Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Healthcare--"False Promise of Choice"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:17 AM
Original message
Healthcare--"False Promise of Choice"
False promise of choice
Posted by Don McCanne, MD on Thursday, Jul 16, 2009
This entry is from Dr. McCanne's Quote of the Day, a daily health policy update on the single-payer health care reform movement. The QotD is archived on PNHP's website.

For Many Workers, Insurance Choices May be Limited
By Mary Agnes Carey and Julie Appleby
Kaiser Health News
July 15, 2009

President Obama and leading Democrats have stressed that people who like their employer-sponsored insurance would be able to keep it, under a health care overhaul. But they haven’t emphasized the flip side: That people who don’t like their coverage might have to keep it.

Under the main health bills being debated in Congress, many people with job-based insurance could find it difficult to impossible to switch to health plans on a new insurance exchange, even if the plans there were cheaper or offered better coverage. The restrictions extend to any government-run plan, which would be offered on the exchange.

The provisions could change, and there are a few exceptions: Workers would be allowed to buy insurance through the exchange if their job-based coverage gobbled up too much of their incomes or was too skimpy. Also, under the House proposal, people could get insurance through the exchange if they paid their entire premiums — a cost that would be prohibitive for many workers.

Democratic lawmakers and administration officials say the restrictions are critical to maintaining a strong employer-based insurance system, which covers 158 million Americans.

But critics argue that the rules run counter to suggestions from health care reform advocates that an overhaul could provide people with a broader choice of insurance options. The rules, they say, could be especially unfair to some lower-income workers who are enrolled in costly job-based insurance. Also, they argue, the restrictions would hurt the proposed public plan by limiting enrollment.

Jonathan Oberlander, associate professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said the restrictions create a “big gap between the rhetoric and the reality” of health reform.

“The rhetoric is that Americans will gain new alternatives,” he said. “But the reality is that they are putting up firewalls that are going to restrict the access of people with employer-sponsored insurance to the exchange.”

One result, he said, is that any public plan would be substantially smaller than what many backers are envisioning. That would reduce the public plan’s power to compete with private insurers and hold down costs, he said. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that nine million to 10 million people would enroll in the public plan by 2019.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/July/15/Firewall.aspx

Imagine presidential candidate Barack Obama telling his audiences during the campaign, “We promise you choice. For most of you already receiving your health insurance through your place on employment, we will provide you with the choice of keeping that insurance plan or paying heavy financial penalties for dropping off the plan, no matter how unhappy you are with it. For a select few of you, we will offer the choice of private plans within an insurance exchange, even if you can’t afford them, and maybe even throw in a public plan that a couple of you may be able to purchase, if you meet our rigid enrollment criteria.”

Choice? Over a year ago in a Quote of the Day I discussed the decision to market health reform as a matter of choice - of keeping the plan you have if that’s your choice. The title of that qotd was “Message trumps policy?”

This isn’t an “I told you so.” Er… uh… I guess it is.

If reform is to be effective, it must be based on sound policy science. Instead, it is being based on political messaging. It may sound good, but nothing fits together. What a disaster.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. They have two goals that are hard to reconcile
1. Give everybody necessary health care
2. Protect the Insurance Industry.

Hard to come up with anything viable with those two goals.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
39. I think this bill is good public policy.
Granted, single payer would be cheaper because of uniform paperwork.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coyote_Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. The proposal
currently under consideration will leave millions uninsured - and many without choice. And that public option is certain to be far more costly than a private plan.

Health care reform is my line in the sand. Looks like I'm finallly going to have a real reason to wash my hands of politics. No need to even make the effort to contribute when those who are supposed to respresent my interests don't even pretend to make the effort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChimpersMcSmirkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
44. Millions more will be covered and I don't have any choice as it is.
That's a net win in my book. Even if the only thing to come out this(which it won't)is increased coverage then I'm for it, simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
3. Kaiser Health News? Is this related to the healthcare-industrial complex giant Kaiser-Permanente?
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 08:27 AM by marmar
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. As I've said before, there are people here who are buying into the Insurance Industry propaganda
and there are people here promoting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. That was my fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. I'm certainly NOT buying into insurance corp propaganda. I
think we need to know what's actually being proposed in Congress, and determine if that's what we want/need/can afford. Know what you are getting and NOT getting!

This piece was quoted by PNHP. Single payer proponents.

Gees!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. info--
I searched on 'Kaiser Health News' and found this--

"Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a nonprofit news organization committed to in-depth coverage of health care policy and politics. KHN is a major program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-profit private operating foundation, based in Menlo Park, Calif., dedicated to producing and communicating the best possible analysis and information on health issues.

KHN’s mission is to provide high-quality coverage of health policy issues and developments at the federal and state levels. In addition, KHN covers trends in the delivery of health care and in the marketplace. Among our goals: provide new opportunities for health care journalists to produce in-depth work and a new vehicle to distribute it through collaborations with major news organizations and on this Web site. This Web site also features daily summaries of major health care news from across the nation, as well as original videos and a broad range of commentary from contributing writers and experts. "


It seems to be part of the big Kaiser in CA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. No ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Family_Foundation

"...The Foundation was established in 1948 by Henry J. Kaiser. In 1977, ten years after Kaiser's death, his conglomerate of disparate organizations split apart. The Kaiser Family Foundation was initially a major owner of these shares, at the time of dissolution, the Foundation owned 32 percent according to Fortune Magazine.<2>

By 1985, the foundation no longer had an ownership stake in Kaiser's old companies, and therefore is no longer associated with Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser Industries...."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
7. Insurance Company PROPAGANDA. Epic FAIL!!!
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I don't think it's insurance propaganda.
I am asking people to use their critical thinking skills though...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. It reads like veiled propaganda by an organization determined to pull the plug on any public plan...
Sorry, but Kaiser isn't an uninterested party in this fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
11. Large Insurance company hype, imho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. huh? so why would PNHP have quoted the article?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Did you ever stop to think that a Single-Payer-Only organization may want to undermine a Non-SP bill
Obama and the current legislation is not Single Payer, though it is a first step in that direction.

PNHP is Single-Payer only and they would rather see the current legislation defeated, so they'll side with those who are not *for* single-payer if they say something they like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. oh gees, the paranoia runs so high... seeing enemies everywhere? instead of reading
Congress' proposals very carefully.

Do you have anything substantive to counter what the article says about who gets to enroll and NOT enroll in these proposals?

Most single payer advocates would support a truly public option as a second choice.

Do some research, and then let's talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. You are the one quoting propaganda in support of your argument.
You haven't provided *any facts*. If you are making a statement, you need to provide supportive evidence that doesn't come from a biased source. That's your burden, not the one pointing out your source is bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. "propaganda"? LOL. I see there isn't much in the way of critical analysis
happening. Do some more research and then get back to me and we'll talk. It's silly for me to attempt a conversation with people who are name-callers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Excellent point! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #13
30. Perhaps a non-single payer plan with a public option that is so weak
as to continue to entrap the workers in costly insurance with no recourse SHOULD be undermined.

The plan as is, without a STRONG and readily available public option, is worse than what we have now. It mandates people buy insurance when they can't afford it; it disallows people moving to the public plan if their employers offer insurance - ANY insurance at ANY cost - and does nothing to guarantee that the insurance will pay. People will still be denied, and everybody with pre-existing conditions will be moved to the public option which will drive UP the costs of that public option, guaranteeing its eventual demise.

Or so I understand it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. Even if this were true, the proposals for public option are being changed/tweaked probably on a ...
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 09:59 AM by kjackson227
daily basis, so nothing is concrete as of yet. Also, even if this were true, why would I opt out of my employer's group insurance plan anyway??? Our employees (me included) receive group insurance with very minimal cost (under $100 per month) with benefits that are comparable to the public option. If there comes a time that public option is better and/or cheaper than this company's group insurance, then I'm sure the employer will switch to the public option. No big deal. If anyone's spreading fear, it's Kaiser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. It's greater than yourself. Nice that you like your insurance. There
are many who have very high deductibles and high co-pays, and pre-existing condition clauses etc. that would LOVE to get out of those kinds of plans.

Yes, it's changing day by day. Hope the proposals improve as a result.

When I looked at the Senate's HELP plan, the ONLY folks who could enroll were those withour insurance, and the costs, even if with any subsidy, were prohibitive.

My point is--instead of making knee-jerk reactions and comments, read, think, critique!

Gees folks, remember how to write a critical piece? You use all information, not just that which supports your initial thesis. Sometimes the information comes from unlikely sources. Keep an open mind. I think that's a definition of "education".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Well, just like you posted your "initial thesis", I posted mine...
and while I know it's not all about me, it's not all about you either. Okay, you read the Senate's HELP plan, this is one out of what three proposals? Yes, it is very important to read, think, critique, and I would add "UNDERSTAND".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. FYI, I read a lot, most of the proposals.
We are probably on the same side. Please stop the personal attacks. It weakens your points.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. You are the one with the personal attacks, not me. I couldn't care less if you consider my points..
or not. For some reason you're the one with the burr up your butt, and accused me of caring about no one but myself (your selective memory is showing), but whatever. Have a great day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. That person's M.O. is to project their own behavior onto you and then call you on it.
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 12:02 PM by berni_mccoy
It's very freeper-like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. LOL! There's a whole lotta fear-mongering on the board today...
I can tell President Obama must be making progress with HC... yehhh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Ugh, sorry, I didn't mean you, I meant the person you were responding to.
And yes, Obama must be doing something good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kjackson227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Yes, I knew who you were referencing. Thanks :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #31
43. my comment wasn't personal. The health care issues
are greater than any one of us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #19
41. Three questions; Have you been seriously ill?
Who is you insurance provider?

How much does your company pay?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
17. YewNork has said it very well.
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 09:28 AM by LiberalAndProud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #17
25. I skimmed it. Have to get ready for work now.
On first blush, it seems to be a different issue, but I'll read it more closely later. Thank you for the added information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. You're right.
It's only marginally related in terms of choice / health insurance.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
20. Kaiser Family Foundation is Not Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser Industries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Family_Foundation

"...The Foundation was established in 1948 by Henry J. Kaiser. In 1977, ten years after Kaiser's death, his conglomerate of disparate organizations split apart. The Kaiser Family Foundation was initially a major owner of these shares, at the time of dissolution, the Foundation owned 32 percent according to Fortune Magazine.<2>

By 1985, the foundation no longer had an ownership stake in Kaiser's old companies, and therefore is no longer associated with Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser Industries..."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
21. rec #1 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
23. About PNHP...
http://pnhp.org/about/about_pnhp.php

"Physicians for a National Health Program is a single issue organization advocating a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program. PNHP has more than 16,000 members and chapters across the United States.

Since 1987, we've advocated for reform in the U.S. health care system. We educate physicians and other health professionals about the benefits of a single-payer system--including fewer administrative costs and affording health insurance for the 46 million Americans who have none..."





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
28. Kaiser Family Foundation, PNHP and AHIP...........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #28
37. Also Sourcewatch's page on them confirms the same
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Thanks for adding that link :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
34. Much of America is based on "False Promise of Choice." We deal in illusions.
...er, illusions that amazingly favor the same powerful, vested interests at every turn - - but "conspiracy" is of course NEVER involved! haha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
40. well, so posters learned that Kaiser Health News is not an
insurance front. Interesting.

Any apologies?

How about addressing the content and substance of the original post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. LOL! Seriously? KHN did not like Sicko at all. They have Bill Frist (yes, former RW Senator) on
their board.

You think they are for Healthcare Reform? You are seriously mistaken.

KHN is part of the Kaiser family, the family that brought us to our current place with Healthcare. DID YOU NOT WATCH SICKO? It was Nixon who pushed Kaiser.

I'm sure as hell not going to trust *anything* at face value that comes from an organization founded by the same people with RWers like Frist on the board.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #42
46. so, it's not only Repubs that try to eat their own.
And some wonder at the dysfunction in our Dem party... Dems need to learn how to accept critiques without attempting to kill the messenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChimpersMcSmirkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
45. This thread is a circle jerk of purist fail...
unrecced...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC