Obama to Single Payer Advocates: Drop Dead

[Jkid]

President Obama’s White House made crystal clear this week: a Canadian-style, Medicare-for-all, single payer health insurance system is off the table.

Obama doesn't even want to discuss it.

Take the case of Congressman John Conyers (D-Michigan).

Conyers is the leading advocate for single payer health insurance in Congress.

Last week, Conyers attended a Congressional Black Caucus meeting with President Obama at the White House.

During the meeting, Congressman Conyers, sponsor of the single payer bill in the House (HR 676), asked President Obama for an invite to the President’s Marchy 5 health care summit at the White House.

Conyers said he would bring along with him two doctors – Dr. Marcia Angell and Dr. Quentin Young – to represent the majority of physicians in the United States who favor single payer.

Obama would have none of it.

This week, by e-mail, Conyers heard back from the White House – no invite.

Why not?

Well, believe it or not, the Obama White House is under the thumb of the health insurance industry.

Obama has become the industry’s chief enforcer of its key demand: single payer health insurance is off the table.

Earlier this week, Obama named his health reform leadership team – Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy-Ann DeParle.

Single payer advocates were not happy.

Since leaving Medicare, DeParle cashed in as a director at major for profit health care corporations, including Medco Health Solutions, Cerner, Boston Scientific, DaVita, and Triad Hospitals.

Now, what does the health insurance industry make of the Sebelius/DeParle team?

Here is Karen Ignagni, president of the lead health insurance lobbying group, America’s Health Insurance Plans:

“Today the President is putting in place a team that is ready on day one to provide the leadership necessary to achieve health care reform. Governor Sebelius is the right person to move the President's health care agenda forward. She is a proven leader with extensive knowledge of health care issues and a long history of working effectively across the political aisle. As a former CMS administrator, Nancy-Ann DeParle brings considerable experience and a strong track record working on all of the health care issues facing the nation.”

Karen sounds really upset, right?

Dr. David Himmelstein is a founder and spokesperson for Physicians for a National Health Program.

Himmelstein’s take – Obama is caving to the insurance industry.

“The President once acknowledged that single payer reform was the best option, but now he's caving in to corporate healthcare interests and completely shutting out advocates of single payer reform,” Himmelstein said. “The majority of Americans favor single payer, and it’s the most popular reform option among doctors and health economists, but no single payer supporter has been invited to participate in the administration's health care summit. Meanwhile, he's appointed as his health reform czar Nancy-Ann DeParle, a woman who has made her living advising health care investors and sits on the board of many for-profit firms that have made billions from Medicare. Her appointment – and the invitation list to the healthcare summit – is a clear signal that the administration plans to propose a corporate-friendly health reform that has no chance of actually solving our health care crisis.”

Obama to single payer advocates: drop dead.
__________________________________________________________________
Source: http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/conyers030309.htm
__________________________________________________________________
Then why the hell did I voted Obama for, so he play political incest with health insurance companies? Change my ass.

[Mojambo]

1. It's so frustrating.

Because none of these half measures are ever going to work.

As long as for profit health insurance companies are allowed to run this protection racket, health care costs are going to be through the roof.

[cyclezealot]

44. Why we voted Kucinich

For profit in charge will demand the profiteers make their pound of flesh. There can be no price controls within a for profit system. The only cost savings are with denying patients needed services. It is unimaginable insurance companies will cut their Administrative fees and profit margins. Profit margins demand the denial of patent's services. The end result will be a public convinced the Canadian system has been imposed upon them, when it fact it has not been. and who gets blamed. the government systems which will really be a continuation of what we have.

[JDPriestly]

109. I thought the Obama plan was going to allow choice between

private insurance providers and a buy-in to Medicare or some plan like Medicare. Obama always said that he would allow people to keep their current healthcare plan if they so choose. Sounds good to me for a transition to single payer, and we will eventually have single payer.

[RoccoR5955]

121. You are absolutely correct.

This just one reason why Kucinich would have been a better President.

[cyclezealot]

134. By the time the Calif primary came about

Kucinich had dropped out of the race. We voted for him anyway.

[bluethruandthru]

2. This has always been my sore spot about Obama.

I'm certainly glad he's our President...but the blinders he has on about Single Payer is absolutely unbelievable. I hate to think he's beholden to the insurance companies...but, at this point, it's really difficult for those against single payer to make a plausible argument for their position. ...including Obama.

[salguine]

23. if this is how he's going to handle health care, and maintain Bush's position on

renditions, then you know what? I'm NOT so glad he's our President anymore. He's rapidly showing himself to be just another in a long line of wishy-washy kiss-ass politicians. The last President was so fucking bad we've set the bar for Obama too low. I not sure why I bothered to vote, to tell you the truth. Maybe I just was able to summon up just a spark of hope that he might actually turn out to be a progressive leader, after a lifetime of cynicism. Shame on me for being gullible.

I'll bet that, even if he serves two full terms, we'll be in exactly the same health care mess we're in now in 2016. Just watch.

[Hawkowl]

41. Single term president

The country can't AFFORD insurance companies. That's the bottom line. Insurance raises the cost of all health care by about 35%. If Obama can't grasp this simple fact along with his continuation of Bush's policy of pouring trillions of dollars into Wall Street fat cats he will be a miserable failure of a president. Sorry but that is the trajectory he is on.

[salguine]

43. And by the same token, Obama has to realize that the President that finally

brings a national health care system to America will, from then on, be forever mentioned in the same breath as Lincoln, Jefferson and FDR.

[Hawkowl]

133. True nt

[midnight]

120. I feel that this is to much a compromise too. We can do better.

[enlightenment]

3. Not surprising - but candidate Obama never indicated

support for single-payer so it's no surprise that President Obama doesn't support it either. Candidate Kucinich was the only one who believed single-payer was the proper course of action.

Very sad. But not surprising.

[Mojambo]

9. But he did indicate a willingness to consider varied opinions when it came to setting policy

To not even invite single payer advocates...

It's lame, and a bit surprising.

[enlightenment]

15. I guess I never had any real belief in his campaign rhetoric

since he proved that he would say what he needed to say to get elected (I believe he actually said that what a candidate said during a campaign shouldn't necessarily be what they mean - paraphrasing, but it was something along that line). I'm not criticising the tactic out of hand - it's what politicians do and that's what President Obama is - a politician.

In other words, this doesn't surprise me because I never had any belief that he would entertain even the notion of single payer. He can argue that his advisory group has many opinions - and it does. Just not the one that would represent the most significant change in policy and direction.

For the record, I am a card-carrying supporter of single payer - but I honestly believe I will not see anything remotely like it in the US in my lifetime (I'm middle-aged).

[JSK]

99. He never said he was for single-payer

He always talked about this pie-in-the-sky idea of sitting down and "negotiating" with the health insurance companies.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Somehow I hoped that things would change when he got in there. Ha.

so WRITE the White House and tell them what we want:

www.whitehouse.gov

[enlightenment]

119. I was referring to the post to which I responded -

that Pres. Obama indicated a willingness to consider a variety of opinions.

I'm well aware that he never indicated support for single-payer (any more than Clinton or Edwards).

Please keep up. ;)

[Divine Discontent]

80. not at all. He wasn't my 1st choice, but I knew he was far better than McCain, and,

I knew when he said he'd listen to others, that meant he'd be gracious and considerate, but more than likely push through his plan while being stately.

[polichick]

4. Yep - he's too close to both the insurance and banking industries.

[Skittles]

5. big surprise

NOT

[TBF]

6. This should not be a surprise to anyone - he was crystal clear

during the primaries that he was not for single-payer.

[depakid]

42. Doesn't surprise me a bit- and that'sone reason why I'm glad Dean is no where near this fiasco

[kirby]

117. Dean did not propose Single Payer either.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/03/04/dean-single-payer/

[Jkid]

7. Worse: he used to support single-payer health care.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE

If that doesn't make you rage, then nothing will.

[xchrom]

8. recommend

[msongs]

10. single payer advocates don't provide enough bling nt

[stray cat]

11. I don't remember any of the front running democrats campaigning for a single pay system

so I'm not surprised. I am interested in seeing him push forward a plan like he and Hillary campained for.

[tomp]

29. why do you only care what the "front runners" thought?

why not consider voting for someone who is not a front runner but who has the best ideas, like kucinich? in case you hadn't noticed, they become front runners when more people support them.

[bread_and_roses]

48. That miserable hodge-podge?

All such convoluted approaches do is:
A. feed the rapacious, goudging, profiteer insurers
B. confuse and frighten people so that they are easily swayed by right-wing spin.

It will be a repeat of what we saw with Hillary's original useless muddle. And it is not what we need, and will "solve" nothing except keeping the $$ flowing into insurance co's pockets.

[lostnotforgotten]

12. Obama Health Care - F ----- Change We Can Believe In - F

eom

[Dr.Phool]

54. Late update: Change we can make believe in.

:puke: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :puke:

[cascadiance]

13. So much for wanting to have "contending" voices to listen to!...

Obama, contending voices don't always have to come from the right! Sometimes they are on YOUR left!

[Metta]

14. He's caved to corporations on several key issues. He betrays those of us who put him where he is.

This is not only dumb but it hurts us.

[many a good man]

16. Reality bites

And yes, Obama is a realist, unlike most single-payer advocates.

There is not the political will yet to implement single payer. That's reality. If Obama were to push for SP now he would lose all hope for any kind of health care reform. We can't afford to lose this chance to reform the system, even if only marginally.

I'm a huge advocate of single payer but I, too, am a realist. We will get it some day whether its five, ten, or fifteen years down the road, but we'll get it. I will fight for it as long as I breathe, but I have learned to accept reality.

Do not despair. Don't turn against all attempts to reform the system incrementally. You can still support single payer, but don't get in the way of reform now.

[girl gone mad]

20. Poll after poll shows most people are for single payer, most doctors are for it.

The only people that aren't for it work for insurance companies and their lobbies.

[many a good man]

22. And, more importantly, most legislators are against it

Once the mighty Wurlitzer gets cranking independents will turn against it and the Republican party will rise from the dead. I wish it weren't so. Face reality.

[bread_and_roses]

46. Reality is that incremental reform means you save one person here, another dies there

It is useless at this point. Organizations have devoted endless time and energy state by state to "incremental" reform for years and years - while the numbers of the uninsured and the costs of health care go up and up. At best, as is the case in an organization I work with, twenty years of fighting for "incremental" reform results in THE SAME # of people covered by a health insurance plan - but it has no impact on the ever-rising costs.

Think of the energy sucked out of the progressive movement by many thousands of devoted activists all over the Country putting enormous time and energy into, say, raising by a few percent the number of children eligible for a State funded child health plan? Not to mention the vast energy that individuals must put toward fighting with their own insurance providers?

The reality is that "incremental" reform is a useless waste of our time and resources.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

102. You should always ask for more than you can realistically get

and compromise from there.

Don't START by compromising, because the other side will always try to bargain you down.

If you want 100, ask for 150. You'll get at least 75, and maybe even 100. If you get all timid and start by asking for 75, you'll probably end up with 50, or even 35, because you've shown weakness.

[bluethruandthru]

25. The political will will come when the sheep in this

country realize that they have been royally screwed again and again by the health insurance industry. Even the repubs "ooooh, scary socialist medicine long waits no choice no doctors poor people in my docs office you'll die waiting for care" crap won't cut it with people who are held hostage by their employer because of their insurance benefits...or those with or without coverage losing their homes, dreams and savings because of one illness/accident.
All of us need to educate those around us about single payer - then the political will will exist and change will happen.

[eridani]

30. What utter horeshit. Apparently you believe that mere citizens have no political will

--and that the only "political will" belongs to whoring shitstain lobbyists. Obama is very popular and right now has a really powerful bully pulpit. He could use it to advocate single payer. Why do you think he'd fail? Because the Republicans don't like it? So? They don't like anything he's doing.

[Two Americas]

128. no such thing

There is no "incrementally" possible.

The insurance companies get their way, or they do not.

These "incremental" and "baby steps" and "reality" arguments can be, and are being used to fight against every single progressive reform. If the money people get their foot in the door, things will then get incrementally worse not better.

The big money players have declared all out war on single payer. We need to respond in kind.

Justice delayed is justice denied.

[kaygore]

17. We need to put pressure on Congress and on Obama

We need to call, write, email, write LTTE, etc.

I swear, if single-payer is off the table, then Obama does not have my support in 2012 and I volunteered my butt off for him and sent money that I didn't have just so he would get elected. Single-payer and no influence of lobbyists were my top concerns.

We elected him--many of us at great personal sacrifice. The "health" insurance industry is one of the worst and most incompetent. I am very disappointed. Obama said that all options would be open and then he shuts the door to even discussing the option.

I suspected this when Dean was not even considered for HHS and given the influence of health insurance companies in Illinois and Michelle Obama's background, I guess we should have known that Obama would put his own interests first and the American people be damned!

[rurallib]

18. And this is why I supported John Edwards

Edwards promised specific changes. Obama always hedged.

[GeorgeGist]

19. Their will be no change to the bottom line ...

Obama will continue to feed-the-greed at the working class' expense.

[girl gone mad]

21. He'll be setting us up for systemic failure in health care on the order of the banking collapse.

The health care system is broken and needs to be overhauled. Single payer is the only solution that even comes close to making sense.

[tomp]

31. i agree. if you don't take insurance companies and pharma out of the loop...

...you're doomed to fail. and there will be so much unnecessary hardship for patients (and i predict for health care workers) down the line, it will be sad to see. what a waste of an opportunity.

[Froward69]

24. God Damn it...

I really hope this is not true.

Insurance comps are the foremost problem with the system now...


:banghead: :argh:

[TreasonousBastard]

26. And I agree with him...

France and Italy, rated first and second by WHO for overall health care, do not have single payer systems. Nor does Germany, although it's only rated #25 (US is #37) Nor does Spain, for that matter, or many other European countries. Nobody is talking about them in what passes for debate about our healthcare.

Japan doesn't have single-payer, either, although the cultural differences in responsibilities for care and acceptance of alternative medicine doesn't make it easily comparable to US health care.

The closest thing to an ideal situation that many countries have found is a mix of public and private care. Here, we have tried Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, the Indian Health Service, and various public health hospitals with federal and local governments doing great things to patch holes in the healthcare network, but without showing any outstanding progress anywhere that would lead one to believe they could manage the whole thing any better than it's being managed now.

[eridani]

32. Private companies in those countries have their policies dictated by the government

And they are all non-profit by law.

Medicare isn't outstanding? Well fuck that! My lucky husband is old enough for Medicare, so he'll get to keep our doctor of 25 years after my COBRA runs out. I'm not old enough, so I'll be forced to give up someone who has known my medical history for 25 years.

[ToolTex]

130. Medicare is the only part of US health care that does work! n/t

[defendandprotect]

27. More "Off the table" . . .???!!! This is garbage . . .!!!

We need to keep hammering on Single Payer -- and Conyers' plan -- just

remove age limitations from Medicare and off we go!!!

We don't need to reinvent the wheel --- we have it already!!


PS: and this makes everything more worrisome re trying to privatize Medicare

and/or Social Security. Obama has to listen to what the public wants!!!

[Jkid]

28. Now that's a radical idea.

remove age limitations from Medicare and off we go!!!

Sadly, medicare is the closest we have to a single payer. AND even that will not happen!

[eridani]

33. So, what in bleeding hell ever happened to Yes We Can?

Can we, or can't we!

[defendandprotect]

63. That's the Conyer's plan . . . but should be obvious to everyone . .. !!!

We already have what we need in Medicare -- remove the age restrictions is all

that's necessary -- and any privatization of Medicare under the drug program or

in any other way.

[yurbud]

34. sad...maybe we need some serious external pressure.

[yurbud]

35. any real reform would tell the health insurance industry to drop dead--or report to prison

[Faryn Balyncd]

36. agreed.....

[Faryn Balyncd]

37. K & R .....If it was a Republican president hiring an advisor who wants to PRIVATIZE MEDICARE.. . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5180499&mesg_id=5180499

[bbgrunt]

38. this sucks big time

[mopinko]

39. this gush of hot air got 19 recs?

oy

[MattSh]

45. Make that 23...

K&R

[bread_and_roses]

47. And another from me

On edit - this should be in GD as well.

[harun]

79. And from me! H.R. 676 is the way to go.

[ElboRuum]

67. Unbelievable, isn't it?

Sounds like more PUMA crap to me.

[bread_and_roses]

74. Supporting the progressive, sane, fiscally responsible, widely supported Single Payer is "PUMA?"

I didn't even want Hillary on her last Senate run, much less as POTUS. Obama's stance to date - like that of the other Dem equivocators and triangulators and bought and sold "Representatives" in Congress on this is dictated by insurer $$ for campaigns, there's no other rational reason.

[ElboRuum]

92. No.

Nice strawman there.

What does PUMA mean anyway? Does it mean Hillary? No. Does it mean Dem equivocators? No.

A PUMA simply means Party Unity My Ass. That's all. It is not directed at any particular aspersions thrown this way or that or at any particular individuals. So no, progressive, sane, fiscally responsible, widely supported Single Payer is not PUMA.

What is PUMA is the attitude of what we used to call around here "concern trolls". The OP is precisely that. Typical PUMA post: "WE'VE BEEN HAD! OH NOES!" And while I generally agree with the OP that single payer should not be taken off the table so long as we, the people, want it (and I think we do), we have a President who (unless I am proven glaringly wrong about this) is inclined to listen to the constituents. Sure, we may have to bend his ear and shout into it, but division isn't warranted. Posts that encourage this mentality of "Hey, we've been had!" when no such thing occurred (and it didn't) are precisely the sort of things that are PUMA.

As far as the link, well, I'm going to do a little research when I have some time, because the D.C. address they give doesn't exactly arouse confidence in its credibility. It may very well be legit, but I've never heard of it before. As they say, mind the source.

[bread_and_roses]

124. I appreciate your response

No strawman - I honestly thought PUMA was some outgrowth of the D primaries that had just refused to go away - only ever read about it here, and never saw the acronym spelled out. I'm not a Democrat, and Party unity means nothing to me, though I appreciate the virtues of Party discipline once a candidate is on the ballot. Which is one of the reasons I'm not a Democrat - some of their candidates are such that I could not possibly even adhere to Party discipline, forget unity.

Perhaps because I'm not a Democrat, perhaps I'm less hyper-alert to "concern trolls" than some here - all too often those so described are indeed bringing up the very issues on which Obama is failing us - money and militarism. And I'm no troll - I've worked very long and very hard for any number of Democratic candidates I could support, helped turn two local legislative bodies from R to D, and literally cried with joy when Obama was elected.

I did not check out the link, and would be over-joyed to discover, contrary to the OP other items I've read, that Obama does indeed have single-payer advocates at the table. However, for all the many good things he's done already to reverse the last nightmare years, he's shown no inclination to challenge big money, whatever his "I'm ready for a fight" words. Maybe he doesn't feel strong enough yet, maybe we have not put enough pressure on yet, maybe we all should just put our energy into publicly funded elections, since - absent millions in the street on some of our issues - without that big money is going to write half our policy anyway, no matter what polls say about what the people want or how many calls we put into Congress. We'll see. If events keep going as they are, they may overtake Obama's caution, or we may indeed see millions in the street. Or maybe not. Time will tell.

[inna]

98. rec #62 here. nt

[deek]

40. from whitehouse.gov

"President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history. To send questions, comments, concerns, or well-wishes to the President or his staff, please use the form below:"

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/


``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
related thread:


Demand Single-Payer March 5, 10, 11th

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5180193


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We can do it.

[Cleita]

70. This was the message I left at the White House

I'm very disappointed that there is no room at the health care summit for single payer advocates, or doctors, other health care providers and patients who have suffered through our corporate health care system. The Medicare Part D disaster should have been a petri dish that points to the folly of letting industry write legislation. It has along with Medicare advantage plans increased Medicare spending while reducing benefits to senior citizens it's supposed to help. I know because I am a senior who has been affected by these follies. Now it seems failed corporate universal health plans in Massachusetts, Oregon and Tennessee will be the model for a national health care system. This will break the bank at the expense of those who need health care, the sick and ailing. I do hope you reconsider these decisions.

Actually, I would like a response so that I know someone read this. (There was a condition that no response was necessary on the option.)

[Bluenorthwest]

49. If he demands profit for private Companies, he should

just give up. If Obama can not stand and say 'the Insurers made the right decisions about my Mother's treatment' then he has a problem with honesty.

[4_TN_TITANS]

50. "Then why the hell did I voted Obama" - jeez people...

You all are falling for this bait? Regardless of how Obama approaches healthcare reform, the guy's only been at work a month and a half - and already you all regret having voted for him, with all that he's already accomplished??? Give him a chance to BEGIN some discussions on healthcare before knifing him.

Quit falling for these posts that are meant to divide us and undermine support for Obama. It's more fun watching the Repubs devour each other over Rush.

[SemperEadem]

111. exactly. thank you

[liberalla]

51. No wonder he wanted nothing to do with Howard Dean.

I think we need to align with Howard Dean to promote the inclusion of an option for public healthcare (Medicare) for all ages. Let the people choose a private or public plan as they wish!

And, start a letter writing campaign to President Obama at the White House. We know the letters are read, and that he personally gets 10 letters a day to read. Let him hear from us.

[DFW]

61. Even Howard said single-payer would have to be phased in

Due to formidable resistance from the insurance industry lobby, as well as the
current structure of health care in the USA, he said that it was a goal to strive
for (and be achieved), but not one that could be achieved overnight, as the necessary
structural changes couldn't be implemented all at once without more chaos than the
system could withstand, and if it risked leaving more people outside of the system
while implementing it, then it was a Pyrrhic victory.

If Obama said it wasn't even a goal to strive for, then they have a fundamental
difference in philosophy there.

[iamthebandfanman]

76. umm okay? whats your point?

hes still in favor of single payer, but like you said he thought it should be done over time little by little...

thats a pretty big difference from 'off the table' , wouldnt ya say ?

[DFW]

83. Simply this:

That even Howard realizes that it can't be smoothly put in place overnight.

Obviously it's a big difference from "off the table," but if the first steps are
taken now, if and when it should be put back on the table, the path will a lot
shorter than if no steps are taken at all.

Some cabinet members remain throughout an administration. Some chiefs of staff do, too.

Then again, some don't.

[glinda]

52. What is the best course of action on this? Anyone know???? We could then spread the word and do it.

[earcandle]

53. I say take your health back!

Get healthy. Wean from and then stop taking pharmaceuticals.
Don't participate. Just carry the insurance you need for major medical and ignore the rest of it.

How: whole food, exercise, meditation, cell salts, vitamins. Let the body heal itself.
It does have an intelligence of its own if you listen to it.
(ducking for safety from the barrage of protesters who (think they) cannot live without their meds)


Take a look at Dr. Schussler's Twelve Tissue Remedies. I have the intro of his book written in full
on my website at Health and Well Being. I think
it is an important read for understanding how the body and nutrition work to keep health in the system.

[Enthusiast]

77. My father, his mother and father and

my mother's father died from a stroke. And you are suggesting I don't take my BP meds?

[drm604]

78. Completely unrealistic.

Some people have chronic issues that will not be solved by exercise, vitamins, etc.

Obviously, healthy people should work to stay healthy, but no matter how hard you try to stay healthy sickness or injury can still strike out of the blue.

[fudge stripe cookays]

125. Yeah, I'll get right on that.

And stop taking the injectable medication I THINK I need for my MS. And watch my nervous system degrade to the point where I can't walk or function anymore.

:eyes:

You justly deserve everything that is heaped upon you. You sound like the bike freak who's convinced that ALL of us should just bicycle everywhere, regardless of disability.

[earcandle]

138. Thanks for your replys. I guess you are stuck on pharms then. Good luck.

I am more afraid of them then you are, apparently.

[yurbud]

55. my letter to Obama (with LINK to send yours):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/Contact/


Corporate Crime Reporter quotes an insurance industry source as being very pleased with your team of Sebelius and Nancy-Ann DeParle. They also said in a recent meeting with John Conyers, you refused to invite top advocates of single payer health care to your health care reform summit.

http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/conyers030309.htm

I hope that this is an inaccurate report. For-profit insurance should have no part in formulating the solution since they are most of the PROBLEM.

You should only be considering two options for health care reform, neither of which should make insurance companies happy:

1. strict regulation of insurance companies including price controls and taking denial of service out of their hands and giving that function to an independent body and/or making the companies non-profits.

or better yet

2. Government run single payer.

The other day you said you want to get banks out of the government subsidized student loan business. If we can't trust Wall Street sociopaths with our houses or student loans, why should they be allowed to have the power of life or death over us with health insurance?

[yurbud]

57. if sebelius hasn't been confirmed yet, she needs her ass on the hibachi during confirmation

does that DeParle woman need to be confirmed or no?

Contact your senators and tell them single payer better be on the agenda, and these asshats need to explain why we should let the criminals that let people die to pad their bottom lines should be allowed to dictate the terms of health care reform.

http://senate.gov/

[inna]

101. very even and well written, i hope....

... this will be one of the 10 letters he personally reads today.

[bertman]

56. Just emailed the White House expressing my disappointment at the exclusion of single-payer

advocates from the healthcare reform discussions.

Rec and kick.

Let your voice be heard.

[BlueJac]

58. Big money keeps ruling America

[peoli]

59. he always said he would never do single payer, only if he could start from scratch

so why is this such a shock?

[defendandprotect]

64. Because Single Payer is the natural solution --- removing age restrictions from Medicare . . .

we don't have to reinvent the wheel -- !!!

Other nations all have Single Payer --- why would you ask why we're shocked?

It's what makes sense for health -- i.e., excluding corporations from the health

care system!

[peoli]

90. Im asking because if you followed Obama at all the last two years, single payer was never on the tab

le

dude

[defendandprotect]

132. Obama was ORIGINALLY for Single Payer . . . and reversed . . .

No reason why he can't move back onto the more sensible path again --!!

[Cleita]

60. I didn't vote for him in the primaries, but to vote for McCain or not vote

would have been way more disastrous in the big picture. I'm very disappointed myself. However, I'm looking for a faint silver lining here. Any health care package has to go through Congress first. We need to hound our representatives and senators to please have hearings after the White House presents their corporate prepared package, that they bring not only the single payer advocates Physicians For National Health Care, The California Nurses Association and Michael Moore, to the table but doctors, hospital administrators, other health care providers and patients for whom the private insurance and HMO industries have failed to provide testimony as well. This may be the way we get it through. Even though we don't have a veto proof majority in the Senate, it's close and an intelligent President may not want to fight the will of the people, if we make our will loud and clear, or he will end up with as reviled an legacy as his predecessor George W. Bush.

[leftchick]

62. It is not just the 'health industry'

wall street bankers and lobbyists seem to have his ear as well.

[defendandprotect]

65. As long as we are tolerating the corporate DLC within the Democratic Party . . .

we will have government moving to corporate fascism --- !!!

Democratic "blue dogs" are also hurting Democratic Party, casting their votes

with Repugs -- !!!

[bvar22]

105. Stop tolerating the DLC/Blue Dogs !

http://accountabilitynowpac.com/

[defendandprotect]

131. Great idea . . . and I like the source/Firelake . . . but . . .

there have to be some very real assurances that those contributing will have

LEVERAGE over the candidates -- including Presidential candidates.

Thanks for the info!

I did sign up.

[ElboRuum]

66. I don't know why the hell did you voted Obama for.

:eyes:

[katty]

68. read this yesterday - stunning

[AllyCat]

69. This is maddening, but not at all surprising

Obama never was a single-payer kind of guy. That's why I liked Kucinich.

It's really frustrating as I am tired of non-health care people standing in the way of health care decisions made by patients and their doctors so they can turn a tidy profit and gunk up our system. They are the majority of the reason our system of health care is so expensive.

As an unrelated (or related?) anecdote...I work in a newborn intensive care unit. We have babies who are so premature they cannot eat and are fed parenterally (through an IV or PICC line). The fat part of the "diet" has to be separate from the rest of the diet solution and is very expensive and causes some problems in its administration. We've had a few of the neonatologists fly in the face of American conventional wisdom and start giving these babies fish oil instead of the interlipid solution. Cheap, effective, and helps these kids move their bowels (often a problem) and gain weight. Fish oil. Readily available. Effective. Requires no additional lines to run it. Faster for the nurses to administer. Better for the baby.

It's used all over Europe for this very reason. But we don't do it here...I wonder why not? Hmmm...lets see...no big drug company can make a profit? Could that be? :eyes:

[keepCAblue]

71. "Caving to the insurance industry"... yup, and AIG gets ANOTHER $$$30 BILLION

k & r....

[8 track mind]

72. I still have faith in the guy

The reason why, is that his own Mother was being dicked around by insurance companies while she was on her death bed. I'm willing to give him some time to see what he comes up with.


Just sayin'

:hide:

[SemperEadem]

113. Me, too. I'm not ready to lynch the man.

[Hekate]

115. I agree. Every single time the Left gets our collective knickers in a twist about Obama ...

... he ends up coming through for the people -- just as he said he would.

Every time.

I am more than willing to wait and see what he comes up with for real.

Hekate

[stevietheman]

73. I support single payer, but it also won't pass this Congress at this point.

I think Obama is (politically) correct in simply moving toward getting everyone insured who's not insured already. It's a very good step in the right direction, even if private health care companies still hold a lot of sway.

[yurbud]

81. not if he doesn't rein in what they can charge and who they can deny service to

if he simply sets up a program that pays for people to get insurance, the companies will add overcharging the government to overcharging individuals and business--count on it.

If you've got a bull in china shop, the only way to calm it down is put a bullet in its brain or a pair of pruning shears to snip off its balls. You don't ask the bull what's the best way to put the china back together.

[yurbud]

82. if Democrats fuck this up, they will be handing a gift to GOP. Bowing to insurance companies would

be a major fuck up.

[LSK]

118. Nothing can save the GOP at this point

[iamthebandfanman]

75. welp, guess we know why Deans not in the cabinet now. n/t

[Wetzelbill]

84. It never had a chance

Anybody who voted for Obama because they thought he might want single-payer or even consider it wasn't paying attention. There was no way he was even going to consider it. Same with Hillary.

The best that you will get is a public (Medicare) option that is made available as a choice in his health care plan. That's it. And the way the system is that would actually be major reform.

[drm604]

86. That could be a good first step.

Since it would be non-profit, the Medicare option would most likely be the least expensive choice. It could over time put the insurance companies out of business, leaving us with a single payer. It could be a backdoor way to achieve what otherwise may be unachievable.

[Wetzelbill]

88. well it will be major reform because

If they do put in a public option, it will be very popular. And yes, it could be a backdoor way to achieve it.

[drm604]

100. Industry will see that it's a back door and try to fight it.

The problem for them is that this approach disarms their major talking points. They can't yell about taking away people's choices, because people will have a choice. They can't complain about waiting lines - why would adding another option increase waiting lines? They can't complain about government controlling people's lives, because people can opt out of that supposed control.

It may be that Obama is being very clever with this. It could also be that he really is philosophically opposed to single payer. It's hard to tell which.

[Wetzelbill]

112. Oh they will definitely fight it

Howard Dean was saying they will fight that option, right now it's just a question of whether Obama includes it or not. We'll know if it's real reform based on that aspect alone, if he includes it then Obama is dead serious about reforming the system, if not, well, it will be a sad day for the American people. It might be our last shot at it for a long time.

[bfealk]

85. Conyers was invited

I got an e-mail today that Conyers was invited asking people to call the White House to urge the President to invite other single-payer advocates.

[Algorem]

87. pay to play

[specimenfred1984]

89. Corruption and crime continue until it's called "Corruption and Crime"

and people are arrested. The U.S. still has torture camps, won't try any of our war criminals, is propping up a corrupt banking system and refuses to address the health care issue which is driving 98% of our population broke.

It's called fascism.

[BEZERKO]

91. I had my doubts when that 600 billion plus figure was trotted out.

This smells like Rahm Emanuel to me.

[kirby]

93. I think Obama is correct in his approach...

I believe one of the lessons learned from past attempts is that people are resistant to change and it would be impossible to accomplish such a massive overnight shift.

The route Obama is taking is more incremental. He will work to make Medicare (or something similar) available to all those who want it (including those current 47+ million uninsured). If someone is happy with their current for-profit system, they can continue and not argue that the Government took away their health care choices.

I think the strategy here is that if the public Medicare run system works well (which is should with a much larger, younger, and healthier pool of people), people will transition to a government run system.

I'm not sure why people thought Obama was for a single payer system. He never said he was.

[Danger Mouse]

94. Wow, really? He really told them to drop dead? Wow!

[mistertrickster]

95. Germany has an excellent health care system that ISN'T single payer.

There is more than one good model the US can use.

[inna]

106. actually, the only countries that use single payer are...

... Canada and Australia, as far as i know; and they are not doing as well as many other countries with different systems (all of which have universal health care).

[jonestonesusa]

96. It comes down to a couple of things.

First, it's a matter of paradigm shift (single payer) vs. incrementalism (Obama's reform strategy). While I agree that single payer makes the most sense and that advocates should certainly be allowed at the table, I think we should judge the reform effort by its results. If within a reasonable time frame we get significantly more Americans covered at a bearable cost, it's a victory. That's why I support Sebelius as a Secretary more than some do on this site, because I think she gets results and can bridge some current divides in American public opinion on this issue. Yes, a majority support single payer, but then again a majority support abortion rights, and we all know that a restive minority can still make an issue difficult to legislate.

Secondly - it will continue to take public pressure to make more progressive health care, economics, and war policies happen. The last three Democratic nominees before Obama - Kerry, Gore, Bill Clinton, all had problems at times connecting with the liberal Democratic base on issues like trade, deregulation, incarceration, and the War on Terror. We are constantly trying to get our own moderate-Blue Dog Democrats (Heath Shuler, Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, and many others) to respect the policy positions of the Democratic left. It's no different with Obama. Even though I support Obama myself and have great respect for many of his policy positions so far (Guantanamo, more oversight over military procurement, emphasis on infrastructure, aid to states), I still find that progressive ideas on health care reform, Iraq and Afghanistan, and even monetary policy are not getting a full hearing from Obama. Our own party is divided on these issues, and thus pressure from the liberal side is always needed to help us sustain a genuine political conversation in this country - and in my view, to stop ignoring obvious needs for change until it is too late. As much as Ralph Nader gets bashed here, at least he does not suffer the corporatist wing of the American political system (although that's also why he's never been elected, whereas Obama has been).

[harmonicon]

97. huh? Is anyone surprised?

As far as I recall, Obama has never once said that he would support single-payer health care. I'm glad that he's the president and not McCain or any other Republican, but along with all of the joy I got from his election, I was a bit sad knowing that it meant that it would probably be at least another 8 years before the US got on track to being a first world country again. Still, I think congress should press the issue and do their damnedest to get a single-payer bill in front of Obama. His heart might change if he was faced with having to veto it.

[Jefferson23]

103. This is not a surprise, but it is very sad. The American people deserve

quality health care that includes well care, but Obama never advocated for single payer and I doubt he ever will.

[ProSense]

104. Here's what Howard Dean has to

say.

[katnip]

107. Ok...inhale...

Barak Obama has been president for less than 2 months. I'm going to throw out a few platitudes:think: Please don't flame me...

You have to crawl before you can walk. Rome wasn't built in a day. It's a marathon, not a sprint.

Catchin' my drift? We did not get where we are overnight, and as good as I believe Barak is, we are not going to get out of it overnight.

I am a HUUUUUUGE single-payer advocate. Medicare for all!! But look...the opposition is already screaming "socialists". So this is going to be a gradual process.

He is a smart man but just took on the biggest shit-sandwich I've seen in my whole life. It's a new administration. Nothing is ever perfect...ah back to platitudes.:shrug:

Besides, if you want single-payer get out in the streets and DEMAND it. We seem to have forgotten the power we have as the American people:fistbump:

The people integrated America.

The people stopped a war.

The people can help bring about single-payer healthcare.

Our conservative brothers and sisters would have us think that the only responsibility of government is to protect the people. Well, isn't keeping us healthy PROTECTING us?

Thanks for listening. Peace

[AllyCat]

122. Welcome to DU!

I want it as much as the next person, okay, maybe more than the next person, but have no illusions that he ever said we were going to get this out of an Obama admin. You are right. We need to get out in the streets, but people just won't do it anymore for lots of things. Sigh...

[ElboRuum]

135. Welcome to DU!

:toast:

[tink-r]

108. Single payer not necessarily the best

There are other options than single payer. The German system for one. Check out the NPR series about Health Care in other countries. I found it very informative.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91971170

I have been a unwilling user of the health care system in the US. It is deplorable. Even with health care I make decisions based on what I can afford, not what my doctor wants me to do. I have had 3 major surgeries in the last 20 years. If I have more, I fear I will go into bankruptcy.

Having said that, I don't think we will get a single payer system, even if it was the best option. I now don't think it is. So personally, I agree with Obama on this one.

[LSK]

110. I think he is waiting for year 3 and 4 of his Admin, after the next midterms

Hopefully we will be wayyyyy over 60 Senators and then the GOP cant do a damn thing.

There is no way a Single Payer system would get past the Senate right now.

PS: As I write this, I am uninsured.

[wildflowergardener]

114. Conyers

I read this, then I went over to Daily Kos where an article says he was invited now.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/3/4/15419/10701/140/704659

[NoSheep]

127. Nice. Most important fiber in the whole thread!

[blackdot]

116. What is single payer health insurance?

Never heard of the term.

[drm604]

129. Single Payer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_payer_health_insurance

[George II]

123. Excuse me...........

"Then why the hell did I voted Obama for, so he play political incest with health insurance companies? Change my ass."

Did you vote for Obama for just that one single issue? You should have voted for McCain. THEN what would you have today?

[whistler162]

126. Likely they did!

[George II]

137. From the excellent grammar in that post, you're probably right...

[Learnin]

136. Genuine question

Hi all -

I've been checking out this site for a while and I don't want anyone to think I'm a troll but I do think I have more conservative views than most on here. However, I do have a sincere desire to learn and like to hear as many points of view as I can.

So, here's my question. I hear really scary things about the health care systems in Canada, Europe and England (rationing, long waits, etc.) Aren't those single-payer systems? If so, why does everyone want that here? I pay over $1,000/mo for my health insurance so I would definitely love to be able to spend that money somewhere else but the stories that I hear about other countries do not sound good.

Like I say, a geniune question. I appreciate any responses and thanks.:dilemma:

[MasonJar]

139. Obama is backing away from important policies. So much for not

listening to lobbyists. I tried to tell y'all that Hillary was more progressive than Obama. just look at the two voting records in the Senate.