Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hamsher: FDL Statement on Senate Combined Health Care Bill

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-19-09 10:34 PM
Original message
Hamsher: FDL Statement on Senate Combined Health Care Bill
Jane Hamsher goes on record:



November 19, 2009


It is encouraging that Senator Reid respected the will of the American people and included a public option in the merged Senate bill. However, the addition of a state opt-out provision threatens to leave millions of Americans at the mercy of private insurance monopolies, with the federal government acting as enforcers for a product with no competition to keep prices down.

The President set an arbitrary $900 billion 10-year price tag for the final bill. In order to comply with this, the Senate bill delays the ban on excluding people from coverage for pre-existing conditions until 2014. According to a study by the Harvard Medical School, nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, and it is estimated that medical costs contribute to 62% of all bankruptcies. This is a callous decision that has an enormous cost in human lives and untold suffering.

Yet in the midst of quibbling about $90 billion a year for health care, the President just signed a one year $680 billion defense spending bill, which does not include the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This represents a serious problem with the priorities of those in government.

But while people struggling with crippling health care costs and pre-existing conditions may have to wait until 2014 for relief, states can begin opting out immediately. That means for the next four years, health care will become a partisan football at the state level, easily gamed by the same insurance company lobbyist dollars that flooded on to Capitol Hill this year. And just as 42 members of the House did the bidding of PhRMA and inserted language into the Congressional Record in support of their endless monopolies on biologic “drugs of the future,” the Senate bill followed suit and included the Anna Eshoo-written language which prevents generic versions of vital lifesaving drugs from ever coming to market.

Seventy-two percent of Americans believe it is important to give people the choice of a public option when forcing them to buy insurance. They do not trust insurance companies. A clear majority of the Senate agrees with them, and would willingly pass a bill with an unfettered public option. But Harry Reid has capitulated to lobbyist money and has allowed the Senate to be held hostage by Senators like Blanche Lincoln and Ben Nelson, who have each received over half a million dollars in campaign donations from insurance companies.

It is time to acknowledge that the Senate process is broken and undemocratic, and is working against the interests of the American people. It is too easily gamed by lobbyist money and has become unresponsive to the needs of small businesses struggling to pay for the health care costs of their employees at a time when unemployment is skyrocketing. The Senate filibuster — and the ability of any one Senator to hold the entire body hostage on behalf of lobbying interests — must come to an end.

If Harry Reid truly cares about fighting for the good of the country over the good of Wellpoint, he will immediately dispense with the opt-out and move to reconciliation and allow a majority in the Senate to deliver to Americans what they want and desperately need.



Is this truly the best these sellouts are worth?




Meanwhile....


Some senators are skeptical lawmakers will be ready to tackle another huge issue after finishing health care. "After you do one really, really big, really, really hard thing that makes everybody mad, I don't think anybody's excited about doing another really, really big thing that's really, really hard that makes everybody mad," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said. "Climate fits that category." --- via OpenLeft



Why are these people occupying our government again?



I am truly sick of these people.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-19-09 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
1.  Why are these people occupying our government again?
Because the population keeps electing them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. or something
Germany outlawed electronic voting machines. So should we.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. +1.

I don't know who elects those people, they (with few exceptins) sure as hell do not represent me or anyone I know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-19-09 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. I heard on Countdown tonight that the bill also allows insurance companies
to sell across state lines. Meaning, of course, they can move to states with fewer regulations and coverage mandates and then really stick it to us. Just like when the credit card companies were allowed to move to states with no usury laws - that worked so well for us.

Olbermann's disucssion with Wendell Potter this evening was very good - I don't have a link to it, but if you can catch the late rerun on MSNBC, I'd recommend it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-19-09 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Heard that too. Here is a link describing it from FDL.
At The Request of AHIP, Senate Bill Guts State Health Insurance Regulations


Everyone is so busy patting themselves on the back, no one is explaining this little gem (one of many) to Americans.


It all just makes me sick, dflprincess.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. The whole thing makes me sick, too.
I can't believe....well, yes, I can, unfortunately, that they are doing this stupid bill when they had a chance to actually do something that made sense and would help people. We need to have a major march on Washington before they finalize this bill. I'm SO tired of the corporations running my everyday life, and the lives of my friends & family.

It's wrong. It's sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
4. Rec. Thanks to Jane and the folks at FiredogLake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
5. It's all the fault of the damn left. They just want too much.
I shouldn't have to add this but :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. Bronze Plan Meager In Senate Health Care Bill - 60% actuarial value
Edited on Fri Nov-20-09 12:50 AM by slipslidingaway
http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/19/bronze-plan-meager-in-senate-health-care-bill/

By: David Dayen Thursday November 19, 2009 12:11 pm

"Jon Walker has gone line-by-line through the Senate health care bill and the CBO analysis, so I won’t replicate his concerns here. In short, he believes the Senate bill has poor risk adjustment, meaning that the insurance companies will be empowered to still game the system, just in different ways; he’s appalled at the creation of nationwide insurance plans, which could easily lead to the gutting of state-based insurance regulations; and he lists several other problems, including the opt-out that states could enact before reform, the 1-year implementation delay, the bad “free rider” provision for employers, and others. I do want to highlight one and expand on it a bit.

6) Incredibly Low Actuarial Value – The minimum actuarial level of the lowest level qualified health insurance is 60%. This level is far too low. This is even lower than the requirement in the Senate Finance Committee bill, which was 65%.


Let’s try to untangle the wonk-speak here. Nicholas Beaudrot does the best job of that. Basically, the bill defines down what qualifies as “insurance,” such that insuring Americans has less meaning and value..."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8734426&mesg_id=8734426

CBO - new information on H.R. 3962 ...

The health care calculator at the Kaiser site which estimates premium costs is based on a 70% actuarial value.


"...Basic coverage under the proposals before Congress would provide an actuarial value of 65% or 70%. That means that the patients would be responsible for the remaining 30% or 35% of health care costs, although the proposals would limit the total amount for which the patients are responsible under the plans. Patients also would be responsible for out-of-network services and for services and products not covered by their plans.

If there is a cap on out-of-pocket spending, then why should the precise actuarial value make difference? Simply, the lower the actuarial value, the greater the likelihood that the patient will have to spend the full amount up to the cap. Thus more individuals will be negatively impacted. Also, the amount of the cap makes a very big difference. The proposed caps on out-of-pocket spending, when added to the patient’s share of the premium, create a financial hardship for most low and middle income individuals and families..."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. What unimaginable bastards.

It boggles the mind that it's the Democratic majority that is doing this to us.

This health care Deform will only "create a financial hardship" for many people and amount to a MASSIVE, utterly regressive backdoor tax, plus it will strengthen the position of the parasitic insurance industry and will only delay the true health care reform (i.e., Universal Health Care for all Americans, not universal mandated RACKET for the insurance corps), possibly by decades.

I'm just sickened by this whole thing, I've never been so utterly disillusioned in the political process.
I consider this nothing short of a betrayal. Or something closely approaching the level of betrayal.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Disgusted as well, another thing we continue to hear is how the bills...
will reduce the deficit, one reason is because of the new long term care plan in the proposed legislation. So we'll collect fees from people for long term care insurance that will not be needed right away and use those payments to fund HC reform.

:shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=7926&mesg_id=8540


Generating revenue to cover the plan's cost over the 10 year period...bottom of page 7 in the CBO report. While the program itself sounds good, notice how this new piece reduces the deficit by 72 billion in the 10 year window.

Nice way to reduce the cost for Now.


The headline news was that this bill would reduce the deficit by 104 billion...

BREAKING: CBO Releases Numbers On House Health Care Bill : Reduce Deficit by $104 Billion

...so where did that reduction come from, it appears a large portion (72 billion) is due to this new long term care insurance, aka CLASS.

While that is something to celebrate, the plan would have people paying in over the 10 year budget window for something they will need in the future, naturally this will be all gains until people start drawing from the fund. For reference this is shown on page 26, Table 3 of the CBO report.

It reminded me of the SS Trust Fund that was pre-financed and helped to reduce the deficits, especially during the Clinton and Bush years...







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I appreciate your posts, btw! I just added your journal to my journal tracker.
:hi:

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-20-09 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Thank you....
I should make better use of the DU tools, maybe one day.

:hi:









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 Sun May 05th 2024, 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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