Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts

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

Nov 1, 2013

Scott Walker's Sabotage of Healthcare in Wisconsin

Sowing fear and confusion 

You would think intentionally obstructing healthcare for families would be some sort of a crime.

It's not, it's Scott Walker's policy, and it is the position of the Republican Party.

Robert Kraig and Kevin Kane of Wisconsin Citizen Action have the scoop on the results of Scott Walker blocking healthcare, a report that has received far too little publicity.

Walker has blocked information about healthcare rates; blocked $100s millions in Medicaid with the assurance that most Wisconsin media will go along with the Walker charade that he just cares so much about the Wisconsin people that he needs to block their families' access to healthcare.

Walker and his family have been living on tax-payer-financed healthcare since Walker was 24-years-old and hungry for a public position. Walker moved to the Milwaukee suburb of Wauwatosa so he could run for an open GOP-leaning district in 1993. That's 20 years of tax-payer-supported healthcare for Scott Walker.

Shouldn't Governor Walker and his family abide by the same rules for healthcare that he is proposing for everyone else?  Shouldn't all public officials?

Now, Walker spends his time raising money from fat-cats and living on the public dime, while ranting against and blocking anything providing for the common good of the Wisconsin people -- like easy access to healthcare for other peoples' families. Walker says God tells him what to do.

Consumer activists and the Obama administration remain busy trying to put out information, such as Helping Consumers Understand their Coverage Options, from Coast to Coast.

For those looking for specific rate information who live in states such as Wisconsin with a healthcare-hostile governor, where do you go now?

You can try your local county healthcare site, until the federal web site is more reliable.

You have to wait for the national site to function because private contractors built the HealthCare.gov site, as healthcare industry whistleblower Wendall Potter points out.

 I would have liked to have single payer healthcare for everyone, but that is too much to ask in this dysfunctional Congress.

Scott Walker meanwhile is raising even more money; still living on publicly-funded healthcare for his family, and now a John Doe probe is looking into how Walker and his party raised all that money in the 2012 Recall election.

Jul 22, 2013

Health Care for All Is Winning Message as Republicans Run

What few of the extremist band of Republicans will openly admit is the fact they reject health care as a fundamental human right.

Republicans, like Wisconsin's Paul Ryan and Scott Walker, in their Randian musings of incoherent hate, believe health care is not a right, it's a special type of commodity that buys you a privileged state of living that you achieve, inherit, or earn.

Republicans won't admit to their views, by design, as they continue to oppose and block the Affordable Care Act enacted against unanimous Republican opposition.
---
The GOP's rejection of human rights stems from the fact that Republicans are not all that crazy about people to begin with, especially Americans of color whom Republicans revile as a malignant blight, a parasitic cancer. Republicans truly are a delusional bunch.

It's no giant leap for Republicans, repulsivecans, to wish to prevent the creation of a society that exists for the benefit of all its people, and that does not include the working class or people of color.

This view of people is of course sociopathic, a warped conception of humanity that can only be supported with lies that rightwing hacks are all too happy to tell.

Republicans desperately oppose health care reform because as the benefits become clear and GOP lies are exposed, Republicans will lose politically and for decades be known as the Party that blocked your access to health.

Watch Republicans ratchet up their opposition to any measure based upon inclusion and health care for all as destructive to white America, the real America, and feeding lazy and greedy minorities eating away at white America from within and without.

"Contained therein (Fox News' Bill O'Reilly's post-election rant) were all the same old dog whistles, the same ridiculous, no-longer-so-coded racial appeals. The insistence that all those people of color 'want stuff'—unlike the selfless ascetics who populate white America," writes Kevin Baker (Harper's, Nov. 8, 2012) ... "The aging white men who make up the G.O.P.’s spine have become so accustomed to talking in terms of 'the other,' and they’ve spent so much time mentally dehumanizing anybody who might disagree with them on anything, that they’re now almost congenitally incapable of forming a coalition with the rest of America. This won’t change until they finally feel able to make an argument that consists of more than spouting a slogan and running away."

Considering the delusional architecture of Republicans, now politically backed up against the wall, with new infusions of money from the Koch brothers don't expect Republicans to do anything but spout a slogan and run away.

Jun 29, 2012

Paul Starr: Endorses Health Care Reform in 2010 as stunning historical achievement

A look back at January 2010.

Paul Starr came out vigorously for passing health care reform into law, narrowly held as constitutional by the Roberts court.

Starr's advocacy in the pages of The American Prospect marked an endorsement by perhaps the preeminent social historian of American medical care.

Starr is the author of The Social Transformation of American Medicine (Basic Books, 1982) that likely does not occupy a place on the book shelves of the Tea Party and assorted imbeciles like Senators Jim Demint and John McCain screaming about a "government take-over" of the American health care system. Today, we can add Scott Walker and other members of the Tea Party set.

Writes Starr in 2010:

[Health care reform] is a stunning historical achievement and the most important liberal reform since the 1960s. It may also be the most underappreciated social legislation in recent history. Never in my experience has such a big reform been treated as so small. Never have Democratic members of Congress who are putting their careers on the line for something they believe in been so vilified as sellouts by influential progressives. And never have those progressives been so grudging in their endorsement of landmark legislation or so willing to see it defeated.

How this happened is clear. Facing united Republican opposition, Democratic leaders made a series of concessions to win over centrists in their own caucus and to neutralize key interest groups. One point of contention -- the public option -- came to symbolize hopes on the left, and when that provision was unable to pass the 60-vote hurdle in the Senate, some progressives such as Howard Dean concluded that the entire bill had been gutted.

But that conclusion is wrong. The legislation [is a] major advance in two important respects. After a long period of rising inequality, it would boost the living standards of low-wage workers and their families and improve economic security for the middle class as well. And it would be the most ambitious effort in recent history to reorganize a major institution on a basis that agrees more closely with principles of justice and efficiency.

Mar 26, 2012

GOP Was for Health Reform Plan Before Pres Obama Endorsed Their Idea

Republicans for Mandating Coverage - for it before they were against it 
Look below and you will see Tommy Thompson, now a U.S. Senate candidate, as one of the endorsers of health reform that eliminates the 'free rider' problem—making Americans pay for Americans without health care insurance.

Facts and history have a way of disappearing for Tommy Thompson and other prominent Republicans.

By Igor Volsky

Tommy Thompson for Mandating Coverage,
before he was against it
Republicans For Mandating Coverage (RMC) — a 51-member coalition representing Republicans who supported a federal health care mandate before President Barack Obama endorsed it — urged the Supreme Court on Monday to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.

Thompson has become Wisconsin's Mitt Romney, contorting himself beyond belief, as he leaves the hedgefund-consulting business hoping for a U.S. Senate seat.



As Republicans who have co-sponsored or supported legislation requiring all Americans to purchase individual health insurance in 1993, 1994, 2007, and as recently as 2009, RMC believes that the mandate is based on the fundamental American principle of personal responsibility, rooted in conservative jurisprudence surrounding the Constitution’s Commerce and Necessary and Proper clauses.

In the words of Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Republicans “don’t think the free market ever envisioned an idea that people would be able to do something and make other people pay for it.” “People are either going to buy insurance or they’re going to pay for their own care. They’re not going to say, ‘I got care and you Mr. Tax Payer or You Mr. Premium Payer are going to pay for me.”

‘Republicans For Mandating Coverage’ believes that this is an “American principle” — a principle of “personal responsibility” — that can be constitutionally enforced by the federal government.

Since nearly all Americans are already part of the health care marketplace and health care affects 17 percent of the economy, Congress is authorized to regulate health care behavior under the Commerce Clause. As conservative Judge Laurence Silberman put it: “At the time the Constitution was fashioned, to ‘regulate’ meant, as it does now, ‘[t]o adjust by rule or method,’ as well as ‘[t]o direct.’ To ‘direct,’ in turn, included ‘[t]o prescribe certain measure[s]; to mark out a certain course,’ and ‘[t]o order; to command.’ In other words, to ‘regulate’ can mean to require action, and nothing in the definition appears to limit that power only to those already active in relation to an interstate market.”

The Supreme Court can also find justification for the mandate in the Necessary and Proper Clause. In Gonzales v. Raich, the Supreme Court decided not to strike down a provision of law when that provision is an “essential part of a larger regulation of economic activity.” Justice Antonin Scalia explained in a concurring opinion that “where Congress has the authority to enact a regulation of interstate commerce, it possesses every power needed to make that regulation effective.”

The Affordable Care Act fits Justice Scalia’s rule. The act prohibits insurers from denying coverage to patients with pre-existing conditions. This ban cannot function, however, if patients can enter and exit the insurance market at will. If patients can wait until they get sick to buy insurance, they will drain all the money out of an insurance plan that they have not previously paid into, leaving nothing for the rest of the plan’s consumers. Thus, a requirement that most individuals obtain insurance before they become ill is an essential part of the act’s overall regulation of the insurance industry—or, to use Justice Scalia’s words, it is needed to make the laws insurance regulations effective.

‘Republicans For Mandating Coverage’ believes that ending the government’s role in providing free uncompensated health care to able bodied Americans who can and should pay for their own care, will shrink the size of the federal government, boost the economy, and free taxpayers from the burden of paying for uncompensated medical procedures. Republicans have promoted personal responsibility before the president and the Democrats ever did and today we continue to stand tall for this Constitutional principle.

Frmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (MA)
Frmr. Rep. Newt Gingrich (GA)
Frmr. Gov. Tim Pawlenty
Frmr. Sen. Bob Bennett (UT)
Frmr. Sen. Chris Bond (MO)
Frmr. Sen. William Cohen (ME)
Frmr. Sen. John Danforth (MO)
Frmr. Sen. Bob Dole (KS)
Frmr. Sen. Pete Domenici (NM)
Frmr. Sen. David Durenberger (MN)
Frmr. Sen. Duncan Faircloth (NC)
Frmr. Sen. Slade Gorton (WA)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (IA)
Sen. Orrin Hatch (UT)
Frmr. Sen. Mark Hatfield (OR)
Frmr. Sen. Nancy Kassebaum (KS)
Sen. Dick Richard Lugar (IN)
Frmr. Sen. Alan Simpson (WY)
Frmr. Sen. Arlen Specter (PA)
Frmr. Sen. Ted Stevens (AK)
Frmr. Sen. John Warner (VA)
Frmr. Sen. Hank Brown (CO)
Frmr. Sen. Conrad Burns (MT)
Sen. Dan Coats (IN)
Sen. Thad Cochran (MS)
Frmr. Sen. Paul Coverdell (GA)
Frmr. Sen. Larry Craig (ID)
Frmr. Sen. Judd Gregg (NH)
Frmr. Sen. Jesse Helms (NC)
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Frmr. Sen. Dirk Kempthorne (ID)
Frmr. Sen. Trent Lott (MS)
Rep. Connie Mack (FL)
Frmr. Sen. Frank Murkowski (AK)
Frmr. Sen. Bob Smith (NH)
Frmr. Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC)
Frmr. Sen. Malcolm Wallop (WY)
Frmr. Sen. Don Nickles (OK)
Rep. Cliff Stearns (FL)
Frmr. Rep. Jim (LA)
Frmr. Vice President Dan Quayle (IN)
Sen. John McCain (AZ)
Sen. Scott Scott Brown (MA)
Frmr. Gov. Tommy Thompson (WI)
Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)
Sen. Mike Crapo (ID)
Frmr. President George H.W. Bush
Sen. Olympia Snowe (ME)
Frmr. Sen. John Chafee (RI)
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC)

Mar 22, 2010

Health Care Reform Oppo Echoes GOP WMD Lies

Last Summer, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC)one of the more gas-filled U.S. Senators in an unstable body known to combust or contract with little apparent causesaid he hoped Health Care Reform would be President Obama "Waterloo."

With the unanimous support of the Republican Party, the DeMint-GOP propaganda campaign was defeated last night. The nigger this- faggot that-Hitler-Stalin-totalitarian-death panel-Sarah Palin-Joe Lieberman-$millions-in-lies nonsense lost.

The lies, big money, bigotry and incoherence that comprise the opposition to this significant step forward to universal health coverage may prove to be, if not the Republican Party's Waterloo, then its WMDa cynical and gigantic lie exposed.

No one will be enslaved, no death panels, no Hitler and Stalin revisited.

Politically what will be left of the opposition is just a lot of white people upset that in the words of Paul Starr, the preeminent social historian of modern American health insurance, a "stunning historical achievement" has been made to the profit of Americans of all colors, creeds, classes and medical conditions to the detriment of the insurance companies and the "tough-shit" economics of the Republican Party.

The Democrats deserve credit on this move forward, and the Republicans and Tea Partiers should pay the political costs.


This is What Change Looks Like


Posted by Jesse Lee

After a historical vote in the House to send health reform to the President, he speaks to all Americans on the change they will finally see as they are given back control over their own health care:

Good evening, everybody. Tonight, after nearly 100 years of talk and frustration, after decades of trying, and a year of sustained effort and debate, the United States Congress finally declared that America’s workers and America's families and America's small businesses deserve the security of knowing that here, in this country, neither illness nor accident should endanger the dreams they’veworked a lifetime to achieve.

Tonight, at a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics. We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests. We didn't give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges. We proved that this government -- a government of the people and by the people -- still works for the people.

I want to thank every member of Congress who stood up tonight with courage and conviction to make health care reform a reality. And I know this wasn’t an easy vote for a lot of people. But it was the right vote. I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her extraordinary leadership, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn for their commitment to getting the job done. I want to thank my outstanding Vice President, Joe Biden, and my wonderful Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, for their fantastic work on this issue. I want to thank the many staffers in Congress, and my own incredible staff in the White House, who haveworked tirelessly over the past year with Americans of all walks of life to forge a reform package finally worthy of the people we were sent here to serve.

Today’s vote answers the dreams of so many who have fought for this reform. To every unsung American who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type out an e-mail hoping your voice would be heard -- it has been heard tonight. To the untold numbers who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who organized and mobilized out of a firm conviction that change in this country comes not from the top down, but from the bottom up -- let me reaffirm that conviction: This moment is possible because of you.

Most importantly, today’s vote answers the prayers of every American who has hoped deeply for something to be done about a health care system that works for insurance companies, but not for ordinary people. For most Americans, this debate has never been about abstractions, the fight between right and left, Republican and Democrat -- it’s always been about something far more personal. It’s about every American who knows the shock of opening an envelope to see that their premiums just shot up again when times are already tough enough. It’s about every parent who knows the desperation of trying to cover a child with a chronic illness only to be told “no” again and again and again. It’s about every small business owner forced to choose between insuring employees and staying open for business. They are why we committed ourselves to this cause.

Tonight’s vote is not a victory for any one party -- it's a victory for them. It's a victory for the American people. And it's a victory for common sense.

Now, it probably goes without saying that tonight’s vote will give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration. But long after the debate fades away and the prognostication fades away and the dust settles, what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties -- a system that works better for the American people.

If you have health insurance, this reform just gave you more control by reining in the worst excesses and abuses of the insurance industry with some of the toughest consumer protections this country has ever known -- so that you are actually getting what you pay for.

If you don’t have insurance, this reform gives you a chance to be a part of a big purchasing pool that will give you choice and competition and cheaper prices for insurance. And it includes the largest health care tax cut for working families and small businesses in history -- so that if you lose your job and you change jobs, start that new business, you’ll finally be able to purchase quality, affordable care and the security and peace of mind that comes with it.

This reform is the right thing to do for our seniors. It makes Medicare stronger and more solvent, extending its life by almost a decade. And it’s the right thing to do for our future. It will reduce our deficit by more than $100 billion over the next decade, and more than $1 trillion in the decade after that.

So this isn’t radical reform. But it is major reform. This legislation will not fix everything that ails our health care system. But it moves us decisively in the right direction. This is what change looks like.

Now as momentous as this day is, it's not the end of this journey. On Tuesday, the Senate will take up revisions to this legislation that the House has embraced, and these are revisions that have strengthened this law and removed provisions that had no place in it. Some have predicted another siege of parliamentary maneuvering in order to delay adoption of these improvements. I hope that’s not the case. It’s time to bring this debate to a close and begin the hard work of implementing this reform properly on behalf of the American people. This year, and in years to come, we have a solemn responsibility to do it right.

Nor does this day represent the end of the work that faces our country. The work of revitalizing our economy goes on. The work of promoting private sector job creation goes on. The work of putting American families’ dreams back within reach goes on. And we march on, with renewed confidence, energized by this victory on their behalf.

In the end, what this day represents is another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream. Tonight, we answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us. When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenge -- we overcame it. We did not avoid our responsibility -- we embraced it. We did not fear our future -- we shaped it.

Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

Jan 25, 2010

Paul Starr Endorses Health Care Reform as "stunning historical achievement"

Paul Starr has come out vigorously for passing even the U.S. Senate version of health care reform into law.

Starr's advocacy in the pages of The American Prospect marks an endorsement by perhaps the preeminent social historian of American medical care.

Starr is the author of The Social Transformation of American Medicine (Basic Books, 1982) that likely does not occupy a place on the book shelves of the Tea Party and assorted imbeciles like Senators Jim Demint and John McCain screaming about a "government take-over" of the American health care system.

Starr's endorsement could be critical as the support of perhaps the most perspicuous of academics on American health care should carry weight with the U.S. House Progressive caucus that has understandably looked askance at the Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson-depleted legislation passed by the U.S. Senate.

Writes Starr:

If Congress can complete work on health-care legislation and send it to the president(as of mid-January, the final bill is still under negotiation), it will be a stunning historical achievement and the most important liberal reform since the 1960s. It may also be the most underappreciated social legislation in recent history. Never in my experience has such a big reform been treated as so small. Never have Democratic members of Congress who are putting their careers on the line for something they believe in been so vilified as sellouts by influential progressives. And never have those progressives been so grudging in their endorsement of landmark legislation or so willing to see it defeated.

How this happened is clear. Facing united Republican opposition,Democratic leaders made a series of concessions to win over centrists in their own caucus and to neutralize key interest groups. One point of contention -- the public option -- came to symbolize hopes on the left, and when that provision was unable to pass the 60-vote hurdle in the Senate, some progressives such as Howard Dean concluded that the entire bill had been gutted.

But that conclusion is wrong. The legislation would be a major advance in two important respects. After a long period of rising inequality, it would boost the living standards of low-wage workers and their families and improve economic security for the middle class as well. And it would be the most ambitious effort in recent history to reorganize a major institution on a basis that agrees more closely with principles of justice and efficiency.



- via mal contends

Jan 19, 2010

Mass Senate Race and the Way Forward

Update: Updates on Massachusetts Senate race at Blue Mass and Boston.Com. Early turn-out is high, good for Dems.

Whatever happens tonight in the Massachusetts Senate race, one thing is clear: The political status quo of business as usual and Congress spinning its wheels is not appealing to the American public.

Will Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Democrats choose to support Republican obstruction (for which Democrats are then blamed) by keeping the undemocratic relic known as the filibuster?

Will President Obama follow the economic and monetary counsel of White House economic advisers Lawrence Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy Guitner vis a vis Simon Johnson, Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz?

Which way forward, Democrats?

You can't run on change during a time of immense and numerous crises and then respond with more of the same. Out of touch.

Dec 18, 2009

Krugman: Don't Kill It

Update: NYT: "David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, began the day by calling in to MSNBC to urge the party to hold together, warning of a 'tragic outcome' if Democrats failed to pass a bill that the White House says would expand health coverage while reining in costs." Why if so much is at stake do the Senate Dems not ditch the filibuster?

Kill the filibuster. Blast the President. But pass health care, says Paul Krugman.

Congress better fix the fracking thing, or Sen. Jim Demint's (R-SC) words on health care [Obama's "Waterlooo"] will be proven prophetic. And Demint is a bigoted, religious whackjob.

Does Harry Reid think that the political message that America cannot abide obstruction and business as usual at this time of crisis won't play well, so he just has to keep the filibuster?

Dec 16, 2009

Kill It

MoveOn raised $650,000 in less than 24 hours to send Joe Lieberman home. Howard Dean just laid out the reasons for killing health care reform that enriches insurance companies while allowing skyrocketing rates and forcing Americans into new, sick system.

One can hope against that the end result will offer real reform. Presumably President Obama will very soon issue a statement and visibly get behind reform (and against the health insurance industry) before he loses his base ... completely.

For now, Obama needs to offer a compelling reason to keep this legislative process moving, or progressives should just kill it.

Dean is making the talk-show circuit to spur change in the dynamic health care legislation floating around. From the Post:
Real health-care reform is supposed to eliminate discrimination based on preexisting conditions. But the legislation allows insurance companies to charge older Americans up to three times as much as younger Americans, pricing them out of coverage. The bill was supposed to give Americans choices about what kind of system they wanted to enroll in. Instead, it fines Americans if they do not sign up with an insurance company, which may take up to 30 percent of your premium dollars and spend it on CEO salaries -- in the range of $20 million a year -- and on return on equity for the company's shareholders. Few Americans will see any benefit until 2014, by which time premiums are likely to have doubled. In short, the winners in this bill are insurance companies; the American taxpayer is about to be fleeced with a bailout in a situation that dwarfs even what happened at AIG.

Dec 10, 2009

Oct 10, 2009

Wisconsin's Unity Health Insurance, No New Taxes, Right?

Of the many foolish enterprises of George W. Bush his sought-after taxing of what he called "gold-plated" health care plans is still being considered.

This targeted middle-class tax went nowhere and was blasted by Paul Krugman in January 2007 after Bush emitted the right wing foolishness in his Saturday radio address before the '07 State of the Union address. Wrote Krugman in his "Gold-Plated Indifference" piece:

What’s really striking about Mr. Bush’s remarks, however, is the tone. The stuff about providing 'incentives' to buy insurance, the sneering description of good coverage as 'gold plated,' is right-wing think-tank jargon. In the past Mr. Bush’s speechwriters might have found less offensive language; now, they’re not even trying to hide his fundamental indifference to the plight of less-fortunate Americans.

As Republicans in Congress renew their near universal hostility to health reform, President Obama more frequently hits health insurance companies who have the "power to make arbitrary decisions about your health care," following September reassurances he will not raise taxes for anyone but the wealthiest Americans in this crazy system.

But as we enter the last stages of the health reform legislative process, many in Wisconsin want to know: Is my health plan considered 'gold-plated' and does Obama reject what Bush tried to do, tax my comprehensive health coverage?

Take Unity Health Insurance for example, an affiliate of the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics. Is this what Bush called gold-plated and President Obama, will you promise not to tax this coverage like what Bush and the right-wing wanted?

Taxing or not taxing this insurance is not clear as a policy goal. Let's nail this down.

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

Aug 27, 2009

How Shameless Will GOP Be on Teddy and Healthcare

John R. Bohrer is appalled that the GOP wants to politicize the moral power of the services for Teddy Kennedy.

We all should be.

As the dying wish of Teddy is to see movement on expanding health care as a right, many are reacting with hope of America achieving this long-sought goal.

As Teddy spoke at RFK's service, quoting his brother:

'Beneath it all, he has tried to engender a social conscience. There were wrongs which needed attention. There were people who were poor and needed help. And we have a responsibility to them and to this country. Through no virtues and accomplishments of our own, we have been fortunate enough to be born in the United States under the most comfortable conditions. We, therefore, have a responsibility to others who are less well off.'

Surely a noble effort.
The following is the eulogy for Robert Kennedy given by his brother, Sen. Edward Kennedy at the public memorial service held on June 8, 1968, at St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City.

Your Eminences, Your Excellencies, Mr. President:

On behalf of Mrs. Kennedy, her children, the parents and sisters of Robert Kennedy, I want to express what we feel to those who mourn with us today in this Cathedral and around the world.
We loved him as a brother, and as a father, and as a son. From his parents, and from his older brothers and sisters -- Joe and Kathleen and Jack -- he received an inspiration which he passed on to all of us. He gave us strength in time of trouble, wisdom in time of uncertainty, and sharing in time of happiness. He will always be by our side.

Love is not an easy feeling to put into words. Nor is loyalty, or trust, or joy. But he was all of these. He loved life completely and he lived it intensely.

A few years back, Robert Kennedy wrote some words about his own father which expresses [sic] the way we in his family felt about him. He said of what his father meant to him, and I quote: ‘What it really all adds up to is love -- not love as it is described with such facility in popular magazines, but the kind of love that is affection and respect, order and encouragement, and support. Our awareness of this was an incalculable source of strength, and because real love is something unselfish and involves sacrifice and giving, we could not help but profit from it.’ And he continued, ‘Beneath it all, he has tried to engender a social conscience. There were wrongs which needed attention. There were people who were poor and needed help. And we have a responsibility to them and to this country. Through no virtues and accomplishments of our own, we have been fortunate enough to be born in the United States under the most comfortable conditions. We, therefore, have a responsibility to others who are less well off.’

That is what Robert Kennedy was given. What he leaves to us is what he said, what he did, and what he stood for. A speech he made to the young people of South Africa on their Day of Affirmation in 1966 sums it up the best, and I would like to read it now:

‘There is discrimination in this world and slavery and slaughter and starvation. Governments repress their people; millions are trapped in poverty while the nation grows rich and wealth is lavished on armaments everywhere. These are differing evils, but they are the common works of man. They reflect the imperfection of human justice, the inadequacy of human compassion, our lack of sensibility towards the suffering of our fellows. But we can perhaps remember -- even if only for a time -- that those who live with us are our brothers; that they share with us the same short moment of life; that they seek -- as we do -- nothing but the chance to live out their lives in purpose and happiness, winning what satisfaction and fulfillment they can.

Surely, this bond of common faith, this bond of common goal, can begin to teach us something. Surely, we can learn, at least, to look at those around us as fellow men. And surely we can begin to work a little harder to bind up the wounds among us and to become in our own hearts brothers and countrymen once again. The answer is to rely on youth -- not a time of life but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a quality of imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the love of ease. The cruelties and obstacles of this swiftly changing planet will not yield to the obsolete dogmas and outworn slogans. They cannot be moved by those who cling to a present that is already dying, who prefer the illusion of security to the excitement and danger that come with even the most peaceful progress.
It is a revolutionary world we live in, and this generation at home and around the world has had thrust upon it a greater burden of responsibility than any generation that has ever lived. Some believe there is nothing one man or one woman can do against the enormous array of the world's ills. Yet many of the world's great movements, of thought and action, have flowed from the work of a single man. A young monk began the Protestant reformation; a young general extended an empire from Macedonia to the borders of the earth; a young woman reclaimed the territory of France; and it was a young Italian explorer who discovered the New World, and the 32 year-old Thomas Jefferson who [pro]claimed that ‘all men are created equal.’

These men moved the world, and so can we all.
Few will have the greatness to bend history itself, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation. It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

Few are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change. And I believe that in this generation those with the courage to enter the moral conflict will find themselves with companions in every corner of the globe.

For the fortunate among us, there is the temptation to follow the easy and familiar paths of personal ambition and financial success so grandly spread before those who enjoy the privilege of education. But that is not the road history has marked out for us. Like it or not, we live in times of danger and uncertainty. But they are also more open to the creative energy of men than any other time in history. All of us will ultimately be judged, and as the years pass we will surely judge ourselves on the effort we have contributed to building a new world society and the extent to which our ideals and goals have shaped that event.

The future does not belong to those who are content with today, apathetic toward common problems and their fellow man alike, timid and fearful in the face of new ideas and bold projects. Rather it will belong to those who can blend vision, reason and courage in a personal commitment to the ideals and great enterprises of American Society. Our future may lie beyond our vision, but it is not completely beyond our control. It is the shaping impulse of America that neither fate nor nature nor the irresistible tides of history, but the work of our own hands, matched to reason and principle, that will determine our destiny. There is pride in that, even arrogance, but there is also experience and truth. In any event, it is the only way we can live.’
That is the way he lived. That is what he leaves us.

My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life; to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.

Those of us who loved him and who take him to his rest today, pray that what he was to us and what he wished for others will some day come to pass for all the world.

As he said many times, in many parts of this nation, to those he touched and who sought to touch him:

‘Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not.’

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.