Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Healthcare. Show all posts

Oct 26, 2018

Healthcare Is Winning Issue for Democratic Candidates

Wisconisn Democrats are giving pass to Tea Party whacks
who oppose healthcare, but have made an
election-year transformation.
Madison, Wisconsin — Ten days out from Election Day and Republicans have discovered families like healthcare.

In six years, Wisconsin Republicans have moved from vowing to arrest any federal official who helps implement Obamacare health protections such as preexisting condition coverage to less-than-credible declarations that the Republican Party is now the guardian of healthcare for all.

Ali Valshi has a compelling piece on the election-year transformation on Republicans and healthcare.
Of-course, the white supremacist Trump knows healthcare is a losing proposition so better to point the finger at pressing issues, the real enemy — brown people walking up through Mexico who are coming to kill us.

If Democrats and progressives can make the midterm elections about healthcare, the blue wave builds and overwhelms.

Every pol knows this, but judging from messaging, the knowledge seems not operative, and Democrats, especially Wisconsin Democrats, are playing not to lose.

Sep 21, 2017

Sen. Murkowski Appears 51st 'No' Vote Against Anti-Healthcare Bill, Says The Intercept

Jesus, Lindsey Graham, Bill Cassidy, Dean Heller, and Ron Johnson Want to Repeal Obamacare with the GCHJ Bill as Lisa Murkowsi Vote Looms

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson bill is the most cynical, repulsive Republican act yet, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski,(R-Alaska) may kill it though this drama queen makes the odious John McCain look courageous by comparison.

Citing statements made at a public question-and-answer forum last month and on Sept. 19, The Intercept's Ryan Grim penned an analysis last night concluding Sen. Lisa Murkowski, (R-Alaska), is poised to become the 51st vote against the Republican effort to strip healthcare from 10s of millions of American.

A Murkowski vote against the Graham-Cassidy bill would kill the current legislative effort by Republicans to overturn Obama-era healthcare guarantees. [To track the bill of sorts, here's Congress.gov though I find this site impenetrable and cannot indicate a Senate bill number.]

Rightwing religious whacks

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson bill is also supported by rightwing religious fundamentalist groups including the National Right to Life Committee, Family Research Council and Christian Coalition of America.

The religious fundamentalists support bill language against a woman's right to choose, and the restructuring of the healthcare system to give states more coercive power against individuals.

The religious right is politically strong in gerrymandered states and would benefit as more power is given to states over people.

The anti-healthcare bill designed by the religious right, health insurance corporations and rightwing think-tanks faces defeat at the hands of an obscure senator from Alaska. Next week will tell.

Mukowksi the savior

Notes The Intercept's Grim:

[O]n Tuesday, Alaska’s governor, Bill Walker, announced he was against the new bill. Later that day, while speaking with reporters, Murkowski quoted Walker’s statement, adding that she is not yet announcing her own position.

If all that isn’t enough to give an indication of how she’ll vote this time around, take a look at a conversation she had with a class of high school interns just last month. Murkowski, who tends to hold her cards close to her vest, didn’t announce her decision last time before the vote, either. But that doesn’t mean she hadn’t made up her mind.

In the Q and A with her outgoing interns, she allowed each to ask her a question. The back and forth was recorded and posted to YouTube, [YouTube link added here]. As of this writing, it has been viewed 523 times, and was referenced in a profile of Murkowski written in August by Jennifer Bendery of HuffPost.

One intern, Kobe Rizk, asked Murkowski to name an issue she had 'made a visible difference on and how.'

Murkowski immediately referred back to her vote against repealing the Affordable Care Act. The nay vote had been cast amid tremendous pressure — which Murkowski described later to CNN as 'repercussion from party, a tweet from the president, backlash from your leadership' — and even a threat that Alaska could lose federal funding for energy projects.

For backers of Graham-Cassidy, who still claim to have hope she will come around, Murkowski’s answer to the intern could not bode worse for their bill. Her core argument is that healthcare reform should be done in a bipartisan way, that the process should be transparent and go through the proper committees, and it should not be rushed by an arbitrary deadline just to get something done.

None of that is true for Graham-Cassidy.
It would of course be nice if Murkowski would simply declare her opposition to this obscenity and not make us wait until next week.

Jul 29, 2017

Killing GOP Anti-Healthcare Bill Is Genuine Feel-good Story; But John McCain Ain't No Hero

Roll Call vote on S.Amdt. 667 to S.Amdt. 267 to H.R. 1628
(American Health Care Act of 2017),
(Roll Call vote, July 28, 2017, United States Senate)
The political legend of John McCain long ago veered into the ridiculous.

But McCain's vote early Friday morning against the Republican Party's bill to take away healthcare from millions of Americans was not heroic, maverick, or confirmation of his supernatural streak of independence and decency to which we can only look upon in awe, (Business Insider).

McCain's vote was not even fleeting recognition that Americans deserve healthcare every bit as excellent as that McCain receives as he battles his own tragic bout with cancer.

No, McCain's grandstanding vote was all about McCain. And much of the American political press omits the fact two years ago McCain voted along with his fellow Republicans to deny healthcare to 10s of millions of Americans in an effort to repeal ObamaCare, (McCain and Healthcare Vote).

If we conceptualize the workings of the United States Senate in term of heroism, (never a good idea), the heroes are Sens. Lisa Murkowski, (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins, (R-Maine), along with the 48 Democratic Party and independent senators who represented the overwhelming pro-healthcare sentiment of the American people, (Esquire).

"If you want to laud Senator John McCain for his military service, or for his occasional high-profile stabs at bipartisanship, feel free. But it didn’t take a lick of courage to vote against an ACA repeal bill that was supported by fewer than 20 percent of the electorate, and which would have killed off some unknown number of his constituents if it passed," notes Joshua Holland at The Nation in a piece to which every political commentator should allude.

Friday's vote against Republicans and only Republicans including the lunatic in the White House to deny healthcare to the American people was not a "goddamned Frank Capra movie," (Pierce, Esquire); it was the sum total of American will and millions of citizens who told clueless senators they demand healthcare as an unalienable right.

"If millions of Americans had not raised their voices at town hall meetings, made phone calls to their senators, posted on social media, and resisted in other ways, this bill might already be law. But we know this fight is not over: the threat of repeal remains real. Republicans in Congress will not give up. Neither can we. MoveOn members will remain vigilant and prepared to mobilize at a moment’s notice if it appears Congress is attempting to advance a new bill," notes Anna Galland, executive director of MoveOn.org, (Stewart, MoveOn).

A citizenry prepared to mobilize. That is the real feel-good story of the Summer.

As John Nichols writes, (Twitter):

They traveled to D.C.
They slept outside in wheelchairs.
They were arrested.
They never lost faith.

Mar 3, 2017

Republican Push to Limit HealthCare Hits Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin

Madison, Wisconsin—An out-of-state organization seeking to repeal ObamaCare to benefit health insurance corporations took out a half-page ad in the Wisconsin State Journal, (Madison, Wisconsin), this week to blast Sen. Tammy Baldwin, (D-Wisconsin), for backing people over insurance companies.

The ad is part of an early multi-state TV blitz in an effort to target Democratic senators up for reelection in 2018, (The Hill). 

One Nation is a massive SuperPac, affiliated with Republican senate SuperPacs and funded heavily by the health insurance industry.

Thirty-three U.S. Senate seats are to be contested in 2018 and the Democratic Party has to defend a whopping 25 of those seats, (Red State).

Republicans think they can flip Wisconsin's first-term Democratic senator, Tammy Baldwin, but they know it's a fight.

Here's their strategy:

Republicans excite their base by repeatedly messaging their healthcare is earned, as opposed to the blacks' healthcare which comes out of your pay-check. [Sure it's crazy, but so is racism.]

Blacks and browns are making your healthcare rates soar, (by some manner too mysterious to note with no mention of, or accountability by health insurance companies): Fucking Obama catered to these people with Obamacare and made your life bad. White folks just don't have a chance. 

This is what One Nation is accomplishing, and they want to reach white swing voters.

This appeal is of course ludicrous. But the idea is to tie every issue to race with the compelling message that some manner of The Other is taking yours and getting paid for it no less.

In Wisconsin, appeals to race work and have for many decades. Whether the race-baiting politicians are natives like Tommy Thompson or transplants like Scott Walker and Donald Trump, the ole-time religion of blaming the black and browns is home-cooking in the Badger State.

The Tammy Baldwin v. Republican 2018 race will offer a leading indicator showing if Democrats have figured out how to prevail on an issue they should own: Healthcare.

Shouldn't be that hard and Baldwin is better than most Dems as witnessed by her defeat of Tommy Thompson in 2012 that saw Baldwin successfully define Thompson as what he is: An opportunistic hack who turned his back on Wisconsin. Baldwin won 51 percent to 45 percent.

The turnout in 2018 will be in the 55-percent range. Republicans have worked hard to suppress that urban vote in Milwaukee.

What's the early prediction on the Baldwin reelection race? There is none, Wisconsin folk are utterly unpredictable.

I'll make one observation that will inform the race.

Baldwin was first elected to Congress in 1998.

Magic 98

In 1998 I worked as a poll worker at the then Gordon Commons on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus at a voting precinct serving the southeast dormitories, (mostly freshmen and sophomores). The city-wide turnout wildly exceeded predictions, and the southeast dorms led even these turn-out numbers.

At the polls we ran out of ballots about 5:00 P.M, as students were coming to vote and being told to come back. I personally sprinted to a polling site at a Dayton Street school about a half-mile away and was told they too were out of ballots and to try the Memorial Union polling site. Sprinted to the Union. I picked up about 100 or so ballots, sprinted back to Gordon Commons and was shaking too much to counter-sign the ballots. Serious fun.

Baldwin defeated one Josephine W. Musser, 52 to 46 percent. It was a race many recall with fond memories. [That same 1998 race saw Sen. Russ Feingold narrowly defeat a rightwing Evangelical Mark Neumann by some 37,000 votes. Neumann blamed the Dane County turnout, so did many in Dane County, especially Madison's Isthmus neighborhoods. Read one homemade sign on an East Dayton Street house months later in the heart of the Isthmus in the spring of 1999: "one neighborhood" beat Mark Neumann. Milwaukee County with all those urban types also gave Feingold electoral breathing room.]

What happened in 1998? Baldwin captured the public imagination who saw in her candidacy the hopes and possibilities of people. It was that vivid. Everyone doing field work saw the same thing, but political consultants didn't see the throngs of people turning out as they did. This phenomenon was electoral magic—something that cannot be explained or predicted.

Twenty years later the 2018 race will feature Baldwin against a Republipuke who will run a campaign asking in effect, 'are you gonna let the niggers win and take your healthcare?'

Rightwing thinks anti-healthcare message is a winner in 2018
U.S. Senate races. Who needs healthcare?

Jan 19, 2017

Save Social Security and Medicare from Paul Ryan and Republicans

Senior abandonment by Paul Ryan and
Republicans is a betrayal and moral
dislocation unprecedented in American
history. Join the fight for the people
who made America and bequeathed
us our very lives
.
From the moment you received your first pay-check in the day when paychecks were paper, you may have wondered what that FICA deduction figure, (Federal Insurance Contributions Act), represents on your pay-stub (IRS).

FICA represents the contribution by workers and employers to Medicare and Social Security—the most successful federal programs in United States history.

Last year these earned-benefits, social insurance guarantees, enjoyed sky-high popularity as critical earned benefits: Medicare (77 percent), Social Security (83 percent), (Kaiser). This level of support is persistent across decades, continuing today.

As Paul Ryan and the Republicans target Social Security and Medicare for phase-out and privatization, seniors are scared; afraid that without Social Security and Medicare, "they won't be alive," in the words of one senior-care advocate in Madison, Wisconsin.

Donald Trump promised not to cut Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. Few believe anything Trump has said.

Noted Bernie Sanders in questioning the right-wing Rep. Tom Price (R-Georgia), Trump's nominee for secretary of the U.S. Dept of  Health and Human Services:

During the course of his campaign, Mr. Trump said over and over again that he would not cut Social Security, not cut Medicare, not cut Medicaid. Let me read some quotes. On May 7th, 2015, Mr. Trump tweeted, ‘I was the first and only potential GOP candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.’ On April 18th, 2015, he said, quote, ‘Every Republican wants to do a big number on Social Security, they want to do it on Medicare, they want to do it on Medicaid, and we can’t do that, and it’s not fair to the people who have been paying in for years and now all of a sudden they want it to be cut,’ end of quote. August 10th of 2015 Mr. Trump said, quote, ‘I will say Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will be saved without cuts. We have to do it, people have been paying in for years and now many of these candidates want to cut it,’ end quote.

March 29th, 2016, Trump said, ‘You know, Paul Ryan wants to knock out Social Security, knock it down, way down. He wants to knock Medicare way down, and frankly, well, two things. Number one, you’re going to lose the election if you’re going to do that. I’m not going to cut it and I’m not going to raise age limits, and I’m not going to do all of the things they want to do. But they want to really cut it. and they want to cut it very substantially, the Republicans and I’m not going to do that,’ on and on and on.

Point being, this is not something he said in passing. I think it is likely he won the election because millions of working class people and senior citizens heard him say he was not going to cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Congressman Price, a very simple question:  Is the president-elect, Mr. Trump, going to keep his word to the American people and not cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? Or did he lie to the American people?

Will Donald Trump stand up for seniors and others in need of healthcare? The universe of those needing healthcare would include everyone.

But if Republicans get their way in throwing seniors into the health insurance market, seniors will re-live the trauma of exclusions, per-existing conditions, benefit caps, sky-high deductibles and all the red tape that health insurance companies employ with the aim of making them give up and leave.
---

By Bill Walsh of the AARP

As Donald Trump was mounting his insurgent candidacy for president, he repeatedly set himself apart from the Republican field by vowing to protect the Social Security and Medicare Americans have come to know.

He assured older voters, who proved to be a decisive voting bloc, that those programs would remain intact and the benefits delivered as promised.

"Every Republican wants to do a big number on Social Security. They want to do it on Medicare. They want to do it on Medicaid. And we can’t do that,” he said at a New Hampshire rally during the primaries. “It’s not fair to the people who have been paying in for years.”

Yet within days of Trump’s historic election, the guaranteed health coverage provided by Medicare was cast in doubt. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) revived his plan to replace it with a fixed-dollar subsidy that beneficiaries would use to buy private health insurance. Meanwhile, Congress is expected to move quickly to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which could have the effect of erasing the consumer-friendly Medicare benefits that the law created.

Stirring Fears and Uncertainty

As news of Ryan’s proposed Medicare overhaul spread, it stirred fears among the 57 million beneficiaries who rely on it to cover prescription drugs, doctor visits and hospitalizations. Democrats lined up to pledge their opposition. It also prompted an outcry from consumer groups, including AARP.

What remains to be seen in January, as Congress reconvenes and the president-elect takes office, is how Trump’s campaign assurances to protect Medicare will hold up against House lawmakers intent on revamping the popular health program.

Trump contributed to the uncertainty by announcing House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.) as his pick to run the Department of Health and Human Services. Price has been an advocate of Ryan’s Medicare approach, which supporters call “premium support” and critics decry as a “voucher system.” Trump’s website further raised questions about his plans for Medicare. It says he wants to “modernize Medicare,” which is often seen as Washington code for the type of changes Ryan wishes to make.

Since the election, Trump has not made any comments about Medicare. But in an interview with ABC News on Dec. 4, Vice President-elect Mike Pence said Trump “made it very clear in the course of the campaign that we’re going to keep our promises in Social Security and Medicare.”

The Ryan Approach

Ryan’s Medicare overhaul, a version of which passed the GOP-controlled House, would fundamentally change how Medicare works.

Since its creation in 1965, Medicare has been a “defined benefit” program, guaranteeing a certain level of health coverage. It now pays about 80 percent of costs associated with doctor and hospital visits. Beneficiaries are responsible for paying monthly premiums, copayments and annual deductibles.

57 million Americans rely on Medicare to afford health care Ryan would convert Medicare from a “defined benefit” to a “defined contribution” program. Instead of a guaranteed level of coverage, a dollar amount would be set for Medicare beneficiaries to pay premiums on insurance they would buy from private-sector companies (this is why Ryan calls it “premium support”). Ryan’s plan would also increase the eligibility age from 65 to 67.

A former chairman of the House Budget Committee, Ryan wants to limit how much the government spends on Medicare. In 2015, Medicare accounted for 15 percent of the federal budget, a proportion expected to grow as the number of beneficiaries rises.

“The reforms we’re talking about do not affect the benefits for anyone in or near retirement,” Ryan said last month. “But for those of us in the younger generations, it won’t be there for us if we stay on the current path.”

The Mounting Opposition

Consumer advocates also want to address growing costs in the health care system, including Medicare. But they contend that Ryan’s approach would erode much-needed coverage and shift costs to many who live on fixed incomes and continue to struggle in the shadow of the Great Recession.
While Ryan says the annual subsidy would be greater for low-income people, critics say it is unlikely to keep pace with the rising costs of insurance. The result, they say, is that beneficiaries would shoulder more of the financial burden — or go without needed medical care. Although Ryan also says people would be allowed to stay in traditional Medicare, critics argue his approach is designed to gradually increase out-of-pocket costs in the program and nudge beneficiaries into private plans with no guaranteed level of coverage.

Opponents also say that there are better cost-saving options available. One of the most popular is giving Medicare the authority to negotiate prescription drug prices directly with drug companies. The change would help the federal government control a cost that accounts for $1 out of every $6 Medicare spends. That idea was supported by more than 80 percent of people in a Kaiser Family Foundation poll in 2015. As a candidate, Trump also embraced the idea, another potential point of friction with House Republicans, who generally oppose it, as does the pharmaceutical industry.

The Impact of Obamacare Repeal

What Trump and GOP leaders wholeheartedly agree on is that the first order of business will be repealing the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. Republican congressional leaders want a repeal vote in January so that a bill can be on the president’s desk right after he is sworn in.

77 percent of people say Medicare is a “very important” program Although it has received little attention, a full repeal of Obamacare would eliminate Medicare benefits created by the law. Among other things, it improved Medicare’s financial outlook by slowing the growth of spending and clamped down on fraud, waste and excessive payments. It also enabled tens of millions of Medicare beneficiaries to get free preventive services such as flu shots and screenings for cancer and diabetes. And between 2010 and 2015, nearly 11 million Medicare beneficiaries saved $20.8 billion on prescription drugs—an average of $1,945 per person — because of the gradual closing of the coverage gap known as the doughnut hole.

While Obamacare remains controversial — in part because of its mandate to purchase health insurance and because premiums have increased for some plans—the Medicare provisions have proved popular with beneficiaries.

Medicare’s Enduring Popularity

Even in an era of hostility toward the federal government, support for some programs has remained strong. A Kaiser poll found that 77 percent of people say Medicare is a “very important” program, just below the level of support for Social Security at 83 percent.

Trump’s campaign assurances about protecting Medicare and Social Security undoubtedly played a role in his Election Day victory, especially among older voters. Those 65 and older supported him with 53 percent of the vote, compared with 45 percent for Democrat Hillary Clinton, according to the Pew Research Center. There will be a lot at stake for them when Congress reconvenes.

Next: Our AARP Plan

Jan 22, 2016

Hillary Misleads Horribly on Healthcare

One reason Hillary's poll numbers are tanking days out from the Iowa Caucuses is that Hillary lies, a lot.

Hillary's whopper from last Sunday's debate:

Well, a– as someone who– as someone who has a– a little bit of experience standing up to the health insurance industry that (CHEERING) spent, you know, many, many millions of dollars attacking me and probably will so again because of what I believe we can do, building on the Affordable Care Act, I think it’s important to point out that there are a lot of reasons we have the health care system we have today.

I know how much money influences the political decision making. That’s why I’m for huge campaign finance reform. However, we started a system that had private health insurance. And even during the Affordable Care Act debate there was an opportunity to vote for what was called the public option.

In other words, people could buy into Medicare. And even when the Democrats were in care of the Congress we couldn’t get the votes for that. So what I’m saying is really simple, this has been the fight of the Democratic party for decades. We have the Affordable Care Act. Let’s make it work. Let’s take the models that states are doing. We now have driven costs down to the lowest they’ve been in 50 years. Now we’ve gotta get individual costs down. That’s what I’m planning to do. [Time Magazine]

On Planet Reality, and c'mon this was just some six years ago, the Public Option was hugely popular and one senator, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D,I-Health Insurance Lobby) killed it, that's why 'we couldn’t get the votes for the Public Option.'

Notes Wendall Potter at the Center for Public Integrity:

The Democrats needed [Joe] Lieberman’s vote to get reform passed, and insurers knew it. Shortly before the Senate was set to vote on the bill, Lieberman said he would vote for the bill only if the public option was stripped out.

Lieberman accused public option supporters of having an ulterior motive.

 'A public option plan is unnecessary,' he told Fox News. 'It has been put forward, I’m convinced, by people who really want the government to take over all of health insurance.'

Hillary forgot to mention this bit of history, instead doing what Hillary does best: Lie on behalf of the health insurance industry and Wall Street and make $ millions in return, shafting the uninsured in the process, (Jilani, The Intercept).

So Bernie should just drop the public option now? Forget it.

Jun 25, 2015

Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare, Rejects Activist Rightwingers

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), Obamacare, in a blow to rightwing activists and a political victory for the Obama administration cementing an accomplishment that sociologist and historian Paul Starr notes in 2010, is a "stunning historical achievement and the most important liberal reform since the 1960s" (Mal Contends).

The case is David King, et al., Petitioners v. Sylvia Burwell (No. 14-114). See also David King, et al., Petitioners v. Sylvia Burwell at the Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School.

The Court upheld Obamacare that had been challenged on the basis that five words out of a massive law demanded its destruction.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor to form a 6-3 majority.

Some six million Americans faced losing their healthcare insurance had the Court ruled against the ACA.

"Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them. If at all possible we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.

Justice Scalia penned a dissenting opinion joined by rightwing activists justices, Thomas and Alito, that even for the often peevish Scalia reads as petulant and polemical. "We should start calling this law SCOTUScare," writes Scalia (p.47).

Scalia's currency on the Court has been declining in recent years as his increasingly incoherent opinions have veered into what Judge Richard Posner derided as "gotcha' jurisprudence," as described in Posner's book Reflections on Judging (Harvard University Press. 2013) (p.182).

Many legal observers prior to today's decision doubted that the Court would follow Scalia as Scalia has devolved into a radical and activist ideologue; see "A Court of One" (Murphy, Simon & Schuster). (Greenhouse, NYT) (See also Moncrieff, The New Republic; and Lithwick, Slate).

President Obama Delivered a Statement on Today's Affordable Care Act Ruling

Oct 24, 2013

John Kasich's Medicaid Stand Diminishes Scott Walker

War is not over. Look to Twain and history for Tea Party Glory as Good Americans invoke the God of Battles, beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpouring of fervid eloquence which moved every bible-reading listener, inspiring Andy Borowitz to an act of rapture from which he emitted in The New Yorker: "The dream of keeping poor people from seeing a doctor must never die."
 ---
Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) is making headlines for acting to get his state $2.5 billion in extra Medicaid funds for 275,000 Ohioans under provisions in the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA) or ObamaCare that help the working poor and unemployed whom, out of an act of conscience for Kasich is drawing loud reaction from the right.

"When you die and get to the meeting with St. Peter, he's probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small, but he's going to ask you what you did for the poor," said Kasich after moving to get Ohio $2.5 Billion in Medicaid money from the federal ACA or ObamaCare.

Medicaid is a joint federal and state-funded program that provides health care for over 60 million low-income Americans, with the ancillary benefits of boosting the living standards of low-wage workers and increasing the purchasing power of working families.

"This is not a program designed to encourage dependency. It is a program designed to construct a bridge so that people can be functioning in a way where they can contribute," said Kasich in mid-October.

Eight Republican governors have now opted in the ObamaCare Medicaid provisions for their states.

Wisconsin's Scott Walker is conspicuously not one of them.

In an infamous Walker statement in rejecting $billions in Medicaid for Wisconsin citizens, Walker said, "I care too much about the people of this state not to empower them to control their own destiny." (Stein. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. February 13, 2013)

Walker says this in his administration that has proven to be an outfit of uninterrupted cronyism and corruption.

This is not just the foolish economics in essentially (and hypocritically) punishing low-income working families, but is also intentional infliction of distress on people's lives as Walker and his political allies live in the bubble, a narrow and fanatical ideological make-believe world costing the economy $billions on Medicaid alone.

Writes Paul Krugman in June 2103: "Just think about this for a minute. It's one thing when politicians refuse to spend money helping the poor and vulnerable; that's just business as usual. But here we have a case in which politicians are, in effect, spending large sums, in the form of rejected aid, not to help the poor but to hurt them."

Kasich has drawn the support of faith-based groups, unions, several business groups such as the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, major hospitals and health care providers, notes Diane Suchetka of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Virtually every Ohio Democratic Party officeholder applauds Kasich as the Tea Party and rightwing scream bloody murder in a ferocious campaign not seen since the GOP tried to stop Medicare in the 1960s.

John Kasich has been transformed from a Tax Cutter and Job Grower to a man whom Jason Hart says is losing his commitment to "freedom."

Sep 7, 2009

Health Insurance Parasites

Update: Fight for the public option.

As everyone gets back to work on Tuesday and awaits President Obama's national address on healthcare on Wednesday, seen by some as a "make-or-break moment in his young administration (Peter Baker NYT)," writer Corrente points out what should be axiomatic: Health insurance companies are parasites, a rogue industry.

Perhaps a more apt description is the grubworm: We are the grass and the worm is the health insurance industry:

Grubworms are the larvae of beetles, attacking the roots of turfgrasses and ornamental plants. Damage first appears as drought stress such as wilting and drooping. ... Grub populations also attract predatory mammals such as skunks, raccoons, opossums and moles that can hear the grub activity and dig into the turf in search of a meal- causing further damage to the turf.
"I suffer no illusions that this will be an easy process. It will be hard. But I also know that nearly a century after Teddy Roosevelt first called for reform, the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough. So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year."
– President Barack Obama, February 24, 2009

"No More Mr. Nice Guy"
- Alice Cooper, 1973

Sep 4, 2009

Tyler Durden to President Obama

President Obama is floating the idea that next week's healthcare address to Congress may disappoint progressives seeking Obama's advocacy for healthcare reform that includes a public option as a right and a cost-control measure.

Look to cinema for a response:

We do your laundry, cook your food
and serve you dinner. We guard you
while you sleep. We drive your
ambulances. Do not fuck with us.
- Tyler Durden [Fight Club, 1998)


Aug 21, 2009

Obama and Progressives

President Obama was elected as an agent of change with the energetic support of the peace-and-justice, civil-liberties-loving, Constitution-following, reality-based community.

So it comes as a disappointment to see Obama bow to those who are opposed to change and hostile to civil liberties.

What's going on?

Mike Madden in Salon says, "Obama's just not that into you," asking if progressives and the president are really meant for each other.

Paul Krugman says, "So there’s a growing sense among progressives that they have, as my colleague Frank Rich suggests, been punked. ... So progressives are now in revolt. Mr. Obama took their trust for granted, and in the process lost it. And now he needs to win it back."

Obama needs to make a decision: Cater to Sarah Palin and her off-the-wall, white GOP or make good on the shiny, progressive promises of the last campaign that saw Americans break all manner of new ground in their thirst for real change.

Aug 19, 2009

Gingrich Hits Gov Crats' Death Mandate, Praises Wisc Hospital

It's past time for President Obama to call a liar a liar.

The GOP is in full campaign mode with lots of money and lies. And Obama is playing this game like a 1/4-speed, sixth-grade football scrimmage.

Newt Gingrich's e-mail this morning continues the outrageous lies about proposed health care reform, and Gingrich ironically works in a plug for a Wisconsin hospital and patients' rights to make living, medical-care wills:

Emotions are high in the debate over the future of our health care, and for good reason. What we are discussing are deeply personal, often deeply emotional issues.

Americans are troubled by what we're hearing from Washington because we don't want government to dictate these deeply personal, deeply emotional decisions. Especially those decisions that come near the end of life.

Gingrich knows perfectly well that there no proposed death panels or mandates from Washington on how a person can end her life.

But now Gingrich is the new libertarian, death-with-dignity-and-compassion man.

It's a lie and Obama refuses to engage the lies and not surprisingly polls show support for health care reform plummeting.

Gingrich presents a Wisconsin hospital as a model for how one should be able to end her life vis a vis being told by outsiders what she must do. [That Terri Schaivo thing a few years ago never happened.] Writes Gingrich:

We had that kind of an experience at Gunderson Lutheran Hospital in Lacrosse, Wisconsin, where my father-in-law died.

At Gunderson - without any mandates from government - 92 percent of patients have advanced directives setting out what kind of care they want at the end of life.

Patients are treated with compassion, dignity and humanity. Families are engaged. Doctors are allowed to do what they think is best for patients, without fearing that the federal government is looking over their shoulders.

Obama is in a bubble expanding to Bush league proportions. Way past time to burst it.

Who is telling Obama not to take on the whacks and the liars? The same people who are letting the Party of Terri Schaivo become the Party of death with dignity and compassion.

This morning the New York Times quotes Rahm Emanuel: “The Republican leadership has made a strategic decision that defeating President Obama’s health care proposal is more important for their political goals than solving the health insurance problems that Americans face every day.”

Good, nice observation, but health care should be owned by the Democratic Party as an issue and Obama seems content to play Mr. Nice Guy.

Aug 15, 2009

McClatchy News: Healthcare Opposition Contrived

Update: Gov. Dean predicts healthcare legislation with public option signed in September.

Margaret Talev sets the record straight in Who's behind the attacks on a health care overhaul?

Writes Talev in McClatchy Newspapers:


Much of the money and strategy behind the so-called grassroots groups organizing opposition to the Democrats' health care plans comes from conservative political consultants, professional organizers and millionaires, some of whom hold financial stakes in the outcome.

Aug 13, 2009

Weeds

And not pot.

The online Salon magazine is publishing the most insightful work on these seemingly crazed protesters upset that health care reform might work.

This is not the work of a grassroots uprising; it's AstroTurf and corporate weeds.

See also Adele Stan at Alternet.

Jul 30, 2009

Our Crisis

As the corporate bought-and-paid-for Blue Dogs do their worst to ensure that health care reform is not universal, President Obama faces another problem: The economy and jobs are foremost on the public mind.

And the objective of providing universal care is akin to throwing a man falling from a building a steak dinner.

Health care needs to be done, if nothing else for the long-term fiscal health of the country, but the obvious threat to the project is that those who profit from making health care a commodity and product have a lot of money that can buy a lot of politicians.

Today's Republican Party and its Blue Dog allies have already proven that throwing the country into fiscal crisis is of no concern, and neither is health care costs.

As for the economy and jobs, Carl Ginsberg has a piece out in CounterPunch, Our Crisis, Their Gain, capturing the cause of the growing populist resentment.

There is no denying the inequitable manner in which the government is addressing the economic crisis. I have to believe that there is a political strategy in this, I just don't know what that would be.

Writes Ginsberg:

For some, joblessness is the antithesis of crisis. It is opportunity. People without work equates to competition for employment which means low wages which means enhanced profits. In case you haven’t noticed, the stock market is up. Bond sales by businesses were $570 billion in Q1, a record…. Net financial investment in Q1 was $340 billion, also a record. Go Go. ...

Back to your crisis: The banks are now aggressively pressing people who are delinquent on loans and mortgages in order to extract what they can, charge usurious interest and fees (thank you, Joe Biden), hound you --- to capitalize on your crisis. That is the business model Barack Obama invested in for all of us. Small wonder JP Morgan CEO James Dimon invited White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to visit with his board of directors.

Had President Obama taken our trillions and set up what William Greider calls for in the current Nation magazine, a development fund for long-term capital investment, or what Mike Davis has described, a national debt bank to relieve excessive consumer and mortgage debt, your government would be addressing your crisis. But of course there’s plenty of time for that.

Jul 21, 2009

Health Care and Obama

It looks like the rightwing's strategy of throwing our government into a fiscal crisis is working in halting universal care. The fact that the GOP threw the economy into a meltdown was just icing.

For now, it appears likely we will have to settle for some version of expanded health care coverage over universal healthcare.

Some reactions on expanding healthcare.

From Salon, What is Obama selling? The president is belatedly pitching his healthcare reform plan to the public. But if he wants to win, he has to define it

From ThinkProgress:
by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, and Nate Carlile:

Health Care
The Right's Delay And Kill Strategy
Throughout his campaign for the White House, after his election victory, and as soon as he assumed office, President Obama made it clear that reforming the health care system would be at the top of his agenda. Reiterating that sentiment, Obama said recently that health care is his "highest legislative priority over the next month." And the American public agrees. A recent Gallup poll found that nearly 60 percent of Americans said they favor Congress passing major health care reform this year. And while the relevant committees in the House and Senate are hard at work on legislation, Republicans and conservatives, in and out of power, are doing everything they can to stand in the way of major reform. The right is taking its lead from GOP pollster Frank Luntz, who authored a memo laying out a rhetorical strategy for conservatives to demonize Obama's proposal. Luntz recently admitted that he is urging Republicans to attack reform as a "government takeover" regardless of what the actual legislation says. But Republicans (and some Democrats) have added another obstructionist tactic: delay. As White House budget director Peter Orszag said last Sunday, "The typical Washington bureaucratic game of -- 'if you don’t have a better alternative, just delay in the hope that that kills something' is partly what's playing out here." "There are those who are advocating delay just as a desperation move to try to kill this," he said. Orszag is right: Opponents of reform in Congress are proposing amendments that would maintain the status quo and have resorted to a delay-and-kill strategy.

HOLD AND DELAY: Building on Luntz's plan, Senate Republicans made every attempt to delay the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee's reform measure by offering nonsensical amendments, eliminating affordability measures for middle class families, offering non-starter alternatives, arguing that the
committee should terminate hearings, and fear-mongering over the measure that eventually passed. Former Bush chief of staff Andrew Card argued yesterday that health care reform needs to be slowed down, calling it "contrived haste." "Let's do it
smart, not fast," Card said. Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne reported that Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), one of the few GOP senators negotiating reform, is "under immense pressure from Republican colleagues not to deal at all." A memo written by veteran GOP consultant Alex Castellanos is being circulated among Republican leaders insisting that it is "crucial for Republicans to slow down what it calls 'the Obama experiment with our health.'" RNC Chairman Michael Steele delivered a speech yesterday that was "based, almost word for word," on the Castellanos memo.'

GO FOR THE KILL': While some conservatives want to delay reform to weaken the bill, most simply want to kill it outright. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) said that the GOP should hold the line until the August recess so members of Congress can go home and hear from their "outraged" constituents. "If we're able to stop Obama on this it will be his Waterloo. It will break him," he said. It "could be" Obama's "Waterloo," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich concurred. "I think that's a good way to put it," Steele said in response to DeMint. (Steele also called Obama's reform efforts "risky experimentation" despite his own confusion of the issue. "I don't do policy," he explained.) The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol, a key architect of obstructing reform in the early 1990s, wrote yesterday that Republicans should simply end the reform movement altogether. "With Obamacare on the ropes, there will be a temptation for opponents to let up on their criticism, and to try to appear constructive, or at least responsible. ... My advice, for what it's worth: Resist the temptation. This is no time to pull punches. Go for the kill." MEDIA TAKE THE GOP'S BAIT: In a speech on health care yesterday, Obama struck back at DeMint's comment that defeating reform will "break him." "This isn't about me. This isn't about politics," Obama said. "It is about a health care system that is breaking American families, breaking America's businesses and breaking America's economy." However, many mainstream media figures appear to be letting the GOP's rhetoric sink in to their coverage of the debate, as the Washington Post observed yesterday: "Cable news programs repeatedly declare the president's health care program is teetering or embattled despite a week in which Obama's proposals were endorsed by the doctor and nurses associations and committees in both legislative chambers passed major bills." Indeed, as Media Matters noted, three House and Senate committees have passed reform bills and the American Medical Association and the American Nurses Association have endorsed Democrats' reform efforts. Yet, the media narrative still caters to Republican talking points. "Is his plan in serious peril?" CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked last Friday. CNN's Jessica Yellin asserted that "the White House is feeling really nervous right now. I mean, they know that this thing is a mess." "The conventional wisdom here is that [Obama is] on the ropes here on health care," NBC's David Gregory claimed. Yet, in a candid acknowledgment, NBC's Chuck Todd conceded the media has "created this drama."

Jun 19, 2009

Feingold Pushing Health Care Coverage

Update: Jonathan Cohn - Early Word on the House Bill: So Far, So Good

If national health care's fate were to be decided by Wisconsin's Congressional delegation alone, it would be sailing to President Obama's desk, the GOP and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) be damned.

Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-Madison) and Rep. Steve Kagan (D-Green Bay) are long-time champions of guaranteed health care.

And in the Senate, Senator Russ Feingold is likewise a true-blue advocate. Check out Russ' blog if you have not read it which seems to be e-mailing daily health care postings.

Jun 18, 2009

Ray McGovern on Single-Payer

After Downing Street

At first I thought the BEFORE picture of the arteries around my heart may have been doctored. There it was big as life...or imminent death—the circumflex artery was 90 to 99 percent blocked. (Hadn't heard "circumflex" since studying classical Greek. It's what we called the mark placed over long vowels; and, sure enough, that artery had the same form as that mark.)

Turns out the picture was not doctored. But, happily, I was—by an excellent cardiologist who performed a cardio catheterization and emplaced a stent to unclog the artery. The AFTER picture showed a far happier circumflex with blood flowing freely through it.

I have not tried it yet, but I'm looking forward now to walking up that big hill from the Metro station without the minor distress. That was the only symptom I had had....and only twice, and both times the distress went away quickly. No pressure on chest, no trouble breathing, no sweating, no dizziness; no numbness in arm or elsewhere. Just some quickly passing discomfort.
I was "sure" enough that it was nothing serious that I know I would never have gone to the doctor, IF I DID NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE.

And so, by now I could well have been a heart attack victim—and maybe dead—IF I DID NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE... ...which some 50 million of our brothers and sisters in this wealthy country DO NOT HAVE!

Medical insurance occupies part of my knapsack of unearned privilege, the knapsack about which I am barely conscious as it adheres to me like glue.

Perhaps it's my own medical emergencies over the past year and a half—lymphoma in 2008, and then the almost-out-of-business artery—that have made me more conscious of the scandal that our country does not treat all as "created equal" when it comes to access medical care. And I think this applies in spades to before-it-is-too-late diagnostic testing, without which illnesses like mine would have remained undiagnosed and untreated.

To be blunt about it: Whether from the relatively symptom-less lymphoma (only discovered when the tumor was the size of a large orange), or as a result of the "minor distress" blockage in my artery, I most likely would be dead now—the only saving grace being that you wouldn't have to read this.

The lymphoma has been in remission for 10 months, and the oncologist—in an atypical burst of guarded optimism—has said it may even be cured! And if I regularly take the five heart-related prescriptions written for me on Tuesday, the stint should continue to do its work unstintingly, the circumflex and less circular arteries should keep the heart working, and I can die from something else!

This is my second wake-up call. (Thick Irishmen need at least two.) Maybe one needs to be affected in a personal way to gain some sense of what having no health insurance actually means.
I'm going to do all I can to promote single-payer health insurance as the only real way to get everyone covered, and urge you to do the same. Our son the doctor heartily agrees with the sizable majority of physicians who believe that single-payer is by far the best solution. We're supposed to care about our brothers and sisters in this great country of ours, right?

No one should have to think twice before seeking needed medical help... even after just one seemingly paltry symptom.

Thanks for your prayers and the good vibes you have sent along. Looks as if I'll be around for a while more. Let's see if we can get medical insurance for ALL Americans.

May 17, 2009

Swiftboating Healthcare

Among one of very bad things that the GOP hates Obama for is healthcare reform to guarantee that every American will have access to what is perceived by the vast majority of the world as a human right.

Not surprisingly the GOP and its allies are out to swiftboat Obama's initiative that is planned to get through Congress by June 31.

Obama is fighting back, with the same innovations that knocked back the GOP in the 2008 campaign. The GOP is going to find out very quickly 2009 is 1993.

Medicare needs this for to halt the costs of healthcare; America needs this and so does the administration that needs to repair some bridges with the people who put him into office very fast.

From the Obama Organizing for America:

We knew healthcare reform would face fierce opposition -- and it's begun.

As we speak, the same people behind the notorious 'swiftboat' ads of 2004 are already pumping millions of dollars into deceptive television ads.

Their plan is simple: torpedo healthcare reform before it sees the light of day by scaring the public and distorting the President's approach.

We need the resources to take them head on with an urgent, grassroots campaign to pass real healthcare reform in 2009.When the swiftboaters flood the airwaves with distortions, we'll flood the streets with volunteers armed with facts. When they send lobbyists to tell Congress to back down, we'll send millions of calls, letters, and stories from real Americans asking them to stand up.

Please donate $5 or more by midnight Sunday to fight back against these phony attacks and take our message of reform to the American people.

The swiftboaters are once again trying to sell the American people short. As during the election, we deserve a serious conversation -- not fear-mongering and deceit. You and I see the importance of healthcare reform every day. We can't miss this once in a lifetime opportunity to face one of America's greatest challenges head on.

Passing real healthcare reform will be the toughest, most important challenge we've faced together since electing Barack Obama President.

But it's also a big reason we fought so hard to get here. I know that by working together, and speaking with one, determined voice, we can prevail over the cynics and defenders of the status quo. America's families are counting on us to do just that.