All posts by Rama Schneider

Obama and the public option …

Did Obama commit to a public option? Or did he waver enough to let it be dropped? While reading his remarks from last night I noticed Obama was very direct about calling out some of the lies; but I also noticed he was somewhat circumspect regarding a government run insurance program.

Text of last night’s Presidential remarks follows:

Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery

Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Health Care

Wednesday, September 9th, 2009

Washington, DC

Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, and the American people:

When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month. Credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them; until those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive; until all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes. That is our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we have taken since January, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled this economy back from the brink.

I want to thank the members of this body for your efforts and your support in these last several months, and especially those who have taken the difficult votes that have put us on a path to recovery. I also want to thank the American people for their patience and resolve during this trying time for our nation.

But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future. So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future – and that is the issue of health care.

I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform. And ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell Sr. in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.

Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to a breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle-class Americans. Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer. Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or expensive to cover.

We are the only advanced democracy on Earth – the only wealthy nation – that allows such hardships for millions of its people. There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage. In just a two year period, one in every three Americans goes without health care coverage at some point. And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage. In other words, it can happen to anyone.

But the problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem of the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today. More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job, or change your job, you’ll lose your health insurance too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won’t pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it. Another woman from Texas was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size. That is heart-breaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.

Then there’s the problem of rising costs. We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages. It’s why so many employers – especially small businesses – are forcing their employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely. It’s why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally – like our automakers – are at a huge disadvantage. And it’s why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.

Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined. Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.

These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how.

There are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada’s, where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everyone. On the right, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.

I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.

During that time, we have seen Washington at its best and its worst.

We have seen many in this chamber work tirelessly for the better part of this year to offer thoughtful ideas about how to achieve reform. Of the five committees asked to develop bills, four have completed their work, and the Senate Finance Committee announced today that it will move forward next week. That has never happened before. Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors’ groups and even drug companies – many of whom opposed reform in the past. And there is agreement in this chamber on about eighty percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.

But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government. Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

Well the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.

The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals:

It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge – not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals. And it’s a plan that incorporates ideas from Senators and Congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans – and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.

That’s what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan – more security and stability.

Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves.

For those individuals and small businesses who still cannot afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we will provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need. And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can’t get insurance today because they have pre-existing medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill. This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign, it’s a good idea now, and we should embrace it.

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those – particularly the young and healthy – who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits. If some businesses don’t provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek – especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions – just can’t be achieved.

That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

While there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.

And I have no doubt that these reforms would greatly benefit Americans from all walks of life, as well as the economy as a whole. Still, given all the misinformation that’s been spread over the past few months, I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight I’d like to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.

Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.

My health care proposal has also been attacked by some who oppose reform as a “government takeover” of the entire health care system. As proof, critics point to a provision in our plan that allows the uninsured and small businesses to choose a publicly-sponsored insurance option, administered by the government just like Medicaid or Medicare.

So let me set the record straight. My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly – by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.

Insurance executives don’t do this because they are bad people. They do it because it’s profitable. As one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop the seriously ill; they are rewarded for it. All of this is in service of meeting what this former executive called “Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations.”

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits, excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers. It would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.

It’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated – by the left, the right, or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.

For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice. And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.

Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public – and that is how we pay for this plan.

Here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period. And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize.

Part of the reason I faced a trillion dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for – from the Iraq War to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.

Second, we’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system – a system that is currently full of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care doesn’t make us healthier. That’s not my judgment – it’s the judgment of medical professionals across this country. And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid.

In fact, I want to speak directly to America’s seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that’s been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.

More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years. That is how Medicare was born. And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next. That is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.

The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies – subsidies that do everything to pad their profits and nothing to improve your care. And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.

These steps will ensure that you – America’s seniors – get the benefits you’ve been promised. They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations. And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. That’s what this plan will do for you. So don’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut – especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past, and just this year supported a budget that would have essentially turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program. That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.

Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody. We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average. The commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system – everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.

Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. Much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers. This reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money – an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts. And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long-run.

Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It’s a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.

Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years – less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration. Most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent – but spent badly – in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle-class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.

This is the plan I’m proposing. It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight – Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.

But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.

That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed – the ones who suffer silently, and the ones who shared their stories with us at town hall meetings, in emails, and in letters.

I received one of those letters a few days ago. It was from our beloved friend and colleague, Ted Kennedy. He had written it back in May, shortly after he was told that his illness was terminal. He asked that it be delivered upon his death.

In it, he spoke about what a happy time his last months were, thanks to the love and support of family and friends, his wife, Vicki, and his children, who are here tonight . And he expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform – “that great unfinished business of our society,” he called it – would finally pass. He repeated the truth that health care is decisive for our future prosperity, but he also reminded me that “it concerns more than material things.” “What we face,” he wrote, “is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”

I’ve thought about that phrase quite a bit in recent days – the character of our country. One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role of government has always been a source of rigorous and sometimes angry debate.

For some of Ted Kennedy’s critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their mind, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government.

But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here – people of both parties – know that what drove him was something more. His friend, Orrin Hatch, knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient’s Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.

On issues like these, Ted Kennedy’s passion was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience. It was the experience of having two children stricken with cancer. He never forgot the sheer terror and helplessness that any parent feels when a child is badly sick; and he was able to imagine what it must be like for those without insurance; what it would be like to have to say to a wife or a child or an aging parent – there is something that could make you better, but I just can’t afford it.

That large-heartedness – that concern and regard for the plight of others – is not a partisan feeling. It is not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character. Our ability to stand in other people’s shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together; that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.

This has always been the history of our progress. In 1933, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it. In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.

You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter – that at that point we don’t merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

What was true then remains true today. I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road – to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

But that’s not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history’s test.

Because that is who we are. That is our calling. That is our character. Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.  

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day …

The radical right wing has one thing correct about Obama … he is adamantly opposed to individual freedoms.

This has been well reflected in Obama’s love of the Kennedy/Bush massive federal mandate on local schools known as No Child Left Untested/Behind/Whatever and Obama’s willingness to mandate we all purchase health insurance that supports the well heeled CEO’s of corporate Unamerica.

Here’s  bit more:

The new federal steps, which do not require congressional action, include:

_ Making it easier for small companies to set up 401(k) retirement savings plans in which all workers are automatically enrolled unless they ask to be omitted. Employers can set default amounts of each worker’s pay – perhaps 3 percent – to automatically be deposited into the accounts without being taxed. Workers can raise or lower the contribution levels, and they choose how to invest the money. They will pay taxes on the money only when they withdraw it as retirees, when their tax rates are likely to be lower than when they are working full-time. A similar process would apply to savings plans called SIMPLE-IRAs.

_ Allowing such plans to automatically increase the amount that workers save over time unless the workers object.

(Obama expands workers’ retirement savings options, RawStory, 09/05/09)

(Yeah: love the headline about expanding choice over an article describing the degradation of such.)

Obama is doing a fine job of carrying on with the cheney/bush administration: expanded war, Wall Street/bank/insurance co bailouts, governmental secrecy, all the above and more.

The wing nuts are correct … Obama is about militant and controling government melding with corporate leadership … the definition of fascism. They just haven’t figured out that Obama is their very own.

Let’s just call it what it is … stupidity!

According to The Ledger, a Florida paper, Florida’s Democratic Senator Nelson doesn’t think there’ll be any public option in health insurance (Sen. Nelson: Health Care Reform to Pass, The Ledger, 08/31/09).

According to the article Nelson says the public option can’t get 60 votes to break a filibuster, and despite acknowledging nobody is talking about a government takeover of our nation’s health/medical care system “still any public option will not pass”.

And now for some real stupidity …

“A big part of (the bill) will be shoring up Medicare and Medicaid. We do not have a bill yet because the Senate does not have consensus. We tried all summer to get consensus,” he said.

That’s right … go back and read the above … Nelson the dumber is telling folks we can’t have a public option health insurance program because we need to shore up taxpayer funded health insurance programs.

Ahhh … the sweet, syrupy smell of political and personal stupidity.

PS. Here’s a way to a public option or even maybe single payer: in 2010 let the Democratic House members go down in flames. The White House will still be Democratic and so will the Senate (in name anyway) so there won’t be any real change from what we have now. Once the Democratic politicians see that progressive voters really mean it when they say “work on our agenda”, however, these same Dems will be ready to role their sleeves up to do the work of the American people.

Barre Montpelier Times Argus recycles …

but not how one would think.

A quick comparison of today’s (08/27/09) editorial page and yesterday’s holds few surprises or new information. That’s because 3 out of four letters to the editor appear in identical form in both day’s issues and so does the top of the page oped cartoon.

Thankfully they did spice the page up with a new editorial, Doonesbury comic and one fresh letter.

Recycling is for paper, not content!

Oh what a web we weave …

when at first we succeed to deceive.

From the NY Times, Waxman Takes on Drug Makers Over Medicare:

In 2003, when the Part D drug program was being planned as part of a Congressional overhaul of Medicare, Republicans insisted that the program be administered by private insurers and that the government be precluded from negotiating prices.

Stephen Schondelmeyer, a professor of pharmaceutical economics at the University of Minnesota who had conducted research for the government and industry, said that in 2003 many in Congress argued that private insurers would be more than capable of negotiating discounts with drug makers.

“That didn’t pan out,” Dr. Schondelmeyer said. The dozens of insurers involved, competing among themselves, simply do not have the government’s negotiating clout. While Medicaid is able to obtain rebates of up to 35 percent from drug makers, the Medicare drug rebates have been less than 15 percent, he said.

Of course those mythical savings didn’t “pan out”, and the reason why there were no savings is very simple to understand.

Premiums that are paid to various insurance schemes companies aren’t collected and stashed inside a warehouse full of mattresses. The cash that you or I send in is either handed over by the ton to the executives and the uber wealthy investor class (and in comparatively sub-atomic amounts to lesser employees and mom ‘n pop retirement account investors) or invested in … get ready for it … THE STOCK MARKET AND VARIOUS FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS! (insert gasp of sudden realization here)

As long as an end result of higher returns for those executives and the uber wealthy investor class is the paramount concern then that’s where the attention will be paid.

So if I’m the ABCD Insurance Co, and I’m willing to have my success judged by return on investment and I can keep my investment in BigPharma, Inc giving me large returns on investment by not making BigPharma reduce their profits … why I’m gonna do it!

I’m gonna do it because I’m supposed to look out for investors first and those needing medical care second … and besides … the guvmint is payin’ me what I, as ABCD Insurance Co, need to pass on to BigPharma (which I’ve invested so much in) so my return on investment balance sheet will look awfully good … and if I’m the CEO of ABCD, I’m gonna reap huge financial windfalls along with my buddies in the uber wealthy investor class.

And why wouldn’t ABCD invest heavily in BigPharama when ABCD can wield so much influence in the profitability of BigPharam?

(We’re not even touching the massive bailout that these insurance companies received from the huge Wall Street bailouts of the cheney/bush and Obama administrations.)

And this is all part of why our for-profit health insurance paradigm should go away … we’re using money that should be spent on medical or health care instead on further enriching the already rich.

And when they start to fail because of excessive risk taking … why … we’ll just bail ‘me out again.

It is no accident those savings didn’t “pan out”. They were never really meant to.

On dealing with obduracy …

A very important part of serving on a public committee is learning how to deal with the recalcitrant, the obstinate, the obdurate.

Equally important is understanding when consensus has been achieved and the time to move ahead with a decision has arrived.

We have reached (I’d say long ago passed) the point of consensus on changing health insurance in this country and now is the time to deal with the obdurate and simply move on with or without the obstructionists.

As I pointed out in this recent post, the People of the United States are massively in favor of a solid public option, and support for this public option spreads across age, economic, racial and political bounderies.

Despite this the Democratic “led” White House and Congress still appears to want to reach some form of agreement with those who brought us lies about non-existent “death panels”, non-existent reductions in Medicare services, non-existent medical decisions being made by government and more. (Their latest rendition, which has nothing to do with health insurance reform, is a claim the VA has published a booklet that encourages frail veterans to end their lives quickly rather than live on … total bullshit … read it for yourself).

What the Democratic “leadership” refuses to accept is consensus. Consensus is not about 100% or close to that agreement. Consensus is that point where there is enough support for something that a decision to move on or not can be made and action can be taken on that decision.

This is not the same as a simple majority, although it could be just that. People may not be comfortable pushing someone who disagrees into a corner, and often times even those who disagree will accept a consensus decision and help to make that decision evolve into successful and fruitful action.

We have that political consensus in the United States when it comes to both health insurance reform and the inclusion of a solid public option. The polls prove it! People are ready to say yes and move forward.

Once we realize the consensus is there to make changes to our nation’s health insurance industry (including a strong public option), the next step is how do we deal with the obstructionists, the obdurate, who have as their only goal the desire to stand in the way of 77% of us United Statesians?

Simple … we move on by them, and they will come along because they have to. We’ve tried asking them to stop lying, but, as evidenced by the latest claims over what the VA has (actually hasn’t) been telling the nation’s vets about end of life care, that won’t work.

Hell, the US Senate tried throwing 77% of the nation overboard just to offer these obdurate obstructionist Republicans a washed out, faded version of the public option under the guise of “co-ops”. This hasn’t worked.

No amount of give and take will satisfy … the sole purpose now behind the Republican Party and it’s allied army of obdurate obstructionists is to stop health insurance reform … period!

The public supports health insurance reforms that include a robust public option, and according to House Speaker Pelosi the House of Representatives can’t pass a bill without a public option. The Senate can certainly dig up 51 votes to pass a good solid public option along with other health insurance reforms.

The consensus has been reached, and the time to move past the obstructionist and obdurate is here. Sure they will be kicking and screaming, but they will come along because they really have no more options.

All that’s left now is for the Democratic “leadership” to realize all the above and act responsibly.

And ECFiberNet keeps truckin’ on (literally) ..

( – promoted by odum)

ECFiberNet, the grassroots organized venture that will bring modern day communications to central Vermont, has posted the following email to it’s public list:

After a mammoth effort, our application for financing under the Stimulus program is complete and has been submitted to the Rural Utility Service (RUS).

Atlantic Engineering Group, the design/build construction company, has agreed to begin work on crucial design/mapping work now, in order to maximize speed and momentum so that we can truly “break ground” when the money comes. The fact that AEG is willing to do undertake this phase before the money actually arrives is a testament to their faith in the soundness of the project. AEG will have three trucks in the ECFiber service area beginning in late August, surveying poles and sites to prepare a detailed cable design map. Each truck will display the ECFiber logo.

To acknowledge this first tangible phase of the project, we are holding a publicity event. This will be an opportunity for you to view the trucks and to get a project update, at 10:00 am, Monday, August 31 at the Tunbridge Town Hall. We consider the Tunbridge Town Hall to be the birthplace of ECFiber, where the first organizational meeting took place over 18 months ago.

We greatly hope that you can make it.

For more on ECFiberNet click here.

Little birdies are claiming that Governor Douglas will be there!  

Yes we can!

There’s a lot of headlines that could have gone with this post: “Tin ears in the White House”, “???????” or any other snarky stab at ironic cuteness. For today, however, I’ll simply point out that grassroots pressure is having some success.

In short … yes we can!

First the poll numbers:

SurveyUSA just released some poll numbers of great interest. The short version being 77% of respondents feel it is “extremely important” or “quite important” to “give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance”.

Most importantly this high level of support stretches across political party affiliation and ideology; and these figures are piggybacked on the numbers who are giving “a lot of attention” to this whole debate (73%).

And it seems the Barack “hug a right wing nut who’ll never support me anyway” Obama machine may be finally catching on (Pelosi already has for sure).

President Obama’s advisers acknowledged Tuesday that they were unprepared for the intraparty rift that occurred over the fate of a proposed public health insurance program, a firestorm that has left the White House searching for a way to reclaim the initiative on the president’s top legislative priority.

(Debate’s Path Caught Obama by Surprise, Washington Post, 08/19/09)

Of course the article goes on in the ever ridiculous ways of today’s bigger media and established political punditry by telling us that this isn’t about broad public support of a “public option” (as evidenced by the aforementioned SurveyUSA poll), but this whole argument is really about intra-party (ie among self described Democrats) squabble. Something from the “left of the left” according to some cowardly, unnamed White House adviser.

But in the end those who are too afraid to have their names in the paper are wrong … completely wrong.

All of use, independents and Democrats and Republicans and Progressives and conservatives and liberals and progressives and old and young and black and white and whatever else we may be .. all of us raising our voices is having the direct impact on our politicians that it should be having.

And when 77% of Americans are saying to include a public option, you can bet it will there in the end … unless we shut up.

Yes we can!

Rumors, Douglas and ECFiber …

little birdies are singing a tune and it goes like this:

ECFiber (http://www.ecfiber.net) will be holding a publicity event at the end of the month to show and tell some really great news.

Governor Douglas is planning on attending this event.

End of birdie singing.

ECFiber is a grassroots organized multi-community effort to bring modern communications to the central Vermont area.