Archive for the ‘Health Care’ Category
Apparently it’s finally dawning on Republicans that redistricting to win seats has its limitations. There comes a point when even your supporters have had enough destruction and death.
Their problems are threefold and intertwined. First, the GOP has become effectively agenda-less, advocating policies that lack popular support, and that they quite possibly couldn’t execute even if they controlled the government entirely.
Second, as Politico honchos Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen explain, “The party is hurting itself even more with the very voters they need to start winning back: Hispanics, blacks, gays, women and swing voters of all stripes.” That’s partially a consequence of theiragenda-less-ness, and partially a consequence of its members’ propensity to say things and advocate ideas that further alienate women and minorities.
Third, a combination of chance and poor decisions will turn the coming midterm into a referendum on issues custom tailored to energize Democratic demographics that tend to sit out midterms.
Actually there are four problems, not three. Number 4 is that it isn’t just that their policies “lack popular support”. It’s that their policies are batshit crazy and as destructive as a plague. Read the rest of this entry »
All the great philosophers and theologians since the time of the [early] Greeks have lauded the sacrifice of one’s self and one’s possessions for the sake of the greater good of others as the most honorable action a man can take. Therefore, the great thinkers of the modern rich right wing have implemented a society which makes it not only a privilege for you to sacrifice for the greater oligarchic good but a necessity, thus insuring your entrance into, if not saintliness then at least acceptability within the servant class.
The recent Supreme Court decision allowing the Constitutionality of Obama’s health care bill can be seen as a case in point. With no effort on your part and despite whatever qualms you may have about the way the bill tends to subvert, deny or delay actual treatment, you will be required to pay health insurance corpo’s a sizable chunk of your income for advising you that your illness isn’t covered. (That’s apparently in the Constitution somewhere.)
In this way you will be allowed to sacrifice not just your income but your health for the good of insurance corpo’s whose profits are not yet obscene enough to cause riots. Which seems to be their goal.
Don’t let yourselves be taken in by the appearance of unrestricted greed. Remember, they’re doing it for you, not to you.
Barack Obama’s Blue Dog Presidency took another step toward Bushist crackpottery yesterday when he actively and enthusiastically reached to to Bushist crackpots by embracing a theme almost as close to their dear little paranoid hearts as voter fraud and SocSec fraud: the supposedly massive fraud in Medicare and Medicaid that has for 30 years been their go-to reason for killing both programs.
President Barack Obama made his case for an overhaul of the U.S. medical system to Missouri voters, emphasizing his efforts to curb waste and fraud in government health programs.
“The health-care system has billions of dollars that should go to patient care and they’re lost each and every year to fraud, to abuse, to massive subsidies that line the pockets of the insurance industry,” he said yesterday at a high school in the St. Louis suburb of St. Charles, Missouri.
Obama is trying to rally public support for the biggest changes to U.S. health care in 45 years in the face of unanimous Republican opposition. He said his proposals show there are ways to pay for expanding insurance coverage to tens of millions of Americans without running up the federal budget deficit.
“So much of the money currently in our health-care system is being misspent,” he said. “If we can have a smarter health- care system, then yes, we can provide help to middle-class folks who need it and, at the same time, actually reduce the burden on taxpayers.”
His spirited endorsement included some of the same probably bogus figures in the charges Republicans have been making for decades – figures they’ve never been able to back up with evidence. The Pres claims he has such evidence through a pilot program in several states.
Last year, the Medicare and Medicaid programs for seniors and low-income Americans made $54 billion in unwarranted payments to healthcare providers, according to White House.
To combat the problem, Obama has proposed expanding a program to reward private bounty hunters who find waste by auditing government payments through what are called “payment recapture audits.”
The White House reported that a pilot program in California, New York and Texas yielded $900 million in Medicare savings between 2005 and 2009.
Gee, I hate to say it but this all sounds very familiar. Isn’t there someone else who used to be president who made unsourced claims based on interior White House studies we never saw that were supposedly prepared by people who were never named?
Whenever FoxNews or George W or Darth Cheney wanted to beef up their credibility when they made incredible statements of fantasy as if they were fact, they, too, would, like, pick a big number – say, a BILLION – and subtract 100 million or so from it so it would sound real. “$897MIL” sounds so much more believable, like numbers were actually crunched to produce it. Except that we would find out months – or years – later that they’d simply made the numbers up, that those “facts” had never existed in the real world.
So before I get all excited about how badly we’re being ripped of by our elderly parents and grandparents, I’d like to a) know who ran this pilot program, b) see the study numbers that reached that conclusion, and c) find out how exactly these paragons of virtue defined “waste”. After all, to a health insurance company any money whatever spent on anybody over 65 is a “waste” since they’re just going to die in a few years anyway.
None of this information was included in either news report. None. Maybe because it doesn’t exist.
Powered by Zoundry Raven
Obama Tries to Shame Health Insurance Execs; Next Up, He Tries to Chop Down a Redwood With a Herring
So H&HS Sec Kathleen Sibelius (no known relation to the famous Finnish composer) is having this meeting with top health insurance execs, trying to convince them that, you know, their industry needs regulating.
So President Obama decides to help and interrupts the meeting to read them a letter from a woman who suffered from predatory acts by her insurance company – namely, paying $11K in premiums and medical costs while her so-called “insurance” company paid out less than a $grand.
Apparently his object was to shame them. I’m dying to know how that worked out for him.
I can’t imagine.
But it’s still an improvement, right? And that’s all that matters.
Poor Pres Obama. As things stand, he is losing on all fronts. Nothing is working and nobody seems to appreciate that his Grand Sell-Outs Compromises on the Recession (bank bail-outs), healthcare (insurance corpo toadying) and deficit-cutting (say bye-bye to Medicare) are THE BEST THAT ANYBODY COULD DO. Rahm told him so. But there is one success he can brag about: he’s got whacko movement conservatives and liberals talking to each other. It’s bi-partisanship at last!
After a solid year of GOP refusal to help him do anything at all (a refusal any monkey with opposable thumbs could have predicted), Barry’s insistence on bipartisanship has finally borne some fruit, though not exactly the way he meant it to. See, the bipartisan committee on deficit-cutting got rejected by the Senate but the rejection was bipartisan. That counts, doesn’t it?
The Senate Tuesday rejected a plan backed by President Barack Obama to create a bipartisan task force to tackle the federal deficit this year despite glaring new figures showing the enormity of the red-ink threat.
The special deficit panel would have attempted to produce a plan combining tax cuts and spending curbs that would have been voted on after the midterm elections. The measure went down because anti-tax Republicans joined with Democrats who were wary of being railroaded into cutting Social Security and Medicare.
Now that’s bipartisanship, right? Working together for a common goal even if you have different reasons for targeting that goal. The Pubs just want to stop everything Obama is doing because he’s not a Republican and they’re against non-Republicans. The liberals want to stop what Obama is doing because it’s essentially Republican.
Wait. Maybe their reasons aren’t as different as I thought….
In its first vote on health care overhaul, the Senate Thursday narrowly approved an amendment to safeguard coverage of mammograms and preventive screening tests for women under a revamped system.The 61-39 vote on an amendment by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, would allow the Health and Human Services secretary to require insurers to cover preventive health screenings free of charge.
Under special provisions agreed to prior to the tally, 60 votes were needed to pass the amendment. The margin underscored the fragility of the coalition Democrats are counting on to move forward on President Barack Obama’s signature issue.
Why do we need 60 votes – a filibuster-proof majority – in order to approve something as non-controversial and obviously necessary as mammograms and cancer screening tests?
Why did something as obvious, necessary, and minor barely squeak through this cloth-headed Congress?
How “fragile” is the Democrat “coalition” (between Democrats and Blue Dogs, presumably) when it takes that much effort to pass an amendment this bland?
How “fragile” is our democracy when it takes that much effort to pass an amendment this bland?
1) “I’m sorry but your husband died of cancer and that’s not on our Approved Causes List.”
“Approved Causes List? What causes of death do you approve?”
“Strangulation by an enraged artichoke.”
“Um, is that all?”
“Yes. We consider everything else to be uncovered.”
Consumer flips frantically through several hundred pages of Coverage Information. “It doesn’t say anything about artichokes in here.”
“No. You should have asked.”
“It was your responsibility. Don’t look at me. The Congress says so.”