My First Markup

well, first off, you can explain why you and your colleagues are providing this kind of coverage for a bill written by a WellPoint PR hack.
_
Baucus’s ‘gang of six’ FAILED. Nevertheless, you are treating this bill as if it was the Magna Carta.
_
Why is that?

Simply put Plukasiak, its the only Bill anyone is talking about. I mean, what happened to all of the other Bills that were pending. Its like Baucus has come down from the Mount with this bill and this will save healthcare. Oh and good point about WP PR hack, I actually worked for Empire BCBS around the time they were point by Wellpoint. Its amazing how what was the closest we had to a public health option in the Blues has turned into the most expensive plans on the market. Check it out. Wellpoint and the Blues they own – the largest plans in the largest markets across the country – have consistently raised prices as they’ve become the largest insurer in the nation, particularly through their National Account efforts. They sell ridiculously over-priced plans to corporations that cover bupkiss. Sorry, my rant for the day.

Kate, my thoughts, as I mentioned before. Is this the only plan that is likely to be put to the vote? Are there still other bills being developed or will we simply watch this pathetic bill become amended to death to be as worthless as the paper its written on?

You could serve the public best by reporting on the facts as you hear them from these hearings. First and foremost.
.
I would like to know exactly where they are getting the figures for the cost of any “public option” or the new buzz word, “exchanges” and how much it will impact the deficit? The CBO figures have somehow magically decreased since the meeting with Obama a month or so ago. How do they justify that?
.
I am also very interested in how they discuss and propose Tort Reform into the legislation.
.
Lastly from me, I would like to know how they are going to control cost for healthcare? Not the cost of insurance, but the actual cost of drugs (the 2nd most costly expense to consumers), hospital charges (the most expensive charge to consumers), charges for MRI’s and other interventions. How they plan to decrease the wages paid to Nurses, and fees for Doctors.

Kate-While you are watching the process see if you can find out why the United States spends so much more on health care than other nations? Why do other nations get away with spending one-half to one-third what we spend providing health care to their citizens?
.
If you could report on those questions it would be great.

I’m just curious as to why Repubs think people are being impatient. It’s not like they have a substantive alternative in the can.

How they plan to decrease the wages paid to Nurses, and fees for Doctors.
_
LOL! I mean, while Karen was constantly pushing the Mayo Clinic as a model for health care reform, she NEVER bothered to mention that Mayo Clinic doctors make far more than the average doctor (Mayo pays its doctors about 150% of the median pay for doctors in a given field — in other words, if we switch to the “mayo” system, we’ll first have to substantially raise what the average doctor makes) while assiduously avoiding the most difficult patients (Only 5% of Mayo’s patrients are on Medicaid, compared to 29% of the patients for competing hospitals in Minnesota — and poverty strongly correlates with how well a particular therapeutic approach will work.)
_

what should I be watching for today?

For starters, a brief rundown of the new version of the bill would be nice…Then identify the lobbyists present.
.
I’d like to hear more about the other bills – still wondering why the Finance Committee’s is the only one that seems to matter – but I realize that’s not why you are in that room today.

Well, Kate, can you confirm rumours that Grassley’s nose is now three feet long and growing? I hear he’s taken to wearing very large hats and only going out at night.

Welcome, Kate Pickert!
.
I’m long-time commenter Stuart Zechman, and I’d like to start off by telling you how much I look forward to the kind of reporting that this issue’s importance deserves.

what should I be watching for today?

So glad you asked!
.
Lest we fall into the kind of ritualistic banality and megalomania that characterizes that dumpster Politico, we should probably step away from “today” and speak about “with respect to political reporting”, OK, Kate Pickert?
.
What should you be watching for?
.
1) Substance.
.
What that means is that we, your news users, care first and foremost about “what the legislative point in question means in terms of our daily lives, or its effect –for better or for worse– on our country“.
.
We understand that what does get passed or discussed or negotiated is what must be reported in order to have any evaluation of anything at all, but if the “likelihood” of an event or policy becomes the determiner of its reported value to citizens instead of its value to citizens, something’s wrong with that reporting.
.
It must always be substance first, process second, because the latter exists only to serve the former. News users can’t make decisions about what kind of politicians they should send to Washington (which is why you’re reporting on them at all), if we’re only able to judge the merits of their participation in a process, and not the merits of their proposals.
.
Make sense, Kate Pickert?
.
2) Us
.
Please clarify the reporting you’ve posted in response to questions in commentary.
.
Please take the time and trouble to help your news users understand why you did or did not cover a story a certain way by responding to commentary.
.
Please use response to commentary to give your reportage the transparency that news users expect from trusted sources (you).
.
I’m certain that you’re a reasonable adult, and I don’t have to tell you that you are under no obligation to respond to abuse, trollery, needlessly argumentative people, etc. As a reporter working in new media like this blog, you should be aware of what’s expected from and by your users as they engage you and each other.
.
Engagement with news users is now inextricable from reporting, Kate Pickert. We look forward to making better, more useful news with you.
.
3 You
,
We’re engaged news users, so we’re not your normal, dead tree, one-way, dentists’ office-level-of-attention audience, so we expect you to drop journalistic conventions long associated with writing for that dwindling readership.
.
We’d like it if you would consider our interests first, instead of yours. What I mean is that, if you find yourself writing something in which you could be accused of failure (getting the facts wrong, bias), please consider your readers’ need to derive meaningful conclusions from your story before preemptively shielding yourself from potential accusations. If, at the end of the day, you feel like you can’t be criticized, but news users aren’t better informed for having read your piece, then all is not well –and you will be criticized anyway!
.
Please provide links and quotes to specific sources that support your claims (“Experts agree…”, “Some Democrats are anxious…”, “The feeling on the left seems to be…”, “Legislators had considered…”, “The public is confused…”), or explicitly come out and say that it’s only your sense of things, or insider access that leads you to make these kind of statements. Not doing so will hurt your credibility, since information in most cases is so easily available.
.
Please be up front about “where you’re coming from”, i.e. drop the advertisement of objectivity. We know that you have a political ideology and perspective on America, the world and life. Please don’t write pieces in which the point of information-sharing is to advertise your proclaimed objectivity to the world. We don’t care, and we tend not to trust journalists who hide themselves from us.
.
We don’t read your pieces in order to say to ourselves “Wow, that person bent over backwards in order to not take a position. What a great reporter!“, Kate Pickert. We read He-said/She said, and we say to ourselves “Wow. Do they really teach this in J-school? How useless this convention, how un-helpful it is to readers’ need for clarity. I could probably do this job better than this reporter.“. We read rote stenography, and we’re not helped by it. We read “report the controversy”, and we lose our trust in you by the second. We read “regression to a phony mean”, and we’re offended –and you’ll hear it, now.
.
If you’re worried about the appearance of taking sides in reporting a public dispute, then you should ask yourself whether or not you appear to be on the side of your audience. If you’re concerned about the appearance of neutrality, then be more concerned about looking like an anthropologist from outer space who reports and then heads back to their own planet, where nothing happening on Earth affects their lives.
.
We take the Constitution pretty seriously around here, and so we really and truly believe that the enumeration of your profession in the Bill of Rights obligates you to perform journalism on our behalf and in our interests. You are our eyes and ears where we cannot go, Kate Pickert. You are a supporting beam in the house of democracy. You write for us, and we’re here to help you do that better.
.
Thanks so much for reading and considering this, Kate Pickert, and I very much look forward to working with you and the rest of the commenters here as we cover and engage this very important, very complex issue over the next weeks.

Volume 394 of the Zechman Chronicles is now available in book stores. In it, the young Zechman goes to high school for the first time, and muses, in depth, on what it takes to be a good student. Five hundred pages of rich detail, with seven appendices!

LOL @ the maverick

At least I know where I stand with Zechman. I look forward to Ms Pickert’s response; and answers to questions posed by Rusty.

Let us know who is walking around with the paper bags full of money.

And, Kate. Be very wary of commenters who suggest
.

“Please be up front about “where you’re coming from”, i.e. drop the advertisement of objectivity. We know that you have a political ideology and perspective on America, the world and life. Please don’t write pieces in which the point of information-sharing is to advertise your proclaimed objectivity to the world. We don’t care, and we tend not to trust journalists who hide themselves from us.”

.
Basically translated into English this says:
.

“Do not be afraid to inject your own personal, Progressive ideals, morals or feelings into your journalism. Please make it well known up-front that you will support anything at all that furthers the Progressive agenda”.

.
Also, try your damnest to spin this for the advantage of Progressivism. For Communitarianism. For creating a better America despite most Americans lack of intelligence or our preceived lack of intelligence on their part. We will decide for them what is in their best interest.
.
You may want to review this site for a better description of the soldiers for George Soros, aka stuart zechman. I believe it will aide in giving you a better picture as to where stuart is coming from.
.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977

4) Skimming
-
(Actually, Stuart’s a relentlessly polite and thoughtful contributor here, and everything he writes in that post is dead on. Substanceless, horse-race coverage hurts commenters’ hearts, and your engaging with commenters makes everyone happy.)

SZ:

Do you have a PayPal tip jar where I can leave my contribution to your beer fund?

Ms. Pickert, I don’t know how often you have looked at these pages, but I have to warn you not to feed the trolls. The trolls here, rusty, spob, and texstes are not really into coherent and logical debate (for example see rusty’s fevered writings about federally imposed tort mandates and “paycuts” for nurses and doctors; this is sort of like a chimpanzees throwing his first piece of feces from the trees.
If the clan decides that turd got attention, you can expect a further barrage of “death panels”, mandatory abortions, and other nonsense.

Kate Pickert:
.
Did I forget to mention you should watch for the merciless satirization of your earnestly-given product, and to expect to be pelted with rocks and garbage?
.
Hmmm…I forgot to mention something?
.
We’ve apparently discovered an entirely new category of information.
.
I’ll inform Aristotle.

You could do all a big service by commenting on the opening statements of Sen. Snowe and Sen. Wyden.

Sen. Snowe, especially. It’s not about politics but
policy. She is the essence of what I think a Senator’s
duties encompass.

Kate Pickert:

what should I be watching for today?

Please report on the votes/negotiations/rhetoric on these amendments:

1) Rockefeller Amendment 187–establishes a public option that is tied to Medicare plus 5% rates with the ability to negotiate drug prices, and has an “opt-out” provider network.

and

2) Wyden Amendment 248–ensures affordable access to health insurance exchange plans for all Americans. This basically would open up the public option to all Americans in addition to private plans in the exchange instead of the current firewall of uninsured Americans and small businesses.

and

3) Rockefeller Amendment 185–creates one national exchange, and strikes state exchanges and regional exchanges.

, if you would be so kind.
.
Thanks so much in advance, Kate Pickert!

I shall warn Aristotle to expect a mighty and prodigious tome, Stuart. Can we bring this one in at under say.. three hundred pages?

I think you meant “textee”, but your point about trolls is well taken. Not that anyone listens, but still….

I implore you to ignore the lunatic fringe. I’m looking at you rusty.

Thanks to everyone for the responses.

Welcome, Kate!

Oh “barbie”, one man or woman’s lunatic is another man or woman’s “savior” or even “Messiah”. You only have to look so far as Barack Obama to confirm that!!
.
Have a nice day!

And, I will also welcome you too Kate!

As a side note, I am not advocating for the reduction in wages to Nurses or the reduction in fees paid to Physicians.
.
I only put this on the plate, as most Democrats ARE advocating this as one way to cut the cost of Healthcare.
.
The only thing that cutting wages to Nurses will do is drive more of them out of the Nursing field.
.
Doctors on the other hand have already expressed that if their fees are cut any further they will simply quit practicing medicine.
.
This will only further my theory that RATIONING will occur with any “Public Option” plan that could be enacted.
.
Also this is a good review on the “polls” for and against.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/is-public-opinion-on-health-care-locked.html
.
And Kate, you may want to review this one as well before you hit the send button on your computer to submit your next submission to the High Sherrifs
.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/americans-view-news-media-as-biased.html
.
Sorry to bust your newbie bubble so early on.

LOL! I mean, while Karen was constantly pushing the Mayo Clinic as a model for health care reform, she NEVER bothered to mention that Mayo Clinic doctors make far more than the average doctor (Mayo pays its doctors about 150% of the median pay for doctors in a given field
.
I don’t know about the truth of that statement. I’m sure that some specialists achieve it but the median?
.
In any case, the average physician is funding at least one FTE to manage insurance payments and a considerable amount of professional time to the accompanying disputes. That could be reduced to probably 1/4 FTE if we went to a single-payer system like France or Germany (where insurance reimbursements average less than 7 days to complete). That might not bring them up to Mayo standards but it would constitute a real boon to most primary care physicians.

You should look out for anyone that uses the term ‘socialized medicine’ or derides the European systems.
Most of Europe spend a 30-40 % per citizen of what USA does, but people live longer and do not go bankrupt from being ill.

Please provide links and quotes to specific sources that support your claims

Amen Stuart. I like to know where information is coming from. It makes a difference if something is coming from a congressman or from the huffington post.
-
Also: We here in the swamp are, as a group, interested in more than sound bites. Please post links to articles or bills if your blog is about them. I have no objection to a good bit of analysis, but I’d rather see the info directly. Good luck