SEARCH
Senate Health Care Debate Coming Up, and Other Health Care News |
|
With Saturday’s successful Senate procedural vote behind us, the stage is set for a debate on health care reform after Thanksgiving. Getting this far—putting a comprehensive health care reform bill on the Senate floor—has never happened before. It’s a big victory, but the Senate bill is still flawed, because it relies on a new tax on workers’ health care benefits. Contact your senators and tell them they need to pass a real reform bill, not one that taxes the health benefits of middle-class families.
Here’s the latest news on health care reform:
- In a new report, “The Consequences of ‘No,’” the New England Journal of Medicine looks at the need for strong health care reform. It’s a must-read. The authors, Dr. Arthur Kellermann and Lawrence Lewin, conclude the rapidly increasing numbers of people without insurance have enormous cost consequences for those who have insurance and for the medical system. These findings confirm those of a similar study from the Institute of Medicine earlier this year that show crisis levels of uninsured and the serious cost effects for everyone in the health care system.
- The Commonwealth Fund compares and contrasts the House and Senate health care bills with an eye on cost and quality. It’s a great, short explanation of the changes to our health care system—and it suggests that an excise tax on health care benefits wouldn’t do much to contain costs.
- The health care reform bills being considered would require members of Congress and their staff to be part of the health care exchanges set up in the bill. In other words, reform would give the uninsured the same range of choices and options members of Congress would have available.
- The winner of Organizing for America’s health care video contest highlights the 8 million uninsured children in America.
- The anti-reform governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, says we should let his state’s experience guide health care—even though Mississippi’s policies have left it one of the worst states in terms of coverage, preventative care, preventable hospital admissions, uninsured children and even preventable death due to lack of health care access.
- Families USA offers a handy guide on how to talk about health care reform at your Thanksgiving table.
- And finally, Paul Waldman at The American Prospect highlights and neatly dismembers the dumbest “argument” unleashed by the opponents of health care reform: the comprehensive reform bill is “long.”
4 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
“Comprehensive”??
I don’t see this in the current legislation.
Comprehensivce for whom? For what?
Tell us what difference it will make for those with employer health care now. Will we see controls on how much more premiums and drug prices can go up?
As big of a mess as this is, I really don’t believe you can blame it on the AFL-CIO. I believe Obama should have immediately said that his plan is “Medicare for all”. Single Payer is the best, most efficiant way to implement change. Having said that, at least with a Public Option we will see some decent change. The mamoth opposition to any change mounted by the billion dollar medical insurance companies has been the real obstacle to progress- that and the Republican Party. Keep your eye on the real enemy and not those working for the good of the working class in this nation.
I don’t know the majority of union members, but most of the ones I do know would like to see universal single payer health care. They and a few who don’t want universal single payer would settle for a public option. In fact, the only union member I know who oblects to public option is enraged that a black man is President-that probably qualifies as a personal problem rather than an objective opinion on health care. Most of the info I’ve seen indicates about 60% of Americans would be OK with a public option.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
We don’t know what we have. As I understand, the Senate version has just been authorized for debate on the floor with no future commitments from several corporate leaning senators. Give them some credit, they didn’t abort the fetus. Amendments will be allowed from the floor of the Senate.
Then, the born again Senate version will have to be voted on again and get sixty votes once more to go to the Conference Committee. Then, another new version will emerge from the Conference Committee, That version, however mutated from the original House and Senate versions will then need to get a majority in the House and sixty votes once again in the Senate. Not as easy as it may sound; with everybody and their aunts, uncles, cousins, in laws and outlaws drawing lines in the sand. “I won’t vote for anything that contains a public option.” “I won’t vote for anything that doesn’t contain a public option.” “I won’t vote for anything that pays for abortion.” I won’t vote for anything that doesn’t pay for abortion.” “I won’t vote for anything that adds a nickel to the deficit.” “I won’t vote for anything unless it pays for boob jobs.” Ooops, that was a California beauty queen not a congress person.
I realize I’m getting long winded but, refer to the third bullet point above. “The health care reform bills being considered would require members of Congress and their staff to be part of the health care exchanges set up in the bill. In other words, reform would give the uninsured the same range of choices and options members of Congress would have available.” Sounds nice, if everyone will really have access. Congressmen pay 25% of their premiums. So, if their total family premium is $12,000 they pay $3,000 from a pretty nice base salary. I just wonder if the subsidies that poor people are supposed to get will permit them to purchase a $12,000 family policy. Having the option to buy in, isn’t really the same as having the money to buy in.
Keep on keeping on,
Dave