Re: Health Insurance

Karen –

Don’t confuse the McCain True Believers with reality. They’re counting on faith-based health care policy.
And faith-based foreign policy.
And faith-based tax policy.
And… well, you get the idea.

Whatever did happen to that Romney? You know, the one who was an effective non-partisan governor and got lots of good things accomplished?

Oh right, he tried to make it through the Republican primary.

KT — Good story. a interesting footnote. I recently worked for a health insurer in MA (Can’t use the whole word). The costs are higher than imagined, because more people than estimated were uninsured.
.
You can’t market to young people the way you do to young/middle aged families.
.
People used to going to the emergency room for regular care also need to unlearn that behavior and choose a primary care physician. Steep learning curve.
.
The Connector and state programs charge monthly premiums to low income people, rather than allowing them to pay on a weekly or biweekly basis. Folks who live paycheck to paycheck have trouble putting aside money for a health insurance premium, because there is no payroll deduction by their employers.
.
Lots of barriers, and challenges, but nothing insurmountable. you have file a special 1099 form at income tax time to demonstrate you have health insurance.

KT here–

I just liberated 16 more comments from moderation. I’m not even reading them any more before I approve them. This is totally annoying.

It’s a royal pain in the posterior, KT. under my old name i kept be moved to “m” land.

Kt here–

Wow, Andy. Is that because you are from M—achusetts, do you think?

Interesting, isn’t it, how Kennedy – the politician most vilified by Republicans as a radical leftist – will work with anybody in any way if it advances the underlying cause (Romney here with health care, Bush with education, etc.). More radicals, please.

Karen –
I completely agree. It may not be long before commenters do a collective Swampland cover version of I Shot the (High) Sheriffs. White tux & top hat optional.

OK, that was a joke. A joke.

@FlownOver:
You left out faith-based science.

Great link, Karen, thanks.
-
“It’s funny how data opens up new insight.”
-
Sigh. In a perfect world, where the GOP was sane, someone with Romney’s business and government background would push for a return to reality for that party.
-
Instead, as khakipants points out, he tried to be “Mr. Crazy Social Conservative” for the primaries, and convinced nobody but gullible donors and the National Review. A Mitt Romney, plus integrity, would be a great thing for the GOP and the country.

KT,
.
Great post. I wonder if anybody is going to call Mitt Romney a socialist. Ill not hold my breath

.

You know what? We could actually get everybody insured!”

.
The Romney plan of forcing everyone to buy insurance has big, glaring faults, one of which is funding…turns out that the state and federal governments subsidize the cost of the plan and that benefits and prices are negotiated with the insurers…and that premiums vary depending on who is being insured.
.
As it is now, if you are young and healthy, what you are forced to pay is not that expensive. Elderly or have pre-existing conditions? Then you are looking at higher rates.
.
Note: I’d provide links, but those cause the comments to get caught in the moderation filter, as do names of some states and fruits.

Finally, change we can believe in from some one in our media. Just curious why this comes now?:
.
It is as outrageous now as it’s been throughout the Bush years. It is a contemptible tactic that takes from the voters a very precious right, the right to know for whom we are voting and for what they stand.
.
It must be noted that we media share a lot of the blame. We were pathetically pliant, willing to be timid so as not to offend the White House and be denied the crumbs of access that were granted to those of us who didn’t make waves. When are we going to learn?
.
How about now? The next time a candidate tries to obscure something important, we must raise such a disorderly ruckus that the political manipulators back down. If the campaign people don’t like it, too damned bad.
.
We are not here to suck up to those in power. We’re reminded again that when we do, there are always many in power who are sleazy enough to do whatever it takes to keep their power., even as they secretly and deviously pursue disastrous policies.
.
It’s another form of suppression. Just a little less heavy-handed than the kind we find in obvious dictatorships. Because it’s not as blatant it’s more insidious. Whether it’s armed forced or the outright lying we’ve gotten here, they both steal freedom from all of us.
.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-franken/hiding-the-embarrassment_b_103904.html

So each Swampland blogger gets to moderate his or her own threads? Makes sense, although I have to say I assumed that it was the job of a sole nameless High Sheriff to moderate the lot.
.
It won’t affect KT, who’s just surrounded by love and adulation from the great unwashed anyway, but it would definitely take some of the spice out of the more inane threads by the lesser bloggers.
.
The thicks plotten.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

KT here–

Pourme: This interview with Romney was one of my favorite moments of the campaign this year. He becomes a completely different person when you talk to him about solving a problem: animated, engaging. The interview ran way longer than it was supposed to, and we ended up at the Des Moines airport, where his flight was ready to take off. His aides kept trying to get him to end the interview, and finally, he suggested I join him on his chartered plane. “We’ll find you a seat,” he said, “I could just talk about this all day!” (Alas, that was impractical on my end, and someone from his staff would have been left behind.) Anyway, I really wish that guy had run, instead of the one who did.

I’m reminded of the bulworth rap these days….

“C’mon, say that dirty word! Socialism”

Or, to paraphrase a timeless interweb banner ad,

“Socialism? In my Romney? Its more likely than you think.”

.
KT: This is totally annoying.
.
Not to mention that it really isn’t your job.
.
I’m sure that there is some journalism student that would jump at the chance of interning at Time, even if it was only to parse the arse from ‘Marsechusettes’.

KT–
.
Didn’t expect that to be part of the 21st century job description, I imagine. This is an obvious problem with too heavy a moderatobot. Comments that need to be booted are rare.
.
I’ve always believed that what would happen under a McCain style plan is insurance companies would offer high deductible plans that would cost no more than the credit. Young people who otherwise wouldn’t sign up, would do so, and this would be a moneymaker for the insurance companies. This is the most positive argument for his scheme. These people don’t get annual checkups, don’t get flu shots, don’t take mediciation, so it is no hardship to pay for that kind of thing out of pocket.
.
But there will be more employees with employers who stop offering the benefit than there will be new signups among people who don’t really need health care coverage except in catastrophic circumstances.
.
The principles of what works is clear. Universal coverage. Minimize administrative costs. Create incentives for health care providers to encourage lifestyle changes. And, as Obama said in his interview with JK, stop subsidizing unhealthy diets. How we get there, over the interests of the health insurance industry, big pharma (who are perfectly happy with lots of people with chronic health problems brought on by unhealthy lifestyles) and agribusiness is the problem.

Please let my comment go.

If McCain had picked Romney, I think we would have a very different horserace today. That is if McCain had been willing to let Romney speak out and make sense instead of insisting on his own incoherence.
.
Too bad this interesting info about the MA experience has been kept out of the wider discussion as opposed to the importance of OMG Obama’s a Socialist.
.
KT, wonder if you spelled out Andy’s state in the comments if you would get kicked into moderation. I decided not to use a**ume above just in case.

My post 16, which is in limbo, noted that this wasn’t really in KT’s job description when she signed up.

Way down Moses. Let my comment go.

Messing with WordPress. John McCain is a great man. It’s possible, people. Work for it!

I’m busting my comment out of this joint.

g_c,

I don’t think any of this can be accomplished at the state level. Romney’s attempt seems to have been sincere in the state that the sheriffs won’t allow us to speak the name of (take THAT Uncle Barney), but it still has to exist in an environment of profitmaking insurance companies who make more money by providing less coverage.

KT – just in case you didn’t know…the MA health care reform is bankrupting the state. There is an extreme provider and nursing shortage (many of them have gone elsewhere) causing a larger gap in salaries which are bankrupting hospitals. It is also damaging the methods people use to provide care. All hospitals and community health centers are part of the “health safety net” preventing them from seeing patients if they don’t have health insurance. The state health care plan is extremely limited in comprehensiveness, which prevents providers from being able to treat or screen their patients with tools that aren’t covered by the insurance (another reason providers are leaving). Also – unless you’re pregnant or have a chronic health care condition, there is an 8-14 month wait to get a provider, and a 4-10 month wait to get an appointment. Fun, huh?

Elvis:

Except that Romney has given us conclusive proof that any such “integrity” on his part would be a tactic rather than a personal quality – just like maverickyness. As they say, in politics, sincerity is the most important thing – if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.

I don’t think I’ll be able to trust any Republican candidate for some time. In an extension of the (Groucho) Marxist dictum about club membership, I wouldn’t vote for anyone able to win that nomination.

KT here–

Slowhand: Actually, I’m liberating everyone’s comments and the power is going to my head.

newliberty: Are these problems a function of the approach that Romney took, or the inadequacy of the funding mechanism?

.
jayackroyd: My post 16, which is in limbo, noted that this wasn’t really in KT’s job description when she signed up.
.
Happened to me yesterday when I posted instructions on how to change your nickname…I got moderated, and Dirks got all the credit. *Sniff*. Well, great minds, and all that…
.
I don’t think any of this can be accomplished at the state level.
.
Neither do I. States don’t have the resources or the leverage. Eventually, universal single-payer will have to win out. It’s the only workable solution, as abhorrent as the idea is to some on the right-whinge.

Romney really didn’t have a whole lot of say into the health care mandate. His strategy was to implement SOMETHING or else the legislature would go ahead after he left and implement something disasterous. Romney’s input was to fund enrollment outreach (which has recently been cut) in order to help those that didn’t have the insurance to find a plan they could afford. They then earmarked a large chunk of money into helping people pay for the insurance. Because they needed the funding to help people pay for insurance, they could no longer fund health care for those who didn’t have it. So Romney initiated the “tax penalty” to create an incentive.

It almost seems like the best way would be to create a true unified risk pool and aggregate bargaining power in a single entity instead of inefficient middlemen.

KT,
.
I do a little trolling on the WingNut websites and a meme that has been getting some traction of late is that Obama is going to bring (back) the “fairness doctrine” which supposedly will eliminate a lot of right wing talk radio like Rush and maybe even FoxNews. Its coming up a lot more since the crazy interview with the Orlando news lady who is married to the republican strategist and then the Obama campaign freezing them out for the rest of the race. It came up again with a vengence yesterday when Obama spokesman Bill Burton went on FoxNews and called them out about them trying to get McCain elected and had about a 7 minute dustup with Megyn Kelly. Have you heard anything at all about Obama bringing back the fairness doctrine and if so what would it mean?

Apologies to KT for teasing out the Word Press thing on one of her threads, but I’d just like to throw out a few thoughts.
.
First off, state the obvious: we can’t work against the system, we have to work with it. The word filter needs to be set to catch as few words as possible, but that’s not the commenters’ call, that’s up to the High Sheriffs. It would however go a long way to making the bloggers’ lives easier.
.
Secondly, I think we’ve all taken some glee in ripping Swampbloggers a fresh one for atrocious hackery, puffery and inanity. Those days are gone, but there is still something we can do. If it’s a good blog post, dive into the thread. If it’s nonsense, let it slide past, uncommented upon and unloved. If a Swampblogger is consistently editing out criticism, make others aware of it. People can then choose whose blogs they wish to inhabit.
.
Vote with your keyboard. Tumulty ’08.

Of course, the most important point is that with 7 days to go, McCain’s campaign is playing defense on one of the most critical issues of the day.
.
And playing defense like the LA Clippers.

KT – OMG! Please tell me you touched his hair. My widowed mother gave me acid reflux during the primaries when she described Romney as “delicious.” I have not slept since, and I’ve hit the maximum on my outpatient mental and nervous coverage.

sg-

I don’t see how the fairness doctrine could be reimplemented, with so much content on cable. Its existence was due to the government’s control of the spectrum. It’s not reasonable that they could impose it on radio, since that spectrum is auctioned off. And they certainly can’t impose it on cable or satellite. So it would just be broadcast TV.
.
This is just more wingnut paranoia, stoking each other up, like the black helicopters (which they are okay with for a few more months.)

Obama is even cool in Chinese:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/obama_tshirt.php

FlownOver– agreed, as to Romney and the party.
-
The thing is, after the past 8 years, I’m quite a bit more conservative than I used to be– as in, suspicious of centralized power and of government efforts to ie remake the Middle East in our image, and interested in balancing the budget (long-term, not in the middle of a real bad recession). But common-sense, well-implemented programs like S-CHIP and Social Security are, experience has taught us, quite good things. Why attack them?
-
There simply is no conservative party at all, and certainly no sane alternative to the Dems right now. That’s really no fun at all.
-
Here is a recent report on the goings-on in MA: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/jan-june08/masshealth_04-28.html
-
No, no, jayackroyd, he’s playing defense like the Denver Nuggets.

sgwhiteinfla –

Nancy Pelosi is a big advocate of the Fairness Doctrine, and so are John Kerry and Harry Reid. What the Fairness Doctrine would do, if implemented, would ensure that radio and television stations re-register or re-qualify for licensing every two years by the Federal Government or the FCC. What this would create is opportunity and incentive for a radio station to be considered “unqualified” or not compliant with federal regulations of “fairness.”

While Obama has not come out and said that DIRECTLY that he supports the Fairness Doctrine, I doubt he would veto it. He has said that he’s inclined to support it because he would like to have more minority-owned radio stations. But…we’ll see, right?

A non sleazy craven Mitt Romney would be a good way for the GOP to go. They need technocrats.

The original fairness doctrine only applied to broadcast stations licensed by the FCC. If it were implemented on the same basis, the onus would be on the stations that carry Rush Limbaugh to provide alternative views. Cable programming was never affected as it wasn’t carried over the air. So Fox News would not be impacted.
.
I can see restricting ownership to the pre-1984 days. Too few corporations control the majority of the stations. I wouldn’t necessary go back to 7 per band (AM/FM/TV) of 1934, but corporations owning 1500 stations would be at the extreme end.
.
The 2 year ownership rule would be onerous. Corporations or individuals challenging licenses would have to have duplicate facilities available if the license was revoked. The last time that happened was in 1972 when Boston Broadcasting received the license held by WHDH TV and then operated as WCVB TV. In 1972 dollars it was a 15 million dolar investment.

the nuggets, ouch…

KT, thanks for this post and the story about the Romney interview. He would have been a much tougher opponent…

And… I have to admit that this phenomenon of young healthy people going without insurance is one of the biggest reasons why I supported HRC, and her genuinely universal health care plan. It’s also one more reason why I am now so scared of a McCain Presidency.

As a health consumer advocate in California, I agree with much of the critique of the McCain health plan, and the admission that the coverage provided by a tax credit in the individual market is going to be significantly worse than the group coverage subsidized and negotiated by an employer.

However, I think your post goes one step too far, in giving credence to Romney’s belief in so-called “young invincibles.”

Twentysomethings are a disproportionate piece of the uninsured, but it’s not because they don’t “want” coverage. It’s that they are more likely to be low-income, more likely not to be offered employer-based coverage, and less likely to qualify for public programs (which usually require being a parent).

Much of the differential in insurance coverage is accounted for if you hold for income and job-type. Think of the young person just starting their career, or working for McDonald’s or Wal-Mart.

In this health care policy debate, we should not blame the victim.

I have a series of blog posts about this on our blog, at:
http://www.health-access.org/labels/YoungAndUninsured.htm

“Time Inc., the world’s largest magazine company, is set to announce a revamping that will result in job cuts of 6 percent — more than 600 positions — and a reorganization that could radically alter the culture at the venerable publishing house.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/business/media/29mag.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

I’m not at all surprised, everybody already knows that Mittens is a socialist commie pinko!

As someone familiar with the insurance industry, these revelations are nothing new. The very concept of health insurance is exactly that, it is INSURANCE you pay for in the event you potentially get sick or hurt and require medical care. The younger population (and especially male) is a risk taking population. Try telling a 22 year old male, who just got out of college, has a ton of student loan debts, is making money but not rolling in it, and has never been to the hospital, that it is a good idea to spend $150/month for something they more than likely won’t need to use in the foreseable future. Not going to happen. And since these tend to be the healthiest people in a risk pool for determining premiums, premiums stay MUCH higher than they would be otherwise for the older population of insured.

[...] | Trackbacks (0) | Email This At California Progress Report, Anthony Wright takes issue with a point I made the other day: She suggested that young people would “choose” to go uninsured, as Gov. [...]

[...] California Progress Report, Anthony Wright takes issue with a point I made the other day: She suggested that young people would “choose” to go uninsured, [...]

Keeping health insurance affordable while also allowing the medically unhealthy to recieve benefits can really only be accomplished by a mandate or a penalty to those who don’t sign up for insurance. I admire MA’s stance on healthcare.