Friday, September 11, 2009

WHAT HE SAID

Perhaps I should expand this title to “…AND WHAT HE DIDN’T SAY.” I think most people would agree, our President is a pretty darn good orator. He says the things his supporters want to hear, or at least appears to. He has the power to call out his detractors and calm others.

I needed time to allow the emotional reaction to fade so I could study just what the President did and did not say before firing off yet another email to my representatives on Capitol Hill and the White House.

I know I said in an earlier post I was going to leave the speech analysis to more knowledgeable minds than I, but I just can’t help myself – I must add my two cents! I have included here excerpts from the President's speech along with what I see and what I don't. I look forward to your feedback.

“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.”

So this is where a single payer system gets tossed away. Chalk one up for the insurance companies who represent a big chunk for that 1/6 of our economy.

“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 for those who don't. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.”

Here is the promise we have all been waiting for but will he deliver?

“Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a preexisting 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 the 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 in 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.”

Sounds good so far – aren’t these the very points we have been arguing endlessly about on the blogs?

“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…We'll 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 give ourselves…And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. And 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.”

This is a long bit of quote and I just picked portions out of the longer version for the sake of space. Nothing I omitted changes the message and anyone who wants to read the speech in its entirety can do so just by googling it but there is something here I want to point out – While insurance companies will have to play by the rules in order to get MILLIONS OF NEW CUSTOMERS (hostages), no where in all this grand verbiage do I see where, unlike said car insurance companies and public utilities, THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT REGULATED CAP ON THE PREMIUMS INSURANCE COMPANIES CAN CHARGE!
It gets worse – read on…

“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… 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've insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.”

A government backed public option? No so fast. This ambiguous passage calls for what is being touted as a “public option”, but the wording simply states a not-for-profit option. This is NOT the same thing!

It is time to put in the effort to write, call or email your representatives and demand they ONLY back:


* A single payer plan or, at the very LEAST, a government supported public option. Without a government sponsored plan, millions will STILL be left without health insurance and that is unacceptable.

* Along with that government mandate for health insurance coverage, they also include government regulation and caps on insurance premiums – if utilities and car insurance can be capped because they are considered essential services, then health insurance certainly can be!


* Lastly, remind them, strongly, just who they are working for and that the cost
of betraying the public trust will be a sound defeat in the voting booth!

This is too important to all of us to sit back and wait to see what happens. If you need links to contact your government representatives, I’m providing them here and asking everyone to stand up and be counted now!

For the White House:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

For Senators:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

For State Representatives:

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/index.html

UPDATE:

w-dervish has left a comment bringing up yet another negative aspect of the President's plan:

"This will still leave millions (not sure how many exactly, but I confidently guesstimate it will be millions) uninsured. And showing up in emergency rooms with health problems they should have had treated a lot earlier. And it means people will still die due to lack of insurance."

I quite agree with this assessment and think it should also be a bullet point for representative correspondence so I have added it above.

H/T to w-dervish for this additional information. His excellent post on the speech can be found at his blog "Sleeping With The Devil" HERE.

H/T to Elizabeth from The Middle Of Nowhere who provided a link to a call-in campaign (to your congressman) being spearheaded by Firedoglake which you can access HERE.

9 comments:

  1. rockync said... A government backed public option? No so fast. This ambiguous passage calls for what is being touted as a "public option", but the wording simply states a not-for-profit option. This is NOT the same thing!

    I don't think so either. The not-for-profit "public option" would be under the umbrella of the "insurance exchange", not under the purview of the federal government.

    What I believe he meant here was that the government would charter the creation of a private not-for-profit entity to handle the so-called public option. So as to not rile the private insurance industry (who are scarred to death of a true public option).

    Access to this plan will be HIGHLY restricted. If you already have insurance you can't get in. If you can "afford" (who defines affordibility?) to pay for private insurance you can't get in. The only way you can get in is if (1)you are employed (2) your employer does not offer insurance of any kind (3) you are poor (4) you are not so poor that you can't afford to pay for a not-for-profit plan.

    This will still leave millions (not sure how many exactly, but I confidently guesstimate it will be millions) uninsured. And showing up in emergency rooms with health problems they should have had treated a lot earlier. And it means people will still die due to lack of insurance.

    It will help a lot of people. But, due to the mandate, the insurance companies will be getting a lot more customers, as you pointed out. David Axelrod (appearing post-interview on the Rachel Maddow Show) explained how they planned to get around the MANDATE and still not provide UNIVERSAL COVERAGE -- there will be a "hardship exemption" for people who can't afford the not-for-profit plan.

    This looks, to me, like a fake public option. It certainly is NOT going to "compete" with private insurance in any way, shape or form. Which, I thought, was one of the ways we were going to "keep them honest" and bring down prices.

    IMO President Obama was warned that his liberal base would abandon them if "public option" wasn't in the speech. So we got a fake one.

    (This is the essence of what I posted on my blog.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have been writing about it for weeks. Obama's plan so far is a bonanza for the medical industry cartel. His wavering* on public option is not only worrisome, but also disingenuous -- and flies in the face of promises he made as a candidate.

    Public option is the only thing in this plan that has a chance to provide a real competition, affordability of coverage, and cost controls. Without it, there is no reform to speak of. It is as simple as that, and Obama understands it, but seems too interested in doing something, anything, rather than doing the right thing. Of course co-ops are a joke, and the so-called "trigger" even more so.

    To think of it, a public option that's extremely small in scope and weak (and what Obama has vaguely described in his speech sounds just like that) would be a joke too -- and a "proof," for decades to come, that the guvimint can't do squat and should stay out of health care.

    So we are going to end up with the insurance business "reform" (read: largely cosmetic changes, especially when viewed in light of the gold rush that is coming their way with the obscene mandates and no premium caps) and an awesome photo-op for the politicos shaking hands and congratulating themselves.

    The rest of us? Screwed as usual.

    *Actually I do not think he is wavering. He is being purposely vague and still dangles PO in front of our eyes like a carrot, but all signs are pointing to chances for a useful PO being DOA.

    I have said it numerous times, in letters to my Democratic reps as well: no public option (in which my family can participate) = no more votes for you from us. It'll be third parties, or no vote at all. I'm tired of being screwed up in every election cycle.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rockync, calling (and flooding our reps with messages) is also -- or perhaps more? -- effective. Firedoglake has a convenient set-up for calls here, which anyone can use.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Elizabeth for the link and it's heartening to know that the fight for all inclusive healthcare is going on in other places.
    The Mad As Hell Docs are also on a mission for single payer and can be followed on facebook here or view their website here and they have been garnering a lot of local media attention wherever they go but so far, little national coverage.
    The cards are stacked against us but that only means we must redouble our efforts to get the word out.
    The wing nuts were a distraction and they managed to disrupt our political process for a time, but that time is over and now we must fight back and regain control of the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why can't I get the hyperlinks to embed?!?

    Anyway, the Mad As Hell Docs website is:
    https://madashelldoctorstour.com/
    and their facebook page is:
    http://www.facebook.com/MadDrs?ref=nf

    And is someone feels like enlightening a technodope how to get the links in the comments, I would be eternally grateful.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Fine post and comments here. One thing that it occurs to me to ask is the following.

    Let's say I have an individual policy and decide that whatever nonprofit or other "option" becomes available would be better than what I have. Based on what I've been reading -- which is hardly definitive -- it sounds as if I wouldn't be able to switch to that option since I already have insurance. Sort of sounds like I'm out of luck there. What's up with that? It hardly sounds like a robust alternative to the status quo. But I suppose we'll soon see how it plays out.... Agreed that we should be writing our reps and advocating a strong public option.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This from Robert Reich's Blog (posted TODAY)Senate Finance is on the verge of reporting out a bill that requires that just about every American have health insurance and just about every business provide it (or else pay a fee). But the bill will not include a public option. Nor will it change current law to allow Medicare to negotiate low drug prices. Nor will it include a surtax on the wealthy.

    To embed the hyperlinks you have to use html. I am sure that blogger USED to recgonize hyperlinks and treat them appropriately. No longer apparently.

    to embed the "mad as hell doctors" link type...
    [a href="https://madashelldoctorstour.com/"]Mad as Hell Doctors[/a]

    Replace the brackets with greater and less than signs and you get...

    Mad as Hell Doctors

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you w-dervish for the hyperlink instructions!
    We must be very vocal and very solid in our rejection of any legislation that does not include at least a government backed public option although I'm still more of mind for single payer.
    Dino - that was my take also. You will actually have LESS options than you do today.
    Pretty much everything going on on Capitol Hill is all bullshit and we must keep on them relentlessly.
    We really need an organized grassroots movement that draws all the separate entities fighting for healthcare together.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Excellent post, Rocky.

    I have "friends" on facebook who were posting their thoughts dripping with adulation of Obama after this speech. The grand oratory sucks them in. And they so WANT to believe - which I understand. They have blinders on & some of them are uninsured & desperately need this to be genuine reform. Democrats being suckered.

    I am so sick of hearing about how good competition is in the marketplace. An insurance marketplace - the mere words fill me fury and despair.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.