Public Opposition to Senate Health Care Bill
December 24, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate health care bill is about to seal the deal with the insurance and the drug companies reportedly having invested a significant proportion of the total worth $3.3 billion in lobbying Congress. Further, according to the Center for Responsive Politics the health insurance industry spent millions of dollars on the top five senators overseeing the senate health care bill.
Had not only the Senators delivered to the insurance industry and the Big Pharma by rejecting the people’s choices of a single payer system or the public option to induce real competition ensuring a windfall for everyone of them but also,
The reports confirm that these Senators stand by the oligarchs to grant the insurance industry viz. the Blue Cross Blue Shield a tax break and fee exemptions to a tune of $15 – $20 million a year in Nebraska alone.
Meanwhile, the estimated 46 states are expected to run out of funds for the unemployment payments by 2011.
Again, while the Democrats uphold the health care “reform” as a historic process, it’s a major victory for the same groups in the status quo. It’s reflected in the insurance industry’s latest stock performance that skyrocketed upon the precipitous progress of the ‘industry authored’ senate bill.
There are editorials, television appearances and political interviews favoring the senate bill with a call to embrace the rudimentary version on the argument that some action is better than inaction by highlighting the masqueraded cosmetic benefits that deserve scrutiny.
I agree that action is necessary particularly having worked extremely hard along with millions of fellow Americans in the health care debate. Nevertheless, the real victims in the current health care system will be worse off under the proposed legislation for the following reasons.
First, the health care legislation is hijacked by a handful of Senators threatening to kill the bill if it includes viable options to benefit the public against the industry they are rewarded to represent. Sadly, to the democracy’s demise, the elected officials engage in gerrymandering the national issue.
This is in reference to the ‘noble’ Democrats’ stance to boycott the bill against any elements such as the ‘public option,’ and/or the expansion of the Medicare eligibility as well as the women’s health rights, all of which has been eliminated to appease the selective opponents. It’s clearly indicative of the fact that the government of the people is run by the oligarchs through the revolving door for the mutual prosperity of the ‘K’ street.
At least with the Republican minority, there is no dispute about their role in any legislation and that is to unanimously grandstand the American public rather than protect the national interest. Interestingly the opposition dissolves when the republican political tactics like the filibustering and obstructionism converges with the conservative and moderate democrats’ traits, both hired by the lobbyists, who were once the legislators or the Congressional aides.
Furthermore, the White House lack of serious commitment throughout the process to defend the public interest comprehensively is yet another disturbing factor and raises legitimate concerns about the ‘K’ street phenomenon. It exemplifies the forgotten campaign pledge regarding transparency and accountability through the ‘Change we can believe in.’
It’s important to shed light on the core values claimed by the supporters of the current bill hastily approved to fulfill the legislative formality.
Despite the decision to rush the legislation by Christmas eve, i.e. December 24, 2009, it is confirmed that the main framework will not to be effective until 2013 under the House bill and 2014 in the Senate version,
The time lag leaves approximately 45 million Americans uninsured until such time enabling the insurers to continue with ‘business as usual.’
Accordingly, the legislation is bifurcated into the immediate and later i.e. 2013/2014 Plan.
Immediate Plan:
As per the immediate plan, the taxpayers will fund a $5 billion investment to assist only the “high risk” population who are uninsured for a period of six months and denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions to purchase private insurance in the industry dominant market place.
Under the existing condition, the taxpayers are already covering the bill for patients in that category usually treated in the emergency rooms in the county and federal/state funded hospitals and medical centers.
If the notion behind introducing such plan with a taxpayer funded private insurance is to incorporate the peripheral health care providers’ service represented by the AMA, besides allowing the insurance industry to reap profit at the taxpayer expense identified in the health care costs, then it satisfies the overall health care industry criteria in this legislation,
Moreover, in the absence of legislative enforcements on premiums, co-pays and deductibles, the cost benefit ratio is unknown.
Additionally, the taxpayers would provide financial relief to the seniors for their prescription drug costs considering the Senate Rx restrictions from Canada and elsewhere to comply with the Big Pharma demand. Apparently, the globalization concept subverted to let the protectionism strategy prevail in this respect.
Insurance companies are barred from dropping patients filing medical claims. It’s good because of the continuity. However, in practicality it doesn’t set parameters in terms of insurance costs guaranteed to be hiked by the industry without robust competition in the form of single payer or public option programs.
It would inevitably create the unaffordable situation exacerbated due to the supply and demand market forces coming into play from the mandatory insurance requirement on 30 million uninsured Americans upon the legislation coming into effect in 2013 or 2014.
Similarly, the eligibility extended to dependents up to age 26 on the family insurance plan. It helps young adults with health insurance under the family plan as long as the cost factor remains within the affordable range for the groups ineligible for Medicaid and federal subsidies since it’s unpredictable in a free market.
————————————————————————————————–
Legislation Effective Period – 2013 or 2014
Barring insurers from declining adult patients based on the pre-existing health conditions is a valid piece of legislation. Again, as referenced in the immediate plan there is no specification on the cost factor, which is expected to be much higher than the other plans unlike the universal Medicare program or the public option at the bare minimum.
Eligibility expanded on the Public insurance programs such as Medicaid would reduce the uninsured numbers. This is a government insurance program and the costs would be cheaper than the private products.
Federal subsidies provision to help the lower income groups buy insurance from the private sector. It’s a taxpayer compensation to insure the lower income individuals and families with the private insurance company, enlarging the clientele for the insurance industry.
For those who are self-employed including the individuals ineligible for Medicaid and Medicare, the legislation facilitates a marketplace with choices of private insurance offers through “non-profit” organization in a co-operative style preferred by the insurance industry, as it’s easier to dominate such outlets than the meaningful government insurance program like Medicare.
————————————————————————————————–
Perspective:
It’s not a true reform but instead a makeover with imprudent measures to accommodate the health care industry agenda. It’s a travesty to witness the will of the people in a democracy seeking real changes and meaningful legislation denied over the Washington and Wall Street contrived policy subjugated for profits and political salvation of the minority signifying that politics has no soul.
The bill is entirely funded by the taxpayers at every step of the way via federal aid and subsidies with the government laid infrastructure for the private insurance, pharmaceuticals and health care givers to thrive exponentially from the large consumer base.
What it means is, the health care industry have not surrendered to cost control. The cost factor has been the crucial component that primarily led to the health care reform.
Even though the CBO confirmed the deficit neutrality and subsequent savings over a decade on the Senate bill, it’s worth remembering that the revenues are derived from the proposed Medicare spending cuts at $460 billion along with the Cadillac plan tax revenues and the payroll tax on individuals exceeding the $250,000 threshold. Nowhere in the plan, there is any cost reduction commitment upon the legislation becoming effective, from the medical industrial complex.
Without a clue on the CPI (consumer price index) for products and services particularly the insurance and drug costs in 2013 or 2014 after adjusting for inflation, it’s hard to ascertain the real costs to be incurred by the consumer in the exclusively private health care system.
Whereas, in the government run public option, the guidelines are already available from the established Medicare and Veterans medical insurance programs to prepare the consumers from all different categories.
If the current system is considered flawed, then the one prepared by the Senate will not be a health care rather a nightmare for the American public and the economy with the insurance and the pharmaceutical industry CEO bonuses exploding beyond $700 million, otherwise history repeating itself in three to four years time from now.
When the legislation becomes effective in 2013 or 2014, the market monopoly will devour the exchange programs offered through the cooperatives evidenced in the present time. Already the forecasts of private industry dominance portends grave danger for the average consumers with minimal consumer rights, muddled state laws creating chaos in the out-of-state insurance exchange programs for California attributed to the lack of free market element, the real competition only available through government run single payer or the public option.
Upon careful review, the Senate bill benefits are minuscule compared to the drawbacks elevating the medical industrial complex as the winner without the counter force such as the government run insurance program, the public option to maintain deficit neutrality.
In the government run insurance, there will be firm negotiations with the hospital and the pharmaceutical industries paramount to mitigate costs and wasteful spending cited in the private insurance sector.
I urge the American public especially the grass roots supporters to rise to the occasion and strongly condemn the Republican minority and the conservative / moderate democrats’ threats against democracy and their deliberate failure to act in the best interest of the nation, the republic they are elected to serve with integrity, courage and solidarity.
Remember, the special interests will rein in on democracy until you let it happen. Unless every concerned citizen challenges the power and hold them accountable for defaulting on the legislative duty including campaign pledges, the human beings life standard will continue to deteriorate in the United States and the rest of the world.
It’s your civic responsibility and moral obligation towards yourself and your family burdened with the burgeoning national debts to reclaim your rights suppressed by the Washington power and Wall Street profits and demand that the following be enacted in the health care reform:
In fact, the single payer system should have been the option from the time the health care legislation was considered.
Nevertheless, the government run insurance program i.e. public option with affordable premiums to help the American public should replace the co-op exchange program that is being imposed at the insurance industry’s behest.
Medicare coverage be expanded from the age 55 onwards instead of the age 65.
Provide adequate federal funding to hospitals and medical centers across the nation treating uninsured patients as well as the lower income families who cannot afford to wait until 2013 or 2014.
Today the U.S. democracy is under siege with the health care legislation packaged by the health care industry and their paid representatives in the Senate and the House of Congress.
President Barack Obama was elected to bring about the change promised on the campaign trail.
Therefore, it’s incumbent on the Obama administration to do right by the people. The public do not support the current Senate version of the Health Care reform and it would be unconstitutional to proceed against the democratic will. If the Senate bill is passed then the demands placed on the House Bill with respect to public option should not be compromised during the conference.
Action against the democratic will would be disastrous for the democrats in the mid-term elections in 2010 and the re-election in 2012. The Congress members decision to part with the public and favor the special interests would be an inevitable political suicide rather than a political salvation.
The Senators hired by the special interests undermine the honorable principles of their colleagues in the United States Senate and the House of Congress. The unethical practices also marginalize the American public interest in the present and the future legislative process. This is the United States and not the Islamic Republic of Iran or the People’s Republic of China.
Finally, Health care reform is a matter of life and death. Politics and Profits must cease the speculative sport using the people as pawns.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
The Senate Health Care Bill – Defrauding Democracy
December 16, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate is moving forward to wrap up the ‘historic legislation’ as a Christmas gift to their campaign financiers, the insurance industry. Although, the sound bites deceptively imply the magnanimous favor to the American public, the hostage in the ‘so-called’ health care reform, the reality is examine worthy.
The fact of the matter is the bill cannot be any more hostile to the American people as the taxpayers, the consumers and the electorate in a democracy. It targets the employers i.e. the small businesses, medium and large corporations, the dwindling middle-class and the struggling working class forced to buy private insurance with penalty imposition on the employers and individuals along with the Medicare expansion denial to senior citizens between the age group 55-64.
There is a bizarre component suggesting that it’s not compulsory for the large corporations to cover their employees. Nevertheless, the government assistance sought by the insurance companies to levy charges against the potential offenders. Similarly eligible workers provided with federal subsidies to buy private coverage. Ironically, the government intervention at this level is appreciated by the industry and their Senate representatives but prevented from selling the government run insurance program.
Should the women be spared in this category? Apparently not and concessions seemingly made to appease the Nebraska Democrat Senator Ben Nelson seeking maximum restrictions on abortion coverage in the renewed insurance market the legislation intend to set up. In addition, the Senator’s care for the industry extended to exempt them from the anti-trust laws.
The White House cheered the version and responded accordingly.
“Congressional allies were “on the precipice” of a historic accomplishment.
It is deficit-neutral. It bends the cost curve. It covers 30 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there to make sure that we’re preventing abuse.”
Let’s dissect the bill in the appropriate context.
Deficit neutral – The earlier Procedural Vote Bill appeared to be neutral. However, the current version with numerous industry-biased amendments is awaiting the congressional budget office confirmation on the cost neutrality.
Bends the cost curve – Yet to realize and once again falls back on the CBO determination.
Covers 30 million Americans – Reports from reliable sources affirm 10 millions. Despite owing the benefit of the doubt to the claim, the arbitrary 30 million are mandatorily required to purchase the private insurance in the absence of government run insurance program – the public option.
It’s beyond reasonable doubt that the offer would be initially made available at a teaser rate mimicking the notorious sub-prime mortgage pattern from the Wall Street counterpart, the financial institutions and then later on, the consumers hit with an extraordinary hike as captives in the system, a kind of defibrillator treatment to reset the industry into the exorbitant profit mode.
Insurance reforms preventing abuse – Alas, there is bipartisanship in this respect to include those with ‘pre-existing’ conditions otherwise excluded in the existing protocol. Even then the agreement reached after assurance that the benefactors, none other than the insurance companies absolutely gain from the inevitable customized premiums for the substrata with the anti-trust law exemption tied to the legislation.
Simply the bill is a mockery of the victims’ plight and clearly demonstrated in the kingmakers’ unabashed flattery of the insurance giants for their guarantee to promote the individual lawmakers aka lawbreakers’ political career. Never mind the bitter truth about 45,000 people dying due to the unaffordable and inadequate health care predominantly from the lack of universal system such as single payer adapted by most developed nations around the world.
With respect to funding the bill, it’s extracted from the projected Medicare spending cuts to a tune of $460 billion to health care providers, which translates into forcing patients to accept subsidized service. Alternatively, the seniors end up paying more for better if not quality care. Other derivatives are the Cadillac plan tax revenues including the payroll tax on individuals exceeding the $250,000 threshold.
Essentially, the carefully contrived bill primarily focuses on the insurance industry’s financial interest while ensuring the legislators’ political security at the expense of the vast majority. Thus clarifying the solemn union between Washington and Wall Street as inseparable soul mates.
Whereas for the main street the deal qualifies as the ‘historic scam’ rather than the ‘historic reform.’ Unfortunately, in the contemporary politics priorities are based on the personal justification failing to serve the greater good for all. Aiming to pass a dysfunctional legislation to fulfill a formality is an explicit assault on the intelligence of the millions of Americans who shared their heart wrenching experiences since the debate onset.
The truly meaningful health care reform is the single payer system that not only simplifies the process but also replaces the more than two thousand-page dossier admittedly ignored by the opposition with the remaining members merely glancing at the relevant information in the bill.
Besides, the single payer program comprehensively satisfies the needs in every aspect through the cost effective yet efficient superior care for all Americans irrespective of the socio economic barriers.
Therefore, it’s incumbent on Congress to heed to public plea and honor the democratic will in the health care legislation by transforming the house bill to a single payer format through reconciliation process as a warning that democracy can no longer be undermined by the cohort representing the Wall Street and Washington.
U.S. democracy is increasingly revealed vulnerable to undemocratic elements dominating the political, economic and social domain. It’s a ‘nuclear’ status for the modern democracy.
Hence, Congress must move forward to limit the Senate vote requirement to 51 from the prevailing 60 to eliminate the filibuster currently misused as a threat by the opportunist legislators defaulting on their constitutional duty towards their constituents and the nation.
Evidently, the Senate bill is a cosmetic presentation with the substance designed to exacerbate the American people trials and tribulations, meanwhile contributing to the insurance industry’s further prosperity aided by the narcissistic culture in Washington.
American people should rise and protest against the biggest charade in the form of Senate legislation authored by the insurance industry and demand Congress to approve the single payer system by jamming the communication channels via telephones, text message, emails, social networking sites, blogs etc., Remember, democracy is alive when you remain alert and active in the legislative process.
The powerful is powerless without the political capital accessible only through populace vote.
In conclusion, the American citizens should peacefully dissent the carte blanche to Wall Street and Washington and release America from the reform resistant political sycophants.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Senate Preliminary Victory on Procedural Vote
November 21, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Congratulations! To the American public, President Barack Obama, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and the Senators casting their votes to enable the health care debate for Senate approval.
It’s encouraging to witness the commitment from the majority to improve millions of American lives.
The action was long overdue and it’s just beginning to take fruition. I have no doubt that upon the historic national health care legislation; the American electorate would reciprocate in the 2010 mid-term elections with the appropriate results.
It’s important to maintain the momentum without substantial compromise on the real benefits and rights of the American people. Again, the bill should encompass robust ‘public option’ component and other factors relevant to the women’s reproductive rights, preserving existing Medicare to senior citizens while accommodating reasonable payments to providers in the government run program . The federal deficit reduction or neutrality is equally essential in the final bill.
An extraordinary journey, nevertheless the light is visible at the end of the tunnel.
As stated earlier, I remain steadfast with my support to President Barack Obama and every member in the House and Senate in passing the necessary legislations on various national and international issues.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Senate Vote on Health Care Bill
November 20, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate health care bill is currently under scrutiny requiring 60 procedural votes to qualify for the Senate voting process. At present, the democrats have 58 votes in favor with two independents unclear and the remaining Republican votes unanimously opposed to the bill. I’ve confidence in the (I) U.S. Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders with his support to alleviate the suffering of millions in Vermont and across the nation.
While the Democrats laying out the facts and figures, the Republican lawmakers are meticulously scanning for flaws in their defense to block the anxiously awaited health care legislation.
Senate version of the health care bill proposes $848 billion allowing coverage for 31 million uninsured Americans with a CBO (Congressional Budget Office) assessment confirming an impressive $130 billion cost savings otherwise a massive federal deficit reduction over a decade.
In terms of public benefits, the contentious ‘public option’ substantially compromised with a state opt out plan to appease the opponents against the American interest. Women’s right related to the yet another controversial health topic viz. abortion devised differently from the House Bill. Again, a strategy adopted to lure the conservative vote within the majority.
The tax increases predominantly aimed at expensive health care policies titled as the ‘Cadillac Insurance Plan,’ with a tax imposition on minimal policies increasing the threshold to $8,500 for individuals and $23,000for family coverage. Likewise, $60 billion tax revenue generated mostly from a marginal hike in Medicare payroll tax by 0.50 percent on individual income exceeding $200,000 and $250,000 on combined household earnings respectively.
Although, there are reasons for grievances among different groups in the society, Senator Harry Reid’s challenge is understandable given the preparation in the battleground ahead of the voting session. Seeking perfection in the long anticipated health care reform would prolong the matter providing ammunition for the special interests and their paid representatives to terminate the desperately needed national health care.
I sincerely hope along with the millions of victims from the status quo that the legislators on both sides would rise to the occasion in the tough economic times by honoring the constitutional oath to protect, serve and prioritize the citizens’ plight over other demands. The only way to demonstrate that would be to cast their vote for the health care bill overwhelmingly accepted as the gateway to economic recovery.
Not only the nation’s eyes are set on the Senate’s important event but also the entire world will be watching the elected officials’ true commitment or the lack thereof to the electorate granting them power in a democracy.
I remain optimistic on the outcome and convey my best wishes to Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and other Senators for their valuable contribution towards the historic legislation.
Good Luck! to the members of the United States Senate in the health care bill approval.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
A Candid Disclosure
November 8, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Last night the health care legislation passed by the House of Congress is a major step towards recognizing the American people’s plight in the most stressful economic times. The House members confirmed that their consolidated efforts and commitment to the American electorate could produce the desirable results in the economic, social and environmental cause.
Health care is relevant to all and no longer an individual matter.
I had recently fallen ill from women’s related health issue in the months of September and October 2009. Accordingly, I was scheduled for a major surgery on November 4, 2009 – ironically on the anniversary of the historic Presidential election date and around the special elections.
In order to deal with the health crisis, I had to suspend some activities and focus on the immediate recovery plan. It was a temporary action and not meant to avoid communication at any level. Now, I’m able to resume direct contact with the responsible authorities.
Even though, the surgery was finalized and the consent forms were handed out for signing three days prior to the operation, I experienced a sudden change with the symptoms disappearing and felt a sense of well being without any medical intervention. Therefore, I had no reason to proceed with the surgery and it was cancelled the day before the scheduled date.
I attribute the positive outcome to spirituality and enormously grateful for the grace and compassion from the ‘Almighty God.’
During my illness, I frequently thought about the people diagnosed for a medical condition but unable to undergo treatment due to the lack of affordable insurance and hence deprived of medical care. Needless to say, there are many infants, children, young adults and others who require medical attention and the families are left with hard choices in saving the lives of their loves ones.
In my case, the medical insurance is mainly used for the routine check-ups as a preventive care with the exception of a foot surgery three years ago. Despite the underutilization, the insurance company – Blue Cross Blue Shield wanted to conduct an interview with me regarding the procedure. Perhaps, the aim was to rule out the pre-existing scenario. Again, the insurance company having profited from my good health all these years had a pre-screening protocol that did not take place because the surgery was cancelled.
The Senators against public option in the health care bill owe a legitimate explanation to the millions of Americans forced to postpone decisions on life and death matter in the absence of effective competition through federal run health care against the profit oriented insurance industry.
I emphasize that health care is not a privilege but a necessity for survival. If the richest nation on earth fails to provide a decent health care plan to citizens, the achievements in other areas are meaningless with the public health in jeopardy.
I sincerely hope that the United States Senate will coordinate with the recently passed House bill without compromising the core element i.e. the federal managed health insurance program at a minimum to help the thousands of ailing Americans rightfully seeking the public option in the embattled health care reform.
As for as my health is concerned, I’m feeling fine and remain steadfast in my support to the legislative affairs and foreign policies benefiting the people of the United States and the rest of the world.
I stand by President Barack Obama and the Congress in serving the nation and humanity through legislations and strategies comprising economic growth, social justice and political fairness at home and overseas.
In compliance with the highest commandment, the purpose of my political involvement is to assist the leaderships in the United States and around the world to establish peace, progress and prosperity for all human beings besides protecting the environment.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Bill – HR 3962 – Twenty First Century Milestone
November 7, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Heartfelt Congratulations! To the American public, President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House members for the successful passage of the long overdue Health Care reform.
The American citizens and the members of the Congress deserve the accolades for the hard work, determination and relentless campaign to reach the milestone in the twenty first century. After several months of grueling discussions, exhaustive debates, and personal experiences shared by millions of suffering Americans, the historic reform is materialized today.
Despite threats, ultimatums and partisan politics the achievement is indeed remarkable and praiseworthy. Now, it is dependent upon the Senate members to meet with the national expectations in completing the legislative requirement for President Obama’s signature.
Surely, it was the most contentious battle in the legislative affair and predictably emerged resilient against the anti-progress forces in Washington and Wall Street. There are other equally important issues confronting the nation and the health care legislation has paved the pathway for the ‘Cap and Trade Bill’ and many more to follow in the immediate future.
Again, the sick and the frail population’s voices heard in the Capitol Hill.
I hope that the regulations in terms of ‘pre-existing’ conditions, unaffordable premiums…will be effective immediately to allow the urgent caring and medical attention for the vulnerable members in the society.
Finally, America is on the road to recovery with the health care costs incrementally declining over a decade and simultaneously the approximate 36 million uninsured Americans guaranteed medical coverage that was declared a far-fetched dream by the opponents not long ago. The other factors in the bill will be dissected and critiqued accordingly.
Nevertheless, the dedication by the individuals across the nation contributed to the phenomenal success of the health care legislation.
Hope is turning into a reality and Change is inevitable with this new beginning.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Legislation
October 21, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Congress is engaged in the Medicare payments to doctors as part of the broader aspect of the health care legislation. Despite the opposition’s insinuations against the government run successful Medicare program, it’s imperative for the lawmakers to sustain the viability of the Medicare and the Medicaid by honoring the providers’ legitimate request for payments increase that would substantially reduce the health care costs currently incurred by the taxpayers through payments to private insurers.
As stated earlier, the conservative and the moderate Democrats’ unwillingness to support the public option is contributing to the stalemate in the health care legislation. Even though, the recent Washington Post/ABC Poll confirmed that an impressive 57 percent of the American population is overwhelmingly in favor of the ‘public option’ plan, some Democratic legislators’ reluctance to join the majority on this issue is disappointing and deserve a valid explanation for their position that is detrimental to the national interest.
It’s important for the Democrats opposing the public option to realize that, any skepticism on the viable proposal is a rejection of the long established Medicare with a proven record of reducing the health care costs while simultaneously providing coverage for a significant population, a core objective of the historic health care legislation. The ambiguity on the part of these legislators is justified if the status quo not draining the economy besides hurting the national future which is dependent upon the children, the youth and the baby boomers with inadequate coverage or none at all.
Whatever may be the reasons for the Democrats resting on the fence, the health matter is a test of the human character to expend the entrusted power for the public welfare against the political gains. The prolonged health care legislation is a strong indication to the American electorate to recognize and distinguish between the legislators’ actions or the lack thereof that should essentially prioritize the people over the special interest represented politics.
Accordingly, the 2010 mid-term election will determine the voter satisfaction or frustration in this regard. Those lawmakers in favor of the federal public option display commitment to serve the people electing them to power in a democracy.
The insurance industry has offered the yet another ‘less competitive’ alternative to the federal public option i.e. the state run program and that too only for those unable to afford the ‘insurance industry declared affordable’ payments. Not surprisingly, those in opposition to the ‘average’ American well-being embraced the idea as a brilliant reform when the states’ contemporary performance has been a dismal failure with California being the torchbearer in the dysfunctional event.
The citizens’ request for a public option is not a favor to them from the elected representatives in a democracy. On the contrary, it’s a constitutional duty of every elected official to work towards the national goals and safeguard the interests of every American representing the stars and stripes.
Again, democracy is subject to scrutiny during the legislative matters such as health care and the elected officials pledging to defend the public interest are expected to rise to the occasion by demonstrating their true service to the constituents and others nationwide.
In California, Senator Barbara Boxer believed to be on board with the democratic counterparts on the health care legislation enacting the federal run public option. However, Senator Dianne Feinstein is reportedly wavering on the ‘public option’ component of the bill. The long serving Senators from California are due for re-election in 2010 and the public opinion rely upon the voting records of their elected representatives to the House and the Senate.
Senator Boxer is presently leading the ‘climate change’ bill and the California Senator’s unequivocal approval of the public option enhances the legislative achievements for the feisty representative.
Since the concerned health care advocates do not have the absolute assurance from Senator Dianne Feinstein on the ‘public option’ component of the bill, it’s a sincere hope that Senator Feinstein will not hesitate to be remembered as a key reformer in the historic health care legislation.
The national deficit is the contentious issue for the Republican legislators against any progress. Although, they may have the best intentions in their opposition to the government run public option, it’s rather intriguing to view the self-deprecating legislators from across the aisle in their criticism of the public institution employing them to deliver the service for the greater good of all.
Apparently, these lawmakers have no issues with the guaranteed income, health care benefits and opportunities to compromise ethics for economics with the special interests in Washington. Ironically, the ‘so-called’ fiscal conservatives are also in the frontline pushing for the economically and strategically disastrous troops increase in Afghanistan. All carried out for the sake of ‘political’ opposition.
Indeed, politics is complex and the simple solutions are often ignored in the embattled power struggle.
Health care legislation is a serious matter imploring due diligence, rationale and fortitude for the desired outcome to benefit the present and the future generation. It’s possible only with the federal run public option with an inevitable costs trimming and coverage expansion, the essence of the health care reform.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Bill – Senate Finance Committee and the Republican Vote
October 15, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The decision by the Maine Senator, Olympia Snowe to get on board in the health care reform is a welcome change and provides hope for the bipartisanship even with a singular vote now.
It would have been a cause for celebration if the bill did not marginalize the purpose of this health care reform i.e. the public option that is no longer an option but a necessity for millions of people and small businesses worst hit in the national crisis.
The misplaced objective of this bill from the start has been to impress the ‘so-called’ fiscal conservatives squandering the national wealth on warfare resulting in massive casualties while being miserly on matter related to saving life.
Since the opposition maintains the tradition to oppose anything offered by the democrats, it is no surprise to view the conservative support to the health insurance industry dedicated to sabotage the health care reform by any means.
The onus is entirely on the Democratic majority specifically elected to deliver the long overdue ‘change’ urgently needed to improve the life of all Americans.
With the mid-term elections around the corner, the voter frustration is enormous and cannot possibly prolong if the representatives in a democracy do not meet the essential voter requirements in health care and other issues. To be more specific, the health care bill from the Senate will be meaningless without a ‘public option.’
National deficit is a major concern for citizens with basic economic sense, despite the issue being hailed as the ‘conservative’ and ‘moderate’ economic prudence from both sides of the aisle. The neglected element in this context is the reverse motion by the centrists and the conservatives that is predominantly driving the costs faster than a bullet train.
The identifiable costs are the unaffordable insurance premiums, unnecessary diagnostic procedures to avoid malpractice litigations, unhealthy lifestyle by a large segment of the population and uncontrolled administrative expenditure ultimately passed on to the consumers across the economic spectrum.
The costs factor cleverly evaded through pointed accusations against the ‘government’ intervention and the people, the victims in the sensitive life and death matter.
Even if the current Senate Finance Committee bill supposedly addresses all of the problems contributing to the status quo, the average and the gainfully employed citizens still faced with a challenge due to the mandatory insurance purchase that demands a massive search for the most competitive provider available only during the novelty period. Once the storm settles, it’s guaranteed to be ‘business as usual.’
Therefore, it’s absolutely important for the democratic lawmakers being the majority to ensure that the public option is included in both the House and the Senate bill.
The Senate Finance Committee bill currently accepted as a huge achievement in the absence of the ‘public option.’ Although, the legislature in itself is a cornerstone compared to the health care reform demolition during the Clinton presidency, the legislation passed merely to satisfy the haphazard objective without taking into account the plight of the citizens.’
In terms of the malpractice litigations, the truth lies somewhere in between with the victims being the providers and the public. The misdiagnosis or negligence during the surgical procedures does exist in the twenty first century in spite of the state of the art technology and medical training in the United States. The competent and self-assured professionals need not be overly concerned as the incidents are prevalent among those lacking in this regard.
For instance, not long ago the mastectomy performed on the twenty three year old patient in error resulting from the misreading /swapping of the patients’ record. On a personal account in California, a surgical metal object left behind during the foot surgery causing excruciating pain for a prolonged eighteen months, eventually spotted by a different provider via x-ray and removed through another surgery.
On the other hand, some public members view such experience as an opportunity for financial gains and pursue unmitigated lawsuits forcing the providers to rely upon the expensive malpractice insurance as a safety net. The health care reform cannot play much role in this particular issue.
Instead, the conspicuously flawed legal system requires a major overhauling in the social justice matters and hence taken advantage of by the favored party in the general framework. The justice system should focus less on the economics and more on ethics and morality.
Nevertheless, there is a cost concern in this avoidable dispute leading to the premium hikes, and health care fees inevitably borne by the mainstream public.
Any behind the scenes effort by the legislators under the special interests influence, to derail the health care legislation entirely or partially without a public option would be a political suicide for them given the public expectations based on their daily harrowing experience in the present profit oriented system.
The health care reform is a political gamble for both parties in the coming 2010 elections. With the Republican lawmakers, pledging abstinence over action on the life matter will further reduce their representations in both Houses of the Congress. Similarly, the Democrats as a majority have not demonstrated unity within or delivered the desired results in the health care legislation.
Such fiasco is detrimental to both parties with the public anger and frustration building up to the point of no return.
There is enormous responsibility on the Senate majority leader Harry Reid to comply with the public concern rather than attempting to appease the unwinnable votes in the senate.
After all, at the end of the day even if the ‘special interests’ fund the political campaigns, the ballots determine the power for the candidate and the party.
Perhaps, the lobbyists could convince their representatives in Congress that they have the means to drive political campaigns to support the partisan agenda and encourage the lawmakers to remain loyal to them and not the public. Undoubtedly, the strategy was a huge success up until the recent past, but not anymore as the economic woes created by the same lobbyists’ politics emboldened the mass to hold the elected officials accountable for their actions or the lack there of in all matter.
Demanding accountability and transparency from the authorities with power in the government, corporations and the military are the only effective instruments at the public disposal to bring about the desired change in their life.
Collective public voice and action desperately required to attain the desirable goals in the respective economic, social, political and environmental cause.
Finally, the end-result in the health care reform cannot deprive the suffering millions of population from salvation through the government run public option. No possible explanations from the Senate or the House could justify the inability to incorporate the only effective reform tool, the public option for the health care legislation to qualify as historic or a monumental feat.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Events of the Day
October 6, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Congratulations! to the Nobel Prize winners – UCSF Professor Elizabeth Blackburn, Professor Carol Greider, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore and Jack Szostak, Genetics Professor at Harvard University for their outstanding research in Cell Biology.
United States maintains the pioneer status in the innovative fields of medicine and technology with the coveted prize. It’s yet another glorious honor for the recipients and the nation as the research findings will be enormously beneficial in prolonging life from the leading causes of death i.e. cardiovascular, cancer and other terminal illnesses.
This is a cause for celebration for both the United States and Australia as Professor Elizabeth Blackburn is a proud dual citizen of these two nations.
Great work of this nature must continue to benefit humanity.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
————————————————————————————————–
His Holiness Dalai Lama’s Visit to The United States
It’s a great honor and privilege to have His Holiness Dalai Lama visit the United States.
The Holiness visit always brings peace, joy and hope to all.
More on his holiness’ visit presented shortly.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Resolution – Clarification
September 16, 2009
Ever since the health care debate started, the main objective among the visible opponents has been to fictionalize the various contents of the bill. The principles of the health care bill – costs, quality and affordability extensively discussed per blogpost Health Care Reform July 11, 2009 on this website.
Several testimonials by citizens from all walks of life through various mediums confirmed the urgency for health care reform.
The partisan politics continues to disparage the millions of people deprived of proper health care during the public discourse.
A sensitive national matter turned into a controversial subject by the special interests’ agents. The health care bill described as voluminous, inadequate and far-fetched in reference to the government plan or public option. On the other hand, the noise amazingly disappeared with the White House statement on the possible elimination of the government plan from the competition.
Hence, the overview of the health care funding and the actual role of government plan in the health care legislation vital for true perspective.
How is the government health care funded?
The health care funded through three main categories –
First, by reducing wasteful spending and redundant costs prevalent in the ‘all private run’ system at the moment, a liability transferred on to the Corporations providing insurance, small businesses and individual insurance subscribers by the Health Insurance industry.
Trimmings guaranteed to generate the required savings to a tune of $300-$450 billion, the major portion of it stemming from out-of-court settlements in health care lawsuits, rising costs in malpractice insurance, neglecting preventive care, excessive intervention by the insurance companies with pre-authorization and final authorizations…contributing to a chaotic structure of the huge public system.
Next, streamlining the Health Care industry’s disproportionate costs across the wide spectrum of health care services to fund the program. It’s essential to emphasize that no one is against profit in either private run or hybrid systems. However, profit set to bankrupt the economy and the consumers in the form of businesses and individuals is equivalent to driving blindfolded on a one-way street with a dead end.
Unless and until the health care industry profit margin is reasonable, even the Health Insurance industry objectionable to the government involvement cannot sustain the escalating costs factored with exorbitant mark-ups by the health care complex.
The common problem for both private health insurance and the government plan is the costs incurred in the health care provision – health care professional fees, hospital admissions, treatment, drugs and ancillary services.
In order to keep up with the ever increasing health care industry costs, the health insurance competes with the counterpart by selling unaffordable insurance resulting in the estimated fifty million uninsured as well as cutting corners by denying adequate and quality coverage to the remaining dissatisfied insured population. Even though, the propaganda negates the fact claiming the satisfied insured population at 80%.
The health care and health insurance might appear to be in cohort when they really are at odds against each other in the excessive profit oriented scheme. There has been a rebuttal on this ‘profit’ issue by the health care spokespersons, some even resorting to name-callings as the line of defense. An elaborate explanation was provided via Op-ed, Washington Post, July 2009-
How the reigning in on profit in a free market system would drive the economy to pitfalls.
What was not included in the explanation is the attempt to derive limitless profit at the expense of a vast majority in a sector that would naturally enable the expected returns given the volume based health industry. Similar to the energy sector surviving and thriving in any economy.
Another example for that matter, the world’s manufacturing warehouse, China ending in trade surplus with the rock bottom price due to worldwide mass production.
Regardless of the government plan, the health insurance industry cannot keep its promise to the changes required in the system without the cooperation from the health care industry. In a way, the government plan would ease the burden on the health insurance industry by negotiating with the health care industry via legislation. So, instead of viewing the government or the public option as an obstacle, the health insurance should envisage positive outcome from the hybrid system.
Third, tax increases on the taxpayers with extraordinary income configured in the earlier bill by the House of Congress to supplement health care funding is the prudent path to economic recovery that is excoriating the national revenue from other sectors. It could very well be a short-term pain evolving into long-term healing process.
The emotional outbursts with claims “I want to take my America back form Obama” revolves around the fear and commotion created by the veterans of smear tactics and the infamous ‘swift boat’ campaigners emerging during national elections, illegal wars and all things against national progress.
Ironically, the skepticism and cynicism about public option or a robust government plan for the benefit of the national economy and health in the near future overshadow the crisis in the present health care system.
One might call it a potent weapon by the opponents of the national interests suppressing the anomalies of the exclusive private run enterprise that is proven catastrophic to the overall economy and the general population.
Thus far, in all the town hall meetings organized to address the ‘legitimate’ concerns and queries from the victims of the present health care conglomerate watered down with the negatively charged combative remarks, cleverly pushing the pro-reform legislators on the defense.
Did the opponents gain from the anti-national movement?
Maybe for the time being but only soon to realize that such back alley ambush has its own ramifications that should not be underestimated.
As stated earlier, it’s about time the medical industrial complex and their representatives in the Senate and the House against the public option or the government plan get off the offense and provide believable answers to the simple yet direct questions:
The contentious issue in the health care legislation is the government plan or the public option.
Considering that the contemporary health care system is exclusively private run with the exception of Medicare and Medicaid,
1. Why is the nation left behind with a staggering fifty million population uninsured, if the free market has enough competitors to lower the price?
The correct response: It’s because there is no real or a formidable challenger up to the task of dealing with the monopoly in the system and the non-profit cooperatives will be a fly that would be swatted down by the big players even before it begins to buzz around.
2. Why are the insured population forced to reach out to overseas health care facilities, under the apparently fabulous health care system certified by the paid representatives in the Senate and the House?
Quote – Wall Street Journal – Extensive 2008 editorial and articles – “South Asia, a popular destination for American patients awaiting transplants and various treatment care involving hospitalizations.”
Response: Health care industry’s phenomenal profit driven costs is triggering the health insurance industry to subsidize quality and appropriate treatment necessary but flatly denied to the ailing population. Further, the pre-authorization and final authorization protocols from the private health insurers applicable on healthy and pre-disposed health patients arising from the lack of trust by the insurance industry against the health care industry cause the exodus of the suffering population to foreign locations, not to mention the loss of income to the state and the national economy.
3. Why is the infant mortality and uninsured dependents in the lower income families, elderly care in terms of drug costs to name a few issues, so high under the ‘supposedly’ caring and affordable health care system?
Response: The health insurance and the health care industry policy designed for the healthy and the wealthy minority, rather than the underprivileged and the unfortunate majority.
4. The assertion that government plan dependent upon costs reduction from the health care industry only to be evaded by the health care providers held against the public option entry.
On similar assumption, What is the insurance industry proposal to alleviate the costs to make it affordable for all Americans?
Is the health insurance industry more influential over the health care providers?
In that case, what are they waiting for and why can’t they demonstrate their ability to improve the conditions now, i.e. (if they recognize that there is a systemic problem) to include all in the present system that would benefit the stagnant economy as well.
Alternatively, Does the health insurance possess a unique charm that would mesmerize the health care proponents to agree with the Insurance Industry demands?
One would assume that if it works for one, why it shouldn’t work for another.
Response: Both health care and health insurance industry common goal is to appease their shareholders with handsome returns and will stretch any limits with the consumer as the sacrificial lamb in the expansive, unmitigated health care arena.
5. The Congressmen and Women not in favor of public option, but probably supportive of non-profit cooperative system, is obligatory to their constituents and the entire nation to come forward in a town hall meeting or comparable setting,
To lay out their presumably efficient ‘free market’ operation predicted to create a utopian environment apart from setting precedence for other industrialized nations with hybrid health care systems.
Considering the unanimous consensus that the health care system due for modifications,
It would be fair and justified to call on the health care, the health insurance industry and their representatives in Congress responsible for the stalemate to present the facts and figures to the American consumers and taxpayers in their pledge to clean up the mess in the national health care.
In this context, the activism from the health care professionals seemingly frustrated with the insurance industry dictating terms and conditions in patient care disappointingly missing in action.
The other issue raised by the industry and their agents is – Why is the health care reform a priority and what is the need to rush on the issue?
Response: The economy and the plight of the suffering population speak volume in this regard. Failure to resuscitate the ailing heart would lead to fatality, evidenced in the victims’ real experiences.
In a nutshell, the nation has had enough with the shenanigans from the opponents of the national health care reform who have neither any treatment nor cure to the national epidemic called the health care that is aptly the health nightmare for the sane majority.
To reiterate, Health care is not a privilege or an entitlement but a necessity for survival.
Therefore, targeting higher profit against the market reality directly affecting the economy is not a smart business strategy, besides being beyond the realm of ethics and economics.
The evidence is in the status quo.
If the industries and their agents cannot resolve the matter effectively through cooperation, the obstinacy reflects the national decimation policy.
Finally, health care reform in the absence of universal provision viz. single payer system is cosmetic measure with health industry and political establishment being the real beneficiaries in the lucrative deal.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant