Short of the Magic

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has a Brilliant plan for fixing the Health Care System:

"If you want [Quality Coverage], Go Work for the Federal Government."

At least, that was the answer that Grassley offered up at a town hall meeting in Waukon, Iowa on Tuesday after a constituent asked the senator why he is unable to find good, affordable health insurance like the kind senators get.

Despite the fact that Grassley himself enjoys the benefits of the federal government's excellent public insurance policy, the senator has been avocal opponent of including a public option in any health care plan.

Grassley's stance, incidentally, flies in the face of the opinions of his own Iowa constituents, a majority of whom say they would like to see a public health insurance option.

After sharing his family's personal struggle with the burden of high health care costs, an audience member asked, "My question is... why is your insurance so much cheaper than my insurance and so better than my insurance?"

The question made Grassley cranky.

He responded, first, by suggesting the questioner "go work for John Deere," since they "don't pay anything" for their insurance plan.

When the questioner refused to let the senator wriggle out of answering the question, Grassley revealed how little he knew about his own insurance plan.

Another audience member had to help the senator out by describing the details of the plan. After she finished, the original questioner again asked, "Okay, so how come I can't have the same thing you have?"

Grassley's response: "You can. Just go work for the Federal government."

Interesting article, but IMO you are wrong to even mention whirehouse visions of a thriving marketplace for health care. We need to go to war against insuranc companies. Why? Because they suck and are motivated only by profits. Sure some have decent corporate citizenship, but they simply do not have my, your, or our interests at heart. We do NOT need a "thriving marketplace" when it comes to health care. We need UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, period! Why battle over these half-assed measures when all our competition (excepting China) have some kind of universal health care? We need to adopt the best of the German, French and UK/Canadian systems. It WILL save money over what we currently have, and we might actually better our current numbers for infant mortality and lifespan. . BTW, I HATE Senators & Congress people that keep saying "we" don't want a bureaucrat between us and our doctors. I prefer a federal bureaucrat over ANY insurance company bureaucrat ANY DAY!! oh, and those politicians have a super health plan, paid WITH OUR TAXES!!! they need to shut the h#ll up.

Most people do not consider that who the President selects for his cabinet must be approved by the Senate so this has to be considered when he makes a choice . The same is true of laws and programs . The congress controls the money and makes the laws and the President can only try to convince . Regarding health care ; The "public option" was dreamed up by someone to benefit Wall Street and has saturated the media with this debate . The real truth is "health care providers" cause insurance rates to increase and the same thing will happen with the "public option" as it has with medicare . And Wall Street (GOP) can destroy the "public option" insurance program as they have been doing with medicare . Before RR we had many low cost government clinics and hospitals and he dismantled them so the AMA would not have the competition these low cost health systems offered . A governemnt insurance program will be a failure unless the AMA has competition and many know this but do not have the voice to oppose the media sponsored "public option" . You can bet your socks if the media is pushing it Wall Street wants it .

pauljeb.

"The Lefties have a problem with Iraq, not me"

Thank you pauljeb for making our point. We "Lefties" have long argued that the Right comveniently ignores fiscal irresponsability (the real kind) when is them doing it, and become grandstanding defender of government spending when they feel a Democrat plan will do it.

In your eyes pauljeb there's no problem if our nation spends what the GAO reported to be an ultimate cost of 3 trillion Dollars of expenses in Iraq, and Iraq releated debt (to the Chinese) in a war that was absolutely not needed. You don't have a problem from American taxpayers money (many of them unemployed today) going to pay for your "mistakes were made", to a country that as of last year was showing surpluses.

But you do have a problem if American taxpayers that supported your lovely little war with their hard earned money, ask to keep their health care insurance if they loose their job, or ask to keep their health care insurance if they do get sick !!!!

Now that's a problem for you pauljeb !!!!

And then the Right used to enjoy calling the Left "traitors" on Iraq........ Pauljeb , I don't know you, and I can't say if you were one of these name callers, but I do know this. A traitor by definition is one that betrays his/her country , not one that questions his/her leaders. In my book you can question Obama's policies/plans all you want, but don't you dare to question the validity of American "Lefties" to ask for the same rights you felt you had to waste 3 trillion on Iraq "mistakes were made" , and spend them on America instead.

Maibe the Right has a future after all......... In Iraq.

As pointed out here Medicare is a government insurance program and WallStreet (GOP) has assaulted it from every angle . Medicare Eligibles also receive a Social Security check from which a Medicare payment is deducted . Every year that medicare payment increases . When the Eligibles receive medical care the provider bills medicare for much more than medicare and the supplimental insurance pays leaving the Eligibles with a large out of pocket obligation which also increases every year at a rate much higher than the Eligibles incomes . This points out that the health care providers are the main reason for sky rocketing health care costs and another insurance program will do nothing other than enhance the incomes of the providers while it goes broke . When RR became Gov of Cal he did a lot of damage to all of the educiation anf health care programs and when he and his VP GHWB took over the US Gov they continued the destruction of the programs at the federal level . This public option is nothing more than a flim flam charade played by the media and congress . Before the era of RR and GHWB which includes WJC there were many good health care and education programs and if the objective now is to provide affordable health care for the masses then the only way is to reinstall the destroyed health care programs we had prior to the RR era and also cancel his tax cuts for the rich . Otherwise we will be handing our next generation our problem .

The democrats could have 70 votes, and it still wouldn't matter - if we don't have a fundamental shift in the way we think about and fund health care, we will continue to grow fatter, poorer and sicker. Regardless of whether it is a medicare bureaucrat, a health insurance company nurse, or a fee-for-service doctor, Americans haven't had good decisions about their health care in decades, because it isn't about health, it's about the money.

The old fee-for-service system taught us that doctors are lousy businessmen, and the doctors got richer while the patients got poorer. The managed care system taught us that businessmen are lousy doctors, and the businessmen got richer while the patients got poorer. Under both systems, it was all about the profits; the patient was a distant second.

It hasn't been about good health in quite some time.

Neither the democrats nor the republicans have proposed any decent reforms that put the patient first, and the profits second.

Until someone does, we won't have reform, we'll just have reshuffling - of power, money and misery.

russporter.

The web sites you mention do not, I repeat DO NOT contradict the story by CNN . Medical expenses is indeed the leading cause of personal backrupticies in America, and that is a FACT.

A fcat I might add, that the Right continue to ignore when grand standing about the glories of our beloved private system, that give us such easy access, and great coverage....... Provided you can pay for it that is. Unfortunately since about half our population has been left behind, and simply can't afford health care insurance any more, then ovbiously the benefits of the system become a mute point.

Or to put it in other words is like saying that a Lexus car has the best reliabilty, and luxury, and technology in the automotive market, and thererefore we most continue to buy it , instead of the Toyota Camri the Government is trying to make us get. In the end a Camri will do the exact same job than the Lexus does at half the costs. Granted no GPS, or back off camera..... But who can buy a Lexus these days?

That's our system for you Republicans. You keep on asking Americans to get a Lexus, knowing full well about half of us can't affor it.

PBS Video: Titled 'Sick Around The World'

America You'd Better Wake Up...

America's the Most Expensive Health Care System in the World and the Cost is [Climbing]

Video Link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/video/flv/generic.html?s=frol02p101&continuous=1


5 Capitalist Countries & National Health Care:

Link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/

President Obama is Right, Health Care in America Can't Wait.

Let's be clear, and honest about health care in America. First of all we do not have the best health care in the planet, just the most expensive one. It is true that those that can afford it will indeed get the best care in America, but is that not the same in every industrialized nation?

I absolutely agree with bkrummel when he said that our arguments as presented by our leaders are extreme choices of "yes" , or "no" , of "good", or "bad" .... And reality is never like that. But this is done by politicians on purpose to obfuscate the issues into partisanship warfere, and as a consecuence ultimate failure, and inaction. The real true is that the combined power of the HMO's, Insurance, and Pharmaceutical companies can, and will stop with Lobbyst efforts, and marketing campaigns any attempt at changing the system in a meaningful way. Billions will be spent to buy politicians, and mobilize the usual Right WIngers, to do nothing, and continue the business as usual practice of sky rocketing health care costs, while the Right complains about "fiscal irresponsability " by the Democrats.

In the end what we have is a monster of our own creation. The health care industry is too powerfull, and influential to die. ANd the health care industry will continue to demand an ever increasing share of our GDP untill we go bankrupt as a country. .... Or some one has the vision to listen to people like bkrummel , and say; Why can we have a private industry that trives in conjunction with the government as the rest of the planet has ? Why can we demand that the condition for the private industry to continue to do business in America is, and will be PRICE CONTROLS ?

If Republicans want a private system why don't they demand a CAPITALIST type of competition where the markets of supply, and demand are in line with reality? As we stand today the health care industry simply has no competition. Rates are set by them in a monopolistic way, the government authorizes them, and the rip off of America continues.

Think about this. Every comany in America has to compete in a global free market environment giving us TRUE CAPITALISM ....... Except the health care industry. You think that's by accident? But they call people that want reform "socialist" .

Get Your Facts On What President Obama & VP Biden Views on [Health Care]

De-Program Yourselves from Republican Scare Tactics or Non Talking Points.
------------------------

http://www.factcheck.org/politics/government-run_health_care.html


A conservative group's ad implies Congress is on its way to instituting a British- or Canadian-style health system.
Summary

A group called Conservatives for Patients' Rights began airing a television ad this week that criticizes government-run health care and falsely suggests Congress wants a British-style system here in the U.S.:

* The ad neglects to mention that President Obama hasn't proposed a government-run plan and, in fact, has rejected the idea.

* It claims that a research council created by the stimulus bill is "the first step in government control over your health care choices." The legislation actually says the council isn't permitted to "mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies."

* The ad quotes a Canadian doctor who has been critical of his country's system, but leaves out the fact that the doctor has praised other government-funded systems, such as those in Austria and France.
-----------------------------

Obama hasn???t called for such a government-run plan, also called a ???single-payer" plan. In fact, he has flatly rejected it. The administration has said on the White House???s ???Health Care??? Web page (and previously on its transition site) that ???President Obama and Vice President Biden believe??? that government-run health care is ???wrong.??? And they also believe, the administration says, that the other extreme, ???letting the insurance companies operate without rules,??? is wrong.

(The White House redesigned its health care page on April 30; a cached page with the quoted language is attached to this article.)

Obama has long said he would allow individuals or small businesses to buy insurance through a public plan ??? like the one now available to members of Congress. But nobody would be forced to drop his or her current insurance, and private plans would exist as they do now. This was the health care plan he promoted as a presidential candidate.

As we pointed out several times during the campaign, Obama's proposal was mischaracterized as a Canadian-style plan by his opponents. In Canada and Britain, all citizens have health care coverage, provided by the government and paid for with taxes. Only two Democrats ran for president on a single-payer platform: Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who called for "Medicare for all," and former Sen. Mike Gravel. Clarification, May 1: Gravel has called his plan a ???single-payer Health Care Voucher plan,??? paid for by the government. But advocates have said it???s not a true single-payer plan, since private insurance would still play a role.

While concerns about costs should not be ignored, a hybrid system of public and private options is the only way the market will reform itself - this is why AMA and insurance industry does not like it - it takes away a lot of their power.

www.politifacts.org or www.politifacts.com

Politi-Facts:Paul Krugman says,Health Care Plan are "Less than the $1.8 Trillion Cost of the Bush Tax Cuts."

Even High Estimates for an Early Draft of the Health Care plan are "Less than the $1.8 Trillion Cost of the Bush Tax Cuts."

[True]
-------------------------

Politi-Facts:TheCongressional Budget Office Estimates a Cap-And-Trade Program would Cost the Average Family the Equivalent of "a Postage Stamp a Day."


Says the Congressional Budget Office estimates a Cap-And-Trade Program would cost the Average Family the Equivalent of "A Postage Stamp a Day."

[True]

How to pay for health care? Simple...lower the costs across the board with tort reform as part of the package. How about getting ALL the major players who have created our current system that's crushing our entire economy to contribute...including lawyers.

Insurance companies should charge less...and they can if they don't have to guard against catastrophic punitive damages.

Doctors should be able to accept less for each procedure...and they can if they don't have to cover exorbitant liability insurance made necessary by threat of lawsuits.

Doctors shouldn't be ordering exhaustive, and unnecessary, tests to guard against lawsuits...and they can if meritless lawsuits become a thing of the past.

Pharmaceuticals should be able to make a reasonable profit to encourage development of new drugs without bankrupting families who need medications to stay alive...and they can if they don't have to fear losing the company over a single, punitive, jury award.

We can achieve all this with two changes:
1) juries can only award for economic damages (no punitive damages and no, or limited, awards for pain and suffering). Injured parties would be compensated, but we would no longer allow punitive damages for deterrence. The appropriate penalty to deter behavior is not the purview of 12 unelected jurors...deterence for society's benefit is the job of elected officials who way the pros and cons on society...and answer to the people for their decisions.
2) whoever loses in a civil court case, pays court costs. Simple, effective way to clear away thousands of meritless lawsuits that clog the system and increase the cost of every product and service produced in America.

I only hope partisan politics doesn't yet again kill health care reform. I have to believe that there is a way to rein in the insurance companies, bring them to the table with doctors and congresspersons to find a creative solution to this issue. Why not tear down the entire system and rebuild it? The solution to this, and many other issues, lies in simply working together as a nation to fix it. The general public now is waking up to the fact that self-interest in the auto, financial and insurance industries is ruining the country. That's why we've elected Obama and asked him to find progressive means to solve these problems. Those like Gingrich who scream and use "scare" tactics to stop reform are not truly interested in American ideals or in helping fellow Americans.