Thursday, August 20, 2009

We the People want health care reform

It’s time for the Democrats and the Obama administration to cowboy up.

Forget the Republicans. They are too much in the pocket of the insurance industry and the drug companies to ever vote for health care reform.

We the People urge you to use your muscle, guys. We the Voters gave you clear majorities in both the House and Senate. Use it. Get a bill that includes the public option. Vote it up or down, but vote!

Every day you wait, you lose more ground to the Republican minority that is fighting a smarter, meaner, nastier battle than you seem capable of.

The organized armed protesters are not going away. The organized shouters are not going away. Insurance companies have too much invested in preserving the status quo.


PS--I'm not the only senior who feels this way. Elderbloggers from across the nation are registering their strong belief that we need health care reform. Check out their work at Ronni Bennet's blog, As Time Goes By.


Margaret said...

You folks are delusional.

Blog of Ages said...

I'll tell you who is delusional.

The right wing radio host who organized the gun nuts to carry loaded pistols and loaded assault rifles to a public meeting where the president was in attendance -- that fits the definition of delusional.

Check out Vipers militia. He's a supporter, perhaps a member.

That's delusional.

ian said...

I see 'Margaret' is so confident of her position she hides her identity.

The US lack of debate on health care is being fuelled in part by systematic and deliberate lies about how things work in Europe.

As part of Ronni's campaign I have posted on my own family's experience and what lack of universal health coverage would have meant - including the fact that I wouldn't be around to write the post in the first place.

Keep fighting and exposing the lies.

Alexandra Grabbe said...

Thanks for this succinct post on health care reform! You are right about the Republicans. The problem with the American system is the lobbyists, in this case, the drug and insurance companies, fueled by pure greed, not common sense.

Anonymous said...

Sometimes I think nearly all of our elected officials in the House and Senate are in bought and paid for by lobbyists. Please tell me it ain't so...

If a public option isn't passed this year it's not likely to happen for a long time.

If the Democrats would take a page from the Republican playbook and use the power given to them by the voters we could get this thing passed.

Trying to get bipartisan support on health care is like teaching a dining room table how to dance. --Ira

NancyB said...

Wow, well said. We all need to make our voices heard. Here is one way: go to the Obama site on health reform and sign that you approve of health care reform. This gives the government the ammunition they need to show that people support this!

Betty said...

Who is going to pay?? Me and you if you are fortunate to have a job that affords you the ability to pay. Of course we have to pay. The question is who gets the money - the corporations with their handsome profits who will drop your tail in a heartbeat when you can't pay or lose your job OR the government who manages the costs of everyone's health care like they do for Medicare. I am happy to pay my fair share, and at age 62, I have paid for 40+ years. Just in the past 10 years, my employer and I have paid over $70,000 to a private insurance company; I have used $200. When I leave my job, I will lose my coverage and will not receive a penny refund. Yeah, REFORM NOW!!!

The South Plainsman said...

Lots of heat, not much light.

A first question: what about your health care do you not like?

I see Betty is concerned that her health care is not portable. That is absolutely something that needs to be fixed. That one is easy, and I don't think that any Republicans I have heard of are opposed to that.

Of course, we all know that Medicare has to be fixed, but my thought is that it should be fixed on the front end, by gradually extending the effective age, rather than on the back end by rationing care as determined by some bureaucrats.

We also know that the issue of uninsurability must be addressed. That gets a little more difficult, but it can be done without grossly changing the cost and coverage of everyone else's insurance.

How about those that just don't want coverage? Polls have indicated that about 40% of those without coverage could afford it, but choose not to. Mostly young people, I suspect. Do we have to force them into coverage they don't want and don't think they need?

We do have a few that are too well off for SCHIPS or Medicaid that cannot afford coverage. Let's give them a tax credit, or a subsidy for it based upon income. No problem there.

Then we have the illegal aliens or those in the country unlawfully, or however you wish to describe them. Let's have a vote up or down whether American taxpayers should be required to subsidize them. Of course, they get emergency coverage at any local hospital, and frequently use public hospitals.

That brings us to the public option, which is simply a euphemism for socialized medicine. My friend George favors this although I cannot see why he thinks the government can run all of our health care when it can't run the VA hospitals and veteran's care.

This is what the fight is really about. To what extent should the government be involved in our daily lives?

I vote for as little as possible. Others vote for as much as possible.

Jefferson would be turning over in his grave, but Democrats no longer want to follow Jefferson.

They are more into Marx these days. Too bad.

The South Plainsman said...

Incidently, I forgot to address Alexandra's statements about the lobbyists. She is misinformed. The big Pharma lobbyists are supporting the legislation, having been bought off by an $80 billion cap on their costs.

Likewise, many of the health insurers have also cut their own deals, and are supporting everything but the public option.


The people that are going to get screwed by all of this are'nt the big money folks, its the rest of us.

lilalia said...

I have the feeling that Mr. Obama and his election team realised and mobilised a lot of people, millions and millions, in the last election. Now, in office, it becomes harder to create the same sort of willingness for everyone to roll up their sleeves and get things done. Your post is, hopefully, one of those positive examples.

Darlene said...

I have to take issue with South Plainsman's assertion that the Public Option is a euphemism for socialized medicine. The doctors and hospitals will not be paid for or owned by the government, as would be the case if the option was socialized. It will be just another insurance program, but without the exorbitant profits that the insurance industry is racking up and without the costly overhead of administration. Think of the Veteran's health insurance program and you get an idea of what the Public Option would actually be.

Besides, what is so terrible about part of the government being socialized? That attitude is an ideology that doesn't work in a country as large as ours. Social Security has been one of the most successful government programs since it's inception. I would be poverty stricken without it as would many other elders.

The South Plainsman said...

Darlene, darlin', there is just no way I can answer you in a way that would satisfy you.

So I will ask you a simple question: Where, in all the places socialized medicine has been tried, has it actually worked as well as our current system?

Second question: Are you blonde?

The South Plainsman said...

By the way, Darlene, Social Security is great, but it is broke.

How do you think they are going to "save" money on Medicare?

I also suppose I should have asked: Were you blonde?

JohnSBoles said...

"Darlin", "Are you blond?"
More than a bit injudicious, your honor. I had come to expect more from you.

The South Plainsman said...

John, sometimes I just can't help myself.

That said, I really shouldn't have said that.


Darlene said...

South Plainsman - I really don't want to get into a back-and forth on this subject, but since I started it I guess I will tackle your last two comments.

I have read so many dumb blond jokes that I can only assume this is your clever way of questioning my intelligence. No, I was not blond and I consider myself to be an intelligent 84 year old.

To answer your question: "Where has socialized medicine worked as well as our system? The answer is: Everywhere. And if you don't believe me, read all of the posts from people in Germany, England, Canada, and France. All are very happy with their health care system contrary to how our citizens feel. Not counting the thousands that have no health care (and would love to have it, contrary to the right wing assertions), there are those who are paying up to $1,000 a month for a high deductible policy that could be canceled if they develop an expensive illness, and those who will pay more with fewer benefits if reform doesn't happen.

If that isn't enough to convince you that we have a lousy system, look at the statistics on where our citizens stand compared to other countries that have (What you call) socialized medicine. We rank way below all of them in every category. There are 47 countries who have better health care than we enjoy.

Get the facts because John Adams was famous for saying, "Facts are stubborn things."

Another fact; Social Security is not broke. It needs tweaking before 2041, but with raising the eligibility age a few years, or raising the income level for withholding SS, or a combination of tweaks it will do just fine in spite of the baby boomers retiring.

Anonymous said...

Well done Darlene!

BTW, S.P. Ever hear the one about the Right Wing Nut and the... Oh never mind. --Ira

The South Plainsman said...

Darlene, I am stunned by your assertions, but have decided that we will just have to agree to disagree.

I suspect that the 47 countries with better health care than we have comes from the life expectancy tables. The problem is that in the US we have neonatal intensive care units in most of our hospitals, so if premature babies show any signs of life, they are recorded as live births and rushed to the neonate units. This really contributes to our reduced life expectancy because a very large proportion of those babies don't live very long.

I guess we could ration the care of those babies away, and greatly improve our health care. But then the tables would be reduced by rationiing away health care for the elderly if this plan passes.

So let's just agree to disagree. George and I have to do that with some frequency.

Blog of Ages said...

Lately, I've been wondering if I should charge the S. Plainsman's wife for babysitting him. Lord knows I'm keeping him out of other mischief.

What do you think? Charge by the hour? Or by the piece?

Anonymous said...

You know that the correct solution to our medical problems stem from lack of care of our Medicare program. Only a Democratic government can claim that failure as a victory.
I have seen but very few people that are on the side of Obama and George. Most people,those with a small amount of good sense,are agaist the government control of health situations. To turn the obviously questionable health plan that Obama and his stooges support,to the union goons is undoubtably the worst of all scenarios.If you haven't seen what these thugs can do en masse,then you have been living in a cave.
It's amazing that everything is the fault of the Republicans,when the Democrats have been in control of the government for some time now.Of course with Pelosi,Reid, and their mindless minions trying to run things,there leaves no doubt that the insidious socialist want to turn the country around to a Marxist society. These are not idle words,but facts.There are no parts of todays liberal minds that even close to approaching the original ideals of our forefathers. Why the liberal establishment chooses to destroy the best system of government ever devised is beyond comprehension.
I have an idea; why don't the libs push the Constitution instead of a socialist form of government?
but then again to expect any patriotism in the lib camp is asking too much. They'd rather have the government solve all the problems(?) that come up.
Keep at it SP. You're definitely on the right track.---Goose

ian said...

South Plainsman - are you seriously suggesting that only US hospitals have neo-natal intensive care units? If that's the case, then I must have been imagining the one my daughter spent time in...

Can you also explain why the death rate for the period up to 5 years is also higher in the US than Europe, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia etc...?

Or why the life expectancy at birth is the US is lower than Europe etc? (not such a big gap here I grant you)

National Politics

News on Aging

Geriatric Medicine News

Senior Health Insurance News

Social Security & Medicare News

Posts From Other Geezer Blogs