Starting today, Health Care for America Now is running ads in Washington, DC, reminding Congress and decision makers here in our nation's capital exactly what happened on November 4th. Here's the ad:

Barack Obama ran on health care, plain and simple. He repeated the message we've highlighted above all over this country in speech after speech. In the final month of the campaign, he signed on to Health Care for America Now's vision for reform and spent 86% of his advertising budget talking about health care. And Barack Obama proceeded to win the November 4th election by 7 points.

There is no such thing as a clearer mandate.

HuffPo: The push to pass the Obama agenda has begun, months before the president-elect even takes office.

Read more…

NEWS

Health care advocates promote reform - Politico

Some health care groups are pushing Congress to include funding for threatened health programs in a second economic stimulus package.

Kennedy Announces Plan to Submit Bill For Universal Care - Washington Post

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), making his second appearance on Capitol Hill since he began treatment for a malignant brain tumor in June, told reporters yesterday that he would advance a bill early next year calling for universal health care.

Half of primary-care doctors in survey would leave medicine - CNN

Nearly half the respondents in a survey of U.S. primary care physicians said that they would seriously consider getting out of the medical business within the next three years if they had an alternative.

Senate Finance To Examine Economics Of Health Care Reform - RTT News

The latest in a series of hearings on health care reform will take place Wednesday on Capitol Hill, with a special focus being paid to the economic side of the issue. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont) announced the hearing Monday, as Senators will weigh how to balance health care concerns in light of the overarching economic crisis.

Senate Democrats Get Serious About Health Care System Overhaul - CQ

Rather than waiting for either President-elect Barack Obama to take office next year or for the 111th Congress to convene, Senate Democratic leaders this week are escalating discussions on an ambitious overhaul of the health care system.

Protests Over a Rule to Protect Health Providers - New York Times

A last-minute Bush administration plan to grant sweeping new protections to health care providers who oppose abortion and other procedures on religious or moral grounds has provoked a torrent of objections, including a strenuous protest from the government agency that enforces job discrimination laws.

Medicare coverage gap vexes patients, survey says - Seattle Post Intelligencer

A survey of Medicare Part D enrollees showed that most of them do not fully understand the coverage gap, or "doughnut hole," under which they must pay full cost for their prescription drugs, Medco Health Solutions said Monday.

It May Be the Right Time to Operate - Los Angeles Times

When Barack Obama steps into the Oval Office in January, healthcare reform will join a list of priorities crowded with two wars, a ballooning budget deficit and an economy mired in one of the worst slowdowns since the Great Depression.

Government role in health care won't diminish: Summers - Reuters

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said on Monday the government's role in providing health care won't likely diminish, so greater efficiencies need to be found in the delivery of care.

So, guess what you'll be spending nearly 50% of your paycheck on in 2016? It's not food. It's not your mortgage. It's your health care.

According to a New America Foundation report released today, we're in for a tough, expensive road if we don't get down to health care reform immediately:

As health care costs continue to grow faster than wages, health insurance will become more and more unaffordable for more and more American families every day. The financial burdens associated with health care and health insurance will only get worse over time without action.The cost of the average employer-sponsored health insurance plan (ESI) for a family will reach $24,000 in 2016. This represents an 84 percent increase over 2008 premium levels. Under this scenario, we estimate that at least half of American households will need to spend more than 45 percent of their income to buy health insurance.

Another shocking statistic from the report: Last year, the American economy lost $207 billion because of our poor health care system.

You can check out the impact in 2016 on your state here.

A health care reform plan like Obama's is projected to cost between $50 billion (the number given by the Obama campaign) and $75 billion upfront. Obama says he'll finance his plan by rolling back Bush's tax cuts for the rich. And the savings will be huge.

For an investment of ~$70 billion (that's 1/10th of a bailout), we can plug that hole that's draining $207 billion per year from our economy. For 1/10th of the money that we're giving away without oversight to Wall Street, we can make sure working families don't spend half their income on health care costs.

So, quite frankly, anyone who says we can't afford to do health care reform right now isn't worth listening to. They obviously have no idea what they're talking about.

NEWS

The Cost of Doing Nothing - New America Foundation

The U.S. health care system is in crisis. Health care costs too much; we often get too little in exchange for our health care dollar; and tens of millions of Americans are uninsured.

Employers Offer Workers Fewer Health Care Plans - New York Times

It’s the annual “open enrollment” season in corporate America, when employees choose their medical plans for the coming year. But this time, even if they are fortunate enough to have a job at a company that still offers health benefits, many workers are finding that the buffet of options has been trimmed to a very short menu.

Keeping the Heat on Health Care Reform - WebMD

Does health care reform still have a chance for quick action?

Albany Cage Match: Teachers vs. Doctors! - New York Magazine

Governor David Paterson’s push for midyear budget cuts has unleashed a special-interests smackdown between the state teachers unions and the health-care industry. With spending on school aid and Medicaid eating up nearly half of the state’s budget, and a record $12.5 billion deficit, the governor wants lawmakers to make health care suffer to the tune of $571 million and have public schools do without $585 million. Now the two Albany heavyweights are turning on each other.

Cuomo Investigating Colleges’ Deals With Health Insurers - New York Times

The New York attorney general began sending subpoenas and document requests this month to colleges including Columbia, Cornell, Georgetown and several State University of New York campuses as part of an investigation of relationships between the colleges and health insurance companies that cover students.

Small Firms Shiver as Health Premiums Rise - Wall Street Journal

Already struggling in a tough economy, many small employers are about to face another big hit: markedly higher increases in health-insurance premiums as they head into 2009.

Democrats Weigh How Hard to Hit Agenda - Chicago Tribune

After an election victory won above all on the promise of change, Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress now confront a political question: How much change and how fast?

Sean Lengell at the Washington Times gets to the heart of the issue:

The nation's largest pharmaceutical lobbying group is preparing a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign to tout the importance of free-market health care and undercut an expected push by the Obama administration for price controls of prescription drugs.

The effort, which will include a national television commercial scheduled to begin airing next week, is the first salvo in what likely will be a huge battle over health care reform during the Obama presidency.

Other major industries are also gearing up for the fight, including big businesses and insurance companies. But the stakes are especially high for drugmakers, which stand to lose as much as $30 billion in revenue if President-elect Barack Obama's plan to let the federal government negotiate Medicare drug prices is implemented, according to one independent report.

As with most things, this is about money. Though PhRMA's ads will tout the benefits of a "free market" health care reform, I'm glad reporting on the issue is getting to the real reasons behind these ads.

For the record, free market health care reform is something of a myth. John McCain ran on one of the most aggressive free market health care reform plans we've seen in recent years, and he was soundly defeated. And there's reason to believe the rules of the free market don't really even apply to health care, especially health insurance. Most people don't behave rationally when it comes to health care; they don't plan ahead for the care they are going to need, they have to be dragged into preventative medicine, and when crisis strikes, they understandably don't spend a lot of time shopping around for the best deal.

All PhRMA is doing here is putting their profits before the American people, and hiding it behind the old conservative canard called the free market. One might hope they'd realize that quality, affordable health care for all is a worthy goal worth supporting, even if their bottom line takes a hit, but somehow I think it's unlikely.

As such, expect a lot more from PhRMA, our friends at AHIP (who's been strangely silent lately), and a whole host of other industry front groups who stand to lose if health care reform passes.

NEWS

Drugmaker ads to target Obama idea - Washington Times

The nation's largest pharmaceutical lobbying group is preparing a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign to tout the importance of free-market health care and undercut an expected push by the Obama administration for price controls of prescription drugs.

Dole says Obama should focus on health care - WRAL

Former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole said President-elect Barack Obama should make health care a top priority in his first year in office

Uninsured, and Facing Cancer Surgery - Philadelphia Enquirer

Back in April, Mary Gannon, 54, was taking a shower when she felt the lump in her groin.

Mary earns $11 an hour in a doctor's office as a medical assistant. She's a temp worker, without health insurance.

Experts urge more health care aid to states - Reuters

A huge boost in federal aid to states for health care programs could help kick-start the moribund U.S. economy where consumer and business demand has fallen dramatically, a former senior Clinton administration aide told a congressional panel on Thursday.

U.S. trails other nations in chronic illness care - Boston Globe

Chronically ill Americans are more likely to forgo medical care because of high costs or experience medical errors than patients in other affluent countries, according to a study released on Thursday.

As DemFromCT pointed out yesterday, the white paper Senator Max Baucus released yesterday leaves open the option of altering the current employer-based health care tax exclusion.

At first blush, altering or eliminating the employer-based tax exclusion sounds exactly like what Senator John McCain wanted to do, and exactly what we've been arguing against for months. So why is it ok when Baucus does it?

Igor Volsky over at Think Progress' Wonk Room explains:

So what’s the difference? Why aren’t progressives jumping down Baucus’ throat and accusing him of treason? While McCain proposed replacing the employee deduction with a one-size-fits-all tax credit without reforming the health insurance market, Baucus pairs employee-tax tweaks with market reforms that would increase access to group coverage.

It's a key difference. Let me elaborate.

The current employer-based health care exclusion says that unlike some other employee benefits - which are taxed just like cash - any money your employer spends on your health care isn't taxed. So, for example, if your employer spends $100 every month paying for your health care plan that you get through work, that money is never taxed. If you had to buy health care yourself, you'd have to spend $100/month of your post-tax income on health insurance, which is more expensive. Not taxing the health benefits you get through work encourages employers to offer health insurance. Their money goes farther because it is not taxed and employees have to spend less. It's a win-win.

There's a problem, though, and it's that the tax exclusion is a regressive tax - it benefits the rich more than it does the poor. The rich pay a higher tax rate on their income than the middle and lower classes, but they get their health insurance through their employer tax free just like everyone else. So, $100 in tax-free benefits is worth more to the rich because at their higher tax rate, that $100 turns into much less if you convert it to post-tax money.

Wall Street Journal: Mr. Baucus's ideas are largely similar to Mr. Obama's as well, with a range of Democrats coalescing around an approach.

Read more…

LA Times: Lawmakers are unveiling plans to expand health coverage and curb global warming.

Read more…