NOT DEAD YET

The California Senate passed a bill to create a single-payor health system, less than a week after a special election in Massachusetts cost Senate Democrats' the 60-vote majority they needed to pass federal health reform legislation.

Although Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has promised to veto the California bill, it could signal a change in the health reform debate, as proponents of health reform get frustrated with the national stage and move efforts to the states.

What happens to proposal now? The California Senate passed the bill by 22-14, with all but one Democrat and no Republicans voting for it. It now goes to the state Assembly, which has passed previous California single-payor bills, then to Gov. Schwarzenegger, who vetoed the previous bills. If passed, the bill would authorize $1million to establish a commission to decide how to pay for the system.

How does this relate to national health reform? Democratic State Sen. Mark Leno, the author of the bill, said voters came to dislike Congress' compromise health reform legislation. "Whatever comes out of Washington is much less certain, which only gives greater incentive for leadership coming from state legislators because somehow, some way, health care reform must be addressed," Mr. Leno told the Huffington Post.

What do Californians think? Mr. Leno points to past polls that have shown support for a state-run plan. A new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California finds that 74 percent of Californians believe the state is headed in the wrong direction. This could be interpreted as a call for radical change or anger at current legislators, the people who passed this bill.

What do opponents think? "What a bizarre place I work in," wrote Republican State Sen. Sam Aanestad, an oral surgeon, in the New American. Following the Massachusetts defeat, "Democrats who control the State Legislature in California revived their own universal healthcare bill. Didn't they get the message I did?"

How might other states react? With the prospect of the Congress' health reform bill failing, the health reform debate may now move to the states. Massachusetts has already enacted universal healthcare. Illinois, Oregon and Massachusetts have flirted with single-payor systems in state legislation and referendums, but all have failed so far.

Could it have a polarizing effect? There already is a wide gap between passionate proponents of a single-payor system, such as Physicians for a National Health Program, and opponents of government intervention in healthcare. Positions could harden if the federal health reform bill, which was supposed to bridge the divide, is not passed.

What exactly is a single-payor system? It involves creating a government-run or financed plan open to everyone. It may or may not be linked with elimination of private insurance and government-run health facilities. Canada and several European nations have various kinds of single-payor systems.

How would it affect physicians and hospitals? "I cannot support an under-funded program that would leave patients with far fewer options for care than they have today," Dr. Aanestad stated. The concerns are that a single-payor system could drive reimbursements down to Medicare levels and lead to waiting lines for certain services, as occurs in the Canadian system. Some U.S. physicians are already bailing out of Medicare, the U.S. single-payor system for the elderly, because it pays too little. But others argue that a single payor would be a boon for healthcare, providing a massive infusion of new paying patients and improving health status by detecting diseases earlier.

Could it reduce insurance premiums? Paul Krugman, a New York Times columnist who supports a single-payor system, has argued the arrangement could curb premium growth by eliminating the costs of insurer-middlemen and by extending coverage to healthy people who are less costly to the system.

Would it add to California's budget deficit? The state faces a $20 billion deficit. The California Legislative Analysts Office said the single-payer proposal would cost $200 billion, or more than $5,000 in new taxes for every Californian. But Sen. Leno argued that Californians already pay $200 billion for their healthcare through premiums and other funding. He said the system could be funded through a payroll tax, existing state and federal funding and increased efficiencies by eliminating the insurer-middleman.

Possible removal of anti trust exemption for insurance industry

Last night before President Obama's State of the Union Address, I heard a newscaster say that the Speaker of the House was considering giving up the massive health care reform bill in favor of pursuing passage of small, separate pieces of the larger reform agenda. As an example, she pointed to the anti trust exemption enjoyed by the insurance industry for several decades.

If this is accurate information, WE THE PEOPLE will be the beneficiaries. This small reform item is very large in the overall "big picture" because insurance companies will no longer be able to fix prices (both insurance policies and reimbursement to providers) and will have to act independently. This will lead to competition amongst the insurance companies for policy holders and provider contractors resulting in driving prices down while increasing access to more providers since the health insurance companies will no longer desire to exclude providers from their networks.

Contact your Senators and Representatives and let them know you want the anti trust exemption that protects the insurance industry REMOVED. We all can help accomplish Health Care Now by letting our elected officials know how we feel about the unfair advantage insurance companies have in the market place, and their abusive tactics towards policy holders and providers.

US Supreme Court legalizes prostitution.

The US Supreme Court has validated what I have been screaming about in this blog since August. The court's decision this morning allows unlimited corporation campaign contributions. The worst part is WE THE PEOPLE ARE PAYING FOR IT. Every time you pick up a prescription, every time you make a bank deposit, every time you put gas in your car or heat your home, every time you eat a piece of meat or drink a glass of milk, every time you make an insurance premium payment, you are paying for lobbyists to keep corporate america powerful and protected by the US Government.

Every legislator and elected executive at every level receives campaign contributions from corporations. After today's Supreme Court decision, politicians can receive unlimited funds from the highest bidder. Prostitution is now overtly LEGAL. Our purchases add to the corpus of $$$ available to buy politicians. It has come to a point that the only solution may be revolution.

We are engaged in two wars. Our our economy is NOT improving. The jobless rate continues to increase. The homeless rate continues to increase. Financial assistance to people suffering from international disasters (earthquakes) gets priority over help for our own homeless and jobless. NO HEALTHCARE REFORM. Insurance industry protected by anti trust exemption. Gutless Presidential leadership and worthless congressional leadership. And today the US Supreme Court decision to allow corporations to buy our politicians with unlimited campaign contributions. I doubt very seriously that our founding fathers had unlimited campaign contributions in mind when constructing our Constitution.

South of France is looking very good these days.

Real Health Care Reform NO longer possible

Neither the House or Senate bill provide REAL reform. Real reform would
require:

1) removal of the anti trust exemption for insurance companies

2) limits on policy pricing in exchange for up to 45,000,000 new customers

3) No refusal of insurance for pre existing conditions

4) No cancellation of policies when a policy holder contracts a
catastrophic illness

5) A public option to ensure competition that will drive health care
costs DOWN

Pretty simple and doesn't require 2000 pages of unnecessary language!

I was a staunch supporter of Obama and health care reform until Obama showed he has no balls and the congress showed they are worthless. I hope they all get replaced in their next election. Obama is the biggest political disappointment since I started to vote over 42 years ago.

Democrats Negotiate Healthcare Legislation, Plan to Submit for Cost Estimate Early Next Week

Written by Lindsey Dunn | January 14, 2010

More Key Congressional Democrats, along with Pres. Obama, held a nearly day-long session yesterday to negotiate a joint healthcare reform legislation package with the aim of submitting a final plan to the Congressional Budget Office early next week. Negotiations are expected to continue today.

In a joint statement, Pres. Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said the group had made "significant progress in bridging the remaining gaps between the two health insurance reform bills."

Key issues within the plan that continue to require debate, as outlined by the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal include:

Value of subsidies provided to low-to-middle-income Americans to obtain coverage (Both the House and Senate bills contain provisions that would provide subsidies to Americans with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, but the value of such subsidies is unclear);
Insurance plan value with which to begin "Cadillac" tax on high-cost health plans (The House bill would begin taxing on plans that are valued at or above $23,000 for a family, though the Washington Post report this may be increased to $25,000 after negotiations);
Structure of a mandate that would require employers to offer insurance coverage to employees (House bill currently requires employers with payrolls greater than $500,000to offer coverage, while the Senate bill would impose a penalty on employers with more than 50 employees that do not offer coverage);
Whether an insurance exchange would be run by states or the federal government (Both the House and Senate bills would offer exchanges for Americans that do not qualify for coverage through an employer or a public program); and
Overall funding for the bill (Both House and Senate bills offer slightly differing proposals for funding, including taxes on high-income Americans, taxes on high-cost health plans, taxes on medical devices, reductions in Medicare expenditure growth and annual fees for health insurance companies).
Although the kinks are still being worked out, current estimates place the cost of the legislation, which would extend healthcare coverage to 36 million Americans at approximately $900 billion.

CBO analysis is expected to take at least a week, making it unlikely that the bill would be pushed through both the House and Senate and on to Pres. Obama before his State of the Union address planned for early February, according to the Washington Post.

Republicans vow they will continue work to block the legislation. House Minority Leader Johan Boehner (R-Ohio) told fellow Republicans that they could still "beat the bill," according to the Washington Post.

Read the Washington Post's report on healthcare reform legislation.

Read the Wall Street Journal's report on healthcare reform legislation.