American Morning
Sen. Collins hopes to reach a 'yes' on health care reform
The Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday rejected two amendments to include a government-run public health insurance option in the only compromise health care bill so far. It's one of the many road blocks the plan has faced and the White House is trying to get some Republicans on board.
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/09/30/collins.susan.art.jpg caption="Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) says so far she hasn't seen a health care bill that accomplishes what she thinks needs to be done."]
Senator Susan Collins of Maine is one of those Republicans whose support is being sought by the White House. She spoke to John Roberts on CNN’s “American Morning” Wednesday. Below is an edited transcript of the interview.
John Roberts: We were talking off camera. You said you don't recall seeing times like these. There is so much going on.
Susan Collins: There is. I can't remember another time when there were more important issues on the table. You've got the two wars, a major decision coming up in Afghanistan, the health care debate, a faltering economy, the need for financial reform, environmental legislation, the cap-and-trade bill. It's just an enormous array of issues, all of which are extremely important.
Roberts: This morning let's take a narrow slice of all of that and talk about health care reform. Are you going to be able to vote for health care reform, do you think?
Collins: John, I want to vote for a health care bill but so far I haven't seen one that accomplishes what I think needs to be done. And that is to really focus on the cost of health care. It's the cost of health care that's the biggest barrier to the uninsured and causes such a struggle for middle income families and small businesses.
Roberts: So you say cost is the central concern that you have. Proponents of this public option have said that's one really good way to lower costs. You don't like the public option, you don't like this idea that your fellow senator, Olympia Snowe, is proposing about a trigger to a public option. So what do you do?
Collins: There is so much that we could do. For example, we could allow small businesses to band together to boost their purchasing power. We could pass medical liability reform. That would have a direct impact on cost. We could revamp the Medicare reimbursement system so that it focuses on quality rather than quantity. That would help reduce unnecessary tests. We could provide tax credits for small businesses so they could help insure their employees. There is a lot that unites us and I think that's what our focus should be.
Roberts: Now, if you were to adopt all of the measures that you have just outlined there, how much do you think it would reduce in America the number of people who are currently uninsured?
Collins: Well, 82% of the uninsured are in families where someone works. They either work themselves or they work for small businesses that can't afford to provide health insurance, or they are self employed. So that's where I would start. And from my conversations with many small business men and women, I'm convinced that if we gave them a generous tax credit they would provide health insurance for their employees. That would substantially reduce the number of uninsured Americans.
Roberts: I know that you are a very sought after vote there in the Senate, the White House is certainly pitching you hard. Give us some idea – a behind the scenes look at the sales pitches. How hard are they wooing you here?
Collins: Well, I appreciate that the White House has reached out to me. I've had great discussions with the director of office of management and budget, with Nancy-Anne DeParle the White House adviser, with Rahm Emanuel and I hope we can get to “yes.” I would like to see a bipartisan bill that makes a real difference in reforming health care to expand access and to lower costs, without greatly growing the role of the federal government. I don't think that that's what the people are looking for.
About this Show
Welcome to the American Morning blog where you can get daily news updates from American Morning's reporters and producers. Join us for "the most news in the morning," weekdays from 6-9 a.m. ET, only on CNN.
On Twitter
All parties involved in this health care scheme have lobbyists working for them, except the people who are bearing the burden and paying for it all, the taxpayers and common citizens. The whole system is terribly biased against the very people it is supposed to work for. neither govt program works, nor the private insurance for people. it is an unholy axis of evil among the insurance, the hospitals, the drug companies and the govt.
don't buy insurance, and don't get sick in america. go to canada when you must like an illegal immigrant.
Why don't we get rid of insurance companies, take the money paid to them and give it directly to doctors etc. Insurance companies are unnecessary if we have universal insurance. Yes to the public option!
The Democrats, even with this woman's help, are getting their butts handed to them in Congress and in the forum of public opinion. If this bill passes or not, with or without a public option, it's going to make the Dems look bad. You're either taking over our healthcare system, or you failed to take over our healthcare.
Either way, the DEMS lose face, and the prospects for 2010 are looking grim.
And that's without bringing up 9.8% unemployment for goodness sakes.
To David Smyth ... Maybe you don't understand how the American system of Government works. The Republicans do not have enough votes in the House or the Senate to stop the Democrats from passing the single payer option or any other type of reform.
To blame the Republicans is simply wrong. The Democrats do not want to take the responsibility for passing any legislation.
By the way, I am a dual citizen and maintain my contacts back home in Canada. I have seen both systems at work.
To the "Look at history, it doesn't lie" writer and his ilk...somewhat true...but interpretations are various. Look at the PC approach to the Civil War...and VooDoo econ was not 'debunked'...parts of it are being used by this administration...what does not change is you shallow research and deep hatred of anyone who disagrres with you...attack the argument not the speaker...if you had stayed in school, you would have learned that before...
" Two words…Public Option. And why is this not on the table, especially when most everyone I talk with supports it?"
I don't know - because you and all your friends are liberals?
Contrary to what some have said on here: Not all the American people on here want a public option. I certainly don't. We need reform, of that there is no doubt. We need portability, and even non-profit co-op can work well. What we do NOT need to the federal government making health care decisions. Anyway who says they won't is just fooling themselves.
You can through all the rhetoric against Republicans and Democrats aside. It's all garbage. A socialist medicine is a bad idea PERIOD. Talk to anyone who has lived in England or Canada (those that aren't financially well off) and you'll see how poorly socialized health care works.
If the essence of democracy is compromise lets enact options that will both control and bring down costs: Public Option AND Medical/tort malpractice reform. Enacting both will directly address the biggest problems. This way everybody gives up something but everybody wins. Makes too much sense for today's politicians though.
Why don't we do away with requiring corporations to carry insurance for employees? That would solve the problem with 65% being happy with their insurance and make the USA much more competitive for business. We would be cost competitive around the world. Why should corporations be forced to pay.
I also want to do away with socialized medicine in this country....our soldiers, politicians, and other gov't officials can get their own health insurance.
I am sure the Republican Party would want to endorse such a move since we loath the public option so much.
You could fund the public option, tort reform, and all the other reforms required of the insurance company if you treated the premiums paid by employers for their employees as employee income. You could also take the cap off of salaries subject to the Medicare tax and make it unlimited. That way someone who is making $1M per year would not be paying 0.4% of their income while everyone else is paying 4%.
If you don't like the greedy insurance companies then stop paying them, nobody is forcing you. The argument that everyone has a right to health insurance is a poor one. With that premise I can make it seem like everyone has a right to everything. Besides, everyone does have access to emergency care at a hospital.
To all: We live in different times. It is truly a test to see if we can sustain ourselves as Americans, as a culture, and as a country. We as a culture began as self-reliant people. We as a culture MUST persist as self-reliant people. That’s what distinguishes us from other cultures. We are highly competitive and always seeking to better ourselves. We cannot as a culture rely on a “surrogate parent” (aka government) to protect us. I am very afraid of what’s happening to our culture, our country. Please preserve what our forefathers created. Please read this excerpt from Robert Kiwosaki, the author of Rich Dad, Poor Dad.
"Many people run from mom and dad's shelter to the shelter of a company or the government. Many expect someone else to take care of them, or be responsible for their lack of wisdom and common sense. That is why they seek job security or government sanctuaries. Too many people spend their lives looking for guarantees and spend all their lives avoiding growing up, and always looking for a surrogate parent to take care of them...Government safety nets were created in the Industrial Age and were created only as safety nets for the very needy…We are in the Information Age and it is time that we as a culture begin to grow up. Leave the government safety nets and social programs for those who really need them.
I am afraid that it will be obvious that the Industrial Age is dead and gone. We will know this when the government finally admits that it is broke and will not be able to keep many of its financial promises. Growing up means that you become less and less dependent upon others, and are more and more able to take care of yourself, your needs, and the needs of others. To me, growing up is a lifelong process, a process that many people are avoiding by still seeking security provided by someone else…someone other than themselves.”
-Robert Kiowsaki
I work at a hotel where all employees are offered the option to enroll in health insurance at a cost of $60.00/month. About 30% do not opt to enroll because 1) they think the're invulnerable or 2) they'd rather spend their money on alcohol, cigarettes, and fast food.
These are the people that wind up with the majority of health issues that consume so much of our national productivity. If we can mandate responsible behavior along with health coverage, I'm on board. Otherwise, don't try to make me pay for someone's poor decisions under the guise of compassion.
With all due respect, Senator, while cost is a major factor of needed reform, there is so much more than needed to have true reform and to make health care accessible and affordable for all Americans. Medical liability reform is needed, of course, but we had major tort reform enacted in Florida several years ago. It briefly brought down malpractice rates minimally, but they continued to rise over the years – and no lower costs were ever passed on to the health care consumer. Allowing cooperatives for small business? My small business has been a member of one for years – the plans available to us through it cost more than we can secure outside the cooperative. I'll take whatever tax credit you'd like to give me to help pay our exorbitant health care premiums (currently $17000 per year for just myself and my husband), but that doesn't help me when the insurer rations my care or denies it outright, and it doesn't help me not to live in fear that any serious illness will bankrupt me. A public option should not be an anethema to Republicans. Enacted correctly, it will drive costs down by providing healthy competition to the for-profit insurers. Let's look to France, the country with the best health care system in the world to see how it's done.
All you people who are so dead set against any kind of government run Health Care Program should immediately tear up your Medicare Cards in protest as well as your Tri-Care-for -Life, Champus and Champva cards. These are all well run government programs. So there !
Almost every Government run program is running at a deficit or on the verge of bankruptcy! What makes people think that the government can appropriately run a program that would carry the substantial costs of a public option?
I'd like to know, among our elected officials, who are currently being financially supported by the health insurance industry. And, who among them are opposing the government option to offer health care. I'll bet there is a considerable overlap.
Oh and one more thing ...
IF Tort Reform is such a hot idea and the Republicans are all for it ....
THEN WHY pray tell did they do nothing about it themselves when they had a majority in the House & Senate and controled the White House between 2003 and 01/01/2007.
Oh they did create Medicare D, the huge fiasco that allowed no bid contracts ... actually prohibited Medicare/Medcaid from negotiating for better prices! WOW that was some gift the the drug companies. Oh you people DO realize that participation is/was mandatory unless you can prove that you have a comparable plan! Otherwise you get penalized!
Sound familiar?
Didn't hear you all complaining about Socialism then! Or how GWB intended to pay for it?
By Rush: "Or..they’ll pocket the credit and call it profit. Which do I think they’ll actually do?….Hmmmm."
You OBVIOUSLY have NO idea how a tax credit works. Why don't you leave the tax policy and accounting decisions to those who know what they're talking about.
If you craft a tax credit to encourage a certain behavior, the recipient CAN'T GET the credit if they don't comply with said behavior. Is that to say that there is NO potential for abuse? Of course the potential exists... but with such a narrow focus it's extremely easy to catch those who would try. Unlike the EITC which allows welfare queens to enjoy an extra few thousand bucks of our money every spring!
Buying insurance across state lines is a horrible thing – you are still actuarially assigned cost and risk estimates based on your state, so you won't see any potential regional benefits, and all this does is allow the carriers to all move solely to states where the laws are favorable for insurers – we would all be buying our insurance out of Arizona (most favorable right now by far) within six months.
Competition? Is Aetna Arizona really competing with Aetna New Hampshire? No. Is Kaiser Permanente moving out of their base in CA to sell to the rest of the US? No (their model is dependent on their hospital network). You would see Kaiser move their HQ (sort of) to Arizona, but that's about it.
Why is it that a cornerstone of the Republican plan actually hurts the consumer and rewards industry, while they spin it as a win for the consumer? Oh yeah – because that's how they roll.
Sad, but we've become a whiner and hand-out Nation.
It's about F R E E D O M people. I am so dismayed by those looking for yet another "government" hand-out which is taken from others. Many of you want the government to legislate what doctors, bankers and insurers make. This is already done through a progressive income tax and property tax system. Those who make more, buy more, and use more, pay more.
It's also about P R I O R I T I E S.. If you're employed and can't afford insurance but want/need it, maybe you should seek another job even if that's not what you want to do or it's less convenient. Maybe you have to give up some of the toys in life – cable, booze, cigaretts, etc. –
Republicans have been open about the fact they don't want to see anything pass – that even worse, many want to see O'Bama fail. Boy, that is a patriot act.
Both sides play their games, but the reality seems to be that health care costs are out of control, no band aids are going to fix it, and we are the only developed country without more progressive socialized medicine. Let's also force the AMA to mandate increasing the # of 1st yr docs entering med school from 18,000 to something like 26,000 a yr, thus lower the cost of medicine via supply & demand, and make it more available to all. We have talented men and women who could fill these & other rolls if it weren't for special interest groups wanting to see costs stay high.
I am very tired of the anti American – out of touch – bashing of the Republican party. All they have is negativity – times switch back and forth and at this moment there is no leadership or new ideas from the GOP and all they seem able to do is complain but offer no NEW ideas.
I'm tired of people making claims like the public option won't lower health care cost – where is your proof? You need to put "I THINK" before those statements because other wise you are lying because the country with the highest cost for healthcare is guess who? the USA.
And for people who say that the majority does not favor the public option – look at your polls – almost every single one that the majority supports it; even in the districts with congressmen who are voting no. People need to do their homework before voicing their less than concrete opinions – but if you decide to....you should probably put the work "I THINK" in front of it because we'll know who thought wrong.
Carmen: "All of you conservatives forget one thing: You are the minority. Dubya is history. You lost the election. The majority of American have spoken & they want universal healthcare."
You're statement has absolutely no thought in it. It is just blabber and makes no sense because if the Dems push this through without Repub support, YOU WILL BE LOSING THE NEXT ELECTION. The majority of Americans DO NOT want a public option (go look at the latest Rasmussen polls). They do not want increased government involvement in our lives. If you look at any major public service this government provides it is BANKRUPT (USPS, Medicare, FDIC, etc). This is for good reason, basic free-market principles are always the most effective (and is what made this country a super-power).
What allows insurance companies to get away with charging high prices is that they do not have to compete with one another due to different state legislations. Open up the states and allow all insurance companies to compete with one another and I guarantee you prices will come down as they compete for YOUR business. Put in place a federal regulator (NOT A PUBLIC OPTION PLAN) to oversee the insurance companies to ensure that practices are fair (sort of like the SEC with public corporations). Also, change malpractice laws to give doctors a break and thus they too can lower the cost of their services. The fact is this country has great healthcare service but like any other country, the system has it flaws, and always will. This however will defnitely help reduce costs which is the most important goal right now without reducing QUALITY of service. If you want cheap/free coverage, go to Canada or the UK for cheap service (where you will wait in line for service and also have a greater chance of getting UNDER-diagnosed as opposed to being OVER-diagnosed like in this country). Would you rather have someone tell you that you do not have cancer and be wrong or tell you that you do have cancer and be wrong??? There is a reason wealthly people from universal healthcare countries like Canada and the UK come to this country for medical treatment, they get better and faster service. This is simply a free-market issue, let competition thrive and costs will come down without sacrificing quality.
I pray that as a country we can say what we need to support our American citizens than move forward with solutions to make it happen. I am so tired of the negativity and hate-filled discussions. We all want less expensive health. Make it happen! That is why all of these politicians were elected. I saw a wonderful bumber sticker recently. It read, if you want change, DO NOT RE-ELECT ANYONE. The voting public has changed. We want to see results. We want to see intellegent, adult, elected officials go about taking care of our concerns like responsible adults instead of children.
None of what Ms. Collins said is new. I do not know what is the issue with buying insurance across the state lines. But the rest of the issues, like Tart reform do not reduce the health care costs. The one option that is effective is the public option. If the Republicans do not support the public option, so be it. Let us pass the health care reform with 51 votes.
OK HERE'S THE ANSWER
we have
NON-PROFIT FIRE DEPARTMENTS
NON-PROFIT POLICE DEPARTMENTS
NON-PROFIT SCHOOLS
NON-PROFIT ROAD REPAIR
NON-PROFIT LIBRARIES
NON-PROFIT CANALS AND WATERWORKS
NON-PROFIT PARKS AND RECREATION
NON-PROFIT SPACE PROGRAMS
NON-PROFIT MILITARY
so why not something as basic as everyone's health and
preserving life....
NON-PROFIT HEALTH CARE...
Oh yeah it already exists and it works Medicare,Medicaid,Medical ect
it works and it should be available to all!! Not when you get old!!
available to all NOW!!
"The majority agree that we need a Single-Payer UNIVERSAL healthcare program and we need it NOW. "
Wrong. The majority is against it. Go look at ANY poll.
Government does nothing well. We don't need a government-run healthcare system to compete against private insurance companies. In fact, government just needs to get out of the way. If insurance companies were free to compete across state lines, policy rates would go down. And let us not forget many uninsured are that way by choice. Ever since I began working part time, as a senior in high school in 1971, I was never without medical insurance no matter where I worked. So what's the problem uninsured America? I've been insured for 38 years. If I can do it, why can't those of you who are uninsured? Maybe you made poor choices or had skewed priorities. Healthcare reform is needed to address some of the bad practices in the industry. But healthcare overhaul and massive government interference is not the answer. Government can't do anything better for me than I can do for myself.
OH, I have some more questions for Senator Collins!
EXACTLY HOW MANY HUNDRED OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS would her tax cut program for health insurance drive up the debt????
SINCE THE COST of a basic family health insurance plan will cost at least $10,000, is she seriously suggesting that we have a $10,000 tax cut for families without employer based insurance????
AND HOW EXACTLY WOULD this help people who don't pay $10,000 in federal taxes?
Did the Senator succesfully graduate from High School? Because I would expect better reasoning from a high school graduate, much less a United States Senator.
No real need for name calling, but history and most economics courses I can remember haven't haven't shown any way to reduce a deficit by lowering income.........
"Read my Lips....." – but he did.
The 8 years I paid the most taxes were the most prosperous and peaceful years of my 62 year adult life.
When are we going to focus on the REAL problem, a bipartisan congress united against the people they were elected to serve.
I don't know what the GOP, Bacus and the Insurance industry are afraid of. If you want real choice have a public option. The key word is option. The conservatives are floating plans that give billions to the industry that has created this mess by its greed and mismanagement. I thought we were a democracy.
Government does nothing well. We don't need a government-run healthcare system to compete against private insurance companies. In fact, government just needs to get out of the way. If insurance companies were free to compete across state lines, policy rates would go down. And let us not forget many insured are that way by choice. Ever since I began working part time, as a senior in high school in 1971, I was never without medical insurance no matter where I worked. So what's the problem uninsured America? I've been insured for 38 years. If I can do it, why can't those of you who are uninsured? Maybe you made poor choices or had skewed priorities. Healthcare reform is needed to address some of the bad practices in the industry. But healthcare overhaul and massive government interference is not the answer. Government can't do anything better for me than I can do for myself.
Nobody care about the GOP these days. 65% of Americans want a public option, why is this so hard for our representatives to implement? Bypass the obstructionists and pass health care reform with a simple majority vote. That is how democracy works.
What is the driving factor that causes health care to keep going up? Is it equipment, salaries, insurance, ect.? Doesn't it make sense to find where the cost is that makes health care cost go up and then work to lower them? We can have selling insurance over state lines and public option, but if we don't address the actually health care cost itself then prices will continue to increase.
Why is everyone so upset about the health care bill when it doesn't stand a chance of getting passed? The democrats want it done today and republicans are going to stall until mid-term elections to try and gain more seats. If this happens we will never get anything accomplished. As a democrat, I wanted change and Obama is the man to make that happen, but the republicans are going to do everything in their power to make sure everything stays the same. Republicans don't understand what it's like to be a normal American just getting by and have to pay a outlandish amount of money on health care. They already have their public option, which is paid for by taxpayers. Why don't stop paying for their health care and see what type of insurance they can find on the open market. I hope they don't have any pre-existing conditions!
Give me Socialism if means healthcare! If France, England, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and even Cuba can provide healthcare for all and do it cheaper than we can, so be it! Most of you over 65 are required to have medicare. You have no choice. It is a government program, duh!! Most of those over 65 would not give it up nor would they give up Social Security. Firefighters, police, military, national parks, rangers, all social programs. We just let the insurance industry act like organized crime protection mobs, dictating who can and who cannot have insurance and what they pay.
GET A CLUE! Democratic socialism is not the enemy. A Republican party that takes millions in lobby bonuses from insurance and pharmaceuticals, now there is your Machiavellian propoganda. The only time the GOP needs YOU, the voter is when you cast your vote and he or she comes hat in hand saying "I work for you" BULL..
Not one Republican gets it... We the people DEMAND the public option. No compromises.
Let's take care of living breathing Americans and not chase after the holy dollar for once.
Sorry bud in NC, you are wrong. The majority of americans want health care reform that lowers costs and improve access for people. That doesn't mean they want a public option, in fact quite the opposite.
This below is a very ignorant statement. Apparently this person has no idea of the cost of drug development and the standard new drug applicants have to meet. Before you comment, do some research.
MA September 30th, 2009 12:27 pm ET
One thing we could do to reduce the cost of healthcare is for the FDA to require that new medicines and devices prove that they are better than the existing treatments. The test required now is that they must be better than a placebo or no treatment at all. Almost anything can pass that test. Having passed that simple test the drug companies and device makers can charge ANYTHING! It’s time to put in place comparative studies and ensure that new drugs and devices are safer and more effective for patients than the current treatments.
Its amazing these fools who somehow believe that inter-state purchase of health insurance will solve all our problems!
First of all there is no federal law which prohibits such purchases!
Secondly and probably most important, irregardless of what state you purchase your health insurance from the premiums will be based on the actual cost of providing health services in the state you live in.
Think people, assume you live in California and you purchase a policy from an insurance provider in Indiana. Will the cost of that policy be based on you receiving health services in California or Indiana?
Next, assuming you answered "Indiana" do you expect the insurance provider to reimburse your H/C provider in California at Indiana rates or at California rates? You do realize there is a difference?
IF they reimburse based on Indiana rates, the question then becomes will the actual H/C service provider accept that payment as if it was at a California rate? With all probability they WILL NOT and you would simply be billed for the full balance due as an "Out-of-Network patient. If you expect them to reimburse based on California rates, then why wouldn't you expect to pay a premium based on those actual cost.
All in all ... there has been no motivation or reason for the health service provider to lower their prices.
Hate to make this comparison, but here goes ...
You can call most any insurance provider in the country and get coverage for your car or your home. But one of the big questions from the insurance provider is going to be either 1) where do you primarily drive & park your car? or 2) where is the home located? It would be ideal to be able to purchase either under the assumption that its in the safest location in the country... but thats not REALITY.
Next is Tort Reform, insurance companies have pretty much already taken care of that. You all know this, they have the numbers broken down for everything. No different than if you're in an auto accident and they have their predetermined settlement amounts already in mind. Do a bit of research on "Medical Malpractice Payouts" and you'll find that the actual dollar amounts paid out over the past 10 or so years hasn't changed. HOWEVER ... the cost of Malpractice Insurance has quadrupled!
My question to so many of you on Tort is your complaint of smaller government ... less Federal controll. Wouldn't your idea of Tort reform actually insert the even more so. The Fed would be setting the caps or payout max's! The Fed would be deciding if it was a frivilous case or not! I'm sorry but isn't this a Civil matter thats handled at the state level? Wouldn't this set the precedent or open the door to limiting our rights to sue for other things ... if its considered to be in the best interest of the country?
Why won't she (and so many of her Republican colleagues) quantify the benefit their ideas would generate? Tort reform, pooled purchasing power, and revamped Medicare - what does that mean? Will my wife's obstetrician's malpractice premiums drop from $150K per year to $100K? Big deal. They have no tangible solutions. Sadly, the Dems have no vision and no backbone. This is a disaster, from every angle. In ten years, insurance premiums will be about 40% of our paychecks, and that's for the "lucky" ones who still have it.
Could someone tell me what states have low cost health insurance?
With all due respect to the Founding Fathers and the principles upon which they founded this country, just read some of these posts will ya? We reject this way of life in favor of self subjugation. The pagan "morality" of the left, self realized and self directed, not based in anything at all, subject to constant revision and interpretation to "keep up with the times" and applied subjectively by those who possess it, has convinced a great many people to chuck it in favor of utopia. We might all end up miserable, but we'll be EQUALLY miserable. Viva Karl Marx.
I didn't see ANY ideas here.
Could Sen. Collins be unaware that conservative states have already instituted draconian anti-patient "malpractice reform" laws and it HAD NO EFFECT ON RISING HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS? ....................................
I would ask the lady if she is actually serious about the issue and three specific questions: -----------
1. Would it ever be morally acceptable to leave a hit and run victim, bleading and broken, on the side of the road just because she doesn't have health insurance? -----------
2. Would it ever be morally acceptable to leave a breast cancer victim, like Robin Beaton for example, without treatment because she doesn't have health insurance? -----------
3. Assuming that you agree that it would never be acceptable to leave anyone without medically necesary treatment EXACTLY THE WAY IT HAPPENS IN AMERICA EVERY DAY, how should this treatment be paid for except by having every American insured?
I see and hear a great deal about buying health insurance across state lines. That would be great; but, there is one problem with that.
It would eliminate state governance of the insurance markets and create a great deal of confusion between the states. Each state has a department of insurance with state laws on the books regulating insurance. What happens to them?
Do we really want the federal government taking away the states' regulatory authority regarding insurance?
If there is no public option then there will be no meaningful health care reform. Just lipstick on a pig! Insurance and drug companies have paid millions of dollars to keep things just the way they are. Think about it, thier stock price will not increase unless their profits increase! Big business is only interested in one thing and that is increasing the price of their stock!
At pre-internet days to get published one had to have intelligence, knowledge, and at least an image of impartiality, concen over issues, not over party lines. Now every imbecil believe he or she has something worth sharing, with no pretense of being impartial, with no culture of arguing over issues.
I bet she'll have no problem with her insurance to pay on her behalf a pretty big bill for treatment of her speech impediment, she is covered!
Unfortunately, if that bill was for you or me we both begetting a "rejection" letter from Bluecross- Blueshield for being born with that abnormality; congenital defect not covered.
Why don't all of you get a hold of yourselves. Liberals–where are all the people you are talking about wanting a PUBLIC OPTION? tHE POLLS DO NOT SHOW THIS, only you who voice yourvenom on these blogs want it. You talk about previous Republican administrations raising the deficit. What in the worl do you think the public optionwould do??? OMB has stated it would add 10TRILLION TO THE DEFICIT. OMB is not political. They are number crunchers and could care less about politics. You all need to wake up. Conservatives you need to wake up also. Try to wrk something out that will help all Americans. At least come up with a plan. All Democrats want to do is hand out money and drive the country further into debtr and the republicans wantt o help the rich. Pretty soon there will not ba a country because all the bickering and slanders from all of you will destroy this country.
Everyone want's to cut costs. Here is just ONE WAY how:
Let the government (Medicare etc) negotiate for a better price on drugs. Right now they are REQUIRED to pay list price, even though they buy something like ten billion worth per year. What jack ass thought this was a good idea. Bush. If the parasitical companies don't want to sell at a better price, then the government should buy the same drugs from Canada at the price they pay. No American can legally by drugs from Canada. Change the law, then have our government buy from their government. This will force the drug companies to drop their price to the same they charge Canada or by about 50%. Good idea. Who is for it? The Dems and about 70% of the people. Who is not in favor? The Republicans. Why? Who are they supporting, you and me or the corporations?
PS Don't tell me the drug companies need the money for research. They now spend more money on TV ads than on research.
You can tell when someone doesn't understand economics when they use the word "voodoo". Yes, deficits have soared, but tax cuts aren't to blame. Spending is to blame, and tax cuts aren't a spending program. The problem is too much spending, not a lack of revenue.
I am perplexed by the fact the the current bill would create the public option, (whether it co-ops or full government program). And give us one option next year and yet, READ THE BILL:
"Starting in 2015, states may form ―health care choice compacts‖ to allow for the purchase of individual health insurance across state lines."
So I can add 1 person (public option) to compete against or 1,300 companies to compete against.
Why do we have to wait 6 YEARS before we can get insurance across state lines?
Unfortunately, the GOP is not up to the task of helping govern.
All of specifcs Susan spoke to are tweeks, and tax breaks do not lower costs so does not count.
The one item that all reaserch shows will lower costs – a public option is one she rejects, so i find it hard to understand her positon.
Every major democracy ourside of the US does a fine job running healthcare – better outcomes with lower costs.
What am i missing here?
It seems that both sides are all wet on this issue. The left-Democrats' plans would break the bank which is already cracked. Repubs are offering little to those with pre-existing conditions. Unfortunately, the President's apparent great nemisis, the Medicare Advantage Plan, is the one model of health insurance that really works. Have the federal government withhold a means tested premium from everyone (including welfare, earned income credit recipients) not just senior citizens on Social Security, then have private insurers bid for contracts just as they do now under Medicare advantage plans. The premiums would be passed to the private insurers along with a federal subsidy which would meet the terms of the lowest bidders. Example: a $2,000 per person subsidy would cost the government $600 Billion annually, far less than the $700-800 Billion now being spent by the Feds alone. The bidders themselves, in their proposals, would spell out exactly what their plans would cover, and subsidies could be adjusted accordingly. All applicants would have to be accepted. Those insurers willing to go nationwide should be allowed to do so and, for the sake of common sense, let's put a lid on malpractive punitive damages. Beyond this, there are dozens of other steps to reducing costs, e.g. higher deductibles, higher co-pays, expansion of medical savings accounts, mandatory fees for illegals at emergency rooms ( all legal residents will have a health insurance card).
– Two words...Public Option. And why is this not on the table, especially when most everyone I talk with supports it? Take a guess.
Personally, I think Congress people should be labeled with stickers, just like NASCAR drivers, so we can easily identify their corporate sponsors.
It's funny; most of the comments here agree on ONE thing....competition WILL bring price down. But for some reason, because the 'two' side propose different ways of doing that....the 'think' they are NOT talking about the same thing.
I'd prefer less govt' as it's shown itself a propensity to become bloated...don't even site, Medicare, Social Security, Public Schools...THAT is what I'm talking about...THOSE institutions SHOULD be 're-vamped' as well, as someone said....'A Revolution' yes, especially with Public Schools (it's day has come, the industrial revolution is over, schools need to move forward).
I'd like to give a real, honest to goodness, private business competition a go, with gov't as a referee (as it should be)...with as little intervention as possible.....try the state lines first....it won't take long to see what shakes....
If all else fails, maybe a public option.
And that is the crux for me...this bill was just magically ‘produced/presented' as the ONLY fix, ONLY way…..it’s FAR FAR FAR from it…..and it reeks of disingenuousness.
Then we the chicken heads think the only debate is ‘public option’ no ‘public option’.
Also, why is it, that Democrats automatically resort to 'name' calling on any issue....thugs, racists....what's up? You don't realize you're doing this? it ISN"T effective dialog, much the same as yelling about Death Panels....follow John Lennon’s lead on Chairmen Mao....subtlety will win you friends unbeknownst to them.
I EXPECT NOTHIN LESS FROM THE PARTY OF NO. LETS JUST DO THINGS LIKE WE'VE BEEN DOING, KEEP OUR BLINDERS ON AND RUN NOT ONLY THE ECONOMY INTO THE GROUND BUT LET THE SICK UNINSURED DIE ALREADY,AMERICA WILL BE A BETTER PLACE ITS THE REPUBLICAN WAY
People keep complaining about the public option while at the same time complaining about health benefits which public employees receive.
So why not just make the public option the option to buy into either the Federal employee benefits program or the benefits program for the state where they live? There's already been a large group negotiation, so it satisfies the Senator's idea of grouping businesses together only with a much larger customer base.
People don't care about whether there is a "Public Option" or not – they want affordable Health Insurance. Allowing all insurance companies to compete for customers across state lines would solve this problem without a massive government takeover.
Just because the GOP doesn't agree with the public option doesn't make them the "party of no". Bipartisanship means give and take. The left is very good at take, but horrible at give.
The reason the majority of people what a public option is that most people pay little or no Federal taxes. They want the people who pay the vast majority of taxes to foot the bill. The fallacy in that logic is that all costs are passed on and eventually everyone pays more. Unfortunately the majority of people don't understand simple economic facts.
The approach being taken is just wrong. Instead of a comprehensive bill that attempts to fix everything and ends up fixing nothing, separate bills should be passed to address specific problems like pre-existing conditions, cancellation of coverage, and medical bankruptcy.
There can be no meaningful reform without the PUBLIC OPTION – I see no way out – The Insurance Companies are worse than the WALL Street thieves – They (INS) pry upon people when they are there worst in health – Anyone who has ever dealt with a insurance company for a claim knows that all they are doing is counting the beans and making sure that theres come out the bag first. No public option – no deal.
She is right, it is the cost that is keeping people uninsured, so how is Obama's plan which is going to raise the cost for everyone and raise taxes on the people who actually pay them. All of these people complaining about not having free health care, what a joke. How many of the people complaining actually pay taxes, or work for that matter? We have more people in this country who don't pay taxes than do. If you want free healthcare then move to canada, and wait a year before you can see someone if you are sick, and then wait another year for a specific test because there is so few advanced medical equipment. You will end up coming to the U.S. for your care just like the canadiens do.
Focus on the COST of healthcare, not passing the cost around. Why are costs so high? First, we don't generally pay them directly, so we are for the most part unaware of them. Second, medical technology has advanced a lot. We get more care and the care we get is more advanced than the care we used to get – a double whammy from a cost perspective.
The solution – put purchasing power directly in the hands of the consumer. This means that insurance doesn't cover your yearly exams. This will save money in that (a) the insurance company doesn't administrate the claim so there are fewer parties being paid and (b) the consumer will be much more cost consious if they are the ones paying the bill. Insurance is for uncertainty – you might break a leg, you might develop cancer, you might have appendicitis. Insurance is not for your annuan physical (many people probably only get one because they've already paid for it thru insurance premiums.) Even better would be to get insurance away from employment, so the consumer realizes the cost of their insurance plan.
Sen. Collins may not realize that subsidizing businesses to provide healthcare insurance is a step along the way single payer. Once all companies are hooked on the subsidies, then the govt can eliminate the middle men (the private health "insurers" to which the subsidies go) by nationalizing them.
It's too bad that the millions of dollars Sen. Collins has received from big insurance companies have so clouded her judgment. A majority of Americans, as well as a majority of her own constituents favor a public option, and it's sad that she's ignoring those voices and favoring the lobbyists.
This is probably one of the most important issues we as Americans will face in our lifetime. I also see how we are so divided on the options what the Politicos have come up with, for us.
Why don’t we put it on a special National ballot as a referendum and let true democracy play it out? In my opinion, we could then eliminate all interest groups, corruption, and other biases in the selection process.
If the elected officials have to be involved, they could debate and shortlist, maybe 5 viable options. Then give about three months to debate, look at the pros & cons and finally, we the people will select what we need.
Would that be undemocratic for us?
Polls show a majority of American's support a public option. All of the ideas you mention sound good. But what solves this problem? For profit insurance companies spend 78 cents on the dollar (premiums paid) on health care. The rest goes to salaries, wall street and admin costs. 90 cents on the dollar for non-profit insurance companies go to health care. Medicare spends 97 cents on the dollar. Do the math. The public option will help, but not as much as single payer would. Give us the choice of a public option at least.
@bud in NC
Actually, no, the US is NOT a democracy and never has been. Since its inception it has been a REPUBLIC, which is a very different beast (even if it does integrate some of the concepts of a democracy)..
Mike – I think your solution is way too simple and practicle for the Left to by in to. They need it expensive and complicated so they can control it.
To those who think we are a democracy,
You are WRONG WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY! We are a REPUBLIC and there is a BIG difference. Please view the following: http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment/
The senator does not seem to care about the health and well being of her fellow Americans. The public option is the only way to create competition, but the senator is more concerned about the health insurance companies. This is un-American, and the senator should be duly ashamed of her lack of caring an compassion. The great majority of the American people want the public option, only the health insurance companies, and the senators they have purchased don't want the publc option. Can we, as Americans, stand together to defeat these senators who oppose the will of the people, and don't care about the health and well being of our families? I will.
This Senator is right on. Most people in the US that have Health Care are happy (with possible exception of cost) with there Health Care. Most of the poeple in the US who want Health Care have it – to the tune of 85%.
Only liberals would blame Republicans for their own parties failings. They have a house and senate majority. Nothing is stopping this from passing except their own incompetence. And thank God for that, because their idea of reform stinks.
With all due respect to Senator Collins, I am a small business
owner who already provides health insurance for my co-workers and
my MAJOR concern has been the exponential increases of
premiums over the past five years. Each year we have to to choose
a plan with a few less benefits so that the increased premium is kept at less than 20%. What is she suggesting that would put an end to
the insurance company greed that I think constitutes a major portion
of the health care costs fiasco?
here's something else to consider...
medicare and social security budgets have been reappropriated for other government projects/budgets in the past. one could safely argue that it's such reallocations that contributed to both those programs current state of dissaray.
even if there is a provision in any health care bill allowing for the establishment and maintanence of a public option there is no way to protect the money invested into it from being reappropriated. Congress could legislate tapping those funds at will. They have a history of doing so.
Even if you trust the government of today to do this...could you trust the government of tomorrow?
With all due respect Senator, you are wrong about what the people want. The majority (remember we are a democracy) DO NOT WANT a public option.
Cap the $$$$ amount of malparactice awards and the attorneys percentage of the awards and a significant savings can be realized. The cap would also represent a significant savings for the judicial system since fewer case would reach trial. Next , prod the large providers such as the Blue Crosses to use their immense profits to assist the folks that can't afford the coverages.
Senator Collins said nothing that would help me, a single, middle-aged, self-employed, low-income person. I am too young for the current government-run programs, but I'd jump to join them if they were available. I have Canadian friends who say the Republicans are lying about the Canadian health care system. I WANT THE FREEDOM TO CHOOSE A PUBLIC OPTION! Freedom of choice is as American as apple pie. Denying freedom is un-American and selfish. If you think our government is evil and can't do anything right, then move to a country that has NO government!
Yeah .. a tax credit for the small businesses that will fix health care... where does that tax credit then go ...hmm... back to the health care insurers... what do you know another give away to the health insurance companies ... great idea
Conservatives are missing the liberals' point. They seem to think liberals want govt. bigger for its own sake. That is myopic and presumes that liberals are evil tyrants. Liberals' argument for public health insurance, or public health ANYTHING, starts from a simple moral center: "Everyone has a right to quality health care. Period." So who provides quality health care right now? Private companies. For-profit companies. That have inflated the costs of health care to the point that many people can't afford it, or that deny people who need it the most because their pre-existing conditions put profits at risk, while rewarding their executives with handsome salaries and shareholders with big dividends. That fails the moral test. CEOs will always make multimillion dollar salaries, there's nothing inherently evil about that ... but when they make that money by depriving people of something that, as postulated above, they have a moral right to, that money becomes blood money. Some not-for-profit organization needs to take over, and the government is the only not-for-profit organization big enough to manage it. Is mismanagement a risk? Sure. Is corruption a risk? Sure. But liberals think that it's a risk worth taking to live up to our moral obligations. Better to try and fail than to not try and fail anyway.
THIS IS JUST A WASTE OF TIME! It doesn't matter how much time, how many amendments, or how many republicans contribute to this healthcare! THEY STILL WILL NOT NOT VOTE FOR THE HEALTHCRE BILL EVEN WITH ACCEPTANCE OF THEIR AMENDMENTS! So, democrats should just do what is right for Americans, insure the uninsured, pre-existent conditions, and not add to the deficit! THEY ARE DOING THE SAME THING THEY DID WITH THE STIMULUS PACKAGE! THEY AMENDED CHANGES, ADDED THEIR BILLS, WHILE LAMBASTING THE EFFORT AND DID NOT GIVE ONE VOTE! DEMOCRATS PLEASE DO RECONCILIATION AND IMPLEMENT THE PUBLIC OPTION!
Reducing cost is very important but not the only thing that's important. Not having your health insurance dropped when you get sick or having legitimate claims denied is as important to me as the cost of the premiums. Private health insurance has proved itself as a failure whose only winners are the private insurance companies themselves. Patients lose because they get denied coverage when they actually need it, close to one million go bankrupt over medical bills every year, doctors and hospitals don't get reimbursed properly and timely, businesses suffer from being responsible for their employees' health.
A single payer system that most other countries have (and no that doesn't make england, france, norway, japan or canada into communist countries) would be a huge win for all – Except that is the health insurance blood suckers and their republican minions.
To 'Someone...': You can't really be that stupid, can you? I very much disliked Bush. But if you want to talk about deficits, what's the billions he crapped away compared to Obama's trillions? And Obama still hasn't ended either war to save money like he said he would. Common sense my foot! Most everyone is missing the point–Republicans and Democrats. The real issue is whether or not this is Constitutional for our federal government to do. It's not. There's nothing in the Constitution about forcing everyone to have health insurance, or that health care is a right. Health care is a privilege for those who can pay it. That's why we have health insurance in the first place: to hedge against the possibility of a major health problem that we otherwise might not be able to afford. It is a risk, which is why everyone should do everything in their power to stay healthy, and get major medical for those extreme occurences. Major medical is not expensive. One hundred dollars per month for a healthy young adult male is cheap when you consider all the Apple laptops, iPhones, and cable/internet prices people pay. Still can't afford it? Get a better job! Can't get a better job? Should have stayed in school! Your precious federal government is the reason we can't have health insurance competition across state lines. Small insurance companies could drastically bring down costs if they were able to provide coverage to those in nearby states, or people who move to another state. Let's see if CNN posts my comments. They lean about as left as Fox leans right.
If other countries can make a single payer / public option work successfully...why do we think we can't?
Her plan is to take tax money away from all of us and give it to small businesses to buy insurance for employees? How is that saving any money at all?
From Canada,
Republicans and their supporters just don't get it! When you treat health care like a commodity and put it in the hands of private for profit insurers the cost will never ever come down in any meaningful way. Right now your primary care Physicians are paid less than many Canadian Physicians. When all those insured come on board it will generate more demand for services and you won't have enough primary care doctors by a long shot. (You are severely short of Primary care doctors now!). Doctors don't want to become Primary Care Physicians in the US because of the low renumeration by insurance companies and their debt on graduation. In the past, many of us (Canadian Family Doctors) thought about going to the US for higher pay. But over the last 15 years our US counterparts have lagged behind in pay. Your doctors have very high overheads and the insurance companies are grinding them into the dirt with forms and lower payments.
When I see patients in Canada that are covered under our government plan my invoicing is a piece of cake. I have less than 1% write-offs on government patients and my practise liabilty is only $1000 per year. When I see the odd US patient I often don't get paid as their insurance companies bury me with forms and even after I fill them all out they decline payment. Many of my collegues just treat Americans for free or for some minor amount because it is so difficult to collect money from their insurance companies.
There are variations in the implementation of our government plan across the country but here in Alberta while we have our problems with Health Care I would never want your crappy profit driven patchwork lobby infested system that dumps poor hospital patients on skid row and causes the majority of your personal financial failures.
Republicans and their supporters should be forced to donate time in one of LA's inner city stadiums that provides free care to Americans.
Republicans: you should hold your heads in shame for blocking health care to your fellow countrymen. Does all the money you accept from the insurance lobby really stave off the guilt of screwing over other poorer Americans?
Bud In NC said it best..
"What the people want is a public option"- Ah yes, many do. But they don't say the next part of it..which the PRESS and the Left omits..
-They want someone other than themselves to PAY for the majority of it
Aye, there's the rub...and the reality-disconnect.
People want a public option. Insurance companies do not. Insurance companies spend enourmous amounts of money (our premiums) lobbying to convince our government that people do not want a public option and that it would fail. It would fail from their perspective – it would fail to keep health insurance companies profits from continuing to go through the roof at our expense.
Now that republicons only control the courts and represent roughly 1/3 of Americans they are suddenyl interested in "bi-partisan." I seem to remember republicon operative gorver norquist describing bipartisanship in 2001 as "date rape." If the people are stupid enough in te next generation to ever give republicons a majority again I strongly suspect that will once again be their thinking.
Why is it so hard for Obama and Dem leadership to understand that the GOP will not vote YEA on anything legislation? For once, will the Dems take a page out of the GOP playbook and pass bills without their support.
Simple minds accept are surface thinkers which seldom understand complexities and are always looking for bumper sticker solutions, that republicans are always willing to post but never provide
ALL of the polls that i have seen in the past month show less than half of Americans (both dems, independants, and republicans) are for a public option.
We are seeing the end of the Democrats control. 2010 and 2012 will be great times for republicans, I see a landslide for the Republicans. The Democrats having control will not be forgotten soon, americans will never vote Liberals back into control. Americans do not won't socilazed anything, we are not commies. Thank GOD 2010 is not that long off and Obama will be a 3 year lame duck.
Medical liability reform is not an option to reduce costs until the medical provider industry, including hospitals and physicians begin to work for disclosure and transparency in health care issues. Current problems include failure to accurately designate cause of death on death certificates. Cause of death is not a choice election by an admitting physician who lists pneumonia or cardiac arrest as a cause when these are only end results. The industry needs to stop hiding errors and/or negligence that contributes to mortality statistics. As independent contractors physicians are not responsible to hospitals and hospitals fail to take responsibility for those practicing under their roof. Physicians nor nurses report negligence by others even when observing errors or mistakes. No one is required to report to the patient that an error occurred. THINK ABOUT THAT! No requirement to report errors. Would that be an option in your job?
When the industry cleans up their act then insurance premiums will be reduced. Another option is physician co-ops in which they provide non-profit collectives for their malpractice coverage. Removing the legal rights of the victim to recover for negligence is not an answer for anyone except insurance carriers. In TN new laws reduced lawsuits over 60% while premiums were reduced a mere 2%. Who reaps the benefits? Insurance companies with huge CEO bonuses are catching the windfall.
Physician heal thyself!
To Rick:
Nobody wants a "free ride", just a fair ride. Let me ask you this: Do you think what insurance companies are doing to their paying customers is fair? If so, I'm sure somebody you voted for (Republican, no doubt) has a bridge to sell you.
Aim high!
It's obvious why the white house is courting her. She was one of the three Republicans crossing party lines to vote for the huge nonstimulus government giveaway to Democrat supporters bill misnamed the "stimulus bill". She should be voted out of office for this act and is now obviously worried about losing her job based on her previous socialist views. She said she doesn't want big government but in the 2nd stimulus bill she voted for big government. Judge a person by their actions. She is a socialist that ran as a Republican. I am planning on heavily contributing to whoever runs against her in next election and urge others to do the same despite her "reformed words". when the economy tanks further due to socialism you can send her a nice thankyou card.
here's something else to keep in mind. while Democrat rhetoric has been lambasting Republican criticisms about influence of health insurance lobbyists the logic of what mandatory health insurance means has been ignored.
mandatory health insurance guaruntees an unending market for health insurance companies. a market that US citizens MUST partake in or they must pay the government. essentially, such a concept forces an individual to pay either the government or an insurance company regardless of the quality of the service provided.
pretty thought provoking that mandatory health insurance was one of Obama's biggest selling points while at the same time criticizing the Republicans as being more interested in money from health care company providers.
The public option is good, but won't pass. Put Sen. Collins' requests into the bill, including tort reform. Stop insurance companies from denying claims because of pre-existing conditions. Let's get something passed now.