Dems’ And Dole’s Flaccid Healthcare Advocacy

/52 Comments/in , /by

Last week, former Senator and GOP Presidential candidate Bob Dole went public endorsing President Obama’s attempt to reform healthcare. Dole did so over already existing objections by Mitch McConnell and other Republicans. It spite of those objections, Dole publicly issued a joint statement with Tom Daschle saying:

The American people have waited decades, and if this moment passes us by, it may be decades more before there is another opportunity

Dole further personally reiterated a previous statement made to the Kansas City Star, to the effect

I don’t want the Republicans putting up a ‘no’ sign and saying, ‘We’re not open for business.

Well that was then; this is now. Now, as of yesterday, less than five days after Dole issued a joint ballyhooed statement to the press supporting Obama’s effort to reform healthcare, he suddenly does not want his words used in an advertisement supporting Obama’s effort to reform healthcare. The Sunday New York Times reports:

At the request of former Senator Bob Dole, Democrats are scrapping plans to broadcast a new commercial that touted Republicans like Mr. Dole speaking in support of overhauling the health-care system.

Mr. Dole lodged a complaint with the White House Saturday night, saying that the new commercial, set to run on national broadcast stations on Monday but available online on Saturday, was deceptive.

“He believes it is deceptive, it was not authorized, and he asked that it be pulled,” Michael Marshall, a spokesman for Mr. Dole, said Sunday morning. “He was told late last night by the White House that it would not run.”

The ad has now been pulled not just from broadcast and cable, but from the internet as well. Except the ad was shown on the Sunday news shows and FDL has it. Take a look, the entire Bob Dole part of the ad lasts less than five seconds and consists of a stock still of Dole and a voice over of his printed earlier statement to the Kansas City Star in the exact words

I want this to pass – we have got to do something.

It was a public statement, given to a newspaper of record, on the record, and Bob Dole has the unmitigated gall to demand that the ad be yanked as being “deceptive”??

And the White House leaped into action immediately and killed the ad??? Simply amazing.

This candy ass bufoonery from the same White House that routinely insults and demeans its own activist base that got it elected and is busting their rears to get meaningful healthcare reform passed.

With this type of consistently weak tea, not to mention the wholesale sell out to the healthcare lobby interests, it is little wonder the reform effort is floundering. If only those little blue pills Dole shills for would work on his, and the White House’s, spine.

Jay Rock Demands 90%

/67 Comments/in /by

This is delectable politics. Fresh off a meeting with Ob-Rahma, Jay Rock has come back to the Senate and demanded 90% loss ratio for any coverage the subsidies pay for. "Loss ratio" is insurance-speak for what they actually have to spend providing actual health care. That means the insurance companies can’t steal 20% of our tax dollars to pay for executive salaries. They get 10%.

They’re peeing their pants right now.

But I suspect Jay Rock has offered this as an outcome of his meeting with Ob-Rahma. I’m sure at that meeting they said, "Jello Jay, We’d like you to pitch other ways to save money. We’d like to come up with a way to keep costs down."

And voila!!! 90%!!! Insurance companies have to actually provide health care without gobs of executive subsidies. We’re actually going to demand a certain amount of health care in exchange for the half trillion MaxTax!!!

After Max Tax and Blanche vote it down, it will be crystal clear this is about profits profits profits. 

I don’t know whether Ob-Rahma will pull their head out of Jay Rock’s amendment. 

But I do know this. Jay Rock is intent on fucking with the narrative that MaxTax and Rahm are intent on spinning. If we do our jobs, it’ll be clear why they’re rejecting common sense ways to deliver health care at lower costs and instead are just interested in subsidizing the insurance companies. 

George Steph Wrings His Hands

/104 Comments/in , /by

George Stephanopoulos, clutching his pearls, wants to know why it was necessary for Alan Grayson to call out Republicans on the floor of the House for their stubborn defense of the status quo failed health care in this country (note, in his post, Steph uses Eric Cantor’s YouTube of this speech, which ought to tell you on whose behalf he decided to cover this).

Why Is This Necessary?

Rep. Alan Grayson , D-Fla., says GOP plan is for people to "die quickly." House Republicans are demanding an apology. Don’t they deserve one? Watch here: UPDATE: At Noon today. Rep. Tom Price plans to introduce a new resolution admonishing…

I’m going to pretend Steph is asking sincerely why this is necessary. 

Exhibit One: What Steph had to say about Joe Wilson’s outburst.

If you needed any more evidence that passions run high on health care and America’s partisan divide cuts deep, it came tonight.  When was the last time you heard a member of Congress (Joe Wilson of S.C.) call the President a liar during a joint session address? (Rahm Emanuel has already approached the GOP Congressional leadership and demanded an apology. John McCain has said Wilson should apologize, too. And just moments ago, Wilson bowed to the inevitable and apologized). For that matter, when was the last time you heard a President use the word “lie” in a joint session address? 

No mention of the fact that Wilson was the one lying here. Instead, an excuse for Wilson because "passions run high." No mention of Wilson’s lie–or those of his Republican colleagues–the following day, either (though, once again, Steph highlights what Eric Cantor wants out there). No mention of Wilson’s lie in Steph’s discussion of Wilson’s opponent’s financial bonanza for his outburst either.

Exhibit Two: George Steph’s "outrage" in response to much more incendiary comments from Republicans–such as when Mike Huckabee said that Democrats would have forced Teddy Kennedy to "go home to take pain pills and die." 

Mike Huckabee tossed a hand grenade into the debate over who’s politicizing Ted Kennedy’s death Thursday morning when he told his radio audience that under Obamacare, Kennedy would be told to "go home to take pain pills and die."

Which Democrat will toss it back first?

Read more →

The Senator Henceforth to Be Known as Jay Rock

/110 Comments/in /by

I’ve been threatening to do this for a while: ditching the moniker "Jello Jay." And while I was going to hold out until we actually got a public option through the Senate, I gotta say that nothing seems to have gotten under MaxTax Baucus’ skin so much as Jay Rock picking apart, detail by detail, the many ways in which the MaxTax is a big giveaway to the health care industry. Here’s Jay Rock echoing Wendell Potter.  And here he is noting how impotent Congress has been at trying to reign in the helath care industry with measly little laws. 

Update, via Digby: Jonathan Cohn explains why Jay Rock showed up to champion health care.

Over the last few weeks Jay Rockefeller has emerged as the Senate’s most visible spokesman for a public insurance option. And, purely from a public relations standpoint, this is something of a mixed blessing. He comes from West Virginia and is pretty popular there, so that certainly helps bring non-coastal credibility to the cause. But Rockefeller speaks in a plodding, rambling style that doesn’t always make for great television. He’s also pretty stubborn, which makes him a loud advocate but not necessarily an effective one, at least given the way the U.S. Senate works.

But Rockefeller gets something better than almost anybody I’ve seen–something he’s expressed in interviews and, most recently, during this weeks hearings of the Senate Finance Committee. It’s how everyday people, particularly those without a lot of money, interact with the health care system. It’s easy to treat health care as an abstraction–to make it all about economic theories and Congressional Budget Office projections. (I’m surely guilty of this myself.) Rockefeller sees it through the eyes of West Virginians making $30,000 a year–people who just want to know they can pay their premiums and that, if they do, the insurance they get will protect them when they get sick. 

Rockefeller’s ability to channel these feelings may seem odd, given his privileged pedigree. But it makes sense given what he’s done with his career. Remember, West Virginia didn’t choose him. He chose West Virginia, starting with his service as a VISTA volunteer. He knows his constituents very well. And he acts that way.

It’s a great piece, but I’d add one thing. I actually think Jay Rock’s stubbornness may be effective, partly because others in the Senate can explain it in terms they understand. Read more →

Chris Christie’s Death Panels for “Exceptions”

/21 Comments/in /by

Seven years ago October 16, at the age of 34, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. After six rounds of pretty harsh chemo, surgery, radiation, and five years of hormonal treatments, I am still clean of cancer.

I’m almost getting to the point where I believe I won’t have a recurrence.  As I prepare to move my mother into her new retirement home, I’m beginning to believe I might outlive her.

Except.

Except for the fact that twelve years ago, when I was 29, my breast cancer was misdiagnosed. I had a palpable lump that my primary care physician agreed merited concern. But when I went to the referral doctor, he refused to send me for a mammogram. He refused to send me for an ultrasound. He refused to send me to aspirate what he assumed was "just a cyst."

That doctor, like NJ GOP Gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie, believed that women in their twenties just don’t get breast cancer. Or rather, those 5% of women who are diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age–like both Jane (diagnosed at 32) and me–are "exceptions." Exceptions for whom we should not require insurance companies to offer diagnostic tests like mammograms. Never mind that my insurance company would have had to spend far less than the $75,000 it eventually spent to treat my cancer if we had treated the lump when I first discovered it. Never mind any costs to treat the heart disease that chemo might eventually give me. Never mind the costs if–god forbid–cancer left untreated for five years shows up in the future in a vital organ or something.

Chris Christie thinks it’s smart to end the requirements on NJ insurance companies that they cover things like mammograms for the "exceptions" like me and Jane. He’s a walking death panel for "exceptions" like me and Jane.

And that’s what those of you from NJ can look forward to if he wins the gubernatorial election this November.

Bill Clinton on Student Loans and Health Care

/33 Comments/in /by

me-and-bill.thumbnail.jpegI told you all that I was going to cover Bill Cinton’s Clinton Global Initiative this week. What I didn’t tell you is that I was invited to attend a meeting between Clinton and a group of about 15 bloggers. On the eve of his big shindig, Clinton generously spent an hour and a half with us last night, answering at least one question from each of us.

I’ll talk about what he said about CGI last night as I cover the event itself. For now, I want to point out an inconsistency between what Clinton said about student loans and what he said about a public option for health care.

In response to a question on education, Clinton hailed the House’s recent action to give Federally-guaranteed loans directly to college students rather than via private loan companies. Clinton noted that under his Administration, he provided this as an option, as opposed to the required change now before Congress. Even with just the optional program, students who took their loans directly from the Federal government saved $9 billion in loan repayments. And the Federal government saved $4 billion because fewer people defaulted on the loans held by the Federal government than defaulted on private loans (this was partly because the Federal government could build in flexibility to keep loan payments affordable). If the Senate succeeds in passing this bill, Clinton noted, it would make college more accessible and affordable for the middle class, and would be a crucial element in keeping America competitive internationally.

In short, Clinton argued that by bypassing the private sector in supporting a critical service to taxpayers, both the users of that service and the government could save money and achieve better outcomes.

Clinton was much less insistent on bypassing the private sector with health care, though. While Clinton made it clear that he personally supports the public option, he suggested that those insisting health care reform must have a public option were being unreasonable. "If it’s not a net negative," Clinton said, "we ought to pass it," repeating a sentiment he voiced at Netroots Nation. Of note, Clinton also pointed out that the public option had been largely gutted by limiting access to it to those who buy their own insurance, suggesting that that made it more expendable in the bill itself.

To explain his stance, Clinton invoked an op-ed Paul Begala wrote last month. Read more →

Obama (and John Boehner) on Al Punto

/51 Comments/in /by

Since I pushed Obama’s appearance on Univision’s Al Punto the other day, I thought I should watch it.

The Obama interview lasted about 15 minutes (as did the Boehner interview that followed) and included–in addition to the questions about whether undocumented workers and health care reform I discuss in more detail below–the following questions (working from memory–my Spanish too rusty to live-blog and retranslate while listening!!):

  • Whether the opposition to Obama’s policies stem from racism (he gave the answer about delegitimizing government he has given elsewhere)
  • Presenting a claim John Boehner made–that Democrats don’t have the votes to pass health care by themselves–whether the Democrats could do it on their own (Obama gave a typical answer celebrating bipartisanship but saying he thought it would pass)
  • Whether Obama supported a public option and whether it could be passed (Obama repeated his answers about the importance of the public option as part of a larger reform, and said he did not believe that it was dead)
  • Whether Obama, who has said he supports more cultural exchange with Cuba, supported a big concert they’re doing there
  • What Obama would do regarding Honduras (Obama took a middle ground, appealing to having a more legitimate election in the future)
  • Whether Obama would fulfill his promise to put forth immigration reform in the first year of his Administration (again, Obama took a middle ground, and pointed out he promised he’d have to get it passed)

The most important questions, of course, had to do with the exclusion of undocumented workers from the health exchange (and therefore from health care in the United States). Al Punto host Jorge Ramos asked Obama whether this policy made sense in about three different ways (and asked the same question in his interview of John Boehner). Both Obama and Boehner generally responded by pretending that exclusion from the exchange didn’t amount to exclusion from health care (Obama said something like, "well, if they buy health care from insurers directly, that’s between them and the insurer"). Both, too, responded to questions about health care by talking about the need for immigration reform. Ramos asked Obama specifically about the number of children born in this country who, because at least one parent is undocumented, will have problems accessing health care (if I heard it right, Obama said he’d like to cover these children in SCHIP).

Read more →

MaxTax’s Medicare Reforms: Would They Really Reform Health Care?

/69 Comments/in /by

The MaxTax is largely a Medicare bill attached to 39 pages of private health care reform. To show you what I mean by that, here’s roughly how many pages MaxTax spends on each topic:

Health care exchange and other means to make private care available to the uninsured: 39 pages (including several on preventing tax dollars from being spent on undocumented workers or abortions)

Extending access to the poor and underserved (including expanding Medicaid to 133% of poverty): 34 pages

Improving the efficiency of public health care systems (mostly Medicare): 120 pages

Revenue plans: 25 pages

Total: 223 pages

I make this observation as a way to raise an honest question about Ron Brownstein’s claim that "Baucus’ draft bill offers the most fiscally sustainable framework yet devised for expanding coverage."

About half of Brownstein’s support for this claim comes in a discussion of the changes the MaxTax makes to public health care delivery. To understand what those changes are, read paragraphs four through thirteen of his piece. Those paragraphs summarize the 120 pages of the MaxTax treating Medicare that do things like shift payment to reward the quality of service, rather than the quantity of it (these changes make the kind of changes proposed by Atul Gawande in this important New Yorker piece). 

Now, I’ll get to the other half of Brownstein’s support for his article in a second. But first, regarding the many admirable changes MaxTax advocates for Medicare, here’s my question.

What effect will those important changes in public health care delivery–made in a bill that specifically prohibits public health care solutions for the rest of the population–really have on the fiscal responsibility of health care overall?

That is, Brownstein rightly commends Baucus for implementing changes to Medicare that will probably have real impact on the cost the government pays for Medicare. But this is in a bill that–almost as an afterthought–dumps 30 million people into private care that includes no such changes (at least no mandated changes). The Federal government would, under MaxTax, be paying billions for health care that did not necessarily integrate the same changes that the government would incent in Medicare coverage.

So here’s my honest question. Do policy wonks believe that by rewarding or even mandating such changes in Medicare, the entire health care delivery system would change? Read more →

Pay2Play Ceci: “The Most Influential Players” Love MaxTax

/140 Comments/in , /by

Pay2Play Ceci Connolly has an article out summing up the reaction she’s seeing to Max Baucus’ health care plan:

As they scoured the 223-page document, many of the most influential players found elements to dislike, but not necessarily reasons to kill the effort. Most enticing was the prospect of 30 million new customers.

In order of appearance, here are the people she cites in her article (I’ve bolded the ones she has actual quotes from):

  • Max Baucus
  • Obama
  • Liberal Democrats and allies, particularly labor unions
  • Republicans
  • Major industry leaders and interest groups
  • White House strategists
  • Obama
  • John D. Rockefeller
  • Lawmakers and lobbyists
  • Ron Wyden
  • Neil Trautwein, a vice president of the National Retail Federation
  • Leaders of the Business Roundtable and the National Federation of Independent Business
  • Drugmakers and hospitals
  • Kenneth E. Thorpe, an Emory University professor and Clinton administration official (noting that health care providers stand to make more than they’ll lose)
  • Max Baucus
  • Several trade associations
  • The medical device industry (dsecribed "recruiting" four senators to roll back fees on its industry)
  • One White House aide

In all, Ceci presents a landscape in which the most important players–aside from two Senators who have been slighted in the process thus far–are trade industry groups. And the most important issue for them is the profit they stand to make off of taxing America’s middle class to make them wealthier.

Now, to be fair to Pay2Play Ceci, that’s unashamedly the point of her article–that while the bill has pissed off Democrats and Republicans, it has thus far lulled the industry with dreams of forthcoming riches.

But behind the rhetorical fireworks was a sense that the fragile coalition of major industry leaders and interest groups central to refashioning the nation’s $2.5 trillion health-care system remains intact.

And also to be fair to Pay2Play Ceci, it’s clear that these players were the prime movers behind this bill. The story is absolutely accurate–though that doesn’t mean it has any business being told.

Nothing demonstrates the degree to which actual politicians–much less their constituents–have become mere bystanders as the health care industry crafts up a plan to get 30 million new captive customers.

One more point on this (so I can count this as my daily thrashing of the WaPo). An article like this is the natural outcome of the WaPo’s attempt to be a broker of the key players (not surprisingly, the same industry hacks highlighted here) in the health care debate. Read more →

CBO on Co-Ops

/64 Comments/in , /by

Ezra has posted the CBO’s initial estimates on the costs of MaxTax–some of the assumptions for which seem to pretend that insurance companies will not react in any way to the new rules imposed by MaxTax.

But before I get into what CBO’s assumptions, here’s what CBO thinks of Baucus’ crappy co-op option.

(The proposed co-ops had very little effect on the estimates of total enrollment in the exchanges or federal costs because, as they are described in the specifications, they seem unlikely to establish a significant market presence in many areas of the country or to noticeably affect federal subsidy payments.)

That is, as designed, the co-ops would not be more attractive than the private insurance options, nor would they bring down subsidies (which means they wouldn’t bring down costs to us, either).

As designed, the co-ops are totally worthless.

image_print