Comments on: McConnell: Health Care Public Option A "Non-Starter" For GOP

[ubrew12]

gregorio57 said: "It is not the government's role to provide me with the goods and services some people have come to expect from government. Government is to provide for the 'freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness' and national defense and infrastructure. The rest is up to the individual to earn."

Children don't earn healthcare. They either get it or they don't. 9 million uninsured in America, thats a scandal. Blame the parents, if it helps you, the kids are still uninsured and at risk. Given the fact that 'socialized' healthcare delivers the same healthcare at HALF the cost of private healthcare, your attachment to the private system is like biting off your nose to spite your face. I wish the idiocy of paying trillions of dollars MORE for the same thing others are getting for less is something we could charge only to people like you. You have a right to your own poverty. You don't have a right to impoverish the rest of us just because you have a faith-based attachment to private insurers. We tried it your way, for 30 years, on the promise that it would be more efficient and bring innovation. It did neither. Instead, one out of every three American healthcare dollars goes into administrative costs, so that insurers can figure out ways to deny you coverage for things you thought you'd been paying for. Sometimes, capitalism makes its profit by preying on the weak and infirm, in this case, the sick. The net result is a national scandal, as people die of things easily treatable at an earlier stage. Its all about the survival of the fittest for folks like you. Well, I have news for you. Sometimes the individual IS a country. Your attachment to private insurance is weakening this country, allowing other countries to bypass it. And all in service to a thinly disguised hatred of your neighbors. Grow up already.

[jab232]

The GOP is the non-starter. Remember the Medicare Drug Plan--GOP supported, written by the insurance companies and drug companies? It has a huge donut hole and within a year of passing insurance and drug costs skyrocketed. One report shows that it has cost the government billions more than it would have if drugs had been bid as the veterans' administration does.

We need the public option in health care. Let us buy the same quality government coverage available to Mitch McConnell and his family. Then you can keep your own insurance to go with the government plan.

I don't think McConnell understands. Forty-six million are without health coverage and the number will skyrocket in the next ten years. That's called rationing to me. People are excluded because of so-called pre-existing illness, and some have even been cut off from their present coverage once they get sick. Sixty percent of personal bankruptcies are caused by medical expenses.

There is a huge reservoir of people who want change, and that is true no matter what Mitch McConnell and the let-the-rich-healthcare-CEOs-get-even-richer GOP might say.

[impeachbhb]

Pay no attention to the GOP or the capitalist element of our society. Obama is going to convert us to a socialist state and there is nothing they can do about it.
Health Care, Business, Manufacturing , Retailing, Banking all will be run by the governement.

They will stand to lose a lot because most Republicans and Conservatives are rich and they are going to have to pay for healthcare for the rest of us.
They should have thought about this before they made so much money.

[rednomo]

Oh Those Pesky Facts...

Fact-Checking Karl Rove?s Attacks Against The Public Option

Karl Rove penned an editorial in the Wall Street Journal attacking the public health care option. Rove?s ?myths? echo the poll-tested talking points of Frank Luntz and other conservatives determined to protect the private insurer?s monopoly over coverage and deny Americans choice. Below is a fact-check of Rove?s assertions.

Myth 1: A public option is unnecessary.
Myth 2: Private competition in Medicare Part D has reduced costs.
Myth 3: A public plan would shift costs to Americans with private insurance.
Myth 4: A public plan will lead to a welfare state.
Myth 5: The public option is too expensive.
Myth 6: Americans will be forced into a public option.
Myth 7: The public option would put a bureaucrat between you and your doctor.

MYTH 1: A public option is unnecessary: ?It?s unnecessary. Advocates say a government-run insurance program is needed to provide competition for private health insurance. But 1,300 companies sell health insurance plans. That?s competition enough.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: Insurer and hospital markets are dominated by large insurers and provider systems. Private insurers rarely negotiate with dominant hospital systems and typically pass on the higher costs to beneficiaries in the form of higher premiums. Already, (1 in 6 metropolitan areas in a 2008 study of more than 300 U.S. markets is dominated by a single health insurer that controls at least 70% of consumers enrolled in health maintenance organizations or preferred provider organizations.) Such consolidation negates any real competition. Without it, insurers don?t negotiate prices and boost their profits. In fact, ?there have been over 400 health care mergers in the last 10 years,? and premiums have risen (nearly eight times faster than average U.S. incomes.) A public plan could, in an environment of head-to-head competition, push private insurance companies to negotiate more aggressively with providers and dramatically lower health care spending. [Urban Institute, 10/03/2008; LA Times, 4/09/2009]

MYTH 2: Private competition in Medicare Part D has reduced costs: ?The results of robust private competition to provide the Medicare drug benefit underscore [the ability of private competition to lower prices]. When it was approved, the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would cost $74 billion a year by 2008. Nearly 100 providers deliver the drug benefit, competing on better benefits, more choices, and lower prices. So the actual cost was $44 billion in 2008 nearly 41% less than predicted. No government plan was needed to guarantee competition?s benefits.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: Medicare Part D beneficiaries have experienced significant cost increases. According to a recent analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows ?significant increases in premiums, costsharing amounts, use of specialty tiers, and utilization management restrictions since 2008 that could have important implications for beneficiaries? access to needed medications and out-of-pocket expenses. [KFF, 6/2009]

MYTH 3: A public plan would shift costs to Americans with private insurance: Second, a public option will undercut private insurers and pass the tab to taxpayers and health providers just as it does in existing government-run programs. For example, Medicare pays hospitals 71% and doctors 81% of what private insurers pay. [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

cont

[rednomo]

cont

TRUTH: Private insurer payments promote medical inefficiency. A new public option will change the way the health care reimbursement system so that we pay for value, not volume and reward efficient providers. According to MedPAC, Medicare rates are adequate and consistent with the efficient delivery of services. In fact, over-payments by private insurers to health-care providers drives up overall costs. ?Hospitals which didn?t rely on high payment rates from private insurers are able, in fact, to control their costs and reduce their costs when they need to, and,?combine low costs with quality.? [WSJ, 3/17/2009]

MYTH 4: A public plan will lead to a welfare state: ?If Democrats enact a public-option health-insurance program, America is on the way to becoming a European-style welfare state.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: Americans will choose a public health insurance plan from a menu of different options. The private insurance market isn?t going anywhere. Private insurers will play an important role in providing more integrated coverage options than the public plan and would retain a ?brand advantage? (in the same way that a lot of people rather have the branded drug than the generic) for consumers. Private insurers who offer a superior product through high levels of efficiency, satisfaction in consumer preferences and ease of access to quality medical services? will thrive in a reformed market. [Urban Institute, 10/03/2008]

MYTH 5: The public option is too expensive: ?Fourth, the public option is far too expensive. The cost of Medicare, the purest form of a government-run, public choice, for seniors, will start exceeding its payroll-tax ?trust fund? in 2017. The Obama administration estimates its health reforms will cost as much as $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. It is no coincidence the Obama budget nearly triples the national debt over that same period.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: A public option will lower family premiums. If a public plan is ?far too expensive? and has higher premiums, then Americans will not enroll. But if a public plan offers lower premiums, it will motivate private insurers to lower their costs. As a result, health care costs would decrease across the board.

MYTH 6: Americans will be forced into a public option: ?Government-run health insurance would crater the private insurance market, forcing most Americans onto the government plan.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: The government would not force Americans to purchase coverage from the public plan, but Rove would force everyone under 65 to enroll with a private insurer. Rove is essentially arguing that the public plan would work too well. It would use its inherent efficiencies to lower family premiums and force private insurers to aggressively negotiate on behalf of their beneficiaries.

MYTH 7: The public option would put a bureaucrat between you and your doctor: ?The public option puts government firmly in the middle of the relationship between patients and their doctors.? [WSJ, 6/11/2009]

TRUTH: A public option improves the doctor-patient relationship. Existing reform legislation explicitly preserves the doctor-patient relationship. As a draft of the HELP bill notes, ?a strong doctor-patient relationship is essential to the practice of medicine, and patents have a right to an effective doctor patient relationships, Doctors, nurses, and other health professional have the right to judge what is best for their patients.? Moreover, the public plan?s payment innovations would reward doctors for providing quality care and spending more time listening to their patients. [HELP Legislation, 6/09/2009]

[rednomo]

I really can't take watching the Sunday morning shows anymore. It's infuriating to watch hosts like Bob Schieffer (not to single him out) just ask basic questions about the issues, have no facts on hand and rarely ask a follow up. It's a talking points wonder. What's so frustrating is that the networks have the resources to really fact check and dig deep into policy like on the health care debate, but instead the McConnell's are just asked to comment on proposals or rumors.

Appearing on CBS' Face The Nation Sunday, McConnell told host Bob Schieffer that Mr. Obama's plan for a government health insurance plan would essentially crowd out other insurers from the private market, eliminating competition.

"We can make incredible improvements in American health care, but I don't think having more government, in effect putting Washington between you and your doctor, is the way to go."

Schieffer countered McConnell's contention that the Obama plan would choose (or deny) which treatments a covered individual may get; the White House is not proposing any kind of rationing board, he said. He also repeated the administration's assertion that a public insurance plan would give people another option. "If they want to keep their private insurance, that's OK," Schieffer said.

"I know they say that, Bob," McConnell countered, "but if the government is in the insurance business there won't be any other insurers, it's inevitable."

"All of that really ought to be put aside if we want to get a truly bi-partisan proposal," he said bluntly.

The Republicans and bought off Democrats don't want real competition in the Health Industrial Complex, period. If they love the free market so much then make the health insurance have to compete against something other than their brethren. Do you trust the HIC to actually come through on any of their promises?

How about if CBS puts a few of their crack reporters to work to explain why so many Americans go bankrupt because of health care issues with a large number of them already being covered? The American Journal of Medicine:

Results:

Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

Conclusions:

Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies.

[rednomo]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said President Barack Obama's plan to include government-backed health insurance for the public is a "non-starter" for most Republicans considering health care reform.

Go figure...

Here's a rundown of all the money that the people in Congress who are blocking real reform in health care have received from the health care industry.

Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $4,026,933)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $2,833,731)
*Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $2,758,468)

And when you just go right to Big Insurance, the non-presidential candidates who got the biggest legalized bribes were the 7 senators who have been tasked with the job of killing single-payer:

Ben Nelson (DLC-NE- $1,196,799)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $1,184,113)
Joe Lieberman (DLC- CT- $1,036,302)
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $1,035,530)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $981,400)
*Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $929,207)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA- $884,724)

Number of Americans without health insurance:

2000 = 42.6 million

2009 = 82 million

The Impact of Rising Health Care Costs

* A recent study by Harvard University researchers found that the average out-of-pocket medical debt for those who filed for bankruptcy was $12,000. The study found that 50 percent of all bankruptcy filings were partly the result of medical expenses. Every 30 seconds in the United States someone files for bankruptcy in the aftermath of a serious health problem.

* A new survey shows that more than 25 percent said that housing problems resulted from medical debt, including the inability to make rent or mortgage payments and the development of bad credit ratings.

* About 1.5 million families lose their homes to foreclosure every year due to unaffordable medical costs.

* A survey of consumers found that in order to cope with rising health insurance costs, 86 percent said they had cut back on how much they could save, and 44 percent said that they have cut back on food and heating expenses.

* Retiring elderly couples will need $250,000 in savings just to pay for the most basic medical coverage. Many experts believe that this figure is conservative and that $300,000 may be a more realistic number.

* According to a recent report, the United States has $480 billion in excess spending each year in comparison to Western European nations that have universal health insurance coverage. The costs are mainly associated with excess administrative costs and poorer quality of care.

* The United States spends six times more per capita on the administration of the health care system than its peer Western European nations.

Source: The National Coalition on Health Care

www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml


For all those that parrot the far right, insurance companies and big pharm talking point that we don't need universal health care...

As Bill Maher so gracefully put it, 'With the system we have now the doctors are not making the calls, the patients cannot make the calls because the insurance companies make all the calls. It's called 'hospital gown coverage' whatever condition you currently have, chances are your @ss ain't covered.'

[gregorio57]

The public option healthcare will not truly compete in the free market due to the deep pockets of the taxpayers. It will be a monopoly that will drive the private insurance companies out of business.

The REAL elephant in the room is that medicine, procedures, physician visits are expensive. For example, when I was born in 1957, the hospital bill sent to my parents was $116. That was a lot of money then, but still a manageable cost to pay out of pocket. A similar birth today will cost in the thousands.

A serious illness, will set you back $100,000 or more. That would bankrupt most individuals. There is still the option to just die if you don't want to leave your family destitute. The real solution is for the free market to be allowed to really work. Healthcare does have a real cost and that should be borne by individuals. All insurance does is play a pyramid scheme in which healthy individuals support the obese, inactive, addicts and smokers. Those who choose to lead unhealthy lifestyles SHOULD pay more.

However healthcare needs to compete for our services and not price themselves out of reach of the individual. If an MRI is $200, that's affordable. I might have to skip an $800 MRI.

There are many uninsured persons that could contribute something towards their healthcare but they don't because they rely on the 'free' healthcare they get now through the public health system. This is unfair to those of us who sacrifice and pay into a private system. I could get a new car every few years for the price of my health insurance payments. If you don't pay, you don't deserve health care! Everyone wants something for free but that's not reality! I want my groceries for free. Where's my government ice cream? I want a car for free! Where's my government Lexus!?

It is not the government's role to provide me with the goods and services some people have come to expect from government. Government is to provide for the 'freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness' and national defense and infrastructure. The rest is up to the individual to earn.

[sleepyric]

typical GOP biz lobbyist based response. I am joe average. Go ahead and institute a gov run health care system for those who need it. I can pay my way, but here's a thought, for the private companies, how about getting leaner and meaner and giving me more for my $$ instead of the paperwork chaos you now have in place? Wouldn't that be refreshing. If I want paperwork chaos, I'd choose the government plan!

[nofoolling]

Of course neither McConnell or the GOP want to change the Status Quo on American Healthcare. They are in bed with Big Pharma and along with the FDA have a very cozy incestuous relationship with these Zionist Crooks.

This crooked and downright Evil Cartel have robbed us of our cash and honest meaningful healthcare for many years and it is surely time for change. AND let this be a warning to any Democrats who fancy jumping on the Big Pharma Gravy Train, You Are Being Watched, we will expose you !
Posted by antiestablishment

Your post is right on target, regardless of the childish rant Posted by juwboy, who apparently lacks even the minimul intellect for rational rebuttal, and instead pathetically sinks to the feeble depths of ridicule and name calling, the bastion of septically moronic cowards.

The Reps, together with their masters at the Insurance companies and big pharma, will continue to gouge and scam us till we bleed over health care.

The healthcare business has turned into a racket and it past time we threw out these parasitic vultures that prey on the misery of others.

Those politicians that choose to assist the continued raping of the american sick and needy should be voted out at the earliest possible opportunity.