This would be funny if it wasn't so frightening. The United States has become the land of uninformed fools. These people are fighting against their own best interests.
Insurance companies aren't playing nice any more. Their dire message that health care legislation will drive up premiums for people who already have coverage comes as a warning shot at a crucial point in the debate and threatens President Barack Obama's top domestic priority.
Democrats and their allies scrambled on Monday to knock down a new industry-funded study forecasting that Senate legislation, over time, will add thousands of dollars to the cost of a typical policy. "Distorted and flawed," said White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass. "Fundamentally dishonest," said AARP's senior policy strategist, John Rother. "A hatchet job," said a spokesman for Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont.
But the health insurance industry's top lobbyist in Washington stood her ground. In a call with reporters, Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, pointedly refused to rule out attack ads on TV featuring the study, though she said she believed the industry's concerns could be amicably addressed.
At the heart of the industry's complaint is a decision by lawmakers to weaken the requirement that millions more Americans get coverage. Since the legislation would ban insurance companies from denying coverage on account of poor health, many people will wait to sign up until they get sick, the industry says. And that will drive up costs for everybody else.
So lets all be clear about what these thieves are saying. Unless health care reform put millions of new customers into their coffers then they will lie, cheat and scare the hell out of Americans.
It is time to use the existing laws to put these worthless pigs out of business. It is time that we demand a robust public option with the goal of single payer not too far behind. They have shown their hand again and its not pretty. They know a robust public option will diminish their profits and cause them to have to actually pay claims made by their paying customers. It is time to call their bluff and put into the bill a trigger of single payer health care if the premiums rise more than a certain percentage. Two can play at this game.
This was from the Million Moron March in DC this past weekend although with just 60,000 protesters they certainly missed the mark. Its like watching a klan rally without the sheets. When did America become so incredibly stupid and ill informed? I always knew there were a lot of racists but this level of stupidity is scary. Third world status here we come.
When I first read this I though this can't possibly be true but then I realized the folks on Wall Street will do anything to get your money to fund their lavish lifestyles. What is even more disgusting is that they are not even trying to hide this disgrace. They are showing us exactly how they will create the next bubble with the realization that their campaign contributions will insulate them from any repercussions. Now this is what I call a true death panel.
"The bankers plan to buy life settlements, life insurance policies that ill and elderly people sell for cash - $400,000 for a $1 million policy, say, depending on the life expectancy of the insured person," Times correspondent Jenny Anderson reports. "Then they plan to securitize these policies, in Wall Street jargon, by packaging hundreds or thousands together into bonds," to be sold to investors.
Investors will continue to pay out the premiums on the insurance and will collect the payout when the person dies. "The earlier the policyholder dies, the bigger the return." In the example given, if the insurance is for $1 million, it is sold for $400,000, and an investor pays out $100,000 in premiums before the individual dies, the resultant profit will come to half a million dollars.
Of course, the great danger for an investor would be a sharp rise in life expectancy for a particular section of the population. "A bond made up of life settlements would ideally have policies from people with a range of diseases - leukemia, lung cancer, heart disease, breast cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's," the Times notes, to safeguard against the danger of a cure for any one of these.
The process of buying and selling the life insurance of other people already exists (BusinessWeek ran a story in 2007 under the headline, "Death Bonds"), but "securitizing" these policies to make investment easy is still in its infancy. Yet the Times reports great interest in the possibility. "Our phones have been ringing off the hook," one rating agent is quoted as saying. "We're hoping to get a herd stampeding after the first offering," said an investment banker. Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs are among the banks taking an interest in the new venture.
The Times notes that the market could reach $500 billion, which "would help Wall Street offset the loss of revenue from the collapse of the United States residential mortgage securities market..."
There are several reasons to believe that a new life insurance securitization market - one wit dubbed the resulting securities, "collateralized death obligations" - could be very profitable.
First, with the desperate financial situation facing millions of people, there will inevitably be a large pool of poor or elderly workers who find themselves unable to pay their insurance premiums. They may also be in need of immediate cash to fund mortgage payments, medical expenses or other necessities for themselves or their relatives. As the economic crisis deepens, the willingness of individuals to part with their insurance policies at a low price will increase.
Second, investors will be essentially betting that individuals on average will be dying sooner than anticipated by insurance companies who originally devised the policies - that is, they will be betting that the curve of life expectancy in the population will dip.
Life expectancy in the United States has already begun to stagnate in recent years, particularly in rural areas. While life expectancy grew slightly in 2007, the last year for which numbers are available, this was before the onset of the economic crisis.
The most significant impact of the economic crisis will be a massive lowering in the living standards of the American people. Wages and benefits are being permanently lowered. The ability of sections of the working class to maintain a higher standard of living through debt backed by high housing prices has evaporated, and other forms of credit are also drying up. All of this will inevitably lead to workers dying on average earlier.
Am I the only one who could see a partnership between insurance companies and Wall St. that would deny people care in order to extract a larger return on investment? So first they will try and ruin health care reform then profit off the misery they helped create. Sickening absolutely sickening.
Town Halls should be for debate and there is a lot to debate about the health care system in this country but it serves no purpose for idiots to spout nonsense. Good for Barney Frank. People should educate themselves about what the plan is. Only in America could the desire to extend health care to all be considered a bad thing.
Most of the people in the audience are seniors and are screaming about the government take over of health care. Are they being paid to be stupid or does it just come naturally? MEDICARE IS A GOVERNMENT SINGLE PAYER PROGRAM YOU F*CKING IDIOTS. Every senior in that room complaining should opt out of Medicare and get a private policy. When will Americans educate themselves before they make fools of themselves?
Conservative Blue Dog Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee are celebrating their success in delaying a full floor vote on health care legislation past the August recess and in slightly weakening two key provisions during their negotiations with committee Chairman Henry Waxman.
"We have successfully pushed a floor vote to September," Mike Ross (D-Ark.) told reporters Wednesday afternoon. "The American people want us to slow down, and that's what we're doing here."
So now the FOR PROFIT health care industry will have even more time to lie and scare the American people into believing the Devil they know is better than the Devil they don't. The problem is that the premiums will continue to rise as will profits while more and more Americans will find themselves without coverage and bankrupt as a result of an illness.
The Blue Dog Democrats are a worthless bunch of fools who thought it was just fine to vote for tax cuts for the rich but helping you stay alive...not so much.
A 17-year old died just hours after her health insurance company reversed its decision not to pay for a liver transplant that doctors said the girl needed.
Nataline Sarkisyan died Thursday night at about 6 p.m. at University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center. She had been in a vegetative state for weeks, said her mother, Hilda.
"She passed away, and the insurance (company) is responsible for this," she said.
Nataline had been battling leukemia and received a bone marrow transplant from her brother. She developed a complication, however, that caused her liver to fail.
Doctors at UCLA determined she needed a transplant and sent a letter to CIGNA Healthcare on Dec. 11. The Philadelphia-based health insurance company denied payment for the transplant.
It is time to stop for-profit insurance companies from making any medical decisions. People are dying so that insurance company executives can earn their million dollar salaries.
President Bush vetoed legislation Wednesday that would have expanded government-provided health insurance for children, his second slap-down of a bipartisan effort in Congress to dramatically increase funding for the popular program.
In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill was unacceptable because — like the first one — it allows adults into the program, would cover people in families with incomes above the U.S. median and raises taxes.
"This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage."
There is always enough money for war and tax cuts but expanded childrens health programs are unaffordable. Has this fool ever priced health care? A family of four making $75,000 and living in NY could not afford private health care.
This man makes me sick to my stomach. January 2009 can not come soon enough.
Middle-class households in America have to work harder than ever to maintain their standard of living, according to a report released Wednesday.
Sixty nine percent of middle-class households are at risk of losing their standard of living in the long term, says Demos, an advocacy group for lower and middle-class Americans.
And the rising costs of health care, housing, and education are forcing middle-class families to work harder to maintain that standard, said Jennifer Wheary, the report's co-author in an interview with CNNMoney.com.
"The way that they have stayed secure is by tightening belts," said Wheary. "People now have to work more hours to be at that same level."
Where is the family values crowd as parents are forced to work longer and longer hours just to maintain the lifestyle they currently enjoy? When will people finally realize that it is this unholy alliance between big business and the religious right called the modern Republican party that is destroying the middle class?
The Demos report is designed to measure the financial health of the American middle class by measuring certain key variables.
If their main source of income dries up, only 13 percent of middle class households can live off their assets for nine months, after reducing basic living expenses by one quarter, estimates Demos.
52 percent have no net financial assets at all after debt (excluding home equity), and live paycheck to paycheck.
When you live paycheck to paycheck are you really middle class or are you actually the working poor? I would argue that the working poor is a much more accurate description.
I remember my childhood when almost all the mothers on my middle class street in Yonkers, NY were stay at home moms. That is a pipe dream for the families of today. The question now becomes how do we fix this before the middle class is gone and we have a nation of just rich and poor. The answers to that question are complex but the first two solutions I think are absolutely necessary are the public financing of campaigns and universal health care. Unfortunately I think you will never get the second solution until you institute the first.
The political process in this nation has been completely corrupted by big money. Our Presidential race has become about fund raising not ideas and our media is owned by just a handful of big corporations whose main goal is profit not the truthful dissemination of information.
It will take a middle class movement to reverse this trend but who will have the time when work consumes more and more of your day. Maybe that's the goal. There is a reason that the poor do not vote in the same numbers as the rich. They are normally consumed with what they think are more important priorities. As the middle class is more and more consumed with the problems of making ends meet they too will find voting not as big a priority and the destruction of the middle class will be complete. It is time to fight back.
It is the first UAW strike against Chrysler since 1997, when one plant was shut down for a month, and the first strike against Chrysler during contract talks since 1985. Negotiators stopped talking after the strike began, according to a person briefed on the talks who requested anonymity because the talks are private.
Bargaining between the UAW and the newly private automaker has been slowed by several major issues. The UAW's tentative contract with General Motors Corp. included job security pledges that it was likely to seek from Chrysler, while Chrysler wanted the same health care concessions that the union granted to GM and Ford Motor Co. in 2005. Also at issue was how much Chrysler would pay into a company-funded, UAW-run trust that would take on its roughly $18 billion in retiree health care debt. GM formed that trust as part of its tentative contract.
Our auto industry which was once the envy of the world is now in a very diminished position. One of the main reasons is the ever growing costs of health care. The auto industry supports universal health care because they realize that without it they will continue to operate at a serious disadvantage to foreign auto companies.
The middle class of America can not survive without both strong labor laws and universal health care. As the cost of health care continues to grow workers in all industries are paying an ever greater portion of the health care costs. In many industries the growth in health care costs for the employee has eclipsed the annual raise, which by any standard would mean a decrease in annual take home pay. How can the middle class survive under those circumstances?
When you are losing the argument badly about the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)what does a true compassionate Conservative do? Attack the child of course.
President Bush on Wednesday vetoed legislation expanding a children's health insurance program by $35 billion over five years.
Bush quietly exercised the veto at 10 a.m. before leaving the White House for a trip to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to discuss the federal budget and taxes.
Congress sent the legislation expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, to the White House on Tuesday.
"It is our hope and the will of the American people that the president will sign the bill into law on behalf of the future. It is right for no less than 10 million reasons -- our children," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a joint statement.
The Senate voted 67-29 Thursday to expand the program. Bush has said it's a step toward universal coverage, which he opposes on philosophical grounds.
The program would double -- from 4 million to 8 million -- the number of children covered.
Eighteen Republicans joined all of the Democrats in voting to expand the program from its annual budget of $5 billion to $12 billion for the next five years.
The additional costs were to be largely paid for by additional taxes on cigarettes unlike the endless war which is borrowed funds and will have to be paid for by the same children he just refused health care.
President Bush is the worst President in United States history. 2009 can not come soon enough. Lets hope there is something left to salvage. The only silver lining is that George W. Bush is driving the Republican Party off the cliff.
Gates was scheduled to testify later before a Senate committee on the request, which was 42.3 billion dollars greater than the administration's estimate when it presented its 2008 budget request in February.
"This additional 42.3 billion dollars puts us at just under 190 billion dollars for the global war on terror supplemental request for 2008 -- 189.3 billion dollars," said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary.
Democrats clearly believe they have a winning issue with the State Children's Health Insurance Program legislation, so they're pulling out all the props. Yesterday, children were brought to press conferences around Washington. On the heels of a resounding 265-159 approval in the House last night, it was the Senate's chance to turn up the heat on President Bush, who has threatened to veto the $35 billion increase in children's health insurance funding.
This is an example of the President's priorities. There is always enough money for war but never enough to help the citizens of the country who will pay for the war for a generation.
The $189 billion requested is not part of the national deficit. It is done as a supplemental spending bill and is not included in yearly fiscal deficit numbers. When you hear the deficit has fallen remember that not everything is counted. The math is dishonest as is everything associated with this administration.
The American people need to stand up and demand an end to this war and the fiscal ruination that is being slowly perpetrated. Until we fully understand the strangehold of the military industrial complex on our government, we will forever be involved in military conflicts that enrich the few at the expense of many.
President Bush again called Democrats "irresponsible" on Saturday for pushing an expansion he opposes to a children's health insurance program.
"Democrats in Congress have decided to pass a bill they know will be vetoed," Bush said of the measure that draws significant bipartisan support, repeating in his weekly radio address an accusation he made earlier in the week. "Members of Congress are risking health coverage for poor children purely to make a political point."
In the Democrat's response, also broadcast Saturday, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell turned the tables on the president, saying that if Bush doesn't sign the bill, 15 states will have no funding left for the program by the end of the month.
At issue is the Children's Health Insurance Program, a state-federal program that subsidizes health coverage for low-income people, mostly children, in families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to afford private coverage. It expires Sept. 30.
This President is an immoral fool. Health care for poor and lower income children is bad but no bid contracts for Halliburton and Blackwater are neccessary. Where is his outrage when it is proven that Halliburton has overcharged the American taxpayer? Where is his outrage that $9 billion dollars is missing in Iraq? Where is his outrage that after billions have been spent on reconstruction that cholera is now in Baghdad as a result of unclean water? Where is his outrage that after billions of dollars in contracts, they still have nearly no electricity in most parts of Iraq? Where is his outrage after his close friend Ray L. Hunt sealed a deal for Iraqi Oil.
President Bush is the WORST damn President in our history. His corruption knows no bounds. I dare him to veto this bill and tell the nations poor children that they mean nothing to him. He is no better than the corrupt despots he rails against and in some ways he is worse. January 2009 can not come soon enough for the American people and for the rest of the world who see this fool for what he is - an incompetent corrupt sociopath.
BIG NUMBERS, like 45 million uninsured Americans, are hard to grasp. But that number came home to me at a recent conference. The keynote speaker was former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Her topic was our health care system, and her message was personal and anguished.
The gist was that even she lives in constant fear of major uninsured health bills. Not her own -- those of her son. He can't afford insurance because his son -- her grandchild -- has a preexisting condition.
As I listened, a light dawned: O'Connor and the rest of us with health coverage are also uninsured. We too face terrible, albeit more remote, health care risks -- the risk that our employer will drop our plan, that Medicare will go bust, that our plan won't cover our needs, that premiums will eat us alive, that our doctor will stop taking our insurance, that long-term care will wipe us out, and that our uninsured friends and family members will need major financial help.
My heart bleeds for Justice O'Connor. Maybe if she had not been one of the five that installed President Bush I could feel some sympathy but she helped put this criminal administration in place so I can only laugh at her family's predicament.
Her actions have given us the worst administration in our history and led to six years of inaction on health care and rising numbers of uninsured. I hope she wakes up nightly knowing what her actions have wrought on this nation and even onto her own family. I bet if this issue did not directly affect her family you would never hear her speak about it. Now she understands what 47 million Americans experience on a daily basis. Maybe what we need to do is to cancel the health care plan of all legislators and judges and let them spend a day in the shoes of all the uninsured.
New administrative hurdles, which state health officials were told about late last week, are aimed at preventing parents with private insurance for their children from availing of the government-subsidized State Children's Health Insurance Program. But Democrats and children's advocates said that the announcement will jeopardize coverage for children whose parents work at jobs that do not provide employer-paid insurance.
Under the new policy, a state seeking to enroll a child whose family earns more than 250 percent of the poverty level -- or $51,625 for a family of four -- must first ensure that the child is uninsured for at least one year. The state must also demonstrate that at least 95 percent of children from families making less than 200 percent of the poverty level have been enrolled in the children's health insurance program or Medicaid -- a sign-up rate that no state has yet managed.
Doesn't an article like this just warm your heart? The Bush administration only cares about the unborn. Once you are here you are on your own. The SCHIP programs have been very successful in getting uninsured children insured. The provision that you must be uninsured for one year is the most troubling. Children need yearly health exams as do all people. What happens to the children who become sick during that year of uninsurance? How can a family of four earning $52,000 afford private health insurance? The SCHIP programs at least cover the children. If you still think this administation or the Republican party cares at all about the poor or middle class, I have a bridge to sell you in Minneapolis.
Ministry spokesman Edmilson Oliveira da Silva said the government would not appeal Wednesday's ruling by a panel of federal judges giving the government 30 days to offer the procedure or face fines of US$5,000 (€3,700) a day.
"The health minister was prompted by the judges' decision," Silva said. "But we already had a technical group studying the procedure with the idea of including it among the procedures that are covered."
Federal prosecutors from Rio Grande do Sul state had argued that sexual reassignment surgery is covered under a constitutional clause guaranteeing medical care as a basic right.
Does Brazil have the type of care that we can receive here in the United States? I would say not for the free services but if you have the money to pay for medical care then the care is good.
Brazil's public health system offers free care to all Brazilians, including a variety of surgeries and free AIDS medication. But long lines and poorly equipped facilities mean that those who can afford it usually choose to pay for private hospitals and clinics.
I have always beleived the road to quality health care for all resides in an expansion of the Medicare system to include all citizens. It is why I support HR 676 which would provide for single payer health care for all.
Can you imagine the oputcry from the religious right if we were to approve all sexual reassignment surgery? Brazil may be a developing nation but it seems light years ahead in its social positions on issues of sexuality. It is one of the best countries on earth for AIDS policy as shown with its policy of free AIDS medications for its citizens. Is Brazil perfect for health care, of course not but maybe we could learn a lesson or two from them. It is time that Americans understand that our health care system is failing us. We rank 37 in the world in health care delviery and 42 in life expectnacy but first in per capita cost. Those are all alarming but true statistics.
We do have the best results unless you count how long we actually live then there are 41 countries that have longer life expectancies. As long as you don't want to live a long life then the U.S. health care system is just great. Still think our system is the envy of the world?
The 68-31 vote, one day after the House passed a more ambitious and expensive version over bitter Republican opposition, handed Democrats a solid achievement to trumpet as they leave Washington for a summer break.
It also gave Democrats, who secured a veto-proof margin, a chance to draw a stark distinction between their priorities and Bush's on an issue that resonates with voters.
"For the life of me, I can't understand why the president would want to veto this legislation," said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the Finance Committee chairman. "It's moderate, it's bipartisan, it helps low-income kids. ... It's just the right thing to do for the country."
Bush has proposed spending $5 billion to extend the program. He says the Senate's $35 billion expansion would balloon the decade-old program beyond its original mission of covering children of working-poor parents and would move more people toward government-run health care.
The President wants unlimited funds for a worthless and damaging war but threatens to veto health care for children. What else do you need to know?
President Bush has threatened to veto what he sees as a huge expansion of the children’s health care program, which he describes as a step “down the path to government-run health care for every American.” The House measure calls for changes that the administration will probably find even more distasteful, including cuts in Medicare payments to private health plans.
One of the questions I always have regarding health care is why we talk about what it would cost to insure all citizens while we never question the cost of war. The bill would limit private plans which are costing the government more than traditional medicare. You only need to know who is earning that extra money to see who will strongly oppose any legislation to curb those costs. The answer is the insurance industry which continues to make record profits in health care.
Proponents of the private plans, offered by companies like UnitedHealth and Humana, say they provide more benefits than traditional Medicare.
But the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the government paid the private plans, on average, 12 percent more than it would have cost to care for the same people in traditional Medicare. Moreover, it said, payments to the fastest-growing type of plan, known as private fee-for-service plans, are 19 percent higher than the cost of traditional Medicare.
The House bill would gradually reduce these payments so that Medicare would pay the same amount, regardless of whether a beneficiary was in a private plan or in traditional Medicare.
AARP, which represents nearly 39 million older Americans, and the American Medical Association said they would begin running television advertisements on Monday to secure passage of the House bill.
The barrage of advertisements paid for by insurance company lobbyists will surely join the advertisements paid for by the AARP and the AMA. Will the media cover both sides of this issue or will they only show the advertisements paid for by the insurance industry lobbyists? The pharmaceutical industry is a huge advertiser and will undoubtedly pressure the media to withhold the competing advertisements. Will they fold to the pressure or will they finally act in the public interest?
Watch this report from Dr. Gupta on the Michael Moore film "Sicko" then watch Michael Moore take apart Wolf Blitzer and the mainstream media. Until we all understand how the mainstream media is not doing what is expected of them, we will never fully understand what is happening in our nation today.
I originally saw this posted on Americablog. and needed to comment.
It is reports like this that led me to create this site. All too often Middle Class Americans are voting against their own best interests to satisfy some prejudice or some view on social issues. This report could not highlight this more clearly.
People are being led to the slaughter due to their own willful ignorance or backwards prejudice. The problem is for the rest of us who are pulled down with them. How many would really sacrifice their health care to stop the 16 year old across the street from having an abortion or stopping the Gay couple from marrying? In the end most people will gravitate toward self interest if they know all the facts. I am hoping to bring those facts to light in a simple understandable way that changes peoples perspectives before they vote.
In a Pennsylvania government survey of the state’s 60 hospitals that perform heart bypass surgery, the best-paid hospital received nearly $100,000, on average, for the operation while the least-paid got less than $20,000. At both, patients had comparable lengths of stay and death rates.
And among the 20 hospitals serving metropolitan Philadelphia, two of the highest paid actually had higher-than-expected death rates, the survey found.
One of the main problems with our health care system is that people do believe that higher costs result in better care. This report ends those thoughts. Our health care system is a mess with the United States spending more per capita than all other nations and getting less in the way of results. Many hospitals are on the brink of bankruptcy due to low insurance reimbursements. Who is making all the money in the health care industry? The insurance and pharmaceutical companies are making record profits while close to 50 million people go without insurance.
I would recommend that all citizens go to see the new Michael Moore movie "Sicko" which examines the health care industry. Even Fox News described it as brilliant. We can not truly fix the problem until we understand its causes.
