Will Health Bill Allow States to Do Better?

[davidswanson]

The health insurance bill currently under consideration in Congress would forbid states from providing their residents with healthcare. An amendment correcting that problem was passed in committee last July and then quietly removed. A new campaign is asking the Democrats who voted for that amendment to withhold their votes on the bill until it is reinstated.

Several states' legislatures are close to enacting single-payer healthcare bills. This is a complete healthcare solution that eliminates the for-profit insurance industry, lowers the cost of pharmaceuticals, reduces bureaucracy, and provides universal coverage. As President Obama explains: "Now, the truth is that, unless you have a — what’s called a single-payer system, in which everybody is automatically covered, then you’re probably not going to reach every single individual."

We're not creating such a system in Washington. We're creating something far more limited and compromised, expensive and wasteful. The healthcare bill now in play in Congress may constitute a tremendous step forward, or a tiny one, or a public bailout of the sickness industry that will do more harm than good. The bill includes some good measures but empowers profiteers who are crafting most of the details and whose stocks rise every time passage appears possible.

One good measure that is no longer included was the so-called public option, which -- in its final form -- was to be controlled by privately determined rates and reach fewer than 5 percent of Americans, according to the President, or less than that, according to the Congressional Budget Office. With that fight now lost, should the more progressive members of Congress simply vote for a bill that may do more harm than good, and allow the pattern of ignoring progressive demands to be more firmly established?

What if there were something far less controversial than the public option that could bring healthcare to far more people? And what if this something had already passed in committee and been unceremoniously stripped out of the bill without a fight? Would it be worth a winnable fight right now to put this measure back in?

When the first state passes single-payer healthcare, none of the other 49 states will lose anything they've gained through Congress. But the lucky state whose legislature tries to do something more won't see any immediate benefit, because the insurance companies will sue. And there are federal laws that may allow such suits to prevail and deny states the right to provide their residents with healthcare.

Last July the House Committee on Education and Labor voted 25 to 19, with bipartisan support, to pass an amendment proposed by Congressman Dennis Kucinich to waive federal restrictions and allow states to provide healthcare if they choose. Nothing in any other versions of the healthcare bill from other committees conflicted with this language, but it was quietly removed nonetheless. (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the White House told her to remove it.) And the Senate bill added language forbidding state healthcare solutions through 2017, and not - despite what the President told Kucinich - including the waivers that had been in Kucinich's amendment.

Republicans can be expected to vote No on any healthcare bill, no matter how limited or corrupt. But these 14 Democrats voted yes in committee on the Kucinich Amendment:

Dennis J. Kucinich (OH-10) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Facebook. Twitter.

Donald M. Payne (NJ-10) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Email for constituents.

Robert C. Scott (VA-03) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Email for constituents.

Lynn C. Woolsey (CA-06) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email for constituents. Twitter.

Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Email for constituents. Twitter.

CPC Email for Woolsey and Grijalva: Email form. Email: [e-mail].

John F. Tierney (MA-06) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Facebook.

David Wu (OR-01) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Email: [e-mail]. Email for constituents.

Rush D. Holt (NJ-12) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Email: [e-mail]. Email for constituents. Facebook.

Dave Loebsack (IA-02) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email. Facebook.

Yvette Clarke (NY-11) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email: [e-mail]. Email for constituents.

Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email.

Marcia Fudge (OH-11) phone [phone], fax [phone], Facebook.

Jared Polis (CO-2) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email for constituents. Facebook. Twitter. Legislative Director Rosalyn Kumar.

Paul Tonko (NY-21) phone [phone], fax [phone], Email for constituents. Facebook. Twitter.

Their work was rudely ignored. If they could be moved to withhold their support for a healthcare bill until it reinstates the missing amendment, progressives would find a voice and a lever of power, and the campaign for healthcare reform would be energized in those areas where it has a chance of truly transformational change, namely in the states.

Contact these 14 congress members with the phone numbers and website forms above.

What we are asking for: Please oppose the health insurance reform bill unless the amendment you voted for and passed in committee last July 17th is reinstated, permitting states to enact healthcare reforms if they choose to.

Tweetable version: Please oppose hcr bill unless amendment you passed on July 17th is reinstated permitting states to enact hcr reforms.

More information:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/letstatesdoit

[nightrain]

1. knr. If we have to go through the states to get real health care, then

let's get it going!

[gateley]

2. +1 nt

[subterranean]

3. I'd like to see the state-by-state approach replace the Senate bill

Scrap the bill, and instead give the states enough Federal funding to design and implement their own programs to cover all their residents by a certain deadline. They could choose any form they wish -- single payer, multi-payer, the Massachusetts plan, or a combination. Some states could form networks with others, which might be useful for states with smaller populations. They could even choose to do nothing and keep the status quo, but then they wouldn't get the Federal money. We could also give them incentives to lower overall health care costs.

If the unpopular Senate bill fails to pass, I think this sort of state-based solution might be a better approach to take next. It would probably even end up being cheaper.

[dkf]

4. Wow our politicians are bought and paid for aren't they?

I thought I couldn't be more disgusted but I am constantly surprised how bad it is.

[maryf]

5. PA, CA, on their way

to a single payer system...one more I'll post later, can't remember right now..K&R

[maryf]

10. Minnesota, too,nt

[Aaria]

6. Scrap this one and allow companies to start buying into Medicare.

We have a HCB that is total crap and seems to be a boon doogle for the Insurance companies. We all need health care and we also need a jobs bill, so let's tie the two together. There's isn't a company out there that needs a tax break for an employee that they don't need but if we offer them Medicare for their employees and future retires, then we have people taking retirement that otherwise would stay because they need the health care and companies saving money directly. How do we pay for it, easy, we offer them Medicare for half of what they are paying now for their health insurance and workmens comp. Will the price of half of their old insurance bill cover the cost maybe, maybe it'll be too much and after the first year we can make an adjustment.
This is the little hole in the dike because after the first year, all the small businesses will have learned that they can save money with the plan and everyone will want to take advantage of the system.
Then we would have everyone clamoring to get on the system cause it's only fair, if a small business can do it why can't I. Then comes the problem of paying for everyone else. Well after a year we will have a good idea of what it costs per person and can charge people accordingly. Paying for it is the easy part, you won't have to buy health insurance yourself, so part of that money saved can go to your yearly health care bill. The other source of saving for everyone, small and large businesses, and we citizens, ( that should really be used more) is no more liability insurance bills. Look at your car, home or business insurance bill it's right at the top, we won't need it cause if you in a car accident the injuries will be takin care of , you might get your ass sued cause you f'd up but no medical. Hurt on the job, go get fixed up and get yourself back to work.
But, I like my insurance, well keep it, this system will be voluntary. But Medicare sucks, well I've never heard of anyone being booted from the hospital during their operation while being covered by Medicare. There are no fricking death panels with medicare, like at the insurance companies (yea they actually kill people to make all that money).
What about the poor folk? Believe it your already paying for them, so lets give them preventative medical care instead of paying for them after they are waaay sick. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Anyone remember that old one? If you make less then X a year your covered.

It took 11 years to get the first Medicare bill passed so it could take a while to cover the rest of us. This election they have to understand that if they were not for single payer they will be replaced with someone who is.

Flame on and eat your veggies.

[Laelth]

7. k&r for exposure. This is important.

And I have been arguing similarly for some time.

Here, for example: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/39

:dem:

-Laelth

[nightrain]

8. see this HuffPo link re Kucinich--

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/08/kucinich-becomes-target-o_n_490280.html

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Little Star]

11. Kick

[Nikki Stone1]

12. I wish I had seen this before. K & R

.

[ibegurpard]

13. kick