Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Tsongas comes out swinging for the Massachusetts model of health care reform

By

At a “Nurses for Niki” event, 5th Congressional District candidate Niki Tsongas said the following:

“I believe that we must provide guaranteed access to quality, affordable health care for all Americans, and we need it now,” Tsongas added.  “In Congress, I will work for a system that guarantees choice of physicians, excellence, affordability and timeliness of care. Providing the 47 million uninsured Americans with access to the health care they deserve has to be our first priority.  I believe that creating a system that works is going to take shared responsibility, bringing business, government and individuals together to achieve our goal of universal coverage.” 

“The universal health care plan that I favor already has a promising model,” said Tsongas.  “That’s the newly enacted Massachusetts Universal Health Care Plan, which was supported by Deval Patrick when he was a candidate for Governor and that he continues to strongly support today.  It also seems to be consistent with what leading Democratic candidates for President are advocating.  It was through the principle of shared responsibility that Massachusetts built a plan that has brought coverage to 155,000 people in the last year alone.  We can use this same principle to make this work nationally.  The time for this change is now.  I will support the most immediate hope for providing health care to all Americans that can be passed and implemented quickly.”

All of which led me to wonder: does Tsongas support a national individual mandate?  That is, should every American be forced to buy health insurance?  It’s not obvious from the health care page at her site what her position on that question is, yet of course business and insurance interests would likely not have signed on to the MA plan without the individual mandate.

I’ve asked the campaign, and I will post any response I receive.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. This may be the best example of how democracy in Massachusetts is broken.

    <

    p>
    Let’s face facts.

    <

    p>

  2. The 145-page bill — written in backroom negotiations between the legislative leadership and representatives of health insurers, hospitals, and other powerful interests — was unveiled to the legislature the day before the vote.

    3. <

    p>

  3. The legislature has exempted itself from the Open Meeting Law, so somehow this is legal, and MA citizens somehow accept this.

    4. <

    p>

  4. According to House Speaker Sal DiMasi, negotiatiors on the bill operated under a confidentiality pact, and could not disclose details of the legislation prematurely.

    5. <

    p>

  5. Senate President Robert Travaglini called the bill “a delicate balance between providers, consumers, state and federal governments.” Unfortunately consumers were left out of the process.

    6. <

    p>

  6. The State Senate voted for it 37-to-ZERO! The State House backed it 154-2. Remember — they had less than a day to read it!

    7. <

    p>

  7. Romney proudly signed it into law, even sharing a stage with Ted Kennedy for the first time since he challenged his Senate seat. Romney: “the reason this is so landmark is that we have found a way, collectively, to get all of our citizens insurance without some new government-mandated takeover or a huge new tax program.” Kennedy: “with the signing of this landmark health reform bill, after so many years of false starts, our actions have finally matched our words and we have lived up to our ideals”. Pardon me while I puke!

    8. <

    p>

  8. The legislature then violated the clear instructions of the SJC by avoiding a vote on an amendment that would have enshrined the right to affordable and equitably financed health care for all residents into the state constitution. This move denied the people’s constitutional rights to amend the constitution as well as the right to affordable healthcare.

    9. <

    p>
    And what does the law do??? It forces people to buy stripped down insurance policies — the same ones that are the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country because they don’t ensure anything. This reform does not address the spiraling costs of healthcare. It only opens up new markets for private insurers — the same ones we are already subsidizing mightily. We should take a cue from Michael Moore and stand up loudly against Massachusettsizing national healthcare (where we already pay more than enough in federal healthcare spending to get national single-payer). The whole point of insurance is that the risk is broadly distributed. The whole point of our current health laws is that the government “insures” high-risk people, and private insurers insure low-risk people. In other words, our health laws, including this reform bill, are not for healthcare, but for health-profiteering. Sounds like Katrina/Iraq reconstruction, or Big Dig construction, or democracy destruction to me.

    • All of what you say is accurate, including this item

      <

      p>

      The legislature then violated the clear instructions of the SJC by avoiding a vote on an amendment that would have enshrined the right to affordable and equitably financed health care for all residents into the state constitution. This move denied the people’s constitutional rights to amend the constitution as well as the right to affordable healthcare.

      <

      p>
      The state Supreme Judicial Court has recently set a date to hear the case brought by 10 plaintiffs seeking a remedy to this travesty of justice – the denial of a second up-or-down vote on the merits of the Health Care Amendment and its chance to advance to the statewide ballot.  (disclaimer: I am one of the plaintiffs)

      <

      p>
      Stay tuned at Health Care For Mass.

  9. Tsongas has said she supports the Edwards plan, (pdf) which includes both a personal and an employer mandate.

    <

    p>
    It’s not a bad plan (such as these things go), and it’s a lot more ambitious than Massachusetts. But interestingly, that’s not her emphasis. She seems to think “Massachusetts plan” = “Edwards plan” = “universal coverage”, which is not quite right.

    <

    p>
    BTW, most of the 155,000 people she’s talking about are benefitting not from the personal mandate or the new insurance products, but from straight-up single-payer (MassHealth pays all their bills) or subsidized care. That’s the successful part — the part with the greatest government role!

  10. Early in her campaign, she stumbled on health care, and then to make up for it she suggested that the shiny, new Massachusetts plan was the way to go because she simply didn’t get the nuances of the health care plan and what the options really are.  Now, she’s saddled with blanketly supporting the plan, and saying, “Hey, Deval was with it all along, too” as though that makes up for the fact that she doesn’t get it.  She may have ideas on other issues, but someone should explain health care to her, cuz she doesn’t get it.

  11. A sage bit of advice for all of us from the homepage of SickoCure.org (advice that brings Niki Tsongas to mind):

    <

    p>

    Beware of Phony Universal Coverage: Many political candidates say they support ?universal health care,? but usually this just means making more Americans insurance company customers. Real universal coverage means evicting insurance companies and establishing a national health program instead.

    <

    p>
    BTW Jamie Eldridge for Congress supports the real thing in universal healthcare reform: A Medicare For All single payer program. Jamie is joined by huge numbers of us frontline nurses and physicians across the country, our patients, and by Michael Moore; we all support HR 676 to expand and improve Medicare for All.

    <

    p>
    The 5 things you can do to help enact universal healthcare and related links are on the SickoCure.org website.

    <

    p>
    FYI Moore testified before congress and gave his support for HR 676 before the film SiCKO opened in theaters.  He showed clips from the film and then the patients and family members from the film, and a nurse testified as well.  These congressional hearings are continuing and can be read about at MichaelMoore.com

    <

    p>
    Niki Tsongas sides with HMO’s and Insurance Co’s instead of with ordinary people; sad but true.  Jamie Eldridge is the ONLY MA-05 candidate who thoroughly “gets” the healthcare issue and is a unswerving supporter of HR 676 Medicare For All. Don’t I wish I could vote for Jamie!! (I did give him a contribution – and you can too:)  I’m still trying to get Mike Capuano to re-endorse HR 676; even thought he endorsed it in the last session his staff is giving me B.S. about “he needs to be more careful now that the Dems are in the majority”  – Whaaaat???!!!!!

  12. It seems like, no, Tsongass plan isn’t perfect, but she is far from being a tool of the health care industry or anything like that.

    <

    p>
    She has some great, progressive ideas about health care. From her Web site:

    <

    p>
    -Regional Health Care Markets to lower costs and increase efficiency;
    -Enhanced coverage for children through the State Children’s Health Insurance -Program (SCHIP);
    -Enabling the Federal Government to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices;
    -Investing in preventative care and wellness programs, and;
    -Supporting and enhancing community health centers

    <

    p>
    We’ll get to single payer eventually, but why not make some progress now. It is silly to confuse pragmatism with lack of courage.

    • It is silly to confuse pragmatism with lack of courage.

      <

      p>
      Our entire system is so very very broken that only fundamental reform – NOT the tinkering that you list above (valuable as it may be but far from enough) – will begin to fix it and to prevent the financial raping of our budgets and the obscene amount of preventable suffering and early death that occur as A DIRECT RESULT every. single. day. and. every. hour.

      <

      p>
      Anything less than putting this state and this country squarely on track to sustainable universal coverage, in the form of improved Medicare For All fundamental reforms, is mere tinkering. It most definately cannot and willnot be allowed to hide beind the excuse of “pragmatism”. Anyone choosing this tinkering course has caved in to the insurance and big Pharma industries and their money and political power.

      <

      p>
      Niki Tsongas and every other politician or wanna be politician who sides with the corporate interests of HMO’s, Insurance Co’s and big Pharma does so at the expense of ordinary Americans. Period.  Own it.

      <

      p>
      The lines are being drawn and each individual – candidate, politician, voter, each of us – must decide who they are standing with.  Incremental tinkering is not “pragmatism”; it’s a shameful sellout.

      • and as Mike Gravel said last night, take a look at who’s bundling for whom and who’s pulling in the big campaign contributions.  It seems rather hypocritical to stand on a stage and talk about watered down versions of what we really need while being supported by pharma, insurance and health care providers who suddenly want to support Democrats.

  13. Just find it interesting that the comments here do not address the full content – or even explain the event referenced – Nurses for Niki.  A nurse training group spoke on behalf of her candidacy becuase of her advocacy for nurses, nursing programs and expanded training opportunities. 

    <

    p>
    Tsongas has a history of support for nurses, including her work at Middlesex Community College.  It was held in a pretty interesting setting – Holden Center in Lowell – where a largely immigrant population has been able to achieve nurse training and jobs.  These students will gain a meaningful job and were thrilled that a candidate for congress would take the time to see them, encourage them and answer their questions. 

    <

    p>
    The property in Lowell is being revitalized because of this training business and their investment plans.

    <

    p>
    As a Tsongas volunteer and someone working with Niki, I don’t object to your bringing up all of the old issues or asking your question, but maybe you could give some credit to her for initiative, willingness to continue to address and expand on health care issues, and mention the context of this particular story.

    <

    p>
    Will

    • But supporting nurses isn’t the same as supporting patients.  Let’s not muddy the issue here: Niki’s role on the board of an HMO tarnishes her credibility on health care.

  15. Gove vetoes IVF coverage for unmarried people.

    <

    p>
    Do we have to pay for people’s IVF treatments in Massachusetts?  It hardly seems like a health issue, if the person is perfectly healthy but just lacking someone to do it with.  We suspect that our mandated monthly tax is used to fund people’s IVF treatments and pay for all sorts of things that we don’t necessarily want to support.  Isn’t what‘s funded more important than how it is funded?

    • is that IVF for someone who is “perfectly healthy,” married or not, is not “medically necessary,” and therefore not covered by any insurer.  But that’s just a guess.

        • We don’t think we should be paying for anyone’s IVF, even if it is caused by a medical issue.  But we are paying for it even for people who probably could get pregnant for free?  What about paying for surrogates, is that covered by any companies?

          <

          p>
          How come our state didn’t have any discussion about this like they did in RI?  Not even David knew that we all paid for people’s IVF here.  How would it change the picture if we stopped paying for that?  What other things are we paying for that we don’t know about?

        • that it covers IVF that isn’t “medically necessary”?  I’d be very surprised if it covers IVF for someone who just feels like doing it.  After all, health insurance doesn’t usually cover any treatment that’s not medically necessary.

          <

          p>
          So yes, insurance in MA has to cover IVF — but unless you can show me that it requires coverage of IVF that’s not medically necessary, I will continue to assume that it doesn’t.

          •   “Who are you going out with to-night?” Lenina asked, returning from the vibro-vac like a pearl illuminated from within, pinkly glowing.

            <

            p>  “Nobody.”

            <

            p>  Lenina raised her eyebrows in astonishment.

            <

            p>  “I’ve been feeling rather out of sorts lately,” Fanny explained. “Dr. Wells advised me to have a Pregnancy Substitute.”

            <

            p>  “But, my dear, you’re only nineteen. The first Pregnancy Substitute isn’t compulsory till twenty-one.”

            <

            p>  “I know, dear. But some people are better if they begin earlier. Dr. Wells told me that brunettes with wide pelvises, like me, ought to have their first Pregnancy Substitute at seventeen. So I’m really two years late, not two years early.” She opened the door of her locker and pointed to the row of boxes and labelled phials on the upper shelf.

            <

            p>  “SYRUP OF CORPUS LUTEUM,” Lenina read the names aloud. “OVARIN, GUARANTEED FRESH: NOT TO BE USED AFTER AUGUST 1ST, A.F. 632. MAMMARY GLAND EXTRACT: TO BE TAKEN THREE TIMES DAILY, BEFORE MEALS, WITH A LITTLE WATER. PLACENTIN: 5cc TO BE INJECTED INTRAVENALLY EVERY THIRD DAY ? Ugh!” Lenina shuddered. “How I loathe intravenals, don’t you?”

            <

            p>  “Yes. But when they do one good ?” Fanny was a particularly sensible girl.

Archives