Health Care For America Now

Jonathan Gruber of MIT is out with a new report today, proving once again that health reform - this time the Senate version in particular - would save people money. And once again, he's relying on CBO numbers to prove the point. Here's the argument:

In a letter to Senator Reid on November 20, the Congressional Budget Office (the official government scoring agency) reported that they estimated the cost of an individual low-cost plan in the exchange to be $5200 in 2016. This is a plan with an "actuarial value" (roughly, the share of expenses for a given population covered by insurance) of 70%. In their most recent communication with Congress, CBO also projected that, absent reform, the cost of an individual policy in the non-group market would be $5500 for a plan with an actuarial value of 60%. This implies that the same plan that cost $5500 without reform would cost $4460 with reform, or almost 20% less.

Gruber goes on to chart some of the savings for people:

It's worth noting that the premium savings - calculated between $200 and $400 - are before the subsidies are applied. When the subsidies are factored in, you can see how significant the savings are, especially at lower incomes.

The Senate bill - with exchanges, a public health insurance option, and generous subsidies for lower incomes - would indeed save people a good chunk of change. Of course, there are parts that can and should be improved - better affordability standards for all Americans, for example - but critics who take the insurance industry line and say reform will increase costs are dead wrong.

NEWS

Senate set to open stormy debate on health care - Associated Press

With the Senate set to begin debate today on revamping health care, the solid Democratic coalition that allowed the bill to advance is fracturing already. The majority Democrats will need 60 votes again to finish, but the 60 votes may not be there anymore.

MIT analysis backs Obama - Politico

A new analysis by a leading MIT economist provides new ammunition for Democrats as the Senate begins formally debating the historic health-reform bill being pushed by President Barack Obama.

Even if health bill passes soon, wait for reforms could be long - Washington Post

The White House has a message for Americans suffering under today's health insurance system: "Help is on the way."

Dems seek deal as Sen. debate begins - Politico

After months of buildup, the historic debate on health care reform opens on the Senate floor Monday — but the C-SPAN cameras won’t see the real action.

Seven Things You Didn't Know Were In The Senate Health Bill - Kaiser Health News

Pay attention: The "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" — better known as the Senate health care overhaul bill – is chock full of interesting but little publicized provisions affecting consumers. Sure, the bill is mainly a blueprint for overhauling the insurance system. But look closely and you'll see a variety of items that would affect people from the cradle to old age – from breast pump use to retiree health benefits. It's a congressional tradition, adding pet interests that otherwise might not pass to a big bill that at least will be put up for a vote.

No break from health care for Lincoln in Arkansas - Associated Press

After casting a crucial vote on the health debate, U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln didn’t return to the break she may have wanted when she came home to Arkansas.

The Urban Institute is out with a new report pushing for a triggered "robust" public option based on Medicare rates.

It's easy to see how on first blush, this might be an attractive proposal. A public option based on Medicare rates would save billions of dollars and really hold down costs in an aggressive way. The problem is the trigger and the politics - or more accurately, the problem with this proposal is reality.

The policy arguments against the trigger are numerous, but boil down to this:

The logic at the heart of a trigger is that private insurance companies should be given one more chance to keep their monopoly on the system they’ve screwed up so badly.

A trigger says that some condition must be met in the future for a public health insurance option to be created in a state. That condition could be levels of competition or premium increases or affordability, but whatever it is, the situation on the ground in a state must measurably worsen before the trigger is pulled and a public option created. Why would we delay the public option and give private insurance yet one more chance?

People are going bankrupt and dying every day because they are uninsured or underinsured. Health insurance premiums are going through the roof. The private insurance companies already have a monopoly – with 94% of markets considered “highly concentrated” by Department of Justice standards.

As Senator Chuck Schumer said, "Any reasonable criteria for triggering a public plan has already been met."

But that's if the trigger were actually designed to be pulled. It won't be. That's where we get into the politics.

I'm all for a robust public option. Evidence across the board shows a public option tied to Medicare rates would save a ton of money - both to taxpayers and to individuals - and it wouldn't bankrupt hospitals or doctors like its critics say it would. It's a good idea. (This is not to say that a public option based on negotiated rates can't be powerful. Look at the VA, which negotiates some of the lowest drug prices in the nation.)

But lobbyists have so far prevented a robust public option from being considered in the Senate. And so, we should strive to deal in reality.

We could have an interesting theoretical discussion about, say, whether a trigger for a robust public option is better than an opt-in, but neither is likely to happen in the Senate. While we're theorizing, I'd love to have a pony with my health care reform. Now that would be awesome. But I'm not going to get a pony when President Obama signs a health care bill.

In today's Senate, a trigger is nothing but a race to the bottom. The trigger built into the Medicare Part D bill is instructive - it has never been pulled as drug prices have skyrocketed and seniors have suffered. If triggers are put into this bill, we'd end up with a trigger that can never be pulled, a policy that has actually been proposed as opposed to the robust public option which has already been voted down in committee.

Reality is, if there was enough support for a robust public option in the Senate that would actually come into existence, even with a trigger, then there would be enough support to create it immediately, or at least in 2014 when the Senate health care bill really takes effect. But there's not, and the only trigger on the table is one designed to kill the public health insurance option.

That's why triggers, any triggers, even magical fantasy pony triggers, must be opposed. Period.

What does Black Friday have to do with health care? Given that insurance companies are Wall Street-controlled entities focused more on their bottom line than our health, more than you'd think.

Insurance companies are entwined with Wall Street in a myriad of ways, but one of the most obvious is personnel. The people that run insurance companies often run other Wall Street companies as well. Eric Wiseman, CEO of the clothing and apparel conglomerate VF Corp., is a perfect example: he's on the board of directors of Cigna health care.

VF Corp. makes all kinds of clothes you might be familiar with. They own the brands Nautica, North Face, Lee, Wrangler, Vans, and Lucy, among many others:

Those brands are marketed by the VF Corporation. And VF’s chief executive is Eric Wiseman, who also sits on the board of Cigna, the giant health insurance company. According to the leaflets [that Health Care for America Now is handing out to shoppers in front of malls today around the country], “Greedy health insurance companies like Cigna are spending millions on scare tactics to block reform,” through lobbying and advertising.

Eric Wiseman makes $6.2 million running the publicly traded VF Corp., and he makes another $430,000 for sitting on Cigna's board.

Cigna is one of the three largest health insurance companies in the country, and it has the track record to prove it. Cigna is the company that insurance industry whistle-blower Wendell Potter used to work for, so all the things he says about how the industry cheats, lies, and tries to kill reform come from personal experience with this company. Cigna is right now under investigation from Senator Rockafeller and the Commerce Committee for allegedly failing to disclose whether their money went to people's health care or executive salaries and bonuses. And Cigna is the company that denied Stacy Ritter's sick daughters their care, forcing her into bankruptcy.

Eric Wiseman makes money off of all of that. He makes money when Cigna denies care. He makes money when they use premiums to pay his salary instead our doctors. And he stands to make a ton of money if Cigna, along with the rest of the industry, kills health care reform and the public health insurance option.

So if you're planning on buying some Wranglers for your husband, Vans for your son, or North Face for your wife, maybe you should think twice about where that money is going. And while you're at it, why don't you give Eric Wiseman a call, along with thousands of other shoppers who are getting this message today at malls around the country?

Let him know that you understand the connection between his coveted clothing brands and reform, and tell him to stop being grinchy with our health care. Trust me, nothing scares the head of a publicly traded company more than going after their highly protected brands.

Here's the number to call: (336) 424-6192

You remember Joe Szakos, right? He's the courageous head of the Virginia Organizing Project, our affiliate in VA. He's also an Anthem Blue Cross customer, and his rates just increased 14%. The same week, he received an email from Blue Cross bashing a public health insurance option.

The fact that Blue Cross was spending money that it was extorting from Szakos to help kill reform was infuriating. Szakos did something about it:

Szakos immediately had some questions for Anthem. Chief among them, why is Anthem using its resources to lobby against health care reform with a public health insurance option while at the same time increasing rates by 14.1%?

Szakos, along with three other Virginia Organizing Project board members, went down to Anthem's offices in Richmond, VA to ask. He left in handcuffs. Watch the video:

Szakos, a customer, couldn't get an answer from Anthem. There was no justification for raising rates on one hand, and spending money lobbying against health care reform on the other. And instead of trying to offer Szakos an explanation, they had him arrested.

Szakos' trial began on Monday, and the judge decided to dismiss all charges. From Virginia Organizing Project's press release:

Evidence showed that customers are permitted in the main entrance where Szakos attempted to enter Anthem's Richmond headquarters in July. Evidence also showed that Szakos was connected by cell phone at the time of arrest-waiting for an Anthem representative-following the instructions Anthem security had given him. Judge Neil Steverson chose not to convict Szakos for trespassing on his own insurance company's property.

Of course, Anthem still succeeded in wasting taxpayer money going ahead with this silly trial. And they're still spending money opposing health reform. But we know one thing; if you're a customer, you can go down to your health insurance company and ask them about your rate increases and their lobbying practices. Perhaps more people should.

NEWS

From the Hospital to Bankruptcy Court - New York Times

Some of the debtors sitting forlornly in this city’s old stone bankruptcy court have lost a job or gotten divorced. Others have been summoned to face their creditors because they spent mindlessly beyond their means. But all too often these days, they are there merely because they, or their children, got sick.

NC Health Insurer Being Probed For Campaign Against Public Option - TPM

BlueCross BlueShield of North Carolina is being investigated by the state's attorney general for a recent mailer and spate of robo-calls in opposition to the public option, according to a company spokesman.

Insurance Industry Antitrust Fight Headed To Conference Committee - Huffington Post

The insurance industry successfully fought off a Senate threat to revoke its antitrust exemption as part of health care reform, but the issue lives to fight one more battle in the conference committee negotiations that will take place between the two chambers.

Mark Halperin's Mary Landrieu Photoshop: Pure Class - Huffington Post

As many of you know, Mark Halperin is this babbling idiot whom Time magazine hired to cobble together this insipid web product called "The Page," which is designed to scam people looking for trenchant, up-to-the-minute political news into giving Time many, many unnecessary ad impressions as you follow Halperin's teasing links to his content. That content tends to be a really dumb listicle, or a one sentence piece of pure and unadulterated banality, or, if you are really lucky, a paragraph or two of analysis that's either so conventional as to appear slam-dunk, or so witless that it's completely laughable and wrong.

There was a phone call today with farm leaders from the National Farmers Union and affiliated groups. Their message to those Senators who are not on board yet with a public health insurance option? Rural America needs a public health insurance option most.

The facts in rural America are stark. Roger Johnson, President of the National Farmers Union, noted that rural people spend 22% more on premiums and out of pocket costs than their urban counterparts do. They're also 70% more likely to be uninsured. And where 8% of the population overall rely on individual health insurance policies, the kinds of policies where the insurance companies screw you the most and therefore make the best profit on, 33% of farmers and ranchers rely on these policies.

As a result, farmers and ranchers in rural America get hit hardest by insurance company abuses. John Hansen, President of the NFU in Nebraska, explained:

Farming and ranching is a risky business, with a low margin.

There is a continual pattern of ranchers and farmers out here who can't afford health insurance, or have a body part that has a problem not covered by the insurance policy due to pre-existing exclusions. They have an accident or get sick and suddenly, their entire farm is being fed into the medical system. This is not a theoretical problem.

Annie Cheatam, President of the NFU in New England, added:

Farmers are also very eager to provide health insurance to their employees. But they are reporting that their rates are going up 15-20% a year. No small business can sustain that kind of increase over time. Rates went up 90% in Maine since 2000.

States like Arkansas, Nebraska, and Maine have some of the largest rural populations per capita in the country. Perhaps as a result, the NFU and their allies have found broad support for health reform and the public health insurance option. That's why they are confident that Senators like Blanche Lincoln (who chairs the Agriculture Committee in the Senate and is intimately aware of rural concerns) will find a way to do the right thing. Olly Neal at the Arkansas Land and Farm Development Corporation said:

Senator Lincoln is our friend, and we're pleased she agreed to debate the health care bill. We think, knowing her, that she'll find a way to be supportive of it, and we hope it'll include a public option. We believe there's a way she can get to that support. The majority of Arkansas has shown itself to be supportive of a public option, and we think she'll respond to that majority.

Rural America needs the public option perhaps even more than the rest of America does. The Senators from rural states who are thinking about standing in the way need to do the right thing for their constituents.

NEWS

For Public, Affordability A Key Issue In Health Bill - NPR

Lawmakers debating health care on Capitol Hill have spent months worrying about the potential cost. But mostly it's been the total cost of the bill, not how much individual families who could soon be required to buy insurance for the first time might have to pay.

Health Reform: Is Tax on 'Cadillac' Plans Fair? - Associated Press

Schoolteacher Kinzi Blair makes only $46,000 a year, but she has what many would consider a "Cadillac" health plan, now targeted for a big tax increase by health reformers.

Bishops search for Senate sponsor - Politico

Roman Catholic bishops have yet to find a senator willing to sponsor their amendment for a tougher ban on use of taxpayer money for abortion coverage in the Senate health care reform bill.

Centrists Get Ad Deluge From Both Sides - CongressDaily

Centrist Democratic senators will face a barrage of advertising from the left and the right as they return to their districts for the Thanksgiving holiday in the wake of Saturday's key procedural vote to move comprehensive health reform legislation forward.

Public option at center of debate - Washington Post

Democrats had little time to savor their weekend Senate health-care victory, as two of the lawmakers who voted to move the debate forward Saturday night indicated Sunday that they will not vote to pass the package if it includes a government-run insurance program.

Senate Democrats at odds over health care bill - Associated Press

Moderate Senate Democrats threatened Sunday to scuttle health-care legislation if their demands aren't met, while more liberal members warned their party leaders not to bend.

White House Report llustrates Impact of Health Insurance Reform on Ohio - The Business Journal

A report released Monday by the White House projects that 1.4 million Ohioans who now lack health insurance and 533,000 who are insured through non-group plans could get affordable coverage as a result of health insurance reform.

As debate on health care moves forward in the Senate, it seems like a good time for a reminder: There is no such thing as a good trigger for the public health insurance option. In fact, triggers are nothing but a plan to kill the public option.

Why?

1. The status quo is unacceptable

The logic at the heart of a trigger is that the status quo is ok, as long as it doesn't get worse.

A trigger says that some condition must be met in the future for a public health insurance option to be created in a state. That condition could be levels of competition or affordability, but whatever it is, the situation on the ground in a state must measurably worsen before the trigger is pulled and a public option created. That's unacceptable.

People are going bankrupt and dying every day because they are uninsured or underinsured. The House and Senate bills don't go into effect until 2013 or 2014, and triggers ask people in states to wait even longer to get relief from insurance company abuses.

As Senator Chuck Schumer said, "Any reasonable criteria for triggering a public plan has already been met."

And that's assuming a trigger is written in such a way that it could actually be triggered.

2. The trigger is a catch-22, designed never to be triggered

We've tried triggers before in this country. Medicare Part D has a trigger written into the bill that will allow the government to start negotiating for better drug prices if they start increasing by huge margins. Even though drug prices under the program have skyrocketed, with Medicare Part D paying on average 30% more for drugs than regular Medicaid and costing taxpayers over $60 billion extra over 10 years, the trigger has never been triggered.

That's what happens when triggers are written by Republicans and their lobbyist friends. Indeed, the trigger proposed by Senator Olympia Snowe, who voted against even debating health care on Saturday, was a catch-22 designed never to trigger.

As I've explained:

The trigger amendment isn't a fig leaf. It isn't even a co-op. It's a plan to kill the public health insurance option outright, and give taxpayer money straight to private insurance companies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The overwhelming majority of Americans support a real public health insurance option. Poll after poll confirms this. And the public option is even popular in places like Arkansas, Louisiana, and Nebraska [pdf]. Nearly all Democrats in the Senate support it. And it's the right thing to do.

Triggers are not an acceptable substitute no matter how they are written.

NEWS

Senate Votes to Open Health Care Debate - New York Times

The Senate voted on Saturday to begin full debate on major health care legislation, propelling President Obama’s top domestic initiative over a crucial, preliminary hurdle in a formidable display of muscle-flexing by the Democratic majority.

Schumer: Dems ready to go-it-alone on health care - Associated Press

A leading Senate Democrat said Monday his party is determined to push through a health care overhaul bill with or without Republican support because the "system is broken."

Senators voice optimism on public option - Boston Globe

Buoyed by their weekend victory on a vote beginning the health care debate, several Senate Democrats expressed optimism yesterday they could find a way to keep a government-run insurance plan in the sweeping bill.

Michael Bennet: I'll Lose My Seat To Support Health Care (VIDEO) - Huffington Post

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), a freshman Senator who is fighting to hold his seat in 2010, said he would support health care reform even if it cost him his job.

For a healthcare holdout, it's lonely in the middle - LA Times

Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln, who remains undecided on Senate legislation, is getting pummeled from the left and right.

Health care fight swells lobbying - USA Today

Companies and groups hiring lobbying firms on health issues nearly doubled this year as special interests rushed to shape the massive revamp of the nation's health care system now in its final stretch before Congress.

PolitiFact Smacks Down Rep. Boehner's "Abortion Premium" Claim - Media Matters

As the Senate moves to take up its version of the health care reform bill, Rep. Boehner alleged that the bill levied a new "abortion premium."  PolitiFact.com reviewed his statement.

The Senate Votes to Begin Debate on Health-care Bill - Washington Post

A look at how members of the U.S. Senate voted.