Dear Howard Fineman, you're full of s***

[ProSense]

Fineman: On Health Care, Obama Should Read His Teddy Roosevelt

Howard Fineman


<...>

But the truth is this: there is no single federal entity with authority to oversee and approve the language and conditions of the policies that health-insurance companies offer, especially for individuals, for small companies and for folks who lose their job and try to get hired by another employer.

I'm no fan of regulation. I hate bureaucracy. But we need national, clear standards about what language can or cannot be in a health-insurance policy, and we need an agency to enforce those rules, with tough penalties for non-compliance.

The irony is that the insurance industry wants this too, as long as they also get the federal government to require everyone in America to carry insurance. That means more business for them, but it also means they can spread the risk (and the cost) of provisions they don't currently want to write, such as a ban on denying people coverage for pre-existing conditions.

<...>

Most people have private insurance. They don't want to abandon it. They don't want to lose it. They want it properly and fairly administered.

<...>

Perhaps Obama hasn't stressed this theme for another reason: he wants to satisfy or at least appease the left wing of his party by arguing that only a "public option" plan will -- to use his words -- "keep the insurance companies honest" by forcing them to compete with the government." But think about it. If he were championing a comprehensive regulatory scheme, wouldn't that "keep the insurance companies honest?" And he isn't championing it, why not?

link

No Howard, the insurance companies already have what they want, that's why they're fighting reform. And another thing, the public option is not a "left wing" demand. Asshole.

[MercutioATC]

1. This is DU. You can say "shit".

Just a PSA.

[ProSense]

2. Really? n/t

[MercutioATC]

4. Fuck, yes.

(and you can say "fuck" too...)

[MarjorieG]

3. Yes, just like insurance promised ending pre-existing before. You're as eloquent as I feel!

[DrToast]

5. The insurance companies want a bailout

The only reason they're willing to change their business model is because the population is getting older and they're losing customers.

We know this is true because they tried to block health care reform every other time.

[NYC_SKP]

6. I'm shocked and appalled at your potty mouth, ProSense!!!

Well, shocked a little.

:rofl:

[ProSense]

7. The asterisks are cute.

:P

[NYC_SKP]

10. Your "moms" would be proud.

Mine would have asked "do you eat with that mouth?"

:P

[ingac70]

8. Hey Fineman!

Teddy Roosevelt was the first major politician to bring up the need for National Health.

[rpannier]

9. Major American Politician

Let's not forget that passing such things as National Health Care, Retirement benefits, etc began with Otto von Bismarck

I remind everyone I know who refers to National Health Care as Socialist, that it was a Right wing retired military man that started it.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. +1 and -1 While I agree that the public option isn't left wing, i disagree that the

insurance industry is fighting reform.

You must have missed the news conference with AHIP, The President, and SEIU all standing together smiling about the agreements they had come to.
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/obama-healthcare-groups-eye-cost-control
I know that you believe politically that it's expedient to pretend the insurance companies are fighting reform.

But are you calling Obama a liar? At the town hall in Montana, Obama specifically said that in return for the insurance companies agreement to end pre-existing conditions and cherry picking that Obamna has agreed to require everyone be insured under penalty of law.

From the transcript

snip
"Now, one point I want to make about insurance: Some of the reforms that we want for the insurance market are very hard to achieve, unless we've got everybody covered. This is the reason the insurance companies are willing to support reform, because their attitude is if we can't exclude people for preexisting conditions, for example, if we can't cherry pick the healthy folks from the not-so-healthy folks, well, that means that we're taking on more people with more expensive care. What's in it for us? The answer is if they've got more customers, then they're willing to make sure that they are eliminating some of these practices. If they've got fewer customers, they're less willing to do it.

So it's important for people -- when people ask me sometimes, why don't you just do the insurance reform stuff and not expand coverage for more people, my answer is I can't do the insurance reform stuff by itself. The only way that we can change some of the insurance practices that are hurting people now is to make sure that everybody is covered and everybody has got a stake in it, and then the insurance companies are able and willing to make some of these changes that will help people who have insurance right now. But thank you for the question. I appreciate it. (Applause.)"

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/August/14/transcript-Obama-Montana.aspx

So while It's true that the industry doesn't want the public option, it is also working with Obama on making insurance purchase mandatory and on government subsidies for people to buy private insurance.

Don't kid yourself, even if you think you need to kid other people.

[Mass]

12. Total asshole, but he has a point. If we do not get single payer, we need

national, clear standards about what language can or cannot be in a health-insurance policy, and we need an agency to enforce those rules, with tough penalties for non-compliance.

Though the rest of the paper is totally disingenuous, I agree that there needs to be very strong regulations about what can be and cannot be in an insurance contract and tough penalty if this is not enacted.

This said, the insurance companies will not want that either (I am not taking about preexisting conditions that they know they have to get rid of. I am talking about contrats which state clearly what is covered, at what costs, and what is not covered, and written in a way that is understandable without a law degree.).

[Cha]

13. fineman's been making the negative corporatemedia

rounds trying to sell this snake oil.

[ProSense]

14. Yup, pure snake oil: regulation is all we need and the insurance companies want it too.

BS.

Regulation without a strong public option will do absolutely nothing to reform the American health insurance system.

[Phx_Dem]

15. He's no more clueless than Olbermann. It's a deja vu from last Fall.

I'm not worried at all, and I have to admit I'm enjoying seeing them squirm and nash their teeth every day. They just don't get it. They are all up in arms because Obama has not telegraphed his "plan" for all to hear. Yeah, and that's why he always wins you fools.

[Hieronymus]

17. I saw the two questioning what Obama was doing. I'd like to know too.

[Cha]

18. Remember during the primaries and general

when the "media" was having a feeding frenzy on one thing and another that Obama hadn't laid out for them so they could screw with it? I do.

And, like you say..he won.

[ncteechur]

16. Howard, I'm quite sure that President Obama has read Teddy Roosevelt.

[Clio the Leo]

19. Howard Fineman can get stuffed........

..... there, I feel better now.

(I'm watching him on KO.)

[MasonJar]

20. On Keith two nights in a row Fineman has taken Obama to task for

his lack of support for public option. I agree with what he said. Obama is so wishywashy on this issue that it is so obvious that he is not dedicated to true reform. He is listening to some of those idiots he chose to advise him and he is blowing the public option. He wants a bill for his own political benefit. He does not care what it says. I am sorry to believe this, but I do.

[ProSense]

21. "I agree with what he said. " You agree that the insurance companies want to be regulated? n/t

[mzmolly]

22. Mr. Fineman, regulation can be undone. Public options, not so much.

:hi:

[jbnow]

23. I am missing Fineman's point

Obama talks about the regulations every time and he talked about them during the campaign more than he talked about a public option...
if by regulation he means no more bias against preexisting conditions, can't turn them down, can't charge them more, no lifetime or annual limit on coverage, a cap on a person's annual out of pocket, no copay on well baby or preventative things...

Or is he talking about financial regulations? Because that is the part he says the public option is needed to keep them honest about. What else does he think will keep them honest regarding rates? And as far as championing the rest of these reforms...has he listened to Obama?

He isn't making sense to me