With the early arrival of spring, car owners have another reason to be up in arms over the cost of filling their gas tanks. Projections of $5.00 per gallon by summer are being bandied about across the country, and people are so angered by reckless Wall Street manipulators and oil company greed that they can hardly see straight. While it feels like we are once again being held hostage by Big Oil, there are some simple things that can be done to lessen the load of fuel prices on our wallets.
NYC's Mayor Bloomberg tried a few years ago to encourage carpooling, but his proposal fell flat. Now, it may be worth a second look. If not carpools, then using public transportation should be encouraged. Maybe reducing fares a few days a week for trains and buses would prompt more people to use them? The nation's mayors and governors also need to address this issue and develop solutions to reduce fuel consumption, in both the public and private sectors. Otherwise, this burden on our already stretched budgets will continue causing people to make serious cutbacks in daily necessities, with even food for the family table facing the threat of downsizing.
Meanwhile, the push continues unabated from special interests and the oil industry to approve the tar sands oil-transporting Keystone XL pipeline and increase drilling at numerous other sites, including in the Gulf of Mexico. They are even demanding we ravage the pristine Arctic in pursuit of their "black gold." Domestic oil production has already increased 15% over the past 3 years, with little concern for our collective health or our environment. Yet still, Big Oil wants more. This issue has not gone completely unnoticed in Washington, as Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has introduced the Repeal Big Oil Subsidy Act (S.2204).
It is a no-brainer that subsidies to oil giants such as BP and Exxon, which continue to post record profits, must end. The top five oil companies posted profits of $137 billion last year, alone. This bill would end Big Oil subsidies and use the money for new, clean, renewable energy sources that would create new jobs. America would become more energy independent and our air, water and land would become cleaner by reducing harmful pollution. What is our energy policy, anyway? The hysteria over oil prices is not just because it will cost more to fill up the tank, but because every single item we touch in our daily lives is shipped from somewhere, and the ever-increasing cost of oil inflates those prices as well. Is our president looking at those costs, too? One wonders.
Unfortunately, the bad news for our pocketbooks does not end there. Just about now, statements from health insurers are beginning to hit our mailboxes with a thud for health services delivered this year. Co-pays for specialists can now reach $50 per visit, with $30 for a visit to a primary care doctor, both more than double from last year, with additional increased premiums. If you need physical therapy following an accident or illness, you will be hit with higher co-pays of $30 or $50 or even $75 per session, coupled with a reduced number of covered visits and less time with the therapist. Many insurers only pay $5.00 to the therapist, of a $55 total, while the patient is stuck with a $50 co-pay. Indeed, the fix is in as the insurers reduce needed services and jack up costs across the board, causing patients to make the hard decision to avoid seeking medical care at all, leading to longer and more complicated illnesses that result in more and more costs -- a vicious cycle. To fight some of these outrageous costs burdening patients, the New York State Physical Therapy Association is promoting a bill in Albany to have the specialist designation removed from physical therapy, which would reduce co-pays to their struggling and aged patients. How could any patient working on recovery afford two or three physical therapy sessions a week with such co-pays? It is madness. Of course, the insurers will most certainly fight back so they can continue sticking it to their customers.
Last year, on-the-job health plans for a family of four rose 9%, with a corresponding 8% increase for single workers. Even with generous tax write-offs for corporations to supply health benefits, more and more are dropping employee coverage, or shifting more of the costs to their workers with reduced benefits. Between 2007 and 2010, family healthcare coverage for employees fell from 63.6% to 53.5%. Why are corporations in the business of providing healthcare in the first place? Meanwhile, according to Ira Stoll in his excellent article "Health Insurance Company Stocks Soar Under Obama" in the Riverdale Review on February 16th, profits at those rapacious insurers are on the rise, with United Health Care seeing an increase of 65%, Aetna 33% and Humana 76% in just the past two years.
And if this wasn't outrageous enough, a stunning March 9th editorial in the New York Daily News told the story of an ill person going to a New York hospital for emergency brain surgery and discovering after the fact that even though the hospital was in network, the neurosurgeon wasn't, and therefore only $8,300 of a $40,000 bill would be covered by the insurer, with the patient being expected to pick up the rest of the bill. According to the article, in 2011 alone, 2,000 complaints reached the Department of Financial Services in NY about such practices. Among those complaints, I'm sure, was the fact that out of network doctors can charge 50 to 135 times what Medicare would pay.
If this is being highlighted in New York, it is clear it is a nationwide practice as well. Who, during an emergency, has the clarity of mind to question their health team about who is or isn't in network? One sensible solution offered by the editorial was for legislatures to cap an individual patient's responsibility for the cost of emergency care, and for non-emergency care patients to be informed if their doctors are out-of-network. Patients have the right to be informed up front and to not be thrown into bankruptcy during a medical crisis.
Seniors are also feeling the pinch, with those in Medicare Advantage Plans (an HMO with benefits comparable to traditional Medicare) paying $4,700 out of pocket this year for prescription drugs until that infamous "donut hole" is closed and the insurers start picking up the tab. In addition, there are $2,800 in deductibles to be paid for doctor's services in some Advantage plans. With Social Security recipients receiving on average about $14,000 per year -- well below the poverty level -- these exorbitant costs are an invisible crisis of epic proportions.
The Affordable Care Act and its mandate is currently in the Supreme Court, with a decision due at any time. Even if it is instituted, the bill still won't fully kick in until 2014, when those subsidies for coverage start to appear in the federal budget. Of course, none of this is to occur, conveniently, until after the election. Ultimately, thirty-three million Americans are projected to be brought into this insurance program. It would be a good move for our government to take a look at restraining rising insurance costs on behalf of all hardworking taxpayers now, for the ACA only addresses this uninsured population. So the rest of the country who are insured are being hung out to dry, forced to sink or swim on their own.
With healthcare costs spiraling out of control, perhaps it is time we revisit the concept of cost controls practiced during World War II? Of course, this is a pie in the sky suggestion in this political climate. At the very least, costs for prescription drugs should be negotiated with Big Pharma, working out an arrangement similar to that with the VA system to effectively bring down costs for the public. The ACA, it must be acknowledged, has created several very good reforms that are commendable, and will cover millions, but few would disagree that much more is needed. The system of delivery and how we pay for it remains essentially the same, and there in lies the conundrum. It is that portion of our health care system that fails, with too many expensive moving parts. For now, however, this is what we have, but the process of envisioning and working for a different, better kind of healthcare reform must continue.
Clearly, healthcare as it currently exists is unsustainable, and the costs still leave 50 million uninsured, with 45,000 dying yearly because they can't afford healthcare at all. What kind of nation are we? As the unrestrained healthcare costs continue to rise, more will stop carrying insurance altogether. Meanwhile, the GOP has introduced their budget calling for a draconian cut to Medicare of $165 billion. Those vouchers will not be far behind to purchase healthcare from private insurers. This would speed the dismantling of one of our great safety nets and could be the death knell for Medicare if it is allowed to go forward. The GOP's budget across the board will stick it to the people and deliver more tax cuts for the wealthy. Even those on food stamps are in Paul Ryan's sights, with the program being decimated under his budget. Perhaps digging for food scraps in dumpsters is seen as alright in certain circles.
Many of these healthcare woes wouldn't even exist if 100 years ago in 1912, AFL President Samuel Gompers had taken the high road for National Health Insurance, which was on the table for the fledgling union, instead of workman's compensation. According to Jill Quadrango's excellent book One Nation, Uninsured, Gompers "...denounced compulsory health insurance as a menace to the rights, welfare and liberty of American workers," opting for workman's compensation instead. We continue to pay for that rotten decision and his lack of leadership. The president at the time, progressive Republican Teddy Roosevelt, would have supported the nation moving to a single-payer system.
Hardworking Americans are under siege on all fronts these days, especially in our on-fire pocketbooks. Something has got to give. Wake up, Washington! Occupiers should start to occupy the health insurance industry, along with the offices of Big Oil. A massive, cross-country occupation, with doctors and other healthcare personnel joining in, would make the point to the insurers that the public is sick and tired of the gross, despicable, inhumane behavior of an industry that holds our lives and wellbeing in its clutches. As for the oil industry, why not just park your car for a couple of days and use public transportation if you can, or carpool with friends? That message would also resonate loud and clear, if it is nationwide and coordinated. Hit them in the one place they understand -- their wallet -- and watch their stock prices plummet.
- with Jonathan Stone
Bill McKibben: Payola for the Most Profitable Corporations in History
Ah, were that only possible for gas prices to drop to $1.00 per gallon. That price is well beyond our memories. You are right, that would certainly stimulate the economy, but how much would such a subsidy cost us? We are a much larger country with a large population than Iraq. But an interesting idea non the less.Thanks for jumping in.
You are correct that we need to revisit the health care problem, But as you know, there is a simple answer--single payer, enhanced Medicare for All. In PA, our hope is to pass a pill that will crease a single payer plan, so that we can compare the success with the plan Romney is running from in Massachusetts. We need to try different plans at the state level, compare and contrast, and see what works. The tragedy is that the insurance industry has everyone believing that they are the only ones who can solve the problem, when in fact they were instrumental in creating it. In 1993, the insurance industry came in stating they could solve the problem with managed care. 20 years later, our cost have increased exponentially, we have 30 million more uninsured, the term copay has not only become a new term in our lexicon, but they are increasing now exponentially as well, and who do we go to for answers? Let for once and all get rid of the insurance industry, at the state or national level, and see how we do. We couldn't get too much worse than we already are.
A slight correction if I may. The uninsured numbers 50 million and not 30 million. 30 million of that number would be insured if the ACA passes muster in the Supreme Court and is implemented fully. Yes, we can do better and certainly as you point out, repeatedly turning to the insurers for solutions is beating a dead horse to death. Their only motivation is profit and so we must remove that incentive from the equation.
A correction to your correction. In 1993, we had 20 million uninsured--the reason the Clintons wanted to pass a universal health care plan. Instead, the insurance industry took over, after Harry and Louise worked their magic, promising "free" health care, with ads telling us to "not take our wallets to the doctors, not take our check books to the doctors." Now, nearly 20 years later, we are 50 million uninsured, 30 million more, with runaway costs, a health care system in tatters, and they have us convinced that they are the answer. The day we simply bypass the insurance industry and allow care to occur between providers of care, be it nurse, doctor, nurse practitioner or the others in the caring field of medicine and patients, will we finally have the system that we want. Keep up the fight Pearl
And the fight will go on Scott. I am encouraged while the Supreme Court deliberations on the ACA mandate continues, Numerous newspapers came out for single payer after the court oral arguments. They finally get that it is the only positive solution. A more responsible press would have been pushing single payer for the past few years. But, better late than never. The cat is now out of the bag.
Some of the money retrieved in the bill from removing those subsidies would also be used to pay down our debt. Sounds like a win, win.
Thanks for your kind remarks about my suggestions.
perhaps somebody will tell our President
that Medicare is legal, beloved by the vast majority of seniors,
everybody understands it,
AND it is up and running in all 50 states --
-- wow, EXTEND Medicare to everyone.
Problem solved.
As Pearl indicates in her article, 1) the problem of high health care costs paid by individuals and families is not getting solved, and 2) there will be a jump in taxes in 2014 due to insurance subsidies that kick in due to the Affordable Care Act of 2010.
But will we least cover all Americans by the time the new law's implemented (by 2018-2019)? No, tens of millions will be uninsured (estimates: 23.1 million and 30-40 million).
And what are other countries doing about the topic of costs? They have been implementing health care for all systems. First it was the high-income free-market countries, members of the OECD. Then it was the low-income member countries of the OECD. Now other countries are implementing some kind of health care for all system. Fortunately, ours (IMPROVED Medicare for All) will be the best with one plan, one payer, and negotiations of prices for drugs and durable medical equipment. BUT WAIT --- first we need to have Americans know what the subject is so that they know that it provides employment opportunities; it provides health care peace of mind; and how it compares, side-by-side to other options.
http://www.mforall.org/p/Explanation
- Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate
Keep at it Bob and thanks.
Thanks in return to you for your continued efforts. There are a whole lot of Americans who live and work in other countries who are looking forward to U.S. health care for all, as seen by their testimonials.
http://www.mforall.org/p/Testimonials
We can and will get single-payer health care, improved Medicare for All.
- Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate
There are only two (2) ways to regain control over OUR LIVES.
1. As a citizen, who's knowledgeable, engaged and ever vigilant.
2. As a consumer, who's knowledgeable, engaged and ever vigilant.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vigilant
That's it.
People power, which is btw the definition of democracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
There are several options for real change:
o MASSIVE and peaceful demonstrations like the civil rights movement
o Second revolution
"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them."
— Frederick Douglass, 1857
As for peaceful demonstrations look to the Occupy movement to come back in force. They are not going away any time soon. It is our civil rights movement.
http://moneyedpoliticians.net/2007/06/11/politicians-should-protect-the-public-with-new-oil-usa-option/
Problem is, a government oil company cannot give campaign bribes and the privates can, so don't count on our current politicians approving same.
Corporations are the real power in this country, Republicans brought them to the dance, but the Democrats are now equally smitten.
The People's interests haven't been served by party politics for two decades now. It's time for something else.
It's clear that good governance and campaigning do not co-exist. It is therefore reasonable to limit the campaign season to a short time, by our standards.
It's supposed to be the People's government, the People ought to be paying for the campaign.
Two parties give us little choice on war, American Worker protection, Reining in Oil companies, or election reform. and protection from corporate hegemony. It's time we moved past parties.
Other countries have Liberals and Conservatives. Liberals call themselves Liberals and Conservatives call themselves Conservatives. Here Republicans call themselves conservatives and the Democratic Administration say they're not Liberals. In a very real sense, we have one party with two candidates in every race.