Michael Moore says Democrats’ healthcare bill is giveaway to insurance industry

[Better Believe It]

Michael Moore says Democrats’ healthcare bill is giveaway to insurance industry
November 18, 2009

In a speech broadcast on Canadian television Tuesday, Michael Moore savaged the Democrats' healthcare bill, calling it a gift to the health insurance industry, which he argues will make $70 billion more as a result of mandated health insurance.

"The health insurance companies are going to make an extra $70 billion dollars as a result of Americans being forced to buy their health insurance," Moore quipped. "What company wouldn't love this bill?"

Moore argues that the health insurance industry isn't really upset about healthcare reform. His assertions -- which mirror those of some on the left -- highlight the challenge that Democrats in Congress face on healthcare reform. On the left, critics say that the bill doesn't go far enough in ensuring universal care; on the right, critics say the proposal will lead to a government takeover of healthcare.

"So all of the wailing that they're doing about this bill -- believe me, the health insurance companies are not that upset about it," Moore said. "In fact, they helped write this bill."

"It's not universal health care," he continued. "Thirteen million people will still not have health insurance in the United States.
And the drug companies signed a deal with Obama to keep them out of it, because they agreed to reduce their prices by $8 billion in the first year of the healthcare bill," he asserted.

But he noted that because these companies allegedly raised prices in the last year by $10 billion, they still come out $2 billion ahead.

See the TV interview with Michael Moore at:

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/michael-moore-democrats-healthcare-bill-giveaway-insurance-industry/

[texastoast]

1. Oh, my

SOMEONE doesn't like the facts. Proud to recommend.

:popcorn:

[SpartanDem]

4. Yeah facts like this?

I guess you're proud to stand with the insurance industry too?


A Goldman Sachs analysis of health care legislation has concluded that, as far as the bottom line for insurance companies is concerned, the best thing to do is nothing. A close second would be passing a watered-down version of the Senate Finance Committee's bill.

A study put together by Goldman in mid-October looks at the estimated stock performance of the private insurance industry under four variations of reform legislation. The study focused on the five biggest insurers whose shares are traded on Wall Street: Aetna, UnitedHealth, WellPoint, CIGNA and Humana.

The Senate Finance Committee bill, which Goldman's analysts conclude is the version most likely to survive the legislative process, is described as the "base" scenario. Under that legislation (which did not include a public plan) the earnings per share for the top five insurers would grow an estimated five percent from 2010 through 2019. And yet, the "variance with current valuation" -- essentially, what the value of the stock is on the market -- is projected to drop four percent.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/12/goldman-to-private-insure_n_355998.html

[Better Believe It]

6. So we should depend on Goldman Sachs for factual news and analysis?

Sure.

I'll buy that snake oil lotion.

[SpartanDem]

14. When it comes to analyzing stock performance I'd say they're a pretty good source

If your line of argument is going to be that this just an act of subterfuge and they're just saying it, then it might be time go get fitted for tin foil hat. Hell, just look how they their stocks acted between when Reid said the Senate bill would have a public option and when Lieberman said he'd filibuster.

[Better Believe It]

39. Stock performance is not a good way to judge the state of the economy nor health care legislation

Stocks are up over 40% since the beginning of the Great Recession. Is the recession now over with a booming economy?

Stocks were way up just before the great financial crash. Was that stock bubble also an accurate reflection of the economy?

If you want to determine what is happening in the real economy don't look to stock speculators for guidance!

[SpartanDem]

56. Should it be the sole indicator? No

but it is usually a pretty one and generally their stocks have reflected the up and downs of the health care debate. There is a reason why AHIP only supported one verison of any bill and that was the original Baucus proposal, everything else is bad, to varying degrees, for their bottom line.

[Better Believe It]

57. Should stock prices be a primary indicator of the economy or health care? NO.

You'd be just as well off consulting an astrologer or some CNBC snake oil salesman!

[bornskeptic]

59. I don't think anybody suggested they should be.

The question was about predictions of insurance company prices, and for theat purpose stock prices are more relevant than a prediction pulled out of thin air by Michael Moore. While I admire Michael Moore for many things, an expert pn healthcare economics he's not.

[Better Believe It]

62. You're right. It's obvious that Michael Moore knows nothing about healthcare. Just check out his

movie "Sicko".

That movie had to set back health care reform for at least a decade!

Thanks for your insight into Moore's failure to understand the economics of health care.

"While I admire Michael Moore for many things, an expert pn healthcare economics he's not."

Perhaps you can produce and direct a much more powerful film soon?

[truedelphi]

63. Your argument that since GS apparently hates the bill

Was taken apart piece by piece last week by much wiser sorts than me last week.

And people agreed that this whole thing of GS supposedly hating/fearing the HC bill was a Corporate version of a black flag op.

They are salivating over it passing. And since they know The Average American hates them, they ahve to say they hate the HC reform bill.

[timeforpeace]

26. Drink the Kool-Aid, Michael. You'll feel better.

[gateley]

2. More than a few Dem Senators and Congresspeople are saying the same thing.

And I think Howard Dean, too.

I believe 'em.

[polichick]

69. +1

[Better Believe It]

3. Just saw this article posted in the General Discussion forum. Go to that link.

Please participate and/or read the discussion at the following link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7039468&mesg_id=7039468

[ej510]

7. It is. There is nothing more to say.

[geek tragedy]

5. He's wrong. nt

[valleywine]

8. yeah, Count in big Pharm and the deal they made with the WH as profiteers

also.

[geek tragedy]

11. I'll take the word of the labor movement over a filmmaker, thanks. nt

[valleywine]

25. yeah, the unions have their insurance policies already.

[ej510]

10. The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce hates this bill, because of the

anti-trust exemption being stripped.

[geek tragedy]

12. The insurance companies hate it, because it will hurt their profits. nt

[ej510]

13. Not really.

[geek tragedy]

16. Actually, yes. The best thing for them is to have no bill pass at all. nt

[ej510]

17. They win either way without a strong Public Option to keep the premiums down.

[geek tragedy]

19. The real question is how to get the best bill possible for the American

people passed. Not the ideal bill, but the best one possible.

[Oregone]

22. If this is the *best* bill possible for the American people...

They ought to just line up on the nearest cliff-side and be done with it already.

[geek tragedy]

24. The cheap words of someone with nothing at stake.

You'll forgive those of us who actually care about the real consequences of disregarding purists who care more about acting superior than saving human life.

[Oregone]

29. Oh thats cute geek, but its silly to dismiss those from a debate who have a unique perspective

[geek tragedy]

Unique perspective="I got my health coverage, screw the 47 Million

Americans who don't have it."

Sorry, but those of us who didn't abandon the country consider this a real problem that we have to solve, not something to glibly make snarky comments about.

[Oregone]

34. Now that would be called a straw man argument

I was referring to the fact that I am not a desperate laborer suffering from some type of economic Stockholm syndrome, but rather a world citizen who has experience other health care systems (including time as an uninsured American)

[geek tragedy]

35. Again, it's easy for someone with the luxury of guaranteed coverage in another country

to sit there and lecture others and tell them that they should be content with the status quo.

[Oregone]

36. Again, you attack the messenger. This is beneath you

[geek tragedy]

38. Your comment was "well, if this is the best bill that can pass

then your country is doomed."

Sorry, but not all of us can be so dismissive. We do have to settle for the best we can get. We do have to suffer the consequences of doing nothing.

[Oregone]

43. Well, if this is the best you can get...

Im not sure how you can muster up enough hope each day to wake up and go on believing in some grand illusion of a partially benevolent government who will not exploit you till your grave. If this is the best, what is "mediocre"? What is "the worst"? Those get passed too, depending on who is in office. If this is all, the absolute pinnacle, that you can hope from your government, it says very little of your leaders and system of ruling (as well as the future of the country).

Here is to you for the hope and courage!

:toast:

[geek tragedy]

46. I have no such illusions. I know that progress will have to be fought for every

day AFTER the bill passes. It will need constant improvements. Constant fighting.

[Oregone]

48. Eh, don't you mean compromised fighting?

Where you want a pony, but ask for a dog and settle for a turtle?

Yeah, that sort of fighting is going to really drive this thing home.

If you get out of line and fight for too much, even people on your own side will tell you to shut the fuck up. Sounds like a plan.

[ej510]

28. I can understand where some duers stand on the health care issue.

Some believe if we can pass a Public Option and I mean any Public Option, congress can improve it as time goes on, but I like other duers believe if we do not get a strong Public Option now it could be another 40 years before real health care reform happens again.

[geek tragedy]

32. And if nothing passes, what then?

It's real easy to sit there and pretend the choice is between a really great bill and a deeply flawed but ultimately worthwhile bill.

[ej510]

40. Our choices are shit and nastier shit, but either way it's

still shit. Maybe you're right and congress will turn this pile of shit into gold in the future. I do not trust our corporate owned congress.

[geek tragedy]

42. The only thing you can trust is that doing nothing is a guarantee for failure.

Much better to do something that has a chance to lead to long-term solutions--and that will improve millions of lives. There is no such thing as risk-free reform efforts.

[Oregone]

45. Well, if it was a great bill...

Then you can scapegoat the Republicans for stopping it, barge on into the 2010 elections while politicizing their obstruction, and bring home the bacon.

If its a shitty bill that they stop, some Americans will view Republicans as heroes. Some will be ambivalent to the situation. It doesn't help the Democrats at all.

Having it stopped isn't the worst thing that could of happened if the Democrats were positioned more strategically (they aren't). It isn't as if all legislation passes immediately the first time. Sometimes there are struggles (of a few years). The exploited sense of urgency to sell a bad bill is a bit dismaying.

[geek tragedy]

47. It is a deeply flawed bill, but it does many good things.

Like all legislation, it will be a mixed bag. It won't give us anything as good as what Canada has, but no piece of legislation that good would ever have a chance of passing.

[Oregone]

49. Im not sure why the bag has to be so mixed when you have that many Democrats in charge

If your own party produces a bill that is loaded with some detrimental measures (to be balanced by beneifical ones), that too ought to leave you a bit hopeless too

What to do, what to do? :)

[ej510]

54. Most of our party is owned by some corporation.

Are we even a two party nation? Could our two party system morphed into one party by collusion or are we moving towards one party?

[laugle]

68. Your posts have

a lot of merit!

[ej510]

50. You're right! It won't pass with this congress and it won't pass until Americans demand better.

[cornermouse]

71. Please don't throw me in that briar bush, brer fox.

Same thing.

[Oregone]

18. So was Ted Kennedy on subsidized mandated insurance...

Which he once characterized as "...a partnership between the administration and the private health insurance industry. For the private industry, the administration plan offers a windfall of billions of dollars annually. The windfall is not entirely a surplus, since elements of Administration's proposal appear to have originated in the insurance industry itself"

[ej510]

20. It will depend on the senate version to figure out how much of a surplus they will make after 2013.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theoldman]

9. Michael Moore is not right 100% of the time.

However I will have to agree with him on this one. You have to give him credit for having more knowledge on the subject than any of us.

[geek tragedy]

15. So do many, many people who supported the bill. nt

[texastoast]

33. He's not tied politically one way or the other

He generally peers through the independent looking glass. We just love that about him when he's peeping at Republicans. Not so much when he's targeting Dems.

[Orsino]

67. He's not even 100% right in this case...

...but that doesn't make him any less valuable. He's been warning us about this stuff for a long time now.

If we keep listening to Mr. Moore, perhaps we'll find the energy to force Congress to rip out the worst of the abuses.

[Vidar]

21. K&R

[Lord Helmet]

27. Which version? The House's version? The Senate's version?

k 'n u

[vaberella]

51. Who the hell knows....most of the DUers posting now don't know. Never have. n/t

[DU GrovelBot]

30. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[quantass]

31. And the Butchery isnt done yet....WH still salivating over a Trigger....

I know i get flamed a lot for saying how bad this bill is but i am glad others are seeing it the same way. I have pretty much been beaten down to accept whatever we can get despite fully realizing how shitty this extremely watered down bill is. My hope is that over the years/decades descent ammendments will help the people instead of the corps..until then i will continue to profit from soaring stock prices on those evil insurers -- me thinks Wall Street knows exactly how good this bill is.

[Baltoman991]

44. I'm sure

you can post proof that the White House is salivating over a trigger right? I doubt it since theres nothing out there to suggest such a thing thats factual.

That meme was debunked weeks ago when it first reared it's ugly head here on DU yet here we are again having it posted as fact.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[vaberella]

53. How do you know that?! You're just randomingly tossing it out there and hoping it's true, right?!

nt

[SIMPLYB1980]

37. So? Never put much faith in what he had to say anyway.

:shrug:

[madrchsod]

41. well duh....everyone should know that.

it`s been the plan since the beginning of this debacle.

[vaberella]

55. Which bill is he talking about? Maybe you could inform me?! n/t

[bvar22]

58. Michael Moore joins bvar22 in saying,

the "Democrats' healthcare bill is giveaway to insurance industry."

Thanks, MM for adding your voice to mine.

From the very start, Health Care Reform was ALWAYS going to be a multi-Billion (Trillion?) dollar gift to the For Profit Health Insurance Industry.
That part was Non-negotiable.
No serious discussion of anything that would threaten the dominance of the Health Insurance Industry was EVER allowed.


What the Democratic Party HAS allowed us to do is beg for the crumbs.
I am amused that so many are willing to beg for those crumbs instead of DEMANDING a system that is taken for granted by the rest of the civilized World.

Yes, America is going to settle for FAR LESS, and there are those who will declare "Mission Accomplished".



"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

[treestar]

60. Then why do they fight it?

Besides the whole idea is to get people covered. That's what they are going for. It's not a "gift" when the industry would have to sell to people they would otherwise not want to sell to. Geez.

[dflprincess]

64. They won't have to sell to anyone

True, they can't turn anyone down, but they can still price the premiums so high that no one will be able to afford the policy - or the only policy a person will manage to pay for will have out of pockets so high, they still won't be able to get care.

What the insurance companies are fighting is the end to their anti-trust exemption, they're not going to complain about most of us being forced to purchase their crappy products. They know they can continue to deny coverage and claims as there really isn't anything in the House bill to "keep them honest". The worse that will happen is they'll get fined and, like Walmart and labor violations, they'll just see those as part of the cost of doing business.

[VMI Dem]

61. Is he a good guy or a bad guy today?

It changes daily.

[CTLawGuy]

65. 50 million > 13 million

knowing that the Liebermans, Landrieus, Nelsons, Lincolns, and Stupaks of the world have yet to be neutralized, I'll take whatever progress we can realistically get.

It'll get easier the second time when we deal with the other 13 mil (assuming MM's statements are accurate).

[CTLawGuy]

66. Is that 70 billion in revenue

or 70 billion in profit? I find it hard to believe that there are enough healthy uninsured people who just don't buy insurance to translate into 70 billion in profit. I figure most of the people the insurance companies will get stuck with will be the unprofitable "uninsurable" people.

[cornermouse]

70. It is and he's right.

[pampango]

72. If only Michael would convince the republicans of that, so that they swung from 99% opposed

to the bill to 99% in favor of it. Now every repub senator is lining up to kill HCR, too.

Given the repub party's ties to big business, why would they oppose a health care bill that "is giveaway to insurance industry"? You would think they would be pushing such a bill hard (and House progressives would be voting 95% against it, not for it) and labeling Democratic opposition, as supporters of socialized medicine or "tax-and-spend" liberals or some other worn out phrases from the past. Are the repubs just beating us at 3-D chess by voting against something they really support, while our progressive representatives vote for something they are really against?

The repubs think that if they can kill HCR now, Obama will be weakened, the 2010 election will be focused on the economy (which doesn't look promising for the incumbents) and they can delay any HCR for another 10 or 20 years. The fact that 99.9% of repubs oppose this HCR is proof that the industry wants it killed (but it's a "giveaway!"). The repubs are doing the bidding of the industry by opposing this.

[cornermouse]

74. No. The industry is quite happy with the bill.

The first thing they're seeing is an opportunity to expand the market and their own share of the market. Any things in the bill they don't like can be shot down later using money from their new sources of income otherwise known as new customers.

The repubs oppose it because the dems figure it will give insurance campaign money in their corner.

[IndianaGreen]

73. And the mandates in the bill are an assault on the working class

Thanks a lot!