A sad and preventable story:

Friends say the Miami University graduate who died this week after reportedly suffering from swine flu delayed getting medical treatment because she did not have health insurance.

News of Kimberly Young’s death Wednesday, Sept. 23, came as a shock to those who knew the vibrant 22-year-old who was working at least two jobs in Oxford after graduating with a double major in December 2008.

Young became ill about two weeks ago, but didn’t seek care initially because she didn’t have health insurance and was worried about the cost, according to Brent Mowery, her friend and former roommate.

Mowery said Young eventually went to an urgent care facility in Hamilton where she was given pain medication and then sent home.

On Tuesday, Sept. 22, Young’s condition suddenly worsened and her roommate drove her to McCullough Hyde Memorial Hospital in Oxford, where she was flown in critical condition to University Hospital in Cincinnati.

Health insurance companies have priced people like Young - young, normal, hardworking - out of the market, and because of skyrocketing premiums, fewer and fewer employers offer health care as a benefit. They're forced to turn to "urgent care facilities," storefront operations that are a poor substitute for real, regular care.

We must change the dynamic of the health insurance market so pricing people like Young out is no longer the norm. A public health insurance option is needed to increase competition and keep the insurance industry honest so they can't delay care even if they want to. Along with affordability provisions to make sure people like Young can afford insurance, this tragic situation could have been prevented.

The New York Times describes the trigger as "a possible compromise under which the government would offer its own health plan only if private insurers failed to provide affordable coverage." By that criterion, it's time to pull the trigger! Don't be fooled. The trigger is a bullet aimed straight at the heart of the public health insurance plan option.

Read more…

Today marks the 100th day since GOP health care leader Roy Blunt promised that they would have a health care bill, and there's still no bill:

Minority Leader John Boehner said the goal of the House GOP plan was to improve the current health care system

“As we proceed down this path, we have to be careful not to impede what works in the current system,” Boehner told reporters. “We take the current health care system and make it better for all Americans.”

“I guarantee you we will provide you with a bill that costs less and provides better care for the American people,” said Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who is heading up the House GOP’s health care effort.

Instead, Boehner, the House minority leader, is ramping up his critisism of even the insurance company bailout Baucus Bill:

As the Senate Finance Committee gets set to begin its second day examining Senator Max Baucus' (D-MT) costly government run-health care bill, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) released a list of 10 facts every American should know about what he calls "the wrong prescription during these tough economic times:"

Just a reminder: The GOP opposition to health reform has nothing to do with a public health insurance option. As Boehner's statement makes clear, the GOP will oppose everything as a government takeover of health care. The fact that Max Baucus's bill has no public health insurance option does not matter.

Chairman Baucus just said the public option amendments will be considered on Tuesday in the Senate Finance Committee. Check back here for more info as I get it.

NEWS

Schumer, Rockefeller to Challenge Baucus on Health-Care Plan - Bloomberg

Democrats will step up their challenge to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’s health-care-overhaul plan today, the opening salvo in a larger fight over the shape and scope of final legislation.

Overhaul Divides Business and Its Traditional GOP Allies - Wall Street Journal

Business is parting from its traditional allies in the Republican Party on health care as companies and big corporate lobbyists lend tentative support to a congressional overhaul that conservative lawmakers staunchly oppose.

Schumer And Rockefeller: We Will Get Public Option - TPM

I just got off a conference call with Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). They are confident — very confident — that health care reform will include a public option.

In Poll, Public Wary of Obama on War and Health - New York Times

On one of the most contentious issues in the health care debate — whether to establish a government-run health insurance plan as an alternative to private insurers — nearly two-thirds of the country continues to favor the proposal, which is backed by Mr. Obama but has drawn intense fire from most Republicans and some moderate Democrats.

Blue Dog Opposition To Public Option Fades In Whip Count - Huffington Post

Blocking a public health insurance option is a relatively low priority for conservative Blue Dog Democrats, according to an ongoing survey of its members. The fading House opposition could clear the way for the public option to move through the chamber.

Dems reach 60 with appointment to fill Ted Kennedy's seat; GOP cries foul - The Hill

Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Paul Kirk will become the 60th Democratic vote in the Senate and the first new Massachusetts senator in a quarter-century on Friday, unless a state court intervenes.

Pelosi Presses for a Public Option - Wall Street Journal

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stepped up her push for a publicly run health plan that has divided congressional Democrats, saying it could "save enormous amounts of money."

Obama's Deal With Drug Firms Survives - Washington Post

In the high-stakes battle over health care, the White House and the drug lobby make an unusual — and unusually powerful — team.

We've heard that the Senate Finance Committee will be voting on the public option amendments tonight. Stay tuned to the hearings on CSPAN and see how people vote.

UPDATE:

May be tomorrow, but could be tonight.

CIGNA's corporate slogan is "A Business of Caring." That implies they actually care about you, your health, or your pocket book. And yet, their record with their patients says otherwise - that they deny care, hide information, pressure doctors, and keep people sick for money.

Clearly, their slogan is not accurate:

CIGNA denies care to make a buck. That's their business model. They probably need a new slogan to reflect that.

So, why don't you vote for one? You could pick "Walk it off," "We deny. You die.," or my personal favorite, "Denying care, one patient at a time."

Click here to vote on Sick for Profit and help rebrand CIGNA to be a bit more honest.

The Los Angeles Times has a must-read piece today on the problems of an individual mandate without cost controls attached (emphasis added):

In the drive to bring health coverage to almost every American, lawmakers have largely rejected restrictions on how much insurers can charge, sparking fears that consumers will continue to face the skyrocketing premium increases of recent years.

The legislators' reluctance to control premium costs comes despite the fact that they intend to require virtually all Americans to get health insurance, an unprecedented mandate — long sought by insurance companies — that would mark the first time the federal government has compelled consumers to buy a single industry's product, effectively creating a captive market.

"We are about to force at least 30 million people into an insurance market where the sharks are circling," said California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, a Democrat who served as the state's insurance commissioner for eight years. "Without effective protections, they will be eaten alive."

Soaring premiums coupled with millions of new customers forced to buy policies would likely mean higher costs for taxpayers to cover government subsidies for lower-income families and individuals.

…

"If the government is going to require people to buy an insurance policy, they have to guarantee it is affordable," said Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog. "It is unconscionable not to."

The Baucus bill is a mandate with no price controls, because it lacks a public health insurance option to increase competition with private insurance.

What will make a mandate work? First, health insurance must be affordable. For people who get insurance through work, it means their employers must be asked to share responsibility and provide good insurance to their employees at an affordable price. For people who don't, it means government must provide subsidies high enough to make purchasing insurance on your own within reach for everybody. It's only fair - if we're forcing people to buy insurance, they have to be able to afford it. Second, you need price controls to make sure insurance rates don't keep rising as they have been over the last decade. The best way to control prices is competition with a public health insurance option.

The Baucus bill gives us none of that - its subsidies are too stingy to make insurance affordable, it requires no employer responsibility, and it has no public health insurance option. The Baucus bill also caps expenses for people who buy health insurance in the new "Exchange" marketplace, like every other bill being proposed. However, with no public health insurance option to control costs, what happens when private insurers continue raising their prices at double-digit rates and people hit and exceed their caps? Government and families have to make up the difference.

Without a public health insurance option to control costs, the Baucus bill gives private insurers license to raise their rates as much as they want. Families and taxpayers will have to keep up. Given the way private insurers raise their rates, this isn't right or sustainable.

The American people, I suspect, get this. The other day, Health Care for America Now released a Lake Research poll of likely voters in Maine. In it, we asked if these voters favored or opposed a statement. We gave one statement to one half of our survey, one to another half. Here are the two statements and the results:

1. Do strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose requiring everyone to buy and be covered by a private health insurance plan?
   
   16% strongly favor, 19% somewhat favor, 21% somewhat oppose, 34% strongly oppose
2. Do strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose requiring everyone to buy and be covered by a health insurance plan, with a choice between a public option and private insurance plans?
   
   31% strongly favor, 24% somewhat favor, 13% somewhat oppose, 27% strongly oppose

The only thing changed about the wording between the two statements was the addition of the choice of a public health insurance option. By a 55% to 35% margin, Maine voters want a public health insurance option if they are required to buy insurance.

The addition of a public health insurance option results in a 20 point swing in the popularity of a mandate. The public health insurance option makes the mandate popular, at least in Maine, though I can't imagine the number nation-wide would be too different.

I think Americans understand the policy. They get that if the Baucus bill passes unchanged, we will be bailing out the private insurance companies that have screwed us for years, and we all will be forced to buy insurance that we can't afford. They get that without a the choice of public health insurance option to keep the insurance companies honest and keep prices down, and without decent subsidies and an employer mandate, an individual mandate is unconscionable.

Members of the Senate Finance Committee, America is watching. America understands the issues on the table and understands the consequences of an insurance industry bailout bill. America wants a public health insurance option by large margins, and, at least in Maine, they only want a mandate when they get choice.

Senate Finance Committee, we're counting on you to fix the Baucus bill and give the American people what they want - affordable coverage and a public health insurance option that's available everywhere on day one.

NEWS

Mandate minus price controls may increase healthcare costs - Los Angeles Times

With lawmakers reluctant to limit what insurers may charge, there's little to slow soaring premiums. Coupled with millions of new customers, that adds up to higher costs for taxpayers and consumers.

Democrats Win First Battles Over Plans to Curtail Health Costs - Bloomberg

Senate Finance Committee members clashed over Medicare cost-cutting plans, with Democrats winning the first skirmishes yesterday over how to curb spending in the federal program for the elderly.

Where $2.2 trillion was spent on U.S. health care - USA Today

Only two in 10 Americans say their health insurance coverage and the quality of the health care they receive will improve if a bill passes Congress this year, despite President Obama's promises to improve the system for those with and without insurance.

Reformers Target Insurers with Protest Billboard - Washington Post

It isn't exactly subtle, but it certainly is likely to catch the attention of passersby. The liberal pro-reform Health Care Action Now (sic) coalition has drawn up a billboard targeting health insurance companies for "making our country sick."

Dog Fight: Dueling Whip Counts Hold Fate Of Public Option - Huffington Post

The Blue Dog Coalition is engaged in a member-to-member whip operation in the House, beginning with a survey of its 52 lawmakers, to find out where they stand on critical health care issues. The principal focus is the public insurance option, but the canvass also touches on various tax and revenue increase proposals to pay for reform.

Kennedy Confidant Expected to Take Senate Seat - New York Times

Senior Democrats in Washington said Wednesday that they expected Gov. Deval Patrick to name Paul G. Kirk Jr., a former aide and longtime confidant of the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy, to Mr. Kennedy’s seat on Thursday.

Today I participated in a "Big Insurance: Sick of It" in New York City, in front of the offices of the second largest health insurance company in the country. We came to say enough to insurance company hegemony over our health care. We came to say that "we the people" have to come before their profits. We came to represent the nearly 80 percent of Americans who want to be given a public health insurance plan option.

Read more…