Kathleen Sebelius Comes Out Fighting For Public Option
By Susie Madrak Tuesday Jun 16, 2009 4:30amJust try to remember: The AMA only represents a mere percentage of doctors. More doctors want single payer than don't. In the meantime, more on the proposed reform from Kathleen Sebelius:
As debate gets under way over Obama's initiative to revamp health care, Republican opposition has centered on one of the key pillars of the president's proposal: the so-called public option — a publicly funded insurance plan that would likely compete against private insurers.
A public health insurance plan, Sebelius said, will put pressure on private insurers to keep costs competitive. "And that's a good thing," she says. "I think that's a good thing for the American public. Medicare right now has lower overhead costs than private insurers."
Republicans argue that upward of 100 million Americans would opt out of private insurance in favor of a public plan if such a plan were available. That figure comes from a study by the Lewin Group, a consulting group owned by Ingenix, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group, but it is a selective representation of the study's findings.
Big surprise there, huh!
"The whole idea of the public option has been difficult, in part, because some of the opposition has described it as a potential for a, you know, draconian scenario that was never part of the discussion in the first place," Sebelius says. "So, disabusing people of what is not going to happen is often difficult, because there's no tangible way to do that."
Login or Register to post comments.
Will this help us get our message to Congress?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmI4Qh03IKM&fe...
the doctor mentions that medicare pays less than it costs to run the doctor's office. the real issue here is the complex web of paperwork that private insurance companies have instituted in an attempt to block paying ANY claim. Doctors are forced to staff their office with several administrative people that do nothing more than chase paper to make sure the doc get paid.
many of the active members are retired! Obama told them how it is but Congress[Conrad etal] need to get the message!!! Call them often...1.800.828.0498...
... alas, few of the members are active in the association. Most people join because of the discounted rates for journals and conferences.
Although, their current leadership would make the NRA honchos blush...
...while Democratic Senators simply lie about single payer support. I understand Republicans telling the nation to fuck off and don't get sick, but to see Democrats whoring for insurance money at our expense is the end for me. I'm through with any politican who is against single payer.
The GOP is scared because 100 million will opt out of private insurance? Wouldn't any rational politician look at that as tremendous public dissatisfaction with private insurance?
Oh, sorry. I used "rational" and "politician" in the same sentence.
That's the way it struck me too but I thought maybe I was missing something.
Good for her.
I can't understand how anyone in the house and senate can bash anything that will help the general well being of Americans' health. How can they justify such a thing. Everything is going through a change right now and health care is right in there. Doing things the same old way got us where we are today. Everyone knows the system is broken badly and as a result people are truly suffering. Who in their right mind would be against the best solution to this national problem?
During the Eisenhower administration the top tier tax rate was 90%; now, thanks to the rethuglican party and spineless democrats, it's 17%. That money would help defray the costs of universal health care! These people keep telling tales of the good old days. Well, it's time to revisit those golden years when the wealthy were kept in check-tenuous thought that check was. Also the Paris Hilton tax, also known as the inheritance tax was put into law to discourage the building of dynasties that would rule the country with accumulated wealth. Speaking of accumulated wealth, Doctor, are you afraid you won't be able to afford the greens fee at your country club or the rental space for your antique car collection or your next vacation to a gated island paradise whrere they send the servants home at night to the other side of the electrified chain link fence and the other side of the island. so they won't slit your throats. Skeevosa!
We pay the most for healthcare in the world, but don't receive anywhere near the best healthcare by any measurable standard.
Any doctor that supports maintaining that should have their license revoked.
countries. The USofA ranks 17th (of 32 'comparable' economies) in the world...
No nation can be regarded as 'civilized' in which the health of its citizens is subordinated to the wealth of its elites.
"Republicans argue that upward of 100 million Americans would opt out of private insurance in favor of a public plan if such a plan were available. "
So? Since when did it become government's job to protect the insurance industry? With the public option, private insurers will either have to get their shit together or go bye-bye. That's called the free market, baby!
the the job of the politicians was to serve the people! Oh silly silly me - must have been an alternate universe!
Remember this from the Incredibles?
"Gilbert Huph: Parr! You authorized payment on the Walker policy?
Bob: They were really sick, Mr. Huph. Their policy clearly covers them against...
Gilbert Huph: I don't care about their coverage, Bob! Don't tell me about their coverage! Tell me how you're keeping Insuricare in the black! Tell me how that's *possible* with you writing checks to every Harry Hardluck and Sally Sobstory that gives you a phone call!
Bob: Did I do something illegal?
Gilbert Huph: [begrudgingly] No.
Bob Are you saying we shouldn't help our customers?
Gilbert Huph: [pacing back and forth] The law requires that I answer no.
Bob: We're supposed to help people!
Gilbert Huph: We're supposed to help *our* people! Starting with our stockholders, Bob! Who's helping them out, Huh? "
And that movie was 2004 - The point they were making (I changed the coverage from home owners to health, but its applicable either way), is far worse today. We are so damnably skrewed!
Where are all the supers? (so to speak?)
of the status quo?
If any NPR bobble-head EVER questioned ANY Bushevik with one TENTH of the aggression that Insqueak leveled on Sebelius to extract a (violable) promise to NEVER propose national health care, I never heard it, and I listen to a LOT of NPR "news."
NPR You Can'T Spell RePublicaN Without it!
really believe any type of effective health care reform is going to pass? Ever since the Clinton impeachment, the Democrats have been in a perpetual Stockholm Syndrome mentality - still deferring to their captors.
It will be touted and trumpeted as the greatest thing since indoor plumbing. Everyone will proclaim what a victory it is for the people, what a defeat for the "special interests."
And NOTHING WILL CHANGE! We will still find ourselves being gratuitously fucked over by the HIP (Health Insurance Parasites) at every turn. The "public option" will prove ephemeral, and impossible to qualify for.
To the extent that the HIPsters aren't SCREAMING in pain, to that extent the plan--no matter what it is--will fail to serve the people.
I guess you missed the Reagan years of perennial Dem ass kissing to the putrid derriere of the "great communicator."
Let me get this straight. The AMA is not my friend? OMG, the horror.
Latest polls show 83% of Mericans want a government option. When will this insanity end?
It will end when we have legislators who's wealth isn't comprised of huge amounts of stock in the insurance, pharmaceutical industries. It will end when we have leaders who's careers aren't dependent upon massive bribes - oops, I mean campaign contributions - from these very same industries.
Then and ONLY then will the insanity end.
If people want REAL change, they need to start sending more people like Alan Grayson to Washington.
Right here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/opinion/11k...
I wish Ms. Sebelius would explain in simple terms exactly what a "public option" would mean to any American signing up for it! They're floating this program out there, yet no one is telling us what the hell it is!
Here's another link I wish Ms. Sebelius would address: Pharmaceutical corporations taking tax money for research and development of a drug then selling it to the American people for a ridiculous profit. Where's OUR cut on the deal??
And where is the oversight of pharmaceutical corporations who lie about what a drug should be used for KNOWING it doesn't work???:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206011...
And one more thing. All this fuss about the new tobacco legislation. Pfftttt! The tobacco companies are STILL heavily subsidized with federal tax dollars and their biggest market is the international market! Hello?! If the Feds have finally realized that tobacco and it's chemical compound "nicotine" is far more dangerous to a person's health than marijuana (classified as an herb with NO known deaths!!), then why, oh why, doesn't the government stop all subsidies for tobacco growing and ban the growing of tobacco outright in the United States except for personal use? It's a FACT that nicotine is more addicting than COCAINE! Anybody ever try to quit smoking???
Why does the United States continue to market DEATH and DISEASE to the whole world in the name of profit?
We need to ORGANIZE our districts with health care meetings so we can go to our LOCAL Congressional offices with representatives of our groups and PUSH HARD FOR THEM TO SIGN ON TO H.R. 676!!!!
Too bad Little Masater Insqueak was too busy throwing up rhetorical brickbats to protect the status quo to ask them.
NPR soooooo totally sucks runny shit from the leaking, reeking asshole of the State...and LOVES it...
Thanks for the link.
Here's the testimonial from people who've used Canada's system
And another.
*
All the time.
Public Option is NOT single payer.
This is a shell game. They've taken single payer off the table and are trying to pawn the Public Option off as being the equivalent. It's NOT.
*
Good on you for seeing it.
Obama and the Dims are shitting themselves to try to provide some simulacrum of change without actually changing anything.
If it weren't so tragic, it would be fucking HILARIUOUS!
They are a union but mostly a powerful lobbying group. They were against Medicaid and Medicare. These people are not friends of the American people. They are all about money and that is it. They are a powerful evil organization, they don't care about us.
My husband's father is a doctor. Very narrow minded on medical issues - even though they are "liberals" and consider themselves progressives - and they are great people, but . . .
The mom told me recently "America's not ready for national Health Care" -- speaking from the position, of course, of someone who doesn't have to worry about having health care coverage OR being able to pay for it AND use it at the same time.
*
.
Dear Ms. Sebelius:
America needs REAL health care reform. Not a useless patch job. The Public Option is a patch job. We need single payer and we need it now.
If not NOW -- then when?
The economy is in ruins and still headed for disaster. How does Obama think we will weather this crisis without national health care? The truth is -- we won't. The lack of national health care alone - on top of our financial crisis - has the ability of tearing down the American Economy to its lowest point ever.
Why do they refuse to accept the truth of this? They know it - they're just pretending that if they make it just a little better - everything will be okay.
But it won't be okay. You can take the experts word for this or you can wait and see - but - America and Americans will pay the price.
*
of Obama telling the AMA that the oposition are not telling you the truth?
Nobody in power actually wants ANYTHING to change, EVER!
They will fight tooth and nail to prevent any change, because ANY change disrupts existing power relations.
And it is under the present conditions and existing power relations that the peoplwe now holding power got their power.
And every change, of any kind, poses a threat to the current arrangements, and to the people who hold power in consequence of those arrangements.
It is for this reason that, no matter what they say, no incumbent EVER wants to expand the franchise, to include MORE voters in the pool, because the new voters are unpredictable. It was the current voters who put 'em in power. Those are people they've already fooled into supporting them. Each new voter is just another problem...
As someone without health insurance, I am carefully watching and am engaging people I know in the issue.
I was wondering the source of this claim: "More doctors want single payer than don't."
While appeals to authority are generally of dubious value, in this case, it would of value to have this particular appeal on the side of single-payer. I'd love to be able to back up such a claim.
So, what's the source?
Thanks.
but here's an argument that hasn't been discussed.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/061109.html
119 million can't be wrong
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/060509.html
Coming off the train - you can feel it, its in the air, and its palpable :-(
I'm still trying to get my head around Obama's apparent need for Republicans to like him.
From meeting with Conservative pundits before taking office, then making concessions in his bailout bill that they then voted against anyway.
And now he keeps trying to please a group that defends the guy that is openly hoping for his failure.
Time to say, "We have enough votes to do this with out you", tell them to go screw themselves, and ram his agenda down their throat the way Bush used his (smaller) majority to cram his agenda down the Democrats throats.
that makes them behave like victims of domestic abuse, who sometimes try in vain to earn the acceptance of their abuser. Or they are victims of some weird case of Stockholm syndrome. Or most likely, they are simply more en tune with the GOP needs and policies than they are with their supposed base.
In any case, the GOP comes out fine... it is us who get screwed.
I am however starting to feel pretty underwhelmed by Obama. He is a nice fellow, I think his heart is in the right place, he gives fantastic speeches (which is a very very welcome change from the previous idiot we had as president). However, he seems to be far more concerned on not hurting the sensitivities (and interests) of the GOP... than he seems of defending my sensitivities (and interests). Nothing personal, but in the future I will reserve my support for those who support my interests.
I think liberals need to organize a viable 3rd party, so that we can leave the Dems on their own (and maybe they can start to work to earn our votes instead of simply assume them). Probably whatever faction in the conservative spectrum of things who still conserves their sanity intact can also do the same, and provide a pragmatic alternative to the GOP's insanity.
Democratic politicians are not cowards, and they aren't suffering from Stockholm Syndrome or just trying to pick up conservative voters. The truth is they're REPUBLICANS, and they lead voters along just enough to make it seem like they're not. The only proof you need for this is the U.S. Senate, where Democrats need 60 votes to pass legislation while Republicans only need 51 votes. Clearly Democratic legislators wouldn't impose such a rule on themselves if they weren't working for the GOP.
... see in any other democratic system. The best thing that could have happened to the Dems is the current self destruction we're witnessing from the GOP's part. To the point, that any shabby Dem politician would have made their damnest to add more fuel to the fire.
Alas, it somehow seems the first ones to defend the GOP lately are... Dems.
In fact, if you look at the Dem lineup... people that could be considered populist and in tune with the will of their constituents are the ones like Kucinich, Feingold, etc... are a rather distinguished minority... and not the norm by a large margin.
These facts should have set the warning bells in the mind of most liberal democrats looooong time ago.
I wish a Progressive blog source would actually sytand up and scream that the public option is just appeasement for so-called Progressives.
You know it is watered down. You know it will fail and give those against it the cannon fodder to say, "we told you so."
The culprit is the Insurance Industry. Period.
We must cut the head off that monstrous beast TODAY.
It would help if the so-called progressives would help instead of kissing Mr Obama's lying A$s:
http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/oba...
Public option is NOT single payer and she is correct there.
But the uninformed think it is a means to single payer, it is not.
It is a sham. The insurance companies will send the sick people and anyone else they don't want to insure to the public option.
Single payer is the only way.
Take the profit motive out of health insurance and health care.
Public Option is a trick... it is actually worse than what we have now. Since healthy people may end up paying *twice* for health care: once for the insurance premiums so that the entitlement by the insurance industry to profit can be met. And a second time via taxes, because we still have to pay for the public option... which is most likely the only option which will provide health care... since I guarantee you insurance companies will dump those paying their premiums as soon as they need care (and thus interfere with profits).
The public option only provides a vehicle for the insurance industry to maximize their profits. Which is really really really f*cked up if you think about it.
The funny thing, is that with their practices... a big chunk of the leadership of the insurance companies would be behind bars in a big portion of the industrialized world.
From Single Payer vs. Public Option:
Excellent Chart comparing Public Option to Single Payer:
Single Payer v. Public Option Chart
Found here:
Single Payer Action
Not good enough to come out in favour of some half baked bullshit.
No. It'll keep them bitching about how unfair it is, how the govt should limit enrollment in the 'Public Option' and will try to get legislation passed to require people to buy from them if the PO is full.
Health Insurance for profit should be abolished. People who would lose their jobs can work for the govts health care program.
Come out in favour of single payer and then I'll been impressed.
Right now, I am having to beg Medicare Part D handled by a private insurer to agree with my doctor on a particular drug, half the the strength of the usual. That is Community CCRx, a private insurer.
They promise on he phone that it'll be approved, then when the doc calls it is reams of paperwork for the staff and doctor to fill out. So I can get a drug that will make it possible to do some tests to see if I have something internally wrong. If I hadn't already had a bunch of trouble, I could take the full strength.
Not only that, but as a person who is on the medical dole, I am obliged to follow my doc's orders, but these assholes put me in jeopardy of disobeying orders, so I could lose bennies.
And here's the deal: In the hospital pharmacy where they don't carry it, it would cost $12. In a drugstore, where I have to go, it's $60.
That's an intersting piece of bull shit. I suppose you don't treat them then, or shuffle them down the road to someone who can make ends meet by covering the medicare patients??
Give me a break! When it costs $80 for an office visit, and I see the doctor for all of 5 minutes...I sorta have to wonder what is behind the doors I'm not privey to? That's an absurd statement!
I have ZERO sympathy for the poor doctor that can't make his ends meet. This is outrageous. You do the math. $80 x 12 = rip-off
I think it's time for some of these doctors to get their f*cking heads back down to earth.
The doctor mentions that Medicare pays less than it costs to run his office, but fails to mention that most of us on Medicare carry supplemental insurance to cover that which Medicare does not pay to avoid being sued by the doctors for the balance. He acts as though he just accepts what Medicare pays which is just crap ... he charges what he charges everyone, and then sues for the balance if necessary. Don't believe for a minute these asswipe doctors don't get their money ... you have never been hounded like a doctor will hound you. They all have bill collectors in their offices and they all will hound you to the ends of the earth, trust me, after cancer and 4 heart attacks, I know all about how these pricks operate!
Yo Prez, not long ago, the CBC asked Canadians to nominate and then vote for The Greatest Canadian in history. Thousands responded.
The winner? Not Wayne Gretzky, as I expected (although the hockey great DID make the Top 10). Not even Alexander Graham Bell, another finalist.
The greatest Canadian ever?
Tommy Douglas.
Who? Tommy Douglas was a Canadian politician - and the father of Canadian universal health care.
Yo prez, and its not like you don't have support...!!...
....When polled, a majority of physicians as well as the public support a single-payer plan. For example, a 2007 AP-Yahoo poll asked respondents whether they agreed with this statement: "The United States should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers."
A whopping 65 percent said yes to that question. By political standards, this is a landslide. It is time for Congress (and the Prez) to pay attention to the voters, not the well-funded lobbyists.
Yo PREZ....LEGACY to be the greatest....or another STATUS-QUO FOOL!
Intrepid fighter Sebelius had a few more things to say to NPR. My personal favorites:
"This is not a trick. This is not single-payer"
Asked if the administration's program will be drafted specifically to prevent it from evolving into a single-payer plan, Sebelius says: "I think that's very much the case..."
So let me get this straight...
Single-payer (favored by the public, likely to be the most efficient solution) is some kind of "trick"?
And, whatever lame form "the public option" takes in the final bill, it will never be allowed - by design - to "evolve" into single-payer, no matter how how economical, sensible, efficacious or popular that might be?
So who or what exactly is Sebelius fighting for, anyway? Remember, this - the public option, not single-payer - is the starting point for legislative debate and the all-mighty quest for "bipartisanship". With single-payer removed from the scene, the public option becomes the point from which "we" move towards some illusory consensus in pursuit, I guess, of two or three GOP votes (not needed for passage) that provide just enough veneer to enable the Administration to declare victory or something.
The corporations have spoken. The corporations have won. Already.
I keep hearing medicare has the cheapest costs. Then why not model a universal healthcare after it? Or better yet, take the top 4 countries of the world with universal healthcare, study them, find the best, implement it and stop wasting time, money and energy.
I'm more concerned about healthcare for the elderly. We need to demand that skilled nursing facilities who overpaid the state and federal governments according to this article pay it back NOW:
Potentially inappropriate nursing home payments spur increased Medicare Part A, Part D oversight
June 08, 2009
Tens of millions of dollars were likely inappropriately paid to skilled nursing facilities through the Medicare Part D prescription drug program in 2006, according to a recently released report from the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General.
According to the OIG report, Part D spent roughly $41 million that year to pay for drugs for nursing home residents who should have been covered under the Medicare Part A benefit. While admitting that a small number of facilities constituted the vast majority of inappropriate payments-30 long-term care pharmacies were responsible for 18% of the payments-investigators say that nearly every SNF and half of all pharmacies have at least one Part A patient inappropriately receiving Part D subsidized prescriptions.
In response to the oversight, the OIG made a series of recommendations to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which include more oversight and guidance for skilled nursing facilities. Specifically, OIG told CMS to implement retrospective reviews to prevent future inappropriate payments, and to further educate facilities, pharmacies and drug plans about which Medicare plan is responsible for which medication repayment.
Login or Register to post comments.