SIROTA: How Corp. America (& corrupt pols) perpetuate Health Care Crisis

[yurbud]

The good news in this is the big 3 automakers all endorse the idea of single payer now.

What he doesn't say is why so many Democrats are reluctant to endorse this idea.

I was at a candidate forum here in California a couple of weeks ago, and when one of the guys running for governor said he wouldn't sign a single payer bill, he was booed by the audience. Clearly, that wasn't a position formulated to appeal to his potential base.

This is an issue where there shouldn't be a conflict between business and ordinary people. Democrats should stand with the vast majority of businesses AGAINST the insurance industry.

If someone told me they would never take money from an insurance company, I'd be more likely to trust and vote for them, and if they don't favor single payer they better say that private insurance needs tight regulation with price controls and the percentage of premiums that are paid out in benefits.

A compromise measure would be to have single payer and contract with corporations to process it, and give them a set cut of the money that passes through their hands. That way, they would have an incentive to keep the overhead low so they could turn a profit.

I worked for a legal messenger company for a while and the places I went with the highest security were insurance companies, even more than courts and federal agencies. These guys know how much they are hated.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050106M.shtml

Careless Industry: How Corporate America Perpetuates the Health Care Crisis
By David Sirota
In These Times

Monday 01 May 2006

The Institute of Medicine was created by Congress in 1970 to be the chief, nonpartisan adviser to the federal government on all matters related to health care. That's why the announcement it made in 2004 was so stunning. "Lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States," the Institute said. Therefore, "By 2010, everyone in the United States should have health insurance ... urges the president and Congress to act immediately by establishing a firm and explicit plan to reach this goal."

<snip>


In 2003, HMOs nearly doubled their profits from just a year before, adding $10 billion to their bottom line. That year, top executives at the 11 largest health insurers made a combined $85 million in one year. In the first three quarters of 2004, HMO profits increased by another 33 percent. The sheer numbers behind these profits are staggering: In 2004 alone, the four biggest health insurance companies reported $100 billion in revenues. That's $273 million a day, every day, 365 days of the year.

That's the kind of cash that allowed the health industry to spend more than $300 million on lobbying in 2003, and another $300 million on campaign contributions to politicians since 2000. Their agenda is pretty simple: stop any proposals to curb health care profiteering by private insurance companies.

To make its arguments, the industry buys off high-profile ex-politicians and makes them its spokespeople. Take Marc Racicot-one of Corporate America's favorite tools. This former governor of Montana left public service to become an Enron lobbyist, then became chairman of the Republican National Committee, and then headed President Bush's re-election campaign. Now, looking once again to cash in, Racicot has taken a job as the public shill for the insurance industry's chief lobbying group in Washington, D.C. His direct access to the president will undoubtedly serve him well in that role.


... According to a nationwide ABC/Washington Post poll in 2003, "Americans by a 2-1 margin, 62-32 percent, prefer a universal health insurance program over the current (private) employer-based system."


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050106M.shtml

[MercutioATC]

1. We don't NEED a single-payer system...

...we need to expand Medicare and the FEHBP to cover all Americans. It's a LOT easier to sell than a plan that gets rid of private insurers and it'd work .

[yurbud]

2. what is FEHBP? Medicare for all sounds easier to explain though it is

essentially the same idea or is it? You tell me, I really don't know.

[MercutioATC]

3. Federal Employee's Health Benefits Program

Choice of dozens of private insurers (Blue Cross, Kaiser, Aetna, etc.), no exclusion for pre-existing conditions, premimums set without a prior medical exam, choice of type of insurance (HMO, PPO, PPV), insurer can't raise your rates or drop you based on claims.

I'm cribbing this from Howard Dean, but offering this to all Americans with the government paying a scaled portion of the premimums at lower income levels is one way to get everybody covered (one could voluntarily opt out of the system if they chose).

[yurbud]

4. there would need to be price control and something to stop

the jerking people around about what is and isn't covered.

A problem with any program where the government buys from a private business is political pressure from the business can make pols look the other way as prices spiral out of control even faster than they do when people and businesses buy the product directly themselves.

For example, I am in favor of financial aid for college students, but it's hard not to believe that that since tuition is going directly from government to school, it's easier for schools to get away with jacking up prices.

[MercutioATC]

5. What's covered is determined by the government.

Private insurers have the option to participate in the program or not. Many do, because it offers a large group of people to insure.

Everybody benefits. Insurance companies get a "captive" customer base and the insured get plans that have to meet certain criteria.