Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011
Issue of the Week: GOP Health Care Reform Doublespeak
Plus Hero of the Week
It’s fascinating to witness Republicans playing both sides of the issue of health care reform. Their games have generated a lot of headlines but very little substance that will actually benefit Wisconsin’s health care providers and consumers.
Throughout the campaign, Gov. Scott Walker blasted the federal law. But even before taking office he sent a letter to President Obama stating that he wanted more flexibility in setting up a state-based health insurance exchange, a key component of the federal bill that needs to be in place by 2014. As recently as Monday, Walker was among a group of conservative governors who sent a letter to Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, repeating his request for flexibility just in case the bill isn’t repealed or struck down.
Walker has also established an Office of Free Market Health Care to both set up an exchange and to “explore all opportunities and alternative approaches that would free Wisconsin from establishing a health benefit exchange, including federal waivers.” Note, too, that the bipartisan Legislative Council Committee on Health Care Reform Implementation, now chaired by state Sen. Alberta Darling and state Rep. Pat Strachota, both Republicans, has stalled. The chairs canceled the Jan. 10 meeting and no new meeting has been scheduled.
Witness, too, the testimony of Dennis Smith, Walker’s secretary of the state Department of Health Services, before a committee chaired by Congressman Paul Ryan. While Smith testified that the federal reform would cost the state $433 million, he also noted that the federal government would offset the cost of BadgerCare programs. In total, Wisconsin would save an estimated $500 million over five years, thanks to the federal reform.
Even state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen was forced to walk back his statement that health care reform is “dead” in Wisconsin, following a federal judge’s ruling that the bill is unconstitutional.
State Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee) blasted Van Hollen’s reading of the ruling, saying that the judge did not issue an injunction in his order.
“To say that the entire state government of Wisconsin is beholden to an activist judge in Pensacola, Florida, is absurd,” Richards said.
Van Hollen later explained that he has not advised Walker to halt implementation of the federal bill.
Of course, killing off the federal law would mean that some provisions in the bill that are already in place—enhanced consumer protections, tax breaks for businesses and money sent to seniors in Medicare Part D’s donut hole—would have to be rescinded.
Richards scoffed at the Republicans’ opposition to the federal reforms and stressed the importance of benefits that are already positively impacting consumers, regardless of the Florida judge’s decision.
“Wisconsin citizens will continue to get health insurance even if they have a pre-existing condition,” Richards said. “They’ll continue to get the benefit of health insurance when they need it the most and not be subject to a lifetime limit of coverage. Children will continue to get health insurance and seniors will be able to get lower-cost prescription drugs. We will continue to do that in Wisconsin.”
Heroes of the Week
Southeastern Wisconsin Alzheimer’s Association Volunteers
Alzheimer’s disease is the most common cause of dementia and the sixth-leading cause of death in the United States. Anyone who has had an afflicted friend or family member knows the terrible effects of this debilitating illness.
Locally, the Southeastern Wisconsin Chapter of the Alzheimer’s Association (620 S. 76th St.) serves an 11-county region and an estimated 50,000 people affected by the disease. Volunteers play a vital role in enhancing care and support for patients and their families by answering the help line, raising awareness in the community, lending a hand in the chapter office and helping with special events such as the Mardi Gras Gala fund-raiser (March 8) and the annual Walk to End Alzheimer’s (Oct. 1).
Readers who wish to aid the association’s mission to advance research and provide support for patients are urged to call 414-479-8800 or visit www.alz.org/sewi.
Throughout the campaign, Gov. Scott Walker blasted the federal law. But even before taking office he sent a letter to President Obama stating that he wanted more flexibility in setting up a state-based health insurance exchange, a key component of the federal bill that needs to be in place by 2014. As recently as Monday, Walker was among a group of conservative governors who sent a letter to Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, repeating his request for flexibility just in case the bill isn’t repealed or struck down.
Walker has also established an Office of Free Market Health Care to both set up an exchange and to “explore all opportunities and alternative approaches that would free Wisconsin from establishing a health benefit exchange, including federal waivers.” Note, too, that the bipartisan Legislative Council Committee on Health Care Reform Implementation, now chaired by state Sen. Alberta Darling and state Rep. Pat Strachota, both Republicans, has stalled. The chairs canceled the Jan. 10 meeting and no new meeting has been scheduled.
Witness, too, the testimony of Dennis Smith, Walker’s secretary of the state Department of Health Services, before a committee chaired by Congressman Paul Ryan. While Smith testified that the federal reform would cost the state $433 million, he also noted that the federal government would offset the cost of BadgerCare programs. In total, Wisconsin would save an estimated $500 million over five years, thanks to the federal reform.
Even state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen was forced to walk back his statement that health care reform is “dead” in Wisconsin, following a federal judge’s ruling that the bill is unconstitutional.
State Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee) blasted Van Hollen’s reading of the ruling, saying that the judge did not issue an injunction in his order.
“To say that the entire state government of Wisconsin is beholden to an activist judge in Pensacola, Florida, is absurd,” Richards said.
Van Hollen later explained that he has not advised Walker to halt implementation of the federal bill.
Of course, killing off the federal law would mean that some provisions in the bill that are already in place—enhanced consumer protections, tax breaks for businesses and money sent to seniors in Medicare Part D’s donut hole—would have to be rescinded.
Richards scoffed at the Republicans’ opposition to the federal reforms and stressed the importance of benefits that are already positively impacting consumers, regardless of the Florida judge’s decision.
“Wisconsin citizens will continue to get health insurance even if they have a pre-existing condition,” Richards said. “They’ll continue to get the benefit of health insurance when they need it the most and not be subject to a lifetime limit of coverage. Children will continue to get health insurance and seniors will be able to get lower-cost prescription drugs. We will continue to do that in Wisconsin.”
Heroes of the Week
Southeastern Wisconsin Alzheimer’s Association Volunteers
Alzheimer’s disease is the most common cause of dementia and the sixth-leading cause of death in the United States. Anyone who has had an afflicted friend or family member knows the terrible effects of this debilitating illness.
Locally, the Southeastern Wisconsin Chapter of the Alzheimer’s Association (620 S. 76th St.) serves an 11-county region and an estimated 50,000 people affected by the disease. Volunteers play a vital role in enhancing care and support for patients and their families by answering the help line, raising awareness in the community, lending a hand in the chapter office and helping with special events such as the Mardi Gras Gala fund-raiser (March 8) and the annual Walk to End Alzheimer’s (Oct. 1).
Readers who wish to aid the association’s mission to advance research and provide support for patients are urged to call 414-479-8800 or visit www.alz.org/sewi.
State Rep. Jon Richards thinks that if Penscola's ruling stands that “Wisconsin citizens will continue to get health insurance..." as outlined above?
I think not, especially if the voters of Wisconsin get what they say they want... to have their shrinking Middle-Class wealth stop being "redistributed" to those who have less. Under Walker's thinking, that will mean the total end of federally mandated MedicAid and MediCare, as well as the end of BadgerCare in all its forms. It's called "ending entitlements".
The Middle Class and working class voters forget that there continues to be a "Redistribution of Wealth" from their pockets to those wealthier than them... it happens everytime they vote a top-bracket tax reduction. Happens everytime they go shopping and get products that are not as good as they cost. That's why the business is called "for profit", not non-profit, they take more than they give back. Happens everytime they protect business from lawsuits whenever "crap-happens".
By the way, "crap-happens" because "you get what you pay for", and that worker's pay has been steadily going down. That's the driving force for the rhetoric about "frivolous lawsuits", trying to change things so the plaintiff must prove that the business consciously intended to do wrong, instead of just making a careless mistake.
--------------
Let's get back to why the American voter wanted healthcare reform in the first place. The gradual addition to the insurance fine-print that changed insurance's "promise to pay" in case of bad luck into an "empty promise". And also include the gradual change of jobs from full-time with health benefits to casual (part-time) with no benefits.
Obama promised change, but anyone who has EVER worked in a public or private job when "change" has been demanded knows that change is hard work, change is expensive. Change means you have to give up your comfortable and profitable routine and hustle your way back to comfort and profit again. Nobody really likes "change" except the one who sees the light at the end of the tunnel, the guaranteed personal gain from putting time and money into that change.
Is it any wonder that we ended up with a deal that the insurance lobbyists who fund the campaigns of 535 members of congress wanted? A change that ordered healthy people to buy their health care through these insurance company markups instead? That was seen as more profitable than continuing the empty promises that would someday lead to voters rising up against them. Perhaps it would have been different if "torte reform" had come first.
I think Obama knew this, and allowed it to happen. He also knew that the voters will not easily let go of any gains, Middle Class especially! It's called Strategy!
Eventually, we would realize that mandated full coverage at existing full cost would be too expensive, and we would eventually demand that public option, demand that the public option pay less for more care. Big government beating down big business.
As people gradually leave big insurance for that lower cost public option, the hospitals, doctors, and dentists would eventually drop their prices, like the non-covered cosmetic medicine had to do already.
Eventually, even the public option could be reduced to only catastrophic coverage, to align more like fire insurance or accident insurance does. We don't all expect to burn our houses down and collect, do we? But we sure do all expect to go to the doctor and get free check-ups and free health advice, don't we. This would leave routine medical care subject to free market competition and fair pricing. The benefits of a true, unsubsidized free market.
The solution to the problem is to make it so we no longer have to keep pumping tax dollars into the problem, no longer have to offer it as an entitlement.
Please find one single instance in which Walker (or any Republican) advocates "the total end of federally mandated MedicAid and MediCare, as well as the end of BadgerCare in all its forms". If you cannot produce one, which you can't, since no one has said anything even remotely approaching that statement, you should retract this part of your comment. It's just not true, and your "granny will be eating dog food and the sick will die in the streets" garbage is not helpful in the debate.
The fact is that most Republicans and conservatives want to end prior condition rejections and lifetime maximums in a way that will not reduce the quality of coverage, primarily through state and federal pools for those who really need them. NOTE: 20% of the population of Wisconsin would NOT qualify for these pools, because 20% of the population is not unable to pay for their health insurance benefits. Thus, 20% of the population of Wi should NOT qualify for BadgerCare- but that is not "ending BadgerCare in all its forms" as you state.
I do not necessarily want doctors and providers to drastically cut their rates if that means reducing the innovation that has made the US the leader in new discoveries, treatments, and medicines. I also prefer not to put insurance companies out of business- the huge profits are a myth, as anyone can see with a little investigation of a few annual financial reports from publicly traded insurers. I like being able to protect myself, using my own hard-earned pay, from the health problems that could arise in the future, and I like doing so using a risk-pool- and that's exactly what I get from my insurance coverage.
If I write with sensible, middle-of-the-road realities, it just goes right over people's heads. I write this with inflammatory statements to get people to think, to generate break-room or water-cooler talk. Put enough strong ideas in it, and people will remember. Studies show that scandals, controversy, or unpopular ideas do make the whole debate more easily and permanently remembered.
So Scott Walker did not come right out and say it like I did, but you can surely believe that MANY of our TEA party (Taxed Enough Already) voters are thinking exactly that way. This needs to be brought out into the open, including if there happen to be racist undertones.
A lot of the backlash in today's politics is due to the color of Obama's skin, like it or not. Had the same ideas come from a conservative-looking white male figure, the dialog would be different.
No, you just lied. It's as simple as that. I don't know a single person who cares what color Obama's skin is- you seem to be the one that cares the most.
In fact, I'd love to vote for Alan West in 2012, or Herman Cain, should either choose to run. Both are better candidates that Romney, Huckabee, or Barbour. Bobby Jindal is also not white, but would be a great candidate.
You are making definitive statements based on what "you can surely believe that MANY of our TEA party (Taxed Enough Already) voters are thinking". In other words, you're making it up as you go along, based on your own race-centric beliefs.
By the way- and I sure you didn't know this, as you're just making things up by applying your own twisted thinking to others- Herman Cain headlined DOZENS of Tea Party rallies around the US. And guess what- he's of African descent and has brown skin!!
Or is he not "black enough" for you?