Canadians Compare our Health Care to Theirs. They're Happy with Theirs

Canadian Doctors for Medicare hosted a celebration of Medicare in Canada. The speakers included Roy Romanow, former Saskatchewan Premiere and Commissioner on Health Care in Canada. They tell Americans that Canadian universal health care works and encourage Americans to implement a single payer universal health care systems.



Medicare for all would cost less in the long run and can be cost controlled much more easily than monitoring all the Insurance companies. Our health is not a commodity to be traded on the Market and it shouldn't be a for profit business to insure our health.

Why We Need Government Run Health Insurance

The Lion of the Senate. We will greatly miss you

My fellow Democrats and my fellow Americans, I have come here tonight not to argue as a candidate but to affirm a cause.

I'm asking you -- I am asking you to renew the commitment of the Democratic Party to economic justice.

I am asking you to renew our commitment to a fair and lasting prosperity that can put America back to work.

This is the cause that brought me into the campaign and that sustained me for nine months across a 100,000 miles in 40 different states. We had our losses, but the pain of our defeats is far, far less than the pain of the people that I have met.

We have learned that it is important to take issues seriously, but never to take ourselves too seriously.

The serious issue before us tonight is the cause for which the Democratic Party has stood in its finest hours, the cause that keeps our Party young and makes it, in the second century of its age, the largest political Party in this republic and the longest lasting political Party on this planet.

Our cause has been, since the days of Thomas Jefferson, the cause of the common man and the common woman.

Our commitment has been, since the days of Andrew Jackson, to all those he called "the humble members of society -- the farmers, mechanics, and laborers." On this foundation we have defined our values, refined our policies, and refreshed our faith.

Now I take the unusual step of carrying the cause and the commitment of my campaign personally to our national convention. I speak out of a deep sense of urgency about the anguish and anxiety I have seen across America.

I speak out of a deep belief in the ideals of the Democratic Party, and in the potential of that Party and of a President to make a difference. And I speak out of a deep trust in our capacity to proceed with boldness and a common vision that will feel and heal the suffering of our time and the divisions of our Party.

The economic plank of this platform on its face concerns only material things, but it is also a moral issue that I raise tonight. It has taken many forms over many years. In this campaign and in this country that we seek to lead, the challenge in 1980 is to give our voice and our vote for these fundamental democratic principles.

Let us pledge that we will never misuse unemployment, high interest rates, and human misery as false weapons against inflation.

Let us pledge that employment will be the first priority of our economic policy.

Let us pledge that there will be security for all those who are now at work, and let us pledge that there will be jobs for all who are out of work; and we will not compromise on the issues of jobs.

These are not simplistic pledges. Simply put, they are the heart of our tradition, and they have been the soul of our Party across the generations. It is the glory and the greatness of our tradition to speak for those who have no voice, to remember those who are forgotten, to respond to the frustrations and fulfill the aspirations of all Americans seeking a better life in a better land.

We dare not forsake that tradition.

We cannot let the great purposes of the Democratic Party become the bygone passages of history.

We must not permit the Republicans to seize and run on the slogans of prosperity. We heard the orators at their convention all trying to talk like Democrats. They proved that even Republican nominees can quote Franklin Roosevelt to their own purpose.

The Grand Old Party thinks it has found a great new trick, but 40 years ago an earlier generation of Republicans attempted the same trick. And Franklin Roosevelt himself replied, "Most Republican leaders have bitterly fought and blocked the forward surge of average men and women in their pursuit of happiness. Let us not be deluded that overnight those leaders have suddenly become the friends of average men and women."

"You know," he continued, "very few of us are that gullible." And four years later when the Republicans tried that trick again, Franklin Roosevelt asked, "Can the Old Guard pass itself off as the New Deal? I think not. We have all seen many marvelous stunts in the circus, but no performing elephant could turn a handspring without falling flat on its back."

The 1980 Republican convention was awash with crocodile tears for our economic distress, but it is by their long record and not their recent words that you shall know them.

The same Republicans who are talking about the crisis of unemployment have nominated a man who once said, and I quote, "Unemployment insurance is a prepaid vacation plan for freeloaders." And that nominee is no friend of labor.

The same Republicans who are talking about the problems of the inner cities have nominated a man who said, and I quote, "I have included in my morning and evening prayers every day the prayer that the Federal Government not bail out New York." And that nominee is no friend of this city and our great urban centers across this nation.

The same Republicans who are talking about security for the elderly have nominated a man who said just four years ago that "Participation in social security should be made voluntary." And that nominee is no friend of the senior citizens of this nation.

The same Republicans who are talking about preserving the environment have nominated a man who last year made the preposterous statement, and I quote, "Eighty percent of our air pollution comes from plants and trees." And that nominee is no friend of the environment.

And the same Republicans who are invoking Franklin Roosevelt have nominated a man who said in 1976, and these are his exact words, "Fascism was really the basis of the New Deal." And that nominee whose name is Ronald Reagan has no right to quote Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

The great adventures which our opponents offer is a voyage into the past. Progress is our heritage, not theirs. What is right for us as Democrats is also the right way for Democrats to win.

The commitment I seek is not to outworn views but to old values that will never wear out. Programs may sometimes become obsolete, but the ideal of fairness always endures. Circumstances may change, but the work of compassion must continue. It is surely correct that we cannot solve problems by throwing money at them, but it is also correct that we dare not throw out our national problems onto a scrap heap of inattention and indifference. The poor may be out of political fashion, but they are not without human needs. The middle class may be angry, but they have not lost the dream that all Americans can advance together.

The demand of our people in 1980 is not for smaller government or bigger government but for better government. Some say that government is always bad and that spending for basic social programs is the root of our economic evils. But we reply: The present inflation and recession cost our economy 200 billion dollars a year. We reply: Inflation and unemployment are the biggest spenders of all.

The task of leadership in 1980 is not to parade scapegoats or to seek refuge in reaction, but to match our power to the possibilities of progress. While others talked of free enterprise, it was the Democratic Party that acted and we ended excessive regulation in the airline and trucking industry, and we restored competition to the marketplace. And I take some satisfaction that this deregulation legislation that I sponsored and passed in the Congress of the United States.

As Democrats we recognize that each generation of Americans has a rendezvous with a different reality. The answers of one generation become the questions of the next generation. But there is a guiding star in the American firmament. It is as old as the revolutionary belief that all people are created equal, and as clear as the contemporary condition of Liberty City and the South Bronx. Again and again Democratic leaders have followed that star and they have given new meaning to the old values of liberty and justice for all.

We are the Party -- We are the Party of the New Freedom, the New Deal, and the New Frontier. We have always been the Party of hope. So this year let us offer new hope, new hope to an America uncertain about the present, but unsurpassed in its potential for the future.

To all those who are idle in the cities and industries of America let us provide new hope for the dignity of useful work. Democrats have always believed that a basic civil right of all Americans is that their right to earn their own way. The Party of the people must always be the Party of full employment.

To all those who doubt the future of our economy, let us provide new hope for the reindustrialization of America. And let our vision reach beyond the next election or the next year to a new generation of prosperity. If we could rebuild Germany and Japan after World War II, then surely we can reindustrialize our own nation and revive our inner cities in the 1980's.

To all those who work hard for a living wage let us provide new hope that their price of their employment shall not be an unsafe workplace and a death at an earlier age.

To all those who inhabit our land from California to the New York Island, from the Redwood Forest to the Gulf stream waters, let us provide new hope that prosperity shall not be purchased by poisoning the air, the rivers, and the natural resources that are the greatest gift of this continent. We must insist that our children and our grandchildren shall inherit a land which they can truly call America the beautiful.

To all those who see the worth of their work and their savings taken by inflation, let us offer new hope for a stable economy. We must meet the pressures of the present by invoking the full power of government to master increasing prices. In candor, we must say that the Federal budget can be balanced only by policies that bring us to a balanced prosperity of full employment and price restraint.

And to all those overburdened by an unfair tax structure, let us provide new hope for real tax reform. Instead of shutting down classrooms, let us shut off tax shelters. Instead of cutting out school lunches, let us cut off tax subsidies for expensive business lunches that are nothing more than food stamps for the rich.

The tax cut of our Republican opponents takes the name of tax reform in vain. It is a wonderfully Republican idea that would redistribute income in the wrong direction. It's good news for any of you with incomes over 200,000 dollars a year. For the few of you, it offers a pot of gold worth 14,000 dollars. But the Republican tax cut is bad news for the middle income families. For the many of you, they plan a pittance of 200 dollars a year, and that is not what the Democratic Party means when we say tax reform.

The vast majority of Americans cannot afford this panacea from a Republican nominee who has denounced the progressive income tax as the invention of Karl Marx. I am afraid he has confused Karl Marx with Theodore Roosevelt -- that obscure Republican president who sought and fought for a tax system based on ability to pay. Theodore Roosevelt was not Karl Marx, and the Republican tax scheme is not tax reform.

Finally, we cannot have a fair prosperity in isolation from a fair society. So I will continue to stand for a national health insurance. We must -- We must not surrender -- We must not surrender to the relentless medical inflation that can bankrupt almost anyone and that may soon break the budgets of government at every level. Let us insist on real controls over what doctors and hospitals can charge, and let us resolve that the state of a family's health shall never depend on the size of a family's wealth.

The President, the Vice President, the members of Congress have a medical plan that meets their needs in full, and whenever senators and representatives catch a little cold, the Capitol physician will see them immediately, treat them promptly, fill a prescription on the spot. We do not get a bill even if we ask for it, and when do you think was the last time a member of Congress asked for a bill from the Federal Government? And I say again, as I have before, if health insurance is good enough for the President, the Vice President, the Congress of the United States, then it's good enough for you and every family in America.

There were some -- There were some who said we should be silent about our differences on issues during this convention, but the heritage of the Democratic Party has been a history of democracy. We fight hard because we care deeply about our principles and purposes. We did not flee this struggle. We welcome the contrast with the empty and expedient spectacle last month in Detroit where no nomination was contested, no question was debated, and no one dared to raise any doubt or dissent.

Democrats can be proud that we chose a different course and a different platform.

We can be proud that our Party stands for investment in safe energy, instead of a nuclear future that may threaten the future itself. We must not permit the neighborhoods of America to be permanently shadowed by the fear of another Three Mile Island.

We can be proud that our Party stands for a fair housing law to unlock the doors of discrimination once and for all. The American house will be divided against itself so long as there is prejudice against any American buying or renting a home.

And we can be proud that our Party stands plainly and publicly and persistently for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment.

Women hold their rightful place at our convention, and women must have their rightful place in the Constitution of the United States. On this issue we will not yield; we will not equivocate; we will not rationalize, explain, or excuse. We will stand for E.R.A. and for the recognition at long last that our nation was made up of founding mothers as well as founding fathers.

A fair prosperity and a just society are within our vision and our grasp, and we do not have every answer. There are questions not yet asked, waiting for us in the recesses of the future. But of this much we can be certain because it is the lesson of all of our history: Together a President and the people can make a difference. I have found that faith still alive wherever I have traveled across this land. So let us reject the counsel of retreat and the call to reaction. Let us go forward in the knowledge that history only helps those who help themselves.

There will be setbacks and sacrifices in the years ahead; but I am convinced that we as a people are ready to give something back to our country in return for all it has given to us.

Let this -- Let this be our commitment: Whatever sacrifices must be made will be shared and shared fairly. And let this be our confidence: At the end of our journey and always before us shines that ideal of liberty and justice for all.

From Ted Kennedy's 1980 Democratic Convention Speech

In Loving Memory

Thank you Teddy

Things you need to know

Knowledge is Power. So here's a bit of education for you about Health Insurance Companies.

First, from NavyBlueWife at Fire Dog Lake telling me something I didn't know:

The Sunday morning political talk programs were filled to the brim with health care reform discussions, and central to these discussions is the idea that the insurance industry needs competition. Competition, in the form of a public option or in health care cooperatives, is supposed to level the playing field and bring down premiums for all Americans while providing as close to universal coverage as we can do right now.

There's just one itty bitty, teeny weeny problem. The insurance industry has federal IMMUNITY from competition!

The federal government has not been able to attack the insurance companies through federal anti-trust laws for over 60 years. Under the McCarran-Ferguson Act passed in 1945, insurance companies (and Major League Baseball!) are specifically excluded from federal anti-trust laws as long as the state regulates in that area, and federal anti-trust laws will apply ONLY in cases of boycott, coercion, and intimidation.

Under the McCarran-Ferguson Act, Big Insurance is allowed to collect and SHARE data with each other about claims. With this information, Big Insurance can fix prices, set coverage requirements, outline conditions for coverage denials (like pre-existing conditions), and many, many more.

That's right, folks! Big Insurance can plot together to bring us all down!

This problem is one of the biggest when it comes to creating insurance industry competition, and not one single major news outlet, pundit or other talking head has covered it as of my publishing. In fact, the only time where I saw anti-trust regulation brought up was a minor squawking by Big Insurance. They claimed that they actually would be in trouble under the anti-trust laws if they were forced to work together to reduce costs to consumers. But the laws don't apply, so what's the problem, Big Insurance?? Read more at link

This is information on how Blue Cross/Blue Shield was formed and how it became a for profit company. h/t to Crank Bait at Sam Seder Show Blog:

Dr. Justin Ford Kimball, a Baylor University administrator, is generally recognized as the originator of Blue Cross. Kimball noticed that among the university hospital's unpaid bills were those of a disproportionate number of local school teachers. In 1929, he addressed this problem by organizing a plan in which teachers could be covered for a three-week hospital stay in a semi-private room by prepaying as little as 50 cents a month. The first group health plan was off the ground when 1,250 Dallas-area teachers enrolled at once.

Other groups of Dallas employees joined the program, and it began to attract attention across the United States. Similar plans sprang up in Iowa and Illinois. Like the Dallas prototype, those plans involved only one hospital. In the early 1930s, plans were created that offered customers a choice of different hospitals in their communities. California, New Jersey, and New York were among the first locations for programs of that type. The Blue Cross name and symbol were developed in 1934 by E. A. van Steenwyk, a pioneer of St. Paul, Minnesota's group health plan. By 1935, there were 15 Blue Cross plans in 11 states. The following year, the American Hospital Association (AHA) created the Committee on Hospital Services to oversee the growing batch of Blue Cross organizations nationwide. The Committee's early leader was C. Rufus Rorem, who had been involved with the AHA for several years. By 1938, there were 38 Blue Cross plans in the United States, with a total enrollment of 1.4 million. In comparison, only about 100,000 people were covered for hospitalization by private insurance companies at that time.

Meanwhile, a similar movement had begun for covering the costs of physicians' services. In the Pacific Northwest, a few lumber and mining companies had begun making arrangements to pay doctors a monthly fee for providing their employees with health care services. The first of these plans appeared in Tacoma, Washington, in 1917. The first modern Blue Shield plan was established in 1939 in California. Modeled on the earlier programs, the California Plan enabled its customers to receive physician services for $1.70 a month. Only those with income under $3,000 a year were eligible for the program. The medical societies of other states began to develop similar programs, and in 1946 the first handful of such plans banded into a national group called the Associated Medical Care Plans, overseen by the American Medical Association (AMA). This group informally adopted the Blue Shield as its symbol two years later, and it eventually became known as the Blue Shield Association.

Between 1940 and 1945, the number of Blue Cross plans operating nationwide grew from 56 to 80, and enrollment increased from 6 million to 19 million. Blue Shield's enrollment was approximately 3 million. This growth was largely due to the wartime emphasis on fringe benefits as a way to increase wages without boosting salaries. In 1946, Rorem resigned as executive director of the AHA commission overseeing Blue Cross plans, and was replaced by Richard M. Jones, whom Rorem had hired as head of public relations. The organization's name was then changed to the Blue Cross Commission.

In 1948, Blue Cross and Blue Shield agreed to merge. The move was blocked by the AMA, however, on the grounds that such cooperation between hospitals and physicians could lead to actions in restraint of trade. Nevertheless, the Blues began working together around that time on public policy issues, while remaining independent, competing entities. To facilitate their continued growth, both Blues set up nonprofit agencies to coordinate the activities of their member plans. The Blue Cross Commission established Health Services, Inc. (HSI), a stock insurance company, to coordinate national enrollment in Blue Cross plans and to act as an underwriter to make up for differences in benefits between member plans when national contracts made it necessary. The Blue Cross Association was created as a holding company for HSI stock, which was actually owned by the plans themselves. Blue Shield set up a similar structure, establishing Medical Indemnity of America (MIA) as its counterpart to HSI. Read more at link.

So the Insurance Companies have a law in place to help them take advantage of us. All of us!

And you learned how a non profit Insurance turned into a for profit.

So now you know a bit more to form a good decision about Health Care Reform.

Obama's Op Ed in the NY Times - Must Read

WHY WE NEED HEALTH CARE REFORM

By BARACK OBAMA

Published: August 15, 2009

OUR nation is now engaged in a great debate about the future of health care in America. And over the past few weeks, much of the media attention has been focused on the loudest voices. What we haven’t heard are the voices of the millions upon millions of Americans who quietly struggle every day with a system that often works better for the health-insurance companies than it does for them.

These are people like Lori Hitchcock, whom I met in New Hampshire last week. Lori is currently self-employed and trying to start a business, but because she has hepatitis C, she cannot find an insurance company that will cover her. Another woman testified that an insurance company would not cover illnesses related to her internal organs because of an accident she had when she was 5 years old. A man lost his health coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because the insurance company discovered that he had gallstones, which he hadn’t known about when he applied for his policy. Because his treatment was delayed, he died.

I hear more and more stories like these every single day, and it is why we are acting so urgently to pass health-insurance reform this year. I don’t have to explain to the nearly 46 million Americans who don’t have health insurance how important this is. But it’s just as important for Americans who do have health insurance.

There are four main ways the reform we’re proposing will provide more stability and security to every American.

First, if you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of high-quality, affordable coverage for yourself and your family — coverage that will stay with you whether you move, change your job or lose your job.

Second, reform will finally bring skyrocketing health care costs under control, which will mean real savings for families, businesses and our government. We’ll cut hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid and in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies that do nothing to improve care and everything to improve their profits.

Third, by making Medicare more efficient, we’ll be able to ensure that more tax dollars go directly to caring for seniors instead of enriching insurance companies. This will not only help provide today’s seniors with the benefits they’ve been promised; it will also ensure the long-term health of Medicare for tomorrow’s seniors. And our reforms will also reduce the amount our seniors pay for their prescription drugs.

Lastly, reform will provide every American with some basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable. A 2007 national survey actually shows that insurance companies discriminated against more than 12 million Americans in the previous three years because they had a pre-existing illness or condition. The companies either refused to cover the person, refused to cover a specific illness or condition or charged a higher premium.

We will put an end to these practices. Our reform will prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage because of your medical history. Nor will they be allowed to drop your coverage if you get sick. They will not be able to water down your coverage when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or in a lifetime. And we will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses. No one in America should go broke because they get sick.

Most important, we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups, preventive care and screening tests like mammograms and colonoscopies. There’s no reason that we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. It makes sense, it saves lives and it can also save money.

This is what reform is about. If you don’t have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options once we pass reform. If you have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care you need. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. You will not be waiting in any lines. This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance. I don’t believe anyone should be in charge of your health care decisions but you and your doctor — not government bureaucrats, not insurance companies.

The long and vigorous debate about health care that’s been taking place over the past few months is a good thing. It’s what America’s all about.

But let’s make sure that we talk with one another, and not over one another. We are bound to disagree, but let’s disagree over issues that are real, and not wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that anyone has actually proposed. This is a complicated and critical issue, and it deserves a serious debate.

Despite what we’ve seen on television, I believe that serious debate is taking place at kitchen tables all across America. In the past few years, I’ve received countless letters and questions about health care. Some people are in favor of reform, and others have concerns. But almost everyone understands that something must be done. Almost everyone knows that we must start holding insurance companies accountable and give Americans a greater sense of stability and security when it comes to their health care.

I am confident that when all is said and done, we can forge the consensus we need to achieve this goal. We are already closer to achieving health-insurance reform than we have ever been. We have the American Nurses Association and the American Medical Association on board, because our nation’s nurses and doctors know firsthand how badly we need reform. We have broad agreement in Congress on about 80 percent of what we’re trying to do. And we have an agreement from the drug companies to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors. The AARP supports this policy, and agrees with us that reform must happen this year.

But for all the scare tactics out there, what’s truly scary — truly risky — is the prospect of doing nothing.In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain. If we maintain the status quo, we will continue to see 14,000 Americans lose their health insurance every day. Premiums will continue to skyrocket. Our deficit will continue to grow. And insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against sick people.

That is not a future I want for my children, or for yours. And that is not a future I want for the United States of America.

In the end, this isn’t about politics. This is about people’s lives and livelihoods. This is about people’s businesses. This is about America’s future, and whether we will be able to look back years from now and say that this was the moment when we made the changes we needed, and gave our children a better life. I believe we can, and I believe we will.

Two Issues hurting Health Care Reform

The first Issue is that we don't know what we are fighting for. There is no actual bill and we really don't know if we will like the bill yet.

Robert Reich points this out:

Why are these meetings brimming with so much anger? Because Republican Astroturfers have joined the same old right-wing broadcast demagogues that have been spewing hate and fear for years, to create a tempest.

But why are they getting away with it? Why aren't progressives -- indeed, why aren't ordinary citizens -- taking the meetings back?

Mainly because there's still no healthcare plan. All we have are some initial markups from several congressional committees, which differ from one another in significant ways. The White House is waiting to see what emerges from the House and Senate before insisting on what it wants, maybe in conference committee.

But that's the problem: It's always easier to stir up fear and anger against something that's amorphous than to stir up enthusiasm for it.

The White House has just announced a web page designed to rebut some of the insane charges that the right is instigating. That won't be enough. The President has to be more specific about what he's for and what he's against. Without these specifics, the right can conjure up every demon in its arsenal while the middle and left can only shrug their shoulders.

snip

Now's the time for specifics. It's impossible to fight fearmongering lies about specifics with nothing but positive principles.

And the second Issue is what Seniors are hearing about reform.

Rick Ungar from the Policy page explains:

A CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll published last week reveals that a majority of voters over 50 oppose the healthcare overhaul effort, while most voters under 50 support it.

No shock there. The reality of growing older is such that change becomes more difficult to assimilate- particularly when it involves the number one concern of the elderly, their health. As a result, they are highly unlikely to take a leap of faith without feeling comfortable that they understand what change means to them. Unfortunately, proponents of health care don’t seem particularly interested in telling them.

The White House has said that they are counting on about $500 billion in savings from Medicare and Medicaid to finance reform. The President claims this will be done by cutting waste out of these federal programs including getting rid of testing and treatments that don’t result in improving care.

What does a senior hear in all of this? They hear the word “cut” – and that means getting less.

Here is what seniors are not hearing because nobody is telling them. Hopefully, they will not suffer any reduction in available health care because we intend to succeed in more efficiently controlling these government programs. But, if we remain true to form and fail to better control the programs, the results may, in fact, lead to some lessening in health care benefits or cause seniors to pay just a bit more to effectively stay “even.” Not great news but a hell of a lot better than the alternative. Because if we don’t make changes in Medicare, it will run out of money and may very well do so during our current crop of seniors’ lifetime. It most certainly can happen to those over 50 who are not yet participants but are depending upon Medicare to get them through their sunset years.

Not only are we not explaining this to the elderly in a direct and honest fashion, we aren’t directing the conversation to them in any meaningful way whatsoever. Where are the Obama town meetings at a nursing home, or an assisted living center?

When there is a gaping void in the information flow, all our seniors can do is listen to the information that is being provided to them. And the opponents of reform have been all too happy to oblige. Do most of our 65 plus citizens believe that Congress and the President want to create death panels and euthanize people when we don’t want to pay for their care any longer? I doubt it. But when this is all they are hearing, they are highly likely to think that while it may not be death panels, there may very likely be things in the legislation that are not in their best interest.

If you think avoidance of the seniors is a political calculation, you would be wrong. The senior voting block is deeply significant and getting larger every day. They register and they vote!

This shows how much work is needed by Obama and the House and Senate. They must address these two issues if they want to pass a great Health Care Reform Bill. And at this point I don't find the need for it to be bi-partisan. It seems that the GOP doesn't want to reform health care at all. They are just giving lip service to what they see the nation wants.

The question is: Why don't we have Single Payer?

If Insurance Companies can do this, why are we allowing them to exist? Not to mention the billions of dollars they make from us.

From the Washington Post:

HHS: Insurance Companies Encourage Employees to "Revoke Sick People's Health Coverage"

By David S. Hilzenrath

You might have known that insurers can deny health coverage based on preexisting medical conditions, but here’s something else to worry about: They can take away the coverage you thought you had when actually need it, the government says.

The Department of Health and Human Services put a spotlight on that practice Tuesday in its continuing campaign to build support for an overhaul of health insurance.

“When a person is diagnosed with an expensive condition such as cancer, some insurance companies review his/her initial health status questionnaire,” the HHS said in a posting at HealthReform.Gov. In most states, insurance companies can retroactively cancel individuals' policies if any condition was not disclosed when the policy was obtained, "even if the medical condition is unrelated, and even if the person was not aware of the condition at the time.”

“Coverage can also be revoked for all members of a family, even if only one family member failed to disclose a medical condition,” HHS said.

The department cited recent research by the staff of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, which found that three large insurers rescinded almost 20,000 policies over five years, saving $300 million in medical claims.

At least one insurer included such savings in an employee performance evaluation.

“Simply put, these insurance company employees are encouraged to revoke sick people’s health coverage," HHS said. more at the link

It's time to educate yourselves instead of believing what you hear or read. Research!

China's doing it, why can't we????

China is overtaking our country in so many ways. Here's one more!

From the NY Times:

BEIJING — China announced that it intended to spend $123 billion by 2011 to establish universal health care for the country's 1.3 billion people.

The plan was passed Wednesday at a session of the State Council, the Chinese cabinet. Prime Minister Wen Jiabao presided.

Xinhua, the state news agency, said the authorities would "take measures within three years to provide basic medical security to all Chinese in urban and rural areas, improve the quality of medical services and make medical services more accessible and affordable for ordinary people."

Providing universal health care is seen by some economists as a way to stimulate domestic spending during the current economic downturn. The Chinese have a high savings rate, and one of the reasons usually cited is their concern about possible medical expenses.

Bai Zhongen, chairman of the economics department at Tsinghua University's School of Economics and Management in Beijing, said that establishing universal health care with government-financed insurance would increase general consumer spending. He said the school did a survey in 2007 about the effect of rural health insurance on consumer behavior and "found that in government-sponsored health insurance areas, people are spending more."

The government already gives many people a small subsidy to help pay for health care, but more government financing for individual health care would strengthen the economy, Bai said.

Xinhua reported that the plan approved Wednesday would aim to provide some form of medical insurance for 90 percent of the population by 2011. Each person covered by the system would receive an annual subsidy of 120 yuan, or more than $17, starting in 2010. Medicine would also be covered by the insurance, and the government would begin a system of producing and distributing necessary drugs this year.

The plan also aims to improve health centers in rural and remote areas as well as equalize health services between urban and rural areas, Xinhua reported. Furthermore, the government would begin this year to reform the operations of public hospitals.

"Growing public criticism of soaring medical fees, a lack of access to affordable medical services, poor doctor-patient relationship and low medical insurance coverage compelled the government to launch the new round of reforms," Xinhua reported.

If they can do it with Billinons of people, we can do it with Millions of people, and we should be able to do it better.

I'd like some comments on this one on why we are now lagging on this.

The Danger of the Health Care Protesterss

Rachel Maddow had Frank Schaeffer on her show to talk about these protesters and the people behind them.

Watch:

Rick Scott, the man behind the Town Hall Teabaggers

Rick Sanchez of CNN takes on Rick Scott.

Watch it:



Rick Scott, from the Nation:

A Texas lawyer who shared a business partner with George W. Bush, Scott started his health company, Columbia Hospital Corporation, in 1987. Its growth was meteoric, expanding from just a few hospitals to more than 1,000 facilities in thirty-eight states and three other countries in 1997. As his firm gobbled up chains, like the Frist family's Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), it became the largest for-profit hospital chain in the country. By 1994, Columbia/HCA was one of the forty largest corporations in America, and Scott had acquired a reputation as the Gordon Gecko of the healthcare world. "Whose patients are you stealing?" he would ask employees at his newly acquired hospitals.

He promised to put nonprofit hospitals--which he insisted on referring to as "nontaxpaying" hospitals--out of business and touted his company's single-minded pursuit of profit as a model for the nation's entire healthcare system. "What's happening in Washington is not healthcare reform," he told the New York Times in 1994. "Healthcare reform is happening in the marketplace."

The press portrayed Scott as a guru to be admired and feared, "a private capitalist dictator," in the words of one Princeton health economist. "Probably the lowest body fat of anybody I've been in business with," his partner told the Times.

"Other hospitals were intimidated," recalls John Schilling, who worked for Columbia/HCA in the 1990s. Scott was "like the bully that would come into town and if you didn't sell to him or partner with him, he would open up shop across the street from you and put you out of business."

Not long after joining the company in 1993 as the supervisor of reimbursement for the Fort Myers, Florida, office, Schilling noticed things weren't quite kosher. "They were looking for ways to maximize reimbursement...which ultimately would improve the bottom line."

One way they did this was to fudge the costs on their Medicare expense reports. They were "basically keeping two sets of books," says Schilling. The company would maintain an internal expense report, what it called a "reserve" report, which accurately tallied its expenses. "And then they would have a second report, which...they would file with the government, which was more aggressive." That report would "include inflated costs and expenses they knew weren't allowable or reimbursable. The one they filed with government might claim $5 million and the reserve would claim $4.5." Columbia/HCA would pocket the difference.

It wasn't just happening in Florida, and it wasn't just fraudulent Medicare expense reports. Around the country, dozens of whistle-blowers like Schilling stepped forward to file lawsuits under the False Claims Act, charging the company with sundry forms of chicanery: kickbacks to doctors in exchange for referrals, illegal deals with homecare agencies and filing false data about the use of hospital space.

By 1997 the FBI was investigating Columbia/HCA. Days after agents raided company facilities armed with search warrants, Scott was forced to resign. In 2000 the company pleaded guilty to fraud and agreed to pay the government $840 million. Other civil settlements would follow, ultimately totaling a staggering $1.7 billion, making it the largest fraud case in American history.

(Scott was never criminally charged and continues to deny wrongdoing. His spokesperson did not respond to repeated interview requests.)

And this is the man behind the organization to disrupt these Town Hall meetings. What surprises me are all the people falling all over themselves to come to these town hall meetings from other areas to disrupt them. Why? What is the real reason?

For Mr. Scott, it's to protect his Business which is walk-in Health Clinics, most of which are in Wal Marts. For the people he's recruiting? With a true bill from Congress not even out yet, people like Scott are scaring these simple people with all kinds of misinformation. And these simple people, deep down, don't trust a Black President. That's the whole thing right there. They want to believe that this president will do them wrong. What a sad world we live in!

Rachel Maddow Exposes Fake Protesters at Town Hall Meetings

Rachel, as usual, does a great job exposing who is really behind these Fake Town Hall meeting protesters.



The rich want to remain rich and will do anything to stay that way. Open yours eye people and see what is really going on. These people don't want you to have good, affordable health care!

Denied Health Care by Insurance Companies?

Watch this and tell me if there is any morality left in the United States of America:



How do they sleep at night? It's easy when you are filled with greed and have no soul!

But answer me this, why do people keep voting against their best interest and how can they believe that these corporations, be it health care or financials or telecoms, will treat them fairly?

Please people, open your eyes, get answers, seek information so that you are not fooled by those who want to scam you. You are easy prey to them.

I was on Humana Advantage and dropped it

My Insurance kept going up every year. But they are making money hand over fist with the Medicare Advantage programs because the Government subsidies it but you still have to pay your share that goes up every year.

Humana Second Quarter profit jumps 34% as premiums rise

Health insurer Humana Inc. said Monday its second-quarter profit rose 34 percent on the strength its robust government business, led by Medicare Advantage offerings, easily offsetting a sluggish commercial segment hamstrung by the recession.

The results for the three months ended June 30 beat Wall Street estimates. The Louisville, Ky.-based company stuck with its previous projection of a full-year profit between $6.10 and $6.20 per share, while analysts expect $6.12 per share.

Its shares rose 91 cents, or 2.8 percent, to close at $33.76.

Humana posted net income of $281.8 million, or $1.67 per share, for the quarter, compared with earnings of $209.9 million, or $1.24 per share, a year ago.

Revenue jumped 8 percent to just under $7.9 billion from $7.35 billion.

Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters expected profit of $1.64 per share on $7.77 billion in revenue.

"Our second quarter results confirm our 2009 financial performance is on track despite pressures from the overall economy," Humana President and CEO Michael B. McCallister said in a statement. "We're making progress reducing costs and investing in improved health outcomes for our members while we closely monitor events in Washington."

Humana's pretax income from its vast government segment surged by 62 percent to $404.7 million in the second quarter. The company attributed the upswing to lower claim expenses in its Medicare drug plans, a 13 percent increase in average Medicare Advantage membership and the introduction of member premiums for most of the company's Medicare Advantage products.

Medicare Advantage plans are government-sponsored, privately run programs for seniors that offer comprehensive health coverage.

The company said its Medicare Advantage membership grew to nearly 1.5 million members as of June 30, up 12 percent from a year ago and a 4 percent increase since the end of 2008. The year-over-year increase included 54,200 members added through acquisitions completed during the second half of 2008.

Medicare Advantage premiums of $4.15 billion rose 19 percent in the quarter versus a year ago.

Wait til these people that have Humana have to use this insurance. The next year their insurance rate will go up and they will be turned down on needed tests and procedures.

Letters to the President

Here's a video that describes the amount of mail the White House gets. A lot of it about Health Care Reform and the problems people have been having with Insurance Companies.

Pres. Obama reads 10 letters a day about these problems. The video is about how they are chosen.