Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The President Spells Out His Vision on Health Care Reform

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:02 PM
Original message
The President Spells Out His Vision on Health Care Reform
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3RD, 2009 AT 2:56 PM

The President Spells Out His Vision on Health Care Reform

Posted by Jesse Lee
Yesterday the President met with some key Senators on health reform, emphasizing the urgency of the situation in his remarks beforehand: "So we can't afford to put this off, and the dedicated public servants who are gathered here today understand that and they are ready to get going, and this window between now and the August recess I think is going to be the make-or-break period. This is the time where we've got to get this running."

Today the White House released a letter sent by the President to Senators Ted Kennedy and Max Baucus, the Chairmen of the key committees in the Senate handling health care reform, spelling out in detail what he would like to see in this historic legislation. The full letter is below:


June 2, 2009

The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
The Honorable Max Baucus
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Kennedy and Senator Baucus:

The meeting that we held today was very productive and I want to commend you for your leadership -- and the hard work your Committees are doing on health care reform, one of the most urgent and important challenges confronting us as a Nation.

In 2009, health care reform is not a luxury. It's a necessity we cannot defer. Soaring health care costs make our current course unsustainable. It is unsustainable for our families, whose spiraling premiums and out-of-pocket expenses are pushing them into bankruptcy and forcing them to go without the checkups and prescriptions they need. It is unsustainable for businesses, forcing more and more of them to choose between keeping their doors open or covering their workers. And the ever-increasing cost of Medicare and Medicaid are among the main drivers of enormous budget deficits that are threatening our economic future.

In short, the status quo is broken, and pouring money into a broken system only perpetuates its inefficiencies. Doing nothing would only put our entire health care system at risk. Without meaningful reform, one fifth of our economy is projected to be tied up in our health care system in 10 years; millions more Americans are expected to go without insurance; and outside of what they are receiving for health care, workers are projected to see their take-home pay actually fall over time.

We simply cannot afford to postpone health care reform any longer. This recognition has led an unprecedented coalition to emerge on behalf of reform -- hospitals, physicians, and health insurers, labor and business, Democrats and Republicans. These groups, adversaries in past efforts, are now standing as partners on the same side of this debate.

At this historic juncture, we share the goal of quality, affordable health care for all Americans. But I want to stress that reform cannot mean focusing on expanded coverage alone. Indeed, without a serious, sustained effort to reduce the growth rate of health care costs, affordable health care coverage will remain out of reach. So we must attack the root causes of the inflation in health care. That means promoting the best practices, not simply the most expensive. We should ask why places like the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, and other institutions can offer the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm. We need to learn from their successes and replicate those best practices across our country. That's how we can achieve reform that preserves and strengthens what's best about our health care system, while fixing what is broken.

The plans you are discussing embody my core belief that Americans should have better choices for health insurance, building on the principle that if they like the coverage they have now, they can keep it, while seeing their costs lowered as our reforms take hold. But for those who don't have such options, I agree that we should create a health insurance exchange -- a market where Americans can one-stop shop for a health care plan, compare benefits and prices, and choose the plan that's best for them, in the same way that Members of Congress and their families can. None of these plans should deny coverage on the basis of a preexisting condition, and all of these plans should include an affordable basic benefit package that includes prevention, and protection against catastrophic costs. I strongly believe that Americans should have the choice of a public health insurance option operating alongside private plans. This will give them a better range of choices, make the health care market more competitive, and keep insurance companies honest.

I understand the Committees are moving towards a principle of shared responsibility -- making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage, and asking that employers share in the cost. I share the goal of ending lapses and gaps in coverage that make us less healthy and drive up everyone's costs, and I am open to your ideas on shared responsibility. But I believe if we are going to make people responsible for owning health insurance, we must make health care affordable. If we do end up with a system where people are responsible for their own insurance, we need to provide a hardship waiver to exempt Americans who cannot afford it. In addition, while I believe that employers have a responsibility to support health insurance for their employees, small businesses face a number of special challenges in affording health benefits and should be exempted.

Health care reform must not add to our deficits over the next 10 years -- it must be at least deficit neutral and put America on a path to reducing its deficit over time. To fulfill this promise, I have set aside $635 billion in a health reserve fund as a down payment on reform. This reserve fund includes a number of proposals to cut spending by $309 billion over 10 years --reducing overpayments to Medicare Advantage private insurers; strengthening Medicare and Medicaid payment accuracy by cutting waste, fraud and abuse; improving care for Medicare patients after hospitalizations; and encouraging physicians to form "accountable care organizations" to improve the quality of care for Medicare patients. The reserve fund also includes a proposal to limit the tax rate at which high-income taxpayers can take itemized deductions to 28 percent, which, together with other steps to close loopholes, would raise $326 billion over 10 years.

I am committed to working with the Congress to fully offset the cost of health care reform by reducing Medicare and Medicaid spending by another $200 to $300 billion over the next 10 years, and by enacting appropriate proposals to generate additional revenues. These savings will come not only by adopting new technologies and addressing the vastly different costs of care, but from going after the key drivers of skyrocketing health care costs, including unmanaged chronic diseases, duplicated tests, and unnecessary hospital readmissions.

To identify and achieve additional savings, I am also open to your ideas about giving special consideration to the recommendations of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), a commission created by a Republican Congress. Under this approach, MedPAC's recommendations on cost reductions would be adopted unless opposed by a joint resolution of the Congress. This is similar to a process that has been used effectively by a commission charged with closing military bases, and could be a valuable tool to help achieve health care reform in a fiscally responsible way.
These are some of the issues I look forward to discussing with you in greater detail in the weeks and months ahead. But this year, we must do more than discuss. We must act. The American people and America's future demand it.

I know that you have reached out to Republican colleagues, as I have, and that you have worked hard to reach a bipartisan consensus about many of these issues. I remain hopeful that many Republicans will join us in enacting this historic legislation that will lower health care costs for families, businesses, and governments, and improve the lives of millions of Americans. So, I appreciate your efforts, and look forward to working with you so that the Congress can complete health care reform by October.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA

(Emphasis added)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. lol, I just posted that
I've been doing stuff for the Saturday meeting all day and didn't know about this letter until a few minutes ago. I should have known you'd be around with it shortly!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8449124&mesg_id=8449147
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I just read it too. lol. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faryn Balyncd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R--The president says an acceptable plan must have: (1)PUBLIC OPTION, & (2)OPEN ENROLLMENT !!!!!!!
Edited on Wed Jun-03-09 08:27 PM by Faryn Balyncd




:toast:


Obama has identified the methods Big Insurance is using to try to destroy the public option.

Big insurance (with the support of Baucus AND of Schumer) is trying to sabotage the public option by CHERRY PICKING, which will force high risk, expensive patients into the public plan, and through such "Adverse Selection" make the public plan a high risk group, unable to compete economically because of the un-even playing field.

Until this letter from Obama, it looked liked Big Insurance was winning the battle in the Senate Finance Committee.

Schumer pointedly REFUSED to consider Open Enrollment when he met with PNHP physicians last week. He said he would "consider" 2 of their 5 issuies , but NOT Open Enrollment. But without Open Enrollment (like Medicare has for Medicare HMO's), and community ratings, the insurance companies will continue to refuse to insure high risk groups, based on pre-existing conditions, forcing them into the public plan, and crippling the public plan's competitiveness.

Obama realizes this.

We need to support him on these 2 issues.

A line has been drawn in the sand.

Any plan that does not have:

- - - - a viable public option open to all

- - - - OPEN ENROLLMENT, requiring insurance companies to accept all comers (using community ratings) without excluding pre-existing conditions

MUST BE DEFEATED!!!!



And the president (if not the Senate Finance Committee, specifically in cluding Baucus and Schumer) is with us!!!!!!!!




:toast:




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. The health care issue seems so large, almost insurmountable. But I'm hopeful
that they'll get something passed that's an improvement. I REALLY think we need a public option. I just know in my gut that keeping us eating at the feet of the ins. cos. will continue to be bad news for us in the long run.

Keeping the insurance company option only, but guaranteeing the ins. cos. customers by mandating that all adults be covered, is a windfall for the ins. cos., but not a great step forward for the average citizen, even with subsidies. Our taxes will keep going up to pay for the subsidies, plus we'll be paying for our own ins., as before. I don't see a big help there, money-wise.

But it couldn't get much worse. So I'm hopeful that they'll get SOMETHING passed that will help.

I have decent ins. coverage through my employer, but I haven't always had that in the past, and I may not in the future. You never know. But I believe that BASIC HEALTH CARE IS A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE. Dying from cancer or another expensive illness shouldn't happen because you didn't have the money to buy an ins. policy, and your employer didn't provide one. Die if you're poor or middle class, live if you're wealthy. It's just not right.

And losing everything you own and becoming homeless because you have one catastrophic illness (this can happen even if you have insurance) shouldn't be happening in our country. We're better than that.

With Kennedy and Obama and others working on it, I'm hopeful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. But... but... There's nothing to be outraged about with that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Read it more carefully
He suggests waivers (from the obligation to purchase insurance), rather than coverage, for individuals who cannot afford the premiums
and the basic "affordable" plan he suggests will provide virtually no relief for those who do not have a single catastrophe - but have regular large expenses every single year.

Personally, I have lived with catastrophic coverage because I am uninsurable. Under the right circumstances, it is a good option. I have virtually no ongoing health expenses, but I have a condition that freaked out one insurance provider so now no one else will touch me. All I needed was something to make sure that I didn't lose everything if something off the wall happened. It was a very good option for me (and would have continued to be a good option for the 15 intervening years since I had that kind of coverage had I not had had access to better employer provided coverage).

I would never recommend that my daughter live with catastrophic coverage. Her annual expenses, as of last Saturday, are expected to run around $60,000 a year. With catastrophic coverage she would be out the premium (for catastrophic coverage typically $1200-$5000 - assuming that everyone pays the same premium and there is no price hike associates with having pre-existing conditions) plus the out of pocket before the catastrophic cap kicked in (typically $5000 or so). She would have those expenses each and every year - and it is likely that for part or all of the next 20 years or so she will be unable to hold down a full time job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
European Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'm glad he wants a Gov't option--but is he willing to throw his weight around.
He needs to deliver more than Charisma! Go Obama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
andym Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
7. This sounds reasonable. Let's try to help get it done! nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I'm with you ~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. I wonder how he would describe "affordable".
If your insurance costs 75% of your rent payment, is that considered affordable?

I remember back in the 80's when I went to school full time, worked part time and paid for my own BCBS insurance. It was one of the cheapest monthly expenses I had.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ms. Toad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's my big question...
Catastrophic coverage typically means it kicks in at $5000 or up. (the basic "affordable" plan was described as providing preventative and catastrophic coverage.) For individuals with chronic health issues that likely means the cost of the premium (perhaps $1200-$3000) PLUS $5000 every year before the catastrophic coverage kicks in. Although I have recommended catastrophic coverage as an option for people in generally good health, for someone with chronic health issues a catastrophic plan is not affordable since the catastrophe happens every year.

And - he is not suggesting that the plan will provide access to health care people for whom the price of insurance is a hardship - only that the requirement that they purchase insurance will be waived.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC