Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts

Monday, May 8, 2017

Kurt Eichenwald: 'and they smiled and high-fived'

https://www.facebook.com/kurt.eichenwald.1/posts/1448157071889590

In 1986, I left a job I loved for one I hated. I had been desperately sick for seven years, with medical bills no one could possibly cover. But I was approaching the dreaded age of 25, when I would be forced off of my parent’s insurance policy. Everyone knew, without insurance, I would die. I was frequently hospitalized. My treatments were very expensive. But the job I loved offered no insurance. The one I hated did.

This was the second time insurance chose the direction of my life. I applied for the job of my dreams a year before. The boss told me he wanted to hire me, but theirs was a small company. They already had a person with high medical costs on salary. If they hired me, he said, their insurer would drop them. Insurance companies could do that back then.

But with the job I hated, I thought I was safe. Then I found out, even the group policy had a preexisting condition clause: I would not be insured for nine months. I could not stay. I would go bankrupt. And so, I went to find another job. All I wanted was insurance. It didn’t matter the job. Insurance would decide my career.
 
I had been a political writer at CBS, an associate editor at National Journal. Very successful at my age. But I only had a few weeks until I was uninsured. I begged a friend at the New York Times to help me. He offered to help me land a position as a copy boy. It was a terrible job, he knew, but it had insurance. At first, I was turned down for the job – I was way too overqualified, the HR person said. But my friend intervened and, after years of personal success, I agreed to take a job fetching people’s coffee.

There was a two-week period before I began my job when I was completely uncovered. I ended up hospitalized. By the time I was conscious, I had rung up a bill in excess of $10,000. That was almost half my expected full-year salary. I called my parents, in tears. I didn’t know what to do. They told me they would take care of it.

Nothing was more depressing than having to have given up everything for insurance, to take a job where everyone was younger than me, everyone was far less experienced than me. And I knew, if I lost my job, I would lose my insurance. And if I lost my insurance, I could die. So I worked – seven days a week, 12-18 hours a day. If nothing else, that helped me believe I would not be fired from my lousy job. But it also gave me the chance to write for various sections of the paper. I would do my copy boy job eight hours a day, then start reporting and writing. This went on for two years – no vacations, no break, terrified every day.

Then, I was offered a junior reporter’s job at the Times. One-year tryout. I worked almost every day. I rarely left the office. I knew the stakes. For me, this wasn’t about being a reporter. This was about keeping my insurance.

In my late 20's, I married. My wife is a doctor. At that point, I had greater freedom. Even if I lost my job, I could be on her insurance. Because of that freedom, I began to write books. If the Times got mad at me for it, it would be ok. But still, I could never shake the belief that I could never say no. I took every assignment. I did not take book leaves. We rarely vacationed.

I finally started to relax around 2008. I had never lost insurance for 12 years. Then, a miracle: the rules keeping people with preexisting conditions from being insured were ended under ACA. I listened to blowhards like Rush Limbaugh rage that people like me – and people with asthma and cancer and cystic fibrosis – were leeches, demanding charity. It amazed me how stupid he and his followers were, not understanding that, without private insurance, people like me would all be on government disability. We would have to stop working in order to survive. People were instilled with rage about a topic they didn’t even understand.

No matter. I knew I would never have to face that problem again. More important, I knew the millions and millions of others like me – young kids, middle aged, whatever – would never again be forced to make decisions about their lives giving up their dreams solely for the insurance. I would hear every day from my wife about people who came to her office in horrible medical shape, people who had gone without treatment or sought their medical care at emergency rooms. People who could only get care in the ER rang up giant medical bills, so expensive no one could pay them. And so the taxpayers picked up the cost. Now, those same people were getting care from my wife with insurance they purchased. Opponents raged about their taxes paying for the subsidies, so ignorant they had no idea their taxes had been paying for the far more expensive emergency room care before.

Last week, the House passed a bill that would push everyone with preexisting conditions back into the same situation. The representatives billowed and cooed that high-risk pools would protect us, fooling the same uneducated ones who didn’t know they paid for the uninsured. High risk pools had been tried before. They failed. But these members of congress probably didn’t even know that. They didn’t care enough to hold hearings to find out whether high-risk pools would work. They didn’t wait to find out how many people would lose their insurance. They had to rush it through. Then they cheered for themselves.

Meanwhile, those of us with preexisting conditions were plunged back into fear. Foundations for people with chronic diseases began receiving phone calls from panicked people. My wife and I reviewed our options if this bill became law. We are middle aged now, which presented new issues. She is four years older than me. She hits retirement age in five years. If she retired and was on Medicare, I would be clinging to a slender thread to keep my insurance. I could never write another book. It would be too dangerous. My wife said she would work until she was almost 70 to keep me safe. Guilt overwhelmed me. She was born in Britain, and we discussed her citizenship and, if necessary, we could move there if I lost my coverage. We would have to burn through our savings for a long time, but eventually I might be able to get onto national health insurance.

But I don’t want to leave America. I don’t want my wife to work until she’s almost 70. I don’t want to be guilty. And most important, I don’t want all the other people with preexisting conditions to be forced to make their life decisions based on where they can get group insurance. Or worse, to not be able to obtain group insurance, be denied private insurance and die.

I watched Fox News. They giggled and laughed that people were being hysterical about preexisting conditions. There were high-risk pools, they sneered, that states could participate in unless they didn’t want to. I watched the clip, over and over, of those self-congratulatory members of Congress, high-fiving and smiling, as I knew the situation at my house was playing out at millions of houses where talking points and rationalizations didn’t change the realities of what we would face. I commented about how terrible this was. And then I saw comments from people deriding those with preexisting conditions as wanting charity.

I thought of members of Congress who wanted prisons as brutal as possible, until they themselves were jailed; then, they became advocates for prison reform. I thought of the ones who screamed about gays until their child came out, then they became tolerant. I thought about the members of Congress who happily sent other people’s children off to fight in Vietnam, while getting their own kids deferments and spots in the National Guard or reserves, making sure they wouldn’t see battle. And then I thought of the child whose parents home I visited, who told me of their boy dying of suffocation in his mother’s arms as they rushed to the hospital. They hadn’t been able to afford his inhaler that week. They had no insurance. They planned to buy it the week that followed. Their son died two days after they decided to take the risk.

And the members of Congress smiled and high-fived.

More people’s children would die. And the members of Congress smiled and high-fived. People would be forced to take jobs they did not want or marry people they did not love. And the members of Congress smiled and high-fived. For millions, every day would be terrifying as they wondered if they would they run up bills that day that would bankrupt them or would they be unable to get treatment? Would they live through the week? And the members of Congress smiled and high-fived.


My anger exploded. I wanted them to feel the consequences of what they thought was so wonderful. Why should they be exempt from the damage they would inflict on others from their vote, votes they cast with so little concern about others that they didn’t hold hearings to find out what damage they might cause?

And so I tweeted, “As one with a preexisting condition, I hope every GOPr who voted for Trumpcare get a long-term condition, loses their insurance, and die.”

Harsh? You bet. I wanted the words to be blunt, to lay out the reality of what real people would face, people who didn’t have the ability of members of Congress to avoid the consequences they voted to inflict on real people.

Conservatives broke out the fainting couches. I was wishing Republicans to die, they moaned. I forgot we live in an era where fools will interpret it the way they are told. One of the propagandists at the Daily Caller, after emailing me for comment at 3:00 in the morning, posted a story proclaiming I wanted my political opponents to die. And the conservative trolls descended, screaming for my death.

I remain angry. I remember the tears of that woman whose son died in her arms. I remember my struggles. I remembered my fears. I remembered the fears of so many others I have spoken to over the years who struggled with preexisting conditions.

I deleted the tweet. Apparently, confronting people with the reality of what they have chosen is just too inappropriate. Voting to let people die is fine, rubbing the fact that they voted to do that is just wrong.

Do I regret what I said? No. I want those words to sink in. My tweet won’t kill anyone. But the vote from those members of Congress will.

And if they are not forced to confront what they are doing, they will just keep smiling and high-fiving.

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Yes, Paul Ryan Actually Did Bend The Knee.

The Washington Post detailed the House GOP’s fight over the ObamaCare repeal and replacement plan this week, rounding up the dramatic details of leadership’s fight to win support for the measure.

At one point, the paper said, House Speaker Paul Ryan (Wis.) got down on one knee to plead with Rep. Don Young of Alaska – the longest-serving Republican in Congress -- to support the bill.  (He was unsuccessful.)

The moments highlighted by the Post during the Republican conference negotiations show what a tough battle Ryan and his deputies faced in whipping the vote.

But they also show the fierce support some offered to leadership - like freshman Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, who lost both legs in 2010 in Afghanistan and called on colleagues to unite behind the bill as he and his Army colleagues had done on the battlefield.

At another point, a Republican shouted, “Burn the ships” to Majority Whip Steve Scalise, invoking the command a 16th century Spanish conquistador gave his crew when they landed in Mexico.

The message was clear, the Post said –- the Republicans felt there was no turning back.

The GOP was ultimately unable to coalesce around the party’s plan and Ryan pulled the bill from the floor Friday, when it was clear it did not have the votes to pass.

Friday, March 24, 2017

Trump: Trump Care Failed Because Of Democrats!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-blames-failure-republican-healthcare-bill-democrats

The American Health Care Act Of 2017 (Trumpcare)


The Best Single Statement Ever On GOP "Healthcare" - Devastating

Dear Mom,

You won't comprehend this because you have Stage 6 Dementia, but things need to change. The nice congressmen in Washington want to free us from government dependency so we can make better healthcare choices without the stigma of taking handouts from society.

So, Mom, about your Medicaid Aged and Disabled Waiver that pays me a 40 hr/week pittance to care for you at home 24/7: the new HHS Secretary and Medicaid Chief sent our Governor a letter that says people on Medicaid should seek employment if they want to keep those benefits. This may sound unfair considering you're 89, bladder and bowel incontinent, unable to walk unassisted, and often lapse into episodes of uncontrollable whimpering, but if the government decides it's for the best, we'll all need to buck up and contribute our fair share. After all, your 50 year nursing career doesn't necessarily entitle you to a free ride.

I'll probably need to get a "real" job too, because I exploit the system. Never mind that your care would cost the state $78,000 annually in a nursing home versus the $16,000 it pays me; leave the math to those smart fellas in Washington who understand that big government should stop controlling our lives. The important thing is we'll have freedom to choose, and not impose an unfair tax burden on millionaires and the medical industrial complex.

Once I stop taking handouts, I won't be home with you. We should bolster the economy by hiring attendant care, but it costs more than I can earn, and Medicare won't cover it because those warmhearted legislators support family values like looking after our own. You'll enjoy being home alone all day, Mom. You don't really need regular meals or clean Depends, and when you have one of your falls, you can rest quietly on the floor in a puddle of urine until I get off work. Those dear congressmen give us other options, too, such as permanently placing you in a facility to die more quickly and efficiently. Here's another choice: I could stay home and attend you for free! We'll do fine on your Social Security income by sacrificing a few luxuries like groceries, property taxes, electricity, and the car.

There's a bonus, Mom. I won't be forced to maintain health insurance! Remember “Obamacare” that saved my life through early cancer screening? The Republicans devised a better plan. Because I'm over 50 and earn $150 per year above the Medicaid cutoff, my annual premium will increase by roughly $6,000, but I can choose to opt out! I'll still have "access” but not be victimized by the enslaving tax subsidy that let me afford coverage for the first time in 25 years. I'm excited about returning to indigent emergency room treatment and boosting insurance industry profits while taxpayers shoulder the cost instead.

With so many great options it's hard to decide, but here's our new plan, Mom. Under Trumpcare, I'll "choose" to lose health coverage, seek a minimum wage job, and dump you in a nursing home. Between the cost of facility care, a couple of ER visits and perhaps one minor surgery for me per year, and the food stamps and heating assistance I'll need once you and your Social Security income leave the household, I estimate we will save the government roughly NEGATIVE $350,000 over the next 5 years! Multiply that by the millions of people who will lose coverage, and you can appreciate what a sensible and economical plan the Republicans have devised.

You'll be proud to receive depersonalized institutional care instead of burdening society in comfort with your family. The facility gets your Social Security check, and Medicare/Medicaid will cover the balance until you hit the newly proposed block grant funding cap. If you're still alive then, we're unsure what will happen, but we can trust Congress to do what's right. I hear they're formulating a plan to ship the poor, elderly, and chronically ill to arctic ice floes. It's called “Trump Tower North: the Last Resort.” You might even get to see polar bears before they become extinct! Won't that be fun?

I'm so happy that the government wants to stop interfering in our lives.

Love,
Your Freeloading Daughter

P.S. Mom, if you do need a job to keep that Medicaid, I thought of a placement for someone who can't function productively, has no grasp of reality, and relies on government entitlements. 435 congressional seats will open up next year. You appear to be perfectly qualified.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/24/1646735/-Dear-Mom-About-your-50-year-nursing-career-Medicaid-Woman-s-post-will-blow-GOP-minds

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Paul Ryan dreamed about screwing over poor people back in college

"So, the health care entitlements are the big, big, big drivers of our debt. There are three. Obamacare, Medicaid, and Medicare. Two out of three are going through Congress right now. So, Medicaid—sending it back to the states, capping its growth rate. We’ve been dreaming of this since you and I were drinking out of a keg."



http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/03/17/paul_ryan_s_college_dream_was_to_kick_poor_people_off_medicaid.html

Saturday, March 11, 2017

'I Might As Well Have Not Voted': Details Of GOP Health Plan Leave Trump Voter Appalled

By Brad Reed

Donald Trump this week signaled his support for the House Republicans’ new health care bill — but it looks like that legislation is going over like a lead balloon with his base.

Not only are the Trump diehards at Breitbart News bashing the plan as “Obamacare 2.0,” but even some casual voters are worried about the president’s plan.

ABC News this week talked with North Carolina resident Martha Brawley, a 55 year old woman who cast a ballot for the first time in her life for Donald Trump. Brawley says that she voted for the president on the hopes that he could bring down the cost of health care — but she’s been appalled so far by what she’s seen from the Republican Congress.

“I voted for Trump hoping that he would change the insurance so I could get good health care,” she told ABC News. “I might as well have not voted.”

Brawley was particularly upset when she learned that, under Trumpcare, she would receive a paltry $3,500 tax credit to buy insurance. At the moment, she gets a federal subsidy of around $8,688 to buy insurance from Obamacare.

“All these people who talk in politics have insurance,” she told ABC News. “People like me don’t.”

One Brief Example Of The Insane Hypocrisy Of The GOP On The Health Care Bill

Posted by Rude One

It's really one of the weirdest things in the American Health Care Act, the bullshit bill that bullshit Republicans rolled out so their bullshit president could declare that he was St. Donald fighting the Affordable Care Act dragon. From pages 10-16, the bill's authors lay out the conditions by which MegaMillions and Powerball and other winners would have to pay for their own damn health insurance. That new part takes up a tenth of the length of the entire 66 page bill that escaped Mario Kart character Sean Spicer jigged around and pointed at for its brevity, contrasting it with the monstrously huge stack of pages that make up Obamacare (yeah, the black guy's was bigger and you could do more with it).

And the lottery section is just bizarrely precise in talking about the conditions when a lottery winner wouldn't be able to get Medicaid: "a State shall, in determining such eligibility, include such winnings or income (as applicable) as income received— (I) in the month in which such winnings or income (as applicable) is received if the amount of such winnings or income is less than $80,000; (II) over a period of 2 months if the amount of such winnings or income (as applicable) is greater than or equal to $80,000 but less than $90,000; (III) over a period of 3 months if the amount of such winnings or income (as applicable) is greater than or equal to $90,000 but..." You get the idea.

Obsessively detailed, no?

This is easy to mock in a "God, how fucking dumb are they?" kind of way. Except, instead, looking at why this language is in the bill reveals something just a little more sinister about the hypocrisy under which the GOP is operating to commit this health care fuckery.

One of the reasons that Republicans are desperately trying to cram the bill through like a limp cock on an unlubed asshole is because the Congressional Budget Office hasn't finished its scoring of the bill to see what its effects might be. When the CBO is done, it will likely reveal that the AHCA is, as previously mentioned, a bullshit bill that will cost a ton of money and kick millions of people off health insurance. Republicans in the House, at least, are trying to maintain the illusion that they're not just complete twat mites who want to straight up murder people to give the wealthy a tax cut, but, yeah, that's pretty much what's going on.

A cynical reader might be thinking, "Well, sure, everyone loves the CBO when it gives them the numbers they want. What's the big deal?" But that's not quite cynical enough.

See, the lottery exclusion up there was actually first brought up in 2016 because, apparently, there are enough winners to make a big damn difference: "Using the typical per capita cost for Medicaid adults, this provision would reduce direct spending by $475 million over the 2016-2026 period." You know who came up with that nearly half-billion dollars in savings because of a seemingly odd provision? The Congressional Budget Office.

That's the depth of hypocrisy occurring here. The Republicans need the CBO's figures to write their goddamn bill, but they are running scared from the CBO when it comes to the final bill's effects on Americans. That's the incredible dickishness involved here.

Friday, March 10, 2017

Paul Ryan: "Did You Know Insurance Works Like Insurance?"

Posted by Rude One

Blithering ass pimple Paul Ryan, a man who looks like he's perpetually contemplating how he can get away with getting fucked by a horse dick, said one of the stupidest things anyone in politics has said recently, and that's even counting every word out of Donald Trump's dumb, leathery, old man mouth.

Using the filmstrip of the damned that is PowerPoint, Ryan attempted to explain what is so bad about the Affordable Care Act's insurance mandate, and, in doing so, demonstrated that you can make anything seem sinister with a colorful pie chart.

"The fatal conceit of Obamacare is that we’re just gonna make everybody buy our health insurance at the federal government level. Young and healthy people are going to go into the market and pay for the older, sicker people. So the young, healthy person’s going to be made to buy healthcare, and they’re gonna pay for the person, you know, who gets breast cancer in her 40's, or gets heart disease in his 50's," Ryan said.

You following that so far? Now let's have some motherfuckin' pie: "So take a look at this chart. The red slice here are what I would call people with pre-existing conditions, people who have real healthcare problems. The blue is the rest of the people in the individual market, that’s the market where people don’t get health insurance with their jobs, or they buy it themselves. [For the record, the blue is about 80% of the pie] The whole idea of Obamacare is the people in the blue side pay for the people on the red side. The people who are healthy pay for the people who are sick. It’s not working, and that’s why it’s in a death spiral."

In other words, the insurance works, well, just like fuckin' insurance works. Exactly like insurance works. Every kind of insurance. Your car insurance? Homeowner's? Yep. But, hell, let's put insurance aside for a moment.

By Ryan's reasoning, there is no reason for there even to be a society, let alone a government. Some of you don't have children and you pay property taxes, which, in most states, goes to fund schools, which you don't use because, hey, you don't have any fuckin' children.

Jesus fuckballs, this is even more of a scam than health insurance because there's a good chance you're gonna go to a doctor some day. If you never have kids, you never take advantage of the school system. Why the fuck should you have to pay for it?

You know why we pay for schools for other people's kids? Because that's what the fuck you do or your entire society turns to shit (unless we start sending kids back to work all those coal mine jobs that Trump has promised). And that's why you pay for other people's health care. Because if you don't, you will end up paying, through emergency room visits, lost productivity, and more.

My insurance that I've paid during this relatively healthy time of my life is a hedge against the time when I get cancer from the soon-to-be poisoned water or have a heart attack from watching cock knobs like Ryan attempt to explain why the basic model for the existence of insurance is wrong. I'm not gonna forego insurance because I'm paying for someone's chemo now. What a fuckin' tool I'd be.

And, look, we shouldn't even be talking about fuckin' health insurance. We should be talking about a national health care system that eliminates the profiteering corporations. But we're Americans, and, goddammit, we want people to suffer because we think it's better that people have a fantasy idea of "freedom." Motherfucker, we have jobs and shit to do. And Ryan wants you to take the time to figure out how to get the best price on that stent surgery that you need. That's not freedom. That's fucking with people's lives and making them believe they are free when they are just slaves in your chains of market forces.

Towards the end of his TED-talk from hell, Ryan gave away the game, the real reason why the House GOP is attempting this nonsense: "We, as Republicans, have been waiting seven years to do this. We, as Republicans, who fought the creation of this law and accurately predicted that it would not work, ran for office in 2010, in 2012, in 2014 and in 2016 on a promise that we would -- if given the ability, we would repeal and replace this law. How many people running for Congress and the Senate did you hear say that? How many times did you hear President Donald Trump, when he was candidate Donald Trump, say that? This is the closest we will ever get to repealing and replacing Obamacare. The time is here. The time is now. This is the moment. And this is the closest this will ever happen."

We're all just victims of a tautology that has ensnared the GOP. They swore up and down that they would repeal the Affordable Care Act, and now that they can repeal the ACA, they have to repeal the ACA because they said they would repeal the ACA and now they can repeal...

Except they can't unless they get a critical number of Americans to think, "Wait, I shouldn't pay for shit I'm not using right this second," which, sadly, is probably a convincing argument to the selfish pricks who voted for these assholes like Ryan.

(By the way, the ACA isn't in a "death spiral." Premiums have gone up for just 3% of all Americans with health insurance. That's what we're arguing about here. It's all a fucking game.)

Friday, February 24, 2017

Republicans Could Be Heroes On Obamacare (And Liberals Should Let Them)

Posted by Rude One

Let me be honest: I'd rather have my prostate checked by Wolverine on a vengeance rampage than help an elected Republican in Congress. But if you are one, chances are you're either facing crowds of angry constituents (and, really, and, c'mon, you can lie to your Twitter followers all you want, but it's mostly your constituents who are showing up) at town hall meetings where they force you to defend the idiot president and your own campaign promises, the ones that really promise to hurt them or their familes, or you're cowering like a beaten puppy in a corner of your local office, avoiding anyone who might tell you to your face what you know is true: "You're full of shit."

Face it, GOP scum. Now that the black guy and that Clinton woman are out of the way as a lightning rod for all the misdirected hatred you could foster, you have nothing between you and the voters. There is no buffer. And anything you do is something you own. Yeah, motherfuckers, acting is a whole lot harder than obstructing. It's a lot easier to talk about killing something than to actually drown the cat or bludgeon the milk man.

But when it comes to the Affordable Care Act, you have painted yourself into a corner and then placed landmines all around the floor. For seven years, it's been a constant chant of "repeal," followed by "repeal and replace," which was already a retreat, an admission that you needed to do something about the uninsured in the United States, that the government had to be involved to some degree, even if it was just with bullshit tax credits.

Now, since the election and certainly in the town halls, what you're hearing, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Rep. Jason "Little Rat-Faced Bitch" Chaffetz of Utah, Rep. Diane Black of Tennessee, and so many more, is that the ACA or, you know, Obamacare, is doing what it was supposed to do: give people who previously didn't have access to health insurance a chance to go to the doctor and get treatment without having to choose between medicine or food. People who previously didn't have that access, those who got policies through the exchanges and through expanded Medicaid, have learned that they like being treated like human beings whose lives have worth.

And when you, the GOP Congress men and women, tell them that you are gonna come up with a plan that'll be even better, that you can't give your constituents all the details because it's "still being worked out" or some such shit, that someone's cancer treatment might be interrupted while you attempt to figure out what "replace" is supposed to mean, that to get cancer treatment under the Affordable Care Act is to not want "freedom" or have "individual responsibility," as Vice President Mike Pence alluded to in a tweet, then you are telling those voters that they do not deserve to be treated like human beings. You're saying, senators and representatives, that their cancer treatments and medicine and other health care, their lives, aren't worth the effort to save.

So, yeah, they're pretty fuckin' angry. You've lost on this issue. You can be jerks about it and dick people over. Or you can admit you lost.

Here's the deal, though. I've got a solution. It's so easy that you will come out of the whole thing looking like the most democracy-loving motherfuckers in history, like goddamned heroes. Listen. No, shut the fuck up, GOP assholes, and listen:

You tell the voters that you heard them. Tell your constituents that you understand how important the Affordable Care Act has been. And tell them that because they have spoken so passionately and made so much sense that you are now going to listen to them. You can make a big fuckin' show about it. "Republicans want to take care of all Americans," you can say. Hell, you can even remind us all about how the ACA was a Republican idea to begin with (which, let's be honest, is the reason you can't come up with a replacement).

You don't have to admit error. You can say that you "evolved," which seems to be the term now for "Boy, I was a fucking prick about that. Sorry." And then you can say that instead of "repeal and replace," you're going to "reform and repair" Obamacare.

And you can essentially do nothing. No, really. You can do absolutely nothing except for a few tweaks that it needs to help out the marketplace in some states. Then you can say, "See? We fixed it. Republicans fix things." Hell, Democrats might go along with it, and you can claim a bipartisan victory, that phantom of something that we used to think was important. Your idiot president can make one of his barely coherent speeches about how he fixed the ACA and now it's "Trumpcare."

Now, sure, sure, you're wondering, "Won't people think we're liars and hypocrites?" To which I can only say, "What the fuck do you think people think you are now, GOP?" But, to put it another way, right now, Republican voters are fucking nuts. They honestly believes that millions of people voted illegally. They really think that Donald Trump is doing a good job. A good many of them are convinced that kids are being raped in the basement of a DC pizzeria because "cheese." You just say that this was what you wanted all along. You wanted to hear from your constituents and you listened. And if Trump tweets that out, you're golden. The stupidity of your voters will be your cover.

As for us liberals, we'll gnash our teeth. But, ultimately, we're liberals. We want people to have access to health care. Democratic members of Congress and candidates will likely campaign on, "Oh, c'mon, we were right all along." As well they should. And maybe they'll win with that. However, GOP, you will definitely be losing a lot of races if you take away Daddy's heart surgery and Mommy's chemo.

Oh, dear, sweet, terrible GOP, you have lost Obamacare as an issue. Because Obamacare without "Obama" is just "care," and do you want to be the party that takes that away from millions of Americans?

(Note: Yeah, they probably do.)

Sunday, February 12, 2017

GOP Rep tries the "death panel" line at town hall

Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R) fields questions at a healthcare reform listening session in New Port Richey, Florida. The false claim of 'death panels' in the ACA was PolitiFact's "Lie of the Year" in 2009.



"..The point is that we are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield."

George Orwell

Monday, December 12, 2016

Revealing Video Proves Why Democrats Are Full Of Shit

Single payer healthcare has been on the tongues of Democratic politicians for decades, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. They've never delivered.

Jimmy Dore breaks it down.

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Paul Ryan Promises 'Unified Republican Government' Will Destroy America in 2017

Take away healthcare because it's hurting you. Take away corporate taxes (and raise yours). Take away regulations that protect you from clean air, water, and food.

By Hrafnkell Haraldsson

Paul Ryan Promises ‘Unified Republican Government’ Will Destroy America in 2017
Paul Ryan promises, “In 2017, we’ll deliver results.” The results, unfortunately, if Republicans can be bothered to do anything at all, will be uniformly bad for Americans.

We’ve heard this song and dance before. The changes are being billed as an improvement, a “better way” and they even have a fancy new website full of lies to back it up. But the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has never been about anything but empty talk while they do literally nothing, at best, solutions in search of problems.

The real actions Ryan plans to take are attacks on the American people on behalf of big corporations.

Relief from Obamacare—this law is hurting families and it’s only going to get worse. Relief from this broken tax code that is costing us jobs, competitiveness, and growth. Relief from overreach and needless regulations that are crushing livelihoods and industries across this country.”

In other words, Take away healthcare because it’s hurting you. Take away corporate taxes (and raise yours). Take away regulations that protect you from clean air, water, and food. Livelihoods aren’t being hurt – yet. But they will be if Ryan gets his way.



“At the start of this year, we as House Republicans made a number of commitments to the American people.

“First, we pledged to open up the process—to find common ground for the good of the country. If you look at how we are wrapping up our work for the end of the year here, we’ve done just that: 21st Century Cures. The National Defense Authorization Bill. The water resources bill.

“These initiatives all went through the committees. They are all bipartisan. And they are all House-Senate agreements.

“That is how we should do things here. It’s important, because that’s exactly how things should work.

“The most overarching thing we set out to do—going all the way back to our retreat in Baltimore almost a year ago—was that we would raise our gaze. We would go from being seen as simply being an opposition party to being a proposition party. And with 7 out of 10 Americans unhappy with the direction our country is headed, we felt we had a duty—a moral obligation—to offer our fellow citizens a better way forward. And that’s exactly what we did.

“We did not just check the box to win an election, or we didn’t do this so I could just [promote] a website—better.gop—a thousand times with you. The idea was, if we actually won the election by campaigning on solutions and ideas, we would be ready to govern.

“And here we are. We are ready to hit the ground running, and we need to hit the ground running. We gave the people a very clear choice, and now the people have given us very clear instructions: deliver results and deliver relief.

“Relief from Obamacare—this law is hurting families and it’s only going to get worse. Relief from this broken tax code that is costing us jobs, competitiveness, and growth. Relief from overreach and needless regulations that are crushing livelihoods and industries across this country.

“That is what a unified Republican government will be about. It will be about helping our people reach their potential, and making America great again.

“So 2016 was about raising our gaze. 2017 is going to be about doing big things for our country.”

The words “unified Republican government” ought to throw fear into the hearts of every American. The Republican plan for 2017 is a disaster. The Republican plan is a mockery.

The real burden, from Ryan’s perspective, is that placed by government on corporations to prevent them from poisoning and killing us all in search of a profit.

Friday, December 2, 2016

Sarah Palin To Lead VA - WTF!!!!

Trump is rumored to appoint Sarah Palin to lead a very important government agency. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. Tell us what you think in the comment section below. https://www.tytnetwork.com/join



“Trump eyeing Sarah Palin for Veterans Affairs?

The Department of Veterans Affairs’ massive network of hospitals and clinics has been under a microscope since scandalously long waiting lists and allegations of cover-ups burst into public. The management morass seemed so intractable that in 2014, President Obama pushed out a decorated former general, Eric Shinseki, and hired a former chief executive of Procter & Gamble, Robert A. McDonald, to sort it out.

Now, according to people close to the transition, Mr. Trump is thinking of taking Veterans Affairs in a new direction, handing its reins to former Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Given Mr. Trump’s passionate campaign pledges to the nation’s veterans, the response — if she is chosen — would be ... interesting.”

Read more here:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/sarah-palin-isn-qualified-lead-va-article-1.2894189

Hosts: Cenk Uygur, Ana Kasparian

Cast: Cenk Uygur, Ana Kasparian

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Bernie Sanders Goes On The Warpath As Trump Nominee Signals Cuts To Social Security


Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) blasted Donald Trump for lying about protecting Social Security after the president-elect nominated a man who is dedicated to killing Social Security and Medicare to run HHS. 

Bernie Sanders Goes On The Warpath As Trump Nominee Signals Cuts To Social Security
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) blasted Donald Trump for lying about protecting Social Security after the president-elect nominated a man who is dedicated to killing Social Security and Medicare to run HHS.

Sen. Sanders reacted to Trump nominated Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) to run HHS in a statement, “Donald Trump asked workers and seniors to vote for him because he was the only Republican candidate who would not cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid – programs that are of life-and-death importance for millions of Americans.

Now, he has nominated a person for secretary of Health and Human Services, Rep. Tom Price, who has a long history of wanting to do exactly the opposite of what Trump campaigned on. Rep. Price has a long history of wanting to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

What hypocrisy! Mr. Trump needs to tell the American people that what he said during the campaign were just lies, or else appoint an HHS secretary who will protect these programs and do what Trump said he would do.”

Sanders is correct. There is no way that Trump would nominate a man who is deeply committed to cutting Social Security and Medicare if he had any intention of keeping the programs fully funded and in place. The nomination of Rep. Price to HHS indicates that the Trump administration is going to be targeting two programs that are beloved by the American people.

Trump has signaled that he is about to make the one move that will turn Bernie Sanders into an immediate and lifelong political enemy of the incoming administration. Sen. Sanders will fight tooth and nail to protect Social Security and Medicare.

Donald Trump is coming for the Social Security and Medicare of those who voted for him. 

Democrats tried to warn seniors that this would happen if they voted for Trump, and it looks like all of their warnings are about to come true.

Tom Price isn’t coming to HHS to save Social Security. Price is coming to destroy it.

Why Is The USDA Dumping Millions Of Pounds Of Fatty Cheese On Poor People?

By Lorraine Chow

Here’s a problem that may have slipped under your radar: The United States is in the midst of an epic 1.25 billion pound cheese glut. Low world market prices, increased milk supplies and inventories, and slower demand have pushed the country’s cheese surplus to its highest level in 30 years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said. Blocks, crumbles and curds are sitting in cold storage stockpiles around the nation; a mountain of cheese so large that every American man, woman and child can eat an extra 3 pounds of cheese this year.

You might have noticed that the cost of dairy products has fallen across the board at the supermarket, and while that’s good news for cheese lovers, dairy farmers and producers have seen their revenues drop 35 percent over the past two years. With more cheese than it knows what to do with, the USDA decided to make two $20 million purchases of surplus cheese in August and October and donated them to food banks. Critics say that the government is simply waving money—ahem, taxpayer funds—at the problem.

This handout abets large-scale dairy producers, who despite the glut, are on their way toward churning out a record 212 billion pounds of milk this year. Michigan dairy farmer Carla Wardin told the Wall Street Journal that she and her colleagues plan to deal with the situation by “doing the same thing … you milk more cows.”

The problems don’t end there. Cheap dairy is not only bad for the health of the environment (from methane-burping cows to water pollution), it’s bad for public health. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine criticized the USDA and its decision-maker Tom Vilsack for effectively dumping artery-clogging food products on poor people. “Please take a moment to ask Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack to reconsider the USDA's plan to distribute the fatty cheese to programs that are already struggling to provide participants healthful foods that fight disease,” the group writes in an online petition.

Although cheese has some healthy properties such as bone-building calcium, cheese is loaded with fat and sodium, and even low-fat varieties can contribute to “bad” cholesterol levels. And let’s face it, the way we usually eat cheese is slapping it generously on top of pizza or nachos, making it a delicious but unhealthy treat.

“Typical cheeses are 70 percent fat and are among the foods highest in cholesterol and sodium, exacerbating obesity, heart disease, and diabetes," says PCRM. "Cheese is the number one source of saturated fat in the American diet."

PCRM's petition concludes that the USDA should help food banks and food assistance programs by providing healthier fare such as fruits, vegetables, beans and whole grains. The diabetes epidemic has risen in poor populations, and sending highly processed, high-fat cheese to food banks isn’t going to make things any better.

Manel Kappagoda, senior staff attorney and program director at ChangeLab Solutions, wrote in a 2014 article that food banks are “a lifeline” for the 50 million Americans who live in food-insecure households and lack access to affordable, nutritious food."

Food pantries, she noted, are critical in maintaining and improving the health of food-insecure Americans. For this reason, many food banks across the country have implemented nutrition standards that eliminate unhealthy products such as candy, sugary drinks and other junk foods. Citing a survey from the Alameda County Community Food Bank in San Francisco, Kappagoda said that families and individuals who go to food banks don’t just want any food—they want fresh produce, low-fat items and other healthy staples.

As Kappagoda wrote, “to help improve the health of the people they serve, food banks can’t just offer food—they must offer good food.”

Lorraine Chow is a freelance writer and reporter based in South Carolina.

Saturday, November 19, 2016

They're Coming For Medicare - Be Ready

By Karoli Kuns

 

One of the best ways we can fight Trump right now is on the battlefield of Medicare. I'm sure everyone remembers how angry and stirred up Republican masses got at the idea of even one small change to Medicare.

Throughout his campaign, Trump assured his adoring followers that there would be no cuts to Medicare and Social Security. He tried to run to the left of Clinton on it, saying he would save it and make it better for everyone.

Those of us familiar with such empty promises knew that "make it better" was code for cuts, but his followers were having no part of it. Now is the time for battle, and the first battleground is going to be Medicare.

As I write, Paul Ryan is drafting his legislation to privatize Medicare and cut benefits. The Republican Congress has promised they will shovel this legislation through using budget reconciliation as their goal.

To make it palatable for today's seniors, Ryan has also promised that the current Medicare system will remain in place for people age 55 and above. That's a terrible idea, as Jonathan Cohn explains:
If at the same time Republicans shrink Medicaid, those seniors will suffer even more, since today the poorest seniors can use the program to pay for whatever medical bills Medicare does not.
Ryan promises that the proposal would not affect seniors who are 55 or older, since the new system wouldn’t begin operating for 10 years. But realistically the entire Medicare program would change once premium support took effect ― private plans would almost certainly find ways to pick off the healthiest seniors, for instance ― and, at best, the damage would simply take longer to play out.
Ryan’s Medicare scheme includes one other element ― a provision to raise the eligibility age gradually, so that seniors would eventually enroll at 67, rather than 65. Particularly in a world in which the Affordable Care Act no longer exists, 65 and 66 year olds searching for private coverage would find it harder to obtain, more expensive and less generous than what they’d get from Medicare today.
There are two things to keep in mind here.

First, our response must be swift and vocal. That means that you must have the telephone numbers of your elected representatives at hand and be prepared to call them and register your opposition to any cuts to Medicare. No slacktivism. No online petitions. In-person telephone calls to your representatives, personal visits, and visible opposition.

Second, health policy is always complex. Always. People don't understand it. One of the reasons Medicare is so popular is because it's simpler than any private insurance plan. People pay a payroll tax and when they're 65 they enroll in a Medicare plan that covers most of their costs. They can buy a supplemental plan at low cost to cover what traditional Medicare doesn't. It's simple, and it's elegant, and it works. It's going to be up to us to keep this message clear and plain everywhere. When we talk to people, when we post on social media, and when we comment on blogs.

Do not let them use muddy terms and oversimplify their plans, like they did with the Affordable Care Act. They are the ones slogging through complex policy. Know your facts, be armed with them, and be prepared to fire a volley at anyone lying about their plans.

Make no mistake. This is the battleground. Gear up for it. Forget the distractions with outrageous claims and just stay focused on fighting. If we fight, we will win.

Thursday, August 18, 2016

Now we know the real reason Aetna bailed on the Affordable Care Act

By Bob Bryan

On Monday night, news broke that one of the five largest insurers in the US, Aetna, was leaving 70% of the counties in which it offers insurance through the Affordable Care Act's public healthcare exchanges.

The move was seen as a huge blow to the future of the act, making Aetna the third large insurer, after United Healthcare and Humana, to significantly reduce its Obamacare business.

Aetna cited the large losses that the company has incurred from the exchange business — $200 million in the second quarter alone — when explaining its decision to roll back its business.

These statements, however, appeared to be a dramatic turnaround from the company's first-quarter earnings call in April, when CEO Mark Bertolini said the firm planned to stay in the exchanges and that the company was "in a very good place to make this a sustainable program."

Now, however, it appears a large reason for the shift in tone was the Department of Justice's lawsuit to block Aetna's merger with rival Humana.

A July letter, acquired by Huffington Post reporters Jonathan Cohn and Jeffrey Young, outlined Aetna's thinking on the public exchanges if the deal with Humana were blocked. The letter from Bertolini to the DOJ outlined the effect of a possible merger on its Affordable Care Act business.

For one thing, Bertolini notes that the cost savings from the Humana deal would allow the companies to further expand coverage into parts of the US.

"As we add new territories, given the additional startup costs of each new territory, we will incur additional losses," the letter said. "Our ability to withstand these losses is dependent on our achieving anticipated synergies in the Humana acquisition."

Additionally, the letter seemed to foretell the move on Monday. Here's the key passage (emphasis added):

"Our analysis to date makes clear that if the deal were challenged and/or blocked we would need to take immediate actions to mitigate public exchange and ACA small group losses. Specifically, if the DOJ sues to enjoin the transaction, we will immediately take action to reduce our 2017 exchange footprint.
 
"We currently plan, as part of our strategy following the acquisition, to expand from 15 states in 2016 to 20 states in 2017. However, if we are in the midst of litigation over the Humana transaction, given the risks described above, we will not be able to expand to the five additional states. 

"In addition, we would also withdraw from at least five additional states where generating a market return would take too long for us to justify, given the costs associated with a potential breakup of the transaction. In other words, instead of expanding to 20 states next year, we would reduce our presence to no more than 10 states."
 
In other words, the cost of fighting the DOJ would make Aetna unable to sustain the losses incurred from the public exchanges.

According to a letter from the DOJ provided by Aetna, the DOJ asked the company what the effect would be on the firm's Affordable Care Act business if the merger were not completed. Thus, Aetna responded with its letter.

A spokesperson for Aetna said the decision to roll back the coverage was not because of the DOJ's lawsuit, but rather realizing the full details of the losses. The statement from the spokesperson reads, in part:

"In the time since we submitted our written response to DOJ and provided a courtesy copy to [the Department of Health and Human Services], we gained full visibility into our second quarter individual public exchange results, which — similar to other participants on the public exchanges — showed a significant deterioration. That deterioration, and not the DOJ challenge to our Humana transaction, is ultimately what drove us to announce the narrowing of our public exchange presence for the 2017 plan year. 

"If the Humana transaction is eventually blocked, which we don't believe it will be, the underlying logic of our written response to DOJ would still apply with regard to the public exchanges where we will participate in 2017." 

In the original letter from Aetna to the DOJ, Bertolini said that if the company lost the lawsuit and the deal were eventually scuttled, Aetna would drop its remaining Affordable Care Act business and leave the public exchanges entirely.

The DOJ declined to comment.

The DOJ blocked the merger between Aetna and Humana, along with the merger of fellow big-five insurers Anthem and Cigna, on the grounds that consolidating the industry would lead to lower competition and higher costs for consumers.

"They would leave much of the multi-trillion health insurance industry in the hands of just three mammoth companies, restricting competition in key markets," Attorney General Loretta Lynch said when announcing the lawsuit to block the mergers.

Typically the number of independent options available to consumers is correlated with lower costs.
"If the big five were to become the big three, not only would the bank accounts of the American people suffer, but the American people themselves," Lynch said.

The companies countered that the merger would not affect consumers and would allow the combined firms to be more cost-efficient and sustainable.

Read the full letter from Bertolini, via The Huffington Post, here »

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Brazilian Doctor’s Chilling Warning To Olympic Visitors: ‘Don’t Get Sick’


Add a public healthcare crisis to the ever-growing list of problems plaguing this summer’s Olympics in Rio.

As part of an episode of HBO’s Real Sports set to air Tuesday at 10:00 p.m. ET/PT, the network examined the condition of Brazil’s public hospitals. What they found wasn’t pretty.

Denied permission to tour a hospital by Brazilian officials, HBO managed to sneak a hidden camera inside for their investigation. Watch the disturbing footage below of patients lined up along hospital walls, with some even forced to lay on the floor.



Dr. Jorge Darze, President of the Rio De Janiero Doctor’s Union, called the images “revolting.” He alleges criminal negligence on the part of Brazilian officials who’ve allowed the healthcare crisis to escalate by wasting money on Olympic-related projects unlikely to provide much benefit to residents after the Games conclude.

“I would say it’s a criminal situation,” Darze told Vice News earlier this year. “One that breaches basic human rights.”

His chilling advice for Olympic visitors?

“Don’t get sick.”