Kennedy Pushes For Universal Health Care

Mass. Senator Wants Federal Government To Require Everyone To Have Health Insurance

(AP)  The federal government should join the state of Massachusetts in enacting universal health coverage, said Sen. Edward Kennedy, the new chairman of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over numerous health issues.

Kennedy's home state is the first to require everyone to have health insurance, just as drivers must have automobile coverage.

Kennedy has his own version of what universal health coverage would look like. He wants to extend Medicare to all. In his first hearing Wednesday as chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, the Massachusetts Democrat called on 10 witnesses from all over the country to talk about how to make health care more affordable.

"Insurance coverage is down. Costs are up. And America is heading to the bottom of the league of major nations in important measures of the quality of care," Kennedy said.

Kennedy emphasized how Democratic legislators in his home state worked last year with Republican Gov. Mitt Romney in crafting universal coverage there. He wants the same spirit of compromise to take hold in Congress.

However, the hearing also showed that finding agreement won't be easy. While all the witnesses agreed that health care is becoming less affordable every year, they often had very different solutions.

For example, the Business Roundtable renewed its calls to change medical liability laws and for the federal government to give consumers more information about the cost and quality of the care they get, two priorities often cited by the Bush administration.

"High health care costs are affecting job creation, and high health care costs are hurting our ability to compete in global markets," said Larry Burton, the roundtable's executive director.

But Andrew Stern, international president of the Service Employees International Union, called for much more dramatic change. He told lawmakers that it's time to recognize that employer-based coverage "is dead." The statement infers a much more active role for the federal government in funding health care.

Karen Davis of the Commonwealth Fund, which conducts health research, told lawmakers to look at Denmark as a model for the United States. She said that nation's government pays doctors a capped rate for each of their patients, plus additional amounts when they perform a service. Each doctor handles about 1,500 patients, and they can handle walk-ins and same-day appointments. And Denmark residents love their health care system, she said.

Most of the witnesses agreed on two points:

First, Congress should expand funding for a health insurance program that now provides health insurance to about 5 million children. The children live in families that make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to afford the monthly health insurance premiums offered through the private sector.

Second, Congress should not get in the way of states trying to grow the number of residents who have health insurance.

The state of Massachusetts employs a combination of subsidies and penalties to make insurance more affordable and to force people to buy it. The law requires employers with 11 or more full-time employees to offer health coverage or be subject to a $295 fee for each employee, as well as face being billed for services their uninsured employees get.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this week proposed a plan that would extend health care to 6.5 million uninsured Californians. Under the proposal, all Californians must have insurance, although the poorest would be subsidized.

Some of the committee's Republicans would like the committee to renew its attention to help for small businesses. They support a plan that would let businesses buy insurance through regional or national trade associations. The insurance would be free of many state mandates. That could make it a cheaper alternative, but would also provide scaled-back coverage in some instances.

"My primary interest is to provide health insurance reform for small businesses and working families, and I believe that 1 million more people will be insured if we enacted the (small business health plans)," said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo.

Also, Wednesday, the Children's Defense Fund called on Congress to provide health insurance for all children in the United States. About nine million live in families without insurance. The organization said all children in Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program should be automatically enrolled in one program that provides all medically necessary care.

Children in families with incomes over 300 percent of poverty could also pay premiums that would allow them to participate.

"A child's chance to survive and thrive should not depend on the lottery of geography," the organization said.

[processor2]

I wonder if Ted Kennedy's health care plan includes care for drowned women at the bottom of Chappaquidic.

..........

[cheyenne16-2009]

Oh, and this will be FREE health care for all illegal aliens, just how much is this going to cost the taxpayers? BILLIONS!
Hey, Teddy, you have a lot of money, YOU PAY for medical care for all the illegals, YOU PAY the hospital costs for all the anchor babies born to illegal aliens in the coming years, just DON'T EXPECT ME TO PAY FOR IT! We already pay ENOUGH!
My kids need medical coverage, but because we are LEGAL United States citizens, we pay though the roof for our HMO, and our taxes pay for all the anchor babies born here in California, taxes illegals DON'T PAY.
While you're at it, Teddy, why don't you go ahead and give all our Social Security funds to illegals too, that way when the baby boomers all retire, this nation will be operating so far in debt there won't be enough money in the world to get us out.
Got any more good ideas? KEEP THEM TO YOURSELF!

Isn't it about time Teddy Kennedy was put out to pasture? What the heck is wrong with the voters in Mass. anyway?

[orwell2007]

Anyone who supports or who is leaning towards government-run "universal health care" (mandatory for everyone, no opting out) should take the time to explore the decades-long record of these approaches in the UK and elsewhere. In England, for example, which has had universal health care since 1948, the National Health Service is now rejecting people who smoke cigarettes, who drink alcohol, or who are obese for lifesaving surgery. Rationing of care (inevitable under such statist schemes) is therefore underway, starting with the classes of people who it is politically correct to discriminate against.

Universal health care is antithetical to freedom, personal responsibility, and choice. It is based on force and coercion and the designs of self-appointed bureaucratic experts, rather than on the individualized personal care of principled healers. It amounts to nothing less than medicine (government-run medicine) at gunpoint. Just try and opt out if universal health care becomes law. It will be like failing to file your income taxes.

It will be the most profound, and worst, change in American life since this nation was founded.

[orwell2007]

Anyone who supports or who is leaning towards government-run "universal health care" (mandatory for everyone, no opting out) should take the time to explore the decades-long record of these approaches in the UK and elsewhere. In England, for example, which has had universal health care since 1948, the National Health Service is now rejecting people who smoke cigarettes, who drink alcohol, or who are obese for lifesaving surgery. Rationing of care (inevitable under such statist schemes) is therefore underway, starting with the classes of people who it is politically correct to discriminate against.

Universal health care is antithetical to freedom, personal responsibility, and choice. It is based on force and coercion and the designs of self-appointed bureaucratic experts, rather than on the individualized personal care of principled healers. It amounts to nothing less than medicine (government-run medicine) at gunpoint. Just try and opt out if universal health care becomes law. It will be like failing to file your income taxes.

It will be the most profound, and worst, change in American life since this nation was founded.

[frankly6]

Something must be done because the cost of healthcare is increasingly out of reach for millions of Americans. Part of the reason it's so expensive is that the cost of caring for the uninsured is simply passed on to the insured. We already have a terribly inefficient form of universal healthcare. We pay twice as much as any other nation per person and yet we are 23rd in quality of care. I think that some form of universal healthcare is the answer.

[bellal-2009]

Good post orwel2007. Having had multiple chronic and acute diseases in my family, I worry about choice and quality of care. We are so close to cures in various diseases it would be a shame to derail progress.

[bellal-2009]

frankly6, I find it hard to believe we are 23rd in quality of care internationaly. Look at what we have the Mayo Clinic, St.Judes, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Fred Hutchison Cancer Research, various world class childrens hospitals, I mean there are so many the list goes on and on and the work they're doing is amazing absolutely amazing.

[bildooreilly]

Now they're going to force us to buy health insurance just like they do auto insurance, what a great scam for the insurance industry, nothing like big government guaranteeing that you'll be in business for decades to come.... I over 1/3 of my income in taxes, I could easily afford health insurance if I didn't have to give the worthless government a 1/3 of my $ for absolutely nothing in return... what a bunch of worthless *** in both parties.... throw them all out!

[carlylaine]

The reason for the current "HEALTHCARE CRISIS" is because the insurance companies wanted HMOs. They lobbied well and we got burned.

PROCESSOR2: That was a riot.

[bluestardad]

America needs this and I hope Mr. Kennedy gets it passed.

[processor2]

I wonder if Ted Kennedy's health care plan includes care for drowned women at the bottom of Chappaquidic.

..........

[cyberus-2009]

What we DON'T need is a national health care program, as mentioned in other posts Canadians come here to get care they need.
In my opinion if they are going to require health care it should be (1) paid for by a flat tax (no cap) and (2) people without insurance are put in a pool to be assigned to an insurance company (all companies required to provide a minimum plan and take a share of the "pool")

[meboard]

Yes processor2, the Kennedy plan does cover drowning women and rehabilitation for smart-azz conservatives. Sounds like a plan to me!

[opinionfair]

If Universal Healthcare worked, it would have been implemented back in the days of the Clinton Administration. Quality of Care is an issue. HUGE!If the government would get out of the business of healthcare then maybe costs would go down. Let's use the drug companies as an example. Why doesn't the government get involved in lowering drug prices and regulating the industry better so costs will go down? Let's get to the real issue, not a bunch of white wash on HMO's. HMO's were created to lower healthcare costs. That worked out well eh. Mary

[bergs43]

We have to be careful here with the term "health insurance" and "minimal coverage". Give them and inch and they'll take a mile. Sorry for the clichi, but the company I work for offers health insurance, great right? Wrong. It's one of those "minimal coverage" plans. I paid $100.00 a month and was allowed 5 doctor visits and 10 prescriptions a year. A plan...if a person doesn't need hospitalization. Guess what? That's right, I needed an operation. End result? I received a hospital bill for $17,000 of which my "insurance" paid a whooping $1,300. This is not counting all the other "little" medical bills associated with this surgery, for a total of $30,000. I make under $30,000 a year and live in New York. I make too much (ha!) for much help with these bills. I don't think it's news to anyone that I will be spending many years paying these bills off. The company I work for CAN afford to offer better coverage, they choose not to because, well, they don't HAVE to. After all, the top executives need their great, huge bonuses now don't they? I think we need to make companies and corporations more accountable here. Universal health insurance is not just a government issue, it could be supplemented by government but everyone needs to contribute something, instead of it falling all on the least who can afford it (like me).

[olgreyghost]

A man runs rampant through a Wal-Mart parking lot, robbing patrons at gun-point of their hard-earned cash before they have a chance to go in the store and buy their groceries and other essential staples. He then takes all his booty he has collected by threat of deadly force and gives it to a charitable organization that promises to "help" people.

Has he done an honorable thing or committed a crime?

[bellal-2009]

Good point ber43, the same thing happened to me twice. Once with employee provided health coverage during a pregnancy and birth, 8K out of pocket. The next one was with a high deductible individual policy for a child hospitalization costing over $10K out of pocket. Now I get the most extensive coverage possible to cover all bases costing about $1200 mo. and it's well worth it.

[bellal-2009]

Employers should get out of the healthcare providing business. When did all that get started anyway?

[randalds]

The very idea that we're still discussing the idea of universal health care in America is disgusting. Health care is as basic of a right to be provided by a government for the common good as an army for protection, the freedom of the press, the freedom of speech and the right to vote. The question is no longer "if" we're going to have universal health care, but when and how to make it work. "If" is a concept long past. We must! This is just one more issue for which the US is shamed in front of the rest of the civilized world and it's long past the time for us to fix it and move on.

[bellal-2009]

Randal, everyone has access to healthcare through state run community health clinics and emergency rooms. And we have universal healthcare, medicare and veterans administration, and medical coupons for the poor. The rest of us should buy health insurance like we do car insurance and get the high quality coverage to protect us from financial ruin.

[randalds]

I disagree bella. Health care should be run by the government as a right, not by private businesses who's only interest is to make money off from it. Yes private health care should still be allowed for those who wish to pay for it, but basic health care is a requirement of the government to provide. No matter what the tax cost.

[bellal-2009]

.... I over 1/3 of my income in taxes, I could easily afford health insurance if I didn't have to give the worthless government a 1/3 of my $ for absolutely nothing in return... what a bunch of worthless *** in both parties.... throw them all out!
Posted by bildooreilly at 05:18 AM : Jan 11, 2007

There's a plan lower our taxes and we can all afford the best health insurance available.

[annabanana-1]

Health care should never be viewed as a "for profit" enterprise. It will always be straining towards providing the least for the greatest cost.

I seldom disagree with Kennedy, but what we need is universal health care (single payer).. NOT universal "insurance".

[randalds]

Amen annabanana. That's why it's a right. The government must provide health care, not access to insurance for it. Any American who is sick should be able to walk into any health clinic, hospital or doctors office, get treated and not be billed. No matter how much money they do or do not have. It should be as free, to everyone, as voting.

[processor2]

I wonder if Ted Kennedy's health care plan includes care for drowned women at the bottom of Chappaquidic.

..........

[bellal-2009]

annabanana and Randal, I couldn't disagree with you more. The pharmacuetical cos. are saving lives. Look at far they've come with treating childhood cancers.

[tiredworker]

I think it is so magnanimous of Teddie to tell the rest of us that we should be willing to give up more of our income so that many of those who eat too much, drink too much, smoke too much, *** to much, can be taken care of, w/limited INDIVIDUAL responsibility. It appears the Amer. population is growing in less intelligent people,in those who are either unwilling or incapable of making wise decisions for themselves. We have to feed children breakfast& lunch at school because their mothers won't, provide diapers, baby food, subsidized housing and healthcare. Why don't we design public policy that gives incentives for people to do the right thing: to take care of themselves, rather than penalizing people by taxing them more and more, because they are willing to work harder and longer to earn more money for themselves or their family? We have watched Socialism fail around the world, yet those in power want to design life such that there are constant "giveaways" to the voters, many of whom don't work,don't pay taxes or haven't improved their skills over the years. I didn't exactly "enjoy" going to school to better my skills when I had little children and a fulltime job but I did it. I had no subsidy for diapers and baby food. Where is this country going?

[gunnerv1]

RandalDS, some more of my unworthy comments, Sounds as if you don't have Medical Insurance and you want everybody else to pay for it. Sorry, I don't buy it. Get off your A**, get a job and pay for it your own da*d self, I pay enough in taxes to support a welfare family. Now I know why you are on the computer all the time, You don't work and you want everybody to pay for you. LEACH, BLOODSUCKER, PARASITE.