Obama caves in

[SonOfSlobone]

Canada, Britain, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland all have some strong socialist tendencies, and they live happy lives. They have a higher life expectancy, I would argue higher quality of living. Low crime, etc. etc.

It ain't that hard to beat the US on life expectancy -- even Cuba is ahead of us. We're #38 on the world list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

 

[SonOfSlobone]

Bob Herbert has an excellent column in the Times summarizing why health care reform is going nowhere:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/opinion/18herbert.html?_r=1

It’s never a contest when the interests of big business are pitted against the public interest. So if we manage to get health care “reform” this time around it will be the kind of reform that benefits the very people who have given us a failed system, and thus made reform so necessary.

Forget about a crackdown on price-gouging drug companies and predatory insurance firms. That’s not happening. With the public pretty well confused about what is going on, we’re headed — at best — toward changes that will result in a lot more people getting covered, but that will not control exploding health care costs and will leave industry leaders feeling like they’ve hit the jackpot.

The hope of a government-run insurance option is all but gone. So there will be no effective alternative for consumers in the market for health coverage, which means no competitive pressure for private insurers to rein in premiums and other charges. (Forget about the nonprofit cooperatives. That’s like sending peewee footballers up against the Super Bowl champs.)

Insurance companies are delighted with the way “reform” is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.

To summarize the summary: Any real reform would take money out of the pockets of the insurance and drug companies, and they're not going to let that happen. Which is what I've been saying all along...

 

[naked gent]

To summarize the summary: Any real reform would take money out of the pockets of the insurance and drug companies, and they're not going to let that happen. Which is what I've been saying all along...

I think if the public option is being taken off the table we'll need some other way to reform the private insurance industry and hospitals. Since we know anything even vaguely socialistic won't fly how about we try adding a little more capitalism to the system.

I made this suggestion while talking about this subject over the weekend and am throwing it out here now to see what people here think.

My modest proposal is to pass a law forcing each individual hospital or a chain of hospitals to determine what their cost of various procedures is and to offer that price to everyone whether they have insurance or not and without regard to the size of the company they might be insured with.

As it is today if you don't have insurance the hospital will charge you as much as double for the same services as an insured person might have. By forcing hospitals to price their services based on their actual costs we'll undercut the power of large insurance companies and open the market to smaller players who currently can't compete because they don't insure enough people.

By injecting more competition into the system consumers will benefit and if you believe healthy competition is a key part of any good capitalist system we'll also be making the system more capitalist than it currently is and we'll also make it obvious who the apologists for the big private insurance companies are and make it harder for them to criticize this "reform"

Just a thought.

 

[Miz1983]

I'm simply... dumbfounded. 52 % of the vote, 60 Dem senators, 256 Dem representatives, and Obama finds a way not to pass the legislation he swore he would.

And all that having his hands tied by some senator from North Dakota, a state "where nobody lives, because it's too cold and they don't have a major sports franchise" (Toby Ziegler, The West Wing )

 

[Miz1983]

My modest proposal is to pass a law forcing each individual hospital or a chain of hospitals to determine what their cost of various procedures is and to offer that price to everyone whether they have insurance or not and without regard to the size of the company they might be insured with.

As it is today if you don't have insurance the hospital will charge you as much as double for the same services as an insured person might have. By forcing hospitals to price their services based on their actual costs we'll undercut the power of large insurance companies and open the market to smaller players who currently can't compete because they don't insure enough people.

By injecting more competition into the system consumers will benefit and if you believe healthy competition is a key part of any good capitalist system we'll also be making the system more capitalist than it currently is and we'll also make it obvious who the apologists for the big private insurance companies are and make it harder for them to criticize this "reform"

Just a thought.

Makes sense.... but isn't that the plan Senator John McCain outlined during last year's campaign ?

 

[NickCole]

Bob Herbert has an excellent column in the Times summarizing why health care reform is going nowhere:

I agree it's an excellent piece. Thanks for adding it to the discussion.

To summarize the summary: Any real reform would take money out of the pockets of the insurance and drug companies, and they're not going to let that happen. Which is what I've been saying all along...

The notion that "they're not going to let that happen" is wrong and it's Pathetic with a capital "P." And I don't agree Herbert says that.

Unless the insurance and drug companies are literally holding a gun to Barack Obama's head they are not literally in the position to call the shots. They have influence, of course, but "they're not going to let that happen" is a wrong and a ridiculous perception to have of the power of the insurance and drug companies. They have, in this case, the power that Obama gives to them.

Although Herbert doesn't blame Obama (God forbid!), I'll point to a couple of things Herbert says that're true and that an objective analysis points to massive fault on the part of Obama; insurance first then pharma:

Insurance companies are delighted with the way “reform” is unfolding. Think of it: The government is planning to require most uninsured Americans to buy health coverage. Millions of young and healthy individuals will be herded into the industry’s welcoming arms. This is the population the insurers drool over.

This is a problem if there's no genuine public option. The person wobbling now about a public option is Obama. Obama doesn't have to give in, and if he does it's not because the insurance companies wouldn't "let" a public option happen, it'll be because Obama is too weak to fight for what's right.

And then there are the drug companies. A couple of months ago the Obama administration made a secret and extremely troubling deal with the drug industry’s lobbying arm, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The lobby agreed to contribute $80 billion in savings over 10 years and to sponsor a multimillion-dollar ad campaign in support of health care reform.

The White House, for its part, agreed not to seek additional savings from the drug companies over those 10 years. This resulted in big grins and high fives at the drug lobby. The White House was rolled. The deal meant that the government’s ability to use its enormous purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices was off the table.

Is this the fault of the drug industry or Obama? Who caved? And why did he cave? If Barack Obama had a principled plan for health care reform and worked with the Dem majority Congress to craft it, there wouldn't be a damn thing the insurance and drug industries could do about it. Sure they can flood the media with ads against it but with Obama's popularity and access to the media that supports him and health care reform (which is a formidable segment of the media in all forms) and several Dems in Congress adding their unified voices, real health care reform would have happened.

Obviously the insurance and drug industries will do everything they can to protect their profits. The question is why Obama caved to them and tossed us under the bus.

 

[NickCole]

I'm simply... dumbfounded. 52 % of the vote, 60 Dem senators, 256 Dem representatives, and Obama finds a way not to pass the legislation he swore he would.

And his "supporters" protect and defend him as it's happening.

 

[naked gent]

Makes sense.... but isn't that the plan Senator John McCain outlined during last year's campaign ?

Not really. MCain's way of increasing competition was do limit the power of states to regulate which would allow competition across state lines. I don't believe he ever addressed the pricing policies of hospitals.

A couple of things to consider. Most people don't exactly comparison shop for hospitals.

Why? Because usually either A.) an ambulance drops you off at one, you have no choice in the matter. Or B.) your primary care doctor refers you to a surgeon who you meet with, and then when you decide ok let's do this thing, he tells you where the surgery is because he only has surgery rights at one (possibly 2) nearby hospitals.

Unless its an emergency you probably have little control over which hospital will preform surgery on you. The determining factor is which hospital has your insurer and doctors contracted with.

Consistent pricing might change that and it would also force hospitals to compete on price to some degree and besides its not a solution just something thats always bugged me. Those who can afford insurance pay a significantly lower price for hospital services than those who cannot and that don't seem right to me.

I understand why it happens but I don't like it and thing it ought to change.

I also heard it said that for those co-ops to work they would have to enroll at least 300,000 members or they would not be able to compete. It strikes me that that is not in my personal interest.

 

[MystikWizard]

I'm simply... dumbfounded. 52 % of the vote, 60 Dem senators, 256 Dem representatives, and Obama finds a way not to pass the legislation he swore he would.

And all that having his hands tied by some senator from North Dakota, a state "where nobody lives, because it's too cold and they don't have a major sports franchise" (Toby Ziegler, The West Wing )

Well, Obama made his intentions clear and he made good on following up with his promise to make it a priority.

However, there are approximately 20-some Democrat Senators NOT on board with the proposal who are the real ones who should be under fire at this point. These are the people responsible for the Public Option being in danger of being removed and these are the people who should be held accountable.

Obama can't hold a gun to their heads and force them to do it. But I do think their names should be made public so they can feel the fury of the country.

These 20 Democrat Senators are the sole people responsible for this measure not passing and they should be put in the spotlight for it.

 

[NickCole]

Well, Obama made his intentions clear and he made good on following up with his promise to make it a priority.

However, there are approximately 20-some Democrat Senators NOT on board with the proposal who are the real ones who should be under fire at this point. These are the people responsible for the Public Option being in danger of being removed and these are the people who should be held accountable.

Obama can't hold a gun to their heads and force them to do it. But I do think their names should be made public so they can feel the fury of the country.

These 20 Democrat Senators are the sole people responsible for this measure not passing and they should be put in the spotlight for it.

Hogwash.

The Obama White House struck a backroom deal with Pharma that screws us. That had nothing to do with any Senators.

As for the 20 Senators, whoever they are, it's Obama's job to GET them on board. Obama was supposed to be The One We've Been Waiting For. What were we waiting for, a chump who can't convince members of his own party to get on board with health care reform that'll lower costs to their constituents and make it available to those without? Good grief!

 

[opinterph]

I don't see anyone falling for the trolling any longer. Who would want to argue with someone who fails to provide logical arguments backed with not one iota of evidence?

Are these remarks directed to anyone in particular?

 

[NW007]

Well, Obama made his intentions clear and he made good on following up with his promise to make it a priority.

However, there are approximately 20-some Democrat Senators NOT on board with the proposal who are the real ones who should be under fire at this point. These are the people responsible for the Public Option being in danger of being removed and these are the people who should be held accountable.

Obama can't hold a gun to their heads and force them to do it. But I do think their names should be made public so they can feel the fury of the country.

These 20 Democrat Senators are the sole people responsible for this measure not passing and they should be put in the spotlight for it.

It could be that these 20 Senators realize as do many citizens, that these proposals do nothing to lower health care costs. Let's not fault the Senators for wanting "honest" proposals and ideas presented in these bills.

 

[MystikWizard]

It could be that these 20 Senators realize as do many citizens, that these proposals do nothing to lower health care costs. Let's not fault the Senators for wanting "honest" proposals and ideas presented in these bills.

I would like to hear your take on how a public option, which is effectively competition from the government, will not result in lower health care costs. If this won't lower health care costs, it sure is interesting to see so many private Health Care companies fight this bill tooth and nail.

Anyway, I would like to hear your perspective on the matter.

 

[NW007]

You don't seem to know that's true or not. You've yet to cite evidence to prove this claim, despite repeated requests. Sadly, no one else can back it up either. I call bullshit.

I can't help you any further !!! You have chosen to dismiss the evidence that was cited. I have stated at least twice for you to look at the CBO study that was presented to Congress and has been cited numerous times on all major news links. I will not spend my time doing your homework for you.

Obama's plan started losing support as soon as that study was presented in mid-June.

 

[NW007]

I would like to hear your take on how a public option, which is effectively competition from the government, will not result in lower health care costs. If this won't lower health care costs, it sure is interesting to see so many private Health Care companies fight this bill tooth and nail.

Anyway, I would like to hear your perspective on the matter.

Perhaps, they are fighting it so hard, because they realize that ultimatley in a matter of years all the competition would be put out of business by the government entity. Then you would be left with just one entity or choice and that being the government . You can open competion by allowing individuals to shop across state lines and by changing some of the restrictions on pre-existing conditions and portability for example.

 

[NW007]

Dismiss what Fucking evidence? You say you have stated to ME at least twice for ME to look at this piece of evidence, but I certainly don't see where you directed anything specifically to me to look at in your prior posts.

Why don't you do that first, and then we'll take a look.

I have no problem taking a look at whatever you would like me to look at. However, I think you are mistaken in your claim that you directed me specifically to look at anything. So with that being said, and with all due respect, watch your Fucking mouth!

I will ignore your rant!!! , but once again it is spelled Congressional Budget Office or CBO for short.