West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
When you wake up in the morning and rub the sleep out of your eyes are you surprised to find a great shadowy figure in the room? We are past the Fourth and the "let's celebrate America" holiday feeling only to find that the lobbyists continued to move forward while we were distracted by fireworks and speeches.
The Wapo points out this morning that a large number of former inner-office employees of Max Baucus and Charles Grassley and other active Congressional committee members are being snatched up by lobbying organizations:
Please go to http://cotocrew.wordpress.com and read the article by Caitlin McNulty of VenezuelanAnalysis.com. The more articles I read like this, the more I realize how advanced countries are with single-payer systems and how the AMA and the Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceuticals Companies have been able to use MONEY to keep us pinned against the wall.
I have been in favor of getting the insurance companies out of healthcare for a long time now.I naively thought that with the election of a sympathetic President and strong mojorities in both chambers of Congress,with healthcare costs going through the roof,with insurance premiums skyrocketing,and health expenditures bankrupting not only individuals but huge corporations and eventually our national government,that we would wake up to the mistakes we made in 1994 and actually "get 'er done" this year.I guess $41million of lobbyist money spread around amongst the proper "leaders" carries more weight than the will of the people as expressed in numerous polls which show wide majorities of Americans supporting a single-payer healthcare system.
I would like to thank Senator Rockefeller for his support and for holding hearings on healthcare reform.
I would also like to make everyone who reads this aware of a group of Doctors who agree with me that any effort at reform which only diverts more taxpayer money into the overflowing coffers of the insurance companies isn't reform.These mandate-types of reform have been tried in Massachusetts,Oregon,and other places,and have failed due to the lack of cost-control mechanisms,which made them unsustainable.This group is Physicians for a National Healthcare Program,and Dr.Robert Stone is one of it's leaders.He can be reached at grostone@gmail.com if anyone would like to get in touch with him and thank him for his work on our behalf.The following is what he had to say about single-payer:
Stone said that by replacing the for-profit, private health insurance companies with a single-payer program - an improved Medicare for All - the United States would save more than $400 billion in administrative costs annually. He also said that single payer is only reform proposal that includes effective cost-containment provisions.
"In fact, the strongest argument for Medicare for All is that it is the most efficient reform proposal with the greatest ability to control costs," Stone said. "That is exactly why so many members of the 'medical-industrial complex' oppose such a plan, because, as the Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman has said, 'Remember that what the rest of us call health care costs, they call income.'
"In short, single payer is the only plan that pays for itself and covers everyone. It's fiscally conservative and socially responsible," Stone said.
President Obama said he wanted healthcare reform that:Covered everbody,provided quality care,and was affordable.I don't see how we can continue to support the for-profit insurance companies who siphon off 31% of every premium dollar for administration costs and profits--that's not affordable;who refuse to pay the healthcare claims of the already-insured; and who cherry-pick the young and healthy for their coverage,which assures more PROFITS.That model will NEVER cover everyone.
I am losing faith that any real reform will take place again this year.This sort of behaviour by our politicians is exactly what turns skeptics into cynics.Just a thought.I suppose I could be wrong.
I am still a believer that promises from the insurance companies or tinkering around the edges and calling it healthcare reform aren't the answer we need to solve the healthcare crisis.And it surely is a crisis when we spend $2.5 trillion per year as a country to provide healthcare and leave 46 million of our fellow citizens with no care.
Earlier to day,after watching the clip of the hearingroom of Sen.Max Baucus,I sent him and Sen.Rockefeller and Rep.Rahall emails similar to the following:
Dear Sen.Byrd,
Could we,this time,not let the promise of reform and increased competition turn into just another occasion for another segment of corporate America to reduce services and raise prices?
Today, we all pay more,one way or another, because doctors and hospitals must cover the costs of those people without insurance. Folks without insurance usually put off getting preventive care or early treatment for an illness. They get sicker and are harder to treat, and we all end up paying more. This is a terrible cycle we have to break, which is why we need meaningful reform.And even if you are lucky enough to have some sort of coverage,how many billing clerks do doctors have to hire just to duel with the claims clerks whose job it is to deny your treatment,another reason we need reform.
But the answer isn't leaving my insurance choice solely to the giant insurance companies. That's just a recipe to increase the insurance industry's profits, and put more paper-pushers between me and my doctor.
Even if the insurance industry agrees to stop excluding people with pre-existing conditions, charging women more than men, or sticking the seriously ill with exorbitant rates, these companies will always be in the business of making a profit by finding the best "risks."
The companies likely will still charge higher rates for getting older, or charge more depending on where a person lives. Middle class people who don't qualify for subsidies could be particularly hard hit as they get older, and ultimately be priced out of the insurance market. We risk winding up back where we started with high rates of uninsured and costs shifted to everyone else.
We need a real, meaningful solution. In addition to employer-based and insurance industry offerings, Americans need the choice of a publicly run insurance plan. All insurers, including the public plan entities offering coverage, would have to compete for customers, state clearly what they cover and what they charge, and play by the same rules and laws, so no one has an advantage. These rules would crack down on waste, fraud and abuse. For those who couldn't afford the full cost of insurance, subsidies would be available to help them pay the premiums for either a private or publicly run plan.
Because the public plan wouldn't need to spend billions on advertising,marketing,and administration it could relieve employers of an increasingly untennable burden,and pressure private insurers to lower their costs. And private insurance would pressure the public plan to be more resourceful and responsive. We'd see vigorous competition, with better prices and better quality and service.
I hope we get a better result from this round of "reform" legislation than we got when we de-regulated the telecoms and called it reform in 1996.How much did YOUR cable,telephone,and internet bills go up after that? And did the deregulation of the airlines bring the increased competition and lower prices that were promised?
On a side note,does anyone know why Jay hasn't cast a vote for a while?Maybe he is completely absorbed by the sections of the healthcare bill Baucus asked him to take charge of:Medicaid Expansion,Quality Improvements......
After the healthcare rountable and before any witnesses were heard from,the Chairman of the Finance Committee declared that single-payer was "off the table",and in fact no supporters of that solution were or have been on the witness lists.Hence the arrests of the Drs.and lawyers who rose to speak from the audience.Baucus'response:"We need more police."
Seems that in addition to healthcare reform debate we are going to have to revisit campaign finance reform,and Obama's lobbying reform has had little effect on who gets heard and who writes the laws and regulations.
So my husband is going after his Big Dream, and opening a medical practice in our area in July. After working for a couple of community health centers for 10 years, he's going to get to practice medicine on his own terms. He is passionate about family practice, loves his patients and his community. He'll be using an Electronic Medical Record software package that he and his buddies created (and hope to market) just so they could all open their own so-called micro-practices which allow extremely low overhead (ie, staff) while offering high-quality healthcare. Their EMR allows them to track patients like no software ever has before, send e-prescriptions (which cuts down on prescription errors), and it's actually easy to use.
Here's the rub. Now that he'll be on his own, what do we do about health insurance? We both hate the idea of supporting this inefficient, corrupt system, never mind the fact that most plans are prohibitively expensive, especially since we're just starting out. There is also the moral issue of us having some wonderful plan (if we can afford it) while many of his patients will have to be without.
Any ideas? Does anybody know of a socially-conscious health plan?!?! Would a HSA be less morally reprehensible?
Why should we buy into a system we're trying to bring down?!
Yesterday 8 advocates for single-payer health plan were arrested when they questioned a Senate hearing on health-care coverage as to why there were no single-payer advocates on the panel.
Jay Rockefeller is on the Senate Finance Committe which was having a "roundtable" on health care coverage that included 15 "witnesses." At least several of those witnesses have direct ties to the for-profit, private health insurance industry.
The next Roundtable is scheduled for May 14. On May 13, a group from the Eastern Panhandle is going to DC to be part of a national lobby day for single-payer healthcare reform. You can email Kris Loken for details if you're interested in participating: krisloken@yahoo.com
Some links about the most recent event:
http://www.commondreams.org/ne... http://www.singlepayeraction.org/
I'm sorry this is so last minute, but if you have no plans tonight, please join us at the Morgan County Democrats monthly meeting at the Country Inn. The Association will meet at 6:00, and then at 6:30, Dr. Matthew Hahn will make the case for Single-payer Healthcare Reform.Using poignant stories from his experience as a community healthcare provider and examples of how current single-payer systems work, he will make the case for the Single-Payer health system here. A buffet dinner is available for $10. For more information, see the Morgan County Democrat website at http://morgancountydemocrats.com/index.html
Sorry for the late notice, but here it is:
A meeting for those interested in promoting a single-payer health plan will be at 7:30 p.m. tonight (January 14) in the fellowship hall of Shepherdstown Presbyterian Church, 100 W. Washington St. Participants should enter from King Street, across from the post office.
(Congratulations on successful citizenship activism in Morgan County! - promoted by Clem Guttata)
Kate Evans approached Matt and me a few weeks ago to help her plan a healthcare reform forum, which was suggested last month by the Obama transition team to get a feel for what citizens want from their healthcare system. We registered our event on the change.org website, received a "moderator's kit" and started planning and promoting. It's always hard to figure out how many people are going to attend an event like this, especially one planned for a winter Monday night. Well, we had at least 60 people show up! After a brief discussion of the four most important problems facing healthcare reform (access to care, cost, quality, and complexity of the system), we broke into groups of about 10-15 to discuss the problems amongst ourselves, and possibly come up with solutions. Afterwards, we got together and listed them on flipcharts. I'll be filing our report on the change.org site soon. To read a really good summary of what went on, read about it in the Morgan Messenger That's what I've been doing!!!!!
In order to sabotage the "bailout" loans to the automakers,the Republicans insisted that the UAW agree to work for the wages paid by the car factories in the right-to-work (right-to-scab)South,furthering the unfair advantages enjoyed by the owners of Honda,Toyota,Mercedes-Benz and the rest,whose home-country governments provide universal,single-payer healthcare for their citizens.
The UAW,like my union,the UMWA,were largely responsible for the rise of America's middle class.
These workers were not responsible for the de-regulation madness that started in 1987 with the replacement by RAYGUN of Paul Volker as Chairman of the Fed with Alan Greenspan.When Phil Gramm got Glass-Steagall repealed in Nov. of 1999,the restraints on Wall Street bankers' urge to gamble with other people's money were removed,and Greenspan oversaw the 2 bubbles that ineviably ensued.
The runaway costs of providing healthcare are hurting GM,Ford,and Chrysler.A plan to help the carmakers and the rest of us follows:
Here are a few of the reasons we need healthcare reform,not insurance reform:
1.Remove the profit motive from healthcare by getting the insurance companies out of healthcare.2. A majority of physicians (59 percent) and an even higher proportion of Americans (62 percent or more) support single-payer national health insurance or "Medicare for All."2 In spite of this, all we are hearing about today are mandate plans that would require everyone to buy the same private insurance that is already failing us. These proposals don't regulate insurance premiums, they don't keep the insurance companies from refusing to pay many of our bills, and they don't improve the insurance we now have. Some offer a "public option," but this will quickly become too expensive as the sick flee to the public sector as private insurers avoid them, abandon them, or make it too difficult for them to get their bills paid.These proposals don't do anything to stop the insurance companies using money from premiums to pay for lobbying,contributing to candidates campaigns,advertising their wares,and going on junkets to Las Vegas!!
3. These proposals won't work, either to expand coverage or to contain costs. Plans like these have been tried in many states over the past two decades (Massachusetts, Tennessee, Washington State, Oregon, Minnesota, Vermont, Maine).3 They have all failed to reduce the number of uninsured or to contain costs.
4. These mandate plans will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the nation's health care costs. In this economic downturn, we need to assure health care for all without adding to the nation's cost and the government's deficit. The bottom line is: these proposals don't reform our fragmented, inefficient system, they just add to its complexity and costs,and we are already spending enough money to cover everyone,if only so much of it didn't go to things that don't add anything to people's healthcare.5. As long as we continue to rely on private for-profit insurers, universal coverage will be unaffordable. Their administrative costs consume nearly one-third of our health care dollar.4 We will never have enough money to provide everyone with decent care until we eliminate private insurance with its enormous waste and inadequate coverage. And we will never be able to keep costs down and get the care we need as long as the wasteful and unnecessary spending by insurance companies stand between us and our doctors. After all,their first priority is PROFITS !!
6. Every other industrialized country has some form of universal health care. None uses profitmaking, investor-owned insurance companies like ours to provide health care for all their people.5
7. We have an American system that works. It's Medicare. It's not perfect, but Americans with Medicare are far happier than those with private insurance. Doctors face fewer hassles in getting paid, and Medicare has been a leader in keeping costs down. And keep in mind that Medicare insures people with the greatest health care needs: people over 65 and the disabled. We should improve and expand Medicare to cover everyone.
8. A single-payer "Medicare for All" system is embodied in H.R. 676, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers and 92 other members of Congress. It would have:
Automatic enrollment for everyone
Comprehensive services covering all medically necessary care and drugs
Free choice of doctor and hospital, who remain independent and negotiate their fees and budgets with a public or nonprofit agency
Public or nonprofit agency processes and pays the bills
Entire system financed through progressive taxes,paid to one entity,instead of the cobbled-together system of private-pay,employer paid and government provided plans like CHIP,Medicaid,military and VA Dr.s and hospitals.
Help job growth and the entire U.S. economy by removing the burden of health costs from business
Cover everyone without spending any more than we are now.6
9. The growth in health care costs must be addressed if any proposal is to succeed.
Single payer offers real tools to contain costs: budgeting, especially for hospitals, planning of capital investments, and an emphasis on primary care and coordination of care.
Mandate plans offer only hopes: competition among insurance companies, computerization, chronic disease management. Competition among the shrinking number of insurance companies has already failed to contain costs and, in the absence of single payer and reformed primary care, computerization and chronic disease management will raise costs, not lower them.
10. Single-payer Medicare for All is the right answer:
It is right on choice. It provides free choice of doctor and hospital, the choice Americans want and value. In mandate plans, we lose those choices.
It is right on efficiency. Single payer would slash administrative costs and promote efficient primary care. It would also enhance evidence-based quality assurance.
It is right on accountability. It will be a public, nonprofit system that will respond to what doctors and their patients need, not what corporate executives and their stockholders want.
Every chance you get,with everyone you talk to,enumerate as many of these "reasons for change" as you can introduce into the conversation. Do it for all of us.........Lonnie
It's worth saying this over and over: insurance companies don't discriminate because they're evil. They do it because it's what insurance companies do. It's a core part of their business, and if they don't do it they'll go belly up.
This is the biggest reason for wanting to get private insurance companies (mostly) out of the healthcare business. If it were just a matter of their being corrupt or evil, that actually wouldn't be so bad. We could figure out ways to regulate them into good behavior. But it's harder than that. The kind of behavior that most of us want - comparable coverage for everyone under nondiscriminatory pricing rules - is flatly not something an insurance company can offer. If they do, they aren't being an insurance company. And if they aren't being an insurance company, then what good are they doing?
In this case the answer is: impeding progress. In other cases they're merely adding huge amounts of overhead to the system. But positive benefits? Those are a little harder to make out.
Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.
