When Vice President Joe Biden appears in Detroit today to unveil $2.4 billion in grants for electric vehicle projects, members of Organizing for America may be there to cheer him on: OFA emailed its members in Michigan last night urging them to "counter mob rule," as the DNC press office put it, by showing up at the event. It's the first field effort by OFA or the Democratic National Committee (under which OFA operates) to counter the anti-health-reform town-hall/protest phenomenon. Organizing for America Michigan State Director Aletheia Henry wrote:
This event comes at a crucial time. Special interests trying to sink health insurance reform. Organized mobs across the country are intimidating lawmakers, disrupting events, and silencing discussions about the change our country needs. The challenges our country faces are simply too great to let these debates be overrun by those angrily shouting down change...
...We need to show that we're sick and tired of the fear mongering.
Biden's event won't be quite like a town-hall: a limited number of general-public tickets were given out yesterday, and Biden won't take questions. OFA supporters are encouraged to meet at a corner two blocks away.
The Democratic National Committee also launched a word-of-mouth campaign today against the raucous town-hall goers: it blasted out the following talking points about the "organized mobs" via email, asking supporters to pass them along to friends and family:
There's been a lot of media coverage about organized mobs intimidating lawmakers, disrupting town halls, and silencing real discussion about the need for real health insurance reform.
The truth is, it's a sham. These "grassroots protests" are being organized and largely paid for by Washington special interests and insurance companies who are desperate to block reform. They're trying to use lies and fear to break the President and his agenda for change.
Health insurance reform is about our lives, our jobs, and our families -- we can't let distortions and intimidation get in the way. We need to expose these outrageous tactics, and we're counting on you to help. Can you read these "5 facts about the anti-reform mobs," then pass them along to your friends and family?
5 facts about the anti-reform mobs
1. These disruptions are being funded and organized by out-of-district special-interest groups and insurance companies who fear that health insurance reform could help Americans, but hurt their bottom line. A group run by the same folks who made the "Swiftboat" ads against John Kerry is compiling a list of congressional events in August to disrupt. An insurance company coalition has stationed employees in 30 states to track where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings.
2. People are scared because they are being fed frightening lies. These crowds are being riled up by anti-reform lies being spread by industry front groups that invent smears to tarnish the President's plan and scare voters. But as the President has repeatedly said, health insurance reform will create more health care choices for the American people, not reduce them. If you like your insurance or your doctor, you can keep them, and there is no "government takeover" in any part of any plan supported by the President or Congress.
3. Their actions are getting more extreme. Texas protesters brought signs displaying a tombstone for Rep. Lloyd Doggett and using the "SS" symbol to compare President Obama's policies to Nazism. Maryland Rep. Frank Kratovil was hanged in effigy outside his district office. Rep. Tim Bishop of New York had to be escorted to his car by police after an angry few disrupted his town hall meeting -- and more examples like this come in every day. And they have gone beyond just trying to derail the President's health insurance reform plans, they are trying to "break" the President himself and ruin his Presidency.
4. Their goal is to disrupt and shut down legitimate conversation. Protesters have routinely shouted down representatives trying to engage in constructive dialogue with voters, and done everything they can to intimidate and silence regular people who just want more information. One attack group has even published a manual instructing protesters to "stand up and shout" and try to "rattle" lawmakers to prevent them from talking peacefully with their constituents.
5. Republican leadership is irresponsibly cheering on the thuggish crowds. Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner issued a statement applauding and promoting a video of the disruptions and looking forward to "a long, hot August for Democrats in Congress."
It's time to expose this charade, before it gets more dangerous. Please send these facts to everyone you know. You can also post them on your website, blog, or Facebook page.
Now, more than ever, we need to stand strong together and defend the truth.
Thanks,
Jen
Jen O'Malley Dillon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee
Well I have news for the DNC. Keep blowing smoke that this is a conspiracy. I'm not involved with any organization and I'm mad as hell and so are all my friends. Many of which are Democrats. You people think the American public is stupid. But we can read. And when YOUR Barney Franks tells how all this will lead to single payer then WE know how disingenuous the politcians supporting the program can be including our President. Please keep thinking it's a conspiracy. PLEASE
You're are mad about what?
Attempts to bring down the cost of YOUR healthcare? Attempts to bring down the costs of health insurance for the ENTIRE nation?
I mean, no plan has yet emerged from any of the committee's tasked with coming up with a plan. Not to mention that at this stage THERE IS NOT YET A HEALTHCARE BILL. So what you are "mad" at are various proposals that may or may not end up in the final draft of a healthcare bill that has not be drafted, debated, or signed.
Really, you're mad at talking points.
Really, you're mad at theories.
Really, you're mad because someone told you to be.
Because, really, there's nothing yet to be mad at.
Dan,
If there is no bill on which to base opposing opinion, then what are Obama and the Democrats basing their supporting opinions on?
By your reasoning, some or all of the items Obama and the Democrats claim are in the bill will never be in the actual bill. Then, as we know from recent past practices, they will force a vote within a very few hours of the finished bill having been written, giving no time for anyone to read and study the actual bill.
When do you typically complain about something, when it's proposed or after it's too late to do anything about it?
rrr
Legislation is proposed all the time. As the proposals come out of different committee's they are then debated. Once debate is complete and reconcillation agreed upon, the legislation is voted on. After passing, or failing, the bill either becomes law or not.
My point is, the people that are mad, are mad at cynically debated proposals. Now is not the time to be angry, now is the time to wait for the final bill prior to passage. This is wasted energy. It the premature anger that I have a problem with.
To your first question, Democrats are supporting the idea of "reform"; nebulous, innocuous, reform. No one method of reform has been proposed as legislation yet, so the anger and frustration is more of a political tactic, than a principled stand.
And if the people that are angry now don't get that, they really aren't angry about "ideas" their anger is about something else.
As I stated, the "ginning up" of this false populism is cynical politics and nothing more.
When is the time to get mad Dan? Our leaders are not given the time to look over things much less understand them much less the American people.
Yes we don't know exactly what is being proposed but we DO know the deadline has come and gone. We also know from the president's OWN words in print and video what his vision is.
Here is what I am mad about today...articles like this, democrats, and "reporters" saying that my 70 year old parents are an angry mob brought together by special interest.
People are much smarter than you and the elitist knuckleheads in Congress give them credit for. Only an idiot would back this yet unknown plan with such fervor knowing that there is not the slightest chance people creating it are unwilling to accept it themselves.. WHAT MORE PROOF DO YOU NEED DAN??!! If the people WRITING it don't want it why should YOU?
I don't belong to any right wing groups, I am not financed by any group. I had never heard of K Street Lobbyists until I read the statement below from the DNC. The following are my opinions that I am still allowed to express.
The government shouldn't be running banks, auto companies, or healthcare. When the government runs everything, it is called Socialism. The Nazis were socialists, this administration hates being compared to socailists. It is about control. They want to tell you - what kind of car to drive (do as I say, not as I do. Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi fly on jet planes whenever they want!), - what kind of lightbulb to use, - where to get your news.
Existing healthcare plans will be pushed out by the government plan that hides its administrative costs, and doesn't need to pay taxes. The government will charge employers less, and they will all switch to the government plan.
By the way, Obama is so arrogant, he didn't even provide a good fake Certificate of Live Birth! I also am not a big fan of Sarah Palin, even though she has more experience than Obama and is not a socialist.
Subject: DNC Statement on Republican Mob Rule
For Immediate Release
Date: August 4, 2009 Contact: DNC Press Office
Phone: 202-863-8148
Statement from DNC Communications Director Brad Woodhouse on the Republican Party and Allied Groups' Mob Rule
The Republicans and their allied groups - desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill - are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right wing extremists funded by K Street Lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of health care in America taking place in Congressional Districts across the country.
However, much like we saw at the McCain-Palin rallies last year where crowds were baited with cries of 'socialist,' 'communist,' and where the birthers movement was born - these mobs of extremists are not interested in having a thoughtful discussion about the issues - but like some Republican leaders have said - they are interested in 'breaking' the President and destroying his Presidency.
These mobs are bussed in by well funded, highly organized groups run by Republican operatives and funded by the special interests who are desperately trying to stop the agenda for change the President was elected to bring to Washington. Despite the headline grabbing nature of these angry mobs and their disruptions of events, they are not reflective of where the American people are on the issues - or the hundreds of thousands of thoughtful discussions taking place around kitchen tables, water coolers and in homes.
The right wing extremists' use of things like devil horns on pictures of our elected officials, hanging members of Congress in effigy, breathlessly questioning the President's citizenship and the use of Nazi SS symbols and the like just shows how outside of the mainstream the Republican Party and their allies are. This type of anger and discord did not serve Republicans well in 2008 - and it is bound to backfire again.
Perhaps you're mad because you have no idea what's going on? Just a thought.
First of all, none of the bills being seriously considered by congress are even on the same planet as a single payer system.
Second of all, they SHOULD be considering such a program. And you should very much want it. but you clearly have no clue what that actually means for you, have been listening to ignorant idiots telling you it means "omg, health care rationing and the government telling your doctor how to do medicine!!!" and actually believing them. What would a single payer system REALLY mean?
1. MUCH lower costs. Like... hundreds of billions of dollars a year in savings. Kind of important for a nation being steadily bankrupted by it's current medical expenses.
2. Universal access. Kind of important for a nation with tens of millions of it's citizens going without needed medical care and ranking DEAD LAST in it's ability to prevent medically preventable deaths according to the latest commonwealth fund study.
3. TOTAL freedom to choose your doctor. There is no such thing as "in plan" or "in network" in such a system.
4. SUPERIOR health outcomes overall. You can listen to some deceiving lobbyist pull out one single statistic about some cancer mortality rate from one study and pretend like that represents the overall performance of the entire US health care system, or you can look at something a wee bit more comprehensive. Like, oh, this:
http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/8/1
5. NO GREATER LEVEL OF RATIONING. This is one of the giant lies told to Americans, that you'll get rationing under a single payer system. New flash, you HAVE rationing right now. What the hell do you think is happening when millions are denied coverage completely, millions more are denied coverage for any procedures they can;t afford to have a top rate insurance plan for, and doctors have to run all their decisions for treatment past insurance corporation accountants for approval???
6. NO GREATER AVERAGE WAIT TIMES. People who tell you that average wait times are horrible in other nations and great in the US are doing it by dishonestly manipulating the data. you see, all those people in the US who just can't get the procedures in question AT ALL? EVER? They're not "waiting" for them so they don't count. When in reality, they're waiting indefinitely.
And no, before someone tries bringing it up, Canadians do NOT flock to the US in droves for care:
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/21/3/19
The US insurance lobby invented that claim in the 90s to derail health reform, it was a lie then, and nothing has changes since.
Should I continue? Or would you like to just go on being furious that you suspect people are trying to do something to improve your medical care pretty much across the board?
What you SHOULD be mad at is that congress is NOT seriously considering single payer.
......Because single payer given where we are is not a realistic option
TOTAL freedom to choose your doctor. There is no such thing as "in plan" or "in network" in such a system.
Yeah, if you wait long enough, you'll eventually get a doctor. My ex moved from Toronto to Kitchener and waited so long for an appointment with a local doctor, she gave up and kept going to her old doctor in Toronto.
Canadians do NOT flock to the US in droves for care
This business says otherwise
They don't flock to the US for health care? Dude, you obviously don't live in a border state. Here in Washington, we do quite well charging Canadians for various procedures they can't get expeditiously in Canada. Florida is also a popular destination for health tourism.
I care for a British ex-pat's daughter here in Seattle, and she assures me that her health care in the US is better and faster than what she experienced over her lifetime in the UK, especially in recent years. You can fuss and bluster all day, but I choose to believe the person who has lived it.
Believe whatever you want about how TOTALLY AWESOME TUBULAR single payer is, the obvious truth is that Americans are suspicious of it, and pretty much want nothing to do with it.
Ah, but which of the people who have lived it do you choose to believe.
.
I moved from the UK to the US over 15 years ago when I married my US born wife (we could have lived in either country, but she had a
.
business that could not be moved easily whereas I was more flexible). I have had good employer provided healthcare for most of that entire period.
.
I recently started my own business and what a difference. I found due to some minor pre-existings that I was completely unable to get affordable healthcare, for an entrepeneur this is a dreadful situation. When we looked at our situation (we have two kids in elementary school) we found that for me to even consider my own independent business we had no choice but for my wife to shutter her business of 16 years and for her to find a job with healthcare benefits. So much for freedom and encouraging small business.
.
On top of that my experiences with the healthcare system here have been awful, long waits to see doctors, no home visits, lack of coordination between providers, fighting with insurance companies to get coverage paid. This is not a local thing either we have lived in several states and had the same experience everywhere. Just recently we needed specialist dental work and even though we paid for dental benefits through my wife's job there was no in-system provider within 500 miles of us. We live in a large state near a major metro area, but her employer's HQ is out of state and the HR dept does not consider this a problem!
.
I have watched over the past 10 years my parents and my wife's parents age into and through their sixties. The difference in attitude, availability of care, standard of care, and especially the level of caring is quite astonishing.
.
What I have seen in the UK.
My father had cancer and was treated immediately and effectively with surgery (a urostomy), the follow up care was comprehensive, and normally done in his home. All the expensive supplies for someone in his condition were completely free at time of service. All prescriptions are free for those under 18 and over 65 in the UK plus numerous other special cases, and for the rest an approx 100UKP annual plan pays for all prescriptions for a year. Individual prescriptions without the plan are about 7UKP.
The following year my Dad had heart problems and had 8 stents fitted. My mother had a similar procedure a couple of years later. They get regular checkups and follow up care. No charge.
They have had a number of other less major health problems as well.
At no point during this whole time were they told they had to fill out huge numbers of forms, deal with any bureaucrats or pay any money. (They paid taxes for this when they were working!)
The only form was for surgical consent. One form one - one signature, no worries over how to pay for all this and the stress that causes on top of being sick.
.
What I have seen in the US.
My father-in-law has diabetes and after breaking his leg very bad knee problems to the point that he can barely get around. He pays a large amount of money (despite being on medicare) for diabetes medication and has had to put off getting his knee fixed because initially his doctor refused to refer him and told him to work through the pain, then after waiting two months to get in to see another GP and finally getting a referral found the cost would be prohibitive so for two years he has lived in pain.
My wife's sister has congenital heart disease, she has had two open heart surgeries when on her mother's insurance when in school/college one of which the insurance company said they would cover then reneged on a technicality leaving them with 100k+ in bills that they spent years negotiating and settling with the hospital. My wife's sister is now in her forties, unable to work or drive (on her doctor's orders) and has no health insurance. She has scraped by on the charity of doctors willing to do pro bono work plus visits to the ER leaving numerous unpaid bills to ruin her finances. She has been denied medicaid and any social benefits despite her doctors continuous support. Now her kidneys are failing, and unless she can finally convince medicaid to take her she will not live much longer.
.
One more example, My neice in the UK was recently suffering from a bad persistent headache, one saturday it flared up so bad that she passed out and when she came to she was delirious had a fever and was in agony. My sister called the NHS to get a Doctor to visit. She was told they were very sorry but due to the load they were suffering from home visits to swine flu cases it would be about 2 hours before a doctor could make it to their house so they might be better to take her to casualty (the ER). So they went to the local Casualty dept where she was seen in less than 15 minutes immediately admitted and given a battery of tests that same day including an MRI to determine if she had meningitis. It turned out she had viral meningitis (the less worrying kind) which although it did not show up on the MRI they kept persuing eventually diagnosing it when an eye doctor did a deep view into her eye and saw swelling at the back and recommended a lumbar punch to verify it.
.
A neighbour of mine here in the US had a young kid with a persistent headache and similar early symptoms. I told her the story about my neice and she looked very uncomfortable as she had to tell me they didn't have insurance and so they would have to wait until it was critical enough to take her to the ER. It reminded me of the day I was getting blood taken last year and saw the mother in front of me have to decide which blood tests her sick daughter would get and which not because the cost was 800USD and she only had 250USD in cash. The doctor wouldn't take her frantic call and she had no one else to turn to so she had to guess which of the blood tests were the most important.
.
So, those are my anecdotes. I am sure you will 'choose to believe' the ones that fits with your world view but at the end of the day my anecdote is worth exactly the same as yours, precisely nothing.
.
It is easy to have a war of anecdotes but to see the true picture you have to pull back and consider the overall statistics. Which country has the better health outcomes, which country has happier healthcare consumers, which country can look itself in the mirror and say it has lived up to its values and has a government that ensures all of its citizens (not just the wealthy) truly have an equal chance (not a guarantee mind you) at life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
.
The real question to ask is why does the US spend so much more money on healthcare than other high-income countries for results that are at best no better, but in most respects worse. According to the WHO annual World Health Report for 2008, the average expenditure as a % of GDP on public health care in high income countries is 6.7% (the UK is typically amongst the lowest), in the US it is 6.9%, but the total expenditure including personal outlay is 9% elsewhere but 15% in the US.
.
Let me restate this...The US taxpayers already spend the same amount as a % of GDP for patchy and incomplete coverage of a fraction of the US population as the UK taxpayers spend to cover every person in the country from cradle to grave.
.
Oh, and guess what, if you have spare cash you can still exercise your right to choose. You can take out supplemental insurance and when you have an elective or non-urgent need, or want a cosmetic procedure you can 'go private'.
.
The main difference I have experienced is this...When sickness occurs:
.
in the US those with the right insurance or the appropriately sized bank account can get instant access, multiple opinions and treatment in luxurious surroundings, the rest get to muddle through with mediocre or non-existent choices. Often the difference between the first group and the latter two is a job to which you are thus shackled.
.
in the UK everyone gets to have access, a first opinion and necessary treatment. If you have money it buys you more choices.
When is the time to get mad Dan? Our leaders are not given the time to look over things much less understand them much less the American people.
Yes we don't know exactly what is being proposed but we DO know the deadline has come and gone. We also know from the president's OWN words in print and video what his vision is.
Here is what I am mad about today...articles like this, democrats, and "reporters" saying that my 70 year old parents are an angry mob brought together by special interest.
People are much smarter than you and the elitist knuckleheads in Congress give them credit for. Only an idiot would back this yet unknown plan with such fervor knowing that there is not the slightest chance people creating it are willing to accept it themselves.. WHAT MORE PROOF DO YOU NEED DAN??!! If the people WRITING it don't want it why should YOU?
GRANT...there is ZERO evidence that costs will go down. Are you ignoring the CBO findings? How can you hold so fast to ideas that have failed categorically by a govt. that has failed categorically in providing such services. You better go back to your shepherd for better talking points
Public discourse is a fine thing, but screaming and yelling to disrupt events so that no one can speak, whether that disruption is an organized or disorganized effort, is an undemocratic tactic.
Would you agree with that statement when it's the crackpots on the left behaving like infants?
Ah, yes, big official rich party organizations sending out emails directing people how to organize and protest. But it's the other guys who are the astroturfed mob, not the guys who follow and repeat DNC and White House talking points that they got through a conference call or email.
Imagine if the RNC had published this in the wake of the anti-war protests in 2003.
Imagine if the RNC had put this out in the wake of the 2003 Iraq war protests.
Imagine if the RNC had complained when the national debt doubled from the time W took office til the time he left?
Imagine if the RNC had complained when W added a big, expensive component to Medicare to cover prescription drugs.
Imagine if the RNC had complained when W decided to move Special Forces units out of Afghanistan to prepare for the war in Iraq?
Conservatism isn't conservative, it's borrow from the communists to buy oil from the terrorists, bankrupt the country to advance the interests of groups that contribute to campaigns, it's supporting things that undermine the country with a few sops thrown to the crackpot moralist wing of the Republican party.
I have a actually read the entire HR 3200 bill. That is far more than most politicians who are saying this is mob rule. It is not, and I am not paid by anyone to be against this bill. There is a difference between reform, and totally changing healthcare.
If you had read the bill, then you would know if you make any changes in your policy. Yeah, "the one you can keep" you will be forced into the government plan. That is not a choice that is a mandate!!!! The truth of this movement is we are more informed, than the politicians trying to force this down our throats!
No one has voted on any bill yet, HR3200 is a proposal from ONE committe.
Again, being angry at an idea is like howling at the moon, unproductive.
Dan, I understand what you're saying here, although I would say that HR 3200 is all but out of committee due to the deal with Blue Dog Democrats. Nonetheless, can I be angry if none of the proposals contain anything I would want to see in reform, and instead focus mostly on expansion?
Also, I find it difficult to be patient to express my views (although I don't find it difficult not to yell, which I agree is a problem) when the two major pieces of legislation so far during Obama's presidency left me no time to express my disagreement. The bailout had hundreds of pages added in an amendment the day before it was passed, and while cap and trade hasn't been voted on in the Senate yet, it was passed through the House in a matter of days. This, combined with Obama's failure to follow through with his campaign promise of leaving legislation on a website for 5 days before he signs it, is what worried many people opposed to any of the current versions of health care reform in committee.
Agreed,
Hold people accountable for the promises they've made. Hold politicians accountable for the things they attempt to slide past an unaware public.
But to be outraged before the bill is finished is what allows them to create 1000+ page bills - an uninformed and reactive public.
Boy I wish I had howled at the moon before Bush bailed ou the banks. Or they voted for a stimulus bill that doesn't stimulate. Or bailing out the unions by buying GM. Or passing a 400B omnibus full of paybacks. Tell me have you read HR 3200. They're claiming they will vote when they come back from recess. If these are just ideas when do they become bills and when can we influence them. I think I'll just continue to howl and you can contiue to wait.
Dan,
You wrote: "No one has voted on any bill yet, HR3200 is a proposal from ONE committe."
That's not true. Here is what thomas.gov reports:
*
*
H.R.3200
Title: To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-15] (introduced 7/14/2009) Cosponsors (8)
Latest Major Action: 7/31/2009 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
ALL ACTIONS:
7/14/2009:
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Education and Labor, Oversight and Government Reform, and the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
7/14/2009:
Referred to House Energy and Commerce
7/17/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/20/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/21/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/31/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/31/2009:
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
7/14/2009:
Referred to House Ways and Means
7/16/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/17/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/17/2009:
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 18.
7/14/2009:
Referred to House Education and Labor
7/15/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/16/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/17/2009:
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
7/17/2009:
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 26 - 22.
7/14/2009:
Referred to House Oversight and Government Reform
7/14/2009:
Referred to House Budget
_______________________________
So, it appears the HR3200 was referred to several committees and all of them except Budget have ordered their portions to be reported. IOW, as soon as Budget reports it out, it will be ready for so-called debate, then a floor vote.
Apparently, your claims here require fact checking.
So when Obama says he has the support of the AMA and AARP on the reform we should assume these organizations are just rubber stamps for him? According to your logic they cannot possibly have the information to make such a judgment.
Can you please site the section(s) in HR 3200 which support your contention that you will be forced into the goverment plan? Include the full applicable text, please. Thanks.
I believe the contention is that whichever plan "you" (general you) have, it will be forced to conform to the standards set by the exchange, which is spelled out in Subtitle A, section 102(b)(1)Grace Period: The Commissioner shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan years beginning after the end of the 5-year period beginning with Y1, an employment-based health plan in operation as of the day before the first day of Y1 must meet the same requirements as apply to a qualified health benefits plan under section 101, including the essential benefit package requirement under section 121.
Overall, to my understanding, this section says if you have health care you like right now, keep it. Then they add the exceptions: it can't change in ANY way (premium up or down, cost sharing, benefits, anything); no new members can be signed up unless the plan fits the requirements of the exchange (not surprising, but also tough on insurance companies, which, like any other company, rely on new customers to maintain profit); and 5 years after the bill goes into effect (Y1), your insurance has to conform to the qualified health benefits plan established by the bill.
Even without the 5 year requirement, it seems like this has the potential to force private insurance companies out of the picture, leaving only a public option.
Hope I got the lawyerly translation close enough, let me know if I read this the wrong way. Also, I haven't had the time yet to read the bill in its entirety, especially since it seems like it will change, so let me know if I missed something later in the bill that invalidates what I say, although I doubt that's the case.
Dan, you're right. Despite the fervent religious beliefs of the liberal fanatics on this thread, everyone from Barack Obama, to Barney Frank to Jan Schakowski to anyone with above a double digit IQ knows that the Democrats intend to take incremental steps to single payer health care. By freezing the terms and membership of current private insurance plans and requiring any new private insurance plans to be "qualified" in the "exchange" to meet all of the requirements that will make it exorbitantly expensive, Obama knows that over time people will be dumped into the public option. They will make private insurance so expensive that no one can afford it and the "public option" will be subsidized by tax dollars so it won't cost as much as the private insurance. In the private sector, when airlines undercharge for air fares in certain markets to put their smaller competitors out of business, "progressives" squeal about predatory pricing and corporate greed. Now that liberals see a chance to expand their power, they adopt these same tactics in order to put private insurance out of business. It is every bit as much a restraint of trade when the government does it as it is when a "greedy corporation" does it.
Our health care system is the best in the world at curing sick people (see p. 184 of this WHO report). If you don't want to acknowledge that fact then don't. There isn't just one study that shows we cure sick people better than the rest of the world; study after study after study shows that. The empirical evidence shows that socialized medical systems ration care (the UK's NICE just restricted steroid injections for back pain, it also restricts other kinds of treatments). It isn't any of the government's business how much American citizens choose to spend on health care. Obama has repeatedly said we spend too much on health care and that we have to get costs under control. The bill that just passed out of committee in the House establishes commissions that will have the power to determine what kind of procedures are "effective" and how many will be provided by the government. Maybe liberals really are so stupid that they don't understand what Obama intends to do.
We need reform. Health insurance needs to be de-coupled from employment (a vestige of another horrible liberal policy, wage controls under FDR), it needs to be de-regulated so that people don't have to buy insurance that covers things they don't need, we need to make it like real insurance to cover extraordinary events instead of pre-paid health care, there need to be tax credits for health savings accounts that can be used to pay service providers directly for preventative care, etc. There are many kinds of reform that would make health care more affordable and, therefore, more available to more people. Unfortunately, Obama wants to pass a this monstrosity to expand and consolidate the power of the federal government and the Democrat party ("You never want a serious crisis to go to waste"). Liberals are just liars.
(I meant Nola Dawg is right). Despite the fervent religious beliefs of the liberal fanatics on this thread, everyone from Barack Obama, to Barney Frank to Jan Schakowski to anyone with above a double digit IQ knows that the Democrats intend to take incremental steps to single payer health care. By freezing the terms and membership of current private insurance plans and requiring any new private insurance plans to be "qualified" in the "exchange" to meet all of the requirements that will make it exorbitantly expensive, Obama knows that over time people will be dumped into the public option. They will make private insurance so expensive that no one can afford it and the "public option" will be subsidized by tax dollars so it won't cost as much as the private insurance. In the private sector, when airlines undercharge for air fares in certain markets to put their smaller competitors out of business, "progressives" squeal about predatory pricing and corporate greed. Now that liberals see a chance to expand their power, they adopt these same tactics in order to put private insurance out of business. It is every bit as much a restraint of trade when the government does it as it is when a "greedy corporation" does it.
Our health care system is the best in the world at curing sick people (see p. 184 of this WHO report). If you don't want to acknowledge that fact then don't. There isn't just one study that shows we cure sick people better than the rest of the world; study after study after study shows that. The empirical evidence shows that socialized medical systems ration care (the UK's NICE just restricted steroid injections for back pain, it also restricts other kinds of treatments). It isn't any of the government's business how much American citizens choose to spend on health care. Obama has repeatedly said we spend too much on health care and that we have to get costs under control. The bill that just passed out of committee in the House establishes commissions that will have the power to determine what kind of procedures are "effective" and how many will be provided by the government. Maybe liberals really are so stupid that they don't understand what Obama intends to do.
We need reform. Health insurance needs to be de-coupled from employment (a vestige of another horrible liberal policy, wage controls under FDR), it needs to be de-regulated so that people don't have to buy insurance that covers things they don't need, we need to make it like real insurance to cover extraordinary events instead of pre-paid health care, there need to be tax credits for health savings accounts that can be used to pay service providers directly for preventative care, etc. There are many kinds of reform that would make health care more affordable and, therefore, more available to more people. Unfortunately, Obama wants to pass a this monstrosity to expand and consolidate the power of the federal government and the Democrat party ("You never want a serious crisis to go to waste"). Liberals are just liars.
Nola Dog,
How do you read that in that way. To me that means, by the end of the five year period, your insurance company must make sure your policy meets or exceeds the standard of care that the government outlines in their minimum standard of care section?
I mean...
"an employment-based health plan in operation as of the day before the first day of Y1 must meet the same requirements as apply to a qualified health benefits plan under section 101, including the essential benefit package requirement under section 121."
How do you read that as saying that you can't have your plan anymore if you increase your coverage? I think that's exactly the kind of fear mongering this article portends. Hello?
Andy (I'm hopin this will pop up under you since I can't directly reply);
First of all, what I said had no "fear mongering" in it. Mine is a valid concern shared by many. I'm going to attempt an analogy here to show you where I', coming from, and while it might not be the most apt available, it's the best I got.
The proponents of the plan say that public and private insurances will be able to compete on an even playing field. My concern is that by forcing private insurances to adhere to a standard set by the government and compete with a body that not only doesn't have to maintain a profit to stay viable, but can regularly sustain huge losses, the field is unfair. Notice also in that rule that companies can't raise premiums, but they may (probably will) be forced to change/add benefits. It's as if the Yankees, with their much larger money advantage over nearly every other team in MLB, mandated that anyone playing in Yankee Stadium has to wear a $10,000 dollar pair of cleets or no cleets at all. The Yankees could afford it, but no other team could, and thus the other teams would forfeit. (Like I said, not the best of analogies, but I tried).
In any event, this bill, in my mind, shackles insurance companies. If my insurance company is so bad, why can't I just go pick a new one? Many would argue, correctly, that the average person can't go choose another insurer because of state restrictions or employer based insurance. I wholeheartedly agree with that argument, but don't think it's a basis for massive overhaul of a system that still functions, although in serious need of some reform. I also think it's a little disingenuous to say "Sure, keep your health care plan, but in 5 years we're changing it." How is that keeping insurance plan? It removes my choice. Right now many Americans (a significant portion of that "47 million uninsured" or whatever the number is now) choose to not buy any insurance at all. Why are we removing that choice? What if I only want catastrophic insurance, because as a knowledgeable individual I make healthy choices about exercise and food? This removes that choice also.
Finally, this bill seems to be much more focused on reforming and expanding to universal health insurance. I've found very little in the bill that even attempts to reform health care. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that much of the debate about health care reform began with the Dartmouth Study regarding inequities in Medicare/aid spending by region (up to 30%, controlling for population, etc.) with no appreciable difference in health care outcomes. That, in my opinion, is the real problem with health care. If we can figure out how to address the inequities in the system that cause these imbalances, I believe we will have figured out how to "bend the curve." There are already people studying it, notably the Mayo Clinic (who have also written a letter of non-support for 3200) and Atul Gawande, to name a few.
Anyway, in the interest of not "fear mongering", I'm trying to lay out my points as rationally as possible in these types of forums. I'll check this particular thread for a few more days if you think I'm misinterpreting something or if you simply think I'm wrong. Let me know
You do realize that being able to read makes you suspect, right? Better to just to listen to Rush and Sean and Glenn, don't bother with the facts when you have revealed truth from those gentlemen.
Now what part of screaming like a jungle monkey at these events makes your movement more informed than those with whom you disagree?
As an organizer for Tea Parties in Delaware, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that I have never been involved in Politics. In fact, I never even attended a demonstration before I organized my first Tea Party on April 15th. I have not been approached by the Republican Party or Insurance Companies to organize. I would tell them NO in any case.
I have been angry about excessive spending by Congress for over 30 years. I have written my elected representatives and phoned Washington repeatedly. And yes, I did this during the eight years Bush was President as well.
To me the final straw was the Stimulus Bill that not ONE Congressperson or Senator read before voting on it.
James Wilson was a Scottish philosopher who greatly influenced James Madison and who spoke more than any other man at the Constitutional Convention. He believed that the entire basis of the rule of law was the consent of those whose obedience the law requires. That the better ordinary people understood the law, the better for the law, and the better for democracy.
The bill to implement the Interstate Highway system was passed in 1953 and was 26 pages long. The average length of a bill when Nixon was President was 50 pages.
The only reason for 1000+ page bills is so we don't know what they are up to.
Our Congress is not representing us when they don't even bother to read the bills.
As someone with family in England who has intimate knowledge of their Health Care System, I do not want that here. They get TERRIBLE care when they are sick. President Obama, Rep. Frank, Rep. Jankowski and many others have repeatedly said they will get to a Single-Payer system via a Public Option. I happen to believe what people say.
I went to a recent Town Hall with our Congressman and asked him one simple question: Will you give up your Government Health Care Plan and go on the plan you will be forcing on us? His answer: NO.
One of our Senators was on the local talk radio station and was asked that same question six different times. His eventual answer: NO.
In other words, they are saying to the people of Delaware, "Let them eat cake".
That is why I am angry. That is why I have started organizing.
Question:
Did you feel the need to organize during any point in your 30 years? Why the Obama stimulus? Was the Bush deficit spending stimulus not enough of a reason? (Tax cut = less revenue for the government, thus deficit spending).
I understand and commiserate with your frustration, Sir. I too am a fiscal conservative. My point is that my fiscal conservatism knows no party loyalty.
I would ask, does yours?
I want to thank you for making this important point.
If you're a "fiscal conservative," then you should be familiar with the graph at the link:
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/83037/
That should answer your question pretty soundly.
This is a ridiculous reply. You are not commiserating you are accusing. Rather then reply the post you accuse the OP of being partisan (totally speculative). If a person does not (or DOES as far as you know) organize for everything YOU think they should, that invalidates their actions? You sir are condescending and close minded.
Goebbles would be proud of the Democrat informational dispersion process. This is getting very serious, and we will see very serious opposition to this lunacy called health reform.
Any mention of Goebbels (for correct spelling, try that there google machine), Hitler, Himmler, Stalin, Marx, Lenin, Mao, Idi Amin, Castro, Chavez or Francisco Franco means you lose.
Lol, what kind of moron gets ANGRY about the mere idea of healthcare reform?
Have you ever even been to a first world country that has universal healthcare? Its definitely not something you should be afraid of even talking about, which is what the position of the teabaggers.
You'd have to be pretty ignorant to think that reforming the way profit-driven health insurance companies decide who gets to live and die is a bad thing.
This is strawman argument stuff made only more ridiculous with the condescension. Moron? Really? A 2nd grader can see people are not angry about "reform", they are angry about the methods and ideas surrounding the implementation.
It is a surprise, however, that people in this country don't see the huge conflict of interest that is presented to the for profit health care industry. I mean, they're beholden to their stockholders first and their customers second. Usually in business, the latter drives the former and if a customers get the shaft, it's not a big deal because you just lose the customer. In health care, the stakes are bigger, though I guess in the end, you still lose a customer.
And that is just for people how actually HAVE health insurance. For the poor suckers that don't, well you're just at the mercy of whoever gives a flip. I just don't get it. I understand the dangers of governmental interference with *anything*, but in the case of an industry that's lost it's way or is abusing its power, then I think it's a necessary evil.
* Conscientious objectors should take their cue from the President:
Rules for Radicals
In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote an entertaining classic on grassroots organizing titled Rules for Radicals. Those who prefer cooperative tactics describe the book as out-of-date. Nevertheless, it provides some of the best advice on confrontational tactics. Alinsky begins this way:
What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.
His “rules” derive from many successful campaigns where he helped poor people fighting power and privilege
For Alinsky, organizing is the process of highlighting what is wrong and convincing people they can actually do something about it. The two are linked. If people feel they don’t have the power to change a bad situation, they stop thinking about it.
According to Alinsky, the organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy. This is necessary to get people to participate. An organizer has to attack apathy and disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent community life where people have simply come to accept a bad situation. Alinsky would say, “The first step in community organization is community disorganization.”
Through a process combining hope and resentment, the organizer tries to create a “mass army” that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals.
Alinsky provides a collection of rules to guide the process. But he emphasizes these rules must be translated into real-life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand.
Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.
Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.
The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.
Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”
Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”
Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.
Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”
Typical Democratic tactics why don't they go try to strong arm thier own supporter base of growing defecters from thier party. Democrats in congress are sure brave when they are shooting thier mouths off about what horror's they are going to bestow on the seniors. Democrats in office are paid for by the taxpayers and should be required attend town hall meetings and be among those they have decided to be exterminated in Obamas healthcare reform. What did you people hire a bunch of mice Insist they do thier job..
.....This guy who is very representative of the GOP today is why I know they are going to be eating dust for the next 20 years.
It's amusing to watch the ongoing intellectual collapse of movement conservatism, a movement which has to be the biggest ponzi scheme of the last 30 years. Let the whackjob rabble howl and make threats - and give them lots of air time. The vast majority of Americans can see clearly what a pathetic bunch of overweight, inadequate kooks these sad creatures are. In fact, if they didn't exist, one would have to invent them. The more these pathetic wretches make fools of themselves, the faster the GOP will decline. Howl for me, howl!
Wow! Such intellectual comments from the enlightened progressive. When you can't argue your position just call them names!
It's amusing to read about the "intellectual collapse of movement conservatism" from someone who calls their opponents "overweight, inadequate kooks."
Physician, heal thyself.
Now is most definitely the time to tell our representatives what we think about the proposals. Now, while they are still working on the bill; not after each committee has already decided what it wants; not after the backroom deals have been made; not after the House and Senate reconcile their versions; not after the bill has been voted on. Now, while they can still change it and know what they are changing.
Obama: socialist, deceiver, evil.
"To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry has acquired too much, in order to spare others who have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle…, 'the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.'" Thomas Jefferson
Wait is that the same Tom Jefferson who was one of the world's greatest theoroticians on human liberty or the guy who raped his slaves? Oh wait they're the same guy.
Obama: socialist, deceiver, evil.
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting their labors under the pretense of taking care of them.” Thomas Jefferson
How amusing. When you publish a DNC press release it is pretty clear you are nothing more than flaks, a propaganda arm of the state.
Clearly townhalls and tea parties are not enough to deal with the tax predator ruling class and its media whores. Even though they seem to terrify you into soiling your pants and blithering idiotically in public. And generating an official enemies' list at the White House for the storm troopers to intimidate.
We will have to move on to citizen's tribunals and guillotines. Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Boxer, Feinstein etc must all be stripped, beaten, caged behind bars in Lafayette Park. Tried, stripped of all their property, to be returned to the tax serfs, and then stripped of their citizenship and exiled to Russia, Iran, Mexico etc.
In all of this back and forth I have yet to see the issue of cost.
I am quite aware of TennCare, a health care scheme that was enacted in Tennessee. What happened was that the state government's health care was initially for those who had fallen through the cracks of coverage. What it became was a means for businesses to shift the cost of their health care premiums for their workers to the state. In just a short period of time...bankruptcy.
Incremental change will not happen. This cost shifting will move fast..almost as fast as the cash for clunkers.
We are all economical beings. We all want an Audi at the price of a Vega.
The problem is that there is a price to this and a bill that will be due for all of us to pay.
Does anyone know if the following is accurate?
Pg 22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS WHO SELF-INSURE!!
Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE which decides what treatments & benefits you get.
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt WILL RESTRICT ENROLLMENT of Special Needs people.
Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you.
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC WILL BE PROVIDED TO ALL NON-US CITIZENS, illegal or otherwise.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill- ALL NON-RESIDENT ALIENS will be exempt from individual taxes. (Resident Americans will pay)
Pg 58 HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individuals
finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued.
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for electronic funds transfer, no choice.
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC EXCHANGE to bring private HC plans under Govt control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange.
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs. for of Benefit Levels for Plans.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.
pg 124 Lines 24-25 HC No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly.
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill -DOCTORS/ AMA - The Govt will tell you what your salary will be TAX.
Pg 145 Line 15-17 All Employers MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with payroll 400k & above, who does not provide public option, pays 8% tax on all payroll.
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with payroll btw 251k & 400k who doesn't provide public option pays 2-6% tax on all payroll.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to the Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans finances & personal records.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax".
DO READ THE FOLLOWING LINES SLOWLY....
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill- Govt WILL REDUCE PHYSICIAN SERVICES for Medicaid Seniors, and low income people.
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesn't matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same
PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations. (seniors)
Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living
wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death.
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program for orders for end of life.The Govt has a say in how your life ends
Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will be used
frequently as patients health deteriorates.
PG 429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may include an ORDER FOR END OF LIFE plans. AN "ORDER" from GOV
Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.
In full disclosure, I am against HR 3200. But in answer to your question, and I've seen this e-mail floating around, there is probably a lot of preferential reading in it. Some of the statements are completely true, some partly, and some probably just about entirely false. I haven't had the time to read the entire thing, but you can check out the claims here:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text
I like that site because it allows line by line comment sections, so you can see what other people are thinking/asking/answering.
Also, another point to make is that not only has this bill not made it out of committee entirely, let alone been passed by the House, we have yet to see the Senate version, which according to most sources will certainly have major differences than HR 3200. In fact, to me, that's one of the biggest reasons to read and discuss the bill now: changes are not only possible, but likely.
Thanks for the info.
If ANY of that stuff gets thru then the bill sucks.
From what I've been seeing there's slightly more than 50% of the people that don't want the democratic takeover of the health care system but these idiots are bent on ramming it down the public's throat.
I hope THEY ARE ALL remembered at election time!
jimmyv sucks. how do i know this? i read it on the internets, so it must be true. 80% of the slightly more than 50% may disagee with this statement, but that's still only 40 plus % so how can you disagree.
sorry jimmyv, the internets have spoken.
Jimmyv,
As you may've deducted from dooleyfromdalton's eloquent pandering, the email that you received is completely false. I received it myself, and did some legwork. I couldn't believe that anything with such outlandish claims could possibly be serious. So, I compared many of the claims in that email with the Bill posted on Congress' website. I found that even the email's organization is inaccurate. For example, it states "HC WILL BE PROVIDED TO ALL NON-US CITIZENS, illegal or otherwise." Well, the bill as illustrated on Congress' website reflects that Section 152 is actually titled "Prohibiting discrimination in Health Care". This section goes on to outlaw discrimination within health care...hardly comparable to another claim in the email, which erroneously states "Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt WILL RESTRICT ENROLLMENT of Special Needs people." FALSE! There are several more examples I can make here, but alas don't have the time. DO review the bill yourself. It is, after all, our government, and our money at stake.
Banshee
I'm sure you're people will enjoy your "facts", as much as I did. Because don't you know that theres nothing more un american then questioning authority as me and the 3 people I went with to a Sam Farr town hall meeting with valid questions, that where not clearly answered btw, are. So I'd be interested in the facts behind your statement,"organized and funded by..." because I'm still wiating for my funding. As a matter of fact is'nt just the opposite?