National Health Care Legislation

March 29, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Last week, President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress achieved a historic victory in passing the health care legislation.

The legislative components and the effective period are presented below:

According to the New York Times report March 22, 2010

By Robert Pear and David M. Herszenhorn – Thank you.

Source: Speaker of the House, Congressional Budget Office, Kaiser Family Foundation, MCCLATCHY – TRIBUNE

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE HEALTH CARE OVERHAUL LEGISLATION, WHICH WILL:

1. 90 days after enactment: Provide immediate access to high-risk pools for people with no insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

2. 6 months after enactment:

Bar insurers from:

Denying people coverage when they get sick

Denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions

Imposing lifetime caps on coverage

Require insurers to:

Allow young people to stay on their parents’ policies until they turn 26

3. Within a year: Provide a $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug beneficiaries who reach the coverage gap called the “doughnut hole”

4. Jan 1, 2011: Require individual and small group market plans to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on medical services; large group plans would have to spend at least 85 percent

5. 2013: Increase the Medicare payroll tax on dividend, interest and other unearned income for singles earning more than $200,000 and joint filers making more than $250,000

6. 2014: Provide subsidies for families earning up to 400 percent of poverty level ($88,200 a year for a family of four)

Require most employers to provide coverage or face penalties

Require most people to obtain coverage or face penalties

7. 2018: Impose 40 percent excise tax on high-end insurance policies

8. 2019: Expand health insurance coverage to 32 million people

———————————————————————————————–
Late deals added to bill’s revisions – By Alan Fram Associated Press – March 22, 2010 – Thank you.

The latest changes to the bill include:

Tax-exempt insurers would have to pay a new fee levied on insurers on only half their premiums.

An Aug.1, 2010, deadline on new doctor-owned hospitals to apply to the government for eligibility to serve – and get paid for Medicare patients would be extended to Dec. 31.

A new 2.9 percent excise tax on medical devices would be lowered to 2.3 percent.

But it will be broadened to apply to some lower-cost devices it hadn’t initially covered, though hearing aids, contact lenses and other items would be excluded.
————————————————————————————————–
Review and Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

There have been numerous questions by the anxious uninsured and they are being presented in this analysis.

Congressional Report dissection:

Clarification from the legislators would be helpful in understanding the criteria in the following categories:

1. 90 days after enactment: Provide immediate access to high-risk pools for people with no insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

From the concerned individuals – the uninsured with pre-existing conditions but are unsure of their acceptance in the high-risk pool due to variations in the health issue.

A. Who are the qualifiers under the ‘high-risk’ pool in the ‘insurers’ language?

B. Should the insured expect escalation in premium costs due to their ‘pre-existing’ diagnosis as compared to the healthy individuals?

C. If there is a difference in coverage costs; by what percentage will it affect them?

As per the Associated Press report, March 24, 2010 –

D. “But a provision to protect children in poor health has a gap. Insurers would still be able to deny new coverage to kids with health problems until 2014.”

Is it possible for these kids to access care under ‘high-risk’ pool, which is expected to be effective in three months from now, i.e. June 2010?

Therefore, specifics are required in this respect.
————————————————————————————————–

2. 6 months after enactment – October 2010,

The legislative component reverses the status quo for those who are currently insured and,

A. Have difficulties on coverage during their illness including children with pre-existing conditions.

B. Parents are permitted to keep their adult offspring until age 26, on their policy.

C. It prohibits the insurers from limiting coverage and policy cancellation when the patients require treatment.

Unequivocally, it’s a crucial piece of legislation.

However, it could have been made effective immediately rather than a six months delay, due to the nature of the problem.

As it’s well known that in health situations, the cost and cure factor is dependent upon early intervention.
————————————————————————————————–

3. Within a year i.e. in 2010 the legislation involves $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug beneficiaries upon them reaching the ‘doughnut hole’ or the coverage gap –

Any financial relief to senior citizens and others dealing with enormous health care costs is a welcome change.

———————————————————————————————-

4. Jan 1, 2011 – Enactment calls for ‘marketplace’ insurers to invest premium dollars on medical services by 80 percent for individuals and small plans, whereas the large groups by 85 percent respectively.

Monitoring is essential to ensure such practice among the insurers.

In the absence of oversight, the law would be redundant.

That’s why the independent and non-profit ‘National Consumer Health Rights Agency,’ would be ideal to deliver the service.

————————————————————————————————-

5. 2013: Increase the Medicare payroll tax on dividend, interest and other unearned income for singles earning more than $200,000 and joint filers making more than $250,000

This was the proposal from the House of Representatives to generate revenue for the health care overhaul.

It appears to be preset to meet with the ‘PAYGO’ budgetary requirement to pay for expenditures with funds for the program in progress.

A prudent fiscal policy that is necessary to address the national deficit and approved by the Congressional Budget Office. It’s an important feature of this legislation.

The Republican opposition projected the negative implication of this particular rule on Medicare recipients quoting that ‘the Medicare quality would be affected.’ They need to explain their position.

————————————————————————————————

6. 2014: Provide subsidies for families earning up to 400 percent of poverty level ($88,200 a year for a family of four)

Require most employers to provide coverage or face penalties

Require most people to obtain coverage or face penalties

7. 2018: Impose 40 percent excise tax on high-end insurance policies

8. 2019: Expand health insurance coverage to 32 million people

In reference to Points 6, 7 and 8:

Perhaps, the funds from the Medicare payroll tax mentioned above are allocated for the subsidies and Medicaid beneficiaries.

Similarly, the 40 percent excise taxes on high-end insurance policies set up to eventually expand health insurance coverage to the targeted 32 million uninsured in 2019.

Again, the same reason stated under 2 C of the analysis, applies to these rules of law.

The people who can’t afford health insurance are most vulnerable to health problems that ultimately become the tax payer responsibility as experienced up until now.

Hence, the law being effective in 2014, four years away from the signed legislation and the reality of the 32 million people being covered in 2019 is a legitimate cause for disappointment among the uninsured.

The authorities owe a plausible explanation to the suffering population regarding the distant period setting for the effectiveness of the law, especially 2014 and 2019.

What is happening to this segment between now and then?

Are there provisions for tax credits to the middle class families and Medicaid expansion to cover the interim premium costs by the uninsured and the unaffordable groups in the society?

If so, how is it being paid for?

Since the revenue from Medicare payroll tax and the excise tax are scheduled in 2013 and 2018, to fund the federal subsidies to lower income families in 2014 and the 32 million uninsured in 2019 respectively,

The health insurance reform cannot be truly evaluated until after 2014.

Besides, the health insurance legislation based on ‘private for profit’ strategy is subject to market rates in 2014 and beyond.

Meanwhile, the legislation tackles the problems faced by the “insured” groups in the society that are significant and guaranteed to save lives.

According to the media reports, the House and the Senate leaders confirmed the available votes to implement a ‘Public Option’ in the health care legislation through reconciliation process within the year.

Indicating that – “We have the votes and we need the will to move forward.”

It’s the best hope for the average citizen in the health insurance reform, considering the anticipated changes becoming law not until 2014 and 2019.

Having passed the legislation, the lawmakers can amend the bill to accommodate the genuine requests from the average citizens for whom the reform was initiated.

It’s a matter of honoring the people’s will in a democracy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Weekly Events Synopsis

March 27, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

This week, President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress secured three major achievements of national and international significance.

Beginning with the latest event:

The world’s prolific nuclear nations, U.S and Russia signed a long overdue nuclear weapons treaty reportedly to reduce the warhead arsenals by one-third with the hope to lead the international community towards a complete nuclear disarmament.

Housing market revival through programs targeting foreclosure for millions of homeowners.

And

National Health Care Legislation – is a historic victory for the democrats and the Obama Presidency.

A review and analysis on these topics is in progress.

Your patience is much appreciated.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Economy, Featured | Leave a Comment 

An Invitation to Experience the Dilemma

March 25, 2010

By Padmini Arhant,

Dear America and the Rest of the World,

I stated my desire to be ‘A-Political’ by not being affiliated to any political party and continue to pursue the peace and environmental goals. Subsequently, there has been flurry of attacks and disparaging remarks mounted by those whom I have supported up until now.

I can understand such position from the quarters dedicated to unsubstantiated allegations.

However, the political power and the ‘public funded’ networks using my donations to attack my decision with the former being fully aware of their doing and the latter without any facts beckons scrutiny.

It’s in human nature to jump into conclusions on matters with false information. They usually target individuals challenging the power to prioritize people over personal and special interest.

The victims become a ‘fair game’ for the authorities and sadly the “public funded” networks searching for scapegoats.

Unfortunately, the trend thus far has been – glorify privately but vilify publicly.

Alternatively, use them when it’s convenient and trash them upon finding their position a nuisance to the power and others following the norm.

I had always maintained that my contribution is focused towards humanitarian and environmental issues, in the United States and around the world.

In fact, it was suggested in their nuance. It was published recently in the local newspaper and I present that segment again.

“A potential source of his problems is the conflict presented by Campbell’s two chosen career paths.

He has spent his career advocating for civil liberties and academic freedom as a law professor while also trying to get ahead in the cutthroat arena of politics. But defending the rights of unpopular individuals is turning out to be poor politics.”

At another instance, it was advocated through their newly found hired networks that Church and State should remain separate and I concur with that philosophy, and repeatedly reinforced the message on my life purpose to fulfill obligations towards humanity without hindering or endangering anyone’s political or personal status.

Hence, the authorities ought to explain the inconsistency and indecisiveness on their part going back to the political campaign in 2008.

Further, I expressed my intention to exercise the first amendment right granted to every individual in a ‘free society.’ in the material presentation based on evidence and not a concocted theory.

Again, I’m not interested in the popularity contest, even though it’s been misconstrued in the manner that deemed fit among the faultfinders.

There was an accusation about my attachment to ‘polls’ during the reference to a ‘friendly advice,’ and it would aptly apply to political figures concerned about their term in office and the re-election prospects, not the peace activists.

On the one hand, I’m being characterized as ‘delusional, a pervert, an underground media prankster, egotistical, self-important with contradictory lifestyle, a bitter and angry mobster’… to say the least.

Interestingly, while on the other, the assailants know where to contact me for donations, in spite of the falsely accused ‘underground’ branding.

Yet, they relentlessly insist that I promote their agenda as predicted during the Presidential campaign –

“Empower some and enslave the targeted ones.”

Somehow, one tends to forget that while finger pointing, it’s essential to pay attention to the remaining fingers directed towards them, especially in the presence of suppressed public evidence.

Seeking flaws in others will eventually lead to none other than them upon soul searching.

That why, it’s important to look within and they’ll find themselves.

Besides, as stated earlier negative emotions hurt the ones harboring more than the ones it’s aimed at.

Their targets are not allowed to have principles and must work according to the state’s preference – i.e. embellish or exaggerate policies and records sometimes to the detriment of democratic values.

When I discuss the real life experience, it’s attributed to ‘presumptuousness.’ On the contrary, the similar citation by them and the authorities in power is admired as ‘family values.’

The irony being, the same ‘public funded’ cable networks considering themselves above the fray from the mainstream counterpart have adapted to the malpractice for unexplained reasons and preoccupied in mudslinging literally at my expense rather than engaging the political power by asking the tough questions on the approved and pending legislations.

Notwithstanding, the highlighted hypocrisy in the obsession against their target.

For instance, the health insurance reform was passed with political wrangling and arm twisting tactics. It was well known from the beginning that the Republican opposition would not yield to any concessions.

More poignantly, the last minute appeasement to attract the ‘anti-abortionist’ votes within the Democratic Party was done with the ‘Executive Order’ explicitly denying the federal funding for the women’s health rights.

There was none including the networks claiming to be the ‘voice for democracy’ dare to ask the authorities –

Why couldn’t they use the same ‘executive order,’ granting ‘Universal Medicare for all’ or include a robust ‘Public Option’ to make the reform truly meaningful?

Not surprisingly, upon signing the legislation, the insurance stocks skyrocketed in the absence of neither.

When there has been precedence set before with the former President Lyndon B. Johnson legislating “Medicare” for senior citizens reportedly analogous to ‘as simple as turning on the light switch’ by declaring, “Medicare begins tomorrow,”

Why didn’t the democrats move forward with a bold action, when the event concluded without a single republican vote?

Why is the law completely effective only in 2014, two years after the ‘possible’ second term of the incumbent administration?

Why not in the year 2010 or even 2011? –

To this, The White House responded that it would take four years to implement the massive overhaul.

Then in that case,

Why didn’t the authorities pursue the easier option by mandating the existing and established Medicare for all?

Regardless of the political ideology, contemporary politics revolves around personal political security on legislative and international matter.

From health insurance reform, 9/11 terrorists trials to the Israel-Palestinian conflicts, policies are carefully weighed in terms of electoral consequences and politically ‘safe’ strategy against,

‘Taking the political risk or laying down the reputation by doing what is right for the nation and humanity.’

As for the alleged ‘delusional’ predicament, I was approached and asked to be a volunteer since January 2008, Presidential election and up until now.

Although there were assumptions that, I was on the White House payroll and receiving payments from the Democratic Party, the truth of the matter being it was a ‘full time’ volunteer service all along.

It was truly an honor to be able to participate in the historic election and work alongside millions of volunteers in the political process.

Meanwhile, I also share the common plight of any average citizen trying to raise a family, generate an income to survive and provide for my children’s future, particularly their educational expenses.

The last three days while the incendiary attacks were carried out against me, I was attending to my sick child and busy meeting with family commitments, since I do not have an extended family support.

Therefore, I apologize for not updating on the developments leading to the unnecessary confusion.

I remain committed in my service to the nation and the people struggling to find a voice in the privatized political system without compromising on ethics and personal values.

Finally, I extend an invitation to experience the dilemma prior to passing judgments against anyone sincerely devoted to seeing the world, a better place for all.

Your understanding and cooperation is deeply appreciated.

I sign off with love and peace to all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics, Featured, Humanitarian, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

Successful passage of Health Care Reform

March 22, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Congratulations! To President Barack Obama, the Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Senate majority leader Harry Reid and the Congress members responsible for the successful legislation of the health care reform.

The debate had consumed more than a year and came to fruition last night. With any legislation, the views are expected to be conciliatory and contradictory.

I take the opportunity to wish our President Barack Obama and the legislators continued victory in all their present and future endeavors.

This website will remain committed to the humanitarian cause without being affiliated to any particular political faction in order to maintain objectivity and keep democracy alive.

My contribution is focused primarily on peace and environmental goals for humanity i.e. ‘Save the Planet,’ and ‘Peace on Earth.’

I look forward to the inevitable peace, progress and prosperity through coherence among the global community.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

American Democracy at Work

February 5, 2010

Dear Fellow Americans,

The health care legislation is being stalled in Congress by the legislators on the special interests’ payroll.

Despite being well informed on the horrendous economic liability accumulated to our national debt from the abominable health care costs and that an estimated 45,000 Americans are dying every year due to lack of health insurance, these legislators simply don’t care about these facts because they feel secure about their job.

Is American Democracy so weak that you will take a “NO” for everything that concerns your interest from the party of “NO” aka GOP, The Grand Obstructionist Party and the special interest loyalist on the democratic side?

C’mon America, show your power. Call your local representatives in the House and the Senate and demand that you want the health care legislation now.

Remember, the crying baby is the one that gets the mother’s attention.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Response to President Barack Obama – Re State of the Union Address

February 5, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Hon. President Barack Obama
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

I appreciate you sharing your concerns and the strategies to revive the economy, the priority for the democratic Congress.

The Democratic Party has suffered major setbacks in the recent elections and obviously, the trend cannot continue in the 2010 elections – for the work to rebuild our nation has just begun with your Presidency.

Considering the American plight particularly in the job front, the economic measures taken thus far by your administration is reassuring and the challenge lies in the legislation approval, amid lack of cooperation from the Republican members in Congress.

Although, you are earnestly seeking bipartisanship in the legislative process, the opposition is utilizing the cynical response to stall progress for political reasons especially in the election year.

They understand that their delaying tactics would let the steam evaporate leaving the charred inaction on national issues becoming a political liability for the democratic majority.

When in fact, the responsibility or rather the blame squarely lies with the trouble makers on both sides and they deserve to be voted out of power.

Needless to say that, the Democratic Party under your leadership and the distinguished members in Congress have a great opportunity to accomplish the immediate and long-term goals for our country provided, we remain steadfast in our objectives and confront obstacles through result-oriented actions.

As you stated eloquently in your State of the Union Address, people can no longer survive on rhetoric and the time is running out for the members of both political parties. It is not that people have no patience.

When the situation is desperate with many families struggling to make ends meet in the harsh economic times, the public trust is won by delivering the most required solutions to the current problems and that being job security, housing as well as affordable health care.

Despite the Supreme Court conservatives’ decision potentially causing impediments in free and fair elections, the grassroots support could be earned by staying on course in dealing with the economic woes confronting our nation.

We cannot ignore the external threats through lobbyists and their representatives to block legislations. It’s reflective of their insecurity in the wake of unprecedented call for reform in Washington.

Therefore, it’s up to us to demonstrate our resolve and integrity to stand by the people and do what is right for them. Your economic policies to help small businesses, middle class and students are prudent.

Similarly, it’s important to provide jobs for the blue-collar workers in the manufacturing sector, who are facing equal hardships due to massive layoffs from the economic recession and globalization.

With respect to health insurance, I understand the hostility surrounding the issue from the expected sources. However, I still think it’s imperative to move ahead with a public option for economic viability and social equality.

It would not only prove our determination to succeed in closing the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots but also strengthen public confidence in the Democratic Party as achievers.

Once the legislations are passed and the opposition is made aware of our intention to proceed in the tasks ahead regardless, it will weaken the opponent’s resistance to issues dedicated in improving average American lives, not to mention the culminated risks for them in the coming elections.

Further, prioritizing public needs over the industry demands is the key to electoral victories evidenced in the Massachusetts election with a political mandate to perform in people’s interest and focus on the national progress in economy, health care, education, energy and environment.

I commend you and your administration for the excellent work in the budget preparation. Nevertheless, implementing the policies efficiently is crucial to gain credibility. Again, I’m not going to pretend on the uphill battle in the legislative matter.

Sometimes, one has to adopt the tricks of the trade practiced by the opposition when they were in a majority i.e. passing legislations through reconciliation process etc.

I reiterate that adopting republican strategies in the legislative process cannot possibly cause an uproar among the conservatives on both sides, for it would prove their double standards and the priorities in pubic service.

If it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander!

As stated earlier, the purpose of my political involvement is to be the voice for the weak and the oppressed. My passionate expression is to reveal the frustration among the victims at home and overseas.

Your tremendous efforts will come to fruition and I’m working with you alongside to promote the policies developed to change the status quo.

Adversity often drives down motives. During this period, the people are vulnerable to propaganda, and as we know, it’s available in abundance.

That’s why, it would be helpful for democrats appearing on radio and television networks including the cyberspace to remind the electorate constantly of your administration’s past year achievements, present targets and future vision.

In addition, updating official websites with credible data on employment, education, health care and other issues would keep the electorate well informed as opposed to being misinformed by the opposition media.

Otherwise, transparency and accountability will go a long way now and during the elections. I’m tirelessly engaged in the humanitarian cause and trying to assist the people in alleviating their suffering.

I extend my unwavering support to your Presidency, Congress members and the Democratic Party, with the hope that every action is devoted to benefit the people and not the governments or corporate power at home and around the world.

Besides, I firmly believe that bringing more progressives into the Democratic Party is always best, for it’s easier to triumph in the legislative affairs of the people. They are also more amenable to work for common good.

You mentioned to me that you’re not a quitter, but a fighter. I believe you and you need to prove that to the American electorate. The health care reform is the place to start in proving the democrats’ ability to move the nation forward.

Rest assured I’m with you and the Congress in reaching these milestones.

I wish you success in all your endeavors.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Featured, Politics, United States | Leave a Comment 

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

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

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

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Health Care Bill from the Senate Finance Committee

September 16, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Also included is the Response to the Presidential Address to Congress on Health Care Reform.

According to the latest report from the Associated Press:

Health care bill advances without bipartisan deal –

“After months of bipartisan negotiations, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Finance Committee, told associates during the day he intends to unveil a detailed outline of legislation on Wednesday and convene the panel next week to vote on it.

Baucus’ proposal is certain to shun the liberals’ call for the government to sell insurance, and rely instead on co-ops to offer coverage in competition with private industry. His approach includes a requirement for individuals to buy insurance, with financial penalties for those who don’t. Rather than a mandate for larger businesses to provide coverage for employees, they would be required to defray the cost of any government subsidies their employees would qualify for.”

——————————————————————————————–
Analysis: By Padmini Arhant

The public officials’ loyalty to the private industry in the health care bill strongly suggests that these officials are making a mockery of the world’s modern democracy emulated by many young and developing nations up until now.

It is obvious from their openness that they will continue to thumb the electorates’ nose and instead chose to oblige to the whims and fancies of the “Special Interests’ hiring them to deliver the meal in every legislation.

If these officials have great concern for the welfare and the interests of the industries they are associated with, then why are they wasting their time in public service?

They might as well work for the private sector and attain the personal financial gains they are looking for in life and leave the public office to the earnest Americans committed to the service of the people and not the ‘Special Interests’ hiring them for mutual benefits.

There are many qualified, honest and hard working individuals in the American society pledged to serve the people and produce the results in favor of the entire population across the political spectrum.

It’s time for America to wake up from the deep slumber and restore democracy now by directing the legislature to include the government run ‘public option’ rather than accepting the status quo from the elected officials clearly operating under the guidance of the ‘Special Interests.’

Has America become so weak that it can’t defend its own democracy invaded by Capitalism conspicuous in the love-fest between Wall Street and Washington?

Perhaps, the marriage between the Wall Street’s ‘Capital’ and Washington ‘Power’ will be a great model for the marriage counseling.

The inseparable bond is awesome but when it happens to the detriment of their constituents without the people favored ‘public option’ the public officials’ priorities are clear.

Unless and until every constituent struggling to make ends meet along with the nervous citizens confronting the lingering economic uncertainties rise to the occasion and demand Washington to address their needs by declining the ‘Special Interests’ decision pushed through the democratically elected officials, it will be too late to challenge the ogre in the health care battle.

The ‘Special Interests’ investment in media propaganda on the government run ‘public option’ as the bureaucratic meddling in the patient care and the controversial ‘death panel’ is a far-fetched psychodrama displayed at the town hall meetings and the weekend rally in the Capitol.

However, the camouflaged truth behind the so-called health care reform is, the bureaucrats in Washington and Wall Street are already in control of the citizens’ destiny with their verdict to move on without the government run ‘public option.’

Again, the Washington and White House ambivalence in the ‘public option’ of the health care bill, despite the grueling tragic experiences shared by many people across the nation regardless of political factions and socio-economic backgrounds is not only disappointing but also thoroughly unacceptable.

Please don’t forget that all those officials have a guaranteed health care, besides the authority and means to survive during and after their political career regardless of whether they return to power or not. Unfortunately, human nature often motivated to care for self prior to others. It’s prevalent more so now than ever before.

In the Darwinian ‘survival of the fittest’ environment, nothing is available without a robust fight and it is poignant in the health care debate. It’s the democratic right of every citizen to expect the essential requirement particularly in the health matter that has revealed the true colors of the individuals’ with power.

Never mind the campaign promise and the constitutional oath while being elected to the office. The gulf between the elitist and the populist is more prominent in the health care matter with the elected officials’ resignation to diminish the SOS from the people granting them with power in a democracy.

The rebuttal could be that the bill has the mandatory requirement for the private insurers to immediately insure all those ailing patients with pre-existing conditions upon passing the legislation and therefore, declare the issue as resolved.

With the Senate Finance Committee diligently proposing the private citizens to purchase health insurance bringing more business to their favored party, the health industry,

Will the private industry cover the disputed 47- 50 million uninsured regardless of the employment situation?

Who will pay for the citizens who cannot afford the price tag from the private insurers in the absence of the government insurance program?

Obviously, the taxpayers expected to cover through government subsidies or aid like they are footing the bill right now for patient care at the county hospitals and ensuring the health insurance as well as the hospital industry’s prosperity while the expenses added on to the national deficit.

Ironically, the objection raised against the government insurance program claiming it would disproportionately increase the national deficit when the Senate Finance Committee proposes exactly that with the non-profit cooperative society funded by the government instead of the direct government involvement such as Veterans Care, Medicare and Medicaid.

The surreptitious Health Care bill from the Health Care industry via the Senate Finance Committee is a mere fulfillment of the legislative duty because it does not address the real problems of the people classified as the minority later to become the majority without a strong competitor.

The industry response might be that the price will be competitive for those individuals to pay for it. Even if such magical event were to take place, the million dollar question is,

How long is the competitiveness effective for the current uninsured to remain in the system with the compulsory insurance purchase enforced upon them?

Although, the question posed is by no means any concessions towards the elimination of government administered public option, it is absolutely important to determine the timeframe as free market has periodically demonstrated its free will to adjust price to meet the shareholders and the Chief Executives’ extravaganza.

Notably, the finance industry offering the teaser rates as a decoy on credit cards and home loans, only to be discovered later by the victims upon receiving notifications from the banking sector regarding the atrocious interest rates hikes.

Interestingly, the myopic view by many to pass the legislation in order to satisfy the process and claim a historic victory ignoring the tragedies of a significant population is a betrayal of the people’s trust in their representatives and a political suicide for the majority party in the 2010 elections.

It shouldn’t be a surprise when the opposition’s relentless effort to sabotage the health care reform spun around during the mid-term elections as the failure of the ‘hope and change’ Obama care plan resulting in a win-win situation for the obstructionists now and in the immediate future.

In conclusion, the White House, the House and the Senate’s coherence to the health care conglomerates by marginalizing the weak, the sick, the vulnerable population and everyone else in the landmark legislation is a colossal mistake due to the misplaced trust in the private industry essentially responsible for the health care disaster.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

P.S. My Response to the President’s Congressional Address on Health Care Reform

From: Padmini Arhant

To: President Barack Obama

Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 5:58:59 PM

Subject: Re: Not the first, but the last

Hon. President Barack Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Please refer to attachment for details.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant


Honorable. President Barack Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Thank you for laying out the Health Care components to clarify the doubts and confusions surrounding the landmark Health Care legislation.

As I consider myself extremely privileged to have known you and your sincere desire to serve the American people representing the stars and stripes of this great country, not recently but from the grueling time on the campaign trail, I’m taking the opportunity to share my honest understanding and legitimate concerns regarding this bill.

I realize the humongous challenges related to the Health Care legislation particularly in dealing with the ‘Special Interests’ force and the worsening partisanship creating a gulf to block the necessary reform, the only hope and salvation for our national economy and the American people , the victims of the heavily politicized and narcissistic Washington culture.

In your speech, you mentioned that the details would follow in the immediate future and that the Health Care address was to familiarize the nation with the framework of the bill. In this context, we cannot ignore the truth that those who are against any reform are always going to detect flaws regardless of the many concessions already in the bill.

The reason for the delay in my response to your message is to review the issue rationally given the public plight on affordability and eligibility in the exclusively privatized industry. You are no stranger to this aspect with your passive experience during your mother’s agonizing battle with the terminal illness in the absence of a guaranteed insurer ideally in the form of a ‘single payer’ or at least the ‘public option’ to save and prolong life. Unfortunately, we all know that it is a common tragedy for the many struggling population in our society.

Obviously, it is a huge mountain to climb with a rugged and slippery slope path. You pledged to the nation last night that you want to be the last President to have aimed at the century old national issue directly affecting every American and emerge successful in the legislation. The consensus among the victims is if the legislation passed to appease those who prioritize their personal interest over the common goal then there was no need to mobilize the nation and raise the hopes of millions during the election campaign and now.

I don’t think it is fair or morally justified to disappoint and deny the people who are the taxpayers, consumers and electorates the means to exist and stay alive through the absolute ‘single payer’ process or in the least a government administered ‘public option’ and not a non-profit cooperative agency. Again, in comparison the former President George W. Bush took the nation to war on false pretences and the ultimatum ‘either you are with us or with the terrorists.’

Apparently, rhetoric of that kind proven to resonate among the ‘Nay’ Sayers on the Special Interests’ payroll. Witnessing the opposition to life saving proposal is no surprise at all but that is not the ‘hope and change’ people voted for last November 2008.

I’m always with you and the great Americans working harder than ever in the legislative matter that promotes equality, fairness and justice for all.

Health Care legislation is a unique moment for your Presidency to do the right by the people and for the people who really matter in a democracy.

Overall, your presentation was very impressive and right on target, although I was hoping for a steadfast commitment towards the majority preferred ‘public option’ that is truly meaningful and paramount to reform the status quo.

I’ll be presenting the brief analysis on your address to the Congress for public view shortly.

Best Wishes

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Verdict on the Health Care Legislation

July 30, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The health care legislation vigorously contested by the opponents of the economic recovery and the unemployment deterrence. Sometimes, it’s easier to deal with the ‘devil’ you know than the ‘devil’ you don’t. The existing health care crisis contributed by the health care and insurance conglomerate’s profit raking strategy fits in with the metaphor.

When the people strive to make it to the top of the slippery slope titled the sensible health care legislation their harnesses are either tampered with or forcibly pulled off by the groups posing as the ‘rescue guards,’ i.e. the representatives in the House and the Senate obligatory to their financiers – the special interests.

In the interim, the ‘so-called’ bipartisanship in the Senate with some prominent legislators and selective House members from both sides of the aisles holding substantial investments in the health care stocks are focused on safeguarding their investments with assurances to the health industry – ‘your wish shall be my command.’

The House and the Senate version presented thus far is directly contradictory to the populist requirement and the President’s initial plan. The shameful tactic in the twentieth century – apart from paralyzing the health care reform, it’s also instrumental for the status quo and they are indicated in the article below.

Deal with ‘Blue Dogs’ sets up health care vote

Associated Press – 07/29/09

“The House changes, which drew immediate opposition from liberals in the chamber, would reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, exempt additional businesses from a requirement to offer insurance to their workers and change the terms of a government insurance option.

More problematic from the Democrats’ point of view is a tentative agreement to omit a provision in which the government would sell insurance in competition with private industry. In its place, the group is expected to recommend non-profit cooperatives that could operate at the state, regional or even national level.

Nor is any bipartisan recommendation likely to include a requirement for large businesses to offer insurance to their workers. Instead, they would have a choice between offering coverage or paying a portion of any government subsidy that non-insured employees would receive.”

What is wrong with the classic ‘pro-industry’ proposal to appease the health care enterprise at every insured and uninsured American taxpayer’s peril?

Firstly, the House bill to reduce the federal subsidies designed to help lower-income families afford insurance, instead of demanding the health care system comprising the AMA, health care providers accepting Medicare and Medicaid, Pharmaceuticals, the hospital industry…and the insurance industry mark-down the preposterous profit margins hidden in the superficially inflated costs driving the economy and every citizen to bankruptcy.

If there is any resistance from the groups in this regard, then taxing the expensive insurance coverage ensuring the tax liability on the industry rather than the end-consumer is absolutely necessary. If it was already agreed to by all negotiators then the measure combined with higher taxes on capital expenditures by the industry should adequately cover the increase in federal subsidies to the economically disadvantaged.

The health industry in their defense might argue that the supply and demand market forces drive the costs in a free market system. In this context, the commonly unknown fact being, the health industry unlike other industries are uniquely advantaged to thrive throughout with excessive demand arising from the myriad of sources causing illnesses to a vast population of which an alarming proportion fall in the >‘unhealthy’ category.

In the absence of robust competition from a government provided affordable health care, the industry giants have the expansive field wide open to themselves with a huge demand as the catalyst for the exorbitant profits in products and services.

In addition, the major market-share by the big players lay overcast of monopoly for others to compete effectively with the price factor, notwithstanding the industry protocol on limited choice and coverage of care at disproportionate costs.

The non-profit cooperatives have been recently involved in financial mismanagement as reported in California and severely lack in efficiency, ultimately benefiting the current private care system by default. Therefore, it’s not surprising for the industry groups to lobby for the non-profit cooperatives against the government run program.

The bill doesn’t end there. Ice cream is more delicious when served with toppings.

With respect to the businesses and large corporations exempt from the insurance coverage requirement to their workers and employees, it’s yet another ‘dessert’ moment for the legislators playing gracious hosts to the corporate musketeers.

Obviously, the lawmakers more appropriately the lawbreakers are falling head over heels in their romance with the corporate sponsors by relieving them from the fundamental responsibility to care for their workers and employees with health insurance while leaving the underemployed American workforce to fend for themselves in the profit manifested exclusive private health club.

As for the Blue Dogs, a misnomer to the species iconic for their unflinching loyalty, unequivocally clarify that ‘conservatism’ motto regardless of political factions is to delay, defeat and derail national progress. Clearly, the democratic electorate will be able to overcome the obstacle by replacing the obstructionists with the supportive ones in the 2010 elections.

To summarize, the health care casserole prepared by the House and the Senate in the Congress is palatable to the industry as the primary patrons and the caterer of the special menu. The remaining large starving population having peeked at the menu items forced to fake satisfaction from the aroma of the dish, although meant for the populist but served to win over the mighty health care industrialists.

Seriously, if this health care legislation meant to be a ‘reform’, then the bill must include the public option plan, increased federal subsidies, free health care for the most impoverished and a nondiscretionary business/Corporate health insurance for all workers and employees.

Failing that, it would be a band-aid treatment for a widespread chronic ailment in the industry gorging profits at every opportunity and the ‘so-called’ solution will be a cyclical nightmare for the nation attempting its way out of the quick sand economy.

The proposal funded through compromise from the industry with costs reduction equalizing profit contraction proportionate to market sustainability and tax increases suggested in the earlier House Bill itemized per extraordinary income category is the ideal gateway to true ‘reform.’

Otherwise, under the present deal the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ not found in Iraq would appropriately apply to the millions dependent on the democratic majority controlling all three branches of the government to do the right by the people.

Because the welfare of the people is paramount for the success of corporations in a capitalist or any other economic systems as people are the consumers and workers alias human capital in the economy.

Politically, irrespective of the massive corporate investment earned from the sweat and blood of the workforce, there will be no power without the people’s vote in a democracy.

Again, the health care reform will be truly meaningful and purposeful when the recommended changes addressing the plight of the people are reflected in the lifetime legislative matter.

It’s time for every American to stand up for their rights and claim the authentic universal health coverage favoring them and not the profit oriented health care industry.

Please call your local representatives and the Senators to oblige to your needs and not the special interests. Only you can make it happen this time.

Power is powerless against the will of the people in politics and economics.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page