US Health Care Reform

[Netto Azure]

i voted maybe so because i don't really care. i mean, one way or another, we're going to die, if its from the health care re-form or not. so why should i bother caring about something that might kill us or not, when i could be worrying about some more important to me? and before anyone says anything, this is my OPINION!

Well I just hope you have some way to pay when you get in an accident. =/

*Updated the Summary

 

[pokejungle]

Well I just hope you get in an accident. =/

*fixed your post for you. sounds much better now.

 

[Netto Azure]

A bit late but still here:

Senate to add 'public option' to healthcare bill​

Senate Democrats, bolstered by polls and party support, shape a provision that would let states opt out. Republicans criticize the idea.​

Reporting from Washington - In a dramatic sign of Democrats' growing confidence that they have the votes to pass a far-reaching healthcare overhaul, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Monday that the bill he intended to send to the Senate floor next month would include a "public option."

The provision would allow the federal government to create an insurance plan to be offered to Americans who do not get medical coverage through their employers -- with the proviso that states could opt out of the program.​

"While the public option is not a silver bullet, I believe it's an important way to ensure competition and to level the playing field for patients with the insurance industry," Reid said during a Capitol news conference.​

Reid's announcement reflected a sharp change in the political outlook for one of the most contentious elements in the healthcare debate.​

Although passage of a healthcare bill that includes a so-called public option is virtually assured in the House, many Democrats were convinced the Senate would never approve a government-run plan. Instead, the Senate Finance Committee proposed the creation of state-level co-ops to compete with private insurers.​

And some senators, most notably Maine Republican Olympia J. Snowe, favored adding a "trigger" to the public option -- letting a government-run plan be offered several years down the road only if private insurers failed to meet cost and coverage targets.​

But bolstered by polls showing steady public support for the government option, Senate Democratic head-counters think they are within one or two votes of securing the 60 needed to cut off an expected Republican filibuster. At least 55% of Americans favor a government insurance plan, polls have consistently shown.​

The possibility of such a plan getting through the Senate substantially increases the likelihood of final approval by Congress.​

The opt-out provision falls short of liberals' hope for unconditional approval of a public plan, but it comes closer than the co-op or trigger mechanisms. For one thing, it would be national in scope and could be activated immediately. Also, by requiring states to take legislative action to exit the plan, it increases the burden for opponents.​

Monday's announcement was cheered both by conservative Democrats and liberal grass-roots groups such as MoveOn.org's political action committee. "There's now real momentum toward meaningful healthcare reform," said MoveOn's executive director, Justin Ruben.​

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), a centrist whose healthcare bill did not include a public option, said in a statement that he would support "any provision, including a public option, that will ensure choice and competition and get the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate."​

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that President Obama -- who has come under fire from some on the left for not pushing hard enough for a government plan -- also applauded Reid's move.​

"As he said to Congress and the nation in September, he supports the public option because it has the potential to play an essential role in holding insurance companies accountable through choice and competition," Gibbs said.​

Reid's decision also signaled that prospects for any Republican support for a healthcare overhaul were dimming even further.​

Snowe, who has been the only Republican lawmaker to back the Democratic healthcare campaign, has been sharply critical of creating a national public option. And she said she was "deeply disappointed" by Reid's choice.​

But the majority leader said he was still interested in working with Snowe and other Republicans. "We looked for Republicans on this," he said. "It's just a little hard to find them."​

With a 60-40 voting majority, which includes two independents who caucus with Democrats, Reid has to hold all his members or pick up Republicans to head off a filibuster.​

Several GOP lawmakers criticized Reid's proposal. "The so-called public option is nothing more than a Trojan horse that will ultimately result in government-run healthcare," said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas.​

Republican critics were joined by the insurance industry, which for months has warned that a government competitor that pays providers less could force hospitals and others to charge commercial insurers more.​

"A new government-run plan would underpay doctors and hospitals rather than driving real reforms that bring down costs and improve quality," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's Washington-based lobbying arm. "The American people want healthcare reform that will reduce costs, and this plan doesn't do that."​

Under Reid's proposal, which mirrors a provision written by the Senate health committee, the national coverage program would be offered through a new insurance exchange that probably would be available initially to about 11 million people. Senior Democrats envision that the exchange would be open only to people who do not get coverage through their employers or who work for small companies that elect to enter the exchange.​

Private insurers as well as the federal government would offer competing plans in this exchange, so only a fraction of those 11 million customers would choose the public option, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.​

To level competition, Reid's proposal would require the government plan to negotiate payments to providers, rather than rely on Medicare rates, which are typically lower than those used by private insurance companies.​

Reid said Monday that states would have to choose to opt out of the public plan by 2014, a year after the government plan would come into being, according to bills pending in the House and Senate. The majority leader did not provide any detail about how states would go about doing that.​

Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) are advancing separate healthcare bills, which would have to be reconciled later this year before final legislation could be sent to the White House for Obama's signature.​

For now, House Democrats are poised to pass a bill that would create a nationwide government plan without any option for states not to offer the plan. Pelosi indicated Friday that the opt-out alternative could be included in a reconciled bill.​

But House lawmakers still disagree over how much such a plan should pay doctors, hospitals and other medical providers. Liberals, including Pelosi, favor a proposal that would link those payments to the existing Medicare program. Proponents think such an arrangement would save money and help drive down costs.​

Many conservative Democrats, particularly from rural areas where Medicare typically pays less, favor an approach like the Senate's in which the government would negotiate its rates with providers, as commercial insurers do.​

Pelosi hopes to settle those differences in time to unveil a bill this week, her office said.​

Well, well, isn't it ironic that the Senate Majority Leader from NEVADA is willing to gamble upon the Health Care reform bill? Not a surprise when he's under pressure for the US Primary next year. >.>​

Still, there are 2 versions of the Public option:​

1. The "Robust" version which uses Medicare rates and the like, found in one of the House bills.​

2. The "Haggling" version where the government has to negotiate rates from the start which as the Senate will adopt.​

Whateves, I really was ready to accept a Senate bill w/o a PO and just simply pressure the House. But hey it's a boon to moderate Healthcare reform. :P

Pelosi unveils House health bill[/URL]​

Nancy Pelosi was flanked by top Democrat lawmakers​

The Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has unveiled a healthcare bill that would extend coverage to 36m more Americans. The top House Democrat said the legislation would provide affordable healthcare to 96% of all Americans.
It would also let the government sell insurance in competition with private companies and make insurers offer cover to those with pre-existing conditions.
The bill is the latest step in a long-running battle over healthcare reform.
President Barack Obama has made reform of the healthcare system a central plank of his domestic agenda.
Scaled-back
Speaking on the steps of the Capitol building in Washington DC, Ms Pelosi called the bill a "historic moment for our nation and families".
She said the legislation would also include a so-called "public option", referring to a controversial new government-run insurance option.

However, the public option she unveiled was a scaled-back version, falling short of the one liberal Democrats had demanded and which had thrown the bill into a logjam.
US President Barack Obama welcomed the legislation in a written statement, saying that "a public option that competes with private insurers is the best way to ensure choice and competition that are so badly needed in today's market".
The bill will now go before the House of Representatives, where it could be voted on as early as next week.
Once both the House and Senate have approved their own versions, a conference committee, made up of lawmakers from both houses, will convene to reconcile the two.
If both chambers then vote in favour of the reconciled version, it will be sent to Mr Obama for his approval, and become law.

Well they went with what I said~​

Senate THEN House~​

 

[TRIFORCE89]

I don't like the house bill. Feels compromised

 

[Netto Azure]

I don't like the house bill. Feels compromised

LOL. Didn't I already poured out my feelings over the blatant buying of Congress? XD

 

[Netto Azure]

AMA, AARP back House health care bill
​

​

Washington (CNN) -- The push to overhaul health care received a major boost Thursday as the American Medical Association and AARP endorsed legislation drafted by top House Democrats.
The AARP, the nation's largest organization of older Americans, is a nonpartisan group that advocates for people 50 and older. The AMA, historically an opponent of health care reform, is considered one the nation's most influential doctors' advocacy groups.
The backing of those two groups comes as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, oversees final changes to the $1.1 trillion health care bill. The measure likely will come to a final vote Saturday.
A 42-page manager's amendment on the health care legislation posted Tuesday night made mostly technical changes in the nearly 2,000-page bill compiled from three Democratic proposals passed by three House committees.
By making the changes public Tuesday, House Democratic leaders could open floor debate on the bill Friday, while fulfilling their pledge to allow 72 hours of review before bringing the measure to the full chamber.
Pelosi insisted Thursday she will have the 218 votes necessary to pass the bill. Meanwhile, President Obama is set to huddle Friday with congressional Democrats on Capitol Hill to review the legislation.
The AMA's president, Dr. J. James Rohack, told reporters Thursday the legislation is "not a perfect representation of our views" but is close enough to warrant his group's support and keep the reform process moving forward.
Rohack said the bill needs to be accompanied by legislation reversing scheduled Medicare reimbursement payment reductions to physicians.
Meanwhile, House Republicans on Thursday continued to signal their opposition to the measure. GOP leaders held a rally on Capitol Hill along with "Tea Party" movement protesters and other activists to warn that the House legislation would translate into a full-blown government takeover of the health care system.

​

Well I guess it's past the easy part, I hate the fact thought that the State option to implement it's own Universal Health insurance was taken out.

Gah, stupid outside influences. :<
​

Obama Courts House Democrats Before Vote
​

​

In a last-minute exercise of presidential hand-holding, President Obama plans to travel to Capitol Hill on Friday morning to meet with House Democrats, one day before they vote on his highest domestic priority: a bill to overhaul the nation's health care system.
Without any Republican support for the legislation, Mr. Obama and the House Democratic leadership must rely entirely on Democrats to get the bill passed. White House officials said the president wanted to address any lingering doubts about the legislation in the House, where liberal Democrats are concerned that the bill's so-called public option — a government-backed insurance plan — is too weak, and where conservative Democrats are uneasy about whether the legislation would permit federal money to be used to pay for abortion.
Shortly before 4 p.m. Thursday, Mr. Obama plans to meet with leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whose members have been pressing the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, to allow the bill to extend coverage to illegal immigrants — a move Mr. Obama opposes.
Despite these concerns from Democrats, most analysts expect Ms. Pelosi will muster the 218 votes she needs for passage. But don't expect any celebrations at the White House after the vote. Administration officials know that the hard part — getting a measure through the Senate — is yet to come.

​

Meh, a bit late now. >.>​

 

[Netto Azure]

Oh well, it also had Liberal opposition due to the whole weak Public Option, ban on abortion funding, and cut off immigrant coverage. :/

But whateves, there's still the Senate and re-vote later on~

US House of Representatives backs healthcare reforms​

The US House of Representatives has backed a healthcare bill in a step towards reforms promised by President Obama, despite strong opposition.

Passed in a narrow 220-215 vote, the bill aims to extend coverage to 36 million more Americans and provide affordable healthcare to 96%.
The bill now has to be reconciled with a separate Senate draft law.
President Obama has made reform of America's healthcare system a central plank of his domestic agenda.
He described Saturday's vote in the House as "historic", saying he was "absolutely confident" the Senate would also back it.
Correspondents say the legislation could lead to the biggest changes in American healthcare in decades.

Concessions
The bill was supported by 219 Democrats and one Republican - Joseph Cao from New Orleans. Opposed were 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats.

​

Before Saturday's vote, Mr Obama made a rare visit to Congress to try to persuade wavering members of his own Democratic Party to back the bill.
He said such opportunities came around "maybe once in a generation".
The bill would allow the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies and make insurers offer cover to those with pre-existing conditions.
But this so-called "public option" had been scaled back in the wrangling that preceded the House vote.
In the run-up to the vote, conservatives from both the Republican and Democratic parties joined forces to pass new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be offered to individuals and groups.
The amendment had been offered to conservative Democrats as a means of persuading them to vote for the main bill.
A Senate debate on the bill the healthcare reform is expected in the coming days.

 

[Bela]

Is it still possible for the Senate to pass the bill under reconciliation, meaning the bill needs 50, not 60 votes?

 

[pokejungle]

I think some of the edits they made to it were unfortunate, but overall I'm happy that change is coming 8D

Slowly, but surely.

 

[Netto Azure]

Is it still possible for the Senate to pass the bill under reconciliation, meaning the bill needs 50, not 60 votes?

Yes, but they have to get over the 60 member needed to end a Filibuster to come to a vote with Reconciliation. (50 Members + The Vice President)

 

[TRIFORCE89]

Is it still possible for the Senate to pass the bill under reconciliation, meaning the bill needs 50, not 60 votes?

... were you watching Colbert the other night?

 

[Netto Azure]

Divided US Senate starts healthcare reform bill debate

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid says his bill will extend cover to 31m

A sharply divided US Senate has begun debating its version of a contentious healthcare bill, a key domestic issue for President Barack Obama.
The legislation aims to extend coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans, but faces entrenched opposition from Republicans.
The most controversial elements are a government-run insurance plan and the funding of abortion coverage.
The House of Representatives passed its version of the bill earlier this month.
If the Senate can agree a plan, the two versions will have to be reconciled and passed again by each chamber before they are sent to the White House for approval.
No votes were scheduled for Monday.



'Nothing more important'
The legislation could lead to the biggest changes in US healthcare in decades, if approved.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid says it will extend coverage to another 31 million people, or 94% of eligible citizens.
The $848bn (£515bn) 10-year legislation seeks to establish a government-backed "public option" for healthcare coverage to compete with private insurers, but allows states to opt out.
"There's not an issue more important than finishing this legislation," Sen Reid said on the Senate floor, saying weekend sittings could be necessary in December to debate the bill.
In a knife-edge vote this month, he managed to secure the support of all 58 Democratic senators and two independents to overcome Republican opposition and allow a full debate on the bill to proceed on Monday.

​

Oh well, one more month or so of shouting. :/

 

[Agent Cobalt]

And hopefully said shouting results in retaining our current system. ^_^

 

[Ivysaur]

In a knife-edge vote this month, he managed to secure the support of all 58 Democratic senators and two independents to overcome Republican opposition and allow a full debate on the bill to proceed on Monday.

Well, that's a relief.

Let's hope the new plan is approved before New Year, or at least in early January.

 

[Netto Azure]

And hopefully said shouting results in retaining our current system. ^_^

Technically the bill will retain most of the Health insurance industry intact.

The government will still fund the Employer-based insurance system by not taxing it.

Heck yeah Went! (b")b

 

[twocows]

I don't even care anymore if it passes. The current system is horrible and the planned "replacement" fixes nothing. I blame lobbyists. Our system sucks thanks to them. We'll never get copyright reform, we'll never get a good healthcare system, and worst of all we'll probably start losing the right to complain as lobbyists try to prevent people from speaking out about whatever they're pushing for. The real kicker is that it isn't just one party; the system's so corrupt that both parties are in the pockets of the lobbying groups.

Some bill passed the Senate a few weeks ago with over 60 votes and a pretty good bipartisan split; I think there were actually a few more Democrats supporting it. The problem? The bill was a huge slap in the face of people calling for copyright reform. It just took the current system and made it even worse (which is relatively hard to do). And what got me the most was that it got zero media coverage, because every major news station has close ties to an MPAA member corporation, which supported the bill.

Of course, all the people are still convinced the other party is the evil group, thanks to the media. They do a great job of keeping us pissed at each other instead of the real bad guys; Fox enrages the Republican supporters and inspires hatred of the "liberal agenda," and MSNBC berates the "religious right" for their authoritarian views.

I'm so sick of our current system. I'd move to Canada, but they're starting to move in the same direction as we are. Personally, I'd love to make my own country, but even then I'm not convinced that once I'm dead, the system would remain sane. Certainly nobody's going to bother trying to overthrow the current system, since they'll all say (a) my life isn't bad enough that I'll try to fight it, and (b) even if I wanted to, the military is too powerful to try to resist.

Maybe I'm being cynical to a fault, but I'm just so tired of the American political system. The healthcare bill has been so stripped of its innards by the insurance lobbies that nothing's really going to change. I'd guess that even if it passes, it'll be about 90% pork (unrelated stuff that got attached so people would vote for it) and 10% fancy language that doesn't do anything except put more money in insurance companies' wallets. The appropriate right or left media will spin it off as a victory, the other side will use it to drum up their supporters, the legislators and insurance companies get rich, and more important bills that do far worse things get passed over with no coverage. Whoever wins, we lose.

 

[Netto Azure]

I don't even care anymore if it passes. The current system is horrible and the planned "replacement" fixes nothing. I blame lobbyists. Our system sucks thanks to them. We'll never get copyright reform, we'll never get a good healthcare system, and worst of all we'll probably start losing the right to complain as lobbyists try to prevent people from speaking out about whatever they're pushing for. The real kicker is that it isn't just one party; the system's so corrupt that both parties are in the pockets of the lobbying groups.

Sadly, you are completely correct.

But when you realize that people in some part of the US really do believe that minor "reform" such as this will lead to "Communofacism" (aka Town Hells and teabagging) plus the fact that the governmental system of the United States is set up to do things incrementally...you are bound to feel that way.

Heck I've been wanting to move to Canada since last year but I'm financially tied to the US so meh, I'll try my best to make do. D:

 

[Mario The World Champion]

I have a big feeling that this will not pass. Clinton did it and he failed. Obama's trying it and he will fail too. If I were him, I'd do the right thing by taking this bill behind a shed and shooting it to put it out of its misery.

 

[Pokeyomom]

Yes it needs to be reformed, and in a bad way. We need to implement some strategy of ending the tyranny that is current health insurance. I have some of the best insurance available (HMA), and I still can't even get the adequete care I need. It's rigoddamndiculas. Most public health care providers are practicing socialist esque medicine anyways (spending 5 minutes with the patient, etc), so might as well gut the beast...

As far as this administrations attempt... Meh. But it's bound to change eventually.

 

[Netto Azure]

I have a big feeling that this will not pass. Clinton did it and he failed. Obama's trying it and he will fail too. If I were him, I'd do the right thing by taking this bill behind a shed and shooting it to put it out of its misery.

If the filibuster wasn't there...We wouldn't be even talking about this. @3@