Tag Archives: insurance

What the Health Care Bill Does for Average Americans

Posted by: Bluedog89

President Barack Obama addresses doctors at the White House.

HP~After months of fierce debate around the country and after an intense day of voting on Capitol Hill, a health care reform bill is on its way to President Obama’s desk.

Once Obama signs the bill into law, as he is expected to do on Tuesday, it will mean an end to the current health care system as we know it.

Pundits on the right and left have been reacting to passage of the legislation, but what does the bill actually mean for the average American?

The immediate effects of the health care bill as well as some that will take effect in the first year of implementation are as follows:

1. Health Insurers cannot deny children health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. A ban on the discrimination in adults will take effect in 2014.

2. Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will get tax credits covering up to 50% of employee premiums.

3. Seniors will get a rebate to fill the so-called “donut hole” in Medicare drug coverage, which severely limits prescription medication coverage expenditures over $2,700. As of next year, 50% of the donut hole will be filled.

4. The cut-off age for young adults to continue to be covered by their parents’ health insurance rises to the age 27.

5. Lifetime caps on the amount of insurance an individual can have will be banned. Annual caps will be limited, and banned in 2014.

6. A temporary high-risk pool will be set up to cover adults with pre-existing conditions. Health care exchanges will eliminate the program in 2014.

7. New plans must cover checkups and other preventative care without co-pays. All plans will be affected by 2018.

8. Insurance companies can no longer cut someone when he or she gets sick.

9. Insurers must now reveal how much money is spent on overhead.

10. Any new plan must now implement an appeals process for coverage determinations and claims.

11. This tax will impose a 10% tax on indoor tanning services. This tax, which replaced the proposed tax on cosmetic surgery, would be effective for services on or after July 1, 2010.

12. New screening procedures will be implemented to help eliminate health insurance fraud and waste.

13. Medicare payment protections will be extended to small rural hospitals and other health care facilities that have a small number of Medicare patients.

14. Non-profit Blue Cross organizations will be required to maintain a medical loss ratio — money spent on procedures over money incoming — of 85% or higher to take advantage of IRS tax benefits.

15. Chain restaurants will be required to provide a “nutrient content disclosure statement” alongside their items. Expect to see calories listed both on in-store and drive-through menus of fast-food restaurants sometime soon.

16. The bill establishes a temporary program for companies that provide early retiree health benefits for those ages 55‐64 in order to help reduce the often-expensive cost of that coverage.

17. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will set up a new Web site to make it easy for Americans in any state to seek out affordable health insurance options The site will also include helpful information for small businesses.

18. A two‐year temporary credit (up to a maximum of $1 billion) is in the bill to encourage investment in new therapies for the prevention and treatment of diseases.

More @

Leave a comment

Filed under (Speaker of the House) Nancy Pelosi, Aging, Barack Obama, Childhood Obesity, Children, Congress, Government, Health, Health Care Reform, History, Medicine, News, Politics, Pres. Barack Obama, Senate, Seniors, United States, US, Women's Issues, Young Men, Young Women

President Obama’s Saturday YouTube Address 02/20/10

white house gov logoWhiteHouse.govPremiums, Profits, and the Need for Health Reform ~ The President points to outrageous premium hikes from health insurance companies, especially those already making massive profits, as further proof of the need for reform. Looking ahead to the coming bipartisan meeting on reform, the President urges members of Congress to come to the table in good faith to address the issue.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Change, Congress, Culture, Democrats, DNC, Economy, Health, Health Care Reform, Media and Entertainment, News, Obama Administration, Politics, Pop Culture, Pres. Barack Obama, Presidents, Senate, Video/YouTube, Weekly YouTube Address

Newswire: BofA repays $45B in government bailout funds

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Bank of America says it has repaid the entire $45 billion it owes U.S. taxpayers as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Bank of America funded the repayment through a combination of cash on hand and the sale of $19.29 billion of securities that would convert into common stock. The stock increase remains subject to shareholder approval.

source:

Heath Care breakthrough: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said that he was happy with where the talks had gone.
“I’ve got a smile on my face. I don’t smile naturally,” he said.

Senate negotiators emerged from a full day of meetings Tuesday saying they had made genuine progress toward a deal on health care reform.

They declined to outline the specifics of the agreement, but said that the measures they had been discussing will be sent to the Congressional Budget Office for cost estimates. Once the estimates are returned, the final deal will be put together.

“We have made a lot of progress. There’s a lot of agreement. We have decided to take the next step and that is to ask the CBO to score what we’ve been discussing,” said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), one of five conservative Democrats negotiating with five liberals.

The discussion has focused on abandoning or greatly narrowing the public health insurance option. In exchange, people 55-64 would be able to buy in to Medicare and Medicaid eligibility would be expanded to people within 150 percent of the federal poverty line. And people within 300 percent of poverty would be eligible for a program pushed by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) modeled on her state’s Basic Health. Cantwell is not one of the ten in the meetings but has stopped by to brief negotiators.

Senators, after the meeting, would not confirm which elements of the discussion were sent to CBO. Much will depend on the results of the CBO analysis.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), one of the liberal members in negotiations, said that he was happy with where the talks had gone.

“I’ve got a smile on my face. I don’t smile naturally,” he said.

source:

Reid: “about access to health care, not abortion.”

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate has rejected an effort to stiffen abortion restrictions in the health care bill.

The vote was 54 to 45.

Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah wanted to ban any insurance plan that gets taxpayer dollars from offering abortion coverage. The stronger restrictions mirrored provisions in the House-passed health care bill.

source:

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

***Breaking–Kentucky Census Worker Bill Sparkman Killed Himself, Police Say

breakingnewsanimation

In this undated 2008 photo, Bill Sparkman speaks to a 7th grade class during a lesson about sound waves.

AP—A Kentucky census worker found naked, bound with duct tape and hanging from a tree with “fed” scrawled on his chest killed himself but staged his death to make it look like a homicide, authorities said Tuesday.

Bill Sparkman, 51, was found Sept. 12 with a rope around his neck near a cemetery in a heavily wooded area of the Daniel Boone National Forest in southeastern Kentucky. Authorities said his wrists were loosely bound, his glasses were taped to his head and he was gagged.

Kentucky State Police Capt. Lisa Rudzinski said an analysis found that “fed” was written “from the bottom up.” He was touching the ground, and to survive “all Mr. Sparkman had to do at any time was stand up,” she said.

Our investigation, based on evidence and witness testimony, has concluded that Mr. Sparkman died during an intentional, self-inflicted act that was staged to appear as a homicide,” Rudzinski said.

Authorities said Sparkman alone manipulated the suicide scene. Rudzinski said he “told a credible witness that he planned to commit suicide and provided details on how and when.”

Authorities wouldn’t say who Sparkman told of his plan, but said Sparkman talked about it a week before his suicide and the person did not take him seriously.

Friends and co-workers have said that even while undergoing chemotherapy for cancer, Sparkman would show up for work smiling with a toboggan cap to cover his balding head. They said he was punctual and dependable.

$600,000 in life insurance
Sparkman had recently taken out two accidental life insurance policies totaling $600,000 that would not pay out for suicide, authorities said. If Sparkman had been killed on the job, his family also would have been be eligible for up to $10,000 in death gratuity payments from the government.

Sparkman’s son, Josh, previously told The Associated Press that his father had named him as his life insurance beneficiary. Josh Sparkman said earlier this month he found paperwork for the private life insurance policy among his father’s personal files but wasn’t sure of the amount.

The Census Bureau suspended door-to-door interviews in the rural area after Sparkman’s body was found, but a spokesman said normal operations would resume in Clay County next month.

Anti-government sentiment was initially one possibility in the death. Authorities said Sparkman had discussed perceived negative views of the federal government in the county.

blank
More @

3 Comments

Filed under Agencies, Cancer, Census Bureau, Crime, Government, Kentucky, Law, Police, Politics, Teachers, Uncategorized, United States

Insurance Probed in Census Taker Bill Sparkman’s Death

Posted by Audiegrl

MANCHESTER-KY-largeAP/Jeffrey McMurray & Devlin Barrett— A census taker found hanging from a tree had named his son as his life insurance beneficiary, and investigators are looking into whether the father manipulated the death scene to make a claim possible, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press Thursday.

In an interview with AP, Josh Sparkman said he found paperwork for the private life insurance policy among his father’s personal files but wasn’t sure of the amount or when it was taken out. He said authorities have told him nothing about the case or produced a death certificate, which is usually needed to make an insurance claim.

Two law enforcement sources, who spoke to AP on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the case, said investigators are trying to determine if Bill Sparkman committed suicide but altered the scene to make it look like a homicide, allowing his son to collect. Life insurance policies typically do not cover suicides within a certain period of time after the policy starts.

Josh Sparkman said he is convinced his father was slain, in part because there were several items missing and apparently stolen from his car.

If it’s deemed suicide, there’s no point in even looking at insurance,” Josh Sparkman said. “There’s no such thing as suicide insurance. The money is not the concern. I just want to know what happened to my dad.

blank
More @ Associated Press

Leave a comment

Filed under Census Bureau, Crime, Kentucky, Law, Politics, True Crime, Uncategorized, Violence

Study: 2,200 Vets Died Last Year Because They Lacked Health Insurance

Posted by Buellboy
nationalveteransdayanc-wide

ThinkProgress/—On the eve of Veterans Day, a team of researchers from Harvard Medical School has released a study finding that an estimated 2,266 veterans under the age of 65 died last year because they did not have health insurance. That “translates to six preventable deaths per day” and more than twice the number killed in Afghanistan since the war began in 2001.

Being uninsured raises a person’s odds of dying prematurely by 40 percent. The researchers found that 1.46 million veterans between the ages of 18 and 64 lacked insurance in 2008. While most veterans are eligible to receive excellent care from the Veterans Administration, those who were not injured in combat and whose income is above a certain threshold are often ineligible. Others are assigned low priorities, providing them with less consistent and more expensive access to care:

blank
More @ thinkprogresssmall2

Leave a comment

Filed under Health, Health Care Reform, Military, Veterans, Veterans Day

AP: AARP To Endorse House Health Care Bill

AP Sources: AARP to endorse House health care bill

(AP)
WASHINGTON — Officials are telling The Associated Press that AARP_the seniors’ lobby_will endorse the health care overhaul bill that House Democrats are preparing to take to the floor.
Officials with knowledge of the group’s decision told The Associate Press on Wednesday that the senior’s lobby has decided to give the $1.2 trillion measure its seal of approval. An announcement is expected Thursday. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the announcement has not been made.
The endorsement, in advance of floor votes as early as this weekend, would be a major boost for President Barack Obama’s signature issue.

Source:

“We think we’ll have the votes”

Oct. 29 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled a $894 billion health care bill Thursday that would extend coverage to 36 million Americans through a mix of subsidies, tax incentives and penalties on individuals and small businesses, but the final package falls short of the more liberal vision of a public health insurance option.

Party leaders would like to start debate on the bill next week and hope to have a final vote before Veteran’s Day on Nov. 11.

The long-awaited introduction of a combined House health care bill produced few major surprises. After weeks of public hand-wringing, leaders – and party liberals – bowed to political reality by allowing doctors and hospitals to negotiate their rates with the government under the public plans.

Unveiling the bill at the Capitol, Pelosi said the bill would meet the goals of “affordability of the middle class, security for our seniors, responsibility to our children. It reduces the deficit, meets President Obama’s call to keep the costs under $900 billion over 10 years and it insures 36 million more Americans.”

“The bill is fiscally sound, will not add one dime to the deficit as it expands coverage, implements key insurance reforms and promotes prevention and wellness across the health system,” Pelosi said.

The bill would cut the deficit by about $30 billion over the next 10 years.

More From : politicologosmall

States can opt out of the public option, but how many will?

The Public Option: Let’s Not Opt Out and Say We Did

By MICHAEL GRUNWALD – Insurers are furious that Senate majority leader Harry Reid’s health-care-reform bill will include a public option – even though it lets states opt out if they don’t want the government-run insurance alternative.
Liberals are ecstatic with Reid over that same public option – even though opt-out states would be able to keep their markets completely private, which would limit the public plan’s power to negotiate volume-based discounts in other states. (Read “Understanding the Health-Care Debate: Your Indispensable Guide.”)
It’s an impressive bipartisan consensus regarding the power of inertia. For all the disagreements over the public option, almost everyone agrees that making it the default is a big deal, and that the compromise allowing opt-outs is a pretty modest compromise. That’s because reams of studies have shown that default settings really, really matter. If Reid’s legislation had omitted a default public option but allowed states to opt in if they wanted one, insurers would be ecstatic and liberals would be furious.

The classic example of the power of the default is the opt-out 401(k) savings plan. In a 2001 study, only 36% of the participants signed up for a retirement savings plan when they had to opt in – even though their employers were matching their contributions. Free money, and only 36% took it! But when participants were automatically signed up for the same plan but given the chance to opt out, 86% of them stuck with it. Scholars have found similar status-quo results with organ donations. If we have to sign up, very few of us become organ donors. If we have to opt out, most of us remain organ donors. Similarly, when our electronic gadgets come with the energy-saving auto-power-down function enabled, we’re cool with that; if we have to enable it ourselves, we rarely bother.

Cont’d Here: timemagazinelogo

5 Comments

Filed under Change, Economy, Health, Partisan Politics, Uncategorized

President Obama’s Saturday Youtube Address 10/31/09

white house gov logo
WhiteHouse.gov—While there is nothing to celebrate until job numbers turn around, the President cites the recent dramatic turnaround in gross domestic product as a sign of better things to come. He also applauds the fact that the Recovery Act has now created or saved more than a million jobs.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
October 31, 2009

Each week, I’ve spoken with you about the challenges we face as a nation and the path we must take to meet them. And the truth is, over the past ten months, I’ve often had to report distressing news during what has been a difficult time for our country. But today, I am pleased to offer some better news that – while not cause for celebration – is certainly reason to believe that we are moving in the right direction.

On Thursday, we received a report on our Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. This is an important measure of our economy as a whole, one that tells us how much we are producing and how much businesses and families are earning. We learned that the economy grew for the first time in more than a year and faster than at any point in the previous two years. So while we have a long way to go before we return to prosperity, and there will undoubtedly be ups and downs along the road, it’s also true that we’ve come a long way. It is easy to forget that it was only several months ago that the economy was shrinking rapidly and many economists feared another Great Depression.

Now, economic growth is no substitute for job growth. And we will likely see further job losses in the coming days, a fact that is both troubling for our economy and heartbreaking for the men and women who suddenly find themselves out of work. But we will not create the jobs we need unless the economy is growing; that’s why this GDP report is a good sign. And we can see clearly now that the steps my administration is taking are making a difference, blunting the worst of this recession and helping to bring about its conclusion.

We’ve acted aggressively to jumpstart credit for families and businesses, including small businesses, which have seen an increase in lending of 73 percent. We’ve taken steps to stem the tide of foreclosures, modifying mortgages to help hundreds of thousands of responsible homeowners keep their homes and help millions more sustain the value in their homes. And the Recovery Act is spurring demand through a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, and through assistance for seniors and those who have lost jobs – which not only helps folks hardest hit by the downturn, but also encourages the consumer spending that will help turn the economy around.

Finally, the Recovery Act is saving and creating jobs all across the country. Just this week, we reached an important milestone. Based on reports coming in from across America – as shovels break ground, as needed public servants are rehired, and as factories whir to life – it is clear that the Recovery Act has now created and saved more than one million jobs. That’s more than a million people who might otherwise be out of work today – folks who can wake up each day knowing that they’ll be able to provide for themselves and their families.

We’ve saved jobs by closing state budget shortfalls to prevent the layoffs of hundreds of thousands of police officers, firefighters, and teachers who are today on the beat, on call, and in the classroom because of the Recovery Act. And we’ve also created hundreds of thousands of jobs through the largest investment in our roads since the building of the interstate highways, and through the largest investments in education, medical research, and clean energy in history.

These investments aren’t just helping us recover in the short term, they’re helping to lay a new foundation for lasting prosperity in the long term – and they’re giving hardworking, middle-class Americans the chance to succeed and raise a family. Because of the investments we’ve made and the steps we’ve taken, it’s easier for middle-class families to send their kids to college and get the training and skills they need to compete in a global economy. We’re making it easier for these families to save for retirement. And in areas like clean energy, we’re creating the jobs of the future – jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced.

In fact, just this week, I traveled to Arcadia, Florida to announce the largest set of clean energy projects through the Recovery Act so far: one hundred grants for businesses, utilities, manufacturers, cities and other partners across the country to put thousands of people to work modernizing our electric grid – the system that provides power to our homes and businesses – so that it wastes less energy, helps integrate renewables like wind and solar, and saves consumers money. And that’s just one example.

So, we have made progress. At the same time, I want to emphasize that there’s still plenty of progress to be made. For we know that positive news for the economy as a whole means little if you’ve lost your job and can’t find another, if you can’t afford health care or the mortgage, if you do not see in your own life the improvement we are seeing in these economic statistics. And positive news today does not mean there won’t be difficult days ahead. As I’ve said many times, it took years to dig our way into the crisis we’ve faced. It will take more than a few months to dig our way out. But make no mistake: that’s exactly what we will do.

For the economy we seek is one where folks who need a job can find one and incomes are rising again. The economy we seek is one where small businesses can flourish and entrepreneurs can get the capital they need to plant new seeds of growth. The economy we seek is one that’s no longer based on maxed out credits cards, wild speculation, and the old cycles of boom or bust – but rather one that’s built on a solid foundation, supporting growth that is strong, sustained, and broadly shared by middle class families across America. That is what we are working toward every single day. And we will not stop until we get there.

Thank you. And Happy Halloween.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Pres. Barack Obama, Uncategorized, Video/YouTube, Weekly YouTube Address

The Public Option Shibboleth, or Act 2 of: HealthCare: A Diatribe

blogpost by Ogenec

Dear Readers, between DJ Hero and other pursuits, I have been delinquent in writing this piece. My bad.  And I’m kinda cheating. I’d promised that Part 2 of my diatribe would address the Baucus bill, while Part 3 would address the public option. However, in light of the passage of time and developments under way in Congress, it makes sense to flip that around. Accordingly, I’ll talk about the public option now, and in Part III whatever bill emerges from conference.
So, here we go:

“The Defining Moment”, today’s OpEd by Paul Krugman is a good place to start. GeoT sent it to me today, with the comment that Krugman was talking to me and the rest of the public option holdouts: time to be reasonable, in otherwords. GeoT was just kidding; he knows I’m the epitome of reasonableness 🙂 But his point is well-taken; in many ways, it’s time to put up or shut up. Instead of being negative about the public option, perhaps we should be more constructive and say what we affirmatively are for, rather than against.

I will do that in a bit, but let me clear up a misconception. I rail against a public option not because I’m opposed to the concept, but because I think proponents both overstate and understate its impact. The real issue is health care reform, which the public option in and of itself does not address.

Let me demonstrate what I mean.  Most proponents claim that the public option will (a) provide competition to insurers, which will in turn (b) help to hold health care costs down, all without (c) morphing into a single-payer plan.  I think that’s pure bunk.  As presently envisaged, the public option will not do (a) or (b); it’s not sufficiently robust.  If, however, you do make it sufficiently robust to fix (a) or (b), the public option will lead, ineluctably, to a single-payer system.

Let’s take these one at a time.  First, the notion that the public option will provide competition.   Not under the current plan, it won’t:  The scale of the program is too small.  As presently constituted, the CBO projects that only 6 million people would enroll in the public plan.  How does such a limited plan introduce competition?  How does it break away from the employer-based model?  Answer: it doesn’t.

Well, then, what about holding health care costs down?  That part is a double-fail.  No real competition means no downward pressure on health care costs.  But it’s even worse than that — CBO projects that premiums for the public plan will exceed what folks in private plans are paying:

[A] public plan paying negotiated rates would attract a broad network of providers but would typically have premiums that are somewhat higher than the average premiums for the private plans in the exchanges. The rates the public plan pays to providers would, on average, probably be comparable to the rates paid by private insurers participating in the exchanges. The public plan would have lower administrative costs than those private plans but would probably engage in less management of utilization by its enrollees and attract a less healthy pool of enrollees.

So let’s recap.  The public option now under consideration would not provide sufficient competition to insurers; health care costs would not go down; and premiums for those in the public plan would go up.  What’s not to like?  This kind of a public option would not present the threat identified in (c) above.  It’s so neutered as to foreclose any risk that it is a stalking horse for a single-payer system.

Most progressives agree with this assessment.  And, say they, that’s precisely the problem: we need the “robust” option.  One that is open to everyone ab initio (or shortly after inception), and that pegs reimbursement to Medicare, or Medicare plus 5%.   Here’s the problem with that approach.  It busts the budget, imposes negative externalities on insureds in private plans and the uninsured, all of which ensure a slow death for private insurance.  It busts the budget because as the number of people covered under the public option increases, so does the cost.  A greater expansion takes the bill well over the $900 billion threshold Obama has set.  And even that threshold is suspect, as both the House and Senate versions of the plan rely on Medicare-related savings that are unlikely to be realized.   As proof, just recall the recent debates over the COLA adjustment and staving off the long-planned cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors.  The likelihood that Congress will display fortitude it heretofore has never possessed to reduce Medicare reimbursements when push comes to shove is virtually nil.

Meanwhile, much has been made of the savings that will accrue to the government (and, hence, the taxpayers) if reimbursement rates are tied to Medicare.  But very few have asked the question, from whom do those savings come?  And the answer is clear: from the same people who unwittingly subsidize Medicare — those in private insurance and the uninsured. That then leads to the next problem — single-payer through the backdoor.   Fred Hiatt explains these inter-related problems quite cogently:

[I]f, as seems likeliest — and as House legislation mandates — the plan uses government power to demand lower prices from hospitals and drug companies, those providers may lower quality or seek to make up the difference from private payers. Private companies would have to raise their rates, so more people would choose the public plan, so private rates would rise further — and we could end up with only the public option and no competition at all. Single-payer national health insurance may be the best outcome, but we should get there after an honest debate, not through the back door.

Robert Samuelson also makes the same point: 

[A] favored public plan would probably doom today’s private insurance. Although some congressional proposals limit enrollment eligibility in the public plan, pressures to liberalize would be overwhelming. Why should only some under-65 Americans enjoy lower premiums? … Private insurance might become a specialty product. …Many would say: Whoopee! Get rid of the sinister insurers. Bring on a single-payer system. But if that’s the agenda, why not debate it directly?

So there’s the nub of the matter.  Either the public option will be so limited as to be neutered and of no significance in providing competition to health insurers.  Or it will be so robust as to kill off private insurance.  The economic equivalent of the Northern snakehead fish, and we get single-payer by default.  But if the latter outcome is what we prefer, let’s have the guts to say so openly and directly.  Let’s not do by indirection what we suspect we can’t accomplish with an honest and frank debate.

Click for details

This is why I’ve been cool to the idea of a public option.   The public option, in and of itself, does not address the real problem – the escalation in the cost of healthcare delivery.  Even if you stripped out the administrative inefficiency of the balkanized health insurance system, you are still left with unsustainable increases in healthcare costs.  And the public option does nothing to address that.  Which is the reason Medicare – touted as the model for the public option – is itself going bankrupt.  To my mind, the underlying issue of increasing costs is far more important.  So the focus on public option rather misses the point: it is the equivalent of addressing the symptom and not the disease.  I want a system that addresses the underlying issues of escalating health-care costs.  I think Wyden-Bennett does; I think the Baucus bill did; and I think Dole-Daschle does as well.  In Part 3, I will expound more fulsomely on this, and analyze the merged bill from this perspective.  I know you can’t wait 🙂

17 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Economy, Health, Republicans, Uncategorized

The Two Faces of Joe Lieberman: Then and Now

posted by GeoT

That Was Then:

National health insurance pool-free for poor and children

Q: How would your health plan improve insurance coverage for the new generation?

LIEBERMAN: There is a morally scandalous fact-that that 43 million Americans don’t have health insurance, 2 million more than when George Bush became president. I’m proposing to create a national health insurance pool like the one that members of Congress get our insurance from. If you don’t have insurance now, you’ll be able to get it, probably free, if you’re among the low-income working poor. If you’re a child, you will be covered by insurance at birth. If you are fired from your work or lose your job, you will not lose your health insurance. MediKids is part of my program. Every child born in America will become a member of MediKids, and it will cover them from birth through 25. Why 25? Because young adults have a hard time affording health insurance, and a lot of them think they’re not going to get sick, but they do, and we need to cover them.

Source: Democratic 2004 Primary Debate at St. Anselm College Jan 22, 2004


This Is Now:

On Tuesday, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) announced that he would withhold his vote for the Senate’s final health care reform bill if it included a government-run public health insurance plan, the Wall Street Journal reports. Lieberman, who usually caucuses with the Democrats, said that the bill in its current state would have to be changed significantly to secure his support. Lieberman said, “To put this government-created insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayers, for the premium payers and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now,” adding, “We’re trying to do too much at once.”

Lieberman said that Reid’s plan for a public option with a state opt-out clause also would not garner his support because “it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line”
Source: politicologosmall

Vodpod videos no longer available.


PETITION TO SENATE DEMOCRATS:

“Any Democratic senators — including Joe Lieberman — who support a Republican attempt to block a vote on health care reform should be stripped of their leadership titles. Americans deserve a clean up-or-down vote on health care reform that includes a public option.”

Over 90,000 signatures and growing…

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION

2 Comments

Filed under Economy, Uncategorized