COMMENTS: 40
You. At a Town Hall Meeting. 5 Questions You Should Ask
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Take Action headlines via email.
If you lived nowhere but in front of your television set, you'd never know that a majority of the American people favor substantial health-care reforms -- and you'd certainly never know that most want to see a public health-care plan offered as part of a mix of options in any overhaul of the system.
In fact, were you a truly dedicated couch potato, you just might think that most of the “regular people” in this country just hate, hate the idea of health-care reform. And then you just might start thinking that maybe you should, too.
Thankfully, you, oh well-informed reader, are not that kind of tuber. No, you are ready for action, ready to show another face of regular America to the media — and to your fellow citizens. And what better place to do that than at a town-hall meeting dedicated to the topic of health-care reform?
Where You Come In
Just as opponents of reform have shown up in force at town-hall meetings conducted by members of Congress who support meaningful change, so, too, can you make your presence known at the town halls of those who oppose it. And when you do, awesome things can occur.
Look at what happened to Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley -- the man who's been holding up the finalization of a health-care bill in the Senate Finance Committee while trying to scare his older constituents into thinking that reimbursing doctors for counseling patients on end-of-life care is really a ruse for "pulling the plug on Grandma."
Watch this video from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, starting at around 2:43, and you'll see one grandma who all but pulled the metaphorical plug on Grassley:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The brilliance of this woman's question was that it was particular to Grassley, her senator,who had been using as his rationale for opposing the public option a study by the Lewin Group. Not only did the quesitoner helpfully point out that the Lewin Group is a wholly-owned subsidiary of United Health Care, one of the largest health insurance companies; she also calculated how much the United Health Care CEO made per hour: $102,000 by her math.
Luckily, Sen. Grassley has a week full of town hall meetings still ahead of him -- meetings at which you could be the star!
Town Halls Galore
Don't live in Iowa? There's still room for your powers of good, as congressional opponents (and supporters) of health-care reform are convening public meetings and teleconferences in a number of states, on dates ranging from now until the end of the year.
Tonight, for instance, Rep. Allen Boyd of Florida, a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, will convene a meeting in Tallahassee. Later this week, alpha Dog Mike Ross of Arkansas will meet with constituents via teleconference, and next month, Pennsylvania's Kathy Dahlkemper, also of the Blue Dog Coalition, will meet concerned citizens in Emlenton.
And there's plenty more: citizens of Alaska, California, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Washington state all have the opportunity to to discuss health-care reform with those who represent them in our nation's capital. Heck, in Wisconsin, Sen. James Sensenbrenner has a roster of town-hall appearances as jam-packed as a Grateful Dead tour schedule.
Although it's critical for progressives to have a presence at meetings presided over by senators and representatives who pose obstacles to health-care reform, don't forget those who support it: they need your love, and your smart questions. For instance, tonight Virginia's Jim Moran has a meeting scheduled, and it's anticipated that anti-reform enthusiasts will be out in force.
We've compiled the town-hall schedule information here (which wasn't hard to do, thanks to the handy-dandy listing that appears on the Web site of Glenn Beck's 912 Project). Although not every event listed is expressly dedicated to the topic of health-care reform, that's no reason not to bring it up.
Don't Go It Alone
To maximize your presence and point of view, gather a group about you -- your friends and family. Spread out in the room, and get your questions in early, so you can set the tone for the meeting.
Be strategic: If you have a senior citizen in your group, make arrangements with that person to politely ask a pointed question. (If you don't have a senior citizen in your group, recruit one if you can.) For instance, if your representative or senator has been advancing the lie that health-care reform is a scheme to kill old people, have that person ask where in the bill the representive finds that information. Ask for the page number, and which version of the bill. Or have that person discuss, in a personal way, the merits of having a discussion her doctor about end-of-life care.
Do you know a progressive member of the clergy? Would she or he be willing to join you to raise the moral concern of letting millions of people go without health care in the richest nation on earth? (Even better if the clergy member wears something symbolic of his ministry.)
Bring your personal stories. Do you or a member of your group have a heart-rending tale about something a heartless insurer did to a loved one, or how lack of coverage created a devastating outcome? Use that story as a lead-in to a question about how the kind of reform your representative says he or she supports would make things different.
For camera impact, have a few hand-crafted signs at the ready, with slogans like: "My Grandchildren Deserve Health Care" or "Dropped By My Insurance Company" (assuming that you were).
5 Basic Questions
Here are five fundamental questions that should illuminate the need for health-care reform to your town-hall audience:
Stay up to date with the latest Take Action headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Suzon on Aug 26, 2009 2:58 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, why not start bringing clear plastic bottles with water representing tears you have shed for your own anxiety and suffering or the suffering of others? Hold up the water bottles when you raise your hands.
I would hold up a bottle of "tears" for Jacie, my friend from college, who died a victim of the insurance industry and Big Pharma.
And for my son who will be in debt for the rest of his life after a minor heart attack when still fairly young.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» just want to add that, although the corporate media is not on our side, they do pick up on visuals
Posted by: Suzon
» RE: just want to add that, although the corporate media is not on our side, they do pick up on visua
Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Seems like sling shots would be appropriate
Posted by: bthespoon
» This is not only truly sad, but weird. What is going on that so many young adults and young....
Posted by: CynicI
» Yes, I think I do see a pattern here. Good cop, bad cop? What happened to death panels?
Posted by: Beck
» The death panels are still there by Big Insurance and it will get worse if the bill passes.
Posted by: Benn_Miller
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 26, 2009 3:32 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Agreed...these psuedo town halls meetings are just circuses...
Posted by: Quist
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CTC123 on Aug 26, 2009 4:24 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Virtual Town Hall H.C.R. In-put
Health Care Profiteers, Lobbyists, and Invested
Interest, collect money from the consumer (U&I), and dispense Trick'le.down Health Care, their primary care is the bottom line.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Search for the facts then act:
Health Care Profiteers & Lobbyists
Health Care for America NOW!
www.aft.org/fight4america
www.HealthCareCantWait.com
www.organizingforamerica.com
www.consumersunion.org
www.WeWantThePublicOption.com
www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck
www.ourfuture.org/action
Great "ACTION" steps Adele & Joshua
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: weightman on Aug 26, 2009 6:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Holland's article on "hijacking" the debate has been an excellent resource, especially the economic cost/benefit analysis. Highly recommended.
I'll forgo my "no compromise" argument for the time being and contribute the following for consideration:
Go to OpenSecrets.org and find out how much money whoever your talking to has taken from the health insurance industry. Be sure to use the 2008 data.
Then ask them why we can't all have the same plan, like Obama or Grassley or Baucus.
One Group. One Plan. One Payer. The American Plan.
(I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» President Obama WANTS you to be able to have his plan. Exactly that is his point.
Posted by: fcvoigt
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sherry on Aug 26, 2009 6:19 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have found most people informed and supportive about single-payer in general and a surprising number know about HR 676, down to the bill number, its history, its status.
We arm ourselves with literature and calm, quiet voice and keep ourselves mobile, so to speak. (the Organizing for America people --- hired by whom? --- stand behind a table and have been targets of abuse). So far no trouble at all and plenty of support. And because we are outside, not inside, the local media often interview us ---- the blue ribbon organizer was on TV talking about single-payer.
If these events are stages, we can be stage managers.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Organizing.... a great idea but for more than health care...
Posted by: CynicI
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Beck on Aug 26, 2009 6:23 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
from the article:
Among the best features of the bills in Congress are their insurance regulations, which include:
Insurance companies could no longer deny coverage to people because they've had health problems in the past, nor could they charge hugely different rates for different groups of people (premiums could only vary by age, geography, tobacco use and family size).
The House bill bans recissions -- the insurance industry's habitual practice of collecting premiums until someone gets sick, and then digging through their histories for an excuse to cancel coverage.
Insurers wouldn't be allowed to cancel an individual's coverage for reasons other than failing to pay the premium.
Insurers would no longer be permitted to impose annual or lifetime caps on benefits.
Insurers that sell insufficient, cheapo plans that leave people vulnerable to medical crises would be required to disclose that fact to their customers.
All insurers would be required to disclose how much of their spending is on health care and how much goes to costs like overhead, advertising, etc.
Back to me: my conservative family members no longer send me forwards on these topics because they were aghast that I actually replied, but I'm certain the health-care forwards they're sending are abominable. It wouldn't be a bad idea for us polite liberals to start compiling simple forwards of facts like those and sending them far and wide, leaving out the "if you agree, pass this on. If not, delete". To conservatives, those are the two only and obvious options. I even got one once that said, "Not for discussion. If you disagree, delete." Conservative America, folks!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I forgot to add what a GREAT article this is!
Posted by: Beck
» Wish I had this article 48 hours earlier with Ben Nelson (D-NE)
Posted by: zooeyhall
Comments are closed-
Posted by: filhtymcnasty on Aug 26, 2009 7:50 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Kimberly on Aug 26, 2009 8:07 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.
Failure to keep from harm [ 42CFR438.704 ]: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it's shown that an official willfully failed to keep an INDIVIDUAL from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute
.
1998 ~ ANTI-TRUST ~ The HHS/OIG continues to work with the ( AOA ) Administration on Aging, ( HCFA ) Health Care Finance Administration, and the American Association of Retired Persons ( AARP ) to develop an Outreach Campaign [ 42CFR438.704 Marketing Violation ] to Educate Beneficiaries [ Entitled Individuals with Existing Federal HMO Hospital Insurance Benefits ] and those who work with the ELDERLY to recognize FRAUD AND ABUSE and to report it appropriately [ T42CFR417.1 grievance procedure - alternate dispute resolution - systematic denial of COVERED Claims | Anti-dumping and Anti-kickback violation - racketeering ]. This campaign ( PUBLIC FRAUD T42CFR417.1 ) WAS fully "launched" in 1999
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wtfo on Aug 26, 2009 8:10 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
2) What is more important to you (taking into account the probability of needing one vs. the other in an average citizen's lifetime)?
a) Spending whatever is "necessary and required" for the American government to provide taxpayer-funded military services for every citizen?
b) Spending whatever is "necessary and required" for the American government to provide taxpayer-funded healthcare services for every citizen?
3) What is the maximum percentage of an American citizen's current annual income that should ever be demanded by a healthcare provider for healthcare services? What is the maximum percentage of an American citizen's current net worth that should ever be demanded by a healthcare provider for healthcare services?
4) Is for-profit healthcare moral? Is it "moral" for corporations or medical institutions to be required to provide a profit to one or more medically-uninvolved parties when delivering necessary medical or healthcare services to a prospective patient – and of denying available medical services needed to alleviate the pain or prolong the life of that patient when the required profit cannot be obtained? If so, should there be a government-mandated maximum profit or should it be purely a "market-determined" mechanism?
5) Should "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" be construed to include access to healthcare - regardless of the current ability to pay? If not, why not?
6) Is it right for citizens to be forced to pay for the healthcare of OTHER American citizens and government officials thru mandated taxes (e.g. Medicare, Medicaid, V.A. Health Expenses, Tax Payment for Government Official Health Expenses, etc.) but not have their taxes provide for THEIR OWN healthcare first?
7) Is it right for the American taxpayer to fund and guarantee government-provided healthcare coverage of American citizens based solely on age? Why is it that ONLY after they reach the age of 65 are this country's citizens guaranteed access to government healthcare? Isn't this a violation of "equal protection under the law"?
8) Why is it right and proper for our government (be it State or Federal in nature) to provide police protection, fire protection, security protection (FBI/CIA/US Military, etc.), and legal protection to its citizens but NOT provide affordable access to healthcare and medical services? Of what value are any of these other government-provided protections when a citizen or family member is in critical need of healthcare to alleviate pain or prolong life?
9) Are we as a nation getting our money's worth from every dollar we currently spend on our healthcare? What percentage of every current dollar spent on healthcare is actually going to the direct treatment of the patient vs. the percentage going to paperwork, administrative overhead, 3rd, 4th, or 5th party profit, executive compensation, and payments to insurance companies (e.g. litigation insurance)? Couldn't a non-profit government-provided healthcare system be more cost efficient to run and manage if it didn’t have to pay for all these other expenses not directly related to healthcare delivery?
10) Is our healthcare system REALLY better than those in other major industrialized nations - e.g. Canada, England/Germany/Western Europe, Japan, etc.? If it IS better than these other nations, can you prove it statistically and via unbiased comparisons? If it IS NOT better, why are so afraid to elect to adapt the best concepts of some of these other national healthcare policies?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: How About THESE Questions?
Posted by: KitKat
» Not ALL of us have been duped
Posted by: songbird1268
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Aug 26, 2009 8:53 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Aug 26, 2009 9:26 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The insurance and drug crooks have greased the right palms and muddled the issue sufficiently to kill any real reform and will continue to rip us off while providing less service and allowing people to die needlessly.
The thing about this tragedy is that practically NOBODY speaks out against the inhumanity and pathological greed of our out-of-control capitalist oligarchy.
We might as well have a hitler or a stalin running the show for all the compassion we're getting from corporate fat cats and their lackeys in guvmint.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Not a done deal. There is the possibility of a state by state solution.
Posted by: SayBlade
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kettleblack on Aug 26, 2009 9:45 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After the insurance companies get through cleaning out our bank accounts, do we have anything left to pay for our personal medical treatment?
What if we cannot afford the government's mandated insurance? Who determines what we can and cannot afford? Only factoring your income without determining your debt, constitutes a new tax without a public debate.
Welfare for Insurance Companies is not the solution to our Health Care Problem.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Unrepentant Heretic on Aug 26, 2009 10:02 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I come from a Scandinavian country were healthcare is socialized, single-payer. In no Scandinavian country are illegal immigrants covered. They should not be so in the US either, it is economic lunacy. Illegal immigrants should however still have emergency care, something they cannot even get in Scandinavia.
In the US today only some 10 mn are truly uninsured. They should be covered but only by a stripped down version of Medicaid. All children should be covered fully.
All tax benefits, tax breaks for health insurance should be cut and all insurance should be moved from the company to the individual.
Medicare and Medicaid should be rationed and restricted only to the basic level of care.
3. Ask questions that steer the conversation toward the everyday rip-offs of private insurance.
I get so upset when I hear people talking about greedy and profit driven insurance companies.
80 % of all covered in the US are covered by non-profit organizations only 20 % is covered by for profit corporations.
(60 % of the US health insurance companies are already today non-profit i.e. mutual and owned by their policy holders. Today as Medicare and Medicaid is covering 50 % of the population and non-profit insurer’s covers 30 %.)
Stop the lying!!!!
4. The costs of doing nothing: What will happen if Congress doesn't reform the system?
In 1960 the US health care system cost 5 % of GDP but it cured less than 80 % of illnesses we can cure today at a cost of 17 % of GDP.
The cure for the system is to drastically ration Medicare and Medicaid according to norms set up in Scandinavian countries and the UK. You cannot subsidize you must always ration socialized care. It is an axiomatic fact of life in a single-payer system.
77 % of Americans is satisfied with their health care. How on earth are you going to get a reform were most Americans will be worse off and have to pay more for the new system to cover the uninsured and to keep wealthy seniors in luxury style non rationed Medicare?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Health care reform is a lame duck, dead on the water
Posted by: richholland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Beck on Aug 26, 2009 10:04 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Time: Wednesday, August 26 from 6:00 PM - 9:00 PM
Location: Troy High School
4777 Northfield Parkway
Troy, MI 48098
You can view the details of this event at any time by going to:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/gpkg9l
Go armed and prepared! This article gives such good advice on that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Beck on Aug 26, 2009 10:17 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: launcher on Aug 26, 2009 2:49 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Q1) A lot of anti-reform people believe that end-of-life discussions should not be covered by a public insurance plan. Would you, Senator XYZ, stipulate that no PRIVATE insurance plans can have this type of coverage either? (A: No way!)
Q2) Some anti-reformers apparently believe that a public plan should not incorporate a panel of experts to examine the best treatments in terms of medical safety, medical efficacy, and cost benefits. Almost all PRIVATE insurance companies do just that, however, especially those that are for-profit. Would you require insurance companies to stop reviewing the medical practices of the doctors that they reimburse? (A: No way!)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: songbird1268 on Aug 26, 2009 3:38 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amenable Death Rates
Information and statistics like this need to be reported at every opportunity.
More importantly, we have absolutely got to stay focused on the fact that this is a MORAL issue far more than it is an economic or political issue.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: And I'd like to know why don't we read things on this site like
Posted by: launcher
» RE: And I'd like to know why don't we read things on this site like
Posted by: songbird1268
» RE: And I'd like to know why don't we read things on this site like
Posted by: launcher
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SayBlade on Aug 26, 2009 3:59 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you are unfortunate and get swept along in the anti-health care reform wave, ride it and get in front. Demand that your rights to be bankrupted by the health care insurance companies be protected. Your rights to be denied coverage are in danger and quite possibly at risk are your rights to have your kids taken away are because your medical bills make them unaffordable.
Get the picture?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fcvoigt on Aug 26, 2009 4:01 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can anybody be against getting the same deal which the President of the United States has for themselves? It was good enough for President Bush, but it isn't good enough for you?
Actually some people ARE against you getting those same benefits.
Who?
The CEOs who will never again be able to kill you without even consulting a "death panel", by refusing to pay the (doctor/hospital/specialist) for treatment with the money you gave them years ago.
That was the contract they offered you and they are not honouring it.
If you pay in advance for a car, you expect to take delivery, don't you?
You have been paying in advance for years to be protected if you should need it, and now you do need it they are refusing to deliver the protection.
That is stealing.
Why shouldn't they be stopped?
These guys get MILLIONS, EVERY YEAR, while you and your heart condition are being foreclosed onto the street.
And they are using the peanut shells of that money to bribe the town-hall screamers.
BTW my insurance contributions in Germany, with the company of my choice, were based on my EARNINGS as family breadwinner:
!! regardless of my age.
!! regardless of any pre-existing conditions.
!! regardless of my motherhood potential.
!! regardless of the number of family members dependent on those earnings (husband, children, father, mother, aunt-in-law. . .)
The premium I paid was 12% of my NET earnings. I paid half, my employer paid half.
With a cap of 600,00 Euro/month.
The money was deducted from my account before I saw it and I never saw a bill.
Benefits included -
ALL treatment for under-18-year-olds FREE including routine GP and prescribed specialist examinations, all health shots, all other medication, all operations.
Clinic in-patient treatment, opticians' bills, glasses, contact lenses (for a 12-year-old!), routine and emergency dentist visits.
The only money we had to advance was 50% of the cost for teeth braces; that money got PAID BACK by the insurance company when the treatment was successfully completed. (Teens aren't keen on wearing "snow chains"; this helps motivate parents to make sure their kids stay the course - one friend of mine "earned" a three-week summer holiday for the entire family the year his braces came off. )
But also –
!! ALL family doctor and prescribed specialist consultations.
!! ALL hospital costs.
!! clinic treatment as prescribed necessary.
!! PAY adjustments when I was ill for nine months !!
!! any necessary care for any family member dependent on my earnings.
What extras did I pay?
Telephone and TV use in hospital.
The extra cost of a precious metal for teeth caps.
The extra cost of fancy spectacle frames if I didn't care for any of the around 30 "free" designs.
Prescription participation costs ranging from 0,- to 5,- to maximum 10,- Euros per item. (pregnancy-related and chronic medication exempted)
There is almost always a generic available at 0,- extra prescription charge.
Believe me, you are not about to get cheated by the reform. On the contrary.
YOU ARE BEING CHEATED NOW by the insurance companies.
The reform will stop them from cheating you
That's why they are paying (excuse me) intelligence-challenged shouters to overload the blogs with tripe and frighten you at town-hall meetings.
The saddest thing is the MSM appears to be equally challenged and/or up for purchase too.
Now THAT is a pity.
Thank goodness for articles like this one to restore a bit of the balance.
And thank goodness for Ms Maddow, she is a real jewel in my life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jtpatrick108 on Aug 27, 2009 5:33 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: arroyowash on Aug 28, 2009 10:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rep. Shadegg said the health insurance industry responds to incentives created by the government and the government is to be blamed for the current high price of health care. HR 3200 will make matters worse, he said.
Rep. Shadegg said it is a core belief of the Democrats that health insurance is complicated, the American public does not understand it, thus they don't deserve patient choice and a government plan will be created.
He compared health insurance to auto insurance. "Auto insurance responds to public pressure. If you get a notice that your rates went up, you pick up the phone and call Geico or Progressive or State Farm - whomever - and get another quote. Somebody will offer you more coverage for less. And you get to dedide what coverage you want. That's the free market. But there will be no free market in health care under HR 3200.”
Rep. Shadegg talked about the "industry" which wrote this bill. “The trial lawyers are for it, the Democrats get a lot of money from them, so there is not one word about tort reform (medical malpractice) in it. Organized labor is pushing hard for it. The AARP is really just a health insurance company so they love HR 3200. The AMA looked at this one dimensionally. The AMA asked if there will be a SGR update (Medicare payments) and was told yes so on that basis they said they were for it. Bad decision. The government has co-opted your profession. The AMA is in the coding business, they are not representing you.”
Rep. Shadegg said the bill is likely to pass because Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi “is one tough nut, will not back down. The town halls are not enough to stop this. Because the Democrats have a majority, they are ignoring the public rabble and listening only to the moneyed interests."
I want to see patient choice perserved and enhanced. Political affiliations aside, HR 3200 takes a sledge hammer to patient choice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: teon6 on Sep 19, 2009 2:15 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Looking for Inspiration? Try This
Between Hope and Despair: Martin Luther King, Barack Obama and War
The Disaster of the Century: How to Help Haiti




