RiverWillow's Blog

(An Open Letter from Michael Moore) To My Fellow Citizens, the Republicans: Thanks to last night’s vote, that child of yours who has had asthma since birth will now be covered after suffering for her first nine years as an American child with a pre-existing condition. Thanks to last night’s vote, that 23-year-old of yours who will be hit one day by a drunk driver and spend six months recovering in the hospital will now not go bankrupt because you will be able to keep him on your insurance policy. Thanks to last night’s vote, after your cancer returns for the third time — racking up another $200,000 in costs to keep you alive — your insurance company will have to commit a criminal act if they even think of dropping you from their rolls. Yes, my Republican friends, even though you have opposed this health care bill, we’ve made sure it is going to cover you, too, in your time of need. I know you’re upset right now. I know you probably think that if you did get wiped out by an illness, or thrown out of your home because of a medical bankruptcy, that you would somehow pull yourself up by your bootstraps and survive. I know that’s a comforting story to tell yourself, and if John Wayne were still alive I’m sure he could make that into a movie for you. But the reality is that these health insurance companies have only one mission: To take as much money from you as they can — and then work like demons to deny you whatever coverage and help they can should you get sick. So, when you find yourself suddenly broadsided by a life-threatening illness someday, perhaps you’ll thank those pinko-socialist, Canadian-loving Democrats and independents for what they did Sunday evening. If it’s any consolation, the thieves who run the health insurance companies will still get to deny coverage to adults with pre-existing conditions for the next four years. They’ll also get to cap an individual’s annual health care reimbursements for the next four years. And if they break the pre-existing ban that was passed last night, they’ll only be fined $100 a day! And, the best part? The law will require all citizens who aren’t poor or old to write a check to a private insurance company. It’s truly a banner day for these corporations. So don’t feel too bad. We’re a long way from universal health care. Over 15 million Americans will still be uncovered — and that means about 15,000 will still lose their lives each year because they won’t be able to afford to see a doctor or get an operation. But another 30,000 will live. I hope that’s ok with you. If you don’t mind, we’re now going to get busy trying to improve upon this bill so that all Americans are covered and so the grubby health insurance companies will be put out of business — because when it comes to helping the sick, no one should ever be allowed to ask the question, “How much money can we save by making this poor bastard suffer?” Please, my Republican friends, if you can, take a quiet moment away from your AM radio and cable news network this morning and be happy for your country. We’re doing better. And we’re doing it for you, too. Yours, Michael Moore MMFlint@aol.com MichaelMoore.com P.S. I’ll have more to say on this tonight, live on CNN, at 9pm ET. I’ll be talking with Larry King about the health care bill and where we go from here, considering we still don’t have universal health care. P.P.S. In case you missed these photos in yesterday’s NY Times Sunday Magazine… That’s the results of seven years of madness. The Iraq War began its 8th year this weekend. How can we remove more of those responsible for this tragedy in November?

P.S.S. from River Willow,

Thank you Michael Moore and all those who had the courage to fight for our nations’ health.

G. Lynne

Physicist Stephen Hawking had to defend the British health care system against the conservative attacks. He said: ”

“I wouldn’t be here today if it were not for the NHS. I have received a large amount of high-quality treatment without which I would not have survived.” Mr.Hawking suffers from neuron disease. These type of diseases for the average joe in this country have the potential to financial ruin a family. We all know pre-existing conditions as such are a threat to our current health care system, or they will never be 100% full coverage for unfortunate individuals like Hawkins.

A good friend of mine has to have a gastro procedure done in order to rule out the possibility of cancer. Her husband is a private music professor and pays $900.00 a month for their health care. Unfortunately this procedure is not fully cover by her insurance company and they have to come up with $3500.00 out of pocket. That’s A LOT for the average joe. They don’t think they’ll be able to afford it, or they might have to sale some of their possessions.

With the high unemployment rate, I worry all the families that are being left without health insurance, and we all know the cobra rates are ridiculous.

Anybody saying that we have the best health care system in the world, either they are blind or misinformed.

Gemma

ead more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2009/08/12/stephen-hawking-defends-british-health-care-system-against-u-s-conservatives.aspx#ixzz0gwI71StO
The National Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.

Why Democracy Functions Less Effectively With Ignorance…

_______________
AP Poll: Gov’t health plan divides public
By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer Erica Werner, Associated Press Writer
Wed Nov 18, 6:12 am ET

WASHINGTON – Tell Americans that letting the government sell insurance in competition with private industry would be cheaper for them, and a majority is in favor.

Tell them the government would be making decisions about what medical care they could get, and support sinks.

The findings from an Associated Press poll come as lawmakers struggle to advance President Barack Obama’s signature health care overhaul, with the final shape of any government insurance plan very much in doubt. The issue has been the biggest flash point in the health care debate, and the poll results underscore that how it is defined can make a big difference in the public’s response.

Politicians know that. It’s why when Republicans talk about letting the government sell health coverage in competition with private carriers, they cast it as a government takeover that would destroy private industry. Democrats talk about choice, competition and “keeping health insurance companies honest.”

The AP poll, conducted by Stanford University with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, suggests that when such messages are heard, they have an effect.

Half of the 1,500 participants in the AP poll were told that a government insurance plan “would be less expensive than other insurance plans, because the government would not need to make a profit the way businesses do and because the government is able to negotiate lower prices with doctors and hospitals than insurance companies can.”

Fifty-two percent said they favored such a plan, while 35 percent were opposed and 12 percent neither favored nor opposed it.

“I fundamentally feel that the private insurance industry basically holds all the market power” and could use some competition from a nonprofit alternative, said Robert Baulch, 58, of North Chatham, Mass.

The goal is “covering a lot of folks that just can’t get coverage and reducing the cost overall,” he said.

The other half of the people polled were told the government plan would be less expensive, but they were also told that “the government would run the insurance plan and decide which medical care would be paid for and how much would be paid, like insurance companies do.”

That version of the question found 44 percent in support and 38 percent opposed, while 15 percent neither favored nor opposed the idea.

“They would decide which medical care would be paid for,” said Jeff Anderson, 43, of Burlingame, Calif. “If you have a tumor growing inside you that needs to be removed or you’re going to die, and they decide, well, we don’t cover cancer or we don’t cover other types of diseases — you know, that’s just wrong.”

So while both questions elicited more supporters than opponents for a public insurance plan — bearing out the results of past polling that has shown the public generally supportive — the plan commanded majority support only when cast in positive terms that emphasized benefits to consumers over government control.

The poll also sought to elicit views of the government insurance plan design under consideration by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., as he finalizes a health care bill to bring to the Senate floor.

Legislation passed by the House this month included a public plan available nationally for small businesses and, mostly, self-employed people. Under Reid’s version, individual states would be able to opt out of the public plan.

Poll participants were asked whether government insurance should be available to all, or whether state governments should be able to decide not to offer it. Seventy percent favored making it available nationally while 25 percent said state governments should be able to decide.

Overall, the poll found the public split on Congress’ drive to enact sweeping legislation extending coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans. Opinion was also evenly divided on Obama’s handling of the matter, and participants expressed concerns and confusion about costs and various other aspects of the issue.

Despite the controversy surrounding the public plan, it would affect a small number of people. A Congressional Budget Office analysis of the House bill estimated that about 6 million people would sign up for the public option in 2019, once it was fully phased in. That represents about 2 percent of Americans under age 65. (Older people are covered through Medicare.)

The overwhelming majority of the population would remain in private health insurance plans sponsored by employers. Others, mainly low-income people, would be covered through an expanded Medicaid program.

The budget office also said that “a less healthy pool of enrollees” would probably be attracted to the public option, drawn by the prospect of looser rules on access to specialists and medical services. As a result, premiums in the public plan would actually be higher than the average for private plans, according to the budget office.

In the AP-GfK poll, the differently worded questions on the public plan each had a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points. The poll interviewed 1,502 people from Oct. 29-Nov. 8 with an overall sampling error margin of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.

The interviews were conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media. Stanford University’s participation in the project was made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

___

AP Polling Director Trevor Tompson and Associated Press writers Ann Sanner and Natasha Metzler contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc

John was in the fertilized egg business.
He had several hundred young layers (hens), called ‘pullets,’
and ten roosters to fertilize the eggs.
 
He kept records, and any rooster not performing
went into the soup pot and was replaced.
      
This took a lot of time,  so he bought some tiny bells
and attached them to his roosters.
      
Each bell had a different tone,  so he could tell from a distance,
which rooster was performing.
      
Now, he could sit on the porch And fill out an efficiency report
by just listening to the bells.
     
John’s favorite rooster, old Butch,  was a very fine specimen,
but this morning he noticed old Butch’s bell hadn’t rung at all!
     
When he went to investigate, he saw the other roosters were busy chasing pullets,  
bells-a-ringing, but the pullets, hearing the roosters coming, could run for cover.
      
To John’s amazement, old Butch had his bell in his beak, so it couldn’t ring.
     
He’d sneak up on a pullet, do his job and walk on to the next one.
John was so proud of old Butch,  he entered him in the Renfrew County Fair
and he became an overnight sensation among the judges.
      
The result was the judges not only awarded old Butch the No Bell Piece Prize
but they also awarded him the Pulletsurprise as well.
        Clearly old Butch was a politician in the making.
       Who else but a politician could figure out
how to win two of the most highly coveted awards
on our planet by being the best at sneaking up on the populace
and screwing them when they weren’t paying attention.
       
Vote carefully this year, the bells are not always audible.

 
  
“Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people
by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation.”
~~ President James Madison ~~
‘IN GOD WE TRUST!!!’

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – A second Republican senator signaled Wednesday she’s open to voting for sweeping health care legislation this year, putting President Barack Obama closer to a historic achievement that has eluded generations of Democratic leaders.

But Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, told The Associated Press that the bill approved Tuesday by the Finance Committee needs substantial improvements to make coverage more affordable, contain costs, and protect Medicare. Nevertheless, she joined her Maine GOP colleague Sen. Olympia Snowe in endorsing the goal of far-reaching changes.

“My hope is we that can fix the flaws in the bill and come together with a truly bipartisan bill that could garner widespread support,” Collins said in an interview. “I think this bill is far superior to the ones passed by the Senate (health) committee and the three House committees, but it needs substantial additional work.”

The ten-year, $829 billion Finance bill was approved by the committee Tuesday on a 14-9 vote, after Snowe broke ranks with her Republican colleagues to support Chairman Max Baucus’ middle-of-the-road plan.

Wednesday, Snowe tackled the most divisive issue still on the table: creation of a government insurance plan that would compete with private ones.

While emphasizing that she still opposes the so-called public option, Snowe said in a nationally broadcast interview that she could foresee a government-run plan that would “kick in” if private insurers failed to live up to expectations that they keep premiums in check.

“I think the government would have a disproportionate advantage” in the event of a government-run option, Snowe acknowledged. At the same time, she added, “I want to make sure the insurance industry performs, and that’s why we eliminate many egregious practices.”

If the industry didn’t follow through on congressionally-mandated changes aimed at making health care more affordable, she said, “then you could have the public option kick in immediately.”

Snowe previously had proposed using the public option as an incentive, or a threat, to private insurers. This “trigger” option, or some version of it, has survived the bitter debate and scrutiny to remain a viable option for compromise.

Such a statement from a Republican can be very influential in an environment in which GOP lawmakers almost universally have opposed any kind of government-run health care option to compete with private insurers. It represents a break in party solidarity, even if finite. Health care proposals advanced in the House include such a government option.

Snowe broached her standby notion again as talks among lawmakers on health care were going back behind closed doors; Senate leaders are trying to merge two very different bills into a new version that can get the 60 votes needed to guarantee passage.

Collins, however, said she could not support Snowe’s idea because she thinks it would make it too easy for a Democratic administration to impose a government plan nationwide. “It would simply delay the public plan for a couple of years,” she told AP.

The White House dispatched chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag and other top advisers to Capitol Hill for afternoon meetings on combining the bills.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said he wants move quickly to merge the Finance bill with a version passed earlier by the Senate health committee. His goal is to get health care overhaul legislation onto the floor the week after next.

Both bills were written by Democrats, but that’s not going to make it easier for Reid. They share a common goal, which is to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance, but they differ on how to accomplish it.

The Finance Committee bill that was approved Tuesday has no government-sponsored insurance plan and no requirement on employers that they must offer coverage. It relies instead on a requirement that all Americans obtain insurance.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill, passed earlier by a panel in which liberals predominate, calls for both a government plan to compete with private insurers and a mandate that employers help cover their workers. Those are only two of dozens of differences.

In general, bills moving toward floor votes in both houses would require most Americans to purchase insurance, provide federal subsidies to help those of lower incomes afford coverage and give small businesses help in defraying the cost of coverage for their workers.

The measures would, among other things, bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and for the first time limit their ability to charge higher premiums on the basis of age or family size. Expanded coverage would be paid for by cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare payments to health care providers. Each house also envisions higher taxes — an income tax surcharge on million-dollar wage-earners in the case of the House, and a new excise levy on insurance companies selling high-cost policies in the Senate Finance Committee bill.

___

Associated Press writers David Espo and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc

Do you think there is a real possibility for our government to come together and agree on a plan that would, among other things. “bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions…” Have you and your spouse or family sat down and talked about it? Have you thought about it? Do you have any ideas that are good and don’t know where to take them?

And if they do, how are we going to pay for it?

Thoughts? Suggestions?? Ideas? Comments?

The Primary Focus of Comprehensive Health Care… + The Primary Focus of National Comprehensive Health Care should be providing Health Care for the Masses, and not protecting a Private Health Insurance Industry– that is part of the problem– at all cost. + There is an inverse direct proportionality with Health Care Cost Containment and the heavy involvement of the Private Health Insurance Industry( which tends to engender a ‘middleman front-loaded administrative cost factor’). Under this dis-functional scenario, funds that should go directly to Health Care, end up going toward such things as Private Health Insurance Industry Media Promotions and Lobbying, among other things. + The Health Care Delivery System in the U.S.A. would begin to improve dramatically(at affordable cost levels) when once there is more of a collective mindset that begins to view Public Health Care as a Political Ideology Neutral phenomena that is akin to National/Civil Defense. + Under the present dispensation of things Health-wise, the Masses are being proverbially cooked in their own juices with both their own Private and Public Funds.

Cheers and be well! E.N. … Oct. 14, 2009

Obama calls for ‘honest debate’ on health care
By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is challenging his critics on a national health care overhaul, accusing them of making “phony claims” about the legislation.

“This is an issue of vital concern to every American, and I’m glad that so many are engaged,” Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address.

“But it also should be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are.”

Obama said illegal immigrants would not be part of the health care overhaul, taxpayers would not be mandated to fund abortions and he does not intend a government takeover of health care — all claims that critics have made at
contentious town hall-style meetings with members of Congress.

He also took a swipe at “death panels,” an idea former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin introduced on her Facebook page.

“As every credible person who has looked into it has said, there are no so-called death panels — an offensive notion to me and to the American people,” Obama said. “These are phony claims meant to divide us.”

Obama’s liberal base was angered this past week after he seemed to suggest he would be fine with a plan that lacked a government-run health insurance option.

“This is one idea among many to provide more competition and choice, especially in the many places around the country where just one insurer thoroughly dominates the marketplace,” Obama said. “Let me repeat: It would be just an option; those who prefer their private insurer would be under no obligation to shift to a public plan.”

In their weekly address, Republicans accused Obama of
misrepresenting his proposal.

“As opposition to the Democrats’ government-run health plan is mounting, the president has said he’d like to stamp out some of the disinformation floating around out there,” said Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga. “The problem is the president, himself, plays fast and loose with the facts.”

Price said that the whole plan should be scrapped and lawmakers should start over with a plan that makes sure patients — not Washington or insurance providers — are the top priority.

“We all know that when the government is setting the rules and is backed by tax dollars, it will destroy, not compete with, the private sector,” said Price, a physician. “The reality is, whether or not you get to keep your plan, or your doctor, is very much in question under the president’s proposal.”

Was President Reagan a “Communist”?

Passed Under The Reagan Administration( As posted by http://www.myspace.com/jayryan7) :

In 1986, Congress enacted the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) to ensure public access to emergency services regardless of ability to pay. Section 1867 of the Social Security Act
imposes specific obligations on Medicare-participating hospitals that offer emergency services to provide a medical screening examination (MSE) when a request is made for examination or treatment for an emergency medical condition (EMC), including active labor, regardless of an individual’s ability to pay. Hospitals are then required to provide stabilizing treatment for patients with EMCs. If a hospital is unable to stabilize a patient within its capability, or if the patient requests, an appropriate transfer should be implemented.

Was President Reagan a “Socialist”?

E.N.