Last night, Nate concluded that, based on what is likeliest to happen to his approval ratings in the coming 18 months, Barack Obama’s optimal window for aggressive agenda-setting is 2009 (“it makes a lot of sense for Obama to be pursuing a very ambitious agenda right now”).
Today marks the beginning of the White House Health Reform Summit. In an ambitious East Room speech beginning now (1pm Eastern), Obama states definitively, “[O]ur goal will be to enact comprehensive health care reform by the end of this year.” He’s all-in.
“Health care is no longer just a moral imperative, it is a fiscal imperative,” Obama says.
By so clearly delineating his intention to sign legislation in the next 10 months, the White House is ignoring the “cable chatter” and the vogue-of-the-week “overload” buzzword. It surely knows that a major benchmark tied to those approval ratings will be Obama’s effectiveness in shepherding the process forward. It’s doubtful that voters would penalize him for a slop factor of a couple extra months, particularly if there are unexpected signs of economic turnaround, but there isn’t much more room based on the clarity in this speech.
This means Obama has two choices: (1) accomplish the sweeping goal he’s laying out; or (2) make it clear through an aggressive use of the bully pulpit that he’s doggedly on the job, in the event Congress balks and thwarts the effort. If he can’t do either one of these things, with (1) clearly being preferable to (2), voters will hold him accountable.
Significantly, the reform must be ambitious for him to get credit. He’s referencing Teddy Roosevelt, 100 years of health buildup, and deriding “tinkering.” Voters will know the difference between a tinker and change you can believe in, and Obama seems to understand that.
The speech is clearly one the White House feels good about. Calling the exploding cost of health care, “one of the greatest threats… to the very foundation of our economy,” Obama blames “failures of will, or Washington politics, or industry lobbying” as the culprit for the current crisis.
As has become a recent trademark, Obama cites an election mandate to justify the aggressive goal. While he will listen to many viewpoints and insists “[t]here will be no sacred cows,” Obama strongly warns that this effort will not be hijacked by oppositional will. “The status quo,” he says, “is the one option that is not on the table.”
“I am here today because I believe that this time is different.”
His chips, now pushed forward on the clean green felt, tell us he knows this hand is make-or-break.
3.05.2009
Obama Bets Big on Sweeping Health Care Reform in 2009
@ 1:05 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
104 comments
It really does seem sometimes that Obama is learning some of the lessons of the Clinton Administration. It always seemed to me like Clinton hedged on Health Care reform, palming it off to his wife and taking really a long time over what was a fairly central plank in the 92 Democratic Party Platform. He has shown a willingness to listen to military leaders, has plenty in his stimulus to keep the left well mollified, and he isn't taking the rightwing windbags like Limbaugh lying down.
Health Care reform really could be something that cements Obama's reputation. Boldness is worthwhile on this issue.
I don't know how sweeping it will be, as he has said it will stay within the private insurance framework.. focusing on 'lowering costs'.
Well, as long as there are four levels of profit in every healthcare delivery, it will always be overpriced.
All-in with K-10 offsuit. We don't know the GOP's hand on this. I hope he tries to get 60 votes not 70-75. Good luck, and I'm hoping for the best.
It needs to get done.
To me, it seems like Obama is taking advantage of his political capital with a shock and awe MO, and I love it. He's jabbing with his left hand at the Repubs by calling Rush Limbaugh their de facto leader (I know it was Emanuel who actually said this, but same difference). Meanwhile, as the GOP is distracted from its message because of infighting, he is preparing the uppercut with his good hand. They will be too out of sorts to be able to block it, and possibly down for the count even if they do because of another rout in 2010. They are SO screwed.
Haha, I'd say we're a little better than the K-10 offsuit.
with 58(59) Senators, and the most ambitiuos and pragmatic Democratic president in half a century...
I'd give us at least Ace Queen of hearts.
Besides, according to his friends and colleagues, Obama is a LEGENDARY poker player. He has all the percentages memorized and he is nearly impossible to beat over along game.
:-)
Very nice write up.
Yay! More costly programs to increase the deficit! Perfect! Just what we need!
Can we slow down and help the economy turn first? This "never waste a good crisis" is getting old and is not a reason for this.
Wayward Son wrote, "Well, as long as there are four levels of profit in every healthcare delivery, it will always be overpriced."
I tend to agree. I believe that a great deal of the inefficiency that is built into our health care system is due to the private insurance industry. Private insurers exist for one reason and one reason only, and that is to skim profits off of the process of providing health care.
Not only are private insurers simply profit skimming middlemen, but they introduce a tremendous burden of inefficiency on both patients and health care providers alike. Most hospitals have hundreds of billing specialists employed for the single task of filing insurance claims to the hundreds of different insurance providers. Payments to hospitals can involve months of back and forth, and tend to be fairly delayed.
Moreover, patients are often left paying a large number of separate bills for a single hospital visit. Case in point, my father recently was hospitalized for a couple of days. Since he passed away shortly afterwards, I have been paying his medical bills. I have received dozens of statements, and have probably paid over a dozen separate bills. Many of these bills are for $30 or less, some as small as $1.40. Imagine, the waste involved in preparing, mailing, and processing a bill for $1.40. I am sure that the hospital would have been money ahead by simply ignoring that particular bill, or better yet, rolling everything into a single bill.
Of the three big issues that Obama laid out in his "State of the Union" speech (medical care, energy, and education), it's medical care that best lends itself to a "big federal solution".
Education reform remains largely a state and local policy area, in which the federal government can, at best, just provide a fraction of the incentive money and play a largely hortatory role.
Energy remains largely a matter of numerous, gradual investments in alternative energy, selective regulation ("cap and trade"), and for the most part a private market solution.
Medical insurance is the one area in which a strong ethical argument for medical or health equity can be made, it is easy to demonstrate that the current "system" is failing: (50 million uninsured); very high costs relative to the return that we get in health, infant mortality, and life expectancy; and too many hands in the till (HMO's and insurance companies taking fees that do not add to the quality of health care; bureaucracy and excess paperwork from the doctor's office to the federal government; predatory patents and restrictions on competition, etc.).
Only a change in the overall funding mechanism with eye toward making health care provision more equitable and more cost-effective is likely to solve this issue. With the right casting of the problem, much of big business and small business will leap on the bandwagon as a way to make U.S. business more competitive globally. With the right casting of the problem (as they did with Medicare back in 1965), they will preserve the "doctor-patient relationship" that we all value.
But this doesn't make it easy to solve, because, among other things "insurance" is mainly a state-regulated industry to this day, and there are some very powerful interests aligned against making the whole thing more efficient. However, even "big pharma" and those engaged in developing new medical technology have some potential benefit from expanding health insurance coverage to the 50 million uninsured.
So it's going to be a hard hard fight to remake the system. I, for one, welcome Obama's taking it on.
Fred -
The skyrocketing costs of health care are the most significant deficit that this country faces.
Unless something can be done to improve efficiencies and bring down costs, health care will bankrupt this country in a big way in the coming years.
The time to act is now, regardless of whether or not we are in a recession. Arguing that the recession is an excuse to ignore long term liabilities is simply a form of obstructionism. In effect, it is the republicans that are trying to ensure that they do not let this crisis go to waste.
Can any of you refute what Mr. Rove is saying about how Obama’s words on the campaign trail do match his actions? Try and do it without resorting to ad hominem attacks.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123621161271234665.html
Some of you may like the geometric expansion of the deicit that Obama is presiding voer, but as Rove points out, Obama won the Presidebncy with by asserting America "cannot and will not sustain" deficits like Mr. Bush's. How do you justify the change of direction?
You cannot b/c Ovomit is a liar. And that makes me sick!
This is lunacy. His haste to pack all of his priorities into the first year is distressing the markets (again today), blowing out the budget, and generally making the recovery that he and we so desperately need more and more distant. Most of his policy priorities will not help the economy in the short to medium term. I know the collapse of equity doesn't concern some of the hard line lefties on the blog, but this is where businesses raise capital, pensions are invested, and consumer confidence is registered. If you don't the daily 2-3 point plunge (now almost 3000 points since Obama took office) worries people, and will weigh on the president's popularity and clout, think again. Clinton was tamed by the bond markets, and so will Obama be by the stock market - the sooner the better.
By the way, Obama is polling worse than Bush in the Gallup (at the same points in their terms). Bush was rising, Obama is drifting downward.
Petey,
Nobody cares what Turd Blossom has to say. He'll be in jail shortly anyways.
Indeed. While partisan Republicans are trying to find their next Ronald Reagan, Democratic and willing Republicans will be reshaping the health care industry, our energy grids and our education system. By the time the partisans find their footing, America will be transformed and prosperous once again.
Maybe, Republicans should back off the Govn't is the problem mantra and face the fact Govn't isn't going anywhere so maybe rather than bickering, they should figure out ways to make it more efficient. Complaining about the workforce at how inefficient they are is no way to make them more efficient, no?
PeteKent,
do you honestly see no difference between Bush's and Obama's deficit spending? Try to remember what, exactly, bush was spending money on.
Hint: Not saving the economy or instituting reform. ;)
>> You cannot b/c Ovomit is a liar. And that makes me sick!
Wow, you really are in top [ironic] form. Tossing such an accusation into the same post that your are linking to Karl Rove ... peddling some of his trademark misleading voodoo math. :)
On healthcare more fundamentally, I wonder how dissatisfied the average voter really is with his coverage and the availability of medical care in this country?
I know people like to complain about it, but if there are 47 million Americans without coverage, then there must be 250 million who have it. Many in this latter group have what to complain about, but do you really think they are willing to risk what they have on a bet that Obama can make it better for them?
It seems to me the people have a long history of distrusting government involvement and are suspicious if its ability to efficiently solve problems. Indeed our largest entitlement programs: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are said to be in shambles, their weight and poor design dragging us down.
Why should we think that the Feds will get it right this time?
Is it Obama’s track record thus far? Oh, right! He does not have one. While Zero has been in total campaign mode since shortly after his inauguration, having discovered how boring the business of governing is, he has left the policy making and the law writing to Nancy Pelosi (you know the one who outsourced the job on the stimulus to a chimp). How confident, then, can we be that Ovomit can get this right?
Time perhaps may tell, but time is not on Obama’s side. Tomorrow we will be faced with yet another dismal jobs report, adding to the millions of jobs that have been lost in this country since he took office a few short weeks ago. As we are all painfully aware, there is no end in sight for this misery and few credentialed observers are optimistic that what Obama has thus far done is going to ameliorate things in the short run.
Right now the people may seem patient and chartable, but I suspect that is because they believe Obama is going to fix things and fix them fast. If the recovery is not here by Christmas and we have another bleak holiday season like the last one, I think the country will turn away from Obama and the Democratics. At that point his expensive and complicated healthcare solutions will seem risky and ill-advised like the rest of his agenda.
Once the Democratics are drubbed in the mid-term elections we will see if Ovomit has the sense that Clinton did to yield to political reality and reverse course. If not he risks the likelihood of being a one-term president.
I hope he fails.
The various market speculators who post here to lament the share price impact on health care refpprm need to get used to the death of your precious market.
To bolster your share prices, most people have been underpaid for 30 years and much of the work went off to slave labor overseas.
To bolster your share prices, shitbird CEO's drove the economy into the ground with massive fraud.
To bolster your share prices, carbon loads intensify and the arctic ocean runs free of ice as the Maldives sink.
To bolster your share prices we have all been beggered or conned into debt.
Shit in your share price hats and wear em as wall street shrinks to a size where we can finally drown it in a bath tub.
I think Obama is indeed approaching health care reform with 4 important differences:
1) "it's all about the money" - not relying solely on "bleeding heart" argument because universal health care is about the money, I know this coming from the birthplace Canadian public health system that has a long history of pragmatic socialists
2) do it now
3) working within the framework of capitalist values - you've got millions of people that rely on the current industry for livelihood, you've got parts to work with, completely blowing it all up and somehow nationalizing these things just isn't going to fly ... work with what you have, not what you wish you had
4) full endorsement rather than just trial ballon - Hillary was ablative armour for Bill, he was just floating it and never made the commitment that it needed to survive
Top that off with the benefit of how the realities of the current situation have started to work their way up the economic (read more politically empowered) demographics he just might pull this off.
As I suspected, no one could refute Mr. Rove without calling him "turd blossom" or some such.
Maxwell did make the suggestion that there was a qualitative difference in what Obama is spending money, but he could not refute the math that Obama is spending many times more than Bush did and this despite his castigation of Bush for running unsustainable deficits.
There is no "voodoo" math here either. Numbers don't, lie tyklerxdurnen, they come from Ovomit's budget.
Ovomit did not attack the deficits b/c of what they were spent on he attacked them for being deficits at all. Now he has gone and tripled and maybe quadrupled the debt and all the rhetoric of the campaign is meaningless. Like promises to tame earmarks.
He just said what he needed to say to get elected. Just as Reverend Wright warned us about his congregant!
I enjoyed for the first time in months watching AC 360 last night. They seem to be onto the fraud Obama is perpetrating. It will only be a short while before the public catches on.
Ovomit is going to need a new enemy to attack. Bush, it seems, is old news (and very unsporting to continue to attack) and Rush is a radio host for crissakes!
Chris Rich:
"Shit in your share price hats and wear em as wall street shrinks to a size where we can finally drown it in a bath tub"
Lenin could not have said it better himself!
I can see why you admire our President.
Many of the "too costly" arguments are problematic in that they rest on simple extrapolations of current costs per citizen to an expanded covered group. (I'm going to leave aside the issue of administrative costs as a separate issue for the moment; since most of those arguments totally ignore the waste in the largely unaccounted-for current administrative costs of medical care.)
Any reasonable reckoning of costs has to look at the health costs (human capital loss) from having so many uninsured people and so many unhealthy people. Reducing these costs would be a social benefit or social saving: less catastrophic illness, less "unemployability," lower absentism rates (missed days from school and work), fewer people who have to stay at home to take care of a sick relative rather than work, etc. A lot of these savings could come about through preventive care -- annual checkups, a reasonable amount of health screening -- before, in many case, permanent damage is done.
And more would be saved by relieving each business of some of the overhead associated with paying medical coverage in a private plan for their employees. To the extent that these costs can be brought down, including by reducing the prices of Rx's, the more efficient our businesses can be.
If all we are talking about is total budgetary cost of the programs without talking about the generated savings, then we are missing a large part of the argument in favor of reform.
For anyone interested in the health care debate, it is being live streamed by the WH.
Franken is meaningless now: Bayh, Feingold and Nelson have abandoned the Democratic's coalition in the Senate and are ready to break ranks with Obama over spending.
Statler, please save your money: AIDS drugs are very expensive and under OvomitCare the Gays will just have to get used to the idea that they are not a "cost-effective" treatment (witness how valueless Obama seems to think the Gays are). The stricken must simply get used to the idea that they are just going to ahve to die sooner. We cannot afford you!
What is interesting about this site is the sheer hostility to capitalism that leeks into it. I consider this a moderate left site, so I can only imagine how bad it is at HuffPost or Daily Kos. Somehow I don't think Geitner and Summers are sharing Chris Rich's profane glee at the collapse of the market in the face of his policies. Nor are most of Obama's voters, who do not share this strange nostalgia for collectivist politics and economics.
The present crisis is a the result of poor regulation, over-borrowing, and eary credit to prop up consumer spending. But it does not implicate low tax, free market principles - just their abuse. Some of Obama's supporters seem to recognzie this. Others seem to think the moment of capitalism's collapse, and socialism's rise, has come. The result seems to be utter policy incoherence and a surprising amount of paralysis from the likes of the Treasury Secretary.
Statler said:
For the sake of the Fifty for Franken campaign, I encourage everyone to feed this troll!
Hey Petey, you don't know what the hell you are talking about. Rove is a fat bastard, just like good ol' Rush Limbastard. The repubs are scared to death of what Obama will do with healthcare because they know it will work and they'll be shown for the true know-nothings they are!
Face it, unless the repubs are willing to tell Limbastard off, he is your leader! He will lead you to obscurity, all the while getting rich doing it!
PK,
You know as well as the rest of us that Obama has vowed to cut the deficit in half. Thats even after he came to office, and you know as well as anyone else that the economic situation is markedly different from even what it was in November.
Rove knows all those things as well and is basically just stirring, and trying to give wingnuts a few lines to use that are cribbed from AM radio. The rest of us understand the political process and understand that Rove really has no leg to stand on when it comes to the deficit so are happy to ignore him on this issue. We just wish you would to.
PeixeGato makes my point:
"Hey Petey, you don't know what the hell you are talking about. Rove is a fat bastard, just like good ol' Rush Limbastard."
They cannot refute Rove so they resort to calling names!
@ Jeff:
How do you prevent the "Free Markets" from abuse if you don't regulate them? The policy of the last 30 years has proven that markets that are left unchecked by meaningful regulation will be abused. I worked in the belly of the investment bank world. Those people are motivated by one thing: GREED! They will do anything to make more money, regardless of what the implications are. All they see is the dollar hanging closest to their eyes. People in that industry don't think about or care about the long term impact of their actions. The few that do find themselves tossed aside on the road to maximum profits.
I'm not anti-capitalist at all. If someone has a good idea and can make a business of it without causing harm to the general public well being, then they should be able to make as much money as they can. But when they get to the point where they have to beg the government (aka the people) for money in order to keep their business going, then their business model has failed and its time to make changes to the way they do business. And if they are getting a big injection of cash from the people, then the people should have a say in what those changes are, just as any other private investor would.
Regarding healthcare, there is an inherent conflict of interest with the private corporations being the only providers of health insurance coverage. They are in business to make a profit, period. The vehicle through which they plan to make these profits is by offering health insurance coverage. In other words, these companies are not in business to provide healthcare. Healthcare is only the vehicle through which they make their money.
Given that scenario, I don't see how any decision they make about pricing or what procedures to "approve" can be made without ANY regard to how it will impact their profits. Here is your conflict of interest. I don't want life and death decisions about my health to be made based on how it impacts someone's bonus pool.
Also, the private companies are in the enviable position of cherry picking their customers. If you have pre-existing conditions, you can't get coverage, period. If you develop a condition while you are covered, then the companies know they can raise your premiums as much as they want because they know you can't go anywhere else to get coverage. There goes your "free market competition".
Wow, that was really easy Pete. You must have a secret desire to see Franken win. Are you a closet LIBERAL?!??!
I guess calling names is OK if your name is Rush Limbastard. That's pretty much all he does.
Oh, and Rove isn't worthy of "refuting". He's old news and should be forgotten as quickly as possible.
markymark:
Obama saying he will cut the budget in half is all about voo doo math!
First he includes all those war costs that he knows he will never have tos pend (thanks to Bush having won the war for him) then he posits the most optomistic recovery scenario to provide revenues that will never materailize. I'm sure there's tons more tricks in those forcasts too.
In fact, the economy is much worse off than when it was in November. You are right about that! All thanks to Ovomit's failed economic policies. DOA.
Kid G: The president is left handed, so that would, presumably, be his "good hand."
On another note, Citigroup is playing with the $1 per share level now. What are odds that this stock gets delisted before they turn things around?
PeixeGato; You lack intellectual rigor. That is boring.
For the record no one here can dispute that Ovomit mispresented his opposition to deficits in the campaign and his rhetoric about fiscal responsibility was just an act.
Franken will be an asset to the Republican Party should he make it to Senate, btw!
Hey Pete, if Bush won the war for us, then why are we still there to the tune of $12 Billion per month?
Please answer, Franken could use another $50!
Hey Petey,
Who said I was going for intellectual rigor? If you had paid any attention to my first post, you'd see that my ONLY goal is to get you to respond so that more money is donated to Franken.
Since then, you have chalked up $150 in donations to the Franken campaign. Looks like I'm not so dumb after all (not that I care what you think).
I'm done with you now. This game, while fun, is beginning to bore me and lose its novelty. However, I'm sure you will continue to contribute to the Franken campaign anyway.
Statler, aren't you a college student? If so, what kind of job do you have that you can afford to give all this money to Franken? Please let me know--I want in on it!
>> here is no "voodoo" math here either. Numbers don't, lie tyklerxdurnen, they come from Ovomit's budget.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. :) They don't lie but those with weak logic skills and poor math skills, or a lack of willingness to use the abilities they have (I'm guessing you'd fall into the later? :) ) can become bamboozled by flawed use of math.
I've been through this before. His comparisons are totally off. He's pulling numbers from different contexts and throwing them together as though they are equal. I don't mean just from different points in time and economic realities but the fact is that prior budgetary decisions are very much impacting today's deficit. For example Bush's foolish tax cuts are still in place due to respect for Rule of Law.
Other commitments such as debit servicing as well. This is a big friggin' ship that's been headed in the wrong direction, at full speed, for some time. :(
Then we've got Karl taking that core quote out of context and trying to pretend it's saying something it's not. Sadly, pragmatically, now is not the time to pull a Hoover and try cut the deficit. He's also projecting decisions that haven't been made ... correction, he's full out ignoring Obama's statements and plan and then attacking the strawman of his own constructed.
P.S. It is hardly prophetic to foresee someone refer to Karl Rove as a "turd blossom", because he is an acknowledged lying sack of turd blossom. :) Hell, his morales are so twisted that he wears that motus operandi like a badge of honour. *shrug*
tylerxdurden,
Nice tyr, but you are still as big a turd blossom as Rove!
@ Statler N Waldorf
By the end of this thread, given how easy Kent is to bait, Franken might have himself a sizable start on a 2014 campaign fund. :)
(PeteKent) >> tylerxdurden, Nice tyr, but you are still as big a turd blossom as Rove!
... and now you show your real blowhard coward colours! I give the substance, albeit it just an overview since there is just so much illogical crap in Rove's article to cover, and you just wimp out and run way calling names. :)
*thumbs up*
PK,
Obama is vowing to cut the deficit period, how that is achieved is irrelevant. Your claim is that he is 'breaking election commitments' but you aren't even giving him a chance to meet them.
And 6 weeks is hardly a fair timespan to judge an economic policy by.
Bottom line- Yet more PKBS.
@Statler
Whoa, dude. You are relatively debt free? You are in great position, don't flame out like that. Now is the time for the payoff!
That stock market is not done self-flagellation yet but it's getting much closer to the end. This works well for you. Get yourself a budget broker, teach yourself the basics or the next few months, and then get in with 5K on a couple stocks. Cash is cheap right now! Just make sure you lock in interest rates for really long term (a very likely end-game of all this is loss of paper money confidence and some inflation leading to interest rate rises, it's really a matter of what the magnitude will be)
Just make sure to stick with long hold value plays. Don't go chasing bear market rallies or high risk guesses or such.
Don't get mad, get rich. Or at least a little more monetarily comfortable. ;)
Oh, and don't get into a [loaded] mutual fund thingie. In large part that's a scam. :P The only people that'll get rich off that are like those that you despise.
Or maybe some real estate ... though that depends on where you are. Don't expect much action there for a while yet, that is likely a very long play right now.
Sorry but your own hard work and applied intelligence is still the solid path to wealth.
Turd Blossom, by the way, was a nickname for Rove in the White House. It isn't a Dem creation - but more of W's wit. We just all learned of it and love it as so perfectly fitting the man who bugged his own offices to help win an election in Texas. I don't really think you can call it "name-calling" to use the same term the POTUS used for his trusted advisor.
Rove knows nothing about budgets or honesty. He's like Carville, always on the move for a soundbite - context be damned. We finally have a President who's honest about what we spend and where, and that while in the long term we can't survive huge deficits but in the short run we have to engage in deficit spending, and its somehow turned into dishonesty? Rove would convince people like PK that black is white - since they think we won jack squat in Iraq, I guess he did.
As for the false stock market/Obama ties, read what the coverage was today - the market went up yesterday, then down today, mainly because of Asian markets. They had rallied on rumors of MORE STIMULUS SPENDING by the Chinese, and when that didn't happen everyone took the quick bump. It seems the market is all for spending when a foreign government does it. Or is it more likely that the stock market is generally divorced from reality and has been for so long that it can't be trusted as a barometer of anything except the mindset of traders and market makers?
Statler -
OK. I'll take the bait.
Does Franken have the same anti gay rights views as Obama?
Statler-
Excellent post above by the way.
Hi, Statler, I enjoy your comments here, although I think you're wasting your time by feeding the trolls.
I wish you'd make up your mind, however, about whether you are:
A.) A starving college student
or
B.) A starving college student who apparently donated at least $10,000 to the Democrats during the fall campaign and has continued to contribute to Al Franken with an apparent non-starving generosity
or
C.) Someone who is, how shall I phrase this delicately?, putting us all on?
Here's what dumbfounds me about the health care debate in the U.S.... we have *mountains* of real world data that shows, very very very clearly... that a universal single payer health insurance system can be run for about 10% of GDP, provide coverage to effectively the entire population, and do it while producing health outcomes at least equivalent to what the system in the U.S. produces while the U.S. is spending over 15% of GDP on health care and leaving tens of millions of people without coverage while they do it.
The difference between 15% and 10% of U.S. GDP is almost three quarters of a TRILLION dollars. Anually. Wasted, because the health care system in this nation is just horribly inefficient.
And we know this. We don't think it, we KNOW it. We can look at the results in a dozen other nations and just say "There, see? Right there... and there... and over there. It WORKS!" So how the hell has this been a subject of serious debate for decades as if it's some great unfathomable mystery how to improve the health care system when every other major industrialized nation on the planet has already done it? How do the Republicans keep managing to make people think health care reform equals massive expense or the communists coming to get them?
It does answer my question. And for what it's worth, I don't think you're putting us on.
The thing that drives me crazy about the Democrats is that they govern by polls. A recent blog on this site showed that 40% of Americans approve gay marriage. As soon as that poll shows 50%, Obama will be for it. I guarantee you.
The health care issue reminds me of Tommy Douglas, the Premier (ie. Governor) of Saskatchewan, a relatively small (population wise) province of Canada.
He won 5 straight terms of office (from 1944 to 1961) but most of his major achievements were done in his first term.
Of these, the most famous is universal health care.
Tommy Douglas was a relatively minor political figure and died back in 1986. Nevertheless, in 2005 he was recognized in a nationwide poll as Canada's "Greatest Canadian".
Obama is right to prioritize health care. It will be a lasting legacy to the American people that will probably someday earn him serious consideration as the "Greatest American".
Statler-
I totally sympathize with the plight of New Orleans and dozens of other poverty stricken urban areas around the country.
The problem is that we've been waging the war on poverty for 50 years. We've spent who knows who many trillions of dollars fighting it, and it hasn't worked. The war on poverty has been lost. Do we continure to spend more on the welfare states we've already created?
Democrats have run cities like Cleveland, Detroit, and New Orleans for a long time. How are they doing?
PeteKent said...
Can any of you refute what Mr. Rove is saying about how Obama’s words on the campaign trail do match his actions?
.
Petekent, you are "Mr." Rove. I always suspected something fishy about you.
.
As for those of you who are so ebullient about obama fighting the right, don't be so sure. He did make it pretty sure that his priority is not expanding coverage under the current system. It's cost containment. As such, be prepared to some sacrifices. Which actually rejoices me. We the people haven't been asked to make any sacrifices so far, under the Grand Bargain plan. Im a center left dem, and i'd hate for him to be a flaming lib. i want the inspirational technocrat back, and i think his taking on both our folks on the left and the folks on the right is the right way to go. Of course, he's mindful of the political roadblock, so he won't overdo it with dems.
Well written and I respect your opinion.
There wasn't even any name calling and only one Rush Limbaugh reference. I think we're making some ground.
Gupta withdraws name for Surgeon General!
Great news - let's get someone in there with some stones.
Statler said:
"I do not see corporations as persons"
Do you see government as persons? You want government to restrain corporations, but government acts no more like people than corporations do. Other than the military, our government doesn't do anything very well. It does most things very poorly in fact.
And since you brought up the abortion issue...
we see an unborn child as a person, a human life. A head, fingers, legs, toes, a beating heart. That's a life.
We don't think anyone has a right to end that life.
I have been impressed more than anything by how much Obama's post-election actions match his pre-election rhetoric. From Afghanistan to health care to support for education. With the exception of getting rid of all lobbying interest, he really seems to walk the walk.
I am hopeful that this could be a special and landmark presidency by the time it is done. For that to happen though, he unfortunately has to risk real failure.
Great, very noble ideas.
It needs to happen.
But it won't.
Profit needs to be taken out of the health care equation in the United States, like the rest of the world.
But it won't.
I'll put money on it never happening.
I hope I'm wrong. I'll tilt at President Obama's windmill, too.
I just don't expect it to happen.
Mo Rage
www.moravings.blogspot.com
Statler:
You can't compare the innocence of an unborn child to murderers and rapists. Murderers and rapists deserve to die. Unborn human life does not.
Pro abortion activists viciously fight for the right to abort pregnancies well beyond what you describe as "small clump of indistinguishable cells.".
You're saying life begins at birth because we start counting our birthdays at the day of our birth. So with that logic, if we called them conceptiondays instead of birthdays, then life would start at conception?
What really needs to happen, but can't, is the following:
1) Make campaigns for the Presidency 3 months long, period;
2) Federally-finance these Presidential campaigns;
3) Get lobbyists and their money out of our law-making system;
4) Take profit our of medical care so all can have this right (and it's not a priviege of the wealthy only.
Only then, when we do all this, will the entire system work.
Ain't gonna' happen.
Mo Rage
www.moravings.blogspot.com
Statler,
You still haven't answered my questions about whether you're a starving college student or not, and now you're waxing fondly about the great old Eisenhower years (back when I myself was 11 to 19 years old) and you, unless you're a 65-y/o college student, were just the proverbial gleam in somebody's eye.
I'm beginning to think that it's YOU who are the major troll around here....
Here is one example of how insurance companies are skimming profits, but being very short sighted in the process:
A patient needs a corneal transplant and an operation to remove a cataract in the eye lens. The doctor wants to do both operations at the same time, using the same incision, one time in the operating theater, one time with the anethelogist, etc., not to mention the less trauma to the eye, the less (total) recovery time for the patient, two trips to the operating theater, etc. However, the insurance company mandates that the operations are to be done separately, or if done at the same time, the insurance will only pay for the operation with the lowest cost.
Cataract removal and intra-ocular lens - $2,000 to $5,000.
Corneal transplant - minimum of $15,000.
However, if the patient needs cataract removal AND corneal transplant, they will get both done, so the insurance company pays for two operations, and the patient also pays for two operations.
Another example - a medical procedure has been performed by hand for 40 years, but 10-15 years ago, a refinement to that procedure was made, now computer assisted. The computer assistance makes it more efficient, more reliable, quicker, and results that are more accurate. MediCare finally gives the new procedure a separate code, but doesn't increase the compensation, and the insurance company also pays exactly the same. However, the insurance company decides it is a new procedure (MediCare just gave it a code, didn't they?), thus it HAS to be experimental, and therefore the insurance company decides it won't pay for the procedure.
The above fits the old canard about being penny-wise and pound foolish.
I'm sure others can show the short-sightedness of insurance companies, where they place their own profits ahead of the well-being of the patient.
Kket, the other possibility is that Statler is a college student from a wealthy family. This is nothing to be ashamed of, and, in fact, I think Statler spends his parents money far more wisely than most college students I know.
The idiot who calls himself PeteKent said...
As I suspected, no one could refute Mr. Rove without calling him "turd blossom"
So calling KKKarl Rove 'Turd Blossom' is a sin? Recent?
From the (UK's) Guardian newspaper (Thursday 2 October 2003):
When George Bush moved into the White House in January 2001, the man who got him there, Karl Rove, chose Hillary Clinton's office for himself.
It was a telling choice. The partnership between the president and the man he calls Boy Genius (or on bad days Turd Blossom) is the political marriage at the heart of the Bush administration.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/oct/02/usa.julianborger1
Statler -
It seems like you're using your anti capital punishment position to justify abourtion. I'll reverse your question to me: how can you be for abortion but against capital punishment?
Statler said:
"For you perhaps it is possible to assume the role of God and allow some to live and others to die. To me, this is the ultimate sacrilege, an arrogance compounded byt he assumption that you could ever do such a thing without any potential for error"
That statement can be used as a very persuasive agrument against abortion. Are you playing God by aborting a life?
It sounds like you may be against abortion after the 1st trimester or into the 3rd trimester or after 39 weeks. What becomes the cutoff? Is it morally OK say before 67 days but at 2:34 PM on the 68th day it's wrong? Who's playing God here?
Statler said:
"Further, anyone who truly felt that life is sacred would be averse to war."
All true conservatives are completely averse to war, but sometimes war is necessary because life is sacred.
Should we have let the nazis take over the world without doing anything? If Russia or China tries to invade the USA someday, should we stand by and do nothing?
Human life is sacred to me, but if someone ever breaks into my home and tries to harm my family, I would kill them without hesitation.
Republicans have very good propaganda. They tell people that the systems in other countries don't work, and those people beleive it.
It's really not the people's fault. Most Americans have never seen the healthcare in Europe or Canada in action. And the propaganda machine is very, very loud.
If people grow up hearing "socializd medicine is evil, socialized medicine is evil, socialized medicene is evil..." after the billionth time, ti starts to sink in.
So long as the progressive moevment allows the Republican noise machine to be louder and more convincing than the truth... progressives will have a lot of trouble getting long term changes.
Fortunately for us, we are learning that. I know for example, that the Obama team are fans of the works of George Lakoff.
I wouldn't be too sweeping about that, Wanderman. The national health system in the UK is pretty terrible. Fairer than yours, no question, but appallingly inefficient and all too often incompetent.
It is a lot better on the continent though, it's true. But it's certainly possible to have a bad socialised healthcare system.
看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,小套房,小套房,進修,在職進修,留學,證照,MBA,EMBA,留學,MBA,EMBA,留學,進修,在職進修,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,住宿,民宿,飯店,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA
on npr this morning - veteran reporter daniel shoor confessed that he had been guilty of underestimating the president's ability to keep multiple issues in play at the same time
What follows are believed to be facts that are believed to exist regarding the present U.S. Health Care System. This may be why about 80 percent of U.S. citizens understandably want our health care system overhauled desperately due to the inadequate health care they receive and access:
The U.S. is ranked number 42 related to life expectancy and infant mortality, which is rather low.
However, the U.S. is ranked number one in the world for spending the most for health care- as well as being number one for those with chronic diseases. About 125 million people have such diseases. This is about 70 percent of the Medicare budget that is spent treating these terrible illnesses.
Health Care costs are now well over 2 trillion dollars of our gross domestic product. This is three times the amount nearly 20 years ago- and 8 times the amount it was about 30 years ago. Most is spent with medical institutions, as far as health expenditures are concerned.
One third of that amount is nothing more than administrative toxic waste that does not involve the restoration of the health of others. This illustrates how absurd the U.S. Health Care System is presently. Nearly 7000 dollars is spent on every citizen for health care every year, and that, too, is more than anyone else in the world.
We have around 50 million citizens without any health insurance, which may cause about 20 thousand deaths per year. This includes millions of children without health care, which is added to the planned or implemented cuts in the government SCHIP program for children, which alone covers about 7 million kids.
Our children.
Nearly half of the states in the U.S. are planning on or have made cuts to Medicaid, which covers about 60 million people, and those on Medicaid are in need of this coverage is largely due to unemployment. With these Medicaid cuts, over a million people will lose their health care coverage and benefits to a damaging degree.
About 70 percent of citizens have some form of health insurance, and the premiums for their insurance have increased nearly 90 percent in the past 8 years. About 45 percent of health care is provided by our government- which is predicted to experience a severe financial crisis in the near future with some government health care programs, it has been reported.
Half of all patients do not receive proper treatment to restore their health, it has been stated. Medical errors desperately need to be reduced as well, it has been reported, which should be addressed as well.
Most doctors want a single payer health care system, which would save about 400 billion dollars a year- about 20 percent less than what we are paying now. The American College of Physicians, second in size only to the American Medical Association, supports a single payer health care system.
The AMA, historically opposed to a single payer health care system, has close to half of its members in favor of this system. Less than a third of all physicians are members of the AMA, according to others.
Our health care we offer citizens is the present system is sort of a hybrid of a national and private health care system that has obviously mutated to a degree that is incapable of being fully functional due to perhaps copious amounts and levels of individual and legal entities.
Health Care must be the priority immediately by the new administration and congress. Challenges include the 700 billion dollars that have been pledged with the financial bailout that will occur, since the proposed health care plan of the next administration is projected to cost over a trillion dollars within the first year or so of the proposed plan to recalibrate health care for all of us in the U.S.
Likely, hundreds of billions of dollars that are speculated to be saved with a reform of the country’s health care system. Health policy analysts should not be greatly concerned on the health care corporate shareholders who may be affected by this reform of our health care system that is desperately needed.
It is estimated that the U.S. needs presently tens of thousands more primary care physicians to fully satisfy the necessities of those members of the public health. This specialty makes possibly less than 100 thousand dollars annually in income, compared with other physician specialties, yet they are and have been the backbone of the U.S. health care system.
The American College of Physicians believes that a patient centered national health care workforce policy is needed to address these issues that would ideally restructure the payment policies that exist presently with primary care physicians.
Further vexing is that it is quite apparent that we have some greedy health care corporations that take advantage of our health care system. Over a billion dollars was recovered for Medicare and Medicaid fraud last year through settlements paid to the department of Justice because some organizations who deliberately ripped off taxpayers.
These are the taxpayers in the U.S. who have a fragmented health care system with substantial components and different levels of government- composed of several legal entities and individuals, which has resulted in medical anarchy, so it seems.
Thanks to various corporations infecting our Health Care System in the United States, the following variables sum up this system as it exists today. Perhaps the United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) is the best solution to meet our health care needs as citizens, it appears.
We would finally have, as with most other countries, a Universal Health Care system that will allow free choice of doctors and hospitals, potentially, and health care for all completely. It should and likely will be funded by a combination of payroll taxes and general tax revenue which is realistically possible. Because the following seems to be in need of repair regarding the U.S. Health Care System:
Access- citizens do not have the right or ability to make use of this system as we should.
Efficiency- this system strives on creating much waste and expense as it possibly can.
Quality- the standard of excellence we deserve as citizens with our health care is missing in action.
Sustainability- We as citizens cannot continue to keep our health care system in as it is designed at this time- as it exists today.
http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/US_healthcare/index.asp
Dan Abshear
看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,小套房,小套房,進修,在職進修,留學,證照,MBA,EMBA,留學,MBA,EMBA,留學,進修,在職進修,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,住宿,民宿,飯店,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,关键词排名,网络营销,網路行銷,關鍵字排名,关键词排名,网络营销,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,PMP,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,PMP,證照,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,網頁設計,網站設計,網頁設計,網站設計,网页设计,网站设计,网站设计,网页设计
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment