Now You See It, Now You Don't, or The Curious Case of The Disappearing Public Option

I would have sworn I heard President Obama say last night that he "supports" the public option. He did it in that cool and non-committal way he has been doing it since he became President -- he supports, but stays open-minded and not dogmatic, and is open to suggestions.

It is a disturbing kind of open-mindedness, in my opinion, and part of that crazy pragmatism Obama has been accused of by many progressives, including his own doctor. There were already worrisome statements in his speech with regard to PO -- for example, that it would include at best only about 5% of our population (so how strong can it be? what will be the real criteria for participation? can people like us, not poor, but no longer able to afford their overpriced, individually bought coverage sign up? etc.) or his insistence that it's only a small part of the reform package, and so on.

As soon as I got on-line, I saw e-mails from the usual suspects: Firedoglake, SEIU, New York Senator Kristine Hilldebrand, imploring me to support them and/or call my representative again ASAP and insist on the public option in our health care reform bill. Or write letters to the editor (per FDL).

The e-mails were urgent in tone, stating, sensibly enough, that even though our President supports the public option, he did not say he will fight for it. Surely these guys know what's cooking. There was also an e-mail from President Obama urging me/us to contact our reps in support of his reform efforts. (BTW, I've done it all numerous times.)

Then came Charlie Rose on TV with his post-speech discussion, which involved Democratic Reps. Anthony Weiner from New York and Kathleen Dahlkemper from PA, Al Hunt from Bloomberg News, Joseph Califano, David Brooks from NYT, Republican Rep. Thaddeus McCotter from Michigan, and Rich Lowry, editor of National Review.

First, Rose talked about the health care reform with Reps. Weiner, Dahlkemper and McCotter. The former two were strongly in favor of PO (Dahlkemper is a Blue Dog who became convinced that only PO can honestly reform the system at this point), while McCotter did what Republicans usually do -- opposed everything they said, though in the manner reasonable enough for a GOPer, pointing out, for example that Dems themselves are not sure what they want in their final bill.

True, though he did this with that annoying customary GOP glee and satisfaction over the Dems confusion. I know, it's hard to blame him for that; however, his behavior again shows the Republican M.O. -- sit back, do nothing/offer nothing of value, and watch the Dems screw up whatever it is to screw up. (BTW, McCotter is one cool cucumber -- and he looks like one too: tall, bald, shiny and shapeless.)

And then something strange happened: Rose parted with Weiner and Dahlkemper, retained McCotter, and brought to the table Brooks, Hunt, Califano, and the geek extraordinaire, Rich Lowry, dripping with disdain (he is, after all, from National Review). The mood of the whole gathering changed, and good punditing times were had by most, while they all, collectively, put PO to death.

I thought, wait a minute! Was I beamed up to some kind of a twilight zone? I could have sworn I heard Obama express his support for PO, yet the whole punditry forum, the majority of which was positively inclined toward Obama, declared PO dead on arrival, with as much as a hand-waving ironic gesture from Brooks, indicating that he never believed PO was even seriously considered by the President. Neither did Hunt or Califano, though Lowry had to stress that he remained wary of anything in the health bill that smacked of anything publicky and stated, with his trademark disdain, shared with McCotter, that progressive Democrats would be stupid to insist on PO and ruin the reform efforts by doing so. (Though I strongly suspect he may be hoping for just that.)
[READ MORE +/-]

Brooks went so far as saying that Obama will not stick by PO because he knows well that Dems will support any reform efforts and will take whatever comes in the name of "reform," if only for their political survival reasons. Most agreed that Obama essentially endorsed Baucus's plan in his speech. (I missed that, but that's what they heard as the bottom line.) McCotter -- gleefully, of course -- did his Republican shtick, insisting that the "government-takeover of health care" is not a solution and that we should start from the beginning, in a true bipartisan fashion. We know what that means, of course, so no decoding necessary.

But the way things stand, PO may indeed be DOA, what with the president's open-mindedness and the GOP obstinate refusal to grow a conscience. Brooks et al. brought up, rather off-handedly, the idea of co-ops or a trigger as alternatives to PO, but did not linger on the subject as for them this was a moot point to begin with.

Their nonchalance was educational, I must say. The pundits would be happy with semi-dysfunctional co-ops which have proven to be no better than the private insurance cartel in delivering cost-effective and humane health care, or the (even more?) ridiculous idea of a trigger for PO, should the private insurance mafia decided not to shape up. (And what are the chances of that? They had decades to shape up and we have no evidence of them even trying. On the contrary.) As for that "trigger," isn't over 20,000 people dying each year because they cannot afford medical care a trigger enough?

BTW, one thing that came across clearly enough again is that for GOPers money is the only thing that matters. (It's awesome to be rich!) Rose tried several times to ask McCotter about the human and humane reasons for enacting the health care reform, and each time McCotter's responses were about money. Each time with that ironic smirk on his cucumbery face.

I don't know why I continue to be shocked by the GOPers evident lack of conscience and human feeling, but I am. I still hope to see some sign of a heart somewhere among them -- they can't all be psychopaths, can they? (File this question under the rhetorical rubric.)

After Rose, I went searching for others' informed opinions about the future of PO and found discouraging confirmations of Brooks et al's assessment. David Sirota, as usual, had a sobering take on Obama's speech, and I found this comment from Don McCanne, MD, on the Physicians for A National Health Program forum:

(...) the debate over the public option has been a very successful diversionary tactic on the part of the insurance industry. The real debate should have been over whether or not to replace the private insurance plans with a single public plan. The insurance industry won outright since we never had that debate.

Now everyone will have to buy a private plan with inadequate benefits (65-70% actuarial value), and unaffordable premiums, with inadequate subsidies, and with continuing unaffordable cost escalation. This will negatively impact middle-income individuals and families the most.

And our out? Those hardship waivers that will waive the fines we would face for committing the criminal act of being uninsured. And with time, more and more of us will qualify for them.

The progressives drew a line on the public option. Maybe now they should back up and draw the line on single payer. That could give us a fresh start on reform that works for the people instead of the insurers.

And Robert Borosage has this to say, among other things:

This president deserves a better opposition both on the right -- one willing to enter an adult conversation about how to solve the staggering challenges this country faces -- and on the left, one willing to push him hard for fundamental reform, and pressure those in both parties standing in the way. He is ill-served by the petty corruption and ideological venom of the right, and the docility of the left. If we are going to be able to overcome the entrenched corporate interests and lobbies that dole out money to conservatives in both parties, we will need a much more independent and aggressive progressive mobilization.

Conclusions:

1. Pundits love to hear themselves talk. For them, issues like the health care reform (or wars) are a political spectacle where they act as interested observers or gamblers putting their bets on certain outcomes and watching, sometimes with passion, sometimes without, whether their predictions "win." It's a game of sophisticated, but inhumane, one-upmanship. For the rest of us, it's a matter of life and death, literally. Sad that this is lost on the pundits, but not surprising, given their lot in life.

2. GOP consists of, by and large, psychopathically disturbed individuals, devoid of conscience and higher human feelings. (I remain open to revise this statement if and when I see a GOPer with even a minuscule evidence of a heart.)

3. PO is dying. It may be dead already, we are just not told about it to prevent excessive panic among progressives and retain the illusion of the President still yielding some bargaining power in shaping the reform process. So call/write/do what you have to do to keep it alive following the links above.

Cross-posted at The Middle of Nowhere.

our culture is sick

i have not been feeling well lately. don't know whether it's the change of seasons or if i have the swine flu- but i just feel 'under the weather.' and, that got me to thinkin' about health care and the state that it's in. i don't go to the doctor. i won't unless i have to. i used to go- and i used to take clients when they needed or wanted to go- and it's funny but we all got similar answers for our ailments. the clients always had asthma and i always had a virus. and my poor mother was prescribed every drug that has ever been recalled from the market.

(READ MORE)

so, why should i bother to go? why should i plunk down $70 a visit to have them tell me to drink fluids and get plenty of rest? the folks with serious illnesses aren't so lucky. i don't know when the health profession turned corporate- perhaps with the rise of the insurance companies or maybe the hmos, but it is really indicative of a bigger problem in our culture. we really have stopped caring about each other.

i have the choice not to go to the doctor or hospital, but that doesn't mean i should take it away from someone else- and that medical care should be profit driven. i suppose it is pollyannish of me to believe that folks should be in the profession who genuinely want to save lives and not just make the big bucks. i don't know what it is going to take for americans to wake up and see the writing on the wall- our way of life doesn't work. perhaps for the entire system to collapse and for us to go back to local communities again. who knows?

MAKE IT CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN

"We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics. It will only grow louder. We’ve been asked to pause for a reality check. We’ve been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope.
But in the unlikely story of America, there’s never been anything false about hope." -- Barack Obama

PETITION TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: "We worked so hard for real change. President Obama, please demand a strong public health insurance option in your speech to Congress. Letting the insurance companies win would not be change we can believe in."

FEAR- FIGHTING BACK WITH FACTS!

Visit http://HealthCareFactCheck.com to help us expose Republicans' lies and over-the-top rhetoric while empowering our grassroots supporters to hold them accountable for trying to deny families quality, affordable health care.

PIRATES OF THE HEALTH CARE-IBEAN

Health care crisis as depicted by pirates - music by Austin Lounge Lizards

LETTER TO FORMER ARKANSAS GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE

I felt compelled to write Mike Huckabee regarding his comments on health care and Ted Kennedy. The inspiration for the letter and the transcript of Huckabee's words comes via The Huffington Post...






Conservative media figures are blasting Democrats for trying to draw political gain from the death of Senator Ted Kennedy. But on Thursday, it was one of their own -- former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee -- who went there. The 2008 Republican presidential candidate suggested during his radio show, "The Huckabee Report," on Thursday that, under President Obama's health care plan, Kennedy would have been told to "go home to take pain pills and die" during his last year of life.

"[I]t was President Obama himself who suggested that seniors who don't have as long to live might want to consider just taking a pain pill instead of getting an expensive operation to cure them…. …Yet when Sen. Kennedy was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer at 77, did he give up on life and go home to take pain pills and die? Of course not. He freely did what most of us would do. He choose an expensive operation and painful follow up treatments. He saw his work as vitally important and so he fought for every minute he could stay on this earth doing it. He would be a very fortunate man if his heroic last few months were what future generations remember him most for."
As it happens, Huckabee made his remarks shortly after he derided Democrats for using Kennedy's death to make the pitch that "Congress must hurry and pass the health care reform bill and do it in his memory," to which Huckabee replied, "That not only defies good taste, it defies logic."

-MY LETTER-

Dear Mike Huckabee,
Your latest comments regarding the president’s health-care plan and Senator Kennedy not only defy good taste, they defy logic. But then, you know this, don’t you?

When you got up on your pulpit, so to speak, and criticized congress for the as of yet politicization of Kennedy’s death and then turn right around and politicize his death before he’d even been placed in the ground, you proved yourself to be a fool first and a contemptible hypocrite second.

You used to be a preacher, right? I can only imagine what minds you must have turned out from your sermons, what lowly forms you must have shaped in the house of God. There must be tens of thousands of misshapen and unfilled men and women walking around with a duplicitous air about them.

Shame on you, shame on you for having done what you knew to be wrong. Shame on you for imagining, no, for knowing, that what you said went completely against what Teddy had fought for his entire life! You, sir, must be a sad man to go the way of a weak-minded marauder, to flout the teachings of your own personal Jesus by resorting to falsehoods in order to gain some imagined political foothold when, in all honesty, there isn’t one for you. You remind me of a snake oil salesman giving a longwinded spiel about the healing properties of his prepackaged mumbo-jumbo juice. He too uses inflammatory language to sway a sale upon the unwitting fools who believe anything they hear spoken with a shade of bravado.

Is that what you want to be known as, a snake oil salesman from Arkansas? Do you want to be remembered as a political preacher sowing fear into the hearts and minds of the citizenry? Wouldn’t you rather be known as a man who used his talents and aspirations to better an already quaking world? My guess is the latter. So why not do just that? Begin to stand against the lies and the fear mongering that are infiltrating our national dialogue, fear for no better reason than some political bone to pick.

You can do it, Mr. Huckabee. I have faith in you, sir. You can be a better man for yourself and for this nation. We don’t need more snake oil salesmen or women, we need men and women to deliver strong leadership that can rise above the status quo and truly make effective changes that benefit all of society. Not left or right or center or rich or poor or black or brown or white, but all of this nations citizenry. We deserve better from our leaders, whether they are serving or whether they have served and still have a sizeable audience that they can sway for the betterment of mankind, we deserve better.

If you don’t speak truth instead of lies to power and begin to truly make a difference then you’re no better than all the other snake oil salesmen and women who lie through their teeth to gain something for themselves. What would a good man do? Seriously, what would a good man do? You know. You know what he would do. So do it…

Sincerely and with peace,
Mark R. Prime
(thepoetryman)

"THE CAUSE OF MY LIFE"

(Poetryman Photomontage)

We, the world, lost a fierce champion for peace
with the lion's, Senator Ted Kennedy's passing,
so let us march forward now guided by his courage
and bring his life's cause to a thunderous certainty.

Please leave your condolences to the Kennedy family here...

and then

Petition the senate to move on Teddy's Health-care for all.

Letter to Representative Michelle Bachmann

Michelle Bachmann thinks prayer and fasting will “help” defeat health-care reform.

Representative Bachmann,
Is it your prayer that comforts those dying in Iraq as they pray to Allah?

Is it your pleading lips that stave off any future Afghan deaths?

Do you purse your lips and launch one up for those suffering on other continents?

For those convicted of a crime, have you a prayer?

Do you beseech God to help those without health-care?

Was it your prayer, as well,
that had our national guard killing and dying in Iraq
as Katrina threw down her watery hell?

Is it your prayer that lifts the spirit of a widow or fatherless child
that they might resist shattering themselves against empire?

Is it your request that brings food to the starving and medicine to the sick?

Is it your prayer that the unborn are saved, but not a death row convict?

Step back for a moment and you’ll see you’ve been dim sighted;
All your sanctimonious pleas and prayers have gone unrequited.

Perhaps, instead of playing to and praying with your feral base,
you should do the job you were elected to do in the first place...

Sincerely,
Mark R. Prime
(thepoetryman)

Tell Obama: The public option is not optional.

If we don't make a stand now for a public option, the Obama administration may hedge on its plan for health care reform.

This weekend, the Obama administration indicated that it might be open to passing health care reform without any provision for a public insurance option similar to Medicare that could compete with private insurance companies.

President Obama said that a public option was just a "sliver" of his plan. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius went so far as to say that the public option was not an "essential" part of reform.

The comments this weekend by the president and Secretary Sebelius rhetorically pave the way for the Obama administration to cave on a meaningful public option and instead accept toothless regional health care co-ops that would be unable to compete with insurance companies and keep them honest.

Please remind President Obama that part of the reason he won the presidency was his plan to enact major health care reform that included a public option, a provision that 76% of Americans support.

Sign the petition asking him to pledge only to sign a bill with a robust public option similar to Medicare.

Q: How Many Republicans Does It Take To Screw Up The Health Care Reform?

A: None. They can just leave the job to the Democrats.

Alright, Mr. President, please forgive my forthrightness, but enough with the charade. We all like a good thriller from time to time, but this ain't one of those times. So please don't keep us in the dark. End the suspense already. We are waiting for that audacity with hope -- and it's nothing outstanding, mind you, just a belief that what's right and just will prevail and that you still stand for it, with us, not against us.

The hands-off un-Clintonian approach you've learned to cultivate for our own good has not worked all that well and we are pleased to see that you're traveling and meeting with people now that the wingnut crock has hit the fan. You put out new messages on your website trying to undo the Limbaugh-Beckian nonsense and that's all good too, but it seems that somehow the kick-ass attitude from your campaign has gotten lost or diluted. Supposedly because you have gone all bipartisan on us.

Why on Earth would you do THAT? Is there anything in the Republicans' staunch opposition to ANY health care reform that would make you think they:
a. are interested in the good of the nation?
b. know what they are talking about?
c. give a damn?
d. make sense?

If not, then why the hell are you so willing to compromise with them? You don't compromise with idiots -- or not very bright children -- playing with destructive toys. You step in and take their toys away -- for their own and everyone's good.

I've never thought I'd say so, but I have to agree with some Republicans* here who, ever so gleefully, notice that the only bipartisan thing you have accomplished so far is to raise criticisms of your nebulous health care reform proposal, which is getting fuzzier by the day. No one is sure what it'll look like, but pretty much everyone has already found things in it to be angry about.

To be sure, the Republicans' idea of the health care reform appears, so far, to be just more of the same for-profit private insurance bonanza.

But is yours really that different?

I've listened to your town hall meeting a couple of days ago, where you showed up with your sleeves rolled up (a nice touch, that), and responded, to a woman inquiring why we can't do a single-payer government-run system, a Medicare for all, by saying something along the lines of it not being feasible or such. Then you added that what we will get is going to be a "uniquely American system."

Forgive my cynicism, but when I heard that, I thought immediately that this, translated into plain English, means just more fleecing of the American middle-class and the poor. It seems that this uniquely American thing will be trying to achieve the impossible: combine for-profit medical "care" with, well, you know, medical care. It indeed seems uniquely American to keep screwing up while the whole world is laughing at us and to do the right thing only after we exhaust all other idiotic options.

The progressive bloggers, in general, have been quite forgiving toward you -- it just shows that you've generated a massive supply of hope and good will in people. But not every one of your supporters is so patient and kind, and I have had my doubts too. Now you're telling us you are ready to drop the public option.

So let's get it straight. We are learning about your secret deals with Big Pharma after you've promised to make any such negotiations public and transparent. Then you -- or your people -- issue unconvincing denials about those.

But we have not been born yesterday, and we realize that profit-making behemoths do not, all of a sudden, grow hearts and consciences, so you must have promised them something pretty sweet in exchange for their support. That 50 million new customers does sound good on its own, to think of it. Add to it a promise of no cost controls, and hallelujah! There is heaven on Earth, after all -- for some of us (OK, not us, but them) at least.

So please tell us straight what this is all about: deal or no deal with the Big Pharma? And if there is a deal, then why? How does this advance your and our cause of the health care reform? No cost containment. No regulation. No public option.

Where does the reform part begin?

Yes, we get the insurance reform proposal shtick going on now. We do notice that you have switched from health care reform to health insurance reform. We totally get it -- it's more palatable and less scary to average Americans to hear that you are going to push for consumer protection laws in the insurance industry rather than a total overhaul of the system, although the latter is what this country desperately needs. The switcharoo is part of that crazy pragmatism your own doctor warned you about. Personally I think you should have listened to him, because that kind of pragmatism is dangerous to your own and our health.

However, we also get the pragmatism part, if we must. And health insurance consumer protection laws are nothing to sneeze at (no pun, I swear), to be sure.

But, still, where is the reform? As in, the single-payer not-for-profit system, which, as you well know and as everybody who has seriously studied the issue clearly states is the only sensible way to reform our health care? How is pouring more money into this bottomless pit of greed and human misery called the American health "care" system going to change it for the better?

Yes, there is that whole thing about politics and sausage-making. None of it pretty, sure. But making compromises with the medical insurance industry in the name of reforming our health care is sorta like negotiating chicken coup's security with the foxes. Sure, they are promising to do a good job of it, but, historically speaking, their record in that matter is not encouraging, to put it gently. See that drool dripping from their chins already?

So while the wingnuts are raving about offing grandpa and palining about with imaginary death panels, we, your supporters, worry too -- that maybe you are punking us, after all.

Please, Mr. President, say it ain't so. Americans are patient people, they can wait when necessary, they've been waiting for, oh, 70 years or so, but I'm not sure how much longer they can manage it, you know, with 14,000 people losing their insurance coverage each day and close to 2,000 dying every month because of lack of adequate health care. 2010 isn't far away, nor is 2012. If Democrats want to have anyone voting for them, they better get this right.

*Thus the picture above. Pigs must be flying as I'm saying this.

Cross posted at The Middle of Nowhere.

IT'S TIME FOR OUR ANNUAL HEALTH (care) CHECK UP

-follow the link below to discover fact from fiction-
Health Care Reality Check!

HEALTH CARE MYTHOLOGY

MYTH: Grassroots Protestors are
Disrupting Town Halls...
House Republican Leader John Boehner’s Office:
“Back home for the August recess, rank-and-file
Democratic Members of the House are facing a
backlash from their constituents.”
FACT: Lobbyist-Run Groups Are
Orchestrating Extremist Mobs
Republicans and well-funded special interest
groups are sending far-right extremists to local
town halls to stop any meaningful discussion of
Health Insurance Reform! Some of these mob
scenes have turned especially ugly -- including
the hanging of Members of Congress in effigy
and use of Nazi SS symbols.

MYTH: “Government-Encouraged
Euthanasia”....
House Republican Leader John Boehner claimed
the House bill “may start us down a treacherous
path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.”
FACT: The claim is “nonsense.”!
The bill never requires anyone to discuss
end-of-life care. Rather, the bill ensures medical
professionals who do offer this type of counseling
… are reimbursed for their time, just as … for
other types of counseling or medical services.

MYTH: Private Plans Outlawed...
Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) claimed on his
website that individual private health insurance
plans will be outlawed in 2013 under the
Democratic health care plan.
FACT: Private health insurance not
banned!
Individual policies will continue to be available,
but people will buy those policies through the
national health insurance exchange, which will
ensure that people with pre-existing conditions
will be able to get coverage. The House bill also
allows for existing policies to be grandfathered in,
so individual purchasers who like their coverage
will be able to keep it.

MYTH: 120 Million Americans Will Be
Deprived of Health Care...
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.): Democrats’ plan “will
deprive roughly 120 million Americans of their
current health care coverage.”
FACT: “This claim is absolutely false”!
The 120 million number Pence cites comes from
the Lewin Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of
insurance giant UnitedHealthCare, which based
its numbers on several public-option scenarios
that are dramatically different than what
Democrats have proposed. The Congressional
Budget Office estimates that in 2013 about 11
million—NOT 120 million—Americans will end up
voluntarily enrolling in the public option, and none
of them will be “deprived” of coverage.

MYTH: There is a Republican Plan...
Minority Whip Cantor: “The Republican plan”
provides “access to affordable basic coverage.”
FACT: “Republicans have yet to
coalesce around a single plan.”
Even though the House Republicans’ “Health
Care Solutions Group” guaranteed a counter
proposal, they have refused to release a plan to
the public.

The Summer of White Discontent

(The picture, of an unnamed protester, is from Sen. Arlen Specter's town hall meeting today. Via AP.)

Many people have questioned the wisdom of Chris Matthews and MSNBC for putting the gun-carrying wingnut on the air and giving him an opportunity to talk.

I can understand that criticism. There is only one reason the man showed up with a loaded gun and a provocative sign* at a town hall meeting devoted to, of all things, health care reform. (Health care! Oh, the irony...) And that reason was to draw attention to himself and his position, if one can call it that. By appearing on the Matthews' program, he got that and then some, more than he deserved. It is easy to predict that he will become a hero of the far right-wing fringe and a fodder for the progressive ridicule.

On the other hand, however, the interview was useful inasmuch as it showed that there is no "there" there. The man could not/would not directly answer Matthews' questions and instead spouted off the well-worn slogans taken straight from the liberty or death bag of the right wingnuttery.

He could be easily dismissed as just another whackjob, which he is in some respects, but his presence at the meeting with the loaded gun and the justifications that he gave for it point to something quite serious and insidious: the white wingnut rage brewing just barely under the surface of the American life this summer (though not only).

In the wingnut's mind, the loaded gun was for "self-defense." As absurd as it sounds, this reasoning shows the deepening fear and projected hatred which have been sweeping the white America -- or some of its segments -- seemingly for ages and which have now intensified with the election of Barack Obama to the highest office.

We know this projected hatred, and the rage it produces, quite well: it too often comes to a boil in political assassinations and acts of domestic terrorism. Mr. Wingnut feels threatened in his rights to "liberty" or whatever may be on his mind, so, in self-defense, he may think nothing of obliterating others, whom he perceives as the source of this threat. We have seen it before.

Right-wing talk show hosts, Limbaugh, Beck and their ilk, stoke the fear and rage with their absurdist rhetoric, which, unfortunately, finds a captive audience in this segment of the population as it "explains" these individuals' disadvantaged position in life, justifies their fears, and further demonizes the others, who, in their eyes, are responsible for it all.

Never mind that Limbaugh and Beck spew their nonsense from the safety of their well-cushioned ivory towers, obscenely compensated for doing nothing more than fomenting disorder and rage. The run-of-the-mill wingnut does not take time to stop and notice what's really being done to him and for what reason -- he grabs his loaded gun, in self-defense, to come to a presidential meeting devoted to, of all things, the health care reform.

We have seen this before and we know where it leads. It is absolutely incumbent on the Republican leaders and talk show hosts to tone down their hateful rhetoric to prevent tragedies that may be just around the corner. If they don't, we will hold them responsible.

BTW, perhaps we can bring back a bit of Dubya's "war on terra" thinking and tactics, because we are clearly dealing with terrorism of the domestic kind here.

*As Cenk Uygur points out, This is the same exact quote Tim McVeigh was referencing in a shirt he wore... before bombing the Oklahoma City federal building.

Cross posted at The Middle of Nowhere

Health Care and Profits Don't Mix

Let's repeat, all together now:

Health Care and Profits Don't Mix
Health Care and Profits Don't Mix
Health Care and Profits Don't Mix

That's my brief explanation for my non-American friends, who wonder why I'm so angry about the state of American health care and what exactly is wrong with it.

Profits, that's what's wrong.

Imagine that you are a decent, law-obeying and risk-averse American (ok, indulge me), which means that you have a health care insurance, either through your employer, or, if you are self-employed, like my husband and I, one you bought on your own -- and you get sick. (Knock on wood, but, you know, we biological beings are really fragile and susceptible to all kinds of microbes, accidents, protracted illnesses, and even death.)

Say (not that I wish any of that on you), you are diagnosed with cancer, or you are attacked by a bear that rips your face off, even though you manage to stay alive. Your first and foremost objective is to seek medical help and save your life. That's obvious so far, no?

But your insurance's first and foremost objective is to make money off of you. And because medical help costs money (a lot, in the US), your objective -- saving your life through seeking medical help -- and your insurance's objective -- making profit off you -- are incompatible. One could even say they are mutually exclusive.

But you paid your insurance premiums every month for years (and they were obscene, especially when you are self-employed), so your insurance is obligated now, according to your contract, to pay for your medical treatment. Right?

Wrong.

Insurance companies are not happy to part with their monies (and who is?), which can be spend so much more effectively on advertising campaigns, new and awesome shiny buildings (have you noticed that the tallest and spiffiest buildings in American cities belong to insurance companies? If you looked really closely, I'm sure you could see tears and maybe even blood running down their walls; but I digress), and ever-higher bonuses for their executives (those yachts ain't cheap, y'know).

A good executive has to show his company's growing profits each quarter or so, otherwise his head is on the chopping block (accessorized with a golden parachute, so don't shed your tears yet).

And if your insurance company really starts paying for your and everybody else's medical treatments, which in the US are obscenely expensive, as I mentioned above, there will be no profits. Hell, there'll be no money left for new yachts and summer houses at all!

So in the name of increasing its profits, your insurance will try to do whatever is inhumanely possible to get out of its obligation to pay for your medical treatment.

If you are the unfortunate victim of the bear encounter, for example, they will classify the multiple surgeries required to restore your face as "cosmetic procedures," which are frivolous and not covered under your (or any) plan.

Aha! It's your fault! You should have read the fine print when you signed your contract -- if you ever saw the contract to begin with -- and if your employer's responsible for your choice of health insurance, likely you had no say in it at all.

But anyway, had you looked closely -- very, very closely, using your telepathic powers -- you should have seen the "Bear Clause" in a tiny print somewhere, stating that if you are mauled by a bear, it is, first, your freaking fault (should have stayed home, damn it), and, second, cosmetic procedures post-bear-mauling -- like putting your face together 'n all -- are not "life saving" and your insurance clerks -- not your doctors, or, god forbid, a total ignoramus like you -- determine what's life saving and what's not. So you're out of luck.

Keep away from bears next time. Or better yet, never leave the house (thus avoiding what the Department of Environmental Conservation calls negative human-bear interactions). Well, now that you don't have a face, you won't anyway.

Now let's say you're diagnosed with cancer.

It's a very scary thing -- and extremely unpleasant for your insurer, because while you are thinking life-saving chemo and radiation, they are thinking, goddamn it, another money drain.

So again, they'll do what they do best: have Clerk X find reasons to curb the payments for your treatment or deny it altogether (they may classify it as "experimental," for example -- a kiss of death, for you).

It does not matter what you think and want (ha ha ha... you were still imagining that it does, no?) or what your doctors recommend. What matters is what Clerk X, under directives from his higher-ups, decides, in his calculating mind, is best for their company's bottom line.

You may be "lucky" enough to require cancer treatment that is not experimental and it is covered by your insurance. Yipee! you think, grateful and hopeful about your future.

Not so fast, my friend. I have mentioned that medical treatment in the US is very expensive, haven't I?

So if you have an insurance with high premiums and a high yearly deductible, first you have to pay thousands of dollars out of your pocket to meet that deductible (ten or twenty thousand a year, say -- and if your illness continues for more than a year, you'll have to pay the thousands of dollars again when the new year kicks in*) -- all that on top of the already obscenely high and ever-rising monthly premiums you have been paying for years.

And rest assured, if you can, now that you've been sick, your monthly premiums will rise to stratospheric levels, as if by magic -- read: insurance companies' calculations which make them dislike sick people, who are distinctly unprofitable.

It is quite probable that through the few courses of chemo and radiation, along with associated hospitalizations (which cost several thousands of dollars per day, yes), tests and other procedures you will exhaust your lifetime insurance benefits.

That's right, you have not misread it: you will exhaust your lifetime benefits, which may end at, say, one million dollars. And one million dollars is easy to exhaust in the US during cancer treatment. So guess what? You're out of luck. You're on your own. Left to die, or do whatever it is that sick and poor people do. (Yes, that still means die.)

You non-Americans may think, what's the big deal, go out and buy another insurance coverage, no?

No.

First of all, with the prolonged cancer and its treatment, you probably have been unemployed (or underemployed) and lost your employer's coverage, if you had it at all. It also means that you have limited, if any, income. And if you insist on stubbornly clinging to life, you've probably lost your house and any other possessions by now, trying to pay for your treatment, and have had to file for bankruptcy. So you have no means to buy a new insurance policy.

Not that it matters, because...

Second, now you have a preexisting condition, which is a death sentence when it comes to finding insurance coverage. No insurance company will take you on -- what, you did not realize that yet?

Health insurance companies like young, healthy, happy people who don't get sick and die healthy after leaving a substantial portion of their life earnings in the pockets of health insurance companies.

Sickos, on the other hand, are costly and they whine a lot. Also like to bother insurance companies with useless calls begging for help. They are so totally no fun and disgustingly unprofitable. Insurance companies do not like sickos and avoid them like a plague (pun, I think, intended).

BTW, preexisting conditions may be anything: acne, allergies, migraines, heart palpitations, a moderate weight loss (happened to me), not to mention cancer or bear maulings.

When you look at an American street, and look really really closely, you'd see how many people walk around with the letters PC (almost) invisibly tattooed on their foreheads. (PC does not stand here for political correctness, mind you.) That's how insurance clerks and executives look at us -- they surely can spot those letters right away. Coverage denied.

And Republicans and/or those who oppose health care reform, come out with ads telling us that the best way to safeguard our health is through education and good life habits -- good food, exercise, etc. -- and, their favorite catch-phrase, personal responsibility.

This always makes me laugh -- how can one not find it funny, in the Beckett-ish, absurdist way?

Not that I have anything against personal responsibility, but personal responsibility, education and a good diet (which, BTW, are not available to the poor) have not shielded me from developing a brain tumor ($100,000.00+ for the hospital stay during the surgery, not counting the doctors' fees), nor do they have anything to do with the myriad illnesses that befall people left and right.

But maybe those ads are created with the old adage in mind that laughter is the best medicine. If that's the case, then their creators perform a valuable public service and should be commended for their efforts. It does not mean they should be taken seriously, of course. On the contrary.

If you have managed to read all this and happen to think, "This woman is so bitter it makes her crazy!" -- you're right, I am bitter.

Crazy? Not so much. Just wait till you see my next two posts.

*I should mention that's a deductible per person, so you better pray that no one else in your family gets sick. And if they do, well, you're screwed.

But you knew that already, didn't you.

AN UPDATE: for more insurance horror stories, check this and this and this and THIS. Also, talk to your relatives, friends and neighbors.

Cross posted at The Middle of Nowhere.

Barack Obama Letter

Dear Friend,

If you’re like most Americans, there’s nothing more important to you about health care than peace of mind.

Given the status quo, that’s understandable. The current system often denies insurance due to pre-existing conditions, charges steep out-of-pocket fees – and sometimes isn’t there at all if you become seriously ill.

It’s time to fix our unsustainable insurance system and create a new foundation for health care security. That means guaranteeing your health care security and stability with eight basic consumer protections:

• No discrimination for pre-existing conditions
• No exorbitant out-of-pocket expenses, deductibles or co-pays
• No cost-sharing for preventive care
• No dropping of coverage if you become seriously ill
• No gender discrimination
• No annual or lifetime caps on coverage
• Extended coverage for young adults
• Guaranteed insurance renewal so long as premiums are paid

Learn more about these consumer protections at Whitehouse.gov.

Over the next month there is going to be an avalanche of misinformation and scare tactics from those seeking to perpetuate the status quo. But we know the cost of doing nothing is too high. Health care costs will double over the next decade, millions more will become uninsured, and state and local governments will go bankrupt.

It’s time to act and reform health insurance, drive down costs and guarantee the health care security and stability of every American family. You can help by putting these core principles of reform in the hands of your friends, your family, and the rest of your social network.

Thank you,
Barack Obama

Tell Reid: No vacation for the Senate before health care reform passes.

TAKE ACTION!!!

President Obama has made it very clear that passing meaningful health care reform is his top priority this summer - but on July 23, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the full Senate wouldn't vote on a bill until the fall.

This is not only disrespectful to the millions of Americans who can't afford private insurance, it's bizarre considering Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced just days prior that she would keep the House in session through it's August recess if that's what it takes to pass a bill.

So what's the problem in the Senate?

The problem is Montana Democrat Max Baucus.

We already have a good health care bill in the Senate from Sen. Kennedy's HELP Committee - a bill that includes a public option. We need the Finance Committee to pass a bill that will fund the HELP Committee bill, and Baucus says he needs time.

Time is one thing. But it's well known that Baucus is planning to pass a bill that won't include a public option. And Reid shouldn't let him.

Sen. Reid shouldn't give Sen. Baucus the time he needs to eviscerate real health care reform - not when Americans' lives are on the line.

Sign this petition today to tell Sen. Reid: Don't let the Senate take a vacation until it passes meaningful health care reform that includes a public option.

Disney Be Faithful to Your Employees

From Anaheim, California - Elizabeth Kaeton blogs at TEC General Convention & will participate today in an action to show solidarity with hotel and convention workers.

This afternoon at 4:30, I will join hundreds of other Episcopalians here at Convention as well as other religious leaders from the area in supporting the Prayer Vigil and March organized by the group "Disney Be Faithful," representing 2150 employees of the three Disneyland Hotels: Paradise Pier, Grand Californian and Disneyland Hotel.

These workers clean the rooms, cook and serve the food, wash the dishes, and carry the luggage.

Disney wants to take away from its employees union family health insurance. They also want to take away full-time jobs, forcing many into positions with no health insurance at all, no vacation and less than full rights.

Disney's net income in the first half of the Fiscal Year 2009 was nearly $1.46 billion. In Fiscal Year 2008, Disney CEO Robert Iger made $30.6 million.

When I signed up to march last Monday, I was approached by one of the organizers with a request I agreed to but I'm still processing.

"Mother," he said (as I winced), "would you stay with us at the end of the march? We're asking some of the clergy to anoint the workers, and it would be wonderful to have you with us."

I was initially taken aback. 'Anoint' he said. What did he mean, really? Did he mean anoint with holy oils or just extend a hand in blessing?

I wanted to make certain I had a correct translation from his Hispanic, Roman Catholic culture to my progressive Western European, Anglo-Catholic understanding.

So, I asked.

"While we are marching," he said softly, "some of the people from Disney will be standing along the sidelines, filming us as we pass by. They will use that film as evidence to get us fired or to have our positions eliminated or downsized."

"You may not be aware, Mother," he said politely, "that for the workers, this Prayer Vigil and March is a big risk. We need to be anointed for the work of justice, after this event, so that we will find the strength to go back to our jobs. Just a little sign from God that He will continue to be with us after the support of this event."

"We know you have probably not brought your oils with you to this place, so we will have some for you. Will you help us? It would mean so much to some of us for a woman to anoint us for the work of justice."

"Anointed for justice."

I continue to find myself deeply moved by that request. There is something that strikes a cord of authenticity with the core values of what the church professes to be, but often is not.

I ask you, wherever you are, to pray with me and for me, that I may be a worthy vehicle of an anointing of God's healing and enabling power upon these workers.

Pray that we may catch a glimmer of God's justice promised of the Realm of God for these workers and their families.

UPDATE

The Reasons for the Action today:

Disney be faithful!
Disney is Faithful to its Shareholders:

• Disney’s net income in the first half of Fiscal Year 2009 was nearly $1.46 billion.
• Disney’s leaders are among the highest paid in the world. In Fiscal Year 2008, Disney CEO Robert Iger made $30.6 million.

Disney, Be Faithful to your Employees:

• Disney wants to take away our union family health insurance. We will be forced to pay up to hundreds of dollars per month for family health insurance. Many families will lose their insurance.

• Disney wants to take away full-time jobs and forcing many of us into “casual regular” positions with no health insurance at all, no vacation, and less than full rights.

Disney, its your turn to be faithful to us!

a matter of life and death

"

my sister-in-law number two (my husband has 2 sisters) has gone into labor and by the time anyone reads this- will most likely have had her daughter. my mom's health continues to weaken as her heart and lungs fight against time to keep her blood flowing and her life going. and the world continues to take life for granted. i am not sure what it is about humans that make them so, well, fickle. on the one hand, we have folks who fight tooth and nail for a fetus' right to live and turn around and fight just as vigilantly to declare war on another cultures' fetuses. strange. we don't have a choice when we are born. our parents got together and for better or worse- had us. should we have the right to die?

much debate has swirled around abortion and whether or not it should be legal- but what about an adult's right to die? who gets to make that choice? some believe it's up to a mythical being called 'god' and others worry about ethical and legal issues. but if you strip those considerations aside and think simply for yourself- would you want to be able to die when you chose? our culture doesn't like to think about dying much. perhaps because we are so very far removed from it. at one time, folks were up close and personal with their loved ones' deaths. they washed the bodies, made the coffins and sat wakes. then, they dug the hole and buried them. now, there are a whole host of folks who whisk the body away and do all of those things very clinically and loved ones get a shot at seeing a strange corpse to 'say goodbye' before cremation or burial. it's like we want to forget they are dead.

i can only speak to what i know and see and believe- i know that my mom says she has made peace with dying. i know that she would rather be healthy and stick around. i would rather she be healthy and stick around too but death is inevitable. none of us escape it. i would also rather that my mom not suffer needlessly. and if she chose to go, i would rather she be allowed to do so. assisted dying is a sticky widget. i have a feeling as our population ages- it may push a bit to the forefront. folks are living longer true- but we also have seen quality of life deteriorate for some and it really doesn't look like the health care system will be fixed in this country any time soon. not in a viable way. millions of folks won't wait to be told that they are allowed to end it. they just will. it would be nice to help them on a journey with dignity.

as for me, i would absolutely rather choose to die if i became ill with a terminal illness. the end result would be the same (assuming that we had exhausted the known medical treatments) and i would not want to suffer nor put my loved ones through prolonged suffering. i would rather folks celebrated my life and not dwell on my death. i think all of us would rather live. it's that human nature and survival instinct- but we also have it within our power to end life. and i think we are going to have to face that next obstacle.
"

That's fine, Gov. Rick Perry, Texas can go ahead and secede from the Union

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas grabbed national attention again this week during the anti-tax teabag ruckus by suggesting that Texas might just at some point get so fed up with federal taxation that they'd want to secede from the United States. He bragged that the Texas economy is in good shape compared with other states, let alone compared to the "federal budget mess," said Fox News.

I say we call that bluff. I live in Texas; I know that Texas is, according to State Representative Eliot Shapleigh, "On the Brink." Here's a small sample of Texas's rankings compared to the 50 U.S. states (1=high, 50=low):

State Government Taxes & Spending

• Tax Revenue Raised Per Capita--------------49th
• Tax Expenditures Per Capita------------------50th
• Per Capita Spending on Mental Health-----46th
• Parks & Rec--------------------------------------49th
• Police Protection--------------------------------48th

Education

Percentage of Population over 25 with a High School Diploma---50th

State of the Child

Percentage of Uninsured Children---------1st

Health Care Issues and Environment

• Percentage of Population without
• Health Insurance----------------------------1st
• Air Pollution Emissions----------------------1st
• Green House Gases Released----------------1st
• Toxic Chemicals Released into Water-----1st
• Hazardous Waste Generated----------------1st
• Carbon dioxide emissions-------------------1st

Workforce Issues

• Income Inequality between the Rich and the Poor--2nd
• Job Discrimination Lawsuits-----------------------------1st

Public Safety

• Number of Executions-----------------------1st
• Number of Gun Shows-----------------------1st
• Number of Registered Machine Guns------1st
• Deaths by Floods/Tornadoes----------------1st

Sorry, Gov. Perry. There's not a lot here to brag about. And there's even less if you look at the entire listing in Shapleigh's document. So, should Texas decide to secede, it might actually be doing the rest of the states a favor. Because, quite honestly, it looks to me like Texas might be pulling the average down.

Flood Leave Deregulate Equality...

1.

Tens of thousands of us have marched, hundreds of thousands have signed petitions -- now let's send a flood of messages, asking leaders to push the G20 to rise to this global challenge!

2.

Tell your Congressperson to support Family Leave Insurance!

3. 

Affordable Car & Home Insurance
Tell Geithner Not to Deregulate Insurance Companies!

4.

Close The Gap: Demand Indigenous health equality!