BS: US Health Care Reform

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: mg
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 03:30 PM

I was trying to say people who complained about Medicare cuts were called fools, rather than they were fools. mg

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 01:54 PM

This is why I have mixed feelings about eliminating the filibuster. If the Republicans gain a majority in either house, and if they try to reverse the hard won reforms we get during the Democratic majorities, I hope the Democrats will filibuster like hell to prevent the Republicans from doing that.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: DougR
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 01:49 PM

Yes. I think it likely and probably their opportunity will come in 2010.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 10:46 AM

Can it be assumed that the Republicans will pledge themselves to reverse these reforms any time they are in a position to do so?

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 02:58 PM

The largest portion of folks that will not be covered, if today's Washington Post has is correct, will be illegal aliens and folks who chose to pay the fine rather than participate...

As for the Repubs not having a say in this??? The Repubs telegraphed their intentions a long, long time ago... I mean, if they wanted to be players they could have but they made the choice to obstruct and obstruct they did... This was all politics on their part hoping that things will go badly so they can get back in power and the the big donations that the party in power generally gets from the Fat Cats... This decision was a calculated risk for the GOP and one that may very well bite them on their ass...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 02:34 PM

As I recall,

1. Republicans were not informed of committee meetings.

2. Republicans were locked out of committe meetings

3. Republicans were not invited to the White House conferences that the Democrats were.

4. Republican amendments were killed without votes in committee.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 12:26 PM

"But even those Republicans who were initially inclined to do that -- and there were at least a handful of them -- were turned away by the White House and the Senate Democratic leaders, who never lifted their sights much beyond the Democratic ranks."

Any documentation for that? As I recall, there were lengthy committee meetings with all sorts of concessions to Republican demands. No GOP votes, though"

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 12:25 PM

"...people who complained about Medicare cuts were fools..."


                            Why?

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 09:20 AM

My apologies Bruce, those were David S Broder's words, not yours.

My response still stands though.

5/10 for improvement. Could do much better.

The bill, not Obama. I think he has such a mountain to climb that we should applaud him for reaching base camp.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 08:08 AM

""Six decades after FDR's death, one of his Four Freedoms will, at long last, be guaranteed to almost all Americans. And the shame of this affluent society tolerating the denial of health care to its citizens will be largely lifted.""

PARTIALLY Bruce......There's quite a way to go till you can say largely. As I understand it, with 30 million newly covered, there will still be 10 - 17 (depending on where you get the figures) million outstanding.

Not there yet, Buddy

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:50 PM

We should rejoice and not complain. Every one of us has a relative, if not ourselves, who will benefit. I don't like how they tried to make it sound like it would be seamless and painless and people who complained about Medicare cuts were fools, but the main thing is there is something.

I wish it was tied to a couple of things..people behaving themselves so there were way fewer drug problems and crime, people realizing that having children out of wedlock is contributing mightily to poverty and social ills. I hope it gets tied to reforms in food stamps, with a small amount monthly alloted for free choice, junk food, bad for you stuff, and the majority of food stamps tied into actual nutritious food, such as WIC already does..a bit too restrictedly but it labels foods in markets as OK for WIC. This will improve the health of people subsisting on unhealthy foods, and will have to be tied to making food available in their neighborhoods.

And it is pretty clear what causes diabetes and resulting huge health mess..too many starches essentially...sugars also being a problem but most bad carbs come from too much starch...knock that down..get good information out to people and health problems will be reduced. THen money can be saved. I doubt it will be for a while and I am quite happy to pay more taxes as well as taxes on my good health insurance to help it along. mg

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:09 PM

Washington Post


A health-care victory that stinks



By David S. Broder
Thursday, December 24, 2009

The health-care reform bill coming out of the Senate presents a real dilemma for spectators: How do you applaud while holding your nose?

As one who covered the Clintons' struggle 15 years ago to pass health-care reform and who wrote an overly long book about their failure to even bring it to a vote in a Democratic Congress, I am in awe at the prospect of such a bill making it all the way to the White House.

When implemented years from now, it promises to make as many as 30 million men and women who now live with the fear of illness or hospitalization leading straight to financial ruin eligible for the same care as their more fortunate, insured neighbors.

Six decades after FDR's death, one of his Four Freedoms will, at long last, be guaranteed to almost all Americans. And the shame of this affluent society tolerating the denial of health care to its citizens will be largely lifted.

But Lord, what a load of embarrassment accompanies this sense of satisfaction! What should have been a moment of proud accomplishment for the Senate, right up there with the passage of Social Security and the first civil rights bills, was instead a travesty of low-grade political theater -- angry rhetoric and backroom deals.


There's blame enough to go around. Start with the 40 Republicans, not one of whom was willing to break out of the mold of negative conformity and offer a sustained working partnership in serious legislative effort.

But even those Republicans who were initially inclined to do that -- and there were at least a handful of them -- were turned away by the White House and the Senate Democratic leaders, who never lifted their sights much beyond the Democratic ranks.

Forced to bargain for every vote among the 60 in his caucus, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid did what he usually does: He reduced the negotiations to his own level of transactional morality. Incapable of summoning his colleagues to statesmanship, he made the deals look as crass and parochial as many of them were -- encasing a historic achievement in a wrapping of payoff and patronage.

The taint has rubbed off on the bill. This week's Quinnipiac University poll found a majority of Americans disapproving of the legislation by 53 to 36 percent and an overwhelming number -- 73 to 18 percent -- saying they do not believe it will, as promised, reduce future budget deficits. It now becomes President Obama's responsibility to strengthen the bill's cost-saving features and present them in a better way. Two of them are vulnerable to attack when the bill goes back to conference with the House in January. Liberal Democrats do not like the independent commission in the Senate bill having power to enforce savings in Medicare and the private health system. And labor does not accept the Senate plan to tax high-end insurance plans.

Obama has not intervened with a heavy hand as the bill has moved through the House and Senate, but now it is time for him to act.

It would help a lot if he reached out personally to those few Republicans who might still want to improve the bill rather than sink it. And it would help even more if he shamed the Democrats into rescinding some of the crasser bargains they made to buy votes along the way.

The country would welcome even a few signs that this legislation has bipartisan support.

Then we could applaud its final passage and take our thumbs from our noses.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 12:46 PM

It hasn't come to pass yet. It still has to make it out of conference and the final version has to be voted on by both houses. Then the President has to sign it. Then it will have come to pass...

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 11:57 AM

Jim Bunning of Kentucky is the one GOP Senator who didn't vote. An ex-major league pitcher who is famous for saying, "When you've dealt with Ted Williams and Mickey Mantle and Yogi Berra and Stan Musial, the people I'm dealing with now (meaning members of Congress) are kind of down the scale,"

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 10:33 AM

Aren't we supposed to say "It has come to pass"?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 10:10 AM

Surprise, surprise...

I find it interesting that the Repubs, who promised to fight this bill to the bitter end, ended up negogiating with Harry Reid for an earlier vote so they could get outta town...

So much for bitter ends???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 10:07 AM

The Senate has passed the bill.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 09:23 AM

By the by, for all the BuShites whining about the projected cost of the health care bills pending, where's the outrage about the Pentagon Budget- $2,700 for every man woman and child in the Land of the Free[sic] in 2010 alone- rife with corruption, waste (remember the Pentagon admitted in 2000 that it had "lost" $2.3 trillion (yes trillion, sweetheart contracts for obsolete weaponry, etc etc.

$2.3 trillion would pay all the costs of completely universal health care for the duration PLUS the bank bailout,PLUS the stimulus package.

I guess "reality has a well-known liberal bias" after all.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 05:44 PM

Well, BB, if the new bill will cost more than 17% of GNP (which the budget office says it won't) it would at least cover a helluva lot more people than the present non-system, which woulsd likely exceed 17 also.

It's a bad bill, but it's a lot better than we have now. A good bill would be a political impossibility as long as the filibuster threat requires a 60% vote to accomplish anything

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 04:33 PM

"One thing for sure is that the US economy cannot be competetive if it continues to spend 17% of it's GNP on health care..."

So, when the NEW BILL costs OVER 17% of the GNP, what are you going to say???

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 04:26 PM

There's no doubt that it's not the best possible bill. It's still an improvement, though. A big improvement.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: michaelr
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 12:51 PM

From MoveOn.org:

Five Critical Flaws in the Senate Health Care Bill

The Senate bill would:
#1—Deny Americans the choice of a public option. In contrast, the House bill contains a national public option, the key to real competition, greater choice, and lower costs. (1)

#2—Leave insurance unaffordable for some lower income and working people. Both bills require virtually all Americans to buy insurance. But even with the subsidies provided, some families could have to pay up to 20% of their income on health care expenses. (2)

#3—Impose dangerous restrictions on women's reproductive health care. Unfortunately, both bills do this and the House provision is worse. Both versions would be a dangerous step and neither should be in the final bill. (3)

#4—Tax American workers' health coverage to pay for reform. The Senate would pay for part of reform by taxing the hard-won benefits packages of some working Americans. The House, on the other hand, pays for reform with a small surcharge on only the wealthiest Americans—a far better approach. (4)

#5—Allow insurance companies to remain exempt from anti-trust laws. Under current law, insurance companies are actually exempt from laws designed to prevent monopolies and price-gouging. The House bill would fix this, but the Senate bill leaves it in place. (5)

Of course, these aren't the only problems with the bill. Most glaringly, both the Senate and House bill would leave millions uninsured, (6) a far cry from the vision of universal coverage so many of us have fought for. That remains a long-term goal.
But these five things need to be fixed immediately—and we need to spread the word to make sure House and Senate leadership and the White House get the message we're counting on them to craft a final bill with these key fixes.

Sources:
1. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Public Plan," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85859&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=5
"The House Bill and the Senate Bill," The Now! Blog, December 21, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85861&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=6
"Why We Need a Public Health-Care Plan," The Wall Street Journal, June 24, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124580516633344953.html
"Why a public health insurance option is key to saving costs," Economic Policy Institute, June 25, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85866&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=7

2. "Assessment of Affordability Provisions in the Exchange in House (H.R. 3962) and Senate (H.R. 3590) Health Reform Bills," Health Care for America Now
http://hcfan.3cdn.net/46590729111c307ccc_lom6b3a6r.pdf
"Finishing Reform Right: Fixing affordability before the President signs a health care bill," The Now! Blog, December 22, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85867&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=8
"Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Individual Mandate," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85860&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=9
"The House Bill and the Senate Bill," The Now! Blog, December 21, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85861&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=10
"Senate health bill is launch pad," Jacob Hacker, December 22, 2009
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30871.html

3. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Abortion," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85862&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=11

4. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Paying for the Proposals," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85863&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=12

5. "Comparing the House and the Senate Health Care Proposals: Insurance Regulations," The New York Times, December 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85736&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=13

6. "H.R. 3962, Affordable Health Care for America Act," Congressional Budget Office, November 20, 2009
http://cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10741
"Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," Congressional Budget Office, November 18, 2009
http://cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=10731
"REPORT: How the Senate Bill Compares to Other Reform Legislation," Think Progress, November 19, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=85670&id=18404-1452401-LQPDZWx&t=14

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 10:28 AM

And that's the bottom line, Bobert. The US needs to bring down the "cost" of health cafe.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 08:37 AM

No matter, bb...

When the automobile came into existence there were nay-sayers who wouldn't ride in them because they *thought* (haha) that they were either evil or, like their daddies told them, that people would die if they were subjected to long periods of speeds greater than 28 miles per hour???

Then the nay-sayers said that Social Security would bankrupt the country... Same with Medicare... Same with, same with, same with...

Problem is that that is exactly waht nay-sayers do... They are always looking for calamity and chaos...

I'm not saying that this bill is perfect... It isn't... The insurance fat cats still purdy much got their way but, like Howard Dean, if there is that much opposition form the nay-sayers then there must be something good in it so I'm willing to give it a chance... One thing for sure is that the US economy cannot be competetive if it continues to spend 17% of it's GNP on health care...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 08:03 AM

I suspect it's a lot like tax reform. By the time the new program gets into play, sleazy accountants have already figured out how to beat the new regulations. In this case insurance wise-guys will have a number of years to figure it out.

                Before insurance companies were capitalized well enough to buy politicians, they used to call it the "protection racket."

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 02:33 AM

But there are limits in the Senate bill, beardedbruce. The insurance companies will have limits imposed on how much they can raise premiums.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:19 PM

"I am not against all health care reform, I am just against dumb health care reform!"


The increased COSTS of the new requirements WILL BE PASSED ON to the customers. If there is additional coverage, with no limits, the insurance companies will charge ALL customers more- which is allowed by both the bills.


Noone will be excluded- but the rates will be double or more of what we are presently paying.

AND we get fined if we do not buy it.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:13 PM

This is the part that worries me the most, Carol... The health insurance industry is made up of masterful crooks and lawyers who will scoure this bill and it won't take them anytime at all to figure out how to game the new system... Same as the banking industry... I say to put provisions in the bill that involves jail time for first offenses...

(But Boderdz... Isn't that over regulating???)

Well... Yes, it is and I thyink jail is all that corrks and lawyers understand... The banks still won't lend to anyone but other banks... Hey, we bailed them out... Same with the health insurance companies... And whatever happened to the 90% proposal rather than the 80%... If Midicare can operate on 3% then even if the crooks don't cheat they still will rake in hundreds of billions in profits by returning 80%... This is more corporate welfare...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 03:22 PM

I just realized a flaw in my reasoning. If the percentage can't go above a certain amount, they can raise the amount and stay within the percentage. However, the bill also limits on how much insurance companies can raise their rates. Which is another thing I like about the bill.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 03:07 PM

Insurance rates for everyone are going to rise without the bill. As they are doing now, exponentially, and have been doing for decades. The insurance companies don't need the excuse of more taxes to raise their rates. The only excuse they need (and use) is that they want more money and bigger profits. However, in the Senate bill, there is a cap on the percentage of the money they take in from those they insure that can go to toward things that aren't the provision of health care (and this percentage is lower than the one that exists currently). That means that there is a limit on how much of the premiums they can use for things like taxes (and profit, advertizing and lobbying costs, corporate jets and other expensive executive perks). This provision is one of the things I like about the bill.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 01:28 PM

Amos,

A pity that the bill(s) being considered do not do what Obama wants.

Insurance rates for everyone will rise- they have to.

In Maryland, the profit margin is regulated. When there are 400 billion in new taxes on the insurance companies, and they have additional expenses that they cannot put on the one incurring it ( ie, the pnes they charge extra for now) they will just raise ALL rates to cover the additional costs. NOTHING in either bill to avoid that.


So all the claims of no increased costs are bull.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Amos
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 09:59 AM

"There is a lot to like in the bill. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it would cover more than 30 million of the uninsured and would, by 2019, result in 94 percent of all citizens and legal residents below Medicare age having health insurance. That is a big improvement from the current 83 percent.

It also estimates that the bill would reduce deficits over the next decade by $132 billion and even more in the following decade. Despite all the exaggerated Republican rhetoric that the bill will lead to fiscal disaster, it has been carefully and responsibly drafted so that it is fully paid for without busting future budgets.

Important elements of the bill have been strengthened during the struggle. An independent board and other new entities would be given greater powers than previously planned to test and implement cost-saving measures free of political lobbying. Tax credits to help small businesses buy coverage have been expanded.

Insurance companies will be deterred from jacking up premiums just before the reforms take effect, prohibited from imposing lifetime limits on benefits and annual limits will be tightly restricted. Insurers will also be required to spend more on medical care and less on administrative costs and profits than they currently do.

The two big concessions that were made in the Senate were unfortunate, but not fatal. The original bill would have created a new public plan to compete with private ones. That was replaced with a likely weaker alternative: a couple of private plans that would be supervised by an obscure government agency that administers heath benefits for federal employees. The reform package should include a public plan, but the absence of one is not a good reason to vote against the bill.

The Senate flirted briefly with a proposal to allow people ages 55 to 64 to buy into the Medicare program to create competition to private plans on new insurance exchanges. The buy-in idea was intriguing, but it was never vetted carefully enough to analyze how it would work in conjunction with other reforms. Its elimination does not make the bill worth opposing.

In another concession, the Senate bill would allow states to ban the coverage of abortions by health plans sold on the new exchanges. Those exchanges will allow people who buy health insurance to choose from an array of private plans, with subsidies provided to help low- and middle-income people pay the premiums.

This amounts to deplorable interference by state governments into decisions that should be made by a woman and her doctor — and abortion rights groups are right to object. The implacable Republican opposition to reform, and obstruction from a handful of Democrats, have made this bill less effective and less fair than it might have been. Still, the United States Senate has a chance this week to get past the bickering and haggling that have robbed it of Americans' trust and pass a historic piece of legislation...." NYT

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: michaelr
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:36 PM

Yeah, thanks Amos, for quoting Obama's speech. My, he sure can talk good.

But the fact remains that this so-called "reform" is a huge gift to the insurance and drug corporations.

Women's abortion rights will be slashed.

People will be fined for not buying the corporations' "products".

Nothing positive is being accomplished here.

The man is a fraud, and so is this deal. It's business as usual, folks, I hate to say I told you so, but...

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:27 PM

"The insurance companies grab about 27% off the top."

                I suspect you're right about this, Dick, and that might even be a modest estimate. What I'm saying, though, that's not really a health care cost--of course it would seem to be to the consumer--it's more like an overhead cost and could be dealt with by other means.

               The way things are set up now, you have to go to a GP to get a referal to see a specialist, but there's a huge shortage of GPs, so that would be something to work on. What if the patient went to a Nurse Practioner to be refered to a GP, so people with sniffles and minor aches and pains wouldn't have to go any further?

               That might not work--I certainly don't know enough about it--but those are the kinds of practical measures that should bring down costs, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Amos
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 06:42 PM

"This marks the first time in our nation's history that comprehensive health reform has come to this point. And it appears that the American people will soon realize the genuine reform that offers security to those who have health insurance and affordable options to those who do not.

I'm grateful to Senator Harry Reid and every senator who's been working around the clock to make this happen. And I'm grateful to you, and every member of the Organizing for America community, for all the work you have done to make this progress possible.
After a nearly century-long struggle, we are now on the cusp of making health insurance reform a reality in the United States of America.

As with any legislation, compromise is part of the process. But I'm pleased that recently added provisions have made this landmark bill even stronger. Between the time when the bill passes and the time when the insurance exchanges get up and running, insurance companies that try to jack up their rates do so at their own peril. Those who hike their prices may be barred from selling plans on the exchanges.

And while insurance companies will be prevented from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions once the exchanges are open, in the meantime there will be a high-risk pool where people with pre-existing conditions can purchase affordable coverage.
A recent amendment has made these protections even stronger. Insurance companies will now be prohibited from denying coverage to children immediately after this bill passes. There's also explicit language in this bill that will protect a patient's choice of doctor. And small businesses will get additional assistance as well.

These protections are in addition to the ones we've been talking about for some time. No longer will insurance companies be able to drop your coverage if you become sick and no longer will you have to pay unlimited amounts out of your own pocket for treatments that you need.

Under this bill families will save on their premiums; businesses that would see their costs rise if we don't act will save money now and in the future. This bill will strengthen Medicare and extend the life of the program. Because it's paid for and gets rid of waste and inefficiency in our health care system, this will be the largest deficit reduction plan in over a decade.

Finally, this reform will extend coverage to more than 30 million Americans who don't have it.

These are not small changes. These are big changes. They're fundamental reforms. They will save money. They will save lives."

President Obama

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:38 PM

True enough, Bill... Ya' see, the fillibuster wasn't used all that much back then... The current batch of Repubs use it almost daily... That is why its time for the nuclear option as a way of bustin' up this little ballgame that the Repubs have perfected... They are making the Dems look like Boy Scouts when it comes to obstructionist tactics...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:25 PM

Rig-
The insurance companies grab about 27% off the top. Trimming that would be a large cost-reduction measure. Tort reform would help some--though perhaps less than you might think. Government-sponsored medical education would be a huge help, as would freeing the government to negotiate drug prices. A better centralized record-keeping system could be a major cost-saver, and preventing prescribing doctors from making money on needless tests would be another.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 03:15 PM

"...51 votes should be enough to get a bill thru the Senate..."

The Republicans sure thought so when passing massive tax cuts for the rich a few years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 02:01 PM

Yeah, Carol, the final bill has not passed and best estimate of when it will is Christmas Eve... But the 60-40 procedural vote, unless something even wierer than what we've seen allready occurs, is an indication that Leibermen and the "Other Three" have had s8ufficient lubricant thrown their way and it is pretty much a "done deal"...

And, Don, I think we are in agreement that 51 votes should be enough to get a bill thru the Senate...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 01:26 PM

Frankly, I don't think you can separate tort reform from excess testing, but anything that could be done on that front would be helpful. Also, the president has mentioned that consolidating medical records would lower costs, and there are probably a number of other things that could be done.

               Hopefully, Congress is thinking about keeping costs down, and not just pushing through a political agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 11:40 AM

I think it's worth noting, Riginslinger, that even if health care costs would be brought down, the insurance companies will continue to gouge the consumers and make their profit by denying care to those who need it, so whether or not they address the cost of care, they still need to address the price of insurance.

One of the reasons for the high cost of care is that doctors are financially incentivized to do more procedures than necessary (aside from the issue of malpractice considerations) because they are paid by the procedure rather than being paid for results. Fixing that situation would go even further toward bringing down the cost of care than tort reform would.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 11:34 AM

So the Senate bill hasn't passed yet. Last night's vote was just to prevent a filibuster (cloture vote). There's still a few votes that need to happen before the bill passes, some of which also require a 60 vote majority. They're hoping to get it done before Christmas. However, 60 Senators did vote for cloture last night.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:40 AM

Still there's quite a difference between controlling the cost of health care and bringing down the price of insurance premiums.
            If you simpy concentrate on insurance, you've not addressed the underlying cause.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 10:32 AM

""I agree with michaelr... Obama gets much of the blame here... If he doesn't roll up his sleeves and do some of the heavy liftin' he ain't gonna get anything important thru this Congress...

Plus, the Dem really need to explore the "nuclear option"... I think it's time for the Senate to become something other than the place where solutions go to die...""

I think that's less than fair, Bobert. You can't really blame Obama for failure to achieve, when the dice are so loaded it is almost impossible to succeed.

As long as all Repubs vote the Party line, (and who has seen them pay any attention to conscience in the last ten years), it just needs one Democrat dissident to block any Democrat bill. Given that at least two "Democrat voting" senators are, so we are told, suspect, there never is a chance of success in delivering any legislation that does not have Republican Party backing.

It ain't democracy guys! In a real democracy 51 percent is a winning majority, and until that pertains in both houses, then Democrat bills at least will just go there to die.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 08:05 PM

10-4, Carol....

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 08:05 PM

"'Cost of what? If they put limits on what the insurance companies can charge, how is that not "doing something to control cost"?'"

             The cost of health care. The cost of insurance is only part of the problem, and that's pretty easily dealt with. In order to do anything constructive over the long term, they need to do something about the cost of care itself.
             The best way to do that is to protect health care professionals and hospitals from frivilous suits. That would do away with a lot of what they are calling "defensive medicine." I would also lower the cost of malpractice insurance.
             If they kept the part in the bill about training more health care professionals, that would help too. I haven't heard how that part of the bill did. It was up against the AMA and others.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:31 PM

I don't have any problem with the bill getting passed through reconciliation. But some people are saying that process would have to get past a lot of committee heads who aren't very enthusiastic about the public option, which makes it more difficult that a lot of people think. That would probably be my first choice if it would work, though.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:24 PM

There is always the possibility of the bill going thru "reconciliation", Carol, that would, if I understand the process, only involve having to muster 51 votes... But, yes, the Senate must first pass something and then the fun begins...

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:19 PM

I don't think the Senate bill has passed yet. I think it's scheduled for a vote late tonight. However...

I was talking specifically about the Senate version, which needs to get passed before anything can go to conference. I'm all in favor of putting the good stuff back in the bill in conference, but I don't see any more chance of the final version of the bill going to a vote if it contains a public option than the Senate bill that they're about to vote on was able to. The final version of the bill will still have to get a 60 vote majority in the Senate, and Nelson has already said he won't vote for cloture if the final version contains the public option.

Subject: RE: BS: US Health Care Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:07 PM

Seein' as some version has passed both chambers of Congress it is now very much in the Dems hands... The Repubs have been bumped off the track by their own choosing... The two versions will have to be reconciled in order for the bill to go to Obama for signiture... So unless the House just rubber stamps the Senate's bill, something that is being referred to as "ping-ponging", then it's going to take some time to get it shaped up and reconciled... If it takes another couple months and comes out with some form of public option or better governemnt oversight of the pools then it is very concievable that over the long run it will save more lives than if it were just rushed thru as it is...

B~