Memo to Congress: On Health Care Vote You Must Choose Between Insurance Companies and Average Americans

Memo: 11/6/09
To: Democratic Members of Congress
Re: Your Vote on Health Insurance Reform

When you cast your vote this weekend on the historic health care reform bill, you will be faced with a simple, clear choice: cast a vote for average Americans, or for health insurance companies.

The stark clarity of the choice is obvious to most Americans, but it has not yet come into focus for some of your colleagues. Yesterday I spoke with several Democratic Members who professed to still be studying the "details" of the bill and pondering their decision.

The health care reform measures have been debated and discussed in Congressional Committees, articles and columns, town meetings, and millions of discussions throughout America for six months. Time for dithering is over. Now -- in the words of the old union anthem -- Members of Congress have to decide which side they're on.

Only one small group of Americans would benefit economically from the defeat of the House health insurance reform bill: the private insurance industry. They want to be free to continue raising premiums four times faster than wages. They don't want the government to prevent them from denying coverage to people who get really sick or have pre-existing conditions. Their profits and CEO salaries and bonuses have been heading skyward even in the midst of the recession.

They love being exempt from the anti-trust laws and the freedom that gives them to divide up insurance markets and raise prices without the fear of serious competition. They are thrilled that, according to an AMA study, 94% of insurance markets are "non-competitive." Health insurance companies love things just the way they are.

Of course if, like CIGNA Insurance CEO Ed Hanway, you made $12.2 million a year ($5,553 per hour), you might also like things the way they are. Like the insurance industry, you too might have spent tens of millions of dollars trying to frighten senior citizens, confuse your colleagues and promote right wing myths like "death panels."

The House stands on the brink of passing historic legislation that creates a public health insurance option that will end the stranglehold of the insurance industry on our health care system. For the first time, the bill will make health insurance available to almost everyone in America -- allowing our country to join the ranks of every other developed nation in making health care a right.

The battle to make health care a right in America has gone on for almost a century. At every turn, measures to do so have been blocked by special interests that were capable of convincing enough Members of Congress that the favors they could do, the campaign contributions they could make, the misinformation and fear they could spew, meant more than the lives of the 22,000 people who die each year because they don't have insurance. Or that those things meant more than the financial ruin that is visited upon million of Americans for no fault of their own except they had the misfortune of getting seriously ill.

What is at stake in the vote this weekend is a question of values. Do we value the wealth and power of a set of large corporations more than the lives and welfare of our families, our friends and our neighbors?

Many of your colleagues in Congress will wish that one provision or the other of this legislation were different. But in the end, each of you is now forced to make only one choice: will you vote with the insurance industry or with everyday Americans.

And there is no political excuse for any Democrat. We've all seen the polling. The elements of insurance reform -- especially the public option and provisions to prevent denial of coverage due to pre-existing conditions -- are popular everywhere. In every corner of America, the insurance companies are right down there at the bottom of the popularity heap with Wall Street Banks and Jack the Ripper.

And something else. If Democrats lose on health insurance reform, the Members who will pay the price are those in the most marginal districts -- the same way they did after the failure of health care reform in 1994. The political fortunes of Democrats in swing districts depends on the popularity of the President and the Democratic brand -- and that hinges on the success of health insurance reform. The fact is that just as a rising tide raises all boats, so a receding political tide leaves those in the shallowest political water aground.

Finally, here is a news flash: not one of the "tea party" gang that came to the Capitol yesterday has any intention whatsoever of ever voting for a Democrat -- whether or not you vote for health insurance reform. They are the hard core of the Republican right that has managed to hijack their own party and convert it into a club that talks to each other rather than the American people.

There is no reason, no excuse, for any Democrat to vote no on health care reform.

And there is one more reason why every Member should vote "aye." This is one of the most historic votes you will ever take. Would you have wanted to tell your grandchildren that you were one of the few Democrats that voted against Social Security, or Medicare, or the 1964 Civil Rights Bill? This is the same kind of vote.

Don't be on the wrong side of history. Leave a legacy that will make you proud for generations to come. This weekend, vote yes for health insurance reform.

P.S.: For those of you that are not Members of Congress - call your Member right now -- the moment you stop reading this article - and tell them to vote yes on health care reform. Many Members have instructed their staffs to count the number of calls they get on each side as we approach the vote. Weigh in with your vote right now.

Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win available on Amazon.com.

 

Comments

[Hemihead]

If you believe this health care bill is about "lowering cost" and "increasing Availability" you probably also believe that Obama is going to reduce the deficit by increasing it, and lower your taxes by raising them.

If the bill actually did ANY of what Obama, Pelosi etc promised, it wouldn't cost 1.2 trillion and have to steal 400 billion from Medicaid. Lower cost health care wouldn't cost 1 to 2 trillion dollars.

This bill is just another example of the corruption in government that exists between both parties and their respective corporate and lobbyist cronies.

What this bill does, is throw billions to the the drug companies, the AMA, the AARP and the SEIU in return for their donations to Obama, and the campaign committees of legislators that have the power to influence health care legislation.

Same old pay for play crap that's bankrupting this country. They've done it with the oil industry and now they're doing it with the health care industry, wake up folks, this isn't about reform; it's about your money being thrown down the drain.

[MadAs]

Why I ask, should we be applauding the representatives that voted for the Health Care bill? They did what they were supposed to do: Put the American people before the corporatist cancer in Congress. They should have done it long ago. The fact that they only now have risen to a very modest bill by the thinnest of margins is hardly cause for celebration!

And to support the point, look at the bill’s future in the Senate, where mind-numbing self-interest masquerades as noble concerns for America, a speel they hope will buy them a few winning votes from the gullible and misinformed.

What they too easily dismiss, is the justified vitriol that the Left will launch against them at their voting booth. Just look at the unsolicited dollars Grayson garnered without solicitation or request, but with merely a few simple, pointed words. Or look at the millions MoveOn raised in a 24-hour period to work against any Senator “fillibastard”!

Those Senators stand a far better chance of throwing themselves for mercy at the feet of the Left than trying to conjoin with a diminishing minority on the Right, a minority with a short (if any) mind and a belief system that has soiled the principles of Christianity with an arcane alignment to the holy cloth of Capitalism and lower taxes for a the obscenely rich.

[seawolf77]

When dealing with republicans you have to get at the core of the matter, not what they want you to see. It's like religion. The real reason they "believe" is so their women don;t run the streets in search of outsized phalluses to compare to their itsy bitsy pee pees. They "say" that's immoral. Here we have health. But you really don't. Any one who has been around the block knows the only real health insurance is thru an employer. If you buy it on the outside try and get sick. They'll drop you like a hot potato on Dan Qualye's face and wait you out in the courts. You'll likely die before your day in court . In the end they see health care reform as just one less stick they will have to keep the masses in line and working. Same with legalization of drugs. One less stick.

[liberalOrgonian]

It is time to DEMAND Insurance Co become non profits.
Set their rates, watch them to see they follow thorough, and not rip off more Americans.
Anyone who has explored other countries health Care systems know,
single payer is the best option and the most affordable.
It is humane and works the BEST to insure their citizens.
It is time for the repubs to STOP talking about pro life,
for they are showing us it is only THEIR life that is important.

[Cosatjockomo]

I agree with you. Not for profit is the way to go. As to this article, I totally predicted the push to pass the legislation even if it sucks, even if it doesn't do what was needed, even if it doesn't do what dems are claiming. Yes there's a public option, but it's estimated that the public option plan will be MORE expensive than private plans. How does this make health care more affordable? All the public plan is going to do is provide an option to sick rich people that have been denied coverage by private insurers. This is NOT the "public option" people were looking for. It is now a misleader term, and you know it, but are still trying to mislead us. God forbid our representatives actually try to get their heads around the thousands of pages of legislation! "Don't read it! Just vote for it!" You're such a dolt.

[Wake-up]

I'll take profit motive over political motive all day long!!

Hey Bob... BTW... we don't have $1+Trillion laying around...........

And tell me, how does the PO actually work? Specifically.

Answer = You don't know, no - one knows, it's a total mess!

[mudshark12]

And they have been "moving at the speed of government" to get this far with a 2000+ page bill, this is one of the reasons it has taken them so long to vote on it, they have to read it over and decide weather it's worth signing. I just hope there are not any penalties (larger co-pays & etc.) for having a chronic illness; that would be like kicking someone when they are down. What I read about that could be a Repug lie but then again, who knows for sure what's going on nowadays with all of the mudslinging things aren't very clear anymore.

[desade4real]

Please set the truth straight. This has nothing to do with "health reform", but simply a control of power by the washington elite. This absolute travesty of a fraud bill is passed, the middle class will suffer. Just about everything in this bill let's government CONTROL health care. Sorry, but this country is not a democracy, but a Republic - a nation of laws. Want to keep your existing health care? Sure you can but only until 2013 when if your plan doesn't conform to government mandates, you will be forced into a government plan. Want 2nd or 3rd doctor opinions? Under the legislation proposed by the House, government will decide if you are allowed additional opinions. If they don't deem them necessary, the you won't be allowed.

This is crap legislation and a complete fraud perpetrated on the American people. It DOESN'T reduce costs (forced reductions in fees isn't the same) or provide real choice. It is a total crime!

[greatscot]

The 50 million uninsured may get stiffed on the Public Option, after all. That would be a big mistake for the Dems. We vote; we're ticked off; and we're tired of being considered expendable by the "elite".

We are going to show the "elite" a thing or two if they exclude a "robust" public option! We can run opposing candidates on Dem. primary tickets for the next elections, - (a 3rd party would just hand the election to the GOP).

We are 50 million strong and can wield a lot of power. We can stop any donations to the DEM party from our fifty million, and we can financially support the new candidates we put up at $10 a pop!!

This message is for the Dems -shaft us, and WE, the fifty million uninsured and the 30 to 60 million underinsured, are going to take some serious revenge. We are not organizing yet, but we are ready. We are here; we are NOT going away; we are taking notes, and we have long memories. Every single Democrat that votes AGAINST our interests is going to be targeted for replacement.

And that goes double for the Dems who think they're clever using parliamentary maneuvres to remove the heart of any new Health-care bill - the Public Option. Ditto, for any elected fo ol who thinks this is a great time to MANDATE millions of new customers for their friends in the Health Insurance Industry. We are watching and paying attention!

[Nellybelle]

I guess I should add to my previous post :

In the true American tradition "Cadillac" plans would be available to those who are willing to pay privately for the extra coverage .

Tort reform is a MUST to reduce malpractice insurance premiums .

[codycap]

http://www.factcheck.org/president_uses_dubious_statistics_on_costs_of.html

And on Jan. 8, 2004 , the Congressional Budget Office also said the Kessler-McClellan study wasn’t a valid basis for projecting total costs of defensive medicine.

CBO: When CBO applied the methods used in the study of Medicare patients hospitalized for two types of heart disease to a broader set of ailments, it found no evidence that restrictions on tort liability reduce medical spending. Moreover, using a different set of data, CBO found no statistically significant difference in per capita health care spending between states with and without limits on malpractice torts.

Worth noting: The nonpartisan CBO is now headed by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously was chief economist for President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers.

[Nellybelle]

Here's a novel approach :

The U.S. Government can buy controlling interest in an existing private HMO . ( They did it for banks, didn't they ?)

Then they can rewrite their private HMO rules :
No exclusions
Reduced premiums
Competitive prices for drugs and hospital services.
Eliminate whole layers of administrative costs by eliminating the doctors and lawyers whose sole
purpose it was to deny claims.
A mandated percent of "charity cases" to be carried free , or fee based on income.

This would force conformity and competition from the privates . And cover the uncovered.

Eventually this would morph into a Swiss or Netherlands system , where everyone is covered by a private carrier , under a uniform and highly regulated set of rules and rates , allowing a modest profit for the carriers.

[TurgidCaterwauling]

Whether it's called health insurance reform or health care reform, it's dead on arrival. The wealthy don't care a whit for the middle class and the poor, either of whom may be uninsured or under-insured. Insurance companies have no incentive whatsoever to compete against each other with better rates and policies. They'll just collude and fix prices and qualifications. And every single congress person who accepts money from lobbyists is guilty of taking bribes--plain and simple.
It is indeed sad that a country that has seen so much glory and still has the potential to offer so much has resorted to the corporate cannibalizing of its citizens.

[Eggsackley]

I would rather have a much stronger public option, but if a bill with a public option does not pass, there will be hell to pay for its opponents. I and a lot more people will be looking for ways to help unseat them,.
My senator and congressman are both on board, and I will continue to support them, but I will be looking for ways to help voters in other states to defeat the blue dogs in primaries and all republicans I was once a member of the Grand Old Party, but it's not grand anymore, just old and sad.
If a the public option does not prevail, the next time out, we should all go for broke on single payer, and just put all the health insurers out of business. To hell with them if they don't want to compete.

[carnegie]

THANK YOU

[ThomH]

"Only one small group of Americans would benefit economically from the defeat of the House health insurance reform bill: the private insurance industry."

Wrong, dead wrong. The reason that AHIP and Harry and Louise want "healthcare reform" ala HR 3962 is that the Healthcos will BENEFIT mightily from it.

Just think: they are endangered by declining enrollment, rising prices and growing public ire. Solution: "health care reform", better called "Permanent Public Health Support for Health Insurers."

How? By delivering more customers via a possibly unconstitutional mandate, a permanent infusion from the public till via subsidies, and higher priced insurance via limits on medical treatment denials. Result: more revenues and profits for insurers, at the expense of taxpayers and policy buyers, and those facing the consequences of a dangerous $500 billion cut to Medicare.

Unless the Kucinich amendment is restored to allow states to install single payer systems,

KILL THIS BILL!

[janiceh]

Exactly. The insurers will benefit greatly from the mandate.

[Ted Voth]

'Death panels' are not a right-wing myth. We have them already. They're called 'health insurance companies.'

[gabemill]

Mr. Creamer has it right.......this is a showdown of morality: Do you side with the American people, or do you succumb to insurance interests?..... That answer should be glaringly clear!
I do NOT like that this bill has been watered down, as it has been.......to appease the right, who will still NOT vote for it... come h.ell or high water. Personally, I want single payer for all. As a recipient of VA health care, and fully recognizing the advantages of a "socialized" system.....I desire the same benefits/rights for ALL Americans. As this is not in the cards, at this stage, we need to move forward with the best option available. Health care reform has been attempted since the Truman days, and has ALWAYS been opposed by the republicans, to the detriment of the American people. To further acquiesce to the informationally challenged and ideologically impaired, will haunt the Democratic Party/Libe­rals/Progr­essives for MANY years to come......worst of all, thousands more will continue to suffer in the richest Nation the world has ever known.

[Awake-and-Sing]

A showdown of morality indeed.

Just how immoral is it to force tens of millions of people who cannot afford health-insurance premiums now to buy for-profit insurance at extortion level rates, under heavy tax penalty if they don't, with no effective public option, just so the President can check "health care reform" off his list?

Just how immoral is it to let the DLC corporatists like Obama/Eman­uel/Baucus get away with trillions of dollars of corporate welfare on the backs of working class, middle class and poor people.

Yes, this is a showdown of morality indeed.

[gabemill]

You may have missed this memo, but 45,000 Americans die annually (10 times the tragic cost of the unnecessary Iraqi war) because they lack access to health care insurance, as it exists today. Sadly, we are the ONLY industrialized Nation that operates health care on a for profit basis. What solution would you suggest to rectify this travesty? Health care, growing at 4 times wages, will ultimately, bankrupt us. As we already pay for those without insurance, this proposal would spread accountability and lower costs for all. The least amongst us will be subsidized at a reasonable level they can afford (unlike today). To mandate that all participate, is similar to the requirements that we already have, regarding auto insurance. What part of that don't you understand?
This is not an ideal solution, certainly.­.....howev­er, based on my single payer experience (VA), it is highly preferred over nothing, as you seemingly defend. Having been unsuccessful in attaining reform since the Truman administra­tion....an­d over the constant objections of the republican party.... I say the time has come!