Howard Dean Talks Healthcare on The ED Show

[slipslidingaway]

Run time: 06:08 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VgAihpijuo   Posted on YouTube: May 05, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: May 05, 2009 By DU Member: slipslidingaway Views on DU: 954

 

[Fovea]

1. Go Dr. Dean!

Pound the HMO Dems.

[cooolandrew]

2. You got it hand it to Ed he has the a very televisual presence. Whoever he may once of been I think>

he's a very different person now. Probably not as liberal as everyone would like but he seems to have his priorities in the right place. Any show or movement that takes the country forward deserves folks support. Every forward movement out there is a cog piece in the machine for change, sometimes unnoticeable at first but as a whole has a powerful impact.

On the health-care thing it has to have the private option in order not to upset the apple cart too much but as Ed said if there is a single payer option it's the wisest one to go for. Single payer will sell itself on its own merits alone, plus with more single payer forums and awareness campaigns the momentum can't be held back for what the people really want and need.

In order for this to all work perfectly the next project has to be a living wage and stop shareholders being the slave owners of society and excessive CEO salaries. Nothing wrong with owning shares but it should never be a priority over fair workers wages.

[Triana]

3. Love our Dr. Dean. He said the same things tonight on the call...

...that we MUST have a public health care option (expansion of Medicare to cover those under 65) as a choice in health care reform.

If people want to keep their private insurance, they can. If they want the public option they can have that. If more people choose the public option (HATED by insurance companies who don't want to lose the $$$$) then so be it. It puts public health care in direct competition with private for-profit insurance companies and THEY NEED some competition. If that competition drives them out of business - well, waaah. Who cares?

Having a public option as a choice is the FIRST STEP in moving towards real single-payer, public health care and in REAL health care reform.

[destes]

4. Someone needs to explain.

It's about payroll deductions and other transparencies. As it is now, one can see what is being deducted from their wages for health insurance. It's on their check stub. Most employees have a deal where the employer pays 100% for "employee only" coverage. When that employer based insurance expands to cover the employee's family is when the insurance premiums are shown to be deducted from their paycheck. Even then, however, the employer still supplements that family plan premium.

The questions go like this:
1. If an employee were to opt for the federal health insurance would that mean he could use the money his employer currently pays to a private insurance company to pay his federal premiums? ANS:Obviously, the answer must be yes.
2. In the case of private insurance group plans, how could those plans remain solvent if a substantial number of employees took their premium dollars from them and paid the federal insurance? ANS:Obviously, they couldn't.
3. If employees opt for the federal health insurance option, what mechanism would ensure that the employer would now forward ALL the money formerly reserved for private insurance to the federal insurance?
ANS:That's the question Obama hasn't answered. That's the BIG change. That's where the ravings about socialism comes in.
4. Employers now deal, typically, with only one health insurer. If, in this new system, the employer has to deal additionally with the federal insurance how is the employer compensated for the additional costs of this accounting burden.
ANS:That's the question to which employers deserve an answer.

For over 50 years employer/employee compensation agreements have been tied in with health insurance benefits. (Does anyone else see the historic line here: the union movement>organized crime>health insurance? Just asking.)Those "union" agreements became the template for non-union workplaces. Obviously, that "captive clientele", the employee, is a very lucrative cash cow for the insurance industry. One that they cherish to the point of total dependency. They have so efficiently milked that cow, and profited so much that they now, and for at least 15 years, own most of the MSM, Wall Street, congress and, arguably, the supreme court. During 2000-2008 they had an unwavering hold on the executive. As much as I hate to admit it, it may be that international banking interests represented by the Federal Reserve are one of the "good guys" in this scenario. They too suffer when the US economy falters.

This triangle, worker-employer-insurance vulture, has become the basis of our economy. With the economy in shambles it may just be possible to shake off that vulture. After all, they've been shaking us down for years.

[stlsaxman]

6. Exactly- adopt single payer and watch the unemployment rate plummet!

[DFW]

5. Howard always had that double-edged sword of making sense a lot

It is his greatest asset, and was his undoing.

Very few in politics want to hear sensible straight talk all the time.

He also said what need to be repeated so often: the Republicans are just the party of NO.
For every time you hear us labeled "libbruls" in a pejorative way, that's how often we need
to label them as the Party of No. Actually, considering their Stalinist tendencies of late,
maybe just call them the "nyets."

[slipslidingaway]

7. Thanks for the recs and replies... when did a public option

become single-payer???

[destes]

9. That's the problem

It's not single payer so long as the mandate by law will be for everyone to be insured. I'm hoping this is all just Obama's way of herding cats.

It's single payer when EVERYONE is given the health care they need and it is ALL payed for by the federal government from a fund composed of, what are now, insurance premiums (both employee & employer). That's a reasonable mathematical equation.

I think employers will want to keep those premiums they are now paying for their employees. If the boss doesn't kick in the cash due the new system, it will fail. I don't EVEN want to hear the wingers mouthe off about "socialism's inherent failure.... blah blah blah."

I think that's where the real war is now: between employers' groups who see this shift from the status quo as an opportunity to be more profitable VS the health insurance industry who, rightly, see this as their swan song. Either way you look at it, neither of these interests have the welfare of the general public as their priority. If one's gripe is overpaid CEO types then maybe the baddest guy is the hierarchy of the insurance industry. If your pet peeve is "the boss" then it may be a case of biting the hand that feeds you.

At issue is no less than a shift in the economics of the nation that is every bit as challenging as any global warming initiatives or the loose nukes of Pakistan. (sounds like a rock group)

[slipslidingaway]

10. I know President Obama was for mandated coverage of

children, although I do not think it has been extended to adults.

What I hate to see happen is the lines being blurred between these very different options and discussion of SPHC dismissed.

It will be interesting to see the arguments between employers who want to keep the insurance premiums... yes it is a shift in the economics of our nation.

A belated welcome to DU.

:hi:

[slipslidingaway]

8. Please see this poll...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5598298&mesg_id=5598298

Poll question: Single-payer health care is the same as having a public option
while maintaing private plans.

Yes
No