Obama: Health Care Reform Closer than Ever

President Predicts Success in Achieving Overhaul of Health Care System

(AP)  President Barack Obama said an overhaul of the U.S. health care system is closer than ever, but he warned of tough battles ahead as major industries such as insurance companies fight hard to preserve their profits.

Mr. Obama made his remarks Monday night at a pair of Democratic Party fundraisers in Miami.

He spoke a few hours after Senate leaders endorsed legislation that would add a government-run health insurance plan for Americans, with states having the right to opt out. Mr. Obama did not mention the Senate action, but he predicted success in realizing his top domestic policy priority.

Mr. Obama said that America has no choice but to overhaul the health care system to make insurance cheaper for families, businesses and the government.

"It's going to get harder," the president told about 200 people who paid $500 each to greet him at a reception. "Now's the time when all the special interests are saying, 'Oh, this is really going to happen, we might lose some of our profits.' And they start paying big lobbyists, and they start twisting arms."

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care Reform

The focus of the health overhaul debate now shifts to whether Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can persuade a handful of moderate senators to get behind his new proposal for a government-sponsored insurance plan.

That's no sure bet. Even Reid didn't claim to have the 60 votes needed to pass his proposal when he ended weeks of speculation by announcing that the Senate version of sweeping health care legislation would include a provision for the government to sell health insurance in competition with private insurers.

The issue has been the biggest flash point in the health care debate and government-sponsored insurance had been seen as unlikely to be included in Senate legislation because of opposition from moderates. The House's health care bill, expected to be released as early as this week, is certain to contain a strong provision for a so-called public insurance option, though details aren't final.

"While the public option is not a silver bullet, I believe it's an important way to ensure competition and to level the playing field for patients with the insurance industry," Reid told reporters Monday.

Individual states would have the choice of opting out of the government plan under Reid's proposal. It still amounted to a victory for liberal lawmakers who have pushed for a public insurance option they contend would create needed competition for private insurers and provide affordable choices to consumers. Republicans have denounced the public option as a "government takeover" of health care.

The reaction from moderate Democrats - they fear a public plan could drive insurers out of business and take over the marketplace - ranged from muted to skeptical. The one Republican who has so far lent her support to Democratic health overhaul proposals, Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, said she was "deeply disappointed" by Reid's decision.

Snowe had supported allowing government insurance in individual states only if the private market wasn't providing sufficient choice and competition. But Reid said he wasn't sending that "trigger" option to the Congressional Budget Office for evaluation, as he did Monday with the opt-out proposal.

"We hope that Olympia will come back. She's worked hard. She's a very good legislator. I'm disappointed that the one issue, the public option, has been something that's frightened her," Reid said.

If Snowe doesn't come back, the fate of Reid's public option could rest in the hands of a few key moderate Democrats including Sens. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana.

Landrieu said in a statement that she's still "very skeptical" about a government plan run from Washington but would keep working with Reid to find a "principled compromise."

The White House released a statement saying Mr. Obama was "pleased that the Senate has decided to include a public option for health coverage, in this case with an allowance for states to opt out."

Mr. Obama has long voiced support for such a plan but has also signaled it was not a requirement for a health care bill he would sign. He has also said he would like bipartisan support for the legislation - and Snowe appeared to be his best hope for that.

Changes on the public option - and numerous other provisions in the measure - are possible during a debate expected to last for weeks. If Reid's public option proposal is knocked out during the amendment process, liberals will at least have had their shot, possibly answering pressure from Democratic base voters.

The insurance industry was sharply critical of Reid's announcement.

"A new government-run plan would underpay doctors and hospitals rather than driving real reforms that bring down costs and improve quality," said Karen Ignagni, head of America's Health Insurance Plans.

Both the House and Senate are struggling to complete work by year's end on legislation extending coverage to millions who lack it, banning insurance industry practices such as denying coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions, and slowing the rise in medical costs nationally.

Senate Democratic officials say the bill Reid envisions would require most individuals to purchase insurance, with exemptions for those unable to find affordable coverage. Large businesses would not be required to provide insurance to their workers, but would face penalties of as much as $750 per employee if any qualified for federal subsidies to afford coverage on their own.

The bill will also include a tax on high-cost insurance policies, despite opposition from organized labor, officials said. In a gesture to critics of the plan, Reid decided to apply the new tax to family plans with total premiums of at least $23,000 a year. The Senate Finance Committee approved a tax beginning at $21,000 in total premiums.

Officials said Reid had prepared several variations of key provisions so he could make adjustments in his bill at the last minute and still make sure he was within Mr. Obama's target of a $900 billion price tag over a decade.

Differences in bills passed by the House and Senate would have to be reconciled before any legislation reaches Mr. Obama's desk.

[suespring]

Why do you not even discuss the option of buying insurance across state lines as a solution to the problem of competition? You act as if the public option is the ONLY solution to having more competition.

[pflack]

It's time to elevate National Health Care to the same status as Fire and Police Protection, Education and the Military. Our fore fathers had the insight to see the value of a collective effort to handle some things in the most enconomical way. If they would have spouted the "Personal Responsibility" nonsense, we would all have to figure out how to employ our own cop, fireman, teacher, not to mention how many persoal armies would be here. (Sounds like the potential for War Lords)The world continues to evolve, and The United States has to meet the challange. The truth is, there are many who would like to keep the status quo. Some has to do with greed, i.e., the medical industy, but from reading posts, talking with people, I honestly think most who oppose getting serious about reform are reacting to fear mongering from special interest groups. The saddest of all, is the politician who is not being honest in any why, shape or form. He is worried about re-election and has completely failed his consitituency by not being forth right. The time has come for Washington to get on their knees and ask for guidence from a Higher Power outside of themseleves, and for once do what is right.

[mcapek]

Report for a boot camp immediately, lard boy. We will get you down to the permissible weight range in 15 weeks of intense training, so you too can enroll and participate in the new HealthCorps.gov healthcare. That will keep the costs down.

[mcapek]

Great! The incompetents in government that want to you immediately get vaccinated, but are unable to provide vaccines, will be running our healthcare now. Welcome to VA Healthcare Horror 2.

[lovenpeace1]

by mcapek October 27, 2009 12:05 PM EDT
Great! The incompetents in government that want to you immediately get vaccinated, but are unable to provide vaccines, will be running our healthcare now. Welcome to VA Healthcare Horror 2.

********************

Hey mcapek,

None of the Seasonal Vaccines and included this H1N1 Vaccine are made by the U.S. Government. They are all contracted to Private Pharmaceutical companies.

Why are the Private Pharmaceutical companies so slow?

[roach9703]

...And don't forget cash for clunkers!

[mcapek]

"None of the Seasonal Vaccines and included this H1N1 Vaccine are made by the U.S. Government. They are all contracted to Private Pharmaceutical companies." Everybody knows that. But the government promised to have 100 million doses available by now. According to experts that could have happened if everything worked 100%, and it never does. So the government was highly incompetent in its assessment and monitoring of the situation. And these same idiots want us to swallow that the healthcare reform that they are proposing will costs only 870 to 1000 billion dollars. Multiply that estimate by 10 and you will get the true picture of the new "better" health care system.

[sjc_1]

The H1N1 virus grows more slowly in eggs than other viruses. This was not forseen by the companies making the virus. The same thing would have happened if it were Obama or Bush. However, Bush would probably have given the contract to Halliburton, it would have never shown up and would have cost 5 times as much.

[mcapek]

'This was not forseen by the companies making the virus." As I said, the government was incompetent in overseeing and monotoring the situation, making big promises to us and demanding that we all get vaccinated ASAP, and then falling on its face. This has nothing to do with Bush and Haliburton. Its Obamas government to be held accountable for this incompetence. Same idiots that demand that doctors use electronic medical records, because they think it will improve healthcare. Most doctors that have used it have been frustrated by expensive and user unfriendly software, wasting hours of their valuable time. Whatever government meddles usually winds up a screw up, some much worse than others.

[lovenpeace1]

hey Mortarman_29,

No problem if they pass a Health Care Reform without the Public Option. No problem if they Do Not Pass a Health Care Reform at all. Why?

As long as the Costs of Private Health Care Insurance increases at the Average 11% of the last 35 years, a Universal Health Care system will eventually pass to firmly control the cost.

According to all Liberal and Conservative experts, Health Care spending consumes 17% of our GDP today. It is expected to jump to 33% of GDP by 2022. Anything over 31% will suffocate the U.S. Economy. In other words, the 4th Great Depression.

In summary, if we wish to survive as an Empire, we must control the cost of Health Care somehow sooner or later. The Public Option is the best guarantee of that firm control.

So, to my amigo Mortarman_29, shall we have a strong Rebust Public Option now or a Universal Single-Payer system later? I suggest you pick the best of the 2 evils for you. :-)

[lovenpeace1]

Folks,

This is what American's get for $3.6 Trillions a year from our current Private Health Care system:

America ranks #42 worst in Infant Mortality Rate in the modern world:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html

America ranks #47 in Life Expectancy Rate in the modern world:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html

America got the #1 Highest Healthcare Cost (over twice (2X) 2nd place Sweden) in the modern world:
http://dll.umaine.ed/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf

When you are ill or injured and especially in an emergency, nobody shops around for the clinic or hospital with the best value care. Hence, there cannot be Competition in Health Care.

62% of all personal bankruptcies filed in the U.S. every day are due to medical cost issues.

All Foreign Capitalists (companies) have a Huge Competition Advantage against all American's Capitalists because they never pay Private Health Insurance for their employees.

All Seniors are very happy with their Socialized HealthCare (Medicare). Sooner or later you will be a Senior. All low-income Children are happy with their Socialized HealthCare (CHIP). All Military Veterans are very happy with their Socialized Health Care. All Federal workers are very happy with their Socialized Health Care. All congressmen and congresswomen are very happy with their Socialized Health Care. Republicans say they want the same deal that our congressmen/women have!

Americans are paying $6,000.00 more per year (2x) per person with worst ranking results than the next most costly nation Sweden. Sweden is a very Socialistic nation.

What good is it to have the most Advanced/High-Tech Innovated Health Care in the world if nobody can afford and access it?

[slownewsday-05]

"by Mortarman_29
Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. "


Mortimer - we all know you're a paid hack for the health-insurance industry. We all know you have a business you run with your wife which is paid basically to lie about the level of care.

In short, you have no credibility.

And these "facts" you post HAVE NO RELEVANCE. We are not adopting the Canadian system.

We are simply talking about health-insurance reform. Try to stay on topic.



.

[slownewsday-05]

Correction: "We all know you have a business you run with your wife which is paid basically to lie about the level of care in VA hospitals."

[nevermime]

If they want the GOP to support health care reform just call it a war funding bill.

[sassafrass019]

by Mortarman_29 October 27, 2009 11:07 AM EDT

There is NO proposal on the table to recreate the Canadian system in the US. Why do you continue to post these meaningless references to the Canadian System? Just to create fear of something you apparently know little about?

[steveinohio1]

I have read all the above posts. But what is not clear to me is why it is going to be my responsibility to make sure that everyone has health care? I am going to pay a tax for my health care insurance. I am no more for Big Government getting into the insurance business, than I was to see it get involved with the Auto industry, Wall Street, or the Bank bailouts. Look, I know there will be 90 posts telling me that I am wrong and for what reasons. But look at what everyone one of these Government bailouts has done for the economy at this point... Nothing. My bank is paying nothing for my savings account interest. Loans are harder to get today. Cars are still not selling. The stock market is still circling the drain. And there is still no end in sight to all the borrowing by the Government. How much money does the government think they can squeeze out of the working person. I know that the Insurance industry is the driving force in the health care problems in the country. Go after the root of the problem. The Government needs to stick to what is does best. I will get back to you when I figure that one out.

[80evo]

Thanks, you are one of the few on here that sees reality. I'm sure you will be ruthlessly attacked and called every name in the play book for stating the truth. stewiejohn will start in on bush, bekyworst will call you a racist and slowbrainday will call you a lier. same attacks from the same three everyday

[teejcee44]

Spread the wealth. Lets go socialist Mmmmm. Mmmmm. Mmmmm! Barak Hussein Obama Mmmmm! Mmmmm! Mmmmm! Lets be socialist!

[michaelm07]

This idiot president doesn't hear what most Americans think or want, he he cares even less. After all, the man wh never held a real job knows better about what's good for you and your families. None of the so-called 'Representatives' we elected in Washington, represent us.

We have the government we deserve, are you all happy? Are you angry yet or will more lame election promises and a few stimulus dollars trickling your way before next year's elections, pacify you into voting for these morons (all of them), again?

[lovenpeace1]

Hey michaelm07,

Do you prefer a Massive Tax Cut for Corporations to create millions of new jobs.........................................overseas?


Do you know why the Massive Tax Cuts of 2001 and 2003 are Temporary by the Republican Congress and White House of the time? They wanted to limit the damage in lost Revenue to the U.S. Treasury estimated at $1.6 Trillions. At least, they were correct on the damage done with no benefits.

[mycommentspg]

Real health care reform?? I suggest you wait until something is actually passed by Congress. Money controls Washington, members of Congress, and the President. Lobbyists are very much at work. I would expect the final outcome to provide very small actual changes in the health care system. mycommentspage.blogspot

[Mortarman_29]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.

[6*] Nadeem Esmail, Michael A. Walker with Margaret Bank, "Waiting Your Turn, (17th edition) Hospital Waiting Lists In Canada," Fraser Institute, Critical Issues Bulletin 2007, Studies in Health Care Policy, August 2008; Nadeem Esmail and Dominika Wrona "Medical Technology in Canada," Fraser Institute, August 21, 2008 ; Sharon Willcox et al., "Measuring and Reducing Waiting Times: A Cross-National Comparison Of Strategies," Health Affairs, Vol. 26, No. 4, July/August 2007, pages 1,078-87; June O'Neill and Dave M. O'Neill, "Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S."; M.V. Williams et al., "Radiotherapy Dose Fractionation, Access and Waiting Times in the Countries of the U.K.. in 2005," Royal College of Radiologists, Clinical Oncology, Vol. 19, No. 5, June 2007, pages 273-286.

[*] Nadeem Esmail and Michael A. Walker with Margaret Bank, "Waiting Your Turn 17th Edition: Hospital Waiting Lists In Canada 2007."

[*] "Hospital Waiting Times and List Statistics," Department of Health, England. Available at http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Statistics/Performancedataandstatistics/HospitalWaitingTimesandListStatistics/index.htm?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=186979&Rendition=Web.

[lovenpeace1]

by Mortarman_29 October 27, 2009 11:07 AM EDT
Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.

******************************

Hey Mortarman_29,

Socialized medicine is better than no insurance at all. Unless you believe those without health insurance should just be left alone to die.

I prefer to wait 1 year than wait forever.

[Mortarman_29]

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

*Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
*Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
*More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
*Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

[W_A_H]

This is an educational event for the future. "Build it and they have no option but to come"? If one keeps saying something is so does it actually materialize? As a Democrat, the urgency and reasons for that urgency to pass the stimulus was carefully noted. The first policy attempt by this administration fell flat as a pancake as did cash for clunkers and every other pathetic result of the disbursement of these funds. Now cap & trade? How much more punishment is this administration going to inflict on the average American household. Why are small and medium sized businesses still in a federal strangle hold? Just look around the nation in any direction. The result of this is that folks are unemployed, lost homes and can't provide for their families. They want to work, participate and become once again a positive addition to society so where is the business credit from the banks that enjoyed tax payer billions that would allow small business to operate and keep folks employed?

The ?Please sir, may I have some more? will never play in the United States of America.

No, without jobs all else becomes a very distant second as this administration will find out if not already of which thought makes me even angrier.

JOBS Mr. President, JOBS

W. A.

[Mortarman_29]

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries. Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

(Oliver Schoffski (University of Erlangen-Nuremberg), "Diffusion of Medicines in Europe," European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, 2002. Available at http://www.amchampc.org/showFile.asp?FID=126. See also Michael Tanner, "The Grass is Not Always Greener: A Look at National Health Care Systems around the World," Cato Institute, Policy Analysis No. 613, March 18, 2008. Available at http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9272.)

[Mortarman_29]

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

(U.S. Cancer Statistics, National Program of Cancer Registries, U.S. Centers for Disease Control; Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada; also see June O'Neill and Dave M. O'Neill, "Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S.," National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 13429, September 2007. Available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w13429.)

[Mortarman_29]

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

(Concord Working Group, "Cancer survival in five continents: a worldwide population-based study,.S. abe at responsible for theountries, in s chnologies, " Lancet Oncology, Vol. 9, No. 8, August 2008, pages 730 - 756; Arduino Verdecchia et al., "Recent Cancer Survival in Europe: A 2000-02 Period Analysis of EUROCARE-4 Data," Lancet Oncology, Vol. 8, No. 9, September 2007, pages 784 - 796.)

[hungry1968-16]

by luadda22 October 27, 2009 10:25 AM EDT
The top corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39% (in addition to a state tax rate ranging from 0% to 12%). The top rate in South Korea 25% and Canada is 35.5%. Want to guess again why our jobs are going over seas? Don't blame it on the companies, my 18 year old gandson will mow your lawn for $25. To have a union mow your lawn it will take the Teamsters to drive the truck there at $125, the a Longshoremen to unload the mower from the truck at $75, a shop stewart and a journeyman to mow the yard at $175, then repeated to load the mower and return the it to the yard, another $200. At $25 or $575, who are you going to hire?







With all of the loopholes in the tax code, and some businesses barely pay any taxes at all:

http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/tax-law-income-tax/11582115-1.html

"The average U.S. effective tax rate on the domestic income of large corporations with positive domestic income in 2004 was an estimated 25.2 percent. There was considerable variation in tax rates across these taxpayers. The average U.S. effective tax rate on the foreign-source income of these large corporations was around 4 percent, reflecting the effects of both the foreign tax credit and tax deferral on this type of income."


The rest of your post is easily dismissed BS and nonsense.

[luadda22]

If you think it's BS, just go to a trade show at Madison Square Garden and see how many trade unions you have to deal with.

As far as taxes, you state an average. I listed the top rate that can be assessed. I will buy every house in my neighborhood for the "average" price of homes in my city.

Do you consider mortgage interest deduction, earned income tax credit and all the other legal tax deductions as "loopholes"?

[rplat]

Right Obama . . . and if you're a socialist or a Marxist, that's good news.

[Mortarman_29]

Obama is a Marxist. His administration is filled with marxists. They even admit it!

[W_A_H]

No plat it isn't. We had better reach some common ground soon IMO.