The public option is gaining steam in the Senate. Chuck Schumer became the 17th Senator to sign a letter asking Harry Reid for a reconciliation vote on the public option -- a letter that Chris Dodd has yet to sign:
Schumer just fired off an email to supporters in which he announced that he's added his name to the letter, which was initially spearheaded by Senator Michael Bennet and three other Senators. He wrote:
I just added my name to their effort to pass a public option through the reconciliation process, and I wanted you to be the first to know.
This is far from a done deal, but it's an opportunity to break through the obstructionism Republicans have pushed for the past year.
Not sure if Senator Dodd is waiting for an invitation to sign, but his name belongs on that letter too. A bunch of progressive groups (including CREDO) are doing a whip count. Click here if you want to join the effort and help get Dodd on the dotted line.
UPDATE: More Senators are on board (but not Dodd). Chris Bowers of OpenLeft has an updated whip count here.
There is a lot of talk about the recent special election in Massachusetts being a referendum on health care reform. It was not. In fact, Massachusetts has already moved comprehensive reform and 98% of Massachusetts residents have health insurance as a result. It was a referendum on a particular candidate in a climate in which people, hard pressed and frustrated by the economy, are impatient for change.
And nothing has changed.
People still need quality, affordable health care. Our friends and loved ones are still being denied care for pre-existing conditions. We still need to address the health care crisis, and cannot continue to allow medical expenses to bankrupt our country's families and businesses.
It's time to finish reform right. There are two things you can do right now to help:
An estimated crowd of 475 files out of Stamford High School to hold a candle light vigil outside of Sen. Joseph Lieberman's Strawberry Hill Ave. apartment building in Stamford, Conn. on Sunday, Nov. 15, 2009 urging to withdraw his opposition to the public option in the health care reform bill. The event was held by the Interfaith Fellowship for Universal Health Care. Photo: Chris Preovolos / Stamford Advocate
This has to send a potent message to Lieberman. The symbolism is simply stunning. Rabbis protesting outside Joe Lieberman's home in Stamford? Dan Malloy? Who thought they'd ever see this happening?
STAMFORD -- Quietly holding candles, hundreds of clergymen, congregants and reform advocates lined the sidewalks outside Independent U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman's Stamford home Sunday night in a show of support for universal health care.
"When we heard not only would he vote against it, but he'd use his power, his position as a swing vote ... to block it from coming to a vote, we had to send a message so he knows people who vote overwhelmingly favor the public option," said Rabbi Stephen Fuchs, of Congregation Beth Israel in West Hartford.
...
The vigil began at Stamford High School, Lieberman's alma mater, and ended at the senator's home, the Hayes House, across the street.
"In some sense, it's poetic," said Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, who attended the vigil. "The place where Sen. Joseph Lieberman received his high school education, the place he visited upon his announcement to seek the vice presidency, a place where his run for the presidency began -- and it just so happens, a place across the street from where he lives."
The following Resolution was approved and adopted unanimously by the Wilton Democratic Town Committee:
Resolution Urging Senator Joseph Lieberman to Drop Filibuster Threat
and Support U.S. Senate Vote on Health Care Reform with Public Insurance Plan Option
WHEREAS Senator Joseph Lieberman has threatened to filibuster health reform legislation in the United States Senate, and to block a vote on a bill including a public insurance plan option
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), one of a handful of Senate wild cards in this fall's healthcare reform debate, says his concern about the Senate bill is based on the national deficit - not the insurers that dominate his state.
....
"Insurers aren't my biggest concern - I sued them once when I was attorney general, and I'm not afraid to end anti-trust exemptions," Lieberman said. "I am really worried about what this could do to the deficit.
...
One unlikely ally of Lieberman's is state GOP Chairman Chris Healy, who said he agrees with the senator's skepticism about the bill and that he sees few faults in Lieberman's support for home-state interests.
"What we have a lot of here in Connecticut is people in the pharmaceutical industry, biotech and physicians," Healy said. "They're the ones who can figure this out, not the government. Joe Lieberman, even though he's very liberal sometimes, understands that.
"I don't think the industry is going to have their feelings hurt if he's not waving pom-poms. They just don't want Congress to nationalize the management of risk. While I criticize him a lot, to me he's making the most sense out of all the Democrats on this."
Standing alongside Vice President Joe Biden and 4th District Congressman Jim Himes (D-CT), Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) yesterday told a crowd of more than 400 supporters and guests how crucial the recovery program and health care reform are to the economy, then added emphatically: "We are going to get the public option" and received an extended, cheering ovation.
I can tell you because I was there.
The occasion was an event, featuring the Vice President, chosen to highlight transportation infrastructure investments flowing from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, at a site adjacent to a reconstruction project on Connecticut's Merritt Parkway near Exit 46 in Fairfield.
Dodd's remarks came as he and other Senate leaders prepare for expected health care bill merger sessions. That is assuming that the bill passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee -- which has a public option -- is to be merged with one yet-to-be-passed by the Finance Committee -- which does not. A vote in the Finance Committee has reportedly been delayed again.
Sorry for the shortness of this diary. I'm doing it at work. Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake has been doing incredible work trying to keep progressive members in Congress from buckling under and giving up on the public option. With Max Baucus' release of his "plan"--worse than worthless--she has sent out an email urging folks to call their Reps and "ask them to oppose any health care plan without a strong public option."
Regressive Senator Joe Lieberman sat down last week with the Connecticut Post for a long interview and online question session. Among the first questions was about his supposed change in support for a public option from 2004 when he ran an ill-fated campaign for President. Liberman explained that his proposal then was nothing like what is being proposed by others now. And that is true. It's certainly easier to call your plan something it isn't when you're running for the highest office in the land.
Lieberman was also mocked for his support of the Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation which will end up costing taxpayers north of a trillion dollars (more in real dollars than the Vietnam war, inflation adjusted) yet won't support meaningful health care reform. You can watch the full length video at the CT Post site. Apparently that was Donald Rumsfeld's fault...
STAMFORD -- U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman made it clear Wednesday that he would not vote for a health care bill that included a government-run option, but said that without it, he and most of Congress would support comprehensive health care reform.
Discussion on health care dominated an informal question-and-answer session with the fourth-term Connecticut senator, who spoke to the editors of The Advocate and Connecticut Post and answered e-mailed questions from readers.
If the public option "is off the table, we have the opportunity to achieve significant reform with bipartisan support," Lieberman said during the nearly two-hour meeting Wednesday afternoon.
Passing health care reform will save you money. Not passing it will save millionaires money. Will your Representative choose the millionaires or you?
The health care reform bill being voted on in the House this week will save you an average of $2,800 per year.1 That bill says those who make more than a quarter of a million dollars a year should help pay for reform by rolling back Bush's tax cuts by just 1%.2
If you would rather call, please use our toll-free number 1-877-264-HCAN or click here. One of the excuses that some Members of Congress use is that this bill raises taxes on small business. They couldn't be more wrong.
According to the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxes, 96% of small businesses will have access to more affordable health care under the House bill.3
That's why small business owners all across America are supporting this bill.
Please use our toll-free number 1-877-264-HCAN or click here to call Congress today. This bill guarantees us quality, affordable health care. It will cover the uninsured and lower the costs for those of us who have insurance. Let's pass this bill, so we can all have quality, affordable health care.
To your health,
Tom Swan, CCAG Executive Director and John Olsen, CT State AFL-CIO President
Health Care for America Now -- Connecticut Co-Chairs
As you may have suspected, the Medicare-style public option that you thought you were fighting for isn't the same "public option" that's coming out of committees in the Senate and the House. Not even close.
In a must-read diary at the Physicians for a National Health Program blog, Kip Sullivan describes how Congressional Democrats, and even some progressive groups, are using a classic bait-and-switch to redefine the public option and sell us a useless watered-down version:
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the "public option" proposed in the House "tri-committee" bill might insure 10 million people and would leave 16 to 17 million people uninsured. The "public option" proposed by the Senate HELP committee, again according to the Congressional Budget Office, is unlikely to insure anyone and would hence leave 33 to 34 million uninsured. The CBO said its estimate of 10 million for the House bill was highly uncertain, which is not surprising given how vaguely the House legislation describes the "public option." [...]
Obviously the "public option" in the Senate HELP committee bill (zero enrollees; 34 million people left uninsured) and the "public option" in the House bill (10 million enrollees (maybe!); 17 million people left uninsured) are a far cry from the "public option" originally proposed by Professor Hacker (129 million enrollees; 2 million people left uninsured).
Go read Sullivan's diary to understand how the original public option is nothing like what's coming out of Congress, including the one drafted by the Senate HELP Committee.
I sat in on Congressman Himes' "telephone town hall" tonight, and took notes. For those who weren't able to participate, I'll try to reconstruct it to the best of my ability. I missed bits here and there but I think I got most of it. I haven't included any of my opinions, just what I took down.
The Congressman began by saying that health care reform was important to him. He said the current system is not sustainable. Costs rising 10% to 12% per year put great burdens on the government. He claimed that most of the auto industry's problems were caused by the costs of medical care for retirees and employees.
He feels that it is morally problematic that 50 million Americans don't have health insurance. Those without insurance treat at emergency rooms which is expensive and the cost of which is picked up by taxpayers and private insurance companies. This ends up being a "tax" of roughly $1100.00 per family.
The House bill will allow people with employer-provided insurance to keep it. It calls for an insurance "exchange," open to all. Private insurers will no longer be able to turn away those with pre-existing conditions. The bill includes Government subsidies to help pay for insurance for those making up to 400% of the Federal poverty level. Everyone would be required to buy insurance, either private or public. [and he said something I didn't catch regarding 2.5% of adjusted gross income.]
Himes' concern is that the bill doesn't address the inefficiencies in the current health care system. There are not adequate cost control mechanisms to control waste and fraud. He is delighted that Congress is taking on health care reform and gratified it wants to provide health care for all. He is gratified that the bill seeks to alter private insurance companies' behaviors re: recision and pre-existing conditions.
He is disturbed that not enough is done to address the underlying inefficiencies in the system. The current system operates on a "fee for service" model, which lends itself to ordering unnecessary services to clients. He wants to move to a system that rewards good results instead. Health care providers should have a stake in good health rather than in making money by ordering unnecessary tests and services. If Congress was serious about health care reform, they'd contain costs by doing away with inefficiencies and wouldn't be taxing the rich to pay for it. He sees the tax code returning to 1990s levels. We are faced with big economic problems and can't just go to the highest earners -- can't do that every time we have a deficit.
He thinks what is going on now is the "start of the discussion" and hopes there are more than three weeks more in the process. He hopes Congress takes more time.
Then he took questions:
Someone from Westport had fears about the impact of the bill on small business and asked what the impact of the bill would be on a business with ten employees.
Himes said employers would be required to provide insurance to employees or pay a penalty. He has discomfort with a penalty [and/or the word "penalty"]. He clarified that businesses with an annual payroll below $250k would be exempt from the penalty. Businesses with payrolls between $250k - $400k would pay a graduated penalty between 4% and 6%. Those make up 4% of all businesses. He said he had signed a letter to the speaker regarding the effect of the bill on small businesses.
Bill from New Canaan, who is dependent on his employer-provided health insurance expressed concern about being taxed on his insurance benefits.
Himes said the bill as written includes no tax on insurance benefits, and that it was not under consideration. He pointed out that taxing health insurance benefits was John McCain's idea during the Presidential campaign, and that Obama opposed it. He said some economists believe there should be a tax on the benefits as a way of covering some of the cost of the reform. He doesn't disagree with that.
Sarah from Oxford said she heard people would be forced to sign up for the public plan if they lost their insurance.
Himes explained that if people lose their jobs/insurance, they are eligible for the exchange, in which private companies compete with the public option. You choose. The idea is that the competition from the public option will lower the price offered by the private insurers. The bill includes affordability credits to help those who have lost their jobs.
Then there was a survey for the participants: "How should we pay for health care reform?" Options were 1) Do nothing (no reform); 2) Tax insurance benefits; 3) Increase taxes on high wage earners and; 4) Eliminate costs in the system.
Caller Maria from Fairfield was worried about "the insurance industry going national" like Great Britain.
Himes said this is a completely different system from nationalized health care -- a uniquely American system that includes choice, because Americans love choice.
[I missed a bit on the concern about companies turning employees loose in a private v. public system.]
Nils from New Canaan cited page 16 of the bill concerning whether people can go outside the exchange if they want to change insurance coverage. Will private plans be allowed? Himes said private plans in existence would be grandfathered, and private plans would have a five year grace period to meet the minimum standards contained in the bill. There would be no restrictions on buying additional coverage, or "gold plated" plans.
Barbara from Monroe brought up Medicare and was concerned about the parceling of services and cut backs on treatment. She asked if there was a possibility that Medicare will pay for more preventive care under reform.
Himes said the good news was that the "donut hole" now in effect in Medicare is closed in the bill. The bill also eliminates the cost-share for preventive care. The bad news is that Medicare is currently economically unsustainable. Medicare currently reimburses for everything a doctor orders. He thinks that at some point judgements will need to be taken. Patients go to MD.com and then ask their doctors for 20 tests. The doctors, who get paid for doing the tests in the current fee-for-service system, just order them whether they're necessary or not. He said treatment must be evidence-based. Barbara asked who would be making the decisions/treatment plans and Himes discussed the HMO model [I missed bits of that] He said there is a need to change your discussion with your doctor so the treatment you get is not volume-based -- that you get the two tests you need and not the 18 you don't.
Cindy from Darien is concerned about paying for programs. She thinks providing insurance for everyone is good for the country but how do we address people who aren't supporting taxes. She is afraid illegals -- the "underworld" -- will benefit from the proposed reforms. Himes made it clear that the bill contains no coverage for undocumented aliens. He pointed out that leaves 12 million people without insurance under this plan. Right now the system is paying for them and there will be no change in that. They will go to emergency rooms with big problems and hospitals will continue to have unreimbursible costs from treating them. Humanity requires you to treat people who show up. We need a comprehensive immigration policy and secure borders.
Lily in Stamford asked about increases in private insurance premiums, with Anthem asking for a 30% increase; it will be a good plan if the bill brings down private insurance costs.
Himes said he is not satisfied with the cost containment provisions in the bill. He mentioned that the bill will cap overhead expenses for private firms in the exchange at 15%.
Rick from Monroe talked about the CBO director's comment that the bill would expand federal costs and drive the economy into the ground. He is concerned about imposing penalties on small business.
Himes agreed that could be bad if done wrong. He said again that the bill doesn't do enough towards cutting fundamental costs. He has not made peace that it doesn't cut fundamental costs and encourage healthy lifestyles. It doesn't encourage new doctors and nurses who will practice health-based medicine rather than specialize because that's where the money is. He can see voting against the bill if it is not done right. The US is paying twice what the rest of the world does on health care and isn't high on the list for quality care.
Another survey: "What type of reform do you want?" 6) No change (no reform); 7) Single payer; 8) hybrid as in the current bill; 9) hybrid with no public option.
Rick in Westport expressed concern about the speed with which this bill is being acted upon. There are contradictions in the plan. Medicare is full of waste and fraud and no one has ever dealt with it. It will be pushed through, like the stimulus and like cap and trade. Congress is hiding something.
Himes said Congress isn't trying to hide anything. He thinks more time should be taken. Getting the bill done fast is due to concerns that are political -- he said the President and Speaker think that health care reform will die a death by a thousand cuts if things go slower. Himes said it was necessary to act quickly on the stimulus because we were losing 20,000 jobs a day. He said the energy issue had been talked about for a long time. [missed a bit here] He said there have been 80 hearings on health care [missed some here]. He said he did not say Medicare's problems are caused by waste and fraud. Seniors love Medicare. Medicare says yes to everything. It runs more efficiently than private plans do.
Howard, who works in the medical field, wants to know how private plans can compete with a public option.
Himes said the private plans will be capitalized up front and that money is repayable. They will be asked to provide a "plain vanilla plan" which will compete with the public option. He said costs can be cut by the private sector -- Medicare functions more efficiently, has no advertising costs, no high executive salaries...
Jackie from Westport brought up the issue of pre-existing conditions.
Himes said those in the exchange are forbidden to reject people based on pre-exisiting conditions. right thing to do. It is expensive to filter people out. Talked about buying his own insurance and the company sent someone to his house to question his wife and him -- asked if they were going to have more children. Would have rejected them if they were. It's expensive to do that to reject people. No recision allowed in exchange. Morally wrong.
Gene in Monroe said he realized Himes' caution about due diligence, but said there was danger in procrastination. He asked if small businesses can buy into the public program for employees.
Yes, they can participate in the exchange. Companies with 10-25 employees will get a tax credit of 50% of the cost. Businesses can also get together and buy in to plans as a group.
That was the end of the questions.
Himes has a health care blog on his website now. Call his offices in Bridgeport and Stamford with questions and comments.
On June 25th, thousands of activists came to Washington, DC to tell Congress that health care can't wait. On July 4th, while Members of Congress were back at home celebrating the holiday, thousands more across the country declared independence from the insurance industry.
This week the Senate HELP Committee, under the leadership of Senator Chris Dodd, is marking up a draft of health care reform legislation that includes a public option.
Can you call Senator Dodd to thank him for including a strong public option in the draft legislation and to ensure that it passes out of committee? Click here, or dial 1-888-436-8427 to be connected to Sen. Dodd's Washington D.C. office.
We are at a really important stage of the process with the Senate HELP committee finalizing their proposed legislation. Senator Dodd needs to hear from you to make sure this legislation provides:
Coverage we can afford;
Comprehensive benefits we can count on;
Choice of a private plan or a national public health insurance plan ready on day one; and
Equal access to quality care.
We are closing in - Members of Congress in both the House and the Senate are working to champion these goals. Call today to thank Sen. Dodd for standing with us and tell him we are counting on him to pass a bill consistent with these goals out of the HELP Committee!
Click here or dial 1-888-436-8427 to call Sen. Dodd at his Washington D.C. office.
You are the real champions of the health care debate, and we are getting close to the finish line. Keep up the good work.
Thanks for making the call today,
John Murphy CCAG Political Director
Disclosure: I am the Online Organizer for Connecticut Citizen Action Group (CCAG)
For years, candidates for, and members of, Congress told us that we needed to elect and re-elect them in order to lower health care costs and provide universal coverage. And so, for years, we dutifully worked our collective asses off, delivering wide majorities for Democrats--who said they would lower health care costs and provide universal coverage--in both branches of Congress.
Now, when it comes time for them to deliver on health care by providing a public option--the bare minimum required to reduce costs and provide universal coverage--what we are getting instead are backroom deals, flip-flops, and cop-outs.
We know what time it is. We have waited long enough. Now is the time for quality, affordable health care we can all count on.
The insurance industry knows what time it is too. So in pursuit of real health care reform, we find ourselves wading into muddy waters. Insurance companies--the opponents of real reform--have gone to great lengths to dress up their counter-proposals to appear beneficial to the health of the American people rather than to the health of corporate bottom lines. They say they want reform, and create "grassroots" organizations to push for it, but what they really want are profit protections.
This makes Lieberman the only member of Connecticut's Congressional Delegation who does not support the public option. More than anybody else, Joe Lieberman needs to hear from his constituents. Send him an e-mail asking him to explain his opposition to the public option to you himself.
The Senate is poised to be--in the words of Chris Bowers--"the biggest hurdle on health care." We need to find out where our Senators stand on the public option now, so that we know who to thank, and who to persuade. In the extended text, you can see all of the tools for contacting your Senators.
We've been talking about it for a few weeks now, and it is finally here. Congress is meeting now to work out a final version of the Budget and they will decide whether to include funding for Health Care Reform. As you know, this is a very important first step in passing legislation that creates quality, affordable health care for all.
Can you make one more call to Congress? We have come this far-don't stop now!
Let Congress know that you want quality, affordable health care that you can count on, and ask your representatives Congress to support the budget that includes health care reform in 2009.
A budget that includes funding for health care is necessary to win real health care reform this year.
Do you want to call, but need an idea of how to voice your support? Here is a sample script to inspire you:
Hi my name is [Your Name] and I want quality, affordable health care that I can count on, and that everyone in America can count on too.
Please tell [Name of Congressperson] to continue supporting a budget that includes health care reform in 2009 and not to allow a Congressional minority to block it.
Two Democratic sources say that White House is considering Rep. Rosa DeLauro for the now-vacated Health and Human Services Dept. nomination. DeLauro has the health care chops; she knows the issues cold. She is personally close to the two men who will lead healthcare through the Senate, Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. Chris Dodd, for whom she served as chief of staff at one point. Oh, and the chief of staff to President Obama lives in her basement.
This is the question at the center of a blog post by Health Care for America Now campaign director Richard Hirsch that's making the rounds at DailyKos, the Huffington Post, and of course, the HCAN! blog. The answer, essentially, is that single-payer is but one way to reform the health care system so that it complies with the HCAN! statement of common purpose, and that although single-payer may be the simplest or best solution (depending upon one's opinion) we are more likely to succeed if we are open to solutions that are consistent with our principles that may more closely resemble our current system. Flawed and broken though it is, completely removing and replacing it with a single-payer system is not the only way to ensure that our goal of securing quality, affordable health care for every one is achieved.
In his post, Hirsch elaborates on why the HCAN! Campaign is not advocating single-payer to the exclusion of all other possibilities:
One point of this approach was not to scare people away from reform or to make it easier for the opponents of reform to panic the public. I realized we could reassure people about change by building on what people are familiar with - both private insurance and Medicare's public insurance plan.
A lot of what I wrote at the time also had to do with the need to reaffirm the positive role of government in America. To do that, we need to demonstrate that government can better people's lives in real ways. Even though it might make us feel good, stating our ideological position in the hope that people will eventually come around is not effective. We need to win real changes that show government can work in positive ways.
Our goal is to have the United States provide a guarantee of good, affordable health coverage to all its residents. That's the bottom line. A national health insurance plan (single-payer) is one way to accomplish the goal, but it's not the only way. In fact, one of the myths about health care around the world is that "everyone but us has single-payer." In fact, single-payer is the way Canadians provide a government guarantee of good health coverage. Other countries - including the European countries usually held up as models - do it differently, with all sorts of variations of public, private, and non-profit insurance and socialized medicine. But what's true in all these countries is that health care is guaranteed and regulated as a public good.
MLN is powered by