Abortion in the Health Care Reform Bill: Who is telling the truth?
I am writing this somewhat wordy but pragmatic letter and hope it gets in the hands of someone who can make a clear evaluation and find it helpful or at the least noted as to one perspective to the current Health Care Debacle taking place and under careful consideration, could actually prove very beneficial and part of the future solution. I feel the Democrats are out to make a clear change for the good of the country and the Obama Administration is shaping up to be the best Administration I believe I have seen in my lifetime; however is having a clearly difficult struggle battling the concerns over healthcare. I voted for Obama and even made a contribution to the campaign which was the first time in my life to do so because I believe in his overall vision for the country. Currently I live in Tokyo, Japan, and am exposed to a very different healthcare system as well as have many friends from other developed nations who have socialized medicine, i.e. England, Canada, Australia, etc. I have had various debates and have a good understanding of these systems from the standpoint of their basic citizens and the rights thereof from these systems. Of all the countries, Japan has the most hybrid system between socialized medicine and our current system; however would not be a good political strategy to mention as a talking point. Actually these ideas should be applied as original ideas from the Obama administration to the public and will close this healthcare debate once and for all.
To get directly to my point, I feel the Democrats are doing what they always do, bring a good idea to the table (bring the right idea to the table) but back down based on pole numbers and a clearly, historically based fact, of not managing the emotions of the populous. With that being said, I feel many of Americas fears are superficial in nature and may not address a simple premise of government spending, influence and size. I pose the question, “if you add something, you take something away”, such as adding a public option and taking away the obviously broken, inefficient and burdensome Medicare system. This would have an overwhelmingly favorable impact on republicans and the right compromise with democrats and the masses of people who are looking for that right tax cut would be dancing in the streets. I understand we will be cutting a huge tax generator for the government but we will also cut off and stop the hemorrhaging of a government appendage that is infecting everyone as a whole. It is possible to subsidize those in the current system with the public option, under some “special program” and the democratic party has 3 years to win the Medicare constituency over, plus everyone will be satisfied to know they are not contributing to a possible other welfare system and the welfare system of others, and everyone can take care of themselves. The revenue generated in the public option should closely account for the loss of cutting the program, especially if there is a system where it is an availability for every small business, and for those who may not necessarily be able to purchase the public option program all the time can still fall under a special subsidization program under the public option program but maybe with premium adjustments in time. There could be grandfather clauses to alleviate the “the government is trying to pull the plug on granny“ debate. In order to offset the loss in tax revenue, include a tax incentive for those who have proof of insurance for the tax year and be adjusted accordingly if that is a concern with a favorable adjustment for those who do and an unfavorable adjustment for those who don’t; however if it is going broke it may be best just to cut the losses on it. The IRS has the people and infrastructure and can also be included in the debate to validate proof of insurance. That last point is a little complicated to wrap your head around but could make huge in rows in appealing to those who don’t like any of the current systems, who don’t like picking up the tab from one average American to another and don’t see a clear solution. I feel confident that in 3 years the Administration can satisfy its Medicare constituency and its proponents and this type of drastic change will, and I emphasize WILL, have a huge favorable reaction with the American populous as a whole.
As an additional selling point, Americans should be able to “double down” on their health insurance and drastic changes need to be set in motion as to insurance regulation reform. This is a version of the Clinton play book in areas such as telecom, etc; which WILL be good for the health insurance industry, and everyone as a whole and would probably have them off the governments back for a while because they will be too busy creating/selling and purchasing new products and helping to “stimulate the economy” in many many ways. This is not a non-manageable endeavor, just a little unorthodox. That is one good point about Japan’s current healthcare system, to include insurance products such as hospitalization and rehabilitation remuneration, double coverage, etc. People, in general, like to know they can get something back when paying so much into a system that does just that and actually make some money in the event of such a challenging time in their life and this adds a great since of security and satisfaction in those moments. By the way, this is a homerun idea that will leave a lasting hurt on the republican party and brand because everyone benefits as a whole but carries some of their self-reliance and capitalistic ideals. To add to this point and to expound on the “pre-existing” condition problem of the current system, legislation should also include a wide range of other procedures that are deemed not a necessity and allow coverage of these programs at a price to include allowing the private sector to compete for these dollars and to compensate for the losses they will be incurring with having to cover pre-existing conditions. This could even include aesthetic procedures with a regulatory consultation practice. Deregulating that industry but with the right quality of care in the minds of everyone involved is good for everyone. Personally, I don’t like the whole system but these are the right decisions for everyone as a whole.
I don’t quite agree with this but also monetary penalties could be put in place and deemed necessary by the doctor in the advent of non-life threatening problems clogging the emergency room system. A doctor is qualified to make that decision and should, which would help all commercial entities in the system and help the system as a whole in this day and age in curbing the mass influx of those who use the system. On another point with that debate, people have to work and can’t afford to lose a day’s work when their child has the flu and they sacrifice their sleep and wellness in order to go to work the next day but ensure their child is seen, diagnosed and put on the right treatment regimen. With that being said, maybe a system that rewards afterhours care facilities should be looked at such as a tiered payment system by the industry to the facilitators that addresses this.
I have a few other points to add about this and I don’t want to sound like I’m pulling only the positive points of other systems without recognizing the negative points, yet being that so many systems have been in place and for such a long period of time, I think we can get it right and my points could aid it.
A clear plan needs to be outlined with someone reading charts and tables, pros and cons, and an informative debate needs to be made with a clear vision. There is enough time to regroup and get this done this year and not to be rushed and to have people put in the corner on the issue without all the CLEAR facts. Open debates should be held with the public having easy access to make informed decisions and people should be thinking outside the box such as this letter. I have read the top 5 myths about the new reform and the stats on people polled regarding this debate. I would like to make a statement to the Democratic party as a whole that I am ashamed to see that they cannot debunk the death panel debate and strategically, they should look at and put resources into how to overcome this and future situations such as this. I’m sure they can get a good team of psychiatrists and marketing gurus to look at how their messages get drowned out by basic human emotions of fear and distrust. To add, the immigrant debate is a valid one but no one seems to be showing that who pays into the system only helps support the system in revenue, etc. and should get treatment accordingly. We can look at the Denver Olympics at those facts and it would actually be good for the system for allowing as many of those who can pay into it, do so; to include people with student visas and short term visas, etc. The new program should be run like a private system alleviating people’s fears of the government keeping tabs on them and regulating what they have and don’t have and maybe compare it to the postal system or collegiate education system.
In conclusion, thank you for taking the time to read this and would personally like to see how these above mentioned points would not work. I have solutions for some of the other internal problems plaguing the system but can’t remember them all at the time I’m writing this; however many of the new options are definitely headed in the right direction. I just felt compelled to offer my “.10¢” after seeing the reform offered getting slaughtered by the American public in the news and it seems more people are buying into the stats shown to them, therefore buying into some of the current falsehoods. By the way, if the right person reads this and finds it beneficial and would like to ask my opinion on other problems facing the system, please feel free to do so or debunk my points.
Over the past few months, I have taken the opportunity to meet other activists that are passionate about healthcare reform at various rallies to support either HR3200 (Obama's Public Option plan) or HR676 (Single Payer or what Obama would prefer "if starting from scratch").
Thus far, the main opposition to HR676 from the public option folks has been that they "don't think it has a chance..." so they "will settle for a public option."
The Single Payer option is alive and well and has sufficient congressional support to merit further discussion. I see no downside to discussing this third option alongside the public and status quo options. However, I have heard little serious discussion in the mainstream media and a general tendency for the media to also portray a "massive opposition" to reform thanks to a few dissidents at meetings.
Meanwhile, at healthcare rallies around the country, thousands of real supporters of healthcare reform have received little airtime to discuss the important aspects of either HR3200 or HR676 in a logical and rational fashion. Instead, the jokers, laughers, yellers, and shouters have made a circus of this opportunity to avoid coverage of the most important legislation in the history of America.
I don't want to see supporters of healthcare reform to get divided on the issue of the public option vs. the single payer since our goals are similar, we want real care and we want it now.
So why am I for HR676 over HR3200? Perhaps it's a lack in faith of free market economics... maybe I don't think the corporate interests will be compassionate enough or that the government will leverage the public option hard enough to be successful. With a Single Payer plan, I have faith that with all people covered, that we can eventually achieve a higher quality of life, through greater preventitive care measures that will lead to better health and cost savings.
How will we pay for it? With 31% of every healthcare dollar going to for-profit insurance companies that have a fiduciary responsibility to earn profits for their shareholders, they have little incentive or responsibility to ensure care. To the contrary, it is more accurate to say they have a responsibility to deny care to increase profit margins so they can ensure a return on investment to their stakeholders. Eliminating this profiteering from the system is essential to improving the ethos of healthcare in the US. No one should profit off of someone else's misery.
We've bailed out the banks, insurance companies, the carmakers... when will we help bail out ourselves to ensure a quality of life in the future through improved healthcare?
Please visit www.pnhp.org to learn more about HR676.
Please comment on this post to discuss your real concerns with healthcare for all.
Health Care Reform - Former Rear Admiral Rep. Joe Sestak Vet benefits and VA would be increasedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C7MnTdbf84 (video)
Bush administration kicked out about 265,000 vets in 2003 and now it’s about 500,000 vets.
Bush administration cut funding to VA2 billion in 20032 billion in 20042 billion in 20052 billion in 2006
The Obama health care reform brings them back in.
VA gets an 11% increase over 5 years and it’s the largest increase in it’s history.
VA is exempt from the 2.5% tax.
which one is better for the economy?A healthy population.OrA sick population.And how does that effect productivity, absenteeism, and the economy?
Does extending coverage to another 40 million people create more demand for services and create jobs?
Do incentives for the wealthy to use their health care coverage and increase them result in more services and growth in the medical industry?
Do lowering health care cost result in people having more money to spend which stimulates the economy?
What is the cost or negative impact on the US economy when 1 million families go bankrupt a year?
What is the cost or negative impact on the US economy when a person dies from lack of coverage and what is the dollar value of a person’s life?
Is The root cause of health problems and increasing health care costs in the U.S. due to the U.S. diet (obesity epidemic, heart and stoke, cancer).
Does The deteriorating health of the U.S. population indicate that there has been some kind of failure by the medical community or some kind of contribution to it?
questions are alway a good way to start.
That a powerful statement. Can the President deliver for all Americans. That means you and I, color or race, young or aging gens, and rich or poor. Imaging not having to worry about health care for yourself or family. The President wants health for all Americans. That's great news for us to be included in the President's agenda. He is fighting for you and I so we do not have to fear not being able to purchase our medication or not be denied coverage for health coverage. It does matter what pre-existing condition you have. We finally have a choice to decide which doctors we see and if money is a problem we have choice to public options. How can you not support President Obama's three principles: reduce cost, guarantee and affordable for all Americans. What else is left? The vote in Congress is your turn. Stand up for Health Care Reform! Sit down for Health Care! but Do something for Health Care Reform.
Mr. President, I worked very hard, spending many hours and had contributed monetarily as much as I could afford on a fixed income, to get you elected. Now, I feel you have let us all down on so many of your promises; especially, concerning affordable health care for all. Please, if you can find the time, go to this link and hear my (and most of the people in our nation's) pleas...
http://thinkingblue.blogspot.com/2009/06/petition-to-pres-obama-god-bless.html
EXCERPT:
"I have been signing petitions such as this one for healthcare reform, for years. Still the problem exists. What I would like to know is... Why? Why does such shameful neglect and uncaring occur in a country like ours? Why are so many of our people left to suffer?
We are no longer a country “of the people, by the people” we are a country of “the big business/big lobbies, by the big business/big lobbies”. They are the true owners of this land and greed will continue to step on and over those who outnumber the greedy few at the top, millions of times over. Even when they flagrantly and arrogantly fail, they succeed and go on conducting their greed in the same manner.
God bless America, MY FOOT!" http://thinkingblue.blogspot.com
Also on: http://www.youtube.com/user/thethinkingblue
There are roughly 306 million Americans, more than 47 million of whom have no health insurance. That's 1 in 6 Americans, who only seek medical attention in Emergency Rooms, when their stuation is dire. They do not receive preventive care, which is ultimately a fiscal disaster. 60 million Americans have inadequate access to primary health care. 100 million don't have dental insurance. Last year, 116 million ailing Americans fore-went care because they couldn't afford the deductables, were under-insured, or had a lapse in coverage. In 2008, over a million Americans lost their homes, directly attributable to medical bills. Did you know that 2/3 of all personal bankruptcies are related to medical bills? Who pays in the end? We all do.
The US spends $2.3 trillion each year on health care, 16 percent of our GDP. Americans spend $7,129 per person on health care, 50 percent more than other industrialized countries (including those with universal care). Canada spends 10% of it's GDP on health care, England 9%, and France 11%. Yet, we rank roughly 37th in the world, in regard to the quality of our health care (France ranks #1, England #18, and Canada #30). 30% of every insurance dollar goes to paperwork and administration fees. Still, in 2006, the six largest insurance companies made $11 billion in profits, even after paying for direct health care costs, administrative costs, and marketing costs. The number of health insurance industry bureaucrats has grown at 25 times the growth of physicians in the past 30 years. We all know that much of the industry profits come from the arbitrary exclusion of "pre-existing conditions", and terminating people's insurance once they experience a serious illness.
Barack Obama's health insurance plan purports to reduce insurance costs by 30% (more than $350 billion per year, enough to provide comprehensive coverage to every uninsured American). He plans to eliminate "pre-existing condition" restrictions. And most criticaly, provide a public health care option. The current Republican tactic, is to call this plan socialism, because it is a loaded term, calculated to scare people. The fact is, police and fire departments are socialized. And your health is a more fundamental right than both of those. Sooner or later, we will all need help from social safety nets, such as Social Security. With health insurance, what we are effectively talking about, is broadening the OPTION of a form of Medicare and Medicaid to everyone. This will cause private insurance companies to respond more reasonably to their clients, and to reduce their rates to be more competitive. The GOP says that Medicare is expensive. The fact is, that Medicare's administrative costs are far lower than any private health insurance plan. The GOP also complains that government run programs are a disaster. Funny they don't feel that way about the government run insurance plan that Congressmen have.
Keep in mind, that privatised health care, introduces the model of profit (with expensive ads that we ultimately pay for). The whole point of profit, is to give as little as possible, for as much as possible. That's no way to address your health. Fun fact: The pharmaceutical industry is the single largest advertiser in America. This might be why the health care industry is spending 100 MILLION DOLLARS (1.4 million dollars a day) to lobby against and kill the public health care option. Their latest tactic is the "trigger option". Don't buy it.
And don't be fooled. Public health insurance DOES work well in Canada, England and France. Yes, one can always find an exception to harp on for political ends. When you research it, it becomes clear that the vast majority of people in these countries are quite satisfied with their health care. Notice that the opposition to public health care, is all about fear, scare, pessimism, status quo, defeatism. Ask about alternative ideas, and you hear silence. Fact is, approximately 73% of Americans want some version of a public health care option "like Medicare/Medicaid".
Another Republican talking point, suggests that a public healthcare option would take health care out of the hands of patients and their Doctors. In fact, that's exactly what we have now. We all know that insurance companies routinely deny coverage for tests, surgeries, and medications. I have personally experienced insurance company kangaroo appeal decisions, where they are the sole arbiturs of a judgement. As I write, though I'm insured by Aetna, I have to wait 6 weeks to see a neurologist that will accept my insurance.
You want to put a human face on this? My daughter was born this past September 28th with a recessed jaw. Her medical bills thus far are over a half MILLION dollars. She easily has another half million in surgery ahead of her. This is insanity. My 6 month old daughter should not be forced to live an obscene legacy of helplessly and unwittingly running her family into poverty. It simply breaks my heart.
It is woefully overdue for people to have a public health choice available to them. Yes, lobbyists and other rats are lining up to fight it, because lower costs, means lower profits for them. It's time they stop running the show. People have suffered enough. My wife and I have suffered enough. Damn the politics. It's time to act civilized. It's time for decency. People need to support Barack Obama's public health option, NOW.
But no person, including Barack Obama, can do this alone. He needs the will of the people. This means that he needs your two cents. A "letter to the editor", blogging, signing petitions. Many people putting in two cents will create the foundation, momentum, and mandate that Barack needs to press his case. We can do this historic thing. Yes we can. Let's go get em.
All Good Things,
Greg
PS - How countrys rank in health care;
Whatever you call it ... single payer, universal health care, or socialized medicine; the special interest groups have Americans so frightened and conditioned to getting screwed that we have become a nation of cattle. So let's make this simple. Would an insurance company rather earn $1.00 or $2.00? You know the answer.
Many of you perhaps have wonderful insurance coverage through your employer. I wonder how quickly socialized medicine would look good to you if you lost your job? And yes, we have all heard that stupid story that there is only one MRI machine per/province in Canada. First of all, it's not true and, second, Canada is not the only civilized country to have a successful national healthcare program. Bankruptcy from hospital bills is virtually unheard of in advanced countries such as Japan, Switzerland, Taiwan, Germany, France, etc.
It is nothing short of inhumane that America, the country that touts itself as the greatest country on the face of the earth, leaves so many of its citizens without access to proper care. The insurance lobbyists tell you that you don't want bureaucrats between you and your health care, making life and death decisions. What do you think you have now? You have an 18 year old numbers cruncher at an insurance company deciding whether you are a candidate for a liver transplant or whatever. To use an old phrase, if an insurance company executive's lips are moving, they are probably lying.
If a government run system isn't good enough for some of you with deep pockets, then you can go to so-called "boutique" doctors and hospitals. The rest of us will be happy just to get decent basic care.
This is from my father and me:
I have aortic stenosis, my father had a brain tumor. This is our story as quick as possible. Zack Edwards - I was born with aortic stenosis, I had open heart surgery with a technique from Europe and had to have it removed after only 7 years. When I went in to an appointment 7 years after that operation the doctor said that he would need to remove it and replace it with another valve. We scheduled the appointment for two weeks. The surgery cost over $100,000 and I paid less than $2000. I was very happy with my insurance. I have asked friends in England and Canada, about their healthcare and asked them a question that worries me very much. If I get to a certain age will I be able to get these surgeries as readily as possible. They all have said "no." They talk of lists and waiting periods and how sometimes you have to get second and third opinions to get on those lists. Is this what will happen to us in the United States, especially since I hear we are modeling our health care after their "failed" programs. My dad had a brain tumor three months ago and when the doctor saw him with this left side complete paralyzed. The doctor told his nurse to get him a bed and told my dad, that if they didn't get him into surgery the wheel chair he was in would be a permanent fixture. The tumor was the same as Ted Kennedy's and the doctor he used was on Ted Kennedy's substitute doctor list, one that is contacted if the other doctors are unavailable. My dad waited two days and was operated on. The doctor who had just operated on a surgeon from a country with Universal Healthcare the day before. The doctor had to wait and so paid a friend in the United States to do his operation. My father's doctor said that if he was in any other country he would have had to wait, even in this type of emergency. Wait for what approval. He is over 60 years old and could not wait a few days or risks permanent paralysis. Also with the shortage of doctors, inserting universal healthcare and lowering their wages will decrease the doctors we already have. Please President Obama, if you hear our voices do not make our healthcare universal or as some say socialized medicine. I beg you and so does my dad, who is now back up and walking, soon to be commercial fishing again in a few months.
Okay, so this morning a report comes out on www.AmericanParchment.com that the President of Mexico is telling everyone to stay home. Interesting though. If the President of Mexico tells everyone to stay home, that would mean less people should be going across the border by walking, flying, or driving, right. So in his own efforts, he has tried to close the border. Something our Napolitano isn't even willing to do. How can she say it would be ineffective. If you had a cold wouldn't you try every way to keep from getting sick, like taking Zicam, Cold-Ease, drinking a lot of water, etc. Wouldn't closing the border and/or allowing only American Citizens to cross the border after a thorough check help cut down on the possibility of keeping the cold or spreading it to others??? In addition, doesn't a WHO Level 5 Pandemic Protocol call for borders to be closed to stop the spread it the disease?
Please Mr. President close the border. Help us and keep our record of no deaths, minus one person from Mexico. We need to contain the problem. Commerce at the border can hold on.
I am tired of this misinformation campaign on our current healthcare system. In 1991 during an examination for hemorrhoids, I was diagnosed with polyps. The doctor I was allowed to see by my insurance carrier at the time cauterized the hemorrhoids during the polypectomy procedure, painlessly and cheaply (less than $500).
In 1995 my company changed insurance carriers and I was not allowed to see this doctor anymore. I could not find one in the new system that performed this procedure, After several followups for the polyps without this treatment my hemorrhoids developed to the point of requiring surgery in 1998. Beside the pain invovled in the recovery, it took over a month out of work and cost thousands for the surgery.
Where is the choice of doctors? Where is the choice of procedures? Where is the cost savings by not allowing this problem from being treated in a preventative manner?
This is where my hope lies with Pres. Obama's reform of healthcare. Procedures like this will be promoted as part of the preventative measures they are talking about. This is another area where savings can come from. In my case for this one problem that amounts to thousands.
Excerpts from a recent interview with Dr. Karri Cardinal of Cardinal Chiropractic in San Francisco, who answers the question "Why do you think that Barack Obama and even Arnold Schwarzenegger view Chiropractic treatment to be an important part of their health care system?"
