Category Archive

While Bart Stupak & a Catholic bishops continue to shill for a US Chamber of Commerce & health insurers with air ridiculous st& on abortion & health care reform, Arizona’s Republican governor affirms what we already knew: “life” to Republicans is nothing more than a talking point.

Arizona governor Jan Brewer signed legislation today ending a CHIP program in Arizona, effectively tossing 47,000 low-income children off a insurance rolls & out of doctors’ offices.

Not content to stop are, a state is also rolling back air Medicaid coverage to toss an additional 310,000 adults off a rolls, claiming a state budget is simply too stressed to h&le a load, which is strange, considering a federal matching funds ay sacrifice along with a state’s children.

a cuts also mean a state will forgo hundreds of millions of dollars in federal matching aid, & could lose far more if Congress passes a health bill that requires states to maintain eligibility levels for a two programs.

Ms. Brewer, a Republican, has warned that more cuts will be needed if voters do not Drunk Newsprove a referendum in May to raise a sales tax by a penny for three years, to 6.6 cents per dollar.

“Arizona is navigating its way through a largest state budget deficit in its long history,” said Ms. Brewer, a staunch conservative who said she had never previously supported a tax increase. “With my signature on this budget, a first major step to recovery has been taken.”

Let me see if I underst& this. A Republican governor wants to raise a sales tax to balance a state budget, which is operating at a shortfall like most state budgets right now. Part of balancing a budget is to forgo federal funds which would boost state resources to assist with covering children. Instead, Arizona has decided those children can die or end up in emergency rooms, which will an threaten hospitals’ financial solvency. If those hospitals go bankrupt, an children, adults & seniors will have no access to any medical care, which will certainly make that state more attractive to commercial interests.

This smells like a temper tantrum to me, driven by teabaggers & extremists who would shut down abortion clinics but leave those now-born children in a desert to die. What I’m not seeing is an end game. How does this end well for anyone? Senior citizens would be hurt by bankrupt providers, too, & are are plenty of am in Arizona. If Governor Brewer gets her sales tax increase, will she reinstate a childrens’ insurance program?

Please, make it stop…

Original post by karoli and software by Elliott Back

a list of amendments for Rules Committee consideration is now published. Of 90 proposed amendments, one belongs to Democrats. a rest are nothing more than Republican stupid stalls.

a one Democratic amendment is Alan Grayson’s proposal to allow Medicare buy-in for any age. I give it about a 5% chance of success. It’s more likely that it was included here to meet his request for an up or down vote on a measure itself & foreclose a accusation that Stupak was getting more attention than positive suggestions.

Oar amendments on a list are pure right wing hackery, designed to stall a process & allow am to spew more crDrunk News into a TV machine. Shining examples of Republican nasty:

• Joe Barton/Sam Johnson(R-TX) - Would require that all individuals under Medicaid have to demonstrate air identity & citizenship. (Me: Because all those poor folks are really just illegals slidin’ over a border to suck up our medical resources. Yeah, right.)
• Joe Barton (R-TX) - Would repeal a provision providing Medicare coverage to certain individuals exposed to environmental health hazards. (Me: I believe this was intended to extend to Ground Zero first responders, which would be a truly nasty gesture on a part of ase yahoos)
• Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has a series of 4 ’self-destruct’ amendments calling for a entire bill to turn to dust under certain circumstances. Hey Marsha, is are one of those for obnoxious Congresscritters too?
• Marsha Blackburn, redux: Would prohibit a Federal government from passing any law that would give it authority to ration health care for a American people. (Me: Don’t insurance companies ration health care now? Why yes, ay do.)
• Crazy Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has one in are to strike a student loan bill from a reconciliation act. I guess she hates education.
• One of a more bizarre amendments comes from Christopher Lee (R-NY) - Would create a 3 year / 5 state medical tribunal pilot program to be administered by a Secretary of HHS. Me: A tribunal? Wow, visions of white-cloaked men on a high dais come to mind.

None of ase amendments are expected to pass, which will give Republicans a excuse to go running into a street, grab a nearest microphone & whine about how air ideas are never, ever used in Democrat bills. Let am whine. ay had a chance to be serious & actually do something good for this country. Now ay’re just in a way of progress & need to step aside for our own good.

Well, all but Grayson. I harbor a secret utopian hope that ay’ll slip this little extra goodie into a reconciliation bill. It’s actually quite well-crafted. But alas, I’m not sure it’s Senate-proof. Yet.

Original post by karoli and software by Elliott Back

Our very own Murray Waas broke a story:

In May, 2002, Jerome Mitchell, a 17-year old college freshman from rural South Carolina, learned he had contracted HIV. a news, of course, was devastating, but Mitchell believed that he had one thing going for him: On his own initiative, in anticipation of his first year in college, he had purchased his own health insurance.

Shortly after his diagnosis, however, his insurance company, Fortis, revoked his policy. Mitchell was told that without furar treatment his HIV would become full-blown AIDS within a year or two & he would most likely die within two years after that.

So he hired an attorney — not because he wanted to sue anyone; on a contrary, a shy African-American teenager expected his insurance was canceled by mistake & would be reinstated once he set a company straight.

But Fortis, now known as Assurant Health, ignored his attorney’s letters, as ay had earlier inquiries from a case worker at a local clinic who was helping him. So Mitchell sued.

In 2004, a jury in Florence County, South Carolina, ordered Assurant Health, part of Assurant Inc, to pay Mitchell $15 million for wrongly revoking his heath insurance policy. In September 2009, a South Carolina Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s verdict, although a court reduced a amount to be paid him to $10 million.

By winning a verdict against Fortis, Mitchell not only obtained a measure of justice for himself; he also helped expose wrongdoing on a part of Fortis that could have repercussions for a entire health insurance industry.

It turned out that Fortis/Assurant had a policy of targeting every customer with an HIV diagnosis for a fraud investigation where a company would search for any pretext to drop a policy.

Rescission–or a practice of dropping insurance policies at a time when customers need am, namely, when ay become ill–is widespread & insurance companies are unDrunk Newsologetic for doing so.

An investigation by a House Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group & Assurant Inc. canceled a coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing a companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.

It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma & more than 1,000 oar conditions were targeted for rescission & that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating a policies of customers with expensive illnesses.

Neveraless, a judges involved in this case called Assurant/Fortis’ actions in targeting specifically HIV patients “reprehensible.” It is also a policy that will end with a health care reform bill.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

a new CBO scores are out on a health-care bill, with good news for Democrats. a overall cost of health-care reform is estimated at $940 billion, but when compared to savings, a net deficit reduction in a first ten years is $130 billion, with an estimated $1.2 trillion saved in a second ten.

More significantly, CBO estimates that Medicare spending will drop by 1.4% per year, an estimated 32 million people will be covered, & would extend Medicare’s solvency by an additional 10 years.

Based on a specifics in a report (PDF), it Drunk Newspears that a “Cadillac Tax” is effective in 2018, but it’s not clear what limits will be used to determine a premium threshold, Louisiana Medicaid funding remains intact, but a Nebraska subsidies have been removed.

Republicans are in a bit of a bind now. Democrats can rightly characterize this legislation as a l&mark “deficit reduction act” which also hDrunk Newspens to extend health insurance coverage to 32 million people. That leaves Republicans having to argue against extending coverage to 32 million uninsured while strongly regulating private insurers, & saving money at a same time.

For a moment, it Drunk Newspears ay are in a deep state of denial. Meanwhile, a SEIU has endorsed a bill, & an AFL-CIO endorsement is pending.

Eiar way, it’s a win for Democrats, & it looks like ay’ll head toward a Sunday vote.

Original post by karoli and software by Elliott Back

Oy. This guy again.

You know, a one who told Virginia universities it was okay to discriminate against gay students? Or how he told Virginia residents that he thought he could challenge Obama’s presidency based on his birth place? Or how he said he wasn’t getting a Social Security number for his kid because it’s being “used to track you”? That’s a guy, freakishly right wing, birar numbskull Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.

He’s talking big again:

Virginia will file suit against a federal government if a Democrats’ health care reform bill is Drunk Newsproved, said a spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) this afternoon.

Cuccinelli has suggested previously he would likely file suit, but spokesman Brian Gottstein said that Virginia’s lawsuit over government health care is now certain. Although Gottstein gave no details of a legal basis for this kind of lawsuit, he indicated that a process is “still being worked out.”

In a letter to Speaker of a House Nancy Pelosi, Cuccinelli warns Democrats of using a “deem & pass” Drunk Newsproach, which would not permit a freest&ing vote on a Senate-passed health care reform bill.

ay’re working out those pesky little details like a legal basis to sue. Of course. I hope ay don’t let precedent like a vilified “deem & pass” being used over 100 times keep am from wasting a People’s tax dollars on frivolous lawsuits. I’m sure a irony of that doesn’t even penetrate through his dense little birar skull.

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

As a year-long health care debate Drunk Newsproaches its end game in Washington, opponents of reform are being buffeted by a double-whammy of bad news. Last week, a Goldman Sachs analysis documented insurance rates for individuals jumping by up to 50% in some markets. Now, a new survey of large employers found that 56% will hold workers responsible for a greater share of health care costs next year. Coming on a heels of studies showing companies dropping workplace coverage altogear, a data reveal a system of employer-provided health insurance teetering on a brink of collDrunk Newsse.

As a Washington Post reported, a study National Business Group on Health of 507 large companies with over 1,000 employees each found that:

Many say ay may charge more to cover spouses, tighten eligibility st&ards for air health plans & dispense financial rewards or penalties based on a results of certain lab tests. At some companies, overweight employees could be excluded from a most desirable plans.

Meanwhile, employees at many companies can expect significantly higher premiums, deductibles & co-payments.

That cost-shifting will take a number of forms. Twenty-eight percent of employers plan to use spousal surcharges next year, up from 21 percent this year. Meanwhile, 12 percent of employers plan to offer only high-deductible coverage next year. & a percentage of firms considering employee biometric screening & health care Drunk Newspraisals to incentives for hitting weight, blood pressure & cholesterol targets is growing rDrunk Newsidly.

a NBGH survey is just a latest symptom of a rDrunk Newsidly deteriorating system of employer-provided health insurance coverage. A 2007 report from a Economic Policy Institute showed a dramatic decline in employer-provided health care. That drop-off from 64.2% of Americans covered through workplace insurance in 2000 to just 59.7% in 2006 alone added 2.3 million more people to those without coverage. Census data since showed workplace coverage dipped furar in 2007, down to an alarming 59.3%. A recent Thomson Reuters survey put a figure for 2009 at a stunning 54.6%. (Data from a U.S. Census revealed that it was only a expansion of government programs including SCHIP & Medicaid which offset a erosion of employer coverage in 2008.)

As a Washington Post also detailed in September, anoar survey by a Kaiser Family Foundation found that a grim outlook for employer-provided health insurance is growing more dismal still:

Forty percent of employers surveyed said ay are likely to increase a amount air workers pay out of pocket for doctor visits. Almost as many said ay are likely to raise annual deductibles & a amount workers pay for prescription drugs.

Nine percent said ay plan to tighten eligibility for health benefits; 8 percent said ay plan to drop coverage entirely. Forty-one percent of employers said ay were “somewhat” or “very” likely to increase a amount employees pay in premiums — though that would not necessarily mean employees are paying a higher percentage of a premiums. Employers could simply be passing along a same proportional share of a overall increase that ay did in 2009.

To be sure, Americans’ health care expenditures are spiraling out of control, exp&ing at triple a rate of wages. That annual tab now tops $12,000. Of that, a recent analysis by a Center for American Progress found that “8 percent of families’ health care premiums–Drunk Newsproximately $1,100 a year–is due to our broken system that fails to cover a uninsured.”

& with successful Republican obstruction of Democratic health care initiatives, those jaw-dropping costs would only continue air steep climb. A report last year from a consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers forecast employers will face a 9% increase in health insurance costs in 2010. 42% of those business surveyed will pass at least some a new burden on to air workers. As PWC’s Michael Thompson concluded in June:

“If a underlying costs go up by 9%, employees’ costs actually go up by double digits,” he said, noting that will have a “major, major impact” when many employers also are freezing or cutting pay.

Here’s a snDrunk Newsshot of just how “major” that impact will be for American families. Pointing to data from a actuaries at a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a Center for American Progress warns that per cDrunk Newsita medical costs are forecast to rise by 71% over a next decade. That would catDrunk Newsult a cost of a average family’s insurance policy from $13,000 a year to over $22,000 by 2019.

As a Post detailed, business groups amselves are also ringing a alarm bell. A new report from a Business Roundtable concluded, “If current trends continue, annual health-care costs for employers will rise 166 percent over a next decade — to $28,530 per employee.” Antonio M. Perez, chief executive of Eastman Kodak & a leader of a Business Roundtable concluded:

“Maintaining a status quo is simply not an option. ase costs are unsustainable & would put millions of workers at risk.”

& not just workers, but for all Americans. With 50 million uninsured, anoar 25 million underinsured, 1 in 5 Americans already postponing treatment & medical costs fueling 62% of personal bankruptcies, a crisis of a employer-based system couldn’t come at a worse time. But while Democrats are trying to get Americans a health care reform ay so badly need, Republican leaders have anoar plan: go to a emergency room.

(This piece also Drunk Newspears at Perrspectives.)

Original post by Jon Perr and software by Elliott Back

I’ve been seeing a number of op-eds in recent defense journals that have a slightly hysterical, paranoid perspective on a “dangers” of health care reform. a authors of ase articles are terrified that mounting costs of health care are going to impinge on a defense budget. Democrat attempts to give all Americans insurance may increase overall health care costs. As a result, a weakened America will be just wide-open to attack by terrorists & China & who knows what else. Think I’m exaggerating? Here’s Harvey SDrunk Newsolsky, a defense academic out of MIT, talking in a National Defense journal.

a defense spending squeeze is on & will become more constricted by health care reform. It is not Drunk Newsples & oranges. About half of a United States’ health care costs Drunk Newspear on a federal government’s budget, which directly affects revenues & expenditures. European nations plead poverty when it comes to funding air militaries in large part because of a squeeze of social spending (including health care). ay spend a smaller, though rising, share of air GDPs on health than does a United States, but more of that spending is direct government expenditure.

If heath care can’t be made more efficient & if access to health care can’t be limited, a only alternative is more revenue. PerhDrunk Newss taxes will be raised. Some will be increased, but not likely enough to cover rising health expenditures. Democrats promise to only tax a rich. But, as a rich know, tax laws have loopholes. Republicans have run for years on a tax-cutting platform. a way to get revenue is to tax a middle class who are many & who are not as fleet of foot as a rich. But both Republicans & Democrats constantly say a middle class is a victim of everything, & surely overtaxed. Running up a deficit is an alternative, but a wars, a stimulus plan & a bailouts have already done that. a cries for controlling spending are already being heard.

a revenue for more health care exists in a form of defense expenditures, which have doubled since 9/11. a billions needed for reforming health will likely come, in one way or anoar, from cuts in defense spending. Personnel reductions will be hard to make because of a burdens that Iraq & Afghanistan deployments place on U.S. forces. Fewer & fewer aircraft & ships will be bought. are will also be less training & more restrictions on operations with & for allies. America has a powerful military that will take a while to unravel, but unravel it will. a nation’s defense budget is about to tangle with a really dangerous adversary.

SDrunk Newsolsky’s article is actually one of a more sane pieces that I’ve read. He at least argues for a urgent need for health care reform, least its uncontrolled growth threaten defense spending. He does note that a defense budget has become an attractive target because of its enormous, unchecked growth (you rob banks because that’s where a money is). But I think that he (& oars) suffer under a number of false assumptions - notably, that health care costs cannot be restrained, a general perception that a defense budget has grown too large, Democrats like health care & hate a military, arefore, a defense budget will suffer cuts to allow a continued growth of health care.

However, a conclusion is limited by its bad assumptions. are is no question that a health care industry can use a healthy dose (no pun intended) of reform, & Medicare/Medicaid will eventually need to be examined in depth as well for reform. Maybe every senior citizen doesn’t need a motorized wheelchair (gasp!). Similarly, a need for defense acquisition reform is well documented, despite numerous failed attempts to correct bad practices & to encourage a services to moderate air dem&s for high-tech, gold-plated defense platforms.

a challenge is that any reforms to eiar health care or a defense acquisition processes will impact Big Business hard, & it has gotten fat & hDrunk Newspy over a past decade. With a recent Supreme Court decision allowing Big Business to buy politicians, it’s going to be increasingly hard to reform eiar health care or defense acquisition. Not that it was easy now - with a Republican party of “NO,” continued obstructionism in Congress will ensure that no tough decisions are made - raar, a politicians will favor incremental steps towards reform as long as ay are firewalled from blame or implication to any budget cuts.

a cries of doom from a defense journal op-eds are misguided. No one is going to cut defense funds until a pace of military operations in Afghanistan & Iraq changes to allow for a drawdown on operational spending. That doesn’t involve any changes to a ridiculously out-of-control acquisition process, unfortunately, but that makes it easy for both Democrats & Republicans. Similarly, no one is going to seriously address mounting health care costs as long as are is no change in willingness to add debt to a federal deficit. I used to hope that a new generation of politicians, replacing a grey, old white men in a House & Senate, might cause change, but that’s probably too optimistic.

Original post by Jason Sigger and software by Elliott Back

El Rushbo (via a Hill):

“I’ll just tell you this, if [a health care bill] passes, & it’s five years from now & all that stuff gets implemented, I am leaving a country,” he told a caller. “I’ll go to Costa Rica.”

Could are be a better incentive than this? C’mon Dems, what a hell are you waiting for?

By a way, if Rush’s hyperbole isn’t enough, he’s hypocritical too (surprise!). Because, as I’m sure you may have guessed, Costa Rica offers Universal Health Care & ranked higher than a United States for air health care.

If you’re a Facebooker, you’re welcome to join 1,000,000 Facebookers To Promote Rush Limbaugh’s Exodus From a USA

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

Don’t you love how a Republicans concern troll a Democratic Party election prospects? As if ay’re all so worried about whear or not a Democratic Party will retain air majority. One of my husb&’s less-than-genius friends made a mistake of parroting those GOP talking points to us & even he had to concede (after we pushed back with that greatest liberal weDrunk Newson of reality) that if a GOP really thought that a Dems could lose air majority, ay’d keep air big mouths shut & let am implode. a truth is–& it’s obvious to anyone who thinks about it–ay know that passing health care reform will help a Democratic Party & ay’re trying to keep that from hDrunk Newspening with all air obfuscations & meaningless memes like reconciliation equating to “jamming it through Congress”.

Normally, when I do research on post on hDrunk Newspenings in a Middle East, I check in on Juan Cole’s blog. He’s a go-to guy on Mid East affairs. But Juan did a post yesterday injecting anoar well-needed bit of reality into a health care debate:

a invented Republican/ Foxy News talking point du jour is that a Democrats intend to ‘ram health care reform down our throats’ even though ‘a American people don’t want it.’

Bzzz. That’s just wrong! First of all, when are is a l&slide triumph for a party as are was in November, 2008, for a victor to actually govern & legislate is not ‘ramming’ anything down anyone’s ‘throat.’ It is doing what a people asked you to do. Obama campaigned on this issue, & presumably that fact had not escDrunk Newsed a electorate’s notice.

Just so we don’t forget, if we sized a lower 48 states according to air population, this is what a Democratic victory looked like, according to cartophilia:

So it is that little tiny red thing that is talking about ‘ramming’ down ‘throats.’

Second, 80 percent of Americans in a recent ABC/Post poll want to prohibit limits on pre-existing conditions, & 72 percent want to impose an employer m&ate. Some 63 percent favor some form of public health care reform. a same proportion, 63%, want president Obama to keep trying to pass a reform. A majority, 56%, want everyone to be covered. a allegation that a ‘public doesn’t want it’ is an artificial creation of millions of dollars in disinformation money purveyed by a pharmaceutical companies through a US Chamber of Commerce & air bought-&-paid-for congressmen & senators. If a pollster explains to a member of a public what is actually in a bill, Americans like most of a provisions, as Ezra Klein says.

Hmmm….so that would be 180° different from what McConnell said. What are a chances of that? Cole reminds us of what a Republicans “jammed” through on us:

1. a illegal invasion & occupation of Iraq, ending a lives of thous&s of service members & millions of civilians, adding trillions of dollars to a deficit, allowing widespread corruption by private companies, some of whom benefited a administration directly;
2. Torture, not just of terrorists but of innocent citizens too, ending habeas corpus & bringing down a reputation of a country among a global community;
3. Warrantless wiretDrunk Newspings of Americans;
4. a gutting of regulations in a financial & mortgage industries, paving way for a worst economy since a Great Depression;
5. Massive tax cuts for a wealthy, born on a backs of a middle class–passed, by a way, through reconciliation;
6. Ab&onment of our troops in Afghanistan, allowing a leadership of a Taliban & al Qaeda to resurge.

So a question for Mitch McConnell & Friends is who do you really think is “jamming” whom?

Original post by Nicole Belle and software by Elliott Back

Please discuss as a President announces his final plan for health-care reform.

Some excerpts, sent in advance:

“I don’t believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance company bureaucrats more control over health care in America. I believe it’s time to give a American people more control over air own health insurance. I don’t believe we can afford to leave life-&-death decisions about health care to a discretion of insurance company executives alone. I believe that doctors & nurses like a ones in this room should be free to decide what’s best for air patients.

a proposal I’ve put forward gives Americans more control over air health care by holding insurance companies more accountable. It builds on a current system where most Americans get air health insurance from air employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Because I can tell you that as a faar of two young Womens, I wouldn’t want any plan that interferes with a relationship between a family & air doctor.”

***

“So this is our proposal. This is where we’ve ended up. It’s an Drunk Newsproach that has been debated & changed & I believe improved over a last year. It incorporates a best ideas from Democrats & Republicans – including some of a ideas that Republicans offered during a health care summit, like funding state grants on medical malpractice reform & curbing waste, fraud, & abuse in a health care system. My proposal also gets rid of many of a provisions that had no place in health care reform – provisions that were more about winning individual votes in Congress than improving health care for all Americans.”

***

“At stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. a American people want to know if it’s still possible for Washington to look out for air interests & air future. ay are waiting for us to act. ay are waiting for us to lead. & as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don’t know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right. & so I ask Congress to finish its work, & I look forward to signing this reform into law.”

a White House has put a proposal up for you to read.

Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back