Hundreds Join Together To Investigate House Health Care Bill
The House has worked at alarming speed, rushing a mammoth 1,018-page health care bill through two of three committees since the markup process began on Tuesday.
During these preliminary stages of the legislative process, HuffPost's Eyes & Ears is calling on readers to help make sense of the health care bill using Insight, a new interactive research and commenting application.
This is not our first distributive investigation into a big piece of legislation. Hundreds of citizen journalists helped report on major bills like Obama's stimulus package and the financial bailout, finding items in both plans that had previously gone unreported. But using Insight means this can be the most crowd-powered E&E project yet.
Past investigations had limited community interaction. HuffPost readers and our Eyes & Ears investigation teams would email their findings directly to HuffPost editors, who would pool the collective research of hundreds of participants, cull through their findings and feature the best scoops on our homepage.
While these investigations included robust communication between HuffPost editors and individual researchers, they lacked significant interaction between participants.
With this health care investigation we are taking a giant step toward fully horizontal and interactive investigations by partnering with Insight, giving investigators the ability to start a public discussion about individual sections of the bill.
Newly released, Insight was created to give readers the ability to rate the accuracy and importance of widely cited quotes. This project will adapt Insight's interface for a slightly different purpose, allowing you to have a public dialogue on individual line items of legislation. So bear with us, as some aspects on the Insight interface will simply not apply to this project.
Using Insight, readers can create a public comment thread about an individual section of the health care bill simply by highlighting the relevant text. Other investigators will then have the option to comment on and rate the same section of the bill.
If using Insight sounds confusing, that's because there's nothing like it out there. To help you understand understand this new interface, the people at Insight have made a great two-minute screencast.
As Rep. Waxman's Energy and Commerce Committee pores over the bill, more and more people are coming together to discuss the legislation using Insight. Join the investigation here.
Looking into this House bill is just one aspect of HuffPost's Eyes & Ears health care investigation, which is keeping an eye on legislators and lobbyists as the battle over reform evolves.
Next week, citizen journalists at the Huffington Post Health Care Investigative Unit will also be mapping out connections between some of the most influential members of Congress and the funds that drive their campaigns. Meanwhile, reporters are in touch with congressional offices on a regular basis, keeping a record of their latest stances on health care reform.
If you are interested in joining the team, click here and check out Adam Clark Estes's latest update.
Michele Swenson: The Tyranny of Wall St.-Run Health Care: No CEO Left Behind
The insurance industry has shifted to selling so-called "consumer-driven" plans with very high deductibles that shift a great deal of health care cost from employers and insurers to individuals.
ProPublica: Health Care Reform: Search the Competing Bills
by Olga Pierce, ProPublica The hubbub has subsided after President Obama's health care speech, but reform's treacherous route through Congress remains the same. Obama called...
House Democrats Seek to Tax the Wealthy to Finance Health Care ...
House Democrats unveil healthcare bill - Los Angeles Times
Understanding the Kennedy health care bill | KeithHennessey.com
Health Care Bill Released: What Does Congress Hope You're Missing (INTERACTIVE INVESTIGATION)
Loading comments…
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
While it must surely be common knowledge by now, I think it bears repeating that the public option in this bill won't take effect until 2013. It's a little tiresome when you try to point this out and people say "no, you're lying" or "how do you know?" or "could you do any better?", but hey...as long as there are online forums there will be trolls. And anyone who cares to read the entire text of the bill (I did so over the weekend) can verify this information for himself.
Does anyone honestly believe that a public option in 2013 is the best we can do, or is something that we should settle for?
FYI
Nurses Praise House Vote to Permit State Single-Payer Laws
by Ron Moore
http://www
A Real Win for Single-Payer Advocates
by John Nichols
http://www
Canada achieved Universal Health Care one Province at a time. The Federal gov't. was obliged to comply.
This is a question as well as a suggestion. Feel like I am missing something in the debate. We are wanting reform in the system yet no one talks about starting with the premise of the programs and bureaucracies now in place. I suggest in a true reform of healthcare and its costs, one has to start with the elimination of current programs of s chip, Medicare, Medicaid, VA hospitals etc. If the goal is truly universal coverage. Not to begin replacing current programs with the new universal coverage, seems to duplicate coverage for many, many people. Could this not go a long way to cover the cost of universal healthcare?
Am I missing something?? I also believe as a senior citizen that Medicare should also be replaced with universal coverage. Many seniors are financially able to buy health ins and others could be on a sliding scale. Like many programs this may have out lived its need if we truly have universal coverage for all Americans. I wish someone would talk about all the current healthcare programs the government is paying for and how they play in this debate. Thank you Victoria
For those who just want to read the bill, the America's Affordable Health Care Act,(H.R.3
Short version: http://edl
Full test (scroll down to Learn More, then Read Bill Text): http://www
congress has their politburo-style healthcare for them and their families at government expense. why should we the people even have access to health care? after all, we are only the voters.
one month of my health insurance, will convince anyone.
just let me get theirs -- even if i have to pay for it.[at their price.]
I skimmed about the first 200 pages of the bill. The part I read sounds like an improvement to me over what we currently have. At least an attempt is made to regulate insurance companies and to cover more people.
The 2.5% penalty for those who are not on a plan is not too bad if the penalty is applied to the cost of their enrollment in a plan. That point was not clear to me. It did say the penalty was not to exceed the cost of a premium.
If health care infrastructure is improved as a result of this perhaps more jobs for people will also be a result.
I would also like to see the insurance companies out of the equation but perhaps they can be phased out over time.
The 2.5% penalty is the ins. cos. way of using the government as their private police force to capture new insureds.
It is a profit raising device first.
The whole bill is an insurance company boondoggle disguised with HOPE! of future enforcements, which will be ignored, unenforced, or changed.
It's like traffic infractions. I transcribed a couple of meetings for the Nassau County Legislature on Long Island and they were talking about new fines for parking, etc. All they talked about was how much they would reap. At the end, as an afterthought, someone said "and of course, it will increase safety." Sometimes fines do provide for more safety on the roads, but that is not what the first thought is. That's the problem.
That's the first thing I thought about when I, too, read the first part of this bill -- profits and protecting the status quo come first. It can't be stated often enough: It's a bad bill.
It cost too much. Medicare is bankrupting the country. It's obvious.
Actually, it isn't. Why do you think Obama and Congress are trying to kill it rather than expand it? If Medicare has problems it is only because ot he Administrations who have been trying to kill it over the decades.
A question's been asked on another thread about the bill and deserves some investigation why, if true. The contention was that CONgress was making themselves and other parts of the federal government exempt from the health care reforms being enacted. It would not look good if The People were sold out in some way to insurance and pharma, while they protected themselves.
I've heard this in more than one place, too.
the trade unions are also exempt, If we can't be provided the same coverage as members of Congress, its a bad bill
They need to hurry before people read the bills and find all the deals for special interests. In health they need to hurry before seniors learn of the cuts to medicare. The internet is a real problem for Congress, it's not like the good ol days when they could cram through a bill that people could never access. This information thing is problematic. Maybe we need a large internet tax to slow things down?
First, the bill is 40 years late. Hardly a sign of "alarming speed".
As to the analysis: American health care has three main problems:
1) It costs too much. It's the most expensive in the world.
2) It's employer based so losing your job and income is coupled with losing your health insurance.
3) It doesn't cover everyone.
After Obama's "reform" it will:
1) Cost $100,000,000,000 MORE PER YEAR!!! We made this problem worse.
2) Will still be employer based. In fact this tax on our businesses will get worse as additional businesses will be required to cover their employees.
3) Won't cover everyone. It fails to meet this basic minimum of the health care system of every other developed nation in the world.
How much more do you need to know?
I would like to see the specific cuts planned to medicare. There are general terms like "optimum treatment methods".
i just posted on another item concerning health care and a person replying opened my eyes to what the tactic has to be....
americans want health care... republicans wants health insurance.
when you look at this battle going on in congress and divided them along these lines, you will get a better picture of whats happening.
We need to shift that frame back over to Health Care. We could save a lot of money by eliminating the middle-men Insurance Companies that do not add any value to the Health Care System.
no you are wrong conservatives don't want to pay anything more to cover the indigent and lazy......
Pay attention - that's not what space said. He said "republicans want health insurance". That statement NEITHER means "paying anything more to cover the indigent and lazy" NOR "the government involved in my health care coverage".
It actually means EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. Health insurance (private, for-profit health insurance which is obvioulsy what was meant if we're talking about Republicans) is the polar OPPOSITE of the government being involved.
If you're going to challenge people's posts, at least get the intent of the post you're challenging right instead of exactly backwards.
Aren't we already covering the "lazy and indigent" isn't that why our private insurance premiums go up every year to offset those costs?
I heard the president yesterday refer to "health insurance reform" for the first time. He has always in the past refered to it as "healthcare reform." I didn't see this as a good thing...
http://www
Type the entire address in with .html at the end.
47 million un insured
20 million under insured
fast food companies and insurance companies making profits hand over fist. Bushes tax cuts for the rich still in effect
Subtract 10 million poor/indig
18.5 million can pay $50/mo = 925,000,000
18.5 mill can pay $100 = $1,850,000,000
20 mill under insured will switch and can pay $100 = 2,000,000,000
That is a grand total of $47,750,000,000
That is FOUR BILLION, SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS IN PREMIUM PAYMENTS PER MONTH. FIFTY SEVEN BILLION THREE HUNDRED THIRTY MILLION PER YEAR IN PREMIUMS FOR ONE SET OF PEOPLE.
That does'nt count the millions who'll switch from private companies if they can pay $100 or 200 per month and have their entire family covered even with pre-existing conditions. Repeal bush tax cuts asap brings another 700billion
After thinking about it more, we should have a 1 penny federal sales tax on EVERY purchase. I can hear the opponents shouting about making the poor poorer, but my statement is 1 cent on each purchase NOT on every dollar or hundred dollars. From candy bars to fruit to big screen tv's to your house. 1 cent on everything. If your grocery bill was $100. for 53 items, your bill would be $100.53. That's not putting people in the poorhouse especially when we've already been dealing with price increases
Interesting idea.
There's really one thing that anyone should know and understand: whatever ways there are to hand us over to the insurance companies in a silver platter, they will find them. We're screwed! When this is all said and done, we're all gonna wish things had stayed the way they were. There's no hope - the big boys win!
I share your frustration, but if everyone feels like you do- and convinces everyone else-- why bother to try?
YOU are wrong ..........
MANDATED healthcare is what the INSURANCE COMPANIES WANTED from the start.
THIS IS PRIVATIZATION OF HEALTH CARE ..........
Your INTERPRETATION Kaborka was right.....
THE middle class gets NOTHING...
and their TAX SURCHARGE will only make the rich angry too....and you know the result !!!
yes the result is more layoffs...
That's exactly what it is. Without reform of the financial and insurance markets first, this is not a good move.
Sore loser. Take your GOP talking points to someplace that will believe you.
WHO WILL FIGHT AND WHO WILL ROLL OVER
THE MEN ARE SEPARATED FROM THE BOYZ
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
