Politics or Poppycock

A Look From the Left At Politics, Politicians, Policies and Issues of National Concern

Archive for July 27th, 2009

How a healthcare overhaul could affect you

Posted by James O'Rourke on July 27, 2009

Q & A

48297622.jpg

Ron Edmonds / Associated Press

President Obama, shown with congressional Democrats in a Rose Garden appearance, is likely to get more directly involved in healthcare legislation later in the process.
Lawmakers are considering options and costs for currently insured and uninsured Americans.
By James Oliphant and Noam N. Levey
July 27, 2009

Reporting from Washington — Here are some key questions regarding the effort to overhaul the nation’s healthcare system:

I have health insurance and I’m happy with it. Why does the nation need to overhaul healthcare?

Polls indicate that most Americans are satisfied with their coverage. But the White House and other advocates of overhauling healthcare say people are probably paying more for insurance each year. Premiums for employer-provided plans have risen four times faster than wages, and are now double their cost nine years ago. Deductibles are rising as well. Supporters of the legislation contend that healthcare costs are a drag on the economy.

How many proposals are there?

The Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has passed its plan on a party-line vote. A competing plan from the Senate Finance Committee — which has the task of figuring out how to pay for the overhaul — is expected within two weeks. Then the two proposals will be merged by Senate leaders.

In the House, three committees have signed off on an overhaul bill, but the Energy and Commerce Committee has yet to produce its version, which is likely to feature some significant changes. House leaders would like the chamber to vote on a final bill before the House leaves for its August recess.

Which bill does President Obama support?

The president hasn’t endorsed any of them. The White House has preferred to detail what it considers to be the necessary elements in any package and let the legislative process fill in the blanks. But expect the administration to be heavily involved as the House and Senate bills are refined.

What do the plans working through Congress have in common?

There is consensus that more money needs to be invested in preventive medicine, while creating incentives for doctors and hospitals to provide quality care. There is also a strong push to create a more competitive marketplace for health insurance, either through the creation of cooperatives, state-supported “gateways,” or a federal government “public option” that would compete with private insurers. Supporters say competition would drive prices down.

I don’t have health insurance. Would I be forced to buy it?

A requirement to have health insurance is likely to be part of a final bill, similar to the way many states require auto insurance. Today, an estimated 47 million people are without insurance and millions more are considered to be underinsured. Democrats in Congress argue that people with insurance are in effect subsidizing those without, because their premiums are higher than they would be otherwise.

What if I can’t afford health insurance?

A final bill is expected to provide for government subsidies to assist people who can’t afford insurance. The bill is also likely to feature some expansion of the federal and state Medicaid program to cover those slightly above the poverty level.

How is the government going to pay for this plan?

That’s the most contentious issue in Congress. Democrats hope to find most of the money by making Medicare, Medicaid and other programs more efficient. But that may not generate enough savings. In the House, advocates are calling for a tax on wealthy Americans. In the Senate, lawmakers are looking at other possible sources of income, including a fee to be paid by insurance companies.

What if I am happy with my coverage? Will I be forced to switch to some other plan?

The White House and Democrats insist that if you are content with the insurance you have, you won’t be required to switch. But Republicans and other critics say that if the government creates an insurance program, some employers will stop covering their employees, forcing them onto the government plan or another insurer.

Who could sign up for the government insurance?

Initially, the plan would be open only to a few groups, including:

Posted in *Healthcare Issues, 111th Congress | Leave a Comment »

On a single-payer health care system.

Posted by James O'Rourke on July 27, 2009

The Truth-O-Meter Says:

mug-barackobama.jpg

On a single-payer health care system.


Barack Obama on Wednesday, July 1st, 2009 in public statements

Obama statements on single-payer have changed a bit


fom-halfflip.gif

President Barack Obama has been prodding Congress to follow his principles on health care reform. He’s advocating the same principles he supported during the campaign: Keeping employer-provided insurance in place, making it easier for people to shop for private insurance through a regulated exchange, expanding programs to help low-income people, and requiring large employers to offer insurance or contribute to a health care fund. 

But at almost every town hall he’s held, though — five since March 26, 2009 — Obama has been asked a variation of this question: Why won’t you support a single-payer health care system?

”It seems to me,” said a questioner at one of the town halls, “that we would take that same scenario and increase it outward for the entire country, and that is why I still support single-payer. And I know that at one point you did.” 

We’ve gotten similar messages from readers pointing us to a YouTube video as evidence that Obama once supported a single-payer plan, which the readers say indicates he has flip-flopped.

For those who haven’t followed the details of health care reform, a single-payer health care system would mean the government pays hospitals and doctors directly for every person’s health care. It’s not socialized medicine, like in the United Kingdom, where the government owns the hospitals and doctors are government employees. In essence, it’s Medicare, the government-sponsored health care plan for seniors, with no age restrictions. 

The YouTube video , which isn’t the greatest quality, shows Obama speaking in a meeting room to an audience that interrupts him from time to time with applause. A sign on the podium says “AFL-CIO Civil, Human and Women’s Rights Conference,” and Obama sounds like he’s giving a campaign speech:

”I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that’s what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we’ve got to take back the White House, we’ve got to take back the Senate, and we’ve got to take back the House.”

Reports on the Internet date this statement as June 30, 2003. (We’ll address the alleged date more in just a bit.) That was a long time ago, but there’s no statute of limitations for the Flip-O-Meter. The possibility that Obama may have flipped on the issue is relevant because Obama’s conservative opponents sometimes claim that the public option — health insurance run by government that acts as insurer of last resort — is a stalking horse for a single-payer health care system. According to their theory, private insurance will wither in the face of a public option and Obama will get the single-payer system he secretly wants. 

We reviewed Obama’s public remarks and statements, and found no statements that quite match that video. To give you the context, in 2003, Obama was a second-term state senator and beginning a campaign to win the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate. The Democratic field was crowded — there were candidates both better known and better funded than Obama — and he was considered a long-shot at best. He ultimately won, but at the time, nobody was paying much attention to him.

In other statements, Obama has spoken favorably of single-payer in concept, but always adding qualifiers.

  • In February 2004, about a month before the primary election in the U.S. Senate race, the Associated Press reported the stance of all the candidates on universal health care. “Obama says he supports the idea of universal health care but does not think a single-payer government system is feasible. He says the government should be the health care provider of last resort for the uninsured.” In a rundown of all the candidates’ positions, the Associated Press summarized Obama’s position as “Support, but ‘probably not at this stage,’ a single-payer government system.”
  • In his book The Audacity of Hope , published in October 2006 when he was a U.S. senator, Obama described single-payer as the hope of the left, while those on the right wanted a market-based approach. “It’s time we broke this impasse by acknowledging a few simple truths,” Obama wrote, suggesting a system much like the one he supports today.
  • In April 2007, a few months after he declared his candidacy for presidency, the Chicago Tribune reported, “Obama has pledged that, if elected, all Americans would have health-care coverage by the end of his first term. He has said he is reluctant to switch to a ‘single-payer’ national health insurance system because of the difficulty in making a quick transition from the employer-based private system.”
  • At his town halls as president, he routinely answers questions about single-payer by saying he would favor it if he were starting a system “from scratch.” But he consistently adds that’s not the goal of the current reform. “For us to transition completely from an employer-based system of private insurance to a single-payer system could be hugely disruptive, and my attitude has been that we should be able to find a way to create a uniquely American solution to this problem that controls costs but preserves the innovation that is introduced in part with a free-market system,” Obama said in Annandale, Va., on July 1, 2009.

But the video strikes a very different tone from the remarks above. 

To find out more about the video, we tracked down some of the people who worked on health care reform with Obama when he was a state senator in Illinois. Dr. Quentin Young said he has followed Obama’s career since Obama first decided to run for state senator in 1995; he lives in Obama’s Hyde Park neighborhood in Chicago. A longtime activist in health care matters, Young left his medical practice a few years ago to volunteer full time for Physicians for a National Health Program, a Chicago-based advocacy group for single-payer. The group features Obama as part of its Web site. 

Young is an ardent supporter for single-payer, he said, because private insurers have an incentive to deprive people of care. “They do what they’re supposed to do, which is maximize revenue, so they can pay their investors and their executives. Their profits are breathtaking and obscene” he said. “And you wonder why the health system is so costly.”

Single-payer makes sense, he said, and Obama used to believe that, too. “It isn’t as though this is an import from Europe or Canada. We have had 45 years of experience with Medicare,” Young said.

Young believes he was in the room when the YouTube video was made, and if he wasn’t, it’s only because he heard Obama speak often in favor of a single-payer plan during 2003 and earlier, he said.

”As I recall, this was his categorical response, that he thinks single-payer is the way to go,” Young said. “Over the years, there’s been ever more edging on his part, to the point where what he has now is a multitiered program, but it ain’t single-payer.”

Young said the “Jim” Obama refers to in the video is Jim Duffett, director of the Illinois advocacy group Campaign for Better Health Care.

It’s true, Duffett said, when we contacted him. He’s the “Jim” in the video and was at the AFL-CIO speech. He remembered it as having been in December 2003, but it’s possible it was in June, he said.

Yes, Obama did support single-payer, but Duffett said Obama also talked about the need to be strategic and work within political limitations, which he attributed to Obama’s background as a community organizer.

”You have to figure out who’s with you, who’s against you, how you divide and conquer and move that football down the field,” Duffett said. “It just can’t be the same little group of liberals who have health insurance and sit around the table and verbalize their great policy ideas. You have to have more people than that.”

Duffett said if the entire video were aired, it would show Obama making statements about the need to be practical, much like his later public statements. 

”I’ve never felt that his core principles for accessible, guaranteed health care for everyone were ever compromised. He’s an organizer, and you have to figure out as strategically as you can how to win,” he said. 

Duffett urges his supporters to strongly support the public option, the details of which are still in the works. If the public option gets passed and operates well, he said, perhaps it will lead to a single-payer system. “We truly believe a public health option will work to lessen those negative fallacies of what the role of the government can be,” he said.

Young, on the other hand, calls the public option “wimpy” and part of “a really deceitful set of reforms” pushed by the health care industry to make sure they don’t lose any of their profits, even if reform passes. “I don’t think they’ll even let a watered-down public option go forward. And if it does, they’ll use their political clout to weaken it,” he said.

Both Duffett and Young served on the Adequate Health Care Task Force, a 29-member state board created by the Illinois General Assembly in 2004 to research and recommend a health plan for the state. The legislation that created the board was the Health Care Justice Act, and its chief Senate sponsor was Barack Obama. 

The chair of the board was Dr. Wayne Lerner, who holds a doctorate in public health policy and a master’s degree in hospital administration. Lerner is currently the president of Holy Cross Hospital in Chicago.

We asked Lerner if Obama was a single-payer supporter when Obama was a state senator. Lerner said he didn’t know what Obama’s opinion was on the best health care model, though he definitely felt the task force had the freedom to explore all options.

”I never felt constrained one way or the other,” Lerner said. “You’re not going to find a smoking gun in the act or the task force that there was support for a single-payer system from Obama.”

Lerner said he, like many others in Illinois, noticed that Obama moved more to the center on several issues during his run for president, and Lerner was pleased by that. 

”There has to be compromise if we’re going to have health care reform,” he said.

But back to our ruling: Did Obama flip on support of single-payer, as the woman at the town hall implied? The video shows he plainly said, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. … A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we’ve got to take back the White House, we’ve got to take back the Senate, and we’ve got to take back the House.” Well, Democrats now have the White House, and the Senate and the House. And Obama still doesn’t support a single-payer system.

We also have at least one eyewitness — the “Jim” mentioned in the video — who says the 54-second snippet shown on YouTube isn’t a full accounting of Obama’s more nuanced position. And we have a single-payer supporter, Dr. Quentin Young, who said Obama definitely was for single-payer and switched.

So let’s put this to the Flip-O-Meter. Opponents of Obama’s health plan who watch the video see a stark flip (and possibly hints of what they believe he’s wanted all along). Indeed, his comments seem quite clear that he supported a single-payer plan. But a full examination of his comments then and now reveals they have not changed that drastically. Yes, when he was trying to appeal to the Democratic base, he was a bigger supporter of the single-payer plan. But as we note, he still says that he’d prefer such a plan if he was starting from scratch.

So what we see here is a candidate who in 2003 was trying to appeal to a liberal electorate and today has moderated his comments to appeal to a broader national audience. That’s a Half Flip in our view.

Posted in *Healthcare Issues, *Obama Administration | Leave a Comment »

Bush Era Horrors Will Haunt Us Until We Truly Face Them

Posted by James O'Rourke on July 27, 2009

Alternet.org

By Tom Engelhardt, Tomdispatch.com. Posted July 27, 2009.

We can’t just “move forward.” We need to face who we’ve been and just how badly we’ve acted, if we care to become something better.

We’ve just passed through the CIA assassination flap, already fading from the news after less than two weeks of media attention. Broken in several major newspapers, here’s how the story goes: the Agency, evidently under Vice President Dick Cheney’s orders, didn’t inform Congress that, to assassinate al-Qaeda leaders, it was trying to develop and deploy global death squads. (Of course, just about no one is going to call them that, but the description fits.) Congress is now in high dudgeon. The CIA didn’t keep that body’s “Gang of Eight” informed. A House investigation is now underway.

We’re told that the CIA — being the president’s private army and part of the executive branch of our government — has committed a heinous dereliction of duty. In fact, not keeping key congressional figures up to date on the developing program could even “be illegal,” according to Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin. (Not that Congress, when informed of Bush administration extreme acts, ever did much of anything anyway.)

This story, however, has a largely unexplored strangeness to it that has only been discussed on the fringes of the mainstream media (or in the press of other countries). After all, during the eight years this CIA assassination program was supposedly in formation, U.S. military special ops death squads were, as far as we can tell, freely roaming the planet conducting (or botching) assassination missions, and the CIA’s own robot assassins, airborne death squads, were also launching operations — sometimes wiping out innocent civilians — from Yemen and Somalia to Pakistan. They continue to run such operations in the skies over the Pakistani tribal borderlands near Afghanistan. So we still await an explanation of just why the CIA spent close to eight years, under Vice Presidential oversight, getting its death squads almost operational, but never — we’re told — off the ground.

If there seems to be something odd about this latest flap, if there’s much that we don’t know yet, we do, at least, know one thing: This particular small splash from the previous administration’s deep dive into crime and folly will have its brief time in the media sun and then be swallowed up by oblivion, just as each of the previous flaps has been.

After all, can you honestly tell me that you think often about the CIA torture flap, the CIA-destruction-of-interrogation-video-tapes flap, the what-did-Congress/Nancy Pelosi-really-know-about-torture-methods flap, the Bush-administration-officials-(like-Condi-Rice)-signed-off-on-torture-methods-in-2002-even-before-the-Justice-Department-justified-them flap, the National-Security-Agency-(it-was-far-more-widespread-than-anyone-imagined)-electronic-surveillance flap, the should-the-NSA’s-telecom-spies-be-investigated-and-prosecuted-for-engaging-in-illegal-warrantless-wiretapping flap, the should-CIA-torturers-be-investigated-and-prosecuted-for-using-enhanced-interrogation-techniques flap, the Abu-Ghraib-photos-(round-two)-suppression flap, or various versions of the can-they-close-Guantanamo, will-they-keep-detainees-in-prison-forever flaps, among others that have already disappeared into my own personal oblivion file? Every flap its day, evidently. Each flap another problem (again we’re told) for a president with an ambitious program who is eager to “look forward, not backward.”

Of course, he’s not alone. Given the last eight years of disaster piled on catastrophe, who in our American world would want to look backward? The urge to turn the page in this country is palpable, but — just for a moment — let’s not. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bush Administration | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bill Moyers: Dangerous Alliance of Health Industry and Right-Wingers Will Stop at Nothing to Derail Progressive Reforms

Posted by James O'Rourke on July 27, 2009

Alternet.org

By Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, AlterNet. Posted July 27, 2009.

As Republicans fire away on health reform, big business is stepping up attacks too, lobbying and advertising guns blazing.

Push finally came to shove in Washington this past week as the battle for health care escalated from scattered sniper fire into all-out combat. If it all seems to be getting more and more confusing, join the club. It’s hard to see what’s happening through all the gun smoke.

The Republicans have more than health care reform in their bombsights — they want a loss for Obama so crushing it will bring the administration to its knees and restore GOP control of Congress after next year’s elections.

In the words of Republican Senator Jim DeMint, “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.”

The “Waterloo” of DeMint’s metaphor, of course, is not the 1974 Abba hit but the battle in 1815 that ended Napoleon Bonaparte’s rule as Emperor of France — a humiliating defeat and a turning point in European history. Right-wingers like Glenn Beck see Obama as Napoleon incarnate, a popular emperor who must be stopped.

Here’s what Beck said on his television show Monday, July 20: “I’m telling you, this guy is dangerous. He’s never lost before. He won’t understand … like, ‘Who are you to question me?’ I mean, this guy is practically an imperial President now. When he starts to lose and people start to question him and push him back against the wall, he’s not gonna know how to react.”

The Republican strategy is almost identical to the way they turned health care into Waterloo for Bill and Hillary Clinton in 1993.

Back then, one of their chief propagandists, William Kristol, urged his party to block any health care plan for fear that Democrats would be seen as “the generous protector of middle class interests.” Now he’s telling the GOP to “go for the kill … throw the kitchen sink … drive a stake through its heart … We need to start over.”

So in lockstep are the Republicans that when strategist Alex Castellanos issued a memo outlining their battle plan, party chairman Michael Steele parroted large sections of it word for word in a speech at Washington’s National Press Club. Asked a health care-related question that took him off script, Steele replied, “I don’t do policy.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in *Healthcare Issues, Politics As Usual | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »