Doctors' group: Obama plan leaves millions uninsured, boosts private insurers

[Better Believe It]

Doctors' group: Obama plan leaves millions uninsured, boosts private insurers
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Feb. 24, 2010

President Obama's health care proposal, preserving as it does a central role for the for-profit, private health insurance industry, is incapable of achieving the kind of universal, comprehensive and affordable reform the country needs, a spokesman for a national doctors' group said Wednesday.

"Regrettably, the president's proposal is built on some of the worst aspects of the Senate bill," said Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program, an organization of 17,000 doctors who support a single-payer, Medicare-for-All approach to reform. Young's statement comes on the eve of the president's bipartisan summit in Washington.

"For example, the president's proposal would ship hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the private health insurance industry in the form of subsidies," Young said. "And to help finance this, it would impose a new tax on health benefits of workers, especially those in high-cost states.

"Its individual mandate would force millions of middle-income uninsured Americans to buy insurers' skimpy products - insurance policies full of gaps like ever-rising co-pays, deductibles and premiums. Such policies already leave middle-class American families vulnerable to economic hardship and medical bankruptcy in the event of a serious illness like cancer," continued Young, citing a recent study.

"Even so, at least 23 million people would remain uninsured," he said. "We know that being uninsured raises your chance of dying by about 40 percent," he continued, citing another recent study. "That translates into about 23,000 unnecessary deaths each year. As physicians, we find this completely unacceptable."

"In short," Young said, "this proposal is an insurance company bonanza, not good, evidence-based health reform. The president would do better by abandoning the insurance and drug companies and instead taking up the single-payer approach." His group has estimated that such an approach could save hundreds of billions of dollars annually by simplifying health administration.

"By building on and improving the already popular Medicare program, we could put our patients' interests first," he said. "Were President Obama to do so, he would meet with strong public support, including from the medical community."

Although the physicians' group requested an invitation to Thursday's summit at Blair House, no reply from the White House has been forthcoming, Young said. Similarly, requests from Reps. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Anthony Weiner of New York and Peter Welch of Vermont that single-payer advocates be included in the meeting have apparently gone unanswered.

*******

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/february/doctors-group-obama-plan-leaves-millions-uninsured-boosts-private-insurers

[liberal N proud]

1. Any word what they think of the Republican get sick you die plan?

[AndyA]

2. Yeah, because what millions have now is so much better than the Obama plan.

:eyes:

Live fast, die young. It's the American way. (Brought to you by the GOP)

[Better Believe It]

4. I don't think the Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act will help us.

It will mean less coverage at a higher cost to tens of millions of people. And if you have decent coverage with an employer they will cut your benefits while requiring higher co-pays and deductibles in order to escape the health insurance excise tax.

A few million uninsured that might be covered with a "bare bones" package can probably get far better treatment now at emergency rooms.

And that's what you'll be left with after you've been treated under the health insurance industry "bare bones" plan .... bare bones.

[AndyA]

9. It's not perfect, but it is better than nothing, and it can be fixed once in place.

If something doesn't happen, it will be years before anyone dares to touch health care reform again.

People will lose insurance because they can't afford to pay the premium increases, and employers will cut benefits to cut costs.

And when you go to the emergency room, you pay much more than you would otherwise. Then, if you can't pay you are driven crazy by collection agencies, and have to file bankruptcy to stop the calls. Not a good option.

As they say, if you were born to be shot you'll never be hung.

[Oregone]

3. You could figure out pretty quickly that they hate that too

[Better Believe It]

5. Yes They hate it. But, what do 17,000 progressive doctors know?

Perhaps you can educate them.

[frylock]

13. any republican plan is irrelevant to the conversation..

the republican plan is a distraction used by the dems who are too cowardly to take a stand. the dems don't need republicans to do this.

[county worker]

6. If we had a public option, then, there would be less people buying from the insurance industry than

without it. If we had a public option, those who chose to stay with private insurance would see their rates rise higher than if there were not public option since with out it more people would be forced to buy insurance from the industry. If we had a public option than providers would have to negotiate with the public option for reimbursement rates. If we had a public option more people would show up at medical clinics than without it. Many of those people would be the more costly patients to treat and who would require more care thus reducing the average reimbursement rates to providers.

From a provider point of view, only patients with good insurance policies make them profitable.

Now do you want to know why there is so much pressure to do away with the public option? There isn't enough money in it for insurance companies and for providers.

Now providers who care about giving good care to all those who need it would support the public option since there motivation is not financial.

There is constant butting heads with the wealth growers vs the social justice supporters.

[spanone]

7. where is their statement on republican'ts proposals?

[Better Believe It]

12. They need to make a statement about as much as Democratic Underground

Unless you think the Republican party is a huge advocate of Medicare for All, are you serious?

I think their position on healthcare has been made crystal clear and is obviously at odds with the Republican Party.

Do you really question that?

[gateley]

8. Obama couldn't have had reps in favor of Single Payer at the summit -- They

were ostensibly discussing common goals contained in the Senate bill. If he threw in Single Payer he wouldn't have been able to say "We tried" (as the Senate bill is already full of concessions.)

I thing strategically it would have hampered us. It's my hope that now we can charge full steam ahead and get as much under reconciliation as is possible.

I've gone from the Single Payer Or Nothing point of view to welcoming any changes that lead us toward that goal.

I'm excited to see what we do after the 6 week deadline Obama gave.

[dionysus]

10. does switching to geico save 15% or more on your auto insurance? does better believe it

post nothing but smear pieces?

[Better Believe It]

24. Can you provide any link to your claim that 17,000 PNHP doctors have smeared President Obama?

So you're now claiming that their news release is "nothing but a smear piece".

That silly claim can only mean either you didn't read it or you don't have a clue what the PNHP stands for.

Which is it?

We are listening!

[bvar22]

11. K&R...back UP to +5

There ARE members of DU that don't want YOU to have this information.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[Lorien]

19. The DLC brigade. They only care about a political "win' for the team

they don't give a damn about their fellow human beings.

[bvar22]

14. Kick

...because there are members of DU who really don't want YOU to have this information.

[amborin]

15. k&r also here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7785231

[bvar22]

16. There you go again...

"Begrudging" those poor Health Insurance Execs their Millions/Billions of Dollars.
I mean, look at all the baseball players!!!

Just because the Health Insurance Industry manufactures NOTHING, and produces NO (value added) WEALTH doesn't mean they don't have the GOD GIVEN AMERICAN RIGHT to make a 20 - 30% PROFIT off the backs of sick people....and BY GOD, the "Centrist" Democrats are going to PROTECT that RIGHT!!!

Unlike every other civilized country in the WORLD, where Health Care is a RIGHT,
in Obama's "Uniquely American Solution" the ability for Health Insurance Corporation to reap huge profits is the protected RIGHT.
In the "Uniquely American Solution", Working Americans do NOT have a RIGHT to Health Care, The American Working Class has the Obligation to provide PROFITS to the Health Insurance Industry.

Support Obama's Health Insurance Profit Enhancement Bill, because its the "New Democrat" thing to so!

All Hail the "Giant Invisible Hand"...
(that transfers wealth from the Working Class to the Ownership Class.
Reagan would soooo proud of the "New Democrats" and their Health Insurance Profit Protection Plan.


With "Democrats" like these, who needs Republicans?

Individual Mandates + NO Public Option + Massive transfer of Public Wealth to Private Pockets + Tax Increase on the Working Class = Republican Health Insurance SCAM

* Would you favor or oppose the national government offering everyone the choice of a government administered health insurance plan — something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get — that would compete with private health insurance plans?

Favor 82%

Oppose 14%

Not Sure 4%
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010010320/poll-shouts-message-massachusetts-voters-were-sending

Good luck selling this to America in 2010/2012.

"When given the choice between a Republican, and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, the voters will choose the Republican every time." ---Harry Truman

QED Massachusetts

[xchrom]

17. Recommend

[slipslidingaway]

18. Politicians love to cite their research, but continuously ignore their solution...

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/february/a-faulty-prescription-for-reform

"...Sen. Harry Reid, in his opening remarks at the summit, cited our study about 45,000 deaths annually due to lack of insurance (with about 45 million currently uninsured). He also cited another recent study we published showing that 62 percent of bankruptcies are linked to medical bills and illness, and that three-quarters of those bankrupted had health insurance when they first got sick. But when it comes to a remedy, the senator – and the president, I regret to say – offer the wrong prescription..."

[upi402]

20. Prez proposal gives $Billions to health ins. industry

"president's proposal would ship hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the private health insurance industry in the form of subsidies"

There is NO opposition party to corporatism. Wake up party loyalists!

[lamp_shade]

21. Oh... it's YOU. Nevermind.

[slipslidingaway]

22. Needed: an improved Medicare for all

Letter to the Editor
Shepherdstown (W.Va.) Chronicle, Feb. 12, 2010

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/february/needed-an-improved-medicare-for-all

"...Every day, my husband, a physician at a community health clinic, treats people without health insurance who work one and two jobs. He provides the best care he can, but many cannot afford the tests and consultations they need. Some of his patients are among the more than 44,000 people a year in our country who die because they cannot get needed medical care. They deserve to suffer and die?

Even ignoring the fact that Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 25 identifies adequate medical care as a human right, how can we consider ourselves civilized with such a dog-eat-dog attitude?

All other first-world countries consider health care a right...

There would be no premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, and doctors wouldn't spend their time on mountains of unnecessary paperwork. There would be no "out of network" so we could see any physician and go to any hospital we chose.

Such a system of government financed health care - public funds with private providers - is not the same as “government run health care.” It is a system that can be held accountable and where we, citizens of a civilized country, insure that people receive medically necessary care and do not go bankrupt or die because they do not have money."

[indepat]

23. It's a shame indeed that Dems don't understand the good doctor's assertions or is it

they do but care much more about the middle-class funding enormous subsidies to the fatted insurance companies so their death panels can dispense death even more efficiently and vindictively? :P