Two months ago, all looked well for healthcare reform. It was a popular president’s highest priority. The public was solidly behind it and the entrenched interests assured us that they would support it.
Today, it’s a mess. The assurances of the healthcare industry have turned out to be as phony as they were in the 1990’s and, before that, in the 1970’s. Their negative influence isn’t out front and obvious, but it’s there. Goons are disrupting meetings and the true nature of the proposals are being misrepresented. The campaign to sabotage the president’s effort is, in fact, having its desired effect of lowering the public’s support for reform.
Nobody knows where this will end up. In all probability, some form of legislation will eventually struggle through Congress. There may be some improvements concerning pre-existing conditions and policy cancellations, and the healthcare industry may well end up with more paying customers as tens of millions of uninsured are brought into the fold. But, beyond that, it’s unlikely that any significant progress will be made and it‘s a good bet that our healthcare system will continue to be twice as costly, per person, as it is for any other industrialized nation.
And there may be other disappointments as well. For example, half a dozen meetings were reported to have already been held in the White House between President Obama and Billy Tauzin, a former congressman and currently chief lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry. As a result, the president has agreed to two of the industry’s most important objectives. The government will not be allowed to negotiate the cost of drugs for Medicare, according to the reports. The president was also said to have agreed to drop his efforts to allow cheaper drugs to be brought in from other countries, such as Canada.
For its part the drug industry has pledged $8 billion per year in cost savings for 10 years to help pay for the new healthcare package.
Despite the disruptions and the difficulties we‘re seeing, I’m excited about everything that’s happening right now. Regardless of the prospects for reform, the current chaos is casting a much needed spotlight on our political system. In the process, it is showcasing one or two problems that may be even bigger than healthcare.
First of all, the insidious influence of money in politics has suddenly become as obvious as the cash in ex-Congressman Jefferson’s freezer. That cannot be all bad. The only thing that will ever have a chance of improving our form of government is public opinion. The politicians themselves will never voluntarily cut down their money trees. And the essence of the conundrum that currently exists is that no politician can get elected without actually becoming part of the problem. Public opinion is the only hope for those of us who see campaign finance as an evil influence.
But aside from this, if you look at the spotlight that healthcare reform has created, you can see even beyond a political system awash in money - all the way to a mirror that reveals the core problem to be ourselves.
This was drawn to my attention by a comment made by “Randy W.” under last week’s Contrarian article entitled “One Economy, Two Realities.” He wrote quite correctly that the public must take responsibility for itself. “If we are not responsible for our own behavior, then there is no personal accountability and we no longer have a civilized nation,” he said.
If you accept Randy’s point of view then it is only one small step to conclude that our problem is simply that we are too easily manipulated by those who would control our minds.
Why this is so, is a matter for debate, but my theory - which probably many will disagree with - is that it relates to the nature of our society.
It seems to me that some of the things that we are exposed to at an early age may play a role. The "good American," for example, very often grows up to be a church-going member of a political party who may work for a large corporation, and who may also belong to a social club, such as the Elks.
Now, I'm not about to say any of that is bad, but one of the possible results is that it may tend to make this "good American" intellectually lazy, and relatively incapable of exercising independent judgment as to the events swirling around his existence.
Let's face it, many religions indoctrinate their parishioners with a host of moral beliefs, and some political ones as well.
Political parties lay out in great detail what they expect their members to believe.
Large corporations do the same in promoting their own self interests, maintaining brainwashing programs that - in general - are so effective that those who rise through the ranks to positions of significance, more often than not, put the interests of their employers and their fixations with the "bottom line," ahead of the public welfare and even themselves and their families.
And finally, an active social club will relieve its members of hardly ever having to exercise their judgments with respect to their social lives.
The “good American,” as described here may, in fact, be little more than a mind-controlled, intellectual robot who has no clue that he has allowed the special interests to hijack the political process.
So, if the healthcare issue disintegrates into a sordid tale of payoffs, bullying, lies and manipulation, I say - so be it. Let the spotlight shine through the mess we call our political system, if it must, and let it travel on to reflect off the mirror that reveals the true enemy.
Perhaps, in that way, the issue will make the greatest of all possible contributions to our society.
Dave McGill, News Correspondent
Dave’s column, “The Contrarian,” generally published every Friday to Gather Essential News and other groups will sometimes present a contrary view to various aspects of the news, or an alternate take on the conventional wisdom of the day. It will also often appear on other days of the week
Dave has been a senior officer of an eastern insurance company, involved in economic projections and investment strategy, president of a Midwestern mortgage banking company, and a financial consultant in Southern California, serving clients in the field of commercial real estate development.
You can find all of Dave’s “the contrarian” columns at: http://gather.com/thecontrarian. Keep up with Dave’s other postings and Gather activity by joining his Gather network at: http://atadaskew.gather.com. You’ll find Dave and other News correspondents, plus celebrity content and plenty of news experts at: news.gather.com.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 74
thx for a good article
And so will those who are willing to accept a Communist/ Socialist Government as the solution to it all.
for instance, when we read an opinion about something on the the internet, or hear something on the radio, or see it spray painted on the walls we take in a bit of information but we construct a hologram tying everything together in our minds to invent a model of what we thing the world is like.
how much money, power, force and lies have been unleashed on Americans throughout the years to meld the way we see the world. it is well known that the basics of our economy was planned after WWII, and now the main thrust of the militant wing of the power elite is to regiment and disarm Americans of any political power at all except maybe waving the flag on the 4th of July.
On the other hand we have a lot of people who are sick of the way things are going in the country ... the problem is that just like in Iran in their last election ... we really have no objective verifable way to figure out what most of us think. Polls or corrupted by experts who know how to spin and seqence the questions to say just what they want, and they have ways of repeating things through enough of the channels they know people watch to saturate people in the idea of what they want our world view to be.
Are Americans really so stupid, or is it all just smoke and mirrors to make us doubt ourselves and isolate us from each other?
How many of the ridiculous right-wing voices that we hear in the media and on Gather are people who are compensated for that work they do?
Gosh you put this well, I think;
" . . when we read an opinion about something on the the internet, or hear something on the radio, or see it spray painted on the walls we take in a bit of information but we construct a hologram tying everything together in our minds to invent a model of what we thing the world is like."
That "hologram" effect, as you call it, is what people are really getting upset about, I believe, in the sense that we are trained to do this, and, to be quite insistent that we are aware of the illusions of others, and are beyond them . . .
In truth, I personally don't see two "wings" anymore, but one conglomeration of "elites", that stages battles more often than they truly are at odds . . . I see two "right wings", and what Mr. Eisenhower warned about; the "Military Industrial Complex", is a huge player, along with the vast corporate empires, and the banking/financial beasts, and surely some hyper-wealthy titans, etc. It's not that Americans are stupid, but that these folks are very good, and very ruthless about what they do, I think.
Your emphasis on the long time-frame, is so very important to grasping the nature of this ubiquitous power and wealth grabbing going on. That's the people's power, and many people's wealth . . going to a few. The notion that we have "allies" in high places is quaint . . . but highly unrealistic, I fear. Those fellas ain't about to botch their status so carelessly as that dream projects, me thinks.
I've gotten so I'm skeptical of anything I hear or read, but even with the internet at my disposal, how can I be sure that what I'm being told is "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"?
Reality should be presented as objectively as possible by responsible "organs" or information, like the media. Any attempt to pervert this process is a major crime against all of us and should be taken as serious as 911 in my opinion.
Didn't know we had so many mind readers in this country LOL.
Our former president has committed many crimes, insurrection, war profiteering, torture, stock market insider trading, supporting rogue regimes, and the list goes on and on yet when people cry out for justice our leaders say sweep the rule of law under the rug and move on. Their is no move on until the present business is taken care of and prosecuting these war crimes will send Washington the message that the public is fed up with their insurrection.
The government takeover of our education system was hailed by the public because people saw big money coming from government to supply their children with all the tools they needed to get a REAL education but instead got brainwashed and their has never been any money to support the public school system, our schools system is supported by local and state taxes and the federal DOE should be disbanded and this goes back to Kennedy. No child left behind was designed to leave every child behind but again the public allowed it to happen and with a president that did not have the brains to hold a book right side up for his photo opt http://jack113.250free.com/jpg/bush9-11school.jpg on the same day he allowed 9/11 to take place.
Reform, what is reform when the presidents signature on a document becomes meaningless the day he steps out of office? The states have the power to enact term limits on senators and congressmen, a few states have term limits now. By electing Obama we have seen proof that the only thing that changes from election to election is the name in the white house, and what choice was their in the election except to elect Obama? The program never changes or varies from trashing the constitution, sweeping the rule of law under the rug, to war profiteering and empire building.
These Americans have every right to show-up at meetings- meetings that discuss their quality of life and demand answers, answers by the way they never get. What they get are a bunch of lies and they know it, these informed people bring pages of the plan with them read it to these hack politicians- who have not read the thousand plus pages- tell these informed citizens that what they are reading is not in the plan.
David, nice post. I am excited also, these citizen protesters are long over-due, this has nothing to do directly with Obama. The Clinton's got the same treatment with their attempt to give us Socialized government run health-care- by the way the Clinton's were White people.
It is a sad day when the Govt. in charge can get away with labeling citizens{moms and dads- veterans} labeling them as products of anti-government "racist" groups of "MOBS".
I am very excited- Speak- out more. These corrupt elitist snob politicians" all of them", no matter what party, need to be made to understand they work for We the People, not for them. These political louses have total contempt for the people, how dare there they yell at us for asking questions of them, again we are their boss, if any employee in private industry spoke to his boss that way that person would be fired.
These pols. are really getting nasty and desperate. Guess these failed workers of ours think when they got elected they are not to be Questioned-Ever on Anything.
That has to stop and hopefully this is just the beginning. No matter what color the President might be.
Foot-note the only people being bussed into these town-halls are from ACORN and SEIU- union members{ thugs}. for hire!
So you say it has nothing to do with President, but you yourself often refer to it as "Obamacare"
The money being spent to oppose these plans is coming from the medical industry.
Pharmaceutical- who produces your drugs in China and other countries.
Insurance-who are now processing your claims in India
Huge Corporate Hospital Groups- Who have serious problems with fradulent billing for Medicare patients.
Money also is coming from all those businesses that are entirely based on Medicare patients, they sell "equipment" like adjustable beds, lifts, little carts, grab bars.
Anyway,
You can stay delusional about how much support exists for a national health care plan.
Big noise does not equal big opposition.
This whole thing is going to crash and it isn't going to be because of the right wing--but because in his rush Obama didn't have a plan ready to go, just an idea. Now that he has Congress involved, it's going to be so messed up it won't resemble anything Obama had in mind, and you can be darn sure Pelosi and some of her ultra left wingers will be sure to run it 'their' way.
President Obama did not put into play a detailed plan of his own because he knows it must come from your legislators.
The Republicans have refused to offer a plan and have instead taken the single stance: Stop Obama
The Democrats are not clones, and now President Obama is voicing more of what he hopes to see in the plan.
Republicans have been telling Seniors that President is going to End Medicare, is that the untruth you are speaking of having to be undone?
Lazy is the operative word here.
I see you don't understand the difference between dissent and lies.
We can brake the system if we want to. Just stop paying those premiums.
It will be called redistribution of the wealth.
Don't you know that is what your current Social Security & Medicare plan is.
BUSINESS had to pay 1/2 of your Social Security Payment all the years you worked.
REpublicans hate Social Security because it is REDISTRIBUTION of wealth.
If the tax rates were back where the used to be, or even a little bit more reasonable we would not have these deficits.
If we do not like the expenses incurred by crime, sickness, ignorance, etc, then we should work to set the incentives right so that we all are motivated to do the right thing to end them, instead of writing more and more people off and throwing them away.
This country needs re-distribution of wealth. We are the ones who do the work after all and the gap between workers and executives in America is larger than any industrialized country in the world.
And Dexter, you just can't believe it, right? The man who took three quarters of a billion dollars in "donations" is actually representing those who paid him. Let me tell you loud and clear, Dexter, MONEY RULES.
As far as accuracy goes, everything I have ever written and ever will write is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I believe credibility is any writer's strong suit and I wouldn't abandon it for one minute.
The info relative to the White House meetings was probably reported in many papers but I happened to see it in the LA Times on 8/4/09 under the headline "White House gives drug makers a seat."
It reads: "As a candidate for president, Barack Obama lambasted drug companies and the influence they wielded in Washington. He even ran a television ad targeting the industry's chief lobbyist, former Louisiana congressman Billy Tauzin, and the role Tauzin played in preventing medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices. Sinct the election, Tauzin has morphed into the president's partner. He has been invited to the White House half a dozen times in recent months. There, he says, he eventually secured an agreement that the White House wouldn't try to overturn the very Medicare drug policy that Obama had criticized on the campaign trail."
A little further into the article was this statement: "For his part, Tauzin said he had not only received the White House pledge to forswear medicare drug price bargaining, but also a separate promise not to pursue another proposal obama supported during the campaign: importing cheaper drugs form Canada and Europe."
The White House did not deny Tauzin's quoted statements. Again, the quid pro quo was the industry's alleged political and financial support for the initiative. Of course, the question of whether that support is being carried through behind the scenes is another matter entirely.
Welcome to the real world, Dexter...
Read my comments further down..... I dont anybody even tried to deny the negotiations.. but they mean a hill of beans.
That is not a guarantee that we all will end up in agreement, but at least we can discuss the issues intelligently. As Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, we are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts.
For example, you state, "the single payer type of healthcare, a system that works fairly well in England and Canada". I obviously have different standards than you, because I can't see waiting 9 months in constant pain for a hip replacement (as my Canadian winter renter was advised by her doctor). But, at least we can discuss the issue intelligently because we have thought about it.
The Republicans supply the "talking" points.
See Mary's "redistribution of wealth"
Big Government
Socialist
Communist
Facist
It is very sad indeed when Seniors like Mary Bradley say they don't want government health care, but in fact are enrolled in Medicare, our 100% Government Health Care plan for people over 65 or on Social Security Disability.
Mary Bradley of course is Receiving her Redistribution of wealth Social Security Payments and her Redistrubution of wealth Medicare.
What Redistribution of wealth? Not Social Security. That too is an insurance we pay to have for our retirement. It is independant of government and all the money collected goes into another trust to be paid out in retirement benefits later in life.
All good Republicans/conservatives consider the payrolll deductions for
Medicare to be a TAX.
Tax because 1/2 is paid by the employer
Tax because people not yet old enough to be covered pay.
Tax because the deduction will have to be increased to cover the costs.
See,
What part of Social Security and Medicare is not run by the government.
Col. George.
I cannot believe what you have posted. You of all the conservatives posting on Gather sometimes present independent thought and ideas.
Saying Social Security and Medicare are not "Government RUN programs, does not make it so.
They are both government run programs
and the employer portion of the payments is most certainly a tax on employers and is the prime reason that the Republicans have hated this program from the beginning.
It is considered to be too costly for business, especially now.
For its part the drug industry has pledged $8 billion per year in cost savings for 10 years to help pay for the new healthcare package."
Now I know the reason for this headline:
Drugmakers ready $150 million for Obama plan
Boost would halt efforts to derail health-care overhaul
As far as the other points you've made, I see the pharamceutical interests as a key factor in squashing progress and true health care reform with their monopolization of the distribution and consumption of drugs, and I don't care how much they're willing to contribute for what they deem will be savings. I don't think it's just a matter of not allowing cheaper drugs from Canada, but that nothing is being done to consider alternative medicine that could also be effective in reduction of cost.
Of course, there is also tort reform to consider.
Whether or not you think it has significantly or at all helped your state, I hardly think that any attempt to quell frivolous lawsuits that are basically no more than fraudulent claims, can be considered a joke. How that saved money is used might be another story, but that is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
i just read the other day about a doctor that prescribed a drug to a women for a disease that there are other drugs to treat. The drug he prescribed has a high probability of destroying the balance center in the brain. He put her on the drug for too long and now she has to live her life as she is falling head over heels into a bottomless pit. She can hardly stand up or move because of the effects. Totally avoidable, no cure for this "disease". There are some really bad doctors out there, not all lawsuits are frivolous and most of what we hear from the Republicans is exaggeration, as we can see lately.
I would not want to give up the one thing that has historically motivated change, that is, legal fines and awards. And companies would not have to face them if they did their jobs and did not expect to be rewarded for bad work. Think about it, we have a epidemic of highly paid incompetence in almost every field of the economy, and we consistently blame the people for suing or being stupid. We are being brainwashed - but at least we are waking up.
Single payer will accomplish a lot in the US. Once we have a good national health care we will look at the costs and start to realize that its not such a good idea to have so many people on a mainly fast food and junk food diet, it causes disease and lowers productivity, A lot of good will fall out of being fiscally responsible and in control of our own health care.
But , the story about the Negotiation between the Rx companies and the President you talked about in your post occurred long before any of the committees had tendered any bills. If the Congress wants to ignore that agreement, it seems clear the President will still sign a final bill that calls for price negotiations.. It is my understanding, for that particular deal to actually go into effect both sides have to fulfill their part of it. The president is not writing anything that will appear in the final bill. Only Congress will and it will spend much time in reconciliation, so the chance of Medicare not being able to negotiate prices is small. After all what comes from the House will have to be reconciled with what comes from the Senate and usual the final beast is a lot different from either version. Things are removed and things are added.
Healthcare reform is so important that it will go thru a lot to before the President signs it and he can hardly afford to veto anything.. The big questions is, will the conservatives actually try to damage the bill on purpose to ruin it for political reason or will they negotiate in good faith? Or will the Democrats have to strong arm it through with their input?
I admit I personally would rather see the Dems strong arm a bill straight to the White House without any Republican input.. only because I believe teh Repubs intentions are purely related to polcitical strategy more than trying to help anyone!
Do you know where I can get a copy, because his "plan" sounds a lot different than the House and Senate bills that will be voted on in September. You have to wonder why, and why the President doesn't give us his "plan" for bringing the bills in Congress into agreement with his "plan".
For example, he has been saying "if you like your doctor and plan, you can keep them". The bills in Congress don't say that. So how can the President credibly tell the American people they can "keep their doctor and plan" unless he tells us how his plan will be passed into law.
I believe the issue is trust. If the President wants us to support his "plan", he must put it in writing and tell us how it will become law. But, so far, his remarks about a plan no one has seen which doesn't agree with the bills under consideration in the Congress is losing the trust of the people as the polls show.
I believe the success or failure of his "plan" is in his own hands, and depends on whether he can regain the trust of the American people.
If you are making the claim based on one of the pending bills, you should also be able to provide a link or reference.
Which bill
And the section number.
No page number please, the legislation is not page numbered except where someone has copied and edited what is on the legislation.
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf
Try Section 102.a.2 refuting "if you like your plan you can keep it" (as long as you and your insurance co. don't make changes).
Or, Section 102.b.1.A refuting "if you like your plan you can keep it" (for 5 years then we will force you to change to the government plan).
BTW, I assume you don't know where to find a copy of the President's "plan" either, since you didn't respond to my question. The President can say anything he likes as long as he can refer to an imaginary plan.
The text book Human Ecology is written by Gerry Marten, 2001.
Here is a site address.
http://www.gerrymarten.com/human-ecology/tableofcontents.html
--------------
John Holdren co-authored a text book in 1977 Named Population, Resources, Environment.
This book discusses involuntary population control, but does not advocate it. This book was published in 1977, when there was great concern about the population explosion.
- - - - "This is from St. Petersburg Times, July 22, 2009-----
We obtained the book to see exactly what Holdren, then a young man, wrote (or co-wrote). The book is just over 1,000 pages, and it clearly makes that case that an explosion in population presented a grave crisis. Although it is a textbook, the authors don't shy away from presenting a point of view. As the preface states, "We have tried throughout the book to state clearly where we stand on various matters of controversy."
In a section on "Involuntary Fertility Control," Holdren and the other authors discuss various "coercive" means of population control — including putting sterilants in the drinking water.
But they stop well short of advocating such measures.
Now I realize that since you never do a fact check, you think you can post what you believe and expect that any reader will believe.
Your biggest error is in not even getting the book/title author correct.
Dear Friend,
This is probably one of the longest emails I’ve ever sent, but it could be the most important.
Across the country we are seeing vigorous debate about health insurance reform. Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so well are back — even the viral emails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions.
As President Obama said at the town hall in New Hampshire, “where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed.”
So let’s start a chain email of our own. At the end of my email, you’ll find a lot of information about health insurance reform, distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage, 8 common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need health insurance reform now.
Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered by what’s below. So what are you waiting for? Forward this email.
Thanks,
David
David Axelrod
Senior Adviser to the President
P.S. We launched www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck this week to knock down the rumors and lies that are floating around the internet. You can find the information below, and much more, there. For example, we've just added a video of Nancy-Ann DeParle from our Health Reform Office tackling a viral email head on. Check it out:
8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage
Ends Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage because of your medical history.
Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses.
Ends Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms or eye and foot exams for diabetics.
Ends Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be prohibited from dropping or watering down insurance coverage for those who become seriously ill.
Ends Gender Discrimination: Insurance companies will be prohibited from charging you more because of your gender.
Ends Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.
Extends Coverage for Young Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for family coverage through the age of 26.
Guarantees Insurance Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays their premium in full. Insurance companies won't be allowed to refuse renewal because someone became sick.
Learn more and get details: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/health-insurance-consumer-protections/
8 common myths about health insurance reform
Reform will stop "rationing" - not increase it: It’s a myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies.
We can’t afford reform: It's the status quo we can't afford. It’s a myth that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, the President has identified ways to pay for the vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance companies; and increasing efficiency with such steps as coordinating care and streamlining paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal crisis.
Reform would encourage "euthanasia": It does not. It’s a malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to consult with their family and physicians about end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover these voluntary, private consultations for those who want help with these personal and difficult family decisions.
Vets' health care is safe and sound: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget significantly expands coverage under the VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system will continue to be available for all eligible veterans.
Reform will benefit small business - not burden it: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses, provide tax credits to help them pay for employee coverage and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average.
Your Medicare is safe, and stronger with reform: It’s myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will improve the long-term financial health of Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies, and help to close the Medicare "doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors.
You can keep your own insurance: It’s myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them.
No, government will not do anything with your bank account: It is an absurd myth that government will be in charge of your bank accounts. Health insurance reform will simplify administration, making it easier and more convenient for you to pay bills in a method that you choose. Just like paying a phone bill or a utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be standardized so they will be easier to understand. The choice is up to you – and the same rules of privacy will apply as they do for all other electronic payments that people make.
Learn more and get details:
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq
8 Reasons We Need Health Insurance Reform Now
Coverage Denied to Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 12.6 million non-elderly adults – 36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market – were in fact discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years or dropped from coverage when they became seriously ill. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html
Less Care for More Costs: With each passing year, Americans are paying more for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. In 2008, the average premium for a family plan purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage job. Americans pay more than ever for health insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html
Roadblocks to Care for Women: Women’s reproductive health requires more regular contact with health care providers, including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and obstetric care. Women are also more likely to report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to men, women are twice as likely to suffer from headaches and are more likely to experience joint, back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often require regular and frequent treatment and follow-up care. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html
Hard Times in the Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are nearly 50 million people who face challenges in accessing health care. The past several decades have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a primary health care provider in rural areas. With the recent economic downturn, there is potential for an increase in many of the health disparities and access concerns that are already elevated in rural communities. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes
Small Businesses Struggle to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of the uninsured – 13 million people – are employees of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from small business. The percentage of small businesses offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline
The Tragedies are Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at least partly the result of medical expenses. The typical elderly couple may have to save nearly $300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by Medicare alone. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction
Diminishing Access to Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An estimated 87 million people - one in every three Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the uninsured are in working families. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html
The Trends are Troubling: Without reform, health care costs will continue to skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on families, businesses, and state and federal government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign of the need for health care reform is the 46 million Americans currently without health insurance - projections suggest that this number will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the absence of reform. Learn more: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf
And thanks, T.I., for the scoop on the Holdren text...
One things we keep reading concerning the plan is that the insurance companies won't be able to withhold coverage because of existing conditions, but I haven't heard them say whether the premiums could be raised. California passed such a law some years ago and those that had preexisting conditions of a serious nature were simply priced out of the game. The law accomplished nothing...
Yes, they are completely cynical. They agree to insure everyone, but want to charge whatever they wish.
Excessive wealth in this world has completely unbalanced the "playing field" to the degree that the wealth makes the rules they want, hires the referees they want, and divides we the people up into opposing "teams" that are trained to "play" against each other, not for our benefit, but for theirs.
It is called divide and conquer (or control), one of the oldest methods of taking advantage of societies known to man.
It most likely began with the early Roman Empire when Constantine took charge of "Church" doctrine and selected the "allowable" books that made up the One (actually two) "Good Book" where Good and Evil were defined with dogma and people were warned to always follow ONLY the extremes of good which the "Leadership" always claimed "authority" to determine which was which ...
Thus dualism of extremes with "their" God (being whatever "they" called it) the one extreme with the Devil or Satan the other ... and never allowing any of what they call "Fence Sitting" as if any grey areas are absolutely off limits, that cooperation and compassion for and with "The Enemy" is forbidden ... that there is only one extreme allowable, "theirs" ... and "they" call the shots.
Well the world is but a small part of the universe and things just do not in truth work that way ... in truth things are a mix of good and bad, positives and negatives, they were meant to compliment each other rather than constantly fight each other ...
The "Church" even took man and woman and put them at odds in blaming the woman for the evils of mankind (Adam and Eve) ... then "claimed" the patriarchal (male) role of "domination" as the standard ...
To this very day we, especially in the west, think more along such lines than any other ... especially where the farther right-wing religious conservatives are involved ...
Who then is the most vocal, the ones "calling the shots" and doing the labeling of "enemy" putting the "other" side down as the dregs of society ... ?
Do you really think that the "wealth" on "power and control" does not know how that all works, that they will not use it and milk ti for all that it is worth to them for "their" advantage ???
DIVIDE and CONQUER is the method of CONTROL ... it is very evident everywhere, especially in the comments here on Gather where mostly the "Right" blames all others, even moderates and progressives as their enemies, and especially what "they" have "self defined" as the "Liberal Left" which is relatively non-existent except by "their" (the Right's) description ...
Think about it folks ... we really have one common enemy, the greed of excessive wealth that now controls everything that matters ... and they do it by convincing each of us that "someone else" is our enemy, not them of course ... wake up !
Quit blaming the players when the owners are the problem ... take self responsibility for our individual actions instead of relying on the empty words and false promises of others in supposed "authority" ... we are being lied to and we ignore it because we have been taught it is the fault of others and they only are the liars ...
IMnsHO.
Then we can discuss what that means without the distraction of labels.
PS I notice you believe the "Right" label blames all others while the Left label is nonexistent. That is not helpful if you want dialog.
Now as I see things, it is generally the one side (that I mention in my comment) that most often calls the shots, does the accusing, and makes the labels ...
That is just the way it seems to be to me ... arguable of course, undoubtedly.
In the continuing soap opera called healthcare reform - or not - there have been a couple of new developments.
With the cat getting out of the bag concerning those White House meetings mentioned in the above article, everyone seems to be running for cover and the reform process, as a result, may be taking a big step backward.
The White House has now suddenly offered not only different versions of what went down, but also contradictory explanations of "the deal." The bottom line is that Congress is balking at what was allegedly agreed to and the Obama administration is hiding behind the nuances of many a politician's favorite tactic, claiming "It was all a misunderstanding." Where this will leave the drug industry, which had offered $80 billion and its support for reform, is anyone's guess. Bottom line, the gloves may be coming off in a more public way in the battle between the entrenched interests and the supporters of reform.
The situation may cause the drug industry to rethink its faith in its chief lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, whose big mouth and self-promoting comments set off the tempest in the first place.
Also, the Senate has dropped the provision that would have paid doctors for counseling elder patients on living wills and other significant matters they may face as they age. It seemed to be a sensible part of the reform, but distortions by such would-be-defeatists as Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, made the measure a significant liability.
And, what about the White House emails promoting the President's secret (has anyone seen it) health care plan (at taxpayer expense). The emails were supposedly mailed over Axlerod's signature to a list of a) opponents, b) supporters, or c) random email addresses that the Press Secretary knows nothing about. What is that all about?
And, what is the change of tone that the "Townhall" meetings supposedly dominated by mobs all of a sudden are full of calm and thoughtful discussion.
This is change, but I'm not sure what to make of it.
I applaud your most profoundly honest remark:
"insidious influence of money in politics has suddenly become as obvious as the cash in ex-Congressman Jefferson’s freezer"
I think a lot of eyes have been opened. And yes, the "politics" includes Reps and Dems!
Premium-payers need to aggregate themselves into groups where they trust the players. Where people put their trust makes a difference in how they heal.
People who want to buy the latest drug advertised on TV have to have a different plan from people who would not go near a low-serial-number drug for fear of debilitating side effects such as those described above.
I would go first to an acupuncturist if a muscle got pulled. That costs me $15 per hour. Why should any plan pay for more expensive tests and things for me when I don't want that. I can't take arthritis medications that hurt my stomach and kidneys either.
Present plans exclude effective therapies with better side-effect profiles, unless one arranges for catastrophic care but purchases other care under a high-deductible.
My neighbor, a dentist, says increasing numbers of patients are refusing pain medications and antibiotics. They say they will take their herbs.
Deaths from the present system are categorized as iatrogenic. If a person wants a new medication and pesters a doctor for it, at least s/he has taken some risk. The costs of iatrogenic mishaps are staggering: death, disability, and it goes on. It isn't difficult to do a search to get statistics on this.
Issues like this do not go away if you change the payment scheme. It is here on Gather where I was corrected on that some time ago.
A writer from Europe pointed out that a single-payer may wish to save money by handing out pills just as much or more than some other system.
A plan is as good as the people in it. For an individual, it will be better if you are in a plan where you agree with the values and where you feel your voice can be heard.
What evidence do you have that says the public was ever solidly behind these ideas of reform? Polls? Anecdotal evidence from friends and family? What are they please share.
People may have liked the idea of change we can believe in but its become pretty obvious that many had their own idea what that change would be and maybe not what the Administration thinks it should be.
So, Dave McGill, I agree with what you say. And I know it's easy to be cynical because dollars rule democracy, but the power of President Obama's message calls us to believe in the fortune created by goodwill and mutual care.
And this whole debate shows us what enormous pressure the congress faces and how difficult crafting good legislation is. A vibrant healthy republic depends on a healthy community. How else can we stay strong? That's the favorite words of politicians and statesmen and women--to be strong. That depends on health care. Does that sound like national security to you, too?