Recently, Houstonians for Health released it's latest video providing viewers their opinion of what's wrong with the health care system in Houston. Houstonian's' for Health is an unknown group, that I still can't identify. The very detailed video shows how Dan Wolterman, CEO of the powerful Memorial Hermann Health System, tried to "dump" one of their hospitals on tax payers. What's scary about it is the reason that Dan gave for trying to get the Harris County Hospital District to bail him out.
When asked by the Houston Chronicle reporter, Wolterman said he wanted to get rid of it because there was a "demographic decline" in the area. According to the video, the area is 31% Hispanic, 23% African American, and 12% Asian. I'm not sure what Dan doesn't like about those demographics, but he better get comfortable with them given the changing face of Texas.
After seeing the video, I spent some time calling around to learn more about this ground and Wolterman. The information people were willing to give about Wolterman was interesting.
Apparently Wolterman is facing two civil law suits alleging antitrust violations, he threw his doctor's under the bus during the sale, he upset most of the Harris County officials to the point he was compared to a "car salesman," and then had a "political pep rally" with Kay Bailey Hutchison opposing health reform--upsetting local Democrats, probably, Rick Perry as well. With that many powerful enemies.
What's scary about Mr. Wolterman's statement is that it creates the perception, rightly or wrongly, that he would rather serve patients living in the suburbs who are rich/insured patients, rather than underserved patients in the inner city.
You may remember the the first video from Houstonian's for Health Care. You can see Wolterman, front in center, celebrating Kay Bailey Hutchison and pleading for her and her party to slow down the process in reforming health care. Now we see the latest video and understand why.
Texas can't stand for this kind of reckless attitude and "leadership." The problem in health care is less about the system, and more about greedy guys like this who run our institutions. Perhaps it is time to create a system that limits the negative influence of men like Wolterman
As the House of Representatives continues debate on health reform, we've heard appalling untruths from Republicans and heart-wrenching stories from the Democrats. One of our great Texas Democratic representatives stood up tonight to oppose the Republican "alternative," that won't insure the 37 million Americans who lack coverage, and won't cut costs as well as the Democratic bill.
To help cover huge medical bills in Bastrop, Texas, they hold a Main Street pancake supper, an American Legion auction. Essential health care shouldn't depend on the kindness of strangers, the goodness of neighbors, and certainly not the just say "No" of Republicans or the weak tea parties brewed up by the insurance lobby.
Now, belatedly, they offer a scheme as skimpy as a hospital gown. They do nothing to help seniors. Their proposal is inefficient, ineffective, and wasteful. Masquerading as reform, their bill authorizes insurers to continue denying coverage for pre-existing health conditions, such as acne or a C-section. Republican obstructionism has, itself, become a giant pre-existing condition to any meaningful change.
This is a typical old time Republican medicine show--do a little for 5% of the uninsured, do nothing for the other 95% and leave the portion of American families uninsured largely unchanged. The only thing they propose more of is more insurance policy loopholes. Freedom? The only freedom they offer is the freedom to go broke from medical debts - the leading cause of personal bankruptcy.
24% of Texas residents are uninsured, the highest rate in the nation. We have the most uninsured adults, and the most uninsured children. Tonight, all Texans are lucky to have Rep. Lloyd Doggett fighting for our access to quality, affordable healthcare on the floor of the House tonight.
If you can't follow along at CSPAN, I've been live-Tweeting the highs and lows: @KathTX. I'll have some of the better comments from our Texas delegation tomorrow.
Despite repeated campaign promises to always be in the District on weekends, Pete Sessions is working overtime today to kill health care reform.
His latest outburst on the House floor drew "a burst of chatter" in the room, kind of like it does in bi-partisan settings here at home when Sessions gets stuck for an answer and says the first thing that comes to mind, usually a tangent about "socialism" or "Nancy Pelosi."
In his latest gaffe, Pete Sessions defended the insurance industry's practice of charging higher rates to women, comparing the practice to charging higher rates for smokers. Transcript over the jump...
Republican Rep. Michael McCaul is working hard in D.C. to make sure that Texans in the 10th District receive no meaningful health reform. With efforts to block President Obama's proposals at every turn, the unremarkable incumbent has now taken to touting bogus polls and whining about not being included in the process. And what does McCaul have to show for it? A Republican bill that will leave 17 million Americans uninsured, and won't cut the deficit nearly as well as the Democratic bill.
Last week, Michael McCaul went on KVUE to complain about health insurance reform, touting an oh-so-scientific poll from his own website. From KVUE, October 31, 2009:
"In my view, the majority of the American people don't support [the Democratic health reform plan]. Certainly in my district, on my website I have a poll, and it's about 85% against this, it's what's called the public option, the government-run option, the government takeover of our healthcare, it's one sixth of our economy."
Michael McCaul is wrong about health reform. In August, 77% of Americans supported the public option, according to a SUSA poll. That's even higher than it was in June. According to an ABC News poll conducted last week more Americans prefer the Democrats' public option than a watered-down, bipartisan compromise.
McCaul continues on with a series of bogus Republican buzz-words against health reform: "government-run takeover," "getting in between you and your doctor" and "health czar!" Funny, last time I checked, the only person coming between me and my doctor was some insurance company bureaucrat trying to decide if I really need that M.R.I., or visit to a specialist, or blood test, or not. And what's with their czar fetish?
To provide justification for his position, McCaul sites a bogus poll conducted on his website. (How does he know the folks voting on his website are only constituents? Hmm?) On his Facebook Feed, McCaul also published the results of another bogus poll conducted during his own tele-town hall, with 65% opposed to the public option.
Whaaat? You mean to say the small sample of folks who bother to visit his website or join a tele-town hall happen to overwhelmingly agree with his views on the public option?! What's extra irritating here is how the newscaster just takes the bogus statistic as God-given fact. Then she has the gall to suggest that health reform is actually moving too fast. As anyone who has actually been following the legislative process can tell you, things are definitely NOT moving too fast, especially for the 9.3 million Texans who were uninsured for all or part of last year.
Then, just this week, McCaul continued whining in a call-in press conference that Obama and the Democrats have "left out" the Republicans in the health reform process. This is disingenuous, for three reasons.
First, the Republican bill championed by McCaul is widely considered to be a dismal failure. From Ezra Klein:
In 2019, after 10 years of the Republican plan, CBO estimates that ...17 percent of legal, non-elderly residents won't have health-care insurance. The Republican alternative will have helped 3 million people secure coverage, which is barely keeping up with population growth. Compare that to the Democratic bill, which covers 36 million more people and cuts the uninsured population to 4 percent.
According to CBO, the GOP's alternative will shave $68 billion off the deficit in the next 10 years. The Democrats, CBO says, will slice $104 billion off the deficit. ... The Democratic bill, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan.
McCaul describes the Republican bill as better, because it "incentivizes the free market and the private sector to provide coverage." Except that's the same idea that has failed Americans since World War II. It's no change in policy, and it will do very little to change the rate of uninsured Texans.
Second, Republicans--teabaggers and members of Congress alike--are deliberately trying to obstruct the reform process for ideological and political gain. They spent all summer yelling about death panels and insuring undocumented immigrants and shouting "YOU LIE!" during joint sessions of Congress. Republicans are too busy trying to prevent meaningful reform and coverage that will extend to all Americans, in order to support their buddies in the insurance industry. All they want is for President Obama's plans to fail--they don't care about meaningful reform, they only care about their own electoral prospects in 2010 and beyond.
Third, while McCaul complains about not having a seat at the table, he made it nearly impossible for his own constituents to share their views on health reform. He complains that the Democratic bill was written "behind closed doors in Washington," despite the many open town-halls held by Democratic Representatives and constant stream of news coverage about every single step of the process and constant updates from Democratic Congressional leaders.
Meanwhile, it's McCaul who is largely operating behind closed doors, having private meetings with folks who seem to unanimously oppose reform. According to his website, McCaul held only one in-person town hall, at 9:00 a.m. on a Friday, in Katy, the day before Labor Day weekend. He waited until the final day of the Congressional District working period to solicit real input from his constituents. It was only posted to his campaign website three days before the event. Sounds as if Rep. McCaul doesn't want to hear what his constituents have to say. In a district that spans 150 miles from Austin to Houston, he holds only one event, off in one of the most Republican parts of the district. There sure was no event in Travis County, because if there was, McCaul would have heard an earful from his constituents who are tired of losing coverage for pre-existing conditions, being dropped from their plans, and watching premiums rise as access to quality care drops.
To conclude, let's sum up the many ways in which Michael McCaul is wrong about health reform:
Elections have consequences. Barack Obama won, and Democrats have significant majorities in the House and Senate. Democrats are supposed to set national policy. That's what people voted for. (N.B.: Olympia Snowe is not a Democrat and should not be setting health care policy.)
If Republicans want a seat at the table they need to offer real solutions backed by their party, not just vitriol and obstruction. A bill that leaves 17 million people uninsured and doesn't cut costs as well as the Democratic bill is not a real solution.
Congresspeople can't conduct bogus polls on their websites and conference calls and tout it as scientific fact. Anyone who actually has a say in our nation's education funding should know better. The thought makes me shudder.
Michael McCaul is yet another out-of-touch Republican in Congress working hard to prevent the people of the 10th Congressional district from having access to quality, affordable health care. He needs to go.
The Republican Party will release its alternative to President Obama's plan for health insurance reform this week. In true "Party of No" fashion, it offers no solutions, no meaningful expanded coverage, and no guarantees that Americans can finally receive access to the care they need.
In particular, the Huffington Post states that the GOP bill of No Reform would not end discrimination on the basis of pre-existing conditions:
The health legislation authored by House Republicans and set to be unveiled in the next few days reportedly would not prevent health insurance companies from discriminating against patients with pre-existing conditions.
That's not just a stark contrast to Democratic-produced legislation; it puts Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his co-authors at odds with many members of their own party.
Many of the most respected health care voices in the GOP have historically treated the idea of eliminating pre-existing condition exclusions as an obvious plank in any reform effort.
The fact of the matter is, conservative ideology and the influence of the far-right fringe have pushed even "moderate" Republicans into siding with the insurance companies instead of the American people. Seems like a Boehn-headed move.
Rep. Lloyd Doggett, a champion of real reform for all Texans, issued the following statement on the bill:
After months of delay in offering any proposal, Republicans have been as revealing as a hospital gown regarding why we lack a bipartisan health insurance plan-they have speeches, but no real solutions to offer our families.
Sadly, Republican obstructionism is a recurrent pre-existing condition to any meaningful change. Masquerading as reform, their new bill authorizes insurers to continue denying coverage to Americans with 'pre-existing health conditions,' such as acne, a C-section, or any other prior medical treatment. The GOP Leadership again sides with insurance monopolies over struggling middle-class families.
Under their proposal, competition does not increase and health insurance coverage remains little more than a receipt for premiums paid and likely denial of coverage when families need it the most.
Here in Texas, 24% of our residents are uninsured, the highest rate in the country. We desperately need real reform on the federal level to help Texans receive access to the care they need. Unfortunately for the people of Texas, it looks like the Republican Party just doesn't care.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced today that the Senate version of the health reform bill will include an opt-out. This will allow states that want to hurt their constituents and deny them access to health care to reject participation in the national public option.
The opt-out clause should be of some concern to folks like us living in Red States. Republicans in the House and Senate are almost unilaterally opposed to any sort of health insurance reform, choosing to stick up for the insurance companies instead of the 46 million uninsured Americans.
Texas has the highest rate of uninsured residents in the country, as the chart at right demonstrates. Between 2007 and 2008, 9.3 million Texans were uninsured for part or all of the year. It is imperative that Texans have access to real insurance, in order to receive the care they need.
Here are some early specifics about how the opt-out would work, should it make the final bill signed by President Obama. In his press conference, Harry Reid said that states could not opt out before 2014. (Yes, it's a crappy transcript, but that's the best link I can dig up right now.)
2011-2012: National insurance exchange is phased in; consumer reforms begin taking effect.
2013: Public Option goes into effect. Americans are mandated to have insurance coverage.
2014: States can opt out, exact process to be determined.
Apparently, the opt-out will require a 2/3 vote of the state legislature, with the governor able to veto an opt-out. We don't have a link for this yet, but that's what folks close to the process are suggesting to Burnt Orange Report.
Under this scenario, Texans would be able to participate in the public option (if they qualify) in 2013. Legislatures would then have to intentionally deny their constituents insurance by opting them out of the public option.
Importantly, states CANNOT opt out of the consumer reforms that will lower costs, prevent rescission, and stop insurers from denying you coverage for a pre-existing condition. These reforms are huge in making the insurance companies work harder to provide care, rather than just pile up profits.
Other questions that need to be resolved as we work through the sausage-making process:
As governorships and legislative control pass between the two parties, can states opt out later on?
Can a state opt in if it previously opted out?
Are there different processes for states with unicameral and/or bicameral legislatures?
Can states pro-actively pass legislation to opt out before 2014?
Access to the public option is key to creating real competition with the private insurance companies in terms of lower premiums and better quality of care. Any state that does not have the public option will see its constituents paying more for care than their neighbors across state lines. Texans need real reform, and deserve the choice of a public option. Now, let's make sure that our Legislature knows it.
Update 4:26 p.m. -- Rep. Garnet Coleman released the following statement on Sen. Harry Reid's press conference today:
Today, Senator Reid presented a bill that includes a public option, something the American people overwhelmingly support. I commend the Senators for their tireless efforts, and for pushing legislation that will significantly help people in America, and Texas in particular.
The Senate bill includes a provision for states to opt out of the public option. A public option will increase competition and provide more quality, affordable options for middle-income Texans and Americans.
All the more reason we need to make sure Texas stays opted in to the public option.
1:24pm UPDATE: Keep Calling! Congress is getting the message loud and clear that Americans want real health care reform. Add your voice! Click on the image at right.
Today, Organizing for America volunteers across the country are working to make 100,000 calls to Congress in favor of health care reform. This is a critical push in the effort to give all Americans access to the health care they need. Here in Texas, we can do our part, and help save lives amongst the 24% of Texans who are uninsured.
Make Your Call Today. Make your voice heard, and stand up in favor of real reform! Click here to find your Representative and make your call!
Here in Austin, join Texans for Obama tonight at Scholz Garten. Before our monthly meet-up, we'll be calling our Representatives in favor of real reform. These calls count, and show that the number of Americans willing to work for real reform is greater and stronger than any band of tea party shriekers.
Texans for Obama Meeting
Make The Call for Health Care Reform!
Guest Speaker Tom Schieffer
Tuesday, October 20
6:00-8:00 p.m.
Scholz Garten
1607 San Jacinto, Austin, Texas 78701
Not in Austin? There are dozens of events across Texas where you can place your call in favor of real health care reform. Here are just some of the events going on in Texas today:
From house parties to county parties, Texans are committed to passing real health care reform! Find an event near you, head out tonight, and make your calls. Americans overwhelmingly support real reform, and today's the day to show it. Make the call.
Uninsured Texans desperate for health insurance reform may be shut out from participation if the public plan becomes an "option" decided on at the state level. This means that Republicans at the state level might be able to block certain aspects of Federal health insurance reform.
Some Senate Democrats representing Red States (so designated by Presidential preference) are reticent to support a robust public option, the likes of which would let uninsured folks buy in to a government-run insurance plan if faced with a lack of coverage. Meanwhile, Senate Republicans are united in their opposition to a strong public program to give all Americans access to health care. Per TPM, the latest "compromise" to pass any sort of public option might allow individual states to "opt out" of the national plan:
Both conservative and liberal Democrats seem to be open to a new public option proposal floated by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Tom Carper (D-DE) to allow states not to participate in the plan if they decide they don't want to.
Now, most importantly, Red States can't opt out of reforms to the insurance industry, thus making President Obama's overall goals for reform--an end to recission, no denials for pre-existing conditions, caps on out-of-pocket expenditures and premiums--the keys that will force real reform on the corporate insurance providers. These are all really important strides forward for a state that has watched insurance premiums rise 91.6% under Governor Perry. However, this compromise would hurt folks in opted-out states who lack any other choice except for a government-provided plan. The mandate to carry insurance would still exist for Texans, who thus would be forced to buy into a corporate plan.
Admittedly, I have a hard time envisioning a scenario in which the Lone Star State doesn't opt out of the public option. Texas has a preponderance of elected Republicans who simply don't want the people of Texas to have access to health care. Governor Rick Perry openly advocates for leaving the nation. Why should we expect him to opt in to a public option? Whether via the Republican Governor, Republican-majority State House and Senate, or Republican-majority Congressional/Senatorial delegation, I fail to see how Texas--home to the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state in the country--manages to stay opted in. Granted, this proposal is far from being complete or specific. But unless there is a component that strongly compels every state to participate, this latest compromise could end up hurting the Texans who need this reform the most. As a Red State resident, I strongly urge Congress not to let some of the neediest states escape without the reform we need.
People in Red States basically rely on Federal policies to mitigate the harm perpetrated on us by our own elected officials. Because we live in Texas, because we've been gerrymandered into a scenario where both houses of our legislature and Congressional delegations are majority-troglodyte, we might not end up with the same right to access care as folks in states with sane representation at any level. And while this is a pretty strong argument as to why we need to elect more Democrats in Texas at the state and local level, it's not OK for more of our people to suffer needlessly while we work towards doing it.
The graphic to the right shows the rates of uninsured by state. We're the worst. Texas is the worst. The people of Texas need help. We've already been abandoned by our own state officials. We can't let the folks in the Federal level do the same. The people of Texas deserve the same access to health care as any other state in the nation.
Here's what you can do:call your Representative NOW. Urge them to pass real health care reform, that not only includes strong consumer protections and industry regulation, but also doesn't allow individual states to opt out of the public option.
I'm ultimately a pragmatist, a utilitarian. I understand that no public option is far worse for our nation as a whole than a public option for just some of us. I'm just tired of public policy that gives benefits to some, not all. Here in the Red States, things are already pretty bad. Here in Republican-led Texas we're doing pretty terribly on just about every major issue: energy, the environment, education, criminal justice; heck, even the food stamps system is utterly broken. We need to get health care reform right, and especially in the Red States, we need to make sure it's inclusive to all Americans who need it.
But hey, at least schadenfreude-loving UT football fans can take heart: if the opt-out passes, I'm betting Oklahoma doesn't get the public option, either.
As we know by now, there is very little, if any, competition in the health insurance industry. Some states have only one provider. Everyone and that would be everyone involved in the discussions about health care reform knows this is the case nationwide.
So why is the very notion of introducing competition into the health insurance industry such a big deal for Congress? It should be a no brainer. I mean, isn't capitalism and the belief in free markets as the be all and end all of everything perfect and sacred all about competition?
If members of Congress truly embrace the principles of competitive capitalism they would not obstruct health care reform that includes a public option. Indeed, by resisting a competitive force in the health insurance industry Republicans, especially, clearly demonstrate their unbending support for non-competitive monopolies.
Monopolies!? But I thought that is what Communism is all about.
Yesterday MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan had a debate with Betsy McCaughey, a well known Republican opponent of health care reform. Her remarks about health care reform and its impact on seniors have been so extreme that AARP found it necessary to call her out. The organization said her remarks bordered on the cruel.
Cruella McCaughey obviously did not like Ratigan's questions, especially when he described the current state of health insurance as
Corporate Communism.
Predictably, when a Republican does not like the questions, (s)he will hammer the interviewer. When an interviewer will not let a Republican hack spew talking point BS non-stop, the hack will always go for the jugular.
Speaking of Honorary Texans (as they are right now on the Big Orange)...our most recent honoree, Mr. Sean Hannity, is proof positive that good solid hypocrisy can only improve Glenn Beck's chances for getting this award:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced today that the Senate version of the health reform bill will include an opt-out. This will allow states that want to hurt their constituents and deny them access to health care to reject participation in the national public option.
