In the new health care bill released in the Senate, among other provisions, two are that insurance companies can no longer discriminate based on preexisting conditions (guaranteed issue), and individuals will be required to buy insurance (individual mandate). If they don’t, they will be subject to a $95 penalty in 2014 and it goes up to a $750 penalty in 2016. To understand why this penalty is insufficient, we first need to understand why these two principles don’t work unless both are in place…
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
Today House Democrats unveiled their Health Care bill which includes a “robust” public option. Fueled by ressurging confidence from progressives on the left, House Democrats are moving forward with what is clearly the most comprehensive health care plan to date. Unlike the Baucus bill which leaves millions without insurance, the House bill will cover 96% of Americans extending coverage to nearly 45 million uninsured. Forcing private for-profit insurance companies to compete with a public option will reduce costs without sacrificing quality – a win-win scenario. New regulations and requirements will make insurance companies cover those with pre-existing conditions, cap out-of-pocket expenses, and protect people from being dropped when they need it most. The bill will also allow parents to keep their children on their plans until they are 26, giving us young folk time to find a job with benefits.
At first glance the price tag seems daunting coming in at an estimated $896 billion dollars, however Democratic leadership has made it clear that it won’t add to the deficit. To cover its costs the bill will raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans (those earning $500k individually, or $1 million combined), instead of taxing what have become known as “cadillac plans.” Increased tax revenue led the congressional budgeting office to predict that the bill will reduce the federal deficit by $30 million over the next 10 years.
Loading ...In an effort at transparency, Democrats have agreed to publish the 2000 page bill online for a period of 72 hours starting Monday. This means we can expect floor debate on the bill as early as next week.
The “no party” is already attempting to frame the bill as a government takeover of the health care industry, which worked early on when we were just becoming educated on the issue, but now with over 60% of Americans in full support of a public option it seems like a losing strategy. Hopefully some Republicans will have a change of heart when it comes time to vote, if not for bipartisanship, than just to prove that they’re empathetic human beings. Given the saliency of the issue if the “no party” chooses not support the bill and it’s successful, than we can expect several years of Democratic leadership on the Hill and in the White House.
On 10.23.09, In Health Care, By Erik Erlandson
WASHINGTON, Oct 23 (Reuters) – The health reform bill making its way through the House of Representatives will include a public insurance option, but negotiations are continuing on the details of the plan, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Friday.
“At the end of the day we will have a public option” in the House bill, Pelosi told a news conference.
Some thought electing a comedian would make a joke out of congress, they were wrong. As it turns out Al Franken, the Freshman Senator out of Minnesota, is handling his new position with the professionalism and respect it deserves. That’s more than we can say about some of his Republican colleagues, thirty of which voted against his Rape Amendment. The bill would end any government contract with companies that force women to sign agreements preventing them from fairly suing their employer after being sexually assaulted. Jon Stewart did a good bit pointing out the moral deficiencies of the Republican members who voted against the bill.
Today, Senator Franken’s hard at work again, trying to make sure this country gets adequate health insurance.
It’s nice to have at least one Democratic Senator that asks serious questions, even if he’s a comedian.
College Democrats of America executive board member explains why substantive Health Care is especially important for women in America.
As the health care reform debate continues, there is one issue that cannot be ignored: The current health-care system takes a particular toll on women.
Women pay more for coverage because they require more preventative care, and as such are forced to pay higher deductibles. This price gap is especially high for women in the age group most likely to bear children. Indeed, women aged 15 to 44 spend 68 percent more on health care than their male counterparts in the same age group.
Under the current system, pregnant mothers can be denied health-care coverage altogether, potentially causing not only adverse health outcomes for the mother but also for the child.
However, the health-care bills moving through Congress would fix these disparities between men and women. Insurance rates could no longer be based on sex, which is a common practice today in most states. Additionally, co-pays would be eliminated for necessary preventative care, and all states would need to provide some affordable coverage to pregnant women.
So although a shared sacrifice might be necessary for health-care reform to finally pass, it seems a little price to pay to ensure that all women receive the equality in health care they so desperately need. After all, the health of our next generation is dependent upon the health of its mothers.
-Jen Johns
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09287/1005210-110.stm#ixzz0Tvpy1CRC
On 10.08.09, In Health Care, Opinion, By Erik Erlandson
Erik Erlandson
As Barack Obama began his presidency, high hopes for him extended towards the heavens. Though facing a daunting set of challenges, ranging from climate change to financial regulation reform to wars in the Middle East, many Americans were confident that relatively inexperienced Obama, casting himself as a “new kind of politician,” could help our country turn the page on what had been a disastrous four years. The powers and abuses of the executive branch had ballooned under the Bush Administration. America squandered a myriad of opportunities presenting themselves post 9/11, and instead waged a costly war on false pretenses. Obama lit up America on the campaign trail, empowering voters under the banner of a new tomorrow, and a new hope as the Bush Administration began its exit.
Progressives, centrists, and even some republicans, across the United States rejoiced as Obama entered office, and the erected hopes of the campaign trail held firmly in January 2009. In more recent months, after tackling a laundry list of the nation’s pressing problems, Obama’s governing legitimacy faces considerable threat because of a revived debate surrounding health care reform – an issue which crippled the last democratic president Bill Clinton. The failure to pass the Clinton health care plan of 1993 was a significant blow to his presidency, as evidenced by the election results of the following year. Led by Newt Gingrich, the Republican Revolution swept through both legislative houses in 1994, as the Right gained control of both Senate and House for the first time since the 1950s. From then on, Clinton would be forced to make concessions to a new congressional majority, and would be forced to spend ample time personally battling with Gingrich. The realigning election of 1994, cast as a referendum on big government, forever hindered the Clinton presidency.
Anti-government ideologues? Sound familiar?
Descending upon Obama just as they did to Clinton proclaiming that any new-look health care system would be socialist, fascist, and unequivocally anti-American, these market fundamentalists are obscuring the present health care debate with falsities such as death panels and other irrelevant information like Obama’s citizenship. Liberals like myself are becoming more and more concerned that the 2009 attempt at health care reform might hold the same fate as the last try.
Though it would be the death of the public option, a provision deemed necessary by many progressives, the newly introduced Baucus plan might be our country’s last hope for health care reform for a while. While the public option is seen by many as a prerequisite for universal coverage, this doesn’t change the fact that the Baucus plan would be an improvement on the status quo. Our representatives need to realize this. Not only would this kind of a bill challenge the insurance company dynasty that characterizes our current health care infrastructure, but it would ensure a smoother term for Obama, and an easier fought election in 2012 if Mitt Romney, who could claim a health care legislative victory as former Massachusetts governor, was on the Republican ticket.
If Obama and his team learned anything from the “Hillary-care” debacle of the 1990s like they said they did on the campaign trail, I hope it is that something is better than nothing, particularly when it comes to this kind of legislative fight. A flop on health care reform could take the air out of Obama’s sails, as it did to Clinton, potentially resulting in a similar republican turnaround. Such a realignment would be devastating to the progressive agenda, especially after such a triumphant victory in 2008. But what does this all mean? It means the need for compromise in our legislative bodies increases as the days do, and, as Obama said, while the costs of action are great, the costs of inaction are even greater (both financially and politically).
On 09.23.09, In Federal Politics, Health Care, By admin
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
On 09.16.09, In Health Care, By admin
Max Baucus discusses new healthcare
After many months of hard work and over a year of planning Max Baucus unveiled today a “passable” health care bill. In his news conference this afternoon Baucus said the bill “can pass the Senate,” which has been the main stalwart in a summer long battle over healthcare reform. So what makes the Baucus bill passable?
First the plan has no ‘Public Option.‘ Instead it relies on member owned cooperatives and a state-run exchange for individuals and small business owners so they can buy into group plans the same way a large company is able to. Many liberal Democrats are disappointed that both the White House and Senate plans don’t provide a ‘Public Option,’ however the bill still contains several important reforms that can help provide affordable coverage to millions of uninsured.
Second, the bill contains policy that has wide support from both Republicans and Democrats alike including: stopping insurance companies from denying coverage based on a pre-existing condition, capping overall costs to the individual at %13 of income, and subsidizing those who cannot afford to purchase a healthcare plan. Clearly one of the most controversial policies in the legislation is the mandate that everyone must have health insurance or face a fine (similar to how people now have to have car insurance if they drive). Insurance companies are generally in favor of mandates because it adds millions more young and healthy individuals to their plans with the effect of offsetting some of the costs associated with covering pre-existing conditions.
Finally, the cost at $856 billion is significantly lower than other bills that have been proposed. By lowering costs and cutting the public option, Baucus and the Senate leadership hope to gain the votes of conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans.
Ultimately the bill is a milestone in the 60 years since congress began debating healthcare reform. While it may be lacking for many liberals, it nonetheless represents a great deal of progress, and will undoubtedly benefit the majority of Americans who either don’t have insurance or face relentless insurance rates with the fear of being dropped once illness strikes.
On 08.05.09, In Health Care, By admin
From the DNC
Dear Ryan,
There’s been a lot of media coverage about organized mobs intimidating lawmakers, disrupting town halls, and silencing real discussion about the need for real health insurance reform.
The truth is, it’s a sham. These “grassroots protests” are being organized and largely paid for by Washington special interests and insurance companies who are desperate to block reform. They’re trying to use lies and fear to break the President and his agenda for change.
Health insurance reform is about our lives, our jobs, and our families — we can’t let distortions and intimidation get in the way. We need to expose these outrageous tactics, and we’re counting on you to help. Can you read these “5 facts about the anti-reform mobs,” then pass them along to your friends and family?
5 facts about the anti-reform mobs
1. These disruptions are being funded and organized by out-of-district special-interest groups and insurance companies who fear that health insurance reform could help Americans, but hurt their bottom line. A group run by the same folks who made the “Swiftboat” ads against John Kerry is compiling a list of congressional events in August to disrupt. An insurance company coalition has stationed employees in 30 states to track where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings.
2. People are scared because they are being fed frightening lies. These crowds are being riled up by anti-reform lies being spread by industry front groups that invent smears to tarnish the President’s plan and scare voters. But as the President has repeatedly said, health insurance reform will create more health care choices for the American people, not reduce them. If you like your insurance or your doctor, you can keep them, and there is no “government takeover” in any part of any plan supported by the President or Congress.
3. Their actions are getting more extreme. Texas protesters brought signs displaying a tombstone for Rep. Lloyd Doggett and using the “SS” symbol to compare President Obama’s policies to Nazism. Maryland Rep. Frank Kratovil was hanged in effigy outside his district office. Rep. Tim Bishop of New York had to be escorted to his car by police after an angry few disrupted his town hall meeting — and more examples like this come in every day. And they have gone beyond just trying to derail the President’s health insurance reform plans, they are trying to “break” the President himself and ruin his Presidency.
4. Their goal is to disrupt and shut down legitimate conversation. Protesters have routinely shouted down representatives trying to engage in constructive dialogue with voters, and done everything they can to intimidate and silence regular people who just want more information. One attack group has even published a manual instructing protesters to “stand up and shout” and try to “rattle” lawmakers to prevent them from talking peacefully with their constituents.
5. Republican leadership is irresponsibly cheering on the thuggish crowds. Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner issued a statement applauding and promoting a video of the disruptions and looking forward to “a long, hot August for Democrats in Congress.”
It’s time to expose this charade, before it gets more dangerous. Please send these facts to everyone you know. You can also post them on your website, blog, or Facebook page.
Now, more than ever, we need to stand strong together and defend the truth.
Thanks,
Jen
Jen O’Malley Dillon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee
On 08.03.09, In Health Care, By admin
University of Oregon faculty member Mohamed Jemmali makes the case for universal health care in the United States; his primary argument being that we have an economic incentive and moral obligation to pass major health reform.
Oregon Daily Emerald – Rehabilitating health care
Shared via AddThis</a
Flickr Stream
Recent Comments