Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Obama health care speech open thread

By

I’m too distracted to live-blog — I’m trying to watch Oudin/Wozniacki in the US Open while also watching the speech.  What are you hearing?  Perhaps more importantly, what are you not hearing?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I can never keep up enough to live blog, but I’m watching and will take a few notes.

    <

    p>It’s starting…

  2. Are you kidding me?  As if the British and Canadian leaders never have to deal with it now…

    <

    p>Over-unders:
    “bipartisan” – 4
    “cancer” – 3
    “Clinton” – 1
    swing state – 2
    “responsibility” – 2

    • Unless he was planning on fighting LBJ style for Medicare for all then there’s not a chance he’ll be last.  Even then, as you point out, there will always be issues.

  3. Saying that we’re paying a hidden tax for someone else’s insurance plays into their rhetoric, Mr. President…even if you’re going to say that your plan will relieve that burden, it appeases a me-only, individualistic line of thought.

  4. A bit of self-congratulation about stabilizing the economy.

    <

    p>Not the first prez to take on health care, but determined to be the last.

    <

    p>Theodore Roosevelt the first… John Dingle introduces each session a bill first proposed by his father in the 1940’s.

    <

    p>Middle class Americans, not people are welfare, are one illness away from bankruptcy.  

    <

    p>Only advanced democracy, only wealthy nation, that allows such hardship for its citizens.

    <

    p>Every day 14,000 Americans are losing their coverage.  Can happen to everyone.  If you move, lose your job, you can lose your health insurance too.  Or get dropped from coverage due to preexisting conditions.  

    <

    p>Prez is sounding good, lots of applause, standing ovations from Dems… Repugs aren’t standing up

    <

    p>We all pay for charitable and emergency care for others – hidden tax of $1000 per year on each of us.  Heavy burden on our businesses.  Medicare, healthcare is bulk of our deficit problem, nothing else comes close.  Facts no one disputes.  Must reform system, control costs.

    <

    p>Those on left – need single payer system, government provided health care for all.

    <

    p>Those on right – leave individuals to buy insurance on their own, end employer-based system.

    <

    p>Either of these systems would be radical and disrupt the care people currently have.

    <

    p>Prez says he prefers to build on what works, fix what doesn’t.  lots of applause for this

    <

    p>Bills under consideration do exactly this.  Agreement on 80% of what needs to be done.  But have also seen partisan spectacle and scare tactics.  

    • Considering there are five bills in committee, a long distance from compromise, and time running uneasy, Obama speaks with a lot of confidence about a single “plan”.

      • Was POTUS mostly speaking about HR 3200 the other night or was he envisioning a new bill, possibly written largely by the White House?

  5. is that much as I’m frustrated with the timidity of this plan, the requirement that insurers not be able to reject people due to pre-existing conditions is pretty significant.  It says that insurance is more than an actuarial game roulette craps table for some corporations to play…

    • …to expect that individuals would need to have held insurance prior to getting the condition?

      <

      p>Allow me to clarify:

      <

      p>Let’s say I have the opportunity to get insurance but decide not to. Then, I get sick. Then I want to apply for health insurance.

      <

      p>Is it reasonable for the insurance company to not cover the “pre-existing” condition for some period of time? It seems reasonable to me. Afterall, you don’t by life insurance after your dead or homeowners insurance after the fire.

      <

      p>It’s not just an actuarial game. This is a program that is supposed to be funded by premiums. It’s about a solvent program vs. a bankrupt one. The pre-existing clause needs to be coupled with a requirement for each individual to carry insurance.

      • toward having a public option available to everyone.  If an insurance company’s rational move is to take away a woman’s breast cancer treatment because of gallstones she didn’t know about, then health care is not something we should have for-profit insurance companies doing.

        • I’ve heard of pre-existing conditions being exempted, but I’ve not heard of coverage being completely denied. Could you point me to an example?

          • http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI…

            Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery.

            The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne. A word written on her chart was interpreted to mean precancerous, so the insurance company decided to launch an investigation into her medical history.

            Beaton’s dermatologist begged her insurance provider to go ahead with the surgery.

            “He said, ‘This is a misunderstanding. This is not precancerous. All she has is acne.’ … He said ,’Please don’t hold up her cancer surgery for this,’ ” Beaton, 59, said as she testified at a House subcommittee hearing on the terminations of individual health policies by insurance companies.

            Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.

            My mistake though, the woman didn’t have gallstones.  She had acne.  That was why the insurance company would not approve her double mastectomy.

          •  

            Peggy Raddatz testified on behalf of her brother, who was diagnosed with stage four non-Hodgkin’s type lymphoma. In the midst of his chemotherapy treatment, his coverage was rescinded and he was not able to receive the stem cell transplant needed to save his life.

            Raddatz’s brother was told his coverage was canceled for failing to disclose that, unknown to him, a doctor had once noted in his file that a CT scan showed a small aneurysm and some insignificant gallstones.

            Peggy Raddatz worked with the Illinois attorney general’s office and eventually was able, after two appeals, to get her brother’s coverage reinstated.

            Insurance companies argue rescissions are relatively rare, but Waxman said the practice saved the companies $300 million over the past five years. Waxman said he and the insurers agree the solution to the rescission problem is to pass comprehensive health reform legislation.

            from the same CNN article.

          • that the contract is invalid and insuraance recinded if they can show you did not give complete accurate information on your original paperwork. It does not have to be related to your present condition.

          •  When I needed kidney dyalysis, my insirance carrier dropped me like a hot briquet. I then had to divorce my wife, and spend down to being penniless to qualify for medicare (t didn’t take me much spending). I’m all for marriage equality, where’s the line forming?  

      • You’re correct.

        <

        p>Unfortunately that means that
        Those who do not have insurance when they become ill;
        The insured that lose their job after becoming ill;
        Or children who develop an illness;
        will be unable to get insurance for the rest of their lives. Their families also will be denied health care. Death panels.

        <

        p>You’re basically making the point that for profit insurance companies interests are in conflict with providing health care.

  6. Forced purchase of health insurance, and lots of government paperwork if you can’t afford it.  Obama’s turning this into an insurance giveaway and calling it reform.

    <

    p>Give me affordable, government-run health care and I’m fer’it.  Make me choose between atavistic scams (“insurance companies”) and it’s a Republican’s dream job.

    • to the plan.
      Hannity decried it as possibly un-constitutional and he may be correct.
      The Republicans in Massachusetts didn’t challenge the plan that Romney signed, but it is difficult to see how a Court could find it legal for citizens to be forced to support the profits of a private corporation.

      <

      p>Car insurance is different. You are only required to purchase auto insurance if you drive your car on a public road.

    • Ever since the campaign it sounded like he wanted to take the MA plan national, which I do not favor, though it’s still a lot better than nothing.

  7. That applies to widgets and breafast cereals and other market goods where there’s something vaguely approaching perfect competition.  The market failures around health care are legion.

    <

    p>Health care is simply NOT a market good.  

  8. The public option would only be available to those who don’t already have insurance??  So if I have shitty insurance at work, I’m not allowed to switch to a better public plan?  WTF?

    • That’s how the Massachusetts law currently works. My family’s income is low enough to qualify for the really cheap subsidized plans, but because my wife is offered insurance through her job, we aren’t allowed to use them. Fortunately, the insurance her job offers is not unreasonably expensive and is actually very good.

      <

      p>I looked it up in January, so I might be misremembering the numbers. But I think the subsidized plan would cost us about $50/month if we were allowed to sign up for it. The employer-provided plan is about $400/month.

      <

      p>I do think that everyone should be allowed to sign up for the public plan, even if they have some employer-provided option. A lot of lower-income people with full time jobs probably have crappy employer-provided plans that cost a lot, and should be given the option of switching if they want to.

      • that the public option should be made available for anyone to choose.  But once reform is implemented, the price of workplace premiums should drop. $100/wk is a big chunk of paycheck.  Plus you probably have co-pays and deductibles too.  
        It seems to me, the public option won’t lower overall premium costs if it’s not available for everyone to choose.

        • What I didn’t hear (though someone can enlighten me if I missed something) is how someone in my situation would benefit.  My employer does offer health coverage, but it involves a good chunk of my paycheck.  I did some math, realized I was living paycheck-to-paycheck as it is, acknowledged that I’m still young and healthy, and basicaly thought thanks but no thanks.  I’m concerned that there will not be assistance for me on the grounds that I “chose” to turn down what was offered by my employer.

          • That is something that needs to be looked into further. That is why we need an overhaul of yearly income vs cost-of-living scales, in otherwords, poverty guidelines.  As far as I know, they have not changed over the last few years as the cost of basic needs, including insurance, utilities, and groceries, have gone through major price increases, while paychecks have remained stagnant.

            <

            p>Health insurance premiums can eat up 20 hours of a 40 hour week.  Something does have to be done about that if they are going to make it mandatory to buy insurance coverage.

  9. Now it’s time to act.

    <

    p>Plan needs us all to take responsibility – employers, individuals.

    <

    p>Incorporates ideas from both Dems and Repubs.

    <

    p>If you have Medicare, VA, Medicaid, employer-based insurance – nothing in the plan requires you to change what you have.

    <

    p>But it will make insurance you have work better for you.  Against the law to deny coverage for preexisting conditions.  Against the law to drop coverage when you get sick. No longer arbitrary caps on coverage per year or in your lifetime.  Limits on out-of-pocket expenses – no one should have to broke from being sick.  Insurance should have to cover preventative care – saves money, saves lives.

    <

    p>More security & more stability for those who have insurance.

    <

    p>For those who have no insurance, the plan will offer quality, affordable coverage.  If you lose your job, or start your own business can shop for insurance is an  Insurance Exchange.  As a big group, they can be offered affordable coverage just as big corporations.  

    <

    p>Credit McCain for idea for allowing those without insurance with a preexisting condition to get insurance.  didn’t catch all of this

    <

    p>We all pay if some don’t participate.  Unless everyone does their part, reforms can’t work.  Businesses must offer insurance or chip in, individuals must carry insurance just like auto insurance, hardship waivers for those who can’t afford it and for small businesses.  What we can’t have is those who can afford insurance or large businesses gaming the system, not doing their part.

    <

    p>These reforms will benefit the economy as a whole.

    <

    p>Many have grown nervous about reform due to misinformation.

    <

    p>Bogus claims spread by those who want to kill reform at any cost.  There are no panels of bureaucrats to kill senior citizens – laughable if not cynical and irresponsible.  It is a lie, pure and simple.  Will not apply to illegal immigrants.  No federal dollars will fund abortions and federal conscience laws will remain in place.  Will not amount to a government take over of health insurance.  Consumers do better when there is choice and competition.  Many states, most of market controlled by very few companies.  Without competition, price goes up and quality goes down.  Makes it easy to overcharge small businesses without leverage.  Drop the seriously ill.  They do it because it’s profitable.

    <

    p>No interest in putting insurance companies out of business.  Provide a valuable service, employ our friends and neighbors.  Wants to hold them accountable through reforms discussed. Another way to do this is to provide a not for profit option.  An option – believe less than 5% of Americans would sign.  This option is not to be taxpayer subsidized.  To be self-sufficient and rely on premiums.  Could be a good deal for consumers.  Just like public colleges – which don’t inhibit a vibrant system of private universities.  Majority favors a public option.  

    <

    p>Impact should not be exaggerated by left or right.  To those on the left: It’s only one part of the plan.  Means to an end – choice and competition.  Be open to other means.  To those on the right:  It’s not a government takeover.

  10. That was some cagey language…what did he just offer to give away on tort reform?  And did he just offer the Republicans something they can point to as an excuse to delay, saying that they won’t vote for a bill until malpractice law is utterly overhauled?

  11. How do we pay for this plan?

    <

    p>Prez will not sign a plan that adds one dime to the deficit now or in the future.

    <

    p>We have a big deficit because efforts over the last decade were not paid for – starting with the Iraq war.

    <

    p>Will not make same mistake with healthcare.

    <

    p>Most of this plan can be paid for with savings in the existing healthcare system.  Much of what we pay does not make us any healthier.  

    <

    p>Speaking to seniors on Medicare – Medicare is a sacred trust.  Not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan good thing – isn’t Medicare about broke?  But there is waste in the system.  Will ensure seniors get benefits promised and the system is there for future generations.  Also fix the out of pocket prescription drug costs doughnut hole.  

    <

    p>ForcefulI will protect Medicare.  I hope people are watching this – he’s doing a great job.

    <

    p>Medical malpractice reforms. This finally gets the Republicans up on their feet.  Doesn’t think this is a silver bullet, but defensive medicine may contribute to unnecessary costs.  Let’s authorize demonstration projects to test out this idea.  

    <

    p>Plan will cost $900B over 10 years.

    <

    p>Less than the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

    <

    p>Less than the Bush tax cuts.  

    <

    p>Most paid for by money we already are spending in the healthcare system.

    <

    p>If we can slow the growth of healthcare spending by a fraction of a percent per year, will reduce deficit by ? 4 trillion.

    <

    p>No patience for those who think it’s better politics to kill the plan than to improve it.  I will not accept the status quo as a solution.  Not this time, not now.  Everyone knows what will happen if we do nothing.  Deficit will grow.  More families will go bankrupt.  We cannot fail. Too many Americans are counting on us to succeed.

    <

    p>Letter from Senator Kennedy.  Healthcare “Great unfinished business of our society”.  It’s a moral issue.  At stake, not just details of policy, but character of our country.

    <

    p>Those of us who knew Teddy, what drove him was something more.  Hatch and McCain and Grassley knew this.  Worked together to provide

    <

    p>Ted’s passion born not of ideology, but his experience of having two children stricken with cancer.  What would it be like to have to say to a wife, or child or aging parent, there is something that could help you, but I can’t afford it?

    <

    p>Concern for the plight of others is not a partisan feeling.  We are all in this together.  

    <

    p>Recalls when social security, Medicare were passed.  Our predecessors understood that government cannot solve every problem, but the danger of too much government is matched by the danger of too little.  

    <

    p>This is tough debate.  Many are skeptical.  This moment calls for action. We did not come here to fear the future.  We came here to act even when it’s hard. OK, I’m tearing up now.  Great speech  I still believe we can do great things.  Here and now we can meet history’s test.

  12. A heart surgeon.  Need common sense reforms we can afford.  

    <

    p>American people want reform, but want common sense bipartisan plan.  Replacing your healthcare with government run healthcare is not the answer.   Of course, this isn’t what is being proposed, but nevermind.

    <

    p>Prez had chance to take the government run healthcare off the table, but didn’t do it.

    <

    p>Agreement:
    Access to coverage without regard to preexisting conditions.

    <

    p>Insurers should be able to offer incentives for wellness care and prevention.

    <

    p>there were two other things, but I missed them

    <

    p>Hopes prez is serious about medical liability reform.

    <

    p>Obermann, MSNBC: Rep. Boustany has been sued three times for malpractice.

    • And the Republicans showed themselves for who they truly are…a bunch of sallow, tired oldsters using sallow, tired old ideas.  Cantor ostentatiously consulting his BlackBerry during the President’s remarks, another loser yelling out “you lie!’ when Obama took away his scare line, harrumphing losers holding up handmade signs…Democrats haven’t been elected across the country just to give these retreads a veto.

  14. We watched on MSNBC, but when we switched stations to see what the spin was, we couldn’t find coverage on any other station.

    • I watched on PBS, and I actually did see it on Fox as I was flipping channels (so I wonder if the reports that it wouldn’t be on there were an urban myth, or a change of plans).

    • but didn’t hang around to catch the aftermath. I had the Oudin / Wozniacki match recording and jumped over to that. I just finished now (no spoilers).

  15. I wish he had focused more on the impact of the plan on working people with insurance.   To counter the Republican line: “it’s going to help poor people and hurt you and you’re going to pay for it” approach.

    <

    p>Someone needs to explain how much health care inflation costs regular working people, both in premium costs and in lost wages.  How a public option (not to mention single payer) could reduce those costs.  How much more security (and leverage at work) working people will have when they don’t have to worry about losing health insurance if they quit or lose their job.  

    <

    p>I’m glad he made the point about how the whole plan costs less than the Bush tax cuts.  

  16. i regret to say health care as a political issue has always been one that bores me to tears. i just can’t get into learning all the ins and outs.

    <

    p>but a friend emailed me:
    “Maybe it does not exist but do you know where I can find a non-biased, non partisan-rhetoric- filled document, article or whatever on what Obama’s health care reform proposal actually entails? Layman’s terms would be nice too. All I hear are buzz words and talking points but honestly I’m not really sure what it is, specifically, is being proposed. All I can find online (including the white house’s web site) is biased information about how horrible it is or how great it is depending on the opinion of the person writing it.”

    <

    p>any leads I can pass along?

  17. in New Hampshire lauding the speech.  I’ll take that as a good sign.  

    <

    p>I thought Obama was absolutely at the top of his game, but I’m a fan of his particular flavor of Kool-Aid.  The question is whether middle America was watching and was won over.

  18. He made many critical points, most importantly reminding the naysayers (republicans, uninformed Americans, health insurance industry, wealthy folks) about what health insurance coverage currently means in the US, and that it is nothing more that a profit machine for big businesses.  However, he then said that he has spoken to health insurance executives and they say they have to do it to compete with the profit expectations on wall street.  (Are you kidding!!!!????)

    <

    p>Can you believe that there are so many people fighting to keep the health insurance status quo in America.  Fighting to keep health insurance in America a profit motivated, wall street controlled provider of lousy health benefits.

    <

    p>How many of us already knew this, yet it is barely mentioned in the course of fighting for health care reform. Hearing it come straight from the Presidents mouth was

    <

    p>……AWESOME!!!!!

  19. Yes! It will be a self funded, non profit, government run insurance company, paid for by premiums that would be paid to any insurance company.

    <

    p>Hearing him stand up for the public option is what I was hoping for.  It is such an important part of reform, it is equally as important as the other aspects of reform.  It will be the primary motivator in getting insurance companies to become more efficient and cost effective, to provide better services to consumers at a lower cost, and to set a standard for what is expected from the industry.  They are just going to have to find a way around existing only to meet wall streets expectations. These insurance companies are in business because they are suppose to be providing a service to consumers.  It’s about time they start providing that service.

  20. One of the results of being a “grown up” is that, absent an emergency, prior commitments get honored.  As a result, I was in a meeting last night and could not watch President Obama’s speech as it was being given.  What is a good/best URL to watch it sometime today or this evening [once again, prior commitments mean today must be a work day so probably, this evening].

  21. BMG experts on instant polls — So what are we supposed to think about this?

    <

    p>

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — Two out of three Americans who watched President Obama’s health care reform speech Wednesday night favor his health care plans, a 14-point gain among speech-watchers, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. national poll.

    • I’m certainly not complaining about the instant poll results here, but it need to be taken with a grain of salt.

      <

      p>Typically, the people who watch these sorts of speeches (including State of the Union addresses and rare addresses to joint sessions of Congress like this one) tend to be supportive of the President. In other words, supporters are more likely to tune in than opponents. So the “2/3” number is likely higher than the population as a whole.

      <

      p>Still, I think the speech will move the numbers somewhat. The key is whether any changes are lasting, and whether any shift in polling numbers translates into more Blue Dogs (and the most progressive Democrats) getting behind the plan.

      • Well, yes the article goes on to say:

        <

        p>

        The audience for the speech appears to be more Democratic than the U.S. population as a whole. Because of this, the results may favor Obama simply because more Democrats than Republicans tune into the speech. The poll surveyed the opinions of people who watched Wednesday night’s speech, and does not reflect the views of all Americans.

        <

        p>Even more interesting:

        <

        p>

        About one in seven people who watched the speech changed their minds on Obama’s health care plan. “Going into the speech, a bare majority of his audience – 53 percent – favored his proposals. Immediately after the speech, that figure rose to 67 percent,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “But the real question is whether those conversions will last. Bill Clinton got similar numbers after his 1993 address to Congress, but five months later a majority of the country no longer supported his plan.”

        <

        p>Polls are always accurate pictures. But as Judy correctly asked, of what?

  23. why would any “new” govt program work. Medicare by all accounts is bankrupt. Medicare underpays for procedures and services. Medicare leaves most patients with large 20% co-pays. Obama tells us there is waste in Medicare. I would have more belief in govt run healthcare if i could see results from the current Medicare program that are better. Say what you will about for-profit insurance companies they are solvent unlike Medicare.  

    • Medicare isn’t bankrupt.  The Medicare trustees report projects enough money in the trust fund to last until 2017.

      <

      p>Now, of course, we need to address this.  But to say that Medicare is currently bankrupt is completely misleading.

    • It does not drop coverage, increase premiums, place annual or life time caps on care. Medicare pays for pre existing conditions and is transportable. Medicare has covered every senior and disabled person eligible for SS for decades. These are the folks that would have difficulty getting coverage with private insurance and Medicare seems to be able to provide care for the sick at a lower cost than private insurance does for the healthy.

  25. Good thing too – I was starting to worry that the President was going to get through a health care speech less than a month after Kennedy’s death and not mention him!

Archives