per mcjoan, fear and confusion aint all they’re spreading:

The Blue Dog Political Action Committee has collected $1.1 million for the 2010 election cycle, more than any other leadership political action committee on Capitol Hill, according to CQ MoneyLine.

The total includes about $300,000 from health care interests, including $158,000 from doctors and other provider groups; $87,000 from makers of drugs and medical devices; and $50,000 from health insurance interests

.

My fax got through on the first ring:

VIA FAX 202-224-7327
Senate Majority Leader Reid
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
July 23, 2009
Dear Senator Reid:

I am very disappointed to hear that you are planning to break for August before holding a vote on a Health Care Reform Bill in the Senate.

Just last night the President told the nation he wants to stick to the deadline.

Isn’t it likely the well-funded and well-organized Republican opposition and private special-interest groups will use the recess to reduce support for real reform in key districts?

Please stay on the job. It’s only the 23rd.

Sincerely,

I just called Pingree’s office and expressed the view that I was entirely happy to have Congress go home for the break, since that would give grassroots single payer advocates more time to work in the district.

And since “public option” was sold by “progressives” as being a Medicare-like program with 130 million enrollees (Jacob Hacker) and according to the CBO-scoring is going to have only 9 million, that indicated some problems with the bill.

PEOPLE ARE DYING,you and i know it is negligent HOMICIDE,this cannot be tolerated…ps the LIBERAL MEDIA are accessories to MURDER….disgusting automatons

Dylan Ratigan on MSNBC’s Morning Meeting nails it: what we have now for health care is like the Russian oligarchs charging whatever they want. [my paraphrase]

Ratigan has the most intelligent program on morning television these days.

Why not just scrap this travesty and use the recess to start over? We don’t need a health insurance bailout plan, we need single payer health care. It’s ridiculous to count on employer-based health insurance.; My husband has been out of work since Feb. 2008 and we have had no health insurance since then. With more and more people out of work, how can it make sense to maintain this system? I feel as a family we are better off with no health insurance, which costs us zero dollars (the only amount we can afford) than be required to buy expensive crap insurance that won’t provide any safety.

Actually we should scrap the travesty and go for tort reform. After all, on public options you won’t be able to sue the government in any event, so why not give that efficiency now to the private sector. That, and redesign the FDA approval process to speed up the drug approval process and lower costs, and Health Savings Account that are tax deductible so you can keep your own money and buy your own medical insurance would do more to cure whatever problems our health system has than any government takeover. And it would keep the greatness of the American health system alive.

It’s crossed my mind too, that pushing a vote until after the August break would give more time for single-payer advocates to push their plan.

I’m afraid a more realistic scenario is that it will allow Big Money more time to poison the well of public support for any kind of reform and we’ll end up with either nothing, or worse yet, some kind of Republican plan.

And let’s face it, if a public option is done right it will eventually lead to single-payer because Insurance Profiteers simply won’t be able to compete. That’s why they’re fighting so hard against it.

My first choice is of course national, single-payer. But given the options that are actually likely to occur my choices are as follows:

1) Pass a good reform bill NOW (before the break) with a strong public option.

2) If there’s no public option then let it die on the vine and go back to the drawing board.

OT. Official: Joint chiefs chairman ‘infuriated‘ about detainee abuse

Infuriated because they were caught.

In the words of Rahm Emanuel… “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste”. Don’t think for one moment that the democrats are really concerned about the economy being turned around. The more people who are laid off the more the dems prey on their fears. This is exactly what the administration wants and this is the “serious crisis” that Rahm Emanuel was referring to.

The only reason the dems want this pushed through so quickly is because as more time that goes on the more the truth about the bill emerges. (the devil is in the details).

Another thing… if this bill is sucha good idea why doesn’t our congressmen join the plan too?? The reason is they are elitists. We are steerage in their eyes (repubs, dems and inds) The plan that our leaders have is thru Capitol Hill but under a private insurance policy… you know… kind of like other employers do…

You can’t be serious!?!?

Oh, you must be a conservative troll. Tort reform is a joke – it’s such a MINOR contributor to health care costs it doesn’t even belong in this debate.

And speeding up FDA approval when they are already letting dangerous drugs get through and kill Americans because they speed them through too much already. And more “new” drugs will only drive UP health care costs.

How about reforming drug patents to let them go generic sooner? That would actually bring down costs.

Health Savings Accounts are just fine for those of us who have enough disposable income to use them — as long as we never get “really” sick. They will do absolutely NOTHING for the people who are currently uninsured and even a good chunk of the currently underinsured, who live hand-to-mouth as it is.

I realize that weak sh1t is the best the anti-reform people have got, but it’s just too easy to refute.

Nice try, lambchops.
http://www.geocities.com/Eurek…..-sheri.jpg

(Is catlady your dance partner?)

You are always so smart here. Thank you for your contributions.

I have many doctors as clients. They all say the same thing. Fear of being sued is a big factor in driving health care costs through the roof.

I’m sure it’s obvious to those touting bipartisanship that compromise with someone who’s happy with a broken system will not get it fixed.

While I’m in favor of single-payer, a public option at least moves in that direction a little. It’s also the only way I can see to keep real competitive pressure on the private insurers. Without this new player in the game I wouldn’t trust anything to change.

You are always so smart here. Thank you for your contributions.

1. Can you teach me some of that self-restraint?

2. Sarcasm is often wasted.

@mboutot

Payments to plaintiffs, and malpractice insurance premiums, are not the problem. Medical malpractice premiums are less than one-half of one percent of overall health care costs, and medical malpractice claims are a mere one-fifth of one percent of health care costs, says Americans for Insurance Reform. (PDF)

Speed and number of FDA approvals up.

HSA’s don’t work, says GAO (PDF)

What else you got?

XXX – sorry thanks for playing.

I used to work for the state medical association and I know lawsuits are a big concern for doctors. BUT, it is only a tiny factor on the cost of health care.

Tort reform is not the only way to protect doctors from unwarranted lawsuits, and since it doesn’t have much impact on costs to the consumer, it should be a separate debate.

It might cost you zero dollars, but those of us who still have healthcare insurance pay for it in higher premiums, denial of services and increased costs of drugs. It’s a huge part of the problem. Yes we need signle payer, I would settle for a robust public option. But allowing them to go on “vacation” so the healthcare lobby and big pharma can kill it alltogther is simply unacceptable.

@mboutot

Payments to plaintiffs, and malpractice insurance premiums, are not the problem. Medical malpractice premiums are less than one-half of one percent of overall health care costs, and medical malpractice claims are a mere one-fifth of one percent of health care costs, says Americans for Insurance Reform. (PDF)

Speed and number of FDA approvals up, says pharmaceutical manufacturing industry.

HSA’s don’t work, says GAO (PDF)

What else you got?

Sorry for double…

Thanks for the info.
Could docs still be sued with the public option?

On second thought I realize the obvious answer.
Never mind.

Marisa McNee has a fresh, new post up for our perusal: “FDL Action: Whip It! Day 30”

So Congress will pass a bill that Obama will veto. Therefore, business as usual for health care. Or he signs it and the answer will be: business as usual for health care.

That’s what my doctor said. I had to visit my primary care physician and he had a big sign with NO OBAMACARE on his wall. He usually doesn’t participate in politics at all…he refused to say where his heart was last year. But he and the primary nurse practicioner said they order so many tests because if they fail to order one and a lawyer gets it they can be sued. That is an absurd and wasteful way to practice medicine.

As said in 26, it’s not just the cost of insurance. It’s all the unnecessary tests and referrals that have to be done. It’s the fact that my doctor had to refer me to an orthopedist for an arthritic diabetic “frozen shoulder” instead of calling it herself (she knew what the problem was) because the procedure said that her practice couldn’t do a cortisone shot because that would raise their premiums. It’s FEAR of lawsuits that drives the prices up.

Yes, thats just what I heard and yes it truly is wasteful.

For 5 Weeks people need to whip and Whip and WHIP! Let them hear from their constituents during their recess. What do we want? HEALTH CARE! When do we want it? NOW!!!

I have no association with this character. I am ardently for single payer. That should have been obvious. However, we have seen over and over that single payer advocates have no place ‘at the table.’ I would like to see the American populace take the August recess opportunity to tell our elected representatives that they were put in office to serve US, not the lobbyists who bribe them.

So… you guys are in favor of tort reform because making the threat of all those lawsuits go away would fix the problem of doctors ordering unnecessary tests, thereby reducing excessive spending systemically, but simultaneously against the public option because it would also (according to your information) not be possible to sue under that plan? As well as having lower costs and therefore lower premiums and lower deductibles because of the absence of a profit imperative? Have I got that right?