Health care reform can't wait | Napa Valley Register

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Health care reform can't wait

Friday, June 12, 2009

Comment

By MIKE THOMPSON

Congress must act quickly to pass health care reform.

The bottom line is that we can’t wait any longer.

Across our country, 14,000 Americans are losing their health care coverage every day, joining the 46 million who already aren’t covered. I’m as worried as anyone about how we’re going to pay for this overhaul. But the cost of doing nothing is even greater. We must address the lack of access, and the crippling cost of health care that is hurting our families and our economy.

The United States now spends twice as much per capita on health care as almost any other nation, and our outcomes are worse. Spending on doctors, hospitals, drugs and other health care costs consumes more than one of every six dollars we earn — that’s approaching

20 percent of our country’s GDP. The growing costs to employers, estimated at 5 percent in 2008, have forced many businesses to cut back on benefits. It is even worse now during tough economic times. Before the economic downturn, 62 percent of all personal bankruptcies in 2007 were the result of unaffordable medical bills. What’s astounding is that three-fourths of those debtors had health insurance. According to the numbers alone, our system is broken.

But health care is about much more than just numbers. I’ve heard from countless folks in our district who can’t afford healthcare, or are struggling to pay their rising premiums. One constituent likened her health care bills to a second mortgage. Her middle-class family has been paying nearly $15,000 a year for health coverage, which is not uncommon. She’s had to cut back on paying for other things in order to afford to keep her family insured. Her story — and others across our district — underscores the need to act quickly to make sure that all families have affordable access to the care they need.

There is widespread agreement that something must be done. But as is usually the case when making public policy, the devil is in the details. Changing our health care system will be difficult. No one will get everything they want and after it is done there will be more reform to do. The American people want healthcare reform, but at the same time are afraid of losing what they already have (if they already have healthcare coverage). They want access to quality healthcare but are concerned with being able to afford it. Of those who have insurance, few are interested in shifting from an insurance industry bureaucracy to a government bureaucracy.

We need to make sure that people happy with their coverage can keep it. We need to make sure that people will be able to keep their doctors and have a say in their health care decisions. But we must expand the options so that Americans who don’t like their plan or don’t have coverage have a choice. And we can’t afford to wait for an arbitrary “trigger” to be pulled to put this reform into operation. If that is part of the bill, reform will likely never happen.

A public plan that provides true competition will be an important part of this reform. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly two thirds of Americans agree with me that Americans need access to affordable health care through an alternative to the private insurance options on the market. We must ensure that every American has health care coverage, regardless of pre-existing conditions, and that we have adequate protections in place for the doctor-patient relationship. We must also make sure that people can keep their coverage if they change jobs, get divorced or their employer changes their options.

By streamlining health care, reducing fraud and abuse, ending unnecessary testing, discouraging overutilization, investing in smart reforms and emphasizing preventive health care, we can significantly bring down the cost of health care. In addition to working for these changes, I’ll also push to expand access to telemedicine, which provides easier access to health care for people in underserved communities. We can also make significant cost savings by encouraging more collaboration and patient-centered care by doctors. Rather than paying doctors for the volume of procedures they perform, we should reward them for keeping patients healthy.

Reform won’t be easy, but it is urgent that we act now to make sure that all Americans can access quality, affordable health care. For the families in our district, and families across the country who can’t afford to go to the doctor, or can’t afford the medicine they’ve been prescribed, it’s more urgent than ever that we reform our broken health care system as quickly as possible.

(Thompson, a Democrat, represents California’s District 1 in the House of Representatives of the U.S. Congress. He lives in St. Helena.)

84 comment(s)

steph wrote on Jun 12, 2009 1:28 AM:

" Cadillac Escalades are becoming less and less affordable to many people. Some people have never been able to afford a Cadillac Escalade.

So what we're going to do is have the government give a Cadillac Escalade to everybody in America, whether they are here legally or not. Come to America and get a Cadillac Escalade. It will be free. We'll worry about how to pay for this later. All the people who can now afford an Escalade will pay for Escalades for everyone else. Your employer may cut your benefits because now everyone will get a free Escalade which will be paid for by all of us (those who continue to work.)

We'll tell Cadillac they can't charge as much for Cadillacs. This may not be profitable at all for Cadillac, but the cars will be free.

Or, what we may have to do is give everyone a Yugo, but at least we'll all have cars. We're deciding whether or not you can upgrade to a Cadillac with your own money. In Canada, you can't. If you want to drive an Escalade and you're Canadian, you have to come to the US to drive one. Not sure what the Canadians will do when we do away with Escalades, but a Yugo should be fine for everyone unless we run out of Yugo manufacturers. You may have to wait to get your Yugo, but at least it will be fair, because everyone will wait for a Yugo. We may have to bring people in from overseas to build Yugos.

It will be so nice for everyone to have equality. "

kevin wrote on Jun 12, 2009 4:55 AM:

" "streamlining health care"? Code words for what Democrats really mean: rationing health care.

That's the ONLY way to contain costs under their plan.

Mike is right about one thing, people overwhelmingly approve of their own health care plans and DON'T want "change" if it means they will lose it. And that is EXACTLY what will happen with Mike's "public" option.

Businesses won't keep paying for expensive health care if they can dump their employees into a public plan. All too soon the ONLY plan available will be the government's option.

Before you try to nationalize health care for the rest of us, Mike, why don't you try to PAY for the broken and bankrupt health care systems you already are in charge of like Medicare and the Veterans Hospitals? "

napagrammy wrote on Jun 12, 2009 6:03 AM:

" I am tired of hearing "we dont know how we will pay for it, but doing nothing will be worse". That isnt how a budget is run. I have to know how I am going to pay for things before I buy them. If the country isnt careful they will end up just like California. Champaigne taste on a beer budget. Wise up! "

glenroy wrote on Jun 12, 2009 7:04 AM:

" First off Mike…you’re numbers of uninsured are influenced by partisan calculating, including a the percentage that chooses not to purchase health care being able to afford care as needed, those temporarily between coverage….. And those freeloaders who can afford but refuse to pay because they know the government picks up the tag by passing the costs off on the private carriers…..

Secondly Mike…the government can’t provide anything, liberals like yourself like to hold up Medicare as a model, well my doctor and our local hospital already subsidized your model because Medicare only pays on average 72% of the costs, dumping the balance….on the hospitals, doctor, insurance providers, which becomes my cost… MIKE. Are libs just that oblivious or corrupt? I’d would really like to know, seriously Mike…

Mike, I know well how government makes itself look ‘efficient’….Medicare claims 95-97% of their budget is paid out in services….try adding in the 28% being dumped on us and that number is closer to 65%…..in the private sector that means bankruptcy….then again in this Democrat Administration that doesn’t mean anything either.

Mike…sadly because I‘ve always respected you as a dedicated family man, outdoor sportsman, a volunteer during the Vietnam War who served there honorably…….but I don’t think you’ve ever understood how things work in the real world, real meaning not a government job, when you and the rest of the bleeding heart libs come up with another hair brain scam to win the next election, like providing health care, or a few trillion dollars here and there for Democrat caused failures like Fredde and Fannie, 50 billion dollars for the United Auto Workers Union, a billon for HAMAS‘s TV Broadcasting in the Gaza…who do you think pays for this stuff?

Do you care? "

Mr4 wrote on Jun 12, 2009 8:11 AM:

" Mr. Thompson,

Have you ever read the Constitution? Yes, that little document that you were sworn to protect and defend?

Where in that document is the federal government remotely empowered to take over our health care system? Nowhere!

If you really want to help out with healthcare you should start by taking a hard look at all of the idiotic and wasteful regulations currently in place that do nothing but add complexity and waste to the healthcare delivery system. "

TAXPAYER wrote on Jun 12, 2009 8:59 AM:

" Mike, streamlining health care, reducing fraud and abuse by going to government control? Are you kidding?
There has never been or never will be a government run agency that could be more efficent than the private sector.
Quit slinging what your stepping in. "

Paddy wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:19 AM:

" Quit spending money you don't have. What kind of fools have the libs voted into office? Outrageous! "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:26 AM:

" Wow! The uninformed comments on here are amazing. Seriously. We pay over 8,000 per person in this country for healthcare, by far the most expensive on the planet. We have about the 39th best health indicators on the planet.

I notice no one takes into account the fact that businesses can't afford health care for their employess because it is too expensive.

The one thing to take into account with the commenters above is that they are in the minority, which is shrinking by the day. "

nightwatchman wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:27 AM:

" Can you show me where in that column he proposes a government takeover of health care?

It's like you guys just dusted off all of your nonsense about Hillarycare and are regurgitating it, even though the plan is completely different. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:35 AM:

" Explain to me how great our healthcare system is when someone does everything the current system says you need to do to cover yourself and it still isn't enough. Health insurance, AFLAC supplemental and a health savings account:

DONNA SMITH: Yep. That's why I was asked to testify. I tell people that our story, my husband's and my story's not unique. It's not because we're so unique that people talk about us because we're not unique. So many millions of Americans do what all middle-class families do. You hang on. You watch your premiums rise over time and your benefits shrink. And as long as you're healthy, you absorb some of that cost and you deal with it and you make decisions.

But if you get sick, you find out just how inadequate that insurance may be. And I tell people not only did I have health insurance, I had Aflac disability insurance and a health care savings account on top of that. So we were like the prime example of responsible people who try and keep ourselves covered. And yet when we got sick, there was no way the deductibles and out-of-pocket maximum exposure added up so quickly that we were buried very quickly financially.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/transcript1.html "

This shows how vulnerable you really are if you get a serious disease. She couldn't have done anything more except not get sick. Again, as she says, she is the norm not the exception. "

funnyme wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:44 AM:

" The "we" is what worries me the most...Who's "we"? "

Alter ego wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:01 AM:

" What is shrinking Bauhausfan, is the numbers of productive working people who are expected to pay for socialized medicine for everyone else.

I know the US Constitution is not what it used to be; the Dems have redefined it to be a "living document" that means whatever they want it to mean. But to think it is Constitutional to force people to buy something they don't want is ludicrus.

There are Americans whose religious beliefs don't recognize or allow modern medical procedures. How can they possibly be forced to buy something they have no use for?

What about the millions of young people who don't want health insurance? (The same ones who don't bat an eye at paying $1000 per month for a car payment plus more for car insurance.) Why should they be forced to subsidize the health care for others?

You can't have freedom without free will and free choice. "

Mr4 wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:02 AM:

" Bauhausfan, You stumbled upon the problem. You wrote:

" businesses can't afford health care for their employess..."

That is the source of the waste. Businesses should not pay for anyone's healthcare. Do businesses buy our food for us? Our houses? Our children's education? Our clothing? Our cars? ...

Having businesses pay the bill prevents the market from operating efficiently. Remove that and open up insurance companies to interstate competition, and the healthcare system will improve dramatically.

As for your dollar numbers, you forget that almost all healthcare innovation happens here in the US. Other countries import our medicines and technology (without the enormous FDA-imposed cost burden) and can sometimes offer lower costs. But remove our innovation from the equation and all of humanity will suffer. "

amazed wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:12 AM:

" We can "discourage overutilization" by ending services to people who don't pay for them. Every winter, people with the flu pack the Emergency Rooms. If you know you have to pay for it, you only use what you need.

"Rewarding doctors for keeping patients healthy"? That's double-talk for bonuses for failing to treat and, in particular, refusing to refer to specialists, which is what my old HMO did.

When my so-called representatives talk, I try to read between the lines. However, with Thompson, all I see is air -- hot air. "

steph wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:23 AM:

" Oh, bauhaus, you are sadly misinformed if you believe we are misinformed.

When you throw around cliched statistics that you have not researched, it belies your "information."

There is room for change in healthcare, but this letter here from our Congressman, who is regurgitating more soundbites, makes me nervous about who is leading the charge. "

steph wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:25 AM:

" The part of the letter that makes me most nervous?

"Congress must act quickly."

Hmm...when...was, the last time you heard that?

(bailouts?) "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:36 AM:

" Steph - " Oh, bauhaus, you are sadly misinformed if you believe we are misinformed.

When you throw around cliched statistics that you have not researched, it belies your "information."

There is room for change in healthcare, but this letter here from our Congressman, who is regurgitating more soundbites, makes me nervous about who is leading the charge. "

What statistics did I post that are not factual and are not researched? What you wrote is somehow facts and researched? "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:39 AM:

" By the way, I agree that businesses should not pay for healthcare but that is the system we have now.

The fact is the health care is an economic need in that it is literally killing us. Financially and physically. "

nightwatchman wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:40 AM:

" Republican health care plan -- don't get sick! "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:47 AM:

" I am waiting for someone to comment on the case of Donna Smith that I posted, which as she states, is unfortunately very normal.

So I guess what the people who comment on this site against any kind of healthcare reform are just hoping in the lottery of life they don't get a major disease or no on in their family does. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 10:57 AM:

" Steph - Is this a fact or cliched information I have not researched?

Medical bills prompt more than 60 percent of U.S. bankruptcies

"This year, an estimated 1.5 million Americans will declare bankruptcy. Many people may chalk up that misfortune to overspending or a lavish lifestyle, but a new study suggests that more than 60 percent of people who go bankrupt are actually capsized by medical bills.

Bankruptcies due to medical bills increased by nearly 50 percent in a six-year period, from 46 percent in 2001 to 62 percent in 2007, and most of those who filed for bankruptcy were middle-class, well-educated homeowners, according to a report that will be published in the August issue of The American Journal of Medicine.

"Unless you're a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates, you're one illness away from financial ruin in this country," says lead author Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., of the Harvard Medical School, in Cambridge, Mass. "If an illness is long enough and expensive enough, private insurance offers very little protection against medical bankruptcy, and that's the major finding in our study."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/05/bankruptcy.medical.bills/ "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 11:00 AM:

" Steph - Here is some more facts that haven't been researched:

They concluded that 62.1 percent of the bankruptcies were medically related because the individuals either had more than $5,000 (or 10 percent of their pretax income) in medical bills, mortgaged their home to pay for medical bills, or lost significant income due to an illness. On average, medically bankrupt families had $17,943 in out-of-pocket expenses, including $26,971 for those who lacked insurance and $17,749 who had insurance at some point.

Overall, three-quarters of the people with a medically-related bankruptcy had health insurance, they say.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/05/bankruptcy.medical.bills/ "

steph wrote on Jun 12, 2009 11:16 AM:

" Bauhaus:
"We have about the 39th best health indicators on the planet."

What exactly does that mean? "

freeport56 wrote on Jun 12, 2009 11:18 AM:

" Can't Wait????

Because they need the tax money to pay for all the new technology that will not be cheap. Kiss your $5 copay good- bye "

Raven wrote on Jun 12, 2009 11:43 AM:

" it would appear to mean that our health care system isn't doing its job, steph.....keep us healthy and treating illnesses and injuries efficently "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 12:05 PM:

" Steph - " Bauhaus:
"We have about the 39th best health indicators on the planet."

What exactly does that mean? "

If you don't know why don't you research?

According to Steph - "When you throw around cliched statistics that you have not researched, it belies your "information."

I know what health indicators are. You don't but you claim I throw cliched statistics around (your little comment on the top is a right wing cliche).

Just so you know health indicators are life expectancy, infant mortality deaths and they also factor in accessibilty to doctors and so on.

According to the WHO in 2000 the U.S. ranked 37th. Any guess if we are higher or lower now?

http://www.who.int/whr/2000/media_centre/press_release/en/index.html "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 12:09 PM:

" For indicators related to "mortality that is amenable to health care," Schoen said, the United States "ranks 15 out of 19 countries," with results that are one-third worse than top-ranked France.

Included in this score is infant mortality, with the United States scoring 39 and placing last among 23 industrialized nations. The U.S. infant mortality rate, 7 infant deaths per 1000 live births in 2002, was more than twice the average of Iceland, Japan, and Finland, the countries with the lowest rates.

The report noted that there is substantial statewide variation in U.S. infant mortality rates. The five best-performing states averaged 5.3 deaths per 1000 live births, compared with 9.1 per 1000 for the worst-performing states. Yet the best rates were still nearly double the benchmark of 2.7 deaths per 1000 live births.

Another mortality indicator that demonstrated shortcomings in U.S. health care was death before age 75 years from causes that are "at least partially preventable or modifiable with timely and effective health care." Using World Health Organization data from 1998 as a benchmark, the United States ranked 15th out of 19 countries that year, with 115 deaths per 100,000 population.

In 2002, the average U.S. performance in this area was 110 deaths per 100,000 population—a slight improvement, but far below France's 1998 rate of 75 deaths per 100,000 population.

https://www.ashp.org/import/news/HealthSystemPharmacyNews/newsarticle.aspx?id=2349

The thing to remember about all this is that we spend more money than any other country on the planet. We are it - #1 but not in return on the dollar. "

TAXPAYER wrote on Jun 12, 2009 1:00 PM:

" Mike, "in 2008, The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that if Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid go unchanged, by 2082 "the tax rate for the lowest tax bracket would increase from 10 percent to 25 percent; the tax rate on incomes in the current 25 percent bracket would have to be increased to 63 percent; and the tax rate of the highest bracket would have to be raised from 35 percent to 88 percent. Such tax rates would significantly reduce economic activity and would create serious problems with tax avoidance and tax evasion. Revenues will fall significantly short of the amount needed to finance the growth of spending; therefore, tax rates at such levels would probably not be economically feasible."
Mike this is coming from your CBO.
How are you going to now pay for additional healthcare? "

TAXPAYER wrote on Jun 12, 2009 1:11 PM:

" Please look at Canada's healthcare.
Drive along the our boarder with Canada and look at all of the health clinics spring up. A freind of mine lives in Canada, he has said the waiting periods are so long, most people die before the can get treatment. Most Canadians now cross the boarded into the US to get treatment. "

ping wrote on Jun 12, 2009 1:14 PM:

" I just did a search on the title of this editorial. The result was hundreds of modified versions of these talking points.

They tell us that 45 million are uninsured. They don’t tell us that it only represents 15.3 %. They don’t mention of that percentage 43.8% are not US citizens or that 53.8% are between 18-34 years old. or 22,3% have a household income between $50,000-$75,000 or more. http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf (page 22)
They have renamed national healthcare from single payer to “Public Plan”. They say it will provide competition to insurance companies. It will drive insurance companies out of business. Any fool knows that you can’t compete against the Government which can just print more money. Congress knows this.

They say, “By streamlining health care, ... ending unnecessary testing, discouraging overutilization, ... we can significantly bring down the cost of health care.” Translation: a bureaucrat will decide what is necessary and overutilization but refuse to define them. This is a federal HMO on steroids.

No nation on this Earth has a satisfactory single payer healthcare system. The news is filled with horror stories week after week. Having lived in two countries with a “Public Plan” I can tell you that the only people who get speedy care are those who pay cash in the privacy of the exam room.

Ireland has for a generation given free college to doctors and nurses but still have too few. England passes laws mandating waiting periods of less than a year for various procedures and the National Health System simply reclassifies the procedures. Yesterday, the President distanced himself from England’s system but his staff continues to model itself after the UK Efficiency Council.

Dear Editor, challenge Sen Thompson on the facts he presents. "

manxkat wrote on Jun 12, 2009 1:52 PM:

" Mr. Thompson has been in congress for many years but now he says, "...its urgent, we must act now". Why? Is he going to stuff us into another fiasco like he stuffed us into all the bail outs last year and no one knows where the money is? Is he going to operate it like the Napa Flood Control District which has quadrupled in cost in 10 years? I don't want a government run by obama and mike thompson to dictate my medical care options. That scares me! "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 3:29 PM:

" " Please look at Canada's healthcare.
Drive along the our boarder with Canada and look at all of the health clinics spring up. A freind of mine lives in Canada, he has said the waiting periods are so long, most people die before the can get treatment. Most Canadians now cross the boarded into the US to get treatment. "

Please provide facts to back up this familair sounding right wing talking point. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 3:37 PM:

" Debunking Canadian Healthcare Myths.

Below is just one of many debunked by a Canadian who lives in the U.S.

Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.There are no waits for urgent or primary care in Canada. There are reasonable waits for most specialists' care, and much longer waits for elective surgery. Yes, there are those instances where a patient can wait up to a month for radiation therapy for breast cancer or prostate cancer, for example. However, the wait has nothing to do with money per se, but everything to do with the lack of radiation therapists. Despite such waits, however, it is noteworthy that Canada boasts lower incident and mortality rates than the U.S. for all cancers combined, according to the U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group and the Canadian Cancer Society. Moreover, fewer Canadians (11.3 percent) than Americans (14.4 percent) admit unmet health care needs.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_12523427

Of course, the real question is why people want to perpetuate these myths which are easy to refute.

Answer: because it scares people. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 3:41 PM:

" Ping - What are the two countries you lived in with single payer systems?

You must be aware that single payer doesn't mean that the government runs hopitals, at least not what anyone in this country is talking about. "

manxkat wrote on Jun 12, 2009 5:10 PM:

" Thompson laments his constituent's inability to keep up with medical insurance. Maybe Mr. Thompson doesn't know that the Democrat legislature dumped $1,200 new taxes on each family on April first. Maybe Mr. thompson doesn't know that the democrats running the city of Napa areraising garbage fees by 15% after already doubling water and sewer fees on families.
Democrats say a little increase in fees and taxes here and there is no big deal. Well, yes they are because they add up at every level of government with their hands out to families. "

Kevin Eggers wrote on Jun 12, 2009 5:22 PM:

" I agree with “taxpayer”. When Connie Fogal, head of the Canadian Action Party, was visiting the Napa Valley in September, she told me healthcare was terrible in Canada. Connie blamed Canada’s healthcare system for ignoring those with serious problems, including her mother’s illness—Connie’s mother died at the beginning of the year.
Connie still believed that there should be healthcare for all, but not their brand of healthcare.

My family had very little money when I was growing up, and I remember how tough it was for my parents to afford healthcare—that was back in the 1960s. Luckily, our family was pretty healthy and we were able to make it with minimal healthcare. If you look around, our society isn’t getting any healthier, younger, or responsible, and we can’t have limited government without responsibility for our own actions, as well as responsibility to our elderly and needy. What we don’t take care of ourselves, government will—and we deserve what we get--the good, the bad, and the ugly of big government.

What scares me most is that government told us we needed to invade the Middle East or else. We needed to sign the Patriot Act or else. We needed to invade Iraq or else. We needed bailout money to save our financial institutions or else. Now they’re telling us we need to have healthcare or else.

Connie and I did discuss today’s socialism versus today’s capitalism (corporatism) versus the free enterprise system of old. I gave her Frederic Bastiat’s book, “The Law” supporting the free enterprise system, and she gave me books supporting socialism. We both agreed our governments aren’t working within their constitutions or under the rule of law anymore—and it doesn’t matter which party is in power. "

bloodagar wrote on Jun 12, 2009 5:38 PM:

" "Long wait times in ERs only the tip of health-care problems: doctors" an article written By Shannon Montgomery, The Canadian Press.

Then:
"Emergency room doctors say waiting rooms crammed full of patients waiting for hours are the canary in the coal mine for bigger problems plaguing health care.

Hundreds of doctors are meeting in Calgary this week in part to discuss ways for out-of-control waiting lists to be managed.

Dr. Grant Innes, department head for the city's ER departments, says he realized a decade ago that the system needed serious changes.

He says there's `no question' patients across the country are dying because of lengthy wait times.

Innes says there are some glimmers of hope in isolated attempts to move people through the emergency room more quickly.

But he says major issues such as a lack of long-term care beds and a scarcity of family doctors also need to be dealt with." "

bloodagar wrote on Jun 12, 2009 5:40 PM:

" last quoted article was also from the Canadian Times, my apologies. "

bloodagar wrote on Jun 12, 2009 5:55 PM:

" By the way...I have fantastic Health Insurance!

I have $0.00 in: co-pays, prescription (brand name) medication, ER visits, x-ray, all local specialty referrals....you name it: it is FREE for me, my husband and our children.

It is a lot like Kaiser though; you have to be somewhat educated in the medical field or the MD's, PA's and RN's will walk all over you. If I know something to not be true or something should be done prior to the next step or if they are simply wasting time with ridiculous referrals when the primary MD is capable of doing it themselves...I simply stand on their necks until they give in. It is a federally run healthcare system. If I do not like the service I receive...the consequences could lead to that person taking a pay cut...rank demotion for gross incompetence.

Want my insurance?

JOIN THE MILITARY. "

antipc wrote on Jun 12, 2009 7:12 PM:

" Bathausfan,

Maybe the folks aren't afraid at all.

Maybe they're smart enough to see that SSI & Medicare are BROKE!!!!!!

Maybe they don't want anymore feel-good policy failures from Democrat-socialist party.

Canadian healthcare is anything but caring. It should actually be called an early death sentence. "

Hear Ye wrote on Jun 12, 2009 8:06 PM:

" There is nothing more amusing than listening to Bush fanboys/gals act as if they care about the Constitution all of a sudden.

Bauhausfan-

I agree about the Canada myth. Not just because of the facts but one side of my family is entirely in Canada and they don't back up those myths. "

Bill wrote on Jun 12, 2009 8:17 PM:

" There will either be a single payer or a government sponsored alternative.

The insurance companies are frightened now because they are the prime drivers of health care costs. we recive less per dollar paid than any comparable modern system in the industrial world.

I'll leave bushausfan to provide the stats they seem pretty good to me. It doesn't take rocket science to see that the system we now have is unsustainable. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 13, 2009 7:28 AM:

" antipc - If the Canadian system is so bad why do they have better health indicators than we do?

It's like saying that someones car gets less gas mileage than yours but when you actually compare them you find that yours get less mileage.

Just because you say it doesn't make it true. But of course, if you keep saying it maybe some rube or dupe will believe it because they keep hearing it. "

ping wrote on Jun 13, 2009 8:22 AM:

" Dodd's wife serves on health care company boards

By LARRY MARGASAK and SHARON THEIMER – 20 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — “The wife of a senator playing a lead role on a national health care overhaul sits on the boards of four health care companies, one of several examples of lawmakers with ties to the medical industry. Jackie Clegg Dodd, wife of Sen. Chris Dodd, serves on the boards of Javelin Pharmaceuticals Inc., Cardiome Pharma Corp., Brookdale Senior Living, and Pear Tree Pharmaceuticals, a financial disclosure report the senator released Friday shows. ...”
“Other publicly available documents show Mrs. Dodd last year was one of the most highly compensated non-employee members of the Javelin Pharmaceuticals Inc. board, on which she has served since 2004. She earned $32,000 in fees and $109,587 in stock option awards last year, according to the company's SEC filings. Mrs. Dodd earned $79,063 in fees from Cardiome in its last fiscal year, while Brookdale Senior Living gave her $122,231 in stock awards in 2008, their SEC filings show. ...”

Some folks, including the President, try to make a distinction between the Government paying for the insurance which pays for the healthcare and the Government running healthcare. That is so, so far from being true it is insulting.

There is a saying that “Once the mother-in-law takes over the mortgage payments, she gets to pick the drapes.” "

ping wrote on Jun 13, 2009 9:23 AM:

" I have one more thing to say on this topic (I promise).
It has become a mantra that “The USA spends the most on healthcare and ranks 37th in the world”. You’ve all heard it. But have you looked at how the World Health Organization scores this ranking ?

You can read the WHO press release at:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/who_world_health_ranks.html

It is full of slippery terms but when you break it down there are five categories.
The actual illness / cure result is only worth 20% of the score. The USA ranks #1.
“Responsiveness”, the time to treatment, is another 20% and again USA #1.
The remanning 60% revolves around who pays for it and country that allows it’s doctors to also have private care patients shoot to the bottom of the list.
Any country without “Universal Care” drops even further.
Read it for yourselves before you repeat that mantra.

Clip:
"We have created a new tool to help us measure performance," says Dr Murray. "As we develop it further and strengthen the raw data used for these measures in the years to come, we believe this will be an increasingly useful tool for governments in improving their own health systems."

You can down load the whole report at:
http://www.who.int/whr/2008/whr08_en.pdf
Clip:
The World Health Report 2008 analyses how primary health care reforms, that embody the principles of universal access, equity and social justice, are an essential response to the health challenges of a rapidly changing world and the growing expectations of countries and their citizens for health and health care. "

anticommie wrote on Jun 13, 2009 6:25 PM:

" The first line of this story is no suprise sonsidering a democrat wrote it:

"Congress must act quickly to pass health care reform."

Quickly. That seems to sum up the Congress and President these days. Of course they want to pass everything quickly, that way the average joe wont realize the great government takeover of our lives, until it is too late. Shame on you Mike Thompson. "

anticommie wrote on Jun 13, 2009 6:27 PM:

" "The United States now spends twice as much per capita on health care as almost any other nation, and our outcomes are worse."

I think Englands healthcare system's out comes are far worse congressman. "

anticommie wrote on Jun 13, 2009 6:37 PM:

" nightwatchman wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:27 AM:

"It's like you guys just dusted off all of your nonsense about Hillarycare and are regurgitating it, even though the plan is completely different. "

What do you think the next step would be? The government wants to control healthcare, bottem line. But time and time again, I hear even liberals complain about government doesnt know how to run anything right, and yet every chance they get they allow it to happen. "

anticommie wrote on Jun 13, 2009 6:47 PM:

" Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 12, 2009 3:29 PM:

"Please provide facts to back up this familair sounding right wing talking point. "

Every single Canadian I have talked too has said that they would rather come to America and get healthcare then go to theirs. Stop living in a world that doesnt exist. The government is to blame for the state of our healthcare system as are the lawyers. Now you all want them to run it. Government intervention in healthcare is unconstitutional. DONT DRINK THE KOOLAID! "

tony wrote on Jun 13, 2009 11:58 PM:

" I agree with Mr. Thompson’s generalizations; “By streamlining health care, reducing fraud and abuse, ending unnecessary testing, discouraging over utilization, investing in smart reforms and emphasizing preventive health care, we can significantly bring down the cost of health care.”

I wish he would explain how this is going to happen when key health care senators working to over haul the nation’s health care system have investment and family ties with some of the biggest names in the industry.

The reason that it is called “Managed Health Care” is because they are happy to ‘manage’ your illness for a price. "

steph wrote on Jun 14, 2009 7:22 PM:

" Thank you, ping.
I don't expect your research to have any impact on the people who like to claim that our healthcare is ranked 39th in the world. It's just easier to say that we're 39th without having a clue what that means. "

steph wrote on Jun 14, 2009 7:41 PM:

" It looks like Canada believes it has a problem with wait times:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/qual/acces/wait-attente/index-eng.php

http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=f7f55af7-455f-44f2-ac8a-17236a7773dc

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/10/08/f-elxn-doctorshortage.html

That's just the first 5 minutes of searching. "

steph wrote on Jun 14, 2009 7:45 PM:

" I also want to know which outcomes are better in Canada than the US, bauhausfan.

But in the meantime, check this little gem out:

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/06/11/edmonton-friends-of-medicare-campaign.html

Friends of Medicare will use billboards, print ads and messages posted on social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook to mobilize the public against cuts the province is making to Alberta's health-care system, the group announced Thursday.

The group is alarmed about changes the province has already made, including reported hiring freezes, cancelled surgeries and the delisting of services. The province's new single health board, Alberta Health Services, is dealing with a deficit that is believed to be at least $500,000, and there are concerns there are more cuts to come.

In Calgary, Health Minister Ron Liepert dismissed the group's concerns and said Albertans support the actions the government is taking.

"There are certain groups out there that don't want things to change," he said. "We have laid out a plan for health care in this province. Everywhere I go people say you are doing the right thing. We need to recognize that the health-care system isn't sustainable the way it is. So, we won't be changing our course of action."

I mean, wow. "

steph wrote on Jun 14, 2009 7:48 PM:

" It just gets better and better!

Canada is out of control! Luckily they have the US military ready to protect them.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/06/10/bc-health-carbon-budgets.html

B.C.'s largest health authority will have to pay millions back to the provincial government under a policy requiring health authorities to become carbon neutral by 2010.

Great article.

Oh, I'm going to keep going.

Go Canada! The US liberals love you! "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 15, 2009 7:55 AM:

" The cost of health care in the U.S., the highest in the world, jumped 47 percent from 2000 to 2006, a study said. That didn’t buy Americans the longest lifespan.

Americans paid $6,719 a person for doctors, medicines and hospital visits in 2006, up from $4,570 in 2000, according to a report released today by the World Health Organization in Geneva. The yearly spending is more than nine times the global average. With a life expectancy of 78 for a person born in 2007, the U.S. trails at least 27 other countries among 193 in the report.

Cut.

The U.S. has “the least efficient health care system in the world,” said Kevin Schulman, director of the health management program at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. “These costs keep growing despite the recession, and health care is going to shoot up as a percentage of our GDP even more. It’s just spooky.”
In 2006, health care spending worldwide was about 8.7 percent of gross domestic product, according to the WHO report. About 46 percent of the costs in the U.S. were paid by the government, compared with more than 80 percent in the U.K., Norway and Japan.

Cut.

Canada’s health care cost $3,917 a person, and the government paid about 70 percent. The average Canadian life expectancy was 81, the report said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aykIuUrgXbWc "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 15, 2009 8:04 AM:

" With every problem brought up with the Canadian system there are a few things to remember.

1) Everyone is covered.

2) Health care costs per capita are less than ours. We are the most expensive.

3) No one goes bankrupt from getting sick.

Of course their system has problems.

Does our system have problems?

As the three things I pointed out above indicate, we have a fundamental problem. "

TAXPAYER wrote on Jun 15, 2009 9:30 AM:

" The final thing to remember is:
"America the land of the free"

Have a nice day "

steph wrote on Jun 15, 2009 10:32 AM:

" So, bauhaus, you're comfortable using life expectancy as a proxy for quality of healthcare?

I'm not.

Think about it. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 15, 2009 11:25 AM:

" Steph - Life expectancy is a health indicator and reflects the quality of life of the population of the country.

There is nothing to think about.

It is not a proxy but an outcome. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 15, 2009 11:38 AM:

" I find it strange that no one on here wants to talk about the amount of bankruptcy due to medical bills that I posted in a comment above. "

steph wrote on Jun 15, 2009 1:58 PM:

" Really, bauhaus?
So if someone dies in a car accident or because they are 300 pounds heavy, that's an indictment of our healthcare system? If someone smokes themselves to death, it's because their doctor didn't do a good job?
Why doesn't NCQA just simply ask each healthcare organization to report their life expectancy? That would make quality reporting a LOT easier.

Life expectancy is not AN outcome.

I know how to increase my life expectancy--no drug abuse, drive safely with my seatbelt on, exercise, don't smoke, don't get fat. If I have a health problem, I get care from the BEST healthcare system available. If I have a healthcare problem, I want to be right here in the US. "

downtownsupporter wrote on Jun 15, 2009 2:33 PM:

" If the Canadian system is so bad why do they have better health indicators than we do? - Bauhausfan

Because they dont sit on the couch eating processed supersize meals, wash them down with booze while a cig burns in the ashtray.

Why should I be required as a taxpayer to pay for some Lazy, Overweight, Unhealthy American, or illegal immigrants to go to the doctor.
And No I am not a GOP or Democrat supporter. Both sides are stupid. "Know your Enemy" "

russ wrote on Jun 15, 2009 5:33 PM:

" BANKRUPTCY,

So to prevent bankruptcy, you want me to buy government medical insurance for other people. No!

Catastrophic health insurance is not expensive.

Sometimes, people just need to take care of themselves. Government cannot fix all of our problems. "

antipc wrote on Jun 15, 2009 6:53 PM:

" Bauhausfan,

I have very good friends in Canada, try doing some research at the grass roots level. They all hate it, & would welcome our system.

Rushing single-payer healthcare through will be the straw that broke the camels back. Who's going to pay for it? BO won't answer the question & niether can you. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 15, 2009 7:37 PM:

" Question: What are any of you going to do if you lose your job and can't afford health insurance?

If you get cancer?

If you get diabetes?

If you get high blood pressure?

If you got asthma?

By the way, catastrophic health insurance is not the answer for most people, in that most can't afford a 5,000-10,000 dollar deductible before their insurance will kick in. Most of those don't pay a 100% either. "

steph wrote on Jun 15, 2009 9:33 PM:

" bauhausfan--
Your bankruptcy study was funded and supervised by advocates for single-payor healthcare plans here in the US. I smell bias.

Seems the average Canadian is one job loss away from bankruptcy as well, in spite of having "free" healthcare:
http://www.bankruptcy-canada.ca/bankruptcy/personal-bankruptcy-statistics.htm

Yes, everyone is covered in Canada. In fact, they're locked in with no private-pay options, because the benevolent government of Canada has decided that everyone must have equal access to healthcare, no matter if they can afford to pay for quicker or better care. That's why so many of them come to the US, where Canada has no jurisdiction over the work of US physicians, some of whom have escaped the Canadian system, leading to a "brain drain" in Canada. In Canada, equality is paramount. Not quality, strict Equality. Most American liberals seem to highly revere equality, not considering the restrictions this places on freedom and progress.
But some of us want to be able to spend our earned income as we see fit. We also pay lots of taxes. "

AuntMel wrote on Jun 16, 2009 10:40 AM:

" Our family is paying $1200.00 per month ($14,400 a year!) for health insurance on top of a $500.00 deductible that must be met before the insurance company starts covering anything. Each office copay is $40.00 a visit. This is what private competition gets us? There is got to be a better way! I'm liking the military option! "

freeport56 wrote on Jun 16, 2009 11:41 AM:

" another $3 Trillion dollars down the drain. "

freeport56 wrote on Jun 16, 2009 11:43 AM:

" Illegal Immigrants get free health care, so can we! "

BAUHAUSFAN wrote on Jun 16, 2009 12:00 PM:

" Steph - It is intersting how you dismiss information that you don't agree with because it doesn't confirm your position. Remember when you got upset when I posted the poll numbers that said a majority of the country wanted higher taxes on the rich and when you couldn't refute it you finally said they were ignorant and stupid?

I do.

Now you are going to tell me this study by the Harvard Law and Harvard Medical school from 2005 is somehow biased.

Why?

Because you don't like the results.

Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work -- losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html#ixzz0IcZdB6Qn&D "

russ wrote on Jun 16, 2009 3:28 PM:

" Bauhaus,

So you want me to pay for the $5,000 deductible that other folks can't afford to pay before their insurance kicks in? Still no!

The government cannot fix all of our problems. In the 230 years of our republic, how in the world did we get this far without having tax payer funded, government medical insurance?

Bankruptcy is not the end of the world, it protects people from their debts. "

DJ-LLsyawlla wrote on Jun 16, 2009 6:23 PM:

" Mexico has affordable health care we visit our doctor in Mexico,
Cost $35.00 for office call $50.00 for both of us.
Labs x-rays seem to me to 60% to 80% less.
Drugs everything is cheaper.
Wife needed operation four doctors OR nurse and me in OR room $2000.00 US
Three days hospital medication everything $937.00
Airport airfare Rental car $487.00 less than $3500 Total
We used to pay insurance I looked at the whole thing and it seemed stupid.
My father had told me years ago don't buy insurance,of any kind your betting against yourself.
You don't have to have a degree to see very large Insurance office buildings
every where in the USA, 20 30 66 stories.
I and a bunch of other suckers paid for.

Do you think the casinos are so large because the casinos are looking out for you
(never has happened never going to).
We have become very gullible

So we trust our lives to someone who is in the business of making money(AMA, Insurance Co.)
their share holders don't pay them Millions to look out for your best interest as a human they pay them to look out for themselves.
Insurance is like giving Bernard Madoff your money and thinking we can trust him now he is all ready extremely rich.

Why don't we hear about SINGLE-PAYER?
If you want to know the answer to that
follow the money
Mike how much did you get?
In front of God does it influence you? "

glenroy wrote on Jun 16, 2009 11:46 PM:

" Bau….too many comic books.

The number one country in the world for advanced heath treatment is the United States….we have more foreign patients that come here for heart transplants, hip replacements, the latest orthopedic techniques etc than the next several counties combined… they don’t go were it’s free they come here and pay top dollar….the bulk of leading medical research is conducted here in the USA…

Obviously you don’t know why health costs skyrocketed….let me give you some clues….because the government started telling us employers that unmarried couples will be provided benefits for their lovers or our businesses licenses would not be renewed… you know what it costs for AIDS patient health care?…Average health care costs related to life styles? Why else…because when the government gives you free health care they only pay around 70% on average the rest gets dumped on those of us with private coverage so for every 70% government payment someone in the private sector is paying 130% for their services and coverage.

Everything the government touches becomes a mess…everything, there isn’t a single exception….if there was, libs would be harping it big time but there isn’t. The War on poverty will be the model…..they’ve spent over 13 trillion dollars and haven’t moved the poverty level one single percentage point! LOL….government health care…what a fool believes….

Right now roughly 10% of the work force works for a government agency local, state or federal…imagine that at 35%…..we’d make France look like a model of efficiency. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 17, 2009 6:59 AM:

" Glenroy - Too many comic books?

So we have the best healthcare in the world. I don't doubt that, if you can afford it.

But saying that still doesn't address:

1) That it is the most expensive.

2) That we have roughly 50 million uninsured.

3) That we have no one knows how many millions under insured.

4) That we have many who are insured declaring bankruptcy because of point 3 above.

The points I made above aren't a comic book for those people it effects. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Jun 17, 2009 6:28 PM:

" Executives of three of the nation's largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive.

The hearing on the controversial action known as rescission, which has left thousands of Americans burdened with costly medical bills despite paying insurance premiums, began a day after President Obama outlined his proposals for revamping the nation's healthcare system.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-rescind17-2009jun17,0,5870586.story "

notalwaysright wrote on Jun 18, 2009 8:36 PM:

" I'd like to join the military, but they say I'm too old without a degree at 38. "

Mr4 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 9:21 AM:

" Comparing the US to Canada: If you take out the cost of boob jobs in the US, the per capita spend for healthcare goes down significantly. Reduce the number of boob jobs and the system improves.

I can think of one boob whose job I would like to see reduced! "

AKNRA wrote on Jun 19, 2009 12:00 PM:

" First we were told (lied to) by the Obama brigades that we HAD to pass the stimulus bill; it HAD to be done IMMEDIATELY or the country would go into the tank. We HAD to bail out GM! We HAD to do it RIGHT NOW. Yet, GM has in fact gone bankrupt in spite of the illegal government bail out!

NOW here come the same stampeding sycophants trying to destroy the best health care system in the world, with the same hysterical and panicky cries of DO IT NOW! What say you Obama brigades to the fact that even Barrack Hussein Osama’s OWN doctor of 22 years doesn’t agree with what Obama wants to do vis-à-vis healthcare reform? Hmmm? "

wyngyrl wrote on Jun 19, 2009 3:12 PM:

" The giant spider sitting in the middle of our messy healthcare web, which no-one wants to look at, is that health care in the USA is a for-profit endeavor. We now have two populations: those who have insurance and those who don't. In order to keep the profit margins high, the premiums paid by those who have insurance must keep rising in order to cover the costs of those who have no insurance. Some of you are afraid of higher taxes or of paying for someone else's coverage. Guess what - you are already paying and will keep paying until some sort of reform in enacted. The company I work for pays over $300,000 a year to provide insurance for 35 families. That's $1 million in 3 years that we don't have for capital investiment and/or wage increases. This year we were notified that our premiums will increase 45%. Think the insurance companies are concerned about reform? "

Mr4 wrote on Jun 19, 2009 6:09 PM:

" AKNRA; Don't forget Ted Kennedy. He has a Glioblastoma - a particularly nasty brain cancer will basically zero long-term survival.

Kennedy has the doctors at Duke University and Mass General (Harvard) knocking themselves out to give him the best treatment possible. Under tho Obama plan he would be dropped like a rock - sorry, not worth treating. "

John Richards wrote on Jun 21, 2009 10:04 PM:

" Bauhousfan wrote: "That we have roughly 50 million uninsured."

That's one of those typical half-truths spewed by liberals. It includes a large number of non-citizens, and those who have voluntarily elected not to pay for insurance although they could afford it. "

aknra wrote on Jun 24, 2009 7:41 AM:

" MR4, rest assured, every time I hear a story about a child whose life is cut short by a disease, or a teenager who is paralyzed in a car wreck, I always ask why these types of things DON’T happen to the drunken man slaughterer who never served a minute for his crime, yes, Edward (Teddy {*Hic!*} Kennedy, the fool of the Senate. "

Sandra wrote on Jun 24, 2009 7:49 AM:

" "We pay over 8,000 per person in this country for healthcare"...Where did you come up with that number???
Our family pays for all of our own health insurance and it comes to about $11,000 per year for a family of 3. By your figures that should be $24,000.....
"Government run" and "streamline"...quite an oxymoron. And if you believe that streamlined government is possible, I have an inheritance for you from a distant relative in Africa...you just need to send me some money to secure it for you....
I guess our family could become one of the uninsured by making the choice not to keep insurance as a top priority, but that is not an option we could live with. Though many seem to make that choice. I do not care to foot the bill for them, any more than I already am. "

glenroy wrote on Jun 25, 2009 5:26 AM:

" What a waste of money….Teddy….every organ in his body has been pickled for decades.

The average glio victim won't get anywhere near this level of treatment in a government plan....I doubt they'll get any treatment considering the formula under consideration..... .no long term survival no need to spend any money.... "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: