring it to a more productive level.

The people characterized as "them" in this piece are living in existential fear in much the same way many of us are. From their perspective, everything familiar to them is changing and they're terrified of that and don't know what else to do.

The brief point is that they're railing against the wrong bogeyman. They just lack the historical perspective to understand that their America was stolen from them long ago, beginning with Reaganomics and continuing with deregulation and so forth, as we all know.

Now they identify Obama as the "Other" "Not one of us", and so forth, and entrenched interests are only too happy to help them identify Obama and progressives as advancing a "socialist" agenda and a "cult of personality" and so forth. These people are just scared shitless, and they are identifying the wrong bogeyman as the object of their fear.

Only when we take the time to provide education to our fellow human beings about who really stole their America will we be able to get to the point where we can agree with them about how to get our America back.

[Voltage]

Can you educate people who are screaming and swearing at you? Let's face it, they're ignorant and are choosing to remain that way.

[ideasmatter]

I think you make a very good point. Informing the "teabaggers" those like them, and helping them overcome their fear is certainly not the easiest thing to do, but it may be the only way. Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are formidable opponents to deal with though.

[stack]

Yes, you are right. My brother plans to go to the next health care town meeting near him and ask those opposed to the public option to sign a petition. And then he is going to say he hopes that all of those on that petition have clearly stated with their signatures their plan to relinquish their rights to the "public option" of Medicare.
He is going to take a body guard with him. Not a gun, mind you, just a big guy.

[Samson1]

It would be great if this were true. Unfortunately, Obama and the Democrats in Congress are not willing to stand up to the right wing Republicans. What we get is a no reform health care reform. A consumer protection proposed bill when we need financial industry reform and strong oversight. To say I am disappointed is a huge understatement. What we are getting is government by the equivalent of a somewhat conservative Republican. Not what we voted for. The (Obama & co.) have lost me, unfortunately I have no where to go. Just for the heck of it, try adding something meaningful to the health care bill, say you can't use application information to disallow claims or limit or eliminate coverage after the policy has been inforce for 90 days and make it retroactive to current policy. See what happens.

[Nonpartay]

Nothing has been decided yet. There are five bills, not just one, and they have to be consolidated into one for President Obama to sign. You should be writing to your three representatives with your suggestion, not just putting it here. It sounds like a good idea. There are similar ideas in the bills, from what I understand. But if they don't hear from you, they may not think of this themselves. Go for it!

[sc300nc]

The problem is that all of the proposed legislation deals with the cost of insurance, not the cost of healthcare. It is the cost of healthcare that drives the cost of insurance. There is not much in the legislation that actually addresses healthcare costs. The administration has done a great job in demonizing the insurance companies who do play a role in this, but does nothing to address the other big issues involving the cost of healthcare. Private hospitals make money on healthcare, clinics make money, medical supply companies make money, pharmacy companies make money, etc etc etc. Insurance costs for health care providers is huge, and until the Dems divorce themselves from the trial lawyers, nothing will be done to address those costs.

It's the cost of healthcare, not the cost of insurance that needs to be addressed.

[Irmanator]

The private insurance middlemen provide zero value and skim 20 to 30% of the premiums. Make them reduce their margins down to 5% as in the early 90's (source Wendell Potter) by providing competition. The most widely quoted overhead cost for the government run portion of medicare is 3%.
If the final bill could cut insurance costs by 10 or 15%, just by reducing the huge profit margin of the insurance companies it would be a great first step.
I agree that other costs need to be reduced and more legislation may be required if those costs are not addressed in the bill that passes.

[sc300nc]

I agree with the competition, open it up across the country. Competition is the only thing that will drive down the costs of healthcare.

Reducing health insurance costs by 10% is going to do nothing. If you cannot afford $600 a month for health insurance, all of a sudden you can afford $540 a month? Ain't gonna happen and won't make any significant improvements.

[JerseyGirl4Obama]

I say cut out the middle man, pushing the papers, but providing no actual care. That would be the Insurance Companies.

[Soulsurfer]

You hit the nail on the head. Every other industrialized nation in the world considers health and education a right, not a privilege. Conservatives here think if you're poor, you get what you deserve. The "Haves" hate the fact that they have to pay taxes so "undeserving" people can go to school, get health care, or job training. Notice they don't mind paying for police, prisons, and the military.

[tck29]

We should use the term "civilized" instead of "industrialized".

That then begs the question: how civilized is a nation that refuses to offer healthcare to MILLIONS of its own citizens?

[Nathan Scott]

Better yet, where are Obama's plans to offer health care for the 4 billion uninsured around the world? I guess they don't count as human being if you can't trick them into voting for you.

[AJH]

"For the past 20 years, the winning view has been that government should give breaks to big corporations and rich individuals. "

At least 29 years to reagan election but more practically to nixon who in severing us from the gold standard failed to realize he had seperated corporation value and CEO wages from any real measure of economic value to speculative economic valuations while workers wages would remain pegged to the commodity value of their direct production. Clinton was a mixed bag of contradictory policies many not that good in terms of precedent for workers and the poor. He killed the defined benefit pension in jumping into 401(k)'s, failed to put anything resembling addequate worker/env­ironmental protections on trade with china, created a massive trade deficit increasing it 5 fold to then be doubled by bush, doubled the cost of health insurance which Bush doubled again, etc...

[tnkeating]

I don't think so leo, the trade unions are exempt from health care legislation as is Congress and the President, so whats in it for them. Buried deep in the bowels of the 1100 some pages of HR3200 is his attempt to grow the union by leaps and bounds, all new health jobs created are to be unionized and sweet dirty deals are being offered to employers if they unionize there workers, this is corruption at its worst. It is my feeling, and many millions agree that it was the unions that buried the Auto makers, and after ther demize and bailout who came out on top, the people with the least amount of investment, the union. Anyone that had actual money invested got pennies on the dollar, again corruption of the worst kind. Ultimately Obamas plan will fail, not from his lack of trying, nor his lack of corruption, but from our lack of participation and our willingness to accept the what happens as a result.

[CelticMajic]

Nicely said!!!!

[Irmanator]

Please give references to the portions of the bill that provide "sweet dirty deals" regarding unions.
Otherwise, I will assume this is not true and that you are repeating someone else's talking points.

[stack]

Buried deep in the bowels of the 1100 page HR3200 is his attempt to grow the union -- WHAT are you talking about??? Please provide concrete evidence of what otherwise appears to be bogus allegations here.

In addition, the auto workers took HUGE cuts in pay and pensions and benefits to save the American auto companies. Workers were not the problem. The cost of workers' pay is a tiny portion of the cost of a car. Why can't people get that through their heads? Why do people continually blame workers for all problems that are created by Wall Street and bad management?

[Nathan Scott]

Autoworkers outstanding debts were paid off at 4 times the rate of bondholders. It was cronyism through and through.

[Nonpartay]

I'll never understand why those who invest in a company are considered more worthy than those who work all day there producing the products the company sells. If it weren't for them, those investors would make zilch on their investments. What is so superior about investors? I don't get it. What do you have against workers? Why shouldn't they be unionized so they can bargain for better wages. You don't honestly think the corporate types are going to consider their position and give them decent wages and benefits just out of the goodness of their hearts, do you? Not if you're any indication of their mentality.

[northstar11]

leo has come a long way from creighton mine --he's doing ok.--good article.

[JohnnyTexas01]

Well said Comrade!!!

[Wirewoman]

What strikes me most about President Obama's speech is that he brought up the Alliquippa steelworkers who faced down thugs with guns and fought together for the right to organize. The president is urging us to work together, forget our differences and identity issues and fight together to face down the thugs in the insurance and drug corporations. Unfortunately, too many of our own senators and congressional representatives have become beholden to these corporate giants and don't have the guts to stand with their own constituents. So it's up to us, the people, to get the job done.

[Nathan Scott]

So why give more power to future politicians who will do the same thing? Sell out the people for business interest.

Take power away from the politician­s... only then will you see lobby/gifts/favors eliminated. Let people keep insurance companies in check with their own pocketbook.

[Nonpartay]

Oh really? How are they supposed to do that? It's not like they have a lot of choices. If you have insurance through work, you have to take what the company offers you. We can't usually just decide not to have health insurance if we have the remotest chance of paying for it, since health care is not an option, it's a necessity. And when you have insurance companies profiting through your pain, it's not going to be good for you. Sorry, but leaving this to the private market has not worked out well for far too many to make it a viable option.