Maine leaders weigh in on health care bills
6/27/09 | 34 comments

Maine leaders weigh in on health care bills


By Meg Haskell
BDN Staff

As Congress attempts to transform the nation’s health care system, the support of Maine’s U.S. Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe is critical.

“When people are looking at the handful of senators who can make or break this vote, these two are clearly right there,” said Mark Brewer, a professor of political science at the University of Maine, in a recent interview.

President Obama has asked that comprehensive health care reform legislation be ready for his signature by the end of this year. That means the House and Senate must develop, debate and refine separate measures this summer and fall. The two bills must be passed in their respective houses and then merged in the contentious conference process. The resulting final legislation must be approved again by both bodies before being sent to the White House.

It’s a tall order on an ambitious timeline. Health care reform has not been attempted in any exhaustive way since a bitterly failed effort during the Clinton administration in 1993 and 1994.

Whether the reform can succeed this time is the subject of much speculation. But there is little dispute about the influence of Maine’s two moderate Republican senators. With 60 Senate votes needed to support whatever legislation emerges from the Senate Finance Committee, Collins and Snowe have a decisive role to play in ensuring its success.

“They tend to be fiscal conservatives,” he said, “but they don’t buy into the socially conservative wave of Republicans that started in the 1960s and became prominent around 2000,” making them pivotal to the passage and contents of health care reform legislation.

The 100-seat Senate currently is made up of 57 Democrats, 40 Republicans and two Independents, with one seat still open as a persistent dispute rages in Minnesota over the results of last November’s election. Though they hold a narrow majority, Senate Democrats are three votes shy of being able to override a Republican filibuster and carry politically divisive legislation on their own. That’s why Snowe and Collins played such a crucial role in the passage of Obama’s $787 billion economic stimulus bill in February — joined by Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who since has switched to the Democratic side of the aisle — as the only GOP lawmakers to support the measure.

And that’s why their support is seen as essential to the passage of meaningful health care reform, which, like the stimulus legislation, threatens to fracture along party lines despite broad bipartisan agreement that the nation’s current system is unacceptable.

And while the much stronger Democratic majority in the House of Representatives essentially assures passage of a liberal-leaning reform bill from that body, Maine’s Democratic representatives Michael Michaud and Chellie Pingree have strong feelings about what the package should contain.

Earlier this week, as Congress prepared to break for the weeklong July 4 recess, the four members of Maine’s congressional delegation found some time to share their national health reform activities and aspirations with the Bangor Daily News.

Snowe, ‘the Dealmaker’

Snowe serves on the powerful Senate Finance Committee, where the primary health reform legislation, including its astronomical cost, is being hammered out. Snowe also has been named to a smaller bipartisan group within the committee, charged with maintaining the momentum and focus of the reform. She frequently is referenced in national media reports as leading the contentious roundtable talks and was named “the Dealmaker” in a recent Time Magazine story about major players in the health care reform process.

This week, Snowe described activity in the Finance Committee room as “hectic” as members grapple with the complexity and interconnectedness of the U.S. health care system. The committee meets at least daily, she said, often with representatives of insurance, pharmaceutical, medical, hospital and consumer interest groups.

“We all want to do the right thing and provide universal access to health care,” Snowe said. “But we are concerned about the complexity of the legislation we’re crafting and the cost.”

Montana Democrat and Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus aims to bring the bill in at $1 trillion or less over the next 10 years. It’s a mind-boggling price tag, but significantly lower than the estimated $1.6 trillion impact of a competing measure under development in the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, chaired by ailing Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts.

While some pieces of the health reform legislation — such as the need to more tightly regulate insurance companies and to change some physician reimbursement formulas — are falling into place, others remain elusive.

Snowe is the only Senate Republican so far to support the idea of including a “public option,” a government-run insurance program that would compete with private insurers to offer affordable coverage to the estimated 47 million Americans who currently have none.

Snowe has termed the public option — championed by most Democrats and the centerpiece of the proposal developed in Kennedy’s committee — a “last resort” solution. This week, she said the public option should be included in the legislation but only implemented if private insurers fail to provide an acceptable array of plans — including ones that offer a baseline of essential services and are affordable for lower- and middle-income Americans.

“We [lawmakers] will define affordability,” Snowe said. “There will be no wiggle room.”

One accepted corner post of the reform is increased regulation of the health insurance industry. That means, among other things, limiting or eliminating insurers’ ability to refuse coverage on the basis of an individual’s health status or pre-existing conditions, how much premiums can increase for those who use a lot of health care services, the “lifetime cap” on benefits and more.

Snowe said stronger regulation is needed to hold insurers’ feet to the fire.

“We are not depending on private insurers and hoping this will work,” Snowe said. “We intend for it to work.”

The insurance industry, which historically has resisted such regulation, has shown itself to be more amenable now — in part due to the likelihood of another prospective corner post of the reform: mandates requiring all employers to provide insurance, or all individuals to purchase it, or both. This guaranteed boom in their business means insurers are willing to swallow a degree of regulation they might have choked on in the past.

But they are lobbying hard against the public option, which, as a de facto nonprofit agency, would compete aggressively for their customers. And with the single exception of Olympia Snowe, Republicans are backing them up.

Collins: ‘wary of rushing’

Collins, too, meets daily with congressional colleagues and interest groups to discuss proposed health care reform. While she recognizes the urgency of the situation, she said this week she is not persuaded that Obama’s timeline is realistic.

“This is a big challenge. Health care affects every single person in our country and represents one sixth of our economy,” she said. “I am wary of rushing a bill through in the next month rather than making sure the decisions are well founded.”

Collins has strong reservations about the public option, referencing a recent study predicting that as many as 119 million Americans might switch from private coverage to the public plan, potentially causing the collapse of the private insurance sector.

“We want to hold on to what is good about our system and improve what isn’t working,” she said.

Collins said the health care reform bill must address a number of interconnected issues, including the need for more emphasis on wellness and disease prevention, the growing shortage of doctors and other medical providers in rural areas, changing models of reimbursement and liability, and measures to improve end-of-life care and the management of chronic illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease.

Collins said she opposes the idea of an employer mandate. “Most employers want to provide health care coverage,” she said. “If they’re not doing it, it’s because they can’t afford to.” Collins favors providing tax credits to small businesses that do offer insurance, tax credits to employees who purchase it, and subsidies to lower-income workers who need help affording coverage.

Of the estimated 47 million Americans who do not have health care coverage, Collins said, 9 million earn more than $75,000 a year and are uninsured “by choice.” Collins said she still is undecided as to whether this group should be required to carry at least catastrophic coverage so their unpaid medical bills don’t get shifted to other Americans.

A more Democratic House

In the House of Representatives, Rep. Michael Michaud of Maine’s second district said he is “not wedded to [Obama’s] time frame; I’m wedded to the idea that we do what is right for the country.” As a fiscally conservative “blue dog” Democrat, Michaud said, one of his primary concerns is how much the health care reform will cost and how it might be funded.

He is opposed to taxing employer-sponsored benefits, one idea that has been floated.

“Businesses are having a hard enough time providing coverage for their employees,” he said. “It would be going in the wrong direction to tax businesses.”

Like the No Child Left Behind education initiative endorsed by the administration of George W. Bush, the health care reform legislation runs the risk of being an unfunded mandate to the states, Michaud said. Another concern is that, by trying to please too many industry and political interest groups, the national health care reform may not amount to much.

“But we would still pat ourselves on the back and say ‘We reformed health care,’” he said with chagrin.

The newest member of Maine’s congressional delegation, Rep. Chellie Pingree, said reforming the nation’s health care system is “the number one issue” for her constituents. “When I run into old friends or complete strangers in the supermarket, they all say, ‘You’re really going to do something about health care this time, aren’t you?’” she said. “People feel they have been brought to the edge. They really want us to do something now.”

Pingree said she remains interested in a national, government-run single-payer plan — sometimes called the ‘Medicare for All’ model — but acknowledged the concept has little political support.

“Given that the insurance and pharmaceutical companies are focusing on getting rid of even the public option, we’re working just to keep that option on the table,” she said.

The more limited public option, allowing people to choose between private and public coverage, would promote negotiation with drug companies for lower prescription prices, she said, as well as providing more “transparency” about operating expenses, benefits and other financial information.

“I’m surprised any lawmaker would oppose it,” Pingree said. The House will pass legislation that includes the public option, she predicted.

With a week of summer vacation ahead, members of Congress will have a few days to cogitate on the momentous decisions ahead. After the break, they’ll be back on the fast track, trying to craft comprehensive health reform that will improve, streamline and make more equitable the nation’s health care system.

mhaskell@bangordailynews.net

990-8291

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
34 comments on this item
On 6/27/09 at 5:15 AM, Sledman wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Wow, this article is strafed with idiocracies.

If Collins & Snowe were fiscally responsible, Maine would not have one of the highest tax burdens in the country.

Social conservatism is far from prominent. If it was, this country would not be in the mess it's in & would not be on its coliision course of collapse. Liberalism is vomiting forth socialism. Socialism doesn't work for other countries where its people work together. How can libs possibly think it'll work in this country where its population is polarized and self centered? But alas, liberalism is a mental disorder so I've answered my own question.

I think we can all agree the govt can't manage its way out of a puddle let alone manage a national socialist healthcare system. The biggest Maine political & financial disaster, Dirigo Health, should be proof enough.

Obama needs to slow down & stop spending money in a depression. People have had to rein in thier wallets in this depression, so too should he.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 5:51 AM, sumner42 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

If the National Health program is such a good deal for the taxpayers; why has the congress exempted itself from the program? Or did they forget to tell the people about that?

Socialized medicine, by any name, has been a disaster wherever it has been imposed on the people. Just look at England, France, Canada, Mexico; then decide if you want government controlled medicine. We have the best medical care in the world; why destroy it just to give more power to a handfull of bureaucrats in Washington? Does anyone think those bureaucrats have your best health in mind?

Sumner

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 6:13 AM, Mainer50 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Why is it that people confuse socialism with communism? Why is it that people confuse country matters with state matters? The two senators has nothing to do with Maine being the highly taxed state that it is...Also, with the conservative administrations that we have had in the past eight years, has buried the idea of Capitalism to the flower garden. It appears that the people of this country has agreed or why else did Obama get elected. The reason that the idea of one=payer health care hasn't been so "popular" is because the health insrance businesses have paid millions of dollars to lobby the fact that they "could" lose profits. HELLOOOOO, paying millions of dollars and funding campaigns to maintain and have their profit margins soaring??? Where does that leave the every day person who is losing their jobs and funding a war over seas that have no chance of ending??? C'mon people, wake up, we need to balance the scales...where they were swung to the far right, we need to balance them and how do you people think we can do that? I know, I have noticed much to my chagrin, that people don't want to do anything about making change happen, they would rather complain about everything then get their hands dirty but if you can't be a part of the solution, then don't fuel the fire on the problem.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 6:27 AM, MaineFoxx wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Excellant Post Mainer50

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 7:05 AM, zatwoodz wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Maybe our Senator's and Rep's should just look at what a big Success Dirigo Health has been. 120000 people were to be insured by Jan/1/2009 it is now june/27/2009 and under 10000 people are insured. Oh and it was to be paying for itself. And Baldacci just got it so our medical payment are now taxed it pay for this Health Care failure!

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 7:11 AM, zatwoodz wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Mainer50 You are right about one thing people confuse socialism with communism! But this country should not be either of these. Obama is moving us to Socialism.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 7:47 AM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Socialism isn't neccessarily the best answer in every situation, but it holds the best solution for healthcare. The fact that people are willing to take the smaller issues present in countries with nationalised systems is akin to a hobo living in a cardboard box arguing that the uptown apartments have mice...there are some cases where socialism is the answer, and some cases where it shouldn't be. However, those of you who argue for a free market solution to every problem are even less intelligent than those who argue for socialism, even to the extent of communism, because at least they don't believe that a theoretical "force", a figment of the imagination, is capable of providing the control and stability they seek. Their only flaw is assuming the government is always capable of providing this, but at least it's possible in this case. Adam Smith is dead, and so are his ideals.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:43 AM, freedomfighter wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

They are still trying to put this burden on American businesses. American businesses can't compete with the rest of the world if they have to provide health coverage too. That's why most of our jobs have moved to other countries. Insurance companies can make plenty of money with legitimate business and property insurance without having to profit from the sick.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 9:18 AM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I agree freedomfighter, and the thing is that the insurance model doesn't even fit the payment of healthcare costs. Most insurance pays out when an unlikely event, such as a fire, occurs. Life insurance pays out on the occurence of a likely event (death within the term of the policy), but since that event almost always comes late in the policy, the money paid in is able to be invested over the life of the policy and turn a profit for the company, plus there are always more people being born than dying. Health "insurance" covers an "event" that is likely to not only occur at any time during the life of the policy, but also an "event" which is likely to cause significant costs to be incurred on a continuing basis. The only way for a company to make money, especially in a competitive environment (which is the most expensive way to "do" healthcare), is to charge an exorbitant amount of money for what amounts to very little actual coverage.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 9:25 AM, Bangorian wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Why are most of you so uniformed? Maine has a poor, fat, aging population in relatively poor health. Without serious healthcare reform, this State will be quickly bankrupted by healthcare costs in the years to come. A single payer healthcare system would allow those of us who are healthy, but still pay for insurance that we don't use, to share the expenses. Ultimately, this will drive down the cost of healthcare, by removing the profits. I'm asking those of you who get your information from "news" organizations with an agenda to slow down, learn to think for yourselves and understand that the people driving the private-only model are in no way representative of the people of Maine. They are not looking out for your interests, they're just using your ignorance to promote their agenda.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 11:09 AM, changeneeded wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

When has the government ever run something better than private business can? Answer: Never. Look at Medicare/Social Security? Do you really need to look any further?

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 11:40 AM, Mainer50 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

And since when the health insurance companies have the consumers needs at heart? Never, at what point do we stop saying yes to big fat insurance companies profits and yes to the needs of people that need health insurance? When do we say yes to we need to fix this and know that it will take time but also send a message to health insurance companies that we won't stand to be raped by them anymore? In Maine, we only have two major health insurance companies, WHY? because the lobbyiests have the legislatures in their pockets, and therefore bigger profits and less benefits for us. So, changeneeded, what do you suggest to "fix" the problem of health care? Unless, you don't have to worry about health insurance...

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 1:27 PM, Bangorian wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Hey changeneeded - Have you ever heard of the post office? Find me any private company in the world that will get my letter from Bangor Maine to Seattle in 2 or 3 days for $0.42

Stop drinking the Kool-aid and learn to think for yourself.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 3:51 PM, safedman wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Bangorian

What color is the sky in your world??? Were you always this lost or did you bump your head this morning?

Look into the Health plan proposed by obama. You will not see care that you need, the elderly will suffer more than they do at the hands of medicade. The Government controlled health care will make the decision wether you get the care you need, not you and your DR.

Congress and the Whithouse will have a different medical plan do you know why? I will let you figure it out on your own. Hate to mislead you. For the Love of God the reason our country is dieing is because of your mentality. Sorry to be so insulting but I am sickand tired of the people that sit in a circle and sing Kumbiya

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 3:53 PM, EJParsons wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Snowe and Collins will cave in. Someone will sweeten the pot and bribe their votes. That always seems to happen.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 5:10 PM, chersully2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Excellent post, Mainer50.....yes. Many of us see it......others will resist , and as you say, complain instead of be part of the solution. The healthcare system is not working.....therefore, it is time to change some things. Not hastily.....not without much study and collaboration, but also it cannot wait forever. This "socialism" charge is so tiresome and stupid, but you are going to be hearing about it for a long time. There are some very intelligent Republicans that would say we are NOT heading towards socialism but they are not to the right enough for some of these Republicans here.

Mainer50: No, the health insurance companies have not had the interests of the patients/consumers at heart for some time.

Bangorian: Does not sound at all like you bumped your head!! These very negative people have not heard (or care) President Obama say that middle class people,etc. should have the same quality coverage as he and newsman Charlie Gibson (said recently on a newsprogram on ABC for healthcare.)

I admire Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. They work hard and tirelessly. Just because they do not have the same extreme right mentality as some here....well, that's just the way it goes. Not everybody thinks the same. We are not carbon copies. I also admire William Cohen, (Republican , formerly of Bangor). I admire his character and great intelligence. Yes, I am a Democrat now, but have voted Republican in the past. Thankfully, we have a range of thought in this country.

I just cannot for the life of me see William Cohen, Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe act like that Governor of So Carolina. Nope, it's not going to happen, but I can hear the cynics here. I think it points to character. That Governor of So Carolina is saying how "gracious and understanding his Christian wife has been" . Give me a break. He also quoted the Bible (David and Bashesba...Old Testament) saying they were forgiven or something like that and seemed to be drawing some kind of analogy to his situation! What hypocrisy. If I were his wife, I would not trust him as far as I could throw him and am sure she doesn't. I am not saying she should not try and stay with him....of course not. It they can work it out for their family, that would be a good thing. He seemed to really care about the Argentinan woman so it may not be over. It does not really matter where one is on the political spectrum as far as a person's character,etc.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 5:16 PM, Bangorian wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

You don't have any idea what you're blowing off about. More than 20% of Mainer's are on MaineCare (hate to tell you, but that is public insurance). Another 16 percent are not covered, meaning that you and I pay for them when they walk into the ER with cancer. We're already up to a third of the population and we've not yet even covered the elderly, which represent the fastest growing segment of our population (who are on Medicare, also a public program). Those that remain are on private insurance plans and use very little of their insurance becuase they tend to be more educated and healthy. The money that those folks pay to cover themselves and their families winds up largely in the pockets of the insurance companies. A fully public plan in the only way to sort out this foolish system. Safedman, when you talk about Kumbiya, you just sound ilike you haven't read or thought much about this issue. Sorry to be insulting, but I am sick and tired of people who don't take five minutes to understand an issue before they blow off and start name calling. By the way, our country is dying because we're not being smart enough in the way we run it.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 5:34 PM, Brittanicus wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

My email has been inundated with organizations who don't like the thought of a one-payer system, trying to sell me on the usual sterile thoughts for for-profit health insurers. My family has exceptional health care, because of my years with an academic background. But my step daughter received ruthless pre-existing condition clauses and finally succumbed to Cancer. Other family members suffered because of the monopoly by the mega insurance companies, whose bottom line is massive profits for their stockholders. Health care must exist for everybody, not just for the few as it is now. Commercial insurance--FINE! But let their be a government health care system similar to Europe. Choose your own doctor and do away with corrupt PPO and other wasteful plans. Do away with co-pays, premiums and deductibles, because in a nationwide pool everybody can afford it. Our car-makers will be on an equal footing with foreign imports.

As a New American prior to coming here I had very good health care in Europe and Australia, before the illegal immigrant invasion. Lose your job and you are unlikely to afford what is called health care. Only the wealthy families, and relatively stable employees don't want to upset the apple cart. As usual the status quo are trying to undermine any new plan for the whole legal population. No options, no exception--we all pay our share into a Universal government health care plan. With the arrival of the Obama administration we have two issues that are going to be a lightening rods, and in my way of thinking should be placed before the AMERICAN VOTER AS A NATIONWIDE REFERENDUM. HEALTH CARE AND IMMIGRATION REFORM. Of all the current issues in the chambers of Washington, these are the capstone problems facing this nation of Hurricane force.

If our elected public servants try to pass immigration reform or a massive health care plan without the general publics voice, their could be massive ramifications on a grand scale. Both overwhelming problems caused by years of neglect, must be resolved. Already special interest groups are spending millions of dollars, filling the airways of propaganda and corrupt info-commercials, to frighten people. Instead being mouth pieces for the special interest lobbyists, they had better take note that their whole careers representing supposedly the will of the people is in jeopardy. Because of these enormous cost attributed to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and HEALTH CARE--the AMERICAN PEOPLE'S INPUT SHOULD BE MANDATORY? Forget the University professors, economists, think take tank scientists and the Chamber of Commerce, ACLU, Unions, big church and business entities--THE PEOPLE--should--HAVE THE LAST WORD?

Both have their own cataclysmic cost problems to the American taxpayer. THE ONLY WAY TO SATISFY THE LIBERALS, DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, ATHEISTS, EXTREMISTS, PROTECTIONISTS, OPEN BORDER AND FREE TRADERS--IS BY A STATE TO STATE FEDERAL REFERENDUM.

CALL YOUR SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE THE ONLY THING POLITICIANS UNDERSTAND IS PRESSURE FROM---ALL---OF US?

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 6:31 PM, maineboy wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I hope Snow and Collins does the right thing this time and votes against government run health care . We have the best health care in the world. that why people from other countries come here for treatment. Our health insurance is not perfect and needs work but not what congress and the president are talking about. O and by the way its against maine state lawfor an insurance company to discriminate for a pre-existing codition.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 7:17 PM, safedman wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Lets call it what it is....WELFARE...

I know that you will not be making the decisions with your DR. Some beurocrap will make the decision for you. Health care needs to be fixed but not by this congress. Sign and don't read, we pay the price. Have you loked into thew care people from Canada get? Didn't think so.

Get some of the unweds and lazy off welfare maybe the States can set up some med plans for the populace. I am one that feels the Govermnent is not there to take care of me. Too bad you don't feel the same. Please someone feed and cloth me

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:22 PM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

safedman: wow...recycling anti-universal healthcare ads from the 90's or what? Is that Bob Dole hiding behind the safedman handle? We need an intelligence requirement for the right to suffrage in this country, that much is apparant from reading many of these posts.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:30 PM, MaineExpatriat wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I work and have a large portion of my insurance paid for by my employer... that is the only reason I can afford it. If I were to lose my job or try to start my own business I could not afford health insurance and that's a very scary scenario. When I was a kid people could afford to not have insurance. When my sister was born my parents paid for the entire 9 months and birth out of their pockets. We were poor and it did take years to pay it off but we did it. Today that would not be possible, the hospital costs alone would bankrupt a family and the care the mother received would be substandard - to say the least. We need a government plan. It doesn't have to be an all encompassing plan but a backup to the system we already have, if for no other reason than to bring our overpriced system out of the stratosphere. Today 1 out of every 6 Americans can't afford health insurance and the numbers are increasing, while health costs increase to. Something needs to be changed and I don't hear any ideas other than NO. That is not an idea.

and those of you making the moronic statement of "there'll be a beauracrat between myself and my doctor".. well guess what, right now there's a greedy insurance creep between you and your doctor.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:45 PM, chersully2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

MaineExpatriat: Re 6:30 PM Excellent comments. Yes, just saying "no" just is not going to work anymore. Much study and analysis is being put into this healthcare reform (as it should be) to try and come up with the best plan that is workable. Maybe something that takes some of what they have in England, for example, but combine that with some kind of non government component. This can be done; it just takes intelligence and some new ideas. I have hope and confidence that this may happen.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:57 PM, chersully2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Brittanicus: Wow....great post. Thanks for sharing that. So sorry to hear what happened to your step-daughter. No country has a perfect healthcare system but I think if our President and others working on the healthcare reform can come up with a plan that combines the best points of, say a European plan, with something else (there are different ideas being considered), it would be a vast improvement over what we currently have which is not working for most !

Also, I like what you wrote about it being about the People and their input (and not just the business entities,etc). I recently wrote my experiences with healthcare on a website that the President's staff,etc. reads and gives some to him to read. I was called in response to my email and was asked for my permission to "publish" it on other websites,etc. I said, "yes, by all means." I thought this was so great that they would reach out to the "common everyday folk" such as myself.

I have hope and confidence in improved healthcare and hopefully before very long.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 8:59 PM, JMill85 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

"This week, Snowe described activity in the Finance Committee room as “hectic” as members grapple with the complexity and interconnectedness of the U.S. health care system." What they are facing is the fact that CENTRAL PLANNING is difficult, inefficient and generally fails.

I don't like a creepy insurance goon between me and my doctor...but then again, i don't like a creepy federal goverment goon in between either.

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 9:21 PM, GeraldWeinand wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Olympia Snowe has received nearly one million dollars in campaign donations from the health care industry since she has become a senator - nearly 10% of all contributions she has received.

Whom do you think she is thinking about when she weighs calls for a public option?

Report abuse
On 6/27/09 at 9:27 PM, GeraldWeinand wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

changeneeded:

When your house is on fire, to you call your private fire insurance provider to see if you are covered, or the local fire department? Likewise, when you need a policeman to help diffuse a situation, is it the private public safety insurance company you call to see if your policy covers noisy neighbors a burglary?

No, you call your government.

If you want to read how for-profit health insurance companies have been deliberately underpaying their customers, read this:

http://tiny.cc/D6Q2p

And then remember that our government used to provide better oversight and regulation of this industry, until certain ideologues were elected.

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 7:32 AM, safedman wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

LOL!!

A typical lib,

All flash no common sense

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 10:11 AM, fromaweigh wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

A little bit of history is needed to explain how our health care system got so screwed up in the first place. Remember 25 years ago, when people had what was called "hospitalization?" This insurance did not pay for anything unless you were hospitalized, or had procedures performed in an outpatient center. You had a deductible, and a co-insurance payment of usually 20%. Along came HMO's and their promise to give better coverage for less money. My first HMO had a doctor copay of $10 and $15 for specialists. Prescriptions were $5 for generic and $10 for brand name. The HMO's were able to do this by beating the providers in the head and negotiating low prices and promising high volume. People abused the HMO system. If they sniffled they went to the doc, if they had a pain, they went to the doc and so on. Since HMO stood for Health Maintenance Organization, you were encouraged to use the plan. People's responsibility for their own health was turned over to a be all insurance company. Then came the decade of law suits. Since people were going to the docs all the time, the sheer volume of patients, more mistakes were made. Docs were encouraged to treat huge numbers of patients everyday.

People who didn't have insurance were guaranteed treatment in hospitals by law. I agree with this up to a point. Now our ER's are full of people who choose to freeload off the system and show up at the ER when their condition merited a doctors office visit. The hospitals tack on this cost to everyone who has insurance, or is self pay. I had a life threatening illness 3 years ago. My hospital bill was $144K. My insurance company paid $20K. The hospital settled for that amount. So, hospitals are hugely over billing the insurance companies to take care of the non-insured.

To a degree, we already have national health care. It's called Medicare, and Medicaid. The government has entered into a contract to pay providers a fee for service, just like the HMO's do. Right now, I am paying for insurance twice. I am paying for my own insurance, and from my taxes, and insurance for the old and indigent. Granted, I would prefer to keep all my money, but the elderly and truly indigent need help. The problem comes when we have a large number of people who could pay for insurance, but don't, because beer and cigarette money are a higher priority. I have serious issues with these people. I don't want my hard earned money going for these people's insurance.

Now the problem is, how do we get those people to pay at least some of the cost of their care. That is the issue that has brought about the possibility of National Health Care. How do we get those who can, but won't to pay for their health care. It's called the nuclear flyswatter. You see a fly on the wall, and instead of using a flyswatter, you nuke the whole area. Healtcare does not need a makeover, it needs to be tweaked. Congress has the nukes warmed up in the silo, and are going to fire it at health care. We need to eliminate the Earned Income Credit from a tax laws. Whoever heard of giving a tax refund to someone who didn't pay taxes. We need to establish a 2nd tier of income tax that gives tax credits to those who have insurance, and we need to impose a flat tax on those who choose not to purchase insurance. Is this a popular idea, NO. Is it practical, you bet. You have to make people who are getting something for free, pay at least something toward the services that they use. I am for an excise tax of 100% on cigarettes and alcohol. I would welcome a method by which tax refunds are kept by the government if an individual uses the system and has no health insurance. We have to start making everyone pony up for health care. National health care, as it is proposed is not good. I would even favor lowering the age of medicare eligibility to 55 and a tax increase rather than nationalize health care totally. Once we head down the National health care highway, there will be no u-turns. Sorry to be so long-winded, but this is not a simple topic to discuss. Imagine, our politicians are voting on this, I wonder if any of them have the sense to understand the ramifications? I doubt it.

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 12:59 PM, jenkinsl wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Let's make this real simple. Whatever our congress comes up with for health care plans, they have to have the same plan themselves. That won't happen, but it should. No, they are so much better than the rest of us, they get the gold plan for themselves. What a bucnch of hipocrites.

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 1:15 PM, chersully2000 wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

fromaweigh: From reading your post, I am thinking you might be in favor of the healthcare system in Massachusetts now? Everyone must have healthcare, and those that are able to pay for some of their healthcare (adequate income,etc.) are required to.

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 1:20 PM, JWBooth wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

Under the government plan, how much money will I have to give, to which politician, to get the chemotherapy my 80-year old mother needs approved by the 'government health care deciders'.

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 6:02 PM, DTOMAnytown wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

If you would like to help STOP the Government from forcing single payer health care down your throat, go to the following links :

http://freeourhealthcarenow.com/

http://stopuniversalhealthcare.org/

Report abuse
On 6/28/09 at 8:25 PM, Joshua wrote:         Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I really think that a majority of the people in this country are on board with single payer...I think its just a few loons that are being so vocal about this, parroting talking points from conservative talk radio and all that....What really get me is the idea that the government is going to be "deciding" what gets paid...If a doctor recommends something, it will be paid, that's the whole point, and the reason that a recent study (by a research group owned by UHS, no less) that predicted that 140 million Americans would VOLUNTARILY switch to the government plan being floated in Congress. Of course, the right-wing talkshow hosts and insurance companies have turned this into 140 Americans "losing" their current health insurance, so those of you who don't look anywhere else for your information probably don't realize this.

It is the insurance companies who have a reason, and a tendency, to decide who gets what, and the decision is more often than not denial of care. That is how insurance companies turn a profit, and they have armies of people to make those decisions. Those who are best at denying care can make huge sums of money, sometimes even into six digits. These huge bonuses only increase the number of instances in which the insurance companies must deny care to turn a profit. In a government-run single payer system, this entire field is essentially eliminated (which is by far the largest proportion of those employed in the health insurance industry).

Report abuse
You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.