The Clintons vs. The Health Insurance Industry II: The Battle Is On

[McCamy Taylor]

Everyone remembers The Clintons vs. The Health Care Industry Round 1, correct? I know that the health insurance industry will never forget this part.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page2.html

"November 1, 1993 - Hillary Clinton launches a scathing attack against the insurance industry to counter the highly damaging "Harry and Louise" ads. She accuses the industry of greed and deliberately lying about the reform plan in order to protect its profits. She specifically denounces the ads' claim that the Clinton plan "limits choice." Rarely, if ever, has a First Lady publicly attacked any American industry or industry group -- and certainly never in such strong language and in such a furious manner. Her assault makes front-page newspaper stories, network TV news shows, and calls more attention to HIAA's role and message."

And let's not forget that the GOP feared what would happen if the Democratic Party was ever allowed to fix the nation's health insurance crisis. "December 2, 1993 - Leading conservative operative William Kristol privately circulates a strategy document to Republicans in Congress. Kristol writes that congressional Republicans should work to "kill" -- not amend -- the Clinton plan because it presents a real danger to the Republican future: Its passage will give the Democrats a lock on the crucial middle-class vote and revive the reputation of the party."

So, an unprecendented amount of money and effort were spent killing the healthcare reform that almost half of America wanted. Then, the GOP got control of Congress and they have held on. Finally, Bush stole the White House. That means that for the last 12 years, the health insurance industry has been able to breathe easy in America, a land where health care makes up over 10% of the GNP . To get a sweet slice of that pie, all the health insurance industry has to do is write policies for people who will never get sick and find ways to disenroll or get out of paying bills for people who do (really sick people, those with diabilities and the elderly are all supposed to be on government insurance).

However, now the woman who denounced them may be heading towards the White House. Along with a Democratic Congress. And this time the majority of Americans and physicians want a single payer insurance program for the nation. So do employers, who can no longer affords the premiums. This time public health experts are recognizing that single payer can eliminate the problem of the working uninsured. It can provide cradle to garve health care that will promote disease prevention that will improve health and longevity, and it will do so at a reduced cost (The US spends twice as much per capita as the next most expensive country, Switz, for health care, and yet we rank at the bottom of first world nations in terms of health indicators, because of lack of prevention and because of the massive number of uninsured). The only people who do not want single payer health plan are the Republicans who are afraid that it will reflect well on the Democrats and help working class people have better, lomger lives. And of course, the health insurance industry, since many of these scam artists will go broke.

I say the battle is on. We know that Tom Kean Sr. lied when he said that The Path to 9/11 accurately reflected the 9/11 Commision Report. What he did not announce to the world but should have since it is a major conflict of interest is that he is associated with United Health as in United Health Care, a scandal plagued insurance company.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2006/09/15/kean/index_np.html

They paid him almost half a million dollars one year. Companies like United Health Care are going to be in serious trouble if the federal government creates a single payer health care system and withholds the "cream" that private insurance companies have been skimming off the top for their own profit to pay hefty CEO salaries and bonuses to people like Kean and contributions to the GOP. That "cream" can go a long way towards paying for health care for the uninsured or for preventive care like vaccines.

Why would Tom Kean Sr. jeopardize his reputation by lending his name to a pack of lies like The Path to 9/11? Did he do it for the GOP? Most Republicans do not feel the need to tell lies to show their loyalty. It isnt as if he had to do something like this to get W. to campaign for his boy. Who would want W. to campaign for them this year. I think maybe he did it for the finacial good of his industry, the health care industry. The short term goal is to keep the Democrats from gaining control of Congress. The long term goal is to villify the Clintons so that Hillary will never be in a position to threaten the health insurance industry again.

For anyone not convinced that the health insurance industry has its eyes on Hillary check out this article from this summer. Hillary is the number two recipient of industry donations. The industry is scared of her and they are trying to win her favor.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/12/news/newsmakers/healthcare_clinton/

The New York Times reports that while there are still some doubts about her in the health-care industry, some in the industry are making contributions in case she is elected president. The newspaper reports that William R. Abrams, the executive vice president of the Medical Society of the State of New York, is one of her fundraisers in the sector, even though he is a Republican.

Frederick H. Graefe, a health-care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, told the Times in a report published Wednesday that, "People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.

"If the usual rules apply," Mr. Graefe said, early donors will "get a seat at the table when health care and other issues are discussed."


Of course, if they can keep her out of the White House, they will. And they will use any means necessary. This is a matter of business life and death for most of these guys.

[Lasher]

1. Clinton's 1993 universal healthcare proposal was not single provider

It included a network of HMOs and was needlessly complicated. If the proposal had been for a Canadian style single provider system we would have universal healthcare in the USA today.

[No Exit]

2. I would rather see her in the senate with democrats as the majority

Then she could write AND WORK TO PASS legislation that would help with the problems you described above. Needless to say, this only works if HER party is in the majority--something we all want.