BMGers can vote here on a special link.
BMGers can vote here on a special link.
“They Dump the Sick to Satisfy Investors”: Insurance Exec Turned Whistleblower Wendell Potter Speaks Out Against Healthcare Industry
Please share widely!
Reality-based commentary on politics.
billxi says
He wants to keep his money! Ni snarkiness intended.
kemo says
Maybe John Kerry is capable of learning from other’s past mistakes?
<
p>Maybe it has something to do with Massachusetts estimated 1.4 Billion Dollar unsustainable subsidized cost for 2009?
<
p>Maybe it has something to do with Health Care Costs in Massachusetts increasing faster then the national average? Perhaps mandates and subsidies and the public option are not the answer?
<
p>Maybe it has something to do with almost 200,000 people in Massachusetts still without healthcare?
<
p>Maybe it has something to do with insurance premiums rising twice as fast in Massachusetts then in the rest of the country?
<
p>Maybe it is because the program cost continues to jump?
<
p>Maybe it is because (despite all the taxes etc…) the program’s deficits continue to grow?
<
p>Maybe it is because the State Lawmakers recognize what an unsustainable mess and failure this is?… It is to the point that they are considering “rationing” – (caps on insurance premiums & cutting reimbursement to providers).
<
p>Maybe it has something to do with Obamamania wearing off and people asking difficult, unanswered questions on the impact this will have on both the economy and health care?
<
p>Massachusetts should serve as a warning to the rest of the Nation. This is what happens with Government “Health Care Reform”. The plans being pushed are almost a carbon copy of this State’s miserable failure.
annem says
The media and most everyone else is missing an important point: the MA health insurance legislation– Chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006–was written largely by Blue Cross and Blue Shield MA and its passage was achieved with LOTS of lobbying help from Partners Healthcare. Don’t take my word for it, just look at the BCBS MA “Roadmap to Coverage” Reports spanning 4 years. It was a project initiated shortly after the citizen-led ballot initiative Question 5 in the year 2000 that sought to create a real universal healhtcare program in Mass. BCBS and MA HMOs spent over $5.4Mil to defeat it 48-52%. The reports are posted on http://www.BCBSMA.com or on their-joined-at-the-hip BCBS MA Foundation website.
<
p>Here’s a BCBS link that states the project was funded by BCBS MA and Partners HealthCare http://www.roadmaptocoverage.o…
<
p>The facts are that the Mass. Plan (aka The Mass. Sham by those who understand health policy) does not include a pubic health insurance option available to employers, workers, families that’s based on the successful Medicare program. A Medicare-like plan is the type of public option that most healthcare advocates are pressing for in the national reform bill. BCBS MA hired the Urban Inst. and told them explicitly to NOT INCLUDE a public insurance plan in their “roadmap to coverage” work for BCBS MA. John Houlihan from the Urban Inst. stated this fact publicly at a BCBS MA -sponsored forum that I and 350 others attended. Nobody talks about that much, do they?
<
p>In addition to Democracy Now’s excellent work covering health reform issues, I urge people to look at journalist Trudy Lieberman’s articles at the Columbia Journalism Review. Her work includes an ongoing series “Health Reform Lessons from Massachusetts”.
<
p>Here’s the link to these and other excellent health reform articles by T. Lieberman http://www.cjr.org/campaign_de…
<
p>P.S. Why are BCBS MA (a taxpayer funded non-profit, btw) top executives Cleve Killingsworth and Andrew Dreyfus also top executives at the BCBS National Federation? Killingsworth is CEO of both, according to BNET News http://resources.bnet.com/topi…
<
p>Something smells really bad here… Is Senator Kerry looking the other way as enemies of a public plan option attack? He certainly isn’t speaking up to argue the case for a Medicare-like public plan. Maybe Kerry or his staff will reply on BMG to address this concern.
petr says
a paraphrasing of what was said in a closed-door meeting in opposition to what was publicly articulated does not an ‘opponent’ make. Methinks somebodies got their dander up and it’s causing them to shut down their thinking… There is little, other than stupidity and blind rage, to explain this extreme stretch.
<
p>So, until Sen. Kerry directly repudiates his public support of a public option, I’ll avoid taking this all that seriously.
brian-young says
I’m sorry, Bob, but this is just wrong. John Kerry HAS led on a public option, publicly and privately. And he’s done it for longer than people have even been using the phrase “public option.” Back in 2004, he ran with a public option as a centerpiece of his health care plan, and he’s been in favor of it ever since. If John Kerry had his way, we’d have Medicare for all, so it’s clear he’s in favor of a public option.
<
p>He’s been public and vocal about it, and he’s been working hard in the Senate, as well. I’ll paste below the relevant part of his latest statement about it, from a rally outside his office a couple weeks ago …
<
p>John Kerry has been working closely with Ted Kennedy to try to get a public option. DFA misread one anonymously-sourced Huffington Post story (which was later corrected) about one informal discussion in the Finance Committee and ignored the voluminous public record of John Kerry supporting and pushing for a public option. Ted Kennedy and his healthcare team who we’ve partnered with would set you straight if you bothered to ask them.
<
p>And the flings about his personal life were beneath you.
<
p>Here’s that statement:
<
p>
<
p>[note: I’m John Kerry’s New Media Director]
christopher says
I got the email from DFA and was one of the ones who voted for Kerry in this poll, figuring some of the same things about safe seat in a favorable state sitting on plenty of campaign money ($8 million of which coming from the industry according to DFA) as mentioned in the diary. If I had thought about it for a couple of more minutes I would have realized something didn’t sound right. I now recall that DFA has played fast and loose with facts once before when it claimed that convention superdelegates had the ability to overturn the will of the primary votes, whereas in reality they only had the ability to put a thumb on the scale in a very close race.
<
p>PS: While Kerry’s views on this are a heck of a lot better than the current status quo the key policy reason I supported Ed O’Reilly in last year’s primary was O’Reilly’s support for single-payer.
karenc says
“Been working very hard on the Finance committee to try to see it included. Harder slog than it ought to be. I ran for President with a public option as an anchor off my health care plan, want to see one now that we get to do reform. Would do Medicare for all if I could start from scratch, so I’m a definite supporter of a strong, national public option. We’ll see what we can do. Glad to see HELP Committee passed out a bill with one today – EMK and Dodd, you couldn’t have two better leaders on this issue.”
<
p>The difference between him and O’Reilly is that Kerry knows that single payer really is not possible in the Senate and Kerry was not going to promise something he knew was impossible. It never meant he was less for it.
christopher says
I can respect Kerry’s trying to get what’s possible, but my idealistic side says heck with possibility – go for broke.
karenc says
Given the fact that we still don’t know if we have 50 Senators for the public option, I can see why Kerry and Kennedy are trying for what is possible.
<
p>It is amazing that on the 23 member Finance committee, there are only 7 people who are publicly for the public option – and that includes Snowe, who is only for it with a trigger and Schumer, who has spoken positively of non profit co-ops being the public option. I would bet that those meetings have to be frustrating for Kerry, Rockefeller, Stabanow, Menendez and Bingaman, (That might be where is reality based position comes from)
liveandletlive says
a ten year waiting period? If 72% of American’s are in favor of a public plan, then that should be the end of the story. John Kerry’s caving on the public option only weakens the fight. This silly idea sends us one step closer to not getting a public option.
<
p>I think a smarter and more respected idea would be to strive harder to spend healthcare dollars more effectively, to bring the costs down and make Medicare and a public option program exceptional reflections of what providing healthcare could and should be.
<
p>Does John Kerry have any concerns about the way healthcare dollars are spent?
Has he ever expressed concern for this, or supported and aggressively pursued resolutions to this issue? This is what we need our elected officials to do. This would be the hard stuff. A ten year waiting period is a lazy and thoughtless idea.
karenc says
are spent. He had an e-prescribing amendment that passed last year on Kennedy’s medicare bill. ( http://kerry.senate.gov/cfm/re… ) and he has also spoken of measures like standardizing all insurance forms that will cut administrative costs.
<
p>Kerry is NOT for a 10 year trigger. His office called the journalist the day the story was posted and the story was changed to include their denial. So, do you blame unnamed staffers, who also said there was no discussion of the “proposal” or do you believe Kerry himself on his postion.
liveandletlive says
that’s all we can get. He should have kept his mouth shut.
That stance only gives the ten year trigger more weight.
<
p>Would you please confirm or deny that John Kerry received
$8,994,077 from the healthcare industry. That is the highest amount on the list, a rather stunning figure.
<
p>Many people will defend John Kerry to the end, in fear that bringing his lack of courageous leadership up will open the door for a republican to win his seat. I think holding on to ineffective Senators because of that fear is a mistake. We can call John Kerry on his faults and demand that he rise to the occasion of fighting hard for his constituents. If he can’t do that, then we can elect another Democrat who will.
petr says
<
p>I think there is a marked difference between the “many people [who] will defend John Kerry to the end” (whatever it is you think that means…) and those of us pointing out the naked calumny: it is clear, whatever you think of the man, that his position on the public option has been grossly misrepresented. The truth is valuable in it’s own right, apart from the effect it may have for or against your politics…
<
p>Whenever I see a leak like this, being used to attack a Dem, I smell Karl Rove. Roves’ modus operandi is to spread lies about your strengths in order that they be perceived as being weaknesses… This is a textbook example. The whole reason we’re having this discussion is because somebody on this blog was surprised enough by the ‘revelation’ of Kerry as opponent of public option. (I’m looking at you, Bob… )
<
p>You can manipulate public opinion pretty neatly if you’re willing to lie brazenly. Whoever leaked this to the Huffington Post is probably pretty scared about Kerry’s position and feels the need to work against it…
<
p>
<
p>I think you first have to elucidate why and how you’ve come to the conclusion that Massachusetts is “holding on to ineffective Senators.” You do realize, I hope, that you’ve insulted the intelligence of all the people who’ve voted for him since 1983. That’s an awful long time to pull the wool over everybodies eyes (‘cept, of course, yours…)
<
p>
liveandletlive says
<
p>We did it last September, and will probably do it again in 6 years.
<
p>
<
p>What!?! Excuse me !?! So now I have to get in line and follow the status quo or I’m insulting people?!? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? Go ahead and be insulted. I am ready for new leadership from Massachusetts, if that insults you then you are just going to have to deal with it.
petr says
… I bet you think this blog is about you, don’t you… don’t you…
<
p>
<
p>Insulting people isn’t dependent on your relationship to the status quo… You could, simply, be insulting.
<
p>
<
p>Your readiness for new leadership is quite apart from the question of the effectiveness of Kerry’s Senate career. That you conflate the two speaks more of you than of he. “I want someone new” is a vastly different perspective than “He’s an ineffective Senator”.
<
p>I get that he doesn’t meet your criteria. To abstract that to a generalized ineffectiveness is something you need to get over.
liveandletlive says
Speaking out for what one believes in is considered vain?
If I didn’t know better, I would swear you are trying to shut me up.
<
p>Do I think BMG is about me? HA HA HA HA HA, ROTFLMAO!
petr says
<
p>Yes. It is… if what you believe is that you are right and a majority of the commonwealth is wrong. And you further expect us to elect somebody else because you’ve come to the conclusion that the Jr Senator isn’t ‘effective’. It’s really quite simple… and quite vain.
<
p>”Speaking out for what one believes in” isn’t a free get-outta-vanity card.
<
p>
<
p>Not t’all. Speak out all you want, just don’t expect me to genuflect. Newt Gingrich speaks out for what he believes in. He’s also rather vain.
liveandletlive says
You are the vain one. State what you just said to me into a tape recorder and then listen to it. Your arrogance overflowith.
<
p>And thanks for the pass man. I will continue to speak out.
The majority isn’t always right. We had George Bush for 8 years didn’t we?
petr says
<
p>With what you’ve given me to work with here, I’m hard pressed to stay windward of arrogance, no doubt. But my state, whatever that may be, neither alters nor forgives your state. It’s possible (probable even) that we’re both pretty vain.
<
p>
<
p>My point, perhaps poorly articulated, isn’t that the majority is required to be right. As you point out, it sometimes isn’t. My point, such as it is, is that the majority is to be respected and dealt with as a majority, not an inconvenience. You are perfectly free to think John Kerry ineffective, incompetent even. You are not, however, free to airily dismiss the majority of voters with whom you find yourself in disagreement.
liveandletlive says
that I can only speak kindly of John Kerry here at BMG and I guess across Massachusetts, because anything else would be airily dismissing the majority of voters.
<
p>Not getting it.
<
p>But I’m done with this argument. I will continue to say what I think, if you don’t like it, ignore me. You can certainly disagree with me, many do, but name calling is not necessary.
petr says
<
p>Again, you’ve completely ignored what is written to posit false choices of an extreme dichotomy.
<
p>Let us review what you wrote:
<
p>
<
p>I called you out on this, asking you to elucidate why you think Kerry is ineffective and why you think he is not courageous. I further pointed out the insult you proffered in dismissing the majority of voters as error prone and fearful. You have not addressed either of these points apart from a bruised vanity deriving from the apoplexy you feel at the sheer gall I have to question the blatant obviousness of your statements.
<
p>If you think the Honorable Senator Kerry is ineffective and lacks courage, you ought to have an argument that is able to put some legs under this perspective. “The voters are too timid to see clearly” is not a valid argument.
bob-neer says
There is a school of thought that says people should march in lockstep behind their leaders to be effective. Thus, any criticism or internal debate helps the other side and may indeed, as you suggest, be planted by enemies and applauded by them.
<
p>I completely disagree.
<
p>This post and the comments, and the later one I wrote and its comments, provide a very useful review of Senator Kerry’s position on health care. They reaffirm his support for a public option and, to the degree they push him to be even more explicit and even more aggressive are constructive.
<
p>Moreover, I think the extreme visibility provided by the Internet helps to tamp down rumors and create a better informed electorate over the long term.
<
p>All to the good.
petr says
… that discussion is honest, earnest and above-board…
<
p>
<
p>… I can agree with you.
<
p>However, the central driver to this debate was the false expression of opposition to a public option. That’s where the debate started and, frankly, I thought you jumped a little to quickly at believing it. Perhaps I’m wrong about that. I hope so. But the impetus for the debate is a strawman riding on a straw horse, walking down a straw highway… Do you want to have any debate/discussion/review that starts out on those terms? ‘Cause, if you do, you’ll spend most of your time sorting out what it true without gaining anything.
<
p>To thoroughly mix metaphors: you’ll end up in the weeds, separating the wheat from the chaff in order to take away the straw that might break the camels back in order to find the needle in the haystack on the molehill under the mountain… I thought we were done with that kind of epistemological chicanery once Dubya left office…
<
p>
<
p>To be sure. I’m not certain that can be said of this discussion however, at least at first.
<
p>In the spectrum of rumor-mongering there lies, at one end, hyperventilating despair (oh noes! all my worse fears realized!) and at the other drool and titillation (aha! I told you alls your worse fears were true!!). I think the discussion started at despair and we’ve seen the droolers chime in. It’s to your credit that you followed up with clarification and that, indeed, helps to tamp rumors. I just wish you weren’t so quick to believe the assertion in the first place.
liveandletlive says
to cut administrative cost, which is important. How about taking the time to speak out about it? Mentioning it here or there doesn’t do a much. He needs to send out press releases talking about the problem and how it can be resolved. His silence, and the amount of money he receives from the healthcare industry need to be explained. It’s not just John Kerry. It’s all of our representatives. Cutting the waste out of healthcare would have a tremendous impact on the future of a public option plan, as well as the future of Medicare. Why is it that Kerry has not stepped up to the plate to make it an important goal in healthcare reform?
karenc says
The fact is that this was something Kerry spoke of very often in his 2004 stump speeches. He also gave a Faneuil Hall speech in summer 2006, which mentioned those measures. He published a Boston Globe article at the same time – http://www.boston.com/news/glo…
<
p>I can’t find the link for it, but I watched video on line from a 2007 speech Kerry gave to medical technology people. There was an extended discussion at the end when a questioner brought up the difficulty of using technology to simplify processing insurance forms for doctors’ offices because they were not standardized.
<
p>Now, it is true that he is quoted far less than Senator Kennedy on healthcare. This makes sense. No one in the country has done more than Senator Kennedy, who is the chairman of the HELP committee. Kerry is the chair of Foreign Relations, so he is more often the one who speaks on that.
<
p>On issues like the nuts and bolts of cutting costs, few want to hear or read the details – they just want measures passed. The press release spoke of a measure that Kerry DID get passed.
luftmensch says
http://www.jkmediasource.org/n…
karenc says
The claim here is that these are the worst Democrats on this issue. Yet there are 60 Democratic Senators, yet only 38 Senators on Howard Dean’s list supporting the public option (last time I looked). Those 38 include Olympia Snowe, who publicly wants a trigger and Chuck Schumer who Snowe, in a direct quote, said she was working with on triggers and who publicly on a Sunday talk show said positive things about the “co-op” idea. So that is 14 Senators who clearly are less on board than Kerry. Just using Howard Dean’s list and any reasonable criteria, Kerry should not be there.
<
p>Next look at the write-up. He figuratively waves his hand over Kerry’s long record on healthcare, ignoring every statement and action he has ever taken – including the plan Kerry offered in 2004. He puts all his weight on one Huffington Post article based on unnamed staffers comments, that he changed after Kerry’s office called him to disagree and to clearly state Kerry is for a public option now.
<
p>The story in it that article did not even make sense. It claimed that in a closed door meeting Kerry “floated a proposal” for a 10 year trigger, but then said there was no discussion. Having watched open hearings, I have seen them discuss at least briefly proposals that had no chance. That the journalist wrote that there was no discussion should have been a red flag to him that Kerry was not making a proposal.
<
p>This is getting close to swiftboating, where the entire official record was ignored by the media in favor of charges with no backup.
<
p>At any rate, this is what Senator Kerry wrote on Daily Kos last week.
<
p>””Been working very hard on the Finance committee to try to see it included. Harder slog than it ought to be. I ran for President with a public option as an anchor off my health care plan, want to see one now that we get to do reform. Would do Medicare for all if I could start from scratch, so I’m a definite supporter of a strong, national public option. We’ll see what we can do. Glad to see HELP Committee passed out a bill with one today – EMK and Dodd, you couldn’t have two better leaders on this issue.”
http://www.dailykos.com/commen…
<
p>As to Kerry having an obligation to “stand up and gets himself off this list”, he has stood up on the public option and the DFA would know this if they bothered to check Howard Dean’s list. DFA did not write that list, but they have placed it on their front page. I suggest demanding that DFA remove it from their web site or get the original site to take Senator Kerry off.
<
p>Kerry is not on there for anything he did wrong – he is on there because the author of the original site has an agenda that has nothing to do with health care.
jconway says
Kerry will do anything to stay elected and get votes. he is now flip flopping on the F-22, which from a national security perspective is a notorious white elephant that has bipartisan opposition, but I am sure Kerry is doing it to curry favor with Obama and it seems he doesn’t care about saving all those MA jobs he used to justify the project. Similarly it wouldn’t surprise me if he flip flopped on the public option. This man is really a joke of a Senator and is certainly not a profile in courage. If only we had a competent opposition we could have dumped him.
<
p>Anyway don’t blame me I voted for whoever that dude from Glouchester was.
annem says