Baucus: We can accomplish health care reform ‘without’ public health plan option.
Baucus: We can accomplish health care reform ‘without’ public health plan option.
Today, during an event at the Center for American Progress Action Fund about reforming the health care system, ThinkProgress asked Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) if he agreed with Gov. Howard Dean’s (D-VT) argument that the government can’t improve the efficiency and quality of the health care system without giving Americans the choice of enrolling in a new public health care plan:
Let’s see what we come up with. I think we can accomplish the objective [Dean] wants without [a public plan]. We can, we’re going to have to work on it. But we may have to have it, [Dean] may be right. Just don’t know yet.
Watch it:
The public, however, supports a public option. According to a poll by Lake Research, “73% of voters want everyone to have a choice of private health insurance or a public health insurance plan while only 15% want everyone to have private insurance.” The Wonk Room has more here.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
.
A leach; A bug that sustains it’s sole existence off the life of others…
… You know, private insurance companies.
.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pm—
Good grief.
Max Baucus has his head up his butt and lips placed firmly on corporate insurance ass.
—-
March 27th, 2009 at 6:07 pmI imagine that 15% are the insurers, their employees, their lobbyists and the far right a$$holes.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:13 pmHe must think no one is paying attention.
Schering-Plough Corp $72,200
New York Life Insurance $52,900
KKR & Co $50,500
Goldman Sachs $48,900
DaVita Inc $48,350
American International Group $46,750
Amgen Inc $45,750
Aetna Inc $45,250
UST Inc $42,950
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $39,850
American Express $39,800
Akin, Gump et al $38,836
JPMorgan Chase & Co $38,600
Citigroup Inc $37,000
Morgan Stanley $34,500
Huntsman Corp $32,200
Paulson & Co $29,900
Verizon Communications $29,001
FMR Corp $28,850
Kindred Healthcare $28,400
Source: opensecrets.org
March 27th, 2009 at 6:13 pmObviously Baucus, and others like him (I’m looking at you Blanche), seem to not give a shit what the American public wants or needs.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:16 pmAnyone here asking Baucus about the 63% support for inclusion of a public health care option, and why he’s so against the same?
I can see why, but the guy needs a little gentle outing…
New term, one beyond Conservadem: Corporo-dem
March 27th, 2009 at 6:25 pmAnd of course, polls still show a solid majority of Americans want single-payer:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/oct/25/nation/na-poll25
March 27th, 2009 at 6:26 pmhttp://abcnews.go.com/images/pdf/935a3HealthCare.pdf
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2007/december/where_are_we_on_refo.php
Baucus, why aren’t you caucusing with the Repiglycans? Oh, and big pharma called. You can go home now, but stop by the drugstore for your brib..er, congratulatory contribution.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:27 pmHey, the health insurance industry did say the other day they were willing to consider not screwing everyone so badly if we would still let them continue to suck up money for providing nothing.
Fair is fair, right?
Bought any AIG insurance lately?
March 27th, 2009 at 6:28 pmWhen will public interest replace self-interest and greed in both parties??
March 27th, 2009 at 6:28 pmThank goodness the house plan includes a public option. That better be put in during conference.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:31 pmWell its not about the people its about geting elected to his next term so he can raise money for his next term..
….its all about the greed of power and money nothin more nothin less
public financeing for all elections and free tv ads for the elections that would cut the lobbyest off at the knees
March 27th, 2009 at 6:31 pmForStudentPower Says:
And of course, polls still show a solid majority of Americans want single-payer:
Yes, we do.
And, as Dick Cheney would say, “So?”
What did you expect, people? Really?
We’re just livestock. Another disposable resource.
They farm us just as effectively and intentionally as we harvest cattle or sheep.
They just gotta keep us alive. Health isn’t the same thing.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:32 pmWhat is with these DINOs?
March 27th, 2009 at 6:34 pmThe public is hollering loud and clear, but the politicians can’t hear them over the insurance lobbyists.
An example of being bought and paid for as 18,000 to 40,000 continue to die each year because of no access to health care.
Again, as I have so many times, heard a caller from EU, on progressive radio, comment how ridiculous she (and ALL she knows) thinks our insurance industry based system. No one wants this… except maybe those benefiting from lobbyist hand outs.
Yes, a public health care system would be a threat to the health insurance industry as they would lose most of their customers and fold.
President Obama… get out there in another press conference and tell this to the people.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:35 pmtokin librul Says: They farm us just as effectively and intentionally as we harvest cattle or sheep.
They just gotta keep us alive. Health isn’t the same thing.
The Good Book says shepherds, tend your flocks. A dead sheep can only be sheared once.
Just keep them stupid and enough of them alive.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:40 pmIt seems that in Congress, catering to corporate interests is what passes as being “patriotic”, whether you are a Republinut or Demo-rat.
( apologies to REAL Democrats… Republinuts can still go Cheney themselves ).
March 27th, 2009 at 6:41 pmcorporate dems, the middlemen of progress.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:42 pmAlso, as 50% of US bankruptcies are due to inadequate health care insurance and the fact business’s have outsourced as they were burdened with employee health insurance costs, isn’t the number 1 move to stimulate the economy is a new public health system?
March 27th, 2009 at 6:48 pmWow, 73% for public insurance versus the private insurance companies. I wonder who will win out? /snark off
March 27th, 2009 at 6:51 pmhttp://www.maxbaucus2008.com/contact/
March 27th, 2009 at 6:53 pmhttp://baucus.senate.gov/contact/emailForm.cfm?subj=issue
either one works.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:55 pm# 4 pastcaring ceratopogonidae
I just want to scream.
And the public will remain ignorant and continue to accept things the way they are due to the influence of gopper led TV.
Calling Michael Moore… time for another movie.
March 27th, 2009 at 6:56 pm#22 Marie,
Maybe we should all send a second email with a copy and paste of:
#4 pastcaring ceratopogonidae post.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:02 pmLaw Makers and their families get free health care for life, let’s change that policy. To say Dean’s plan is wrong means if your sick you should be left to die unless your one of the chosen people. With most miniorities and poor having no health insurance the Law Makers are looking to only keep the healthy people who pay insurance cost but never need it. Like the car insurance companies you pay but when you have an accident they drop you. Or it’s the fine print that says if you get sick or have an accident your not covered. Doctors will be glad to take the extra million for giving out the little green pill that sends you to your maker to save the US Budget.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:03 pmYou know, it’s pretty telling when Chuck Grassley, a Republican, was actually the one who left the possibility of governement insurance open, as he put it, to keep the private sector honest.
I’m tired of these ranch-dems & southcrats getting in the way when we need all the allies we can get to meet the needs of the public and provide them the relief the “too big to fail” entities won’t.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:09 pmHell, I’m not even for nationalizing the health care system as option #1 because I believe nationalizing insurance will work much faster to increase the rate of care to all.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:12 pmhad enough — good suggestion. I just did.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:13 pmBaucus is the wrong Dem to lead this fight. He’s too entrenched with the status quo (insurance companies).
We need Teddy to lead!
March 27th, 2009 at 7:15 pmThe most telling post goes to #4 pastcaring. This wouldn’t be an issue if we had tighter campaign finance rules. Until our politicians aren’t the employees of these private companies, trying to act like public servants, we will continue to have a mess on our hands.
Campaign finance reform is key! With a relatively small effort the grassroots campaign to pull some sponsors from O’Reilly Factor worked, to the larger one that got Obama elected…there needs to be something equivalent that will override the benefits of money to the politicians.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:26 pmWhy do doctors go to school and training for about ten years? Why do other health care professionals go to school for a minimum of 4 years? Sh*ts and giggles? They like to run up huge schooling bills?
Why do people who have absolutely no training in health care think they should decide who gets medical treatment? And why should they get paid for making decisions based on profit rather than health care?
March 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pmsent, since I’m feeling a little feisty after the O’Reilly stuff :)
Mr. Baucus:
With polls stating around 70% of the U.S. public want the choice of private AND public health insurance plans, I am disappointed in statements you have made today regarding health care reform, stating that a public health insurance plan may in fact be optional.
You don’t list the reasons why we can ‘accomplish the objective’ without offering a public plan. I think I found those reasons:
Schering-Plough Corp $72,200
New York Life Insurance $52,900
KKR & Co $50,500
Goldman Sachs $48,900
DaVita Inc $48,350
American International Group $46,750
Amgen Inc $45,750
Aetna Inc $45,250
UST Inc $42,950
Blue Cross/Blue Shield $39,850
American Express $39,800
Akin, Gump et al $38,836
JPMorgan Chase & Co $38,600
Citigroup Inc $37,000
Morgan Stanley $34,500
Huntsman Corp $32,200
Paulson & Co $29,900
Verizon Communications $29,001
FMR Corp $28,850
Kindred Healthcare $28,400
This is the list of campaign contributions you have received, many placing you in a direct conflict of interest against the American people. I am asking for you to fully understand your duty as a public servant, and for you to reassess the interests you really represent. Thousands die in this country every year form the direct results of being uninsured. Billions are lost in bankruptcies and private insurance middlemen, with no real interest in public health, only profits.
It is time for real change. The American people are asking their representatives for it, and the pressure will only increase.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:43 pmThey can keep denying it, but a public, single-payer plan is inevitable.
Even the insurance industry realizes this (which is why they are appearing to “play ball” with their recent announcements). An insurance industry representative inadvertently made a very good argument for single-payer.
From a NY Times article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/washington/25health.html):
“In the past, insurers have warned that if they could not consider a person’s health in setting premiums, the rates charged to young, healthy people would soar, making coverage unaffordable.
But Karen M. Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, a major trade group, told lawmakers on Tuesday that insurers were exploring ideas to prevent such increases by spreading the risks and costs across a larger population of both healthy and unhealthy people.”
There is no larger population to spread the risk around than the entire population of the U.S. We should all be covered by one, single insurance plan (one single-payer of health care costs). This is inevitable if you follow the logic and the economics.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:57 pmHealth insurance should be a public utility and not a source of profiteering for insurance companies.
March 27th, 2009 at 8:08 pmMarch 27th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Campaign reform. Campaign reform. Campaign reform.
March 27th, 2009 at 8:17 pmThe cost of healthcare insurance per year has insidiously risen to be analogous to buying one brand new small car every year or every other year, depending on what part of the country you live in. Anyone who thinks that the public option is something that can be overlooked or not necessary is either corrupt or stupid (okay, to be nice, maybe they’re misinformed and they just have to be persuaded).
March 27th, 2009 at 8:31 pm#33 Hoodathunktick Says:
Why do doctors go to school and training for about ten years? Why do other health care professionals go to school for a minimum of 4 years? Sh*ts and giggles? They like to run up huge schooling bills?
Plus the fact some of the schools are difficult to get into. Never mind if you have an A GPA….unlike a few years back, some programs are on a first come first serve or lottery basis regardless of grades. As we have a shortage it makes no sense except a way to keep the costs up.
March 27th, 2009 at 8:42 pmGOP leader: Bush a ‘millstone around our necks’
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/27/gop.comeback/index.html
March 27th, 2009 at 9:11 pmgopny Says:
You really are an ignorant soulless piece of garbage. Too bad your Chlamydia ridden whore of a trailer tramp mother didnt teach you to be a human being. Too busy blowing hobos for pocketchange to buy her Mad Dog I guess.
March 28th, 2009 at 5:02 amI own a small business here in Montana. Like so may other small businesses around the country, we’re barely hanging on and with I and my wife’s yearly health insurance premiums costing nearly $8,000, we may not make it through the summer.
I’ve written Max and asked him to reconsider his position on healthcare.
March 28th, 2009 at 9:24 am“We” as in Maxie and private health care companies, his benefactors.
Dirty Max accepts donations from numerous for-profit health care companies with no, as in zero, facilities in his state. Rub that in, Max!
March 28th, 2009 at 9:41 amDr. Dean is right! Max Baucus is wrong! Dr. Dean should be leading the charge!
March 28th, 2009 at 12:00 pmThe public plan is the entire game.
We need to have a 2-pronged strategy for this to work. We need to regulate the heck out of private insurance companies. (1)Have a uniform, generous benefit package that they must offer if they want to sell health insurance. (2) Same price for everybody–community rating. (1) & (2) will go a long way toward prevention of Cherry Picking. (3) No exclusions or penalties for age or pre-existing conditions.
Then, with the tough regs in place, institute a public plan to compete with private insurance on a level playing field. This should keep premiums low and (hopefully) get rid of co-pays, deductibles, and co-insurance.
Public plan is absolutely necessary.
If you are interested in reading a more full development of my opinions, come and check out my blog @ http://twobaddogscafe.blogspot.com
March 28th, 2009 at 12:37 pmIf we can’t have health care then Congress needs to give up their taxpayer paid for health care. It’s not right that they get health care paid for by us and then they refuse to give us single payer health care or Obama’s government vs free market health care.
March 28th, 2009 at 3:08 pmPresident Obama’s Health Care Reformer has a strong private healthcare background. Even the Chicago Tribune finally noticed:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-deparlemar29,0,7090806.story
It took them four weeks:
http://stateofthedivision.blogspot.com/2009/03/white-house-health-care-reformer-is-peu.html
March 28th, 2009 at 3:23 pmIt is now abundantly clear that some of our own Dems missed the lessons of ‘06 and ‘08, and apparently missed the lessons of ‘93 as well. Voting Bills up or down is not about their own political careers or even Party ideology, but about the needs of the very real and hurting constituents those House and Senate leaders allegedly represent. It is up to us to keep up the pressure and remind them of this truth. The one thing President Obama’s election did for We the People is remind us that WE can and do have a voice, and vote, in the political process and that WE can directly impact that process through direct participation in it. Power to We the People!!!
March 29th, 2009 at 5:27 pmAll the world needs healh reform. Social politics under pressure of the social and capitalist system. Many of the people feel the pressure. Charity organization relieves these kind of pressure a bit.
March 30th, 2009 at 4:58 am
It needs a good balance in fackt.
March 30th, 2009 at 4:59 amhttp://www.cosmedicistanbul.com
http://www.estetikklinikleri.com
I suggest that you read the post by Realness…
This is exactly why we will never have a National Health Care. 80%-90% of all campaign contributions come from the Banking Industry and the Insurance Industry. Not one of them (politicians) are going to bite the hand that feeds them.
We need to let our representatives in Washington understand that if they don’t start a National Health Care System ,NOW, we will elect someone who will!!!!!
March 30th, 2009 at 11:08 amThere are TWO ISSUES going on here. One, is the issue of ‘Single-Payer National Healthcare’ as outlined in HR-676.
The other is the issue of Clean Elections, or what is referred to as FENA, the ‘Fair Elections Now Act HR-1286′, which was introduced a few days ago, Tuesday March 31-2009.
In order to get ‘National Healthcare’, the ‘ties that bind’ our Congressional leaders to corporate lobbies, (who finance their campaigns), must once-and-for-all be relegated to placing ‘VOTERS above DONARS’.
So… National Healthcare, and really ALL proposals that the PEOPLE want enacted and passed into law by their Congressional leadership, is tied into the passage of the ‘Fair Elections Now Act HR-1286 (FENA)’. Only then, will our Congressional leaders be unequivocally bound to act in the interest of their constituents, not the lobbyists.
INFO Fair Elections: http://action.citizen.org/t/5489/content.jsp?content_KEY=4050
INFO Fair Elections: http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4764307
INFO Deceptive Practices et al: http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4773589
PETITION Fair Elections Now Act: http://www.commoncause.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4860395
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:30 pmNow, as to Max Baucus specifically… Max Baucus is wholly-tied to the Insurance Lobby. Instead of doing his job by ‘REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE’, he’s only looking out for his own interests. How do we know this? Well, just look at the STATS below. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would come to the conclusion Max Baucus has come to, that the GOP has come to.
Max Baucus, and the GOP, DO NOT have the American People’s best interest at heart. Nor is all their ‘hot air’ about supporting ‘business’ either. What they support are ‘corporate conglomerates’, not the very core of America’s small and mid-sized businesses.
Fax Max Baucus today and tell him he DEAD WRONG! (202)224-9412
Need to know EXACTLY why Max Baucus is DEAD WRONG?
READ IT AND WEEP, AMERICA.
_________________________
HEALTH CARE SPENDING:
Health Care Spending U.S. 2007: $2.4 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2007: $7,900 per person. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2008: Expected to rise 6.9%, two times the rate of inflation. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2008: 4.3 times the amount of national defense. (California Health Care Foundation. Health Care Costs 101 — 2005. 02 March 2005)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2012: Projected to $3.1 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2017: Projected to $4.3 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
_________________________
EMPLOYER-WORKER:
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Costs will overtake profits by the end of 2008. (McKinsey and Company. The McKinsey Quarterly Chart Focus Newsletter, “Will Health Benefit Costs Eclipse Profits,” September, 2004)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased 120% since 1999. Cumulative Inflation 44% and Cumulative Wage Growth 29% for same time period. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased, on average, four times faster than workers’ earnings since 1999. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2007: Increased 5.5% for small employers. Increased 6.8% for employer’s having less than 24 employees. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2007: $2,992. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Increased 5.0%, two times the rate of inflation. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Family $12,700. Single person $4,700. Annual premiums for family-coverage significantly eclipsed the gross earnings for a full-time, minimum-wage worker who earns $10,712 annually. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased 120% since 2000. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Out-of-Pocket Costs U.S.: Increased 115% since 2000. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Increased 12% from 2007. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: $3,400. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
_________________________
GDP STATISTICS:
GDP U.S. 2008: 17% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP U.S. 2017: Projected to 20% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Switzerland: 109% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Germany: 10.7% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Canada: 9.7% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP France: 9.5% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:45 pmNeed more? Here ya go:
__________________________________
POLLING:
Feb. 2009: Grove Insight Opinion Research– Proposals to expand Medicare to all Americans as an alternative to private insurance are met with widespread approval by voters nationwide.
More than 6-in-10 (64%) support federal legislation to create this public health plan option.
__________________________________
Feb. 2009: New York Times/CBS News Poll– Americans are more likely today to embrace the idea of the government providing health insurance than they were 30 years ago.
59% say the government should provide national health insurance, including 49% who say such insurance should cover all medical problems.
__________________________________
Nov. 2008: Ballot initiative question in Massachusetts– ‘Should the representative from this district be instructed to support legislation creating a cost-effective single payer health insurance system that is available to all residents, and oppose laws penalizing those who fail to obtain health insurance?’… local ballot initiatives supporting single payer and opposing individual mandates passed by landslide margins in all ten legislative districts where they appeared.
With almost all precincts tallied, roughly 73% of 181,000 voters, in the ten districts, voted YES.
__________________________________
Apr. 2008: Quinnipiac Poll in PA, FL, OH– ‘Do you think it’s the government’s responsibility to make sure that everyone in the United States has adequate health-care, or don’t you think so?’
In Pennsylvania; Yes–> 65%. No–> 31%. NA/DK–> 4%.
__________________________________
Apr. 2008: Annals of Internal Medicine, Study of Physician Support of National Health Insurance– (Includes a comparison of 2002 and 2007 surveys.)
59% of them support government legislation to establish national health insurance, while 32% oppose it. and 9% are neutral.”
__________________________________
Dec. 2007: AP – Yahoo Poll– ‘Which comes closest to your view?’
34%–> The United States should continue the current health insurance system in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance.
65%–> The United States should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers.
2%–> Refused/Not Answered’
__________________________________
Dec. 2007: New Hampshire Medical Society, Survey of New Hampshire Physicians– Two thirds of New Hampshire physicians, including 81% of primary care clinicians, indicated they would favor a simplified payor system in which public funds, collected through taxes, were used to pay directly for services to meet the basic healthcare needs of all citizens.
__________________________________
May 2007: CNN/Opinion Research Poll– ‘Do you think the government should provide a national health insurance program for all Americans, even if this would require higher taxes?’
Yes–> 64%. No–> 35%. No opinion–> 2%.
__________________________________
Feb. 2007: New York Times/CBS News Poll– ‘Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn’t this the responsibility of the federal government?’
Guarantee–> 64%. Not responsibility–> 27%. DK/NA–> 9%.
‘If you had to choose, which do you think is more important for the country to do right now, maintain the tax cuts enacted in recent years or make sure all Americans have access to health care?’
Cutting taxes–> 18%. Access to health insurance–> 76%. Neither–> 1%. Both–> 2%. DK/NA–> 4%.
__________________________________
Feb. 2007: Minnesota Medicine Magazine, Poll of Minnesota 390 Physicians–
64% favored a single-payer system. 25% HSAs. 12% managed care.
The majority of physicians (86%) also agreed that it is the responsibility of society, through the government, to ensure that everyone has access to good medical care.’
__________________________________
Oct. 2005: The Harris Poll ‘Please indicate whether you support or oppose the policy’.‘–
Universal health insurance 75%–> Strongly/Somewhat Favor. 17%–> Strongly/Somewhat Oppose.
__________________________________
Oct. 2003: Washington Post/ABC News Poll– ‘Which would you prefer–> The current health insurance system in the United States, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance; OR, a universal health insurance program, in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that’s run by the government and financed by taxpayers?’
Universal–> 62%. Current–> 33%. No opinion–> 6%.”
__________________________________
http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:47 pmStill not enough? Okie, dokie…
HARVARD STUDY LINKS BANKRUPTCY TO MEDICAL BILLS
http://www.amazon.com/tag/politics/forum/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg7?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1S3QSZRUL93V8&cdPage=7&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx21GBKQVVVTSKY
“FEBRUARY 3, 2005
PROFESSOR ELIZABETH WARREN, Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law, Harvard
Nearly half of all Americans who file for bankruptcy do so because of medical expenses, according to a new study released jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School this week. The study, which is based on surveys of 1,771 individuals filing for bankruptcy, is the first of its kind to gather extensive information on the correlation between medical conditions and expenses and bankruptcy.
‘Both doctors and lawyers care about how health care is financed, but it was only when we put our heads together that we could probe further,’ explained Elizabeth Warren, professor of law and author of ‘The Two-Income Trap’. ‘We discovered that in 2004 about two million men, women and children were swept through the bankruptcy system in the fallout of a medical problem. Good educations, decent jobs, and health insurance were no guarantee that a person wouldn’t be wiped out by an illness or accident. We believe the current policy debates are overlooking a critical problem: A broken health care finance system is bankrupting middle class America.’
‘Our study is fairly shocking,’ explained Steffie Woolhandler, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune. ‘We found that, too often, private health insurance is an ‘umbrella that melts in the rain’.
The study, published in the journal Health Affairs, has been reported in stories in The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), the Chicago Tribune, and others. To learn more, read the full study online at Health Affairs.”
________________________
http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2005/02/03_bankruptcy.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9447-2005Feb8.html
Elizabeth Warren bio:
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:50 pmhttp://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.html?id=82
And, yes, there’s more…
MEDICAL BILLS LEADING CAUSE OF BANKRUPTCY, HARVARD STUDY FINDS
“FEBRUARY 3, 2005
Illness and medical bills caused half of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001, according to a study published by the journal Health Affairs.
The study estimates that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans annually — counting debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children.
Surprisingly, most of those bankrupted by illness had health insurance. More than three-quarters were insured at the start of the bankrupting illness. However, 38 percent had lost coverage at least temporarily by the time they filed for bankruptcy.
Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work — losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most.
Families in bankruptcy suffered many privations — 30 percent had a utility cut off and 61 percent went without needed medical care.
The research, carried out jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School, is the first in-depth study of medical causes of bankruptcy. With the cooperation of bankruptcy judges in five Federal districts (in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas) they administered questionnaires to bankruptcy filers and reviewed their court records.
Dr. David Himmelstein, the lead author of the study and an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard commented: ‘Unless you’re Bill Gates you’re just one serious illness away from bankruptcy. Most of the medically bankrupt were average Americans who happened to get sick.’
Today’s health insurance policies — with high deductibles, co-pays, and many exclusions — offer little protection during a serious illness. Uncovered medical bills averaged $13,460 for those with private insurance at the start of their illness. People with cancer had average medical debts of $35,878.
‘The paradox is that the costliest health system in the world performs so poorly. We waste one-third of every health care dollar on insurance bureaucracy and profits while two million people go bankrupt annually, and we leave 45 million uninsured,’ said Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program.
‘With national health insurance (’Medicare for All’), we could provide comprehensive, lifelong coverage to all Americans for the same amount we are spending now and end the cruelty of ruining families financially when they get sick.’”
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:52 pmHow about this? Just how does America, the greatest nation in the world, (according to all those GOP fascists), rank in the world regarding health systems?
We COULD be the greatest, but the fact is, when it comes to our healthcare delivery system, we are FAR, FAR FROM IT. Yet Max Baucus and the GOP would have us believe we just need to tweek the ‘Corporate Insurance Conglomerates’ a little bit ‘to encourage them’ to behave ethically, morally, and compassionately. This is bullshit, plain and simple. No ‘for profit’ healthcare system is going to be focused on delivering healthcare. They will, as all business is, be focused on PROFITS. And this is ALWAYS at the expense of those whose very lives depend on getting the healthcare they need, namely all of US!
WORLD RANKINGS:
1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:08 pmStill not convinced? Try this…
Physicians for HR-676—->
‘Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP)’: Dr. Oliver Fein, President: (who was invited to President Obama’s Healthcare Summit along with Rep. John Conyers– who actually wrote HR-676 and of which the PNHP fully backs) http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php
‘The American Medical Students Association’: http://www.amsa.org/
‘The American College of Physicians’ (the 2nd largest group of physicians in the US): http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2007/12/24/gvsa1224.htm
‘The Annals of Internal Medicine’ (trade journal) poll: 59% of US physicians support legislation to support a single-payer national health insurance program: http://cdm-mcrp.blogspot.com/2008/04/majority-us-physicians-support-single.html
‘The California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee’: http://www.calnurses.org/legislative_advocacy
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:09 pmAs if all the above is not enough, here is what LOCAL GOVERNMENT has to say about Single-Payer HR-676, which puts Max Baucus and his fascist GOP face-down in the dirt:
_________________________________
“THE U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS
76th Annual Meeting
June 20-24, 2008
Miami
2008 ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE ACT (H.R. 676)
WHEREAS, every person deserves access to affordable quality health care; and
WHEREAS, the number of Americans without health insurance now exceeds 47 million; and
WHEREAS, millions with insurance have coverage so inadequate that a major illness would lead to financial ruin, and medical illness and bills contribute to one-half of all bankruptcies;and
WHEREAS, proposals for “consumer directed health care” would worsen this situation by penalizing the sick, discouraging prevention and saddling many working families with huge medical bills; and
WHEREAS, managed care and other market-based reforms have failed to contain health care costs, which now threaten the international competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers; and
WHEREAS, administrative waste stemming from our reliance on private insurers consumes one-third of private health spending while the single payer Medicare system has administrative costs of less than 5%; and
WHEREAS, U.S. hospitals spend 24.3% of their budgets on billing and administration while hospitals under Canada’s single payer system spend only 12.9%; and
WHEREAS, Harvard researchers estimate that more than $300 billion could be recovered by replacing private insurance companies with a single public payer, enough to cover the uninsured and to improve coverage for all those who now have only partial coverage; and
WHEREAS, entrusting care to profit-oriented firms diverts billions of dollars to outrageous incomes for CEOs and threatens the quality of care; and
WHEREAS, The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) would assure universal coverage of all medically necessary services, contain costs by slashing bureaucracy, protect the doctor patient relationship, assure patients a completely free choice of doctors, and allow physicians a free choice of practice settings; and
WHEREAS, most polls show that the majority of Americans support universal health care; and
WHEREAS, as of the date of this resolution, the majority of American physicians (59%) believe that Single Payer is the best method of securing universal health care; and
WHEREAS, The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) will guarantee every mayor that all residents and employees of his/her city will be fully covered for health care and save millions of taxpayer dollars now spent on premiums to provide less than full health insurance coverage for government employees; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the United States Conference of Mayors expresses its support for The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676), and calls upon federal legislators to work towards its immediate enactment, and further urges the adoption of a process by which health care will be required to justify any increases to health care costs.”
http://www.usmayors.org/resolutions/76th_conference/chhs_03.asp
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:13 pmHere are the Congressional Co-Sponsors of Single-Payer HR-676:
_________________________
COSPONSORS (93)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR00676:@@@P
Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] – 1/24/2007
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:16 pmRep Baca, Joe [CA-43] – 9/17/2007
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] – 1/24/2007
Rep Becerra, Xavier [CA-31] – 6/13/2007
Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] – 6/15/2007
Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [GA-2] – 12/11/2007
Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] – 2/27/2007
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] – 4/17/2007
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] – 11/9/2007
Rep Carson, Andre [IN-7] – 7/10/2008
Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] – 1/24/2007
Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] – 2/16/2007
Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] – 1/24/2007
Rep Cleaver, Emanuel [MO-5] – 4/22/2008
Rep Clyburn, James E. [SC-6] – 4/24/2008
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] – 2/7/2007
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] – 2/12/2007
Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] – 3/21/2007
Rep Edwards, Donna F. [MD-4] – 9/29/2008
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] – 1/24/2007
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] – 1/24/2007
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] – 1/24/2007
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] – 1/24/2007
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] – 1/24/2007
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] – 3/7/2007
Rep Green, Al [TX-9] – 1/24/2007
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] – 1/24/2007
Rep Hare, Phil [IL-17] – 4/30/2007
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] – 1/29/2007
Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] – 1/24/2007
Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] – 7/23/2007
Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] – 9/18/2008
Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] – 1/24/2007
Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] – 1/24/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] – 1/24/2007
Rep Jefferson, William J. [LA-2] – 6/26/2007
Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] – 1/24/2007
Rep Johnson, Henry C. “Hank,” Jr. [GA-4] – 2/13/2007
Rep Jones, Stephanie Tubbs [OH-11] – 5/23/2007
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] – 2/12/2007
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] – 9/24/2007
Rep Kildee, Dale E. [MI-5] – 4/17/2007
Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] – 1/24/2007
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] – 1/24/2007
Rep Lantos, Tom [CA-12] – 10/1/2007
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] – 1/24/2007
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] – 1/24/2007
Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] – 1/24/2007
Rep Lynch, Stephen F. [MA-9] – 10/9/2007
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] – 1/29/2007
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] – 1/24/2007
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] – 1/24/2007
Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] – 1/24/2007
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [NY-6] – 9/20/2007
Rep Miller, George [CA-7] – 1/24/2007
Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] – 1/24/2007
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] – 1/22/2008
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] – 1/29/2007
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] – 2/27/2007
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] – 3/21/2007
Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] – 2/16/2007
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] – 1/24/2007
Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] – 1/24/2007
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] – 1/24/2007
Rep Richardson, Laura [CA-37] – 9/20/2007
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] – 1/24/2007
Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] – 2/6/2007
Rep Ryan, Tim [OH-17] – 5/8/2007
Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-39] – 4/23/2007
Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] – 9/20/2007
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] – 4/17/2007
Rep Scott, David [GA-13] – 9/20/2007
Rep Scott, Robert C. “Bobby” [VA-3] – 1/24/2007
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] – 2/7/2007
Rep Solis, Hilda L. [CA-32] – 2/12/2007
Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] – 3/27/2007
Rep Thompson, Bennie G. [MS-2] – 6/12/2007
Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] – 9/6/2007
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] – 1/24/2007
Rep Udall, Tom [NM-3] – 2/27/2007
Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35] – 1/29/2007
Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] – 1/24/2007
Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] – 1/24/2007
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] – 5/3/2007
Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] – 1/24/2007
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] – 1/24/2007
Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] – 1/24/2007
Here is a link to the Union Endorsers of Single-Payer HR-676. I didn’t want to post them all because there are 505! of them. If you want to see them all, click on the link.
_________________________________
http://unionsforsinglepayerhr676.org/union_endorsers
“HR 676 has been endorsed, (resolutions passed), by 505 union organizations in 49 states. Endorsers include 121 Central Labor Councils and Area Labor Federations and 39 state AFL-CIO’s (KY, PA, CT, OH, DE, ND, WA, SC, WY, VT, FL, WI, WV, SD, NC, MO, MN, ME, AR, MD-DC, TX, IA, AZ, TN, OR, GA, OK, KS, CO, IN, AL, CA , AK, MI, MT, NE, NY, NV & MA).
The following 20 International/National Unions have endorsed HR 676: USW, UAW, NEA, ILWU, NALC, IAM, UA (Plumbers & Pipefitters), AFM (Musicians), UE, CNA/NNOC, SMWIA, IFPTE, OPEIU, UTU, SEIU, AFT, AFSCME, CSEA (California School Employees Association), UWUA, & CWA.”
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:22 pm