Bill leaves Americans vulnerable to insurance companies: Dennis Kucinich

[G_j]

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/03/latest_health_care_reform_bill.html

Latest health care reform bill leaves Americans vulnerable to insurance companies: Dennis Kucinich
March 14, 2010, 3:01AM

Dennis Kucinich / U.S. Representative

President Barack Obama is in northern Ohio on Monday to campaign for his health care plan, and I will be here to welcome him. I have met with the president three times to discuss how we can work together to address the serious deficiencies in our health care system. Even at this late date, I am hopeful that the White House will be able to reinstate key reforms that passed the Education and Labor Committee on which I serve.

Unfortunately, the president's plan, as it currently stands, leaves patients financially vulnerable to insurance companies. It requires all
Americans to buy private health insurance policies, while failing to ensure those policies do what they are supposed to do -- protect people from financial catastrophe caused by injury or illness.

Comprehensive health insurance is a matter of economic security. While many Americans don't have health insurance at all, many more

Americans have health insurance that doesn't pay for care when they get sick or injured. When that happens, illness can lead to economic ruin. Half the personal bankruptcies in America occur because health insurance companies refuse to pay medical bills.

Unfortunately, if the president's plan becomes law without substantive change, you would still be only a major illness or injury away from personal bankruptcy, except the federal government will have required you to buy a private health insurance policy.

Over the years, I have held many town hall meetings in the 10th District on health care. I am the co-author of H.R. 676, a bill that would improve Medicare and extend its coverage to those under age 65.

This past year, as reform legislation began to take shape, I led a group of members of Congress to create a set of policies that clarified elements of a suitable compromise. I joined a majority of the 77 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who promised to oppose any legislation that did not include a public option.

When a bill was considered in the Committee on Education and Labor last summer, I worked hard to improve it. I won five separate amendments, each of which improved the bill significantly. A key improvement was my amendment to allow states to implement a single-payer plan, the only model proven to control costs while covering everyone.

The amendment waived the application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act for any state that signs into law a single-payer health care plan. My budget-neutral amendment was passed by a bipartisan vote of 27-19. The promise of single-payer health care reform in the states constituted a safety net, if the underlying bill otherwise failed to control costs.

I voted for this version of the health care bill, and it passed in committee. It was a compromise, but a reasonable one. However, the version of the bill that reached the House floor was considerably watered down. It had a severely weakened public option and the employee-retirement waiver had been stripped. It no longer constituted an incremental step forward that would provide relief to my constituents, so I could not support it. The version of the bill that passed the Senate was even worse.

Absent a strong public option or legal protection for states that wish to pursue single payer, the bill that the president is proposing is a step in the wrong direction. Even with the few modest improvements in the bill, the insurance companies will still have dozens of loopholes to deny care and continue to find ways to leave Americans with the unpayable bill.

Kucinich, a Democrat, represents Ohio Congressional District 10.

[Edweird]

1. +1

[nightrain]

2. knr. DK speaks the principled truth.

[suzie]

20. Dennis grandstands--there's some distance between aggrandizing oneself and speaking the truth.

[nightrain]

21. oh BS. He's an extremely humble man. Maybe you grandstand?

[cali]

86. nonsense. humble men don't run for president

not saying he's grandstanding, but c'mon, he's no more humble than any other politician.

[suzie]

91. I've seem Dennis Kucinich address a crowd of Democrats in person.

Humble is the last thing I'd say about him. Arrogant and the most condescending of any politician that I've ever heard.

Dennis Kucinich is simply a refugee from the 1960s, when it was considered "cool" for white male elitist "Leftists" to condescend to everyone else.

[sabrina 1]

43. Address what Kucinich says. We know the talking points

Explain where he is wrong, and defend the lack of a PO in a bill that is now intirely a Democratic Bill, no Republicans to blame.

What in Kucinich's statement do you disagree with?

I don't expect a response as I have asked this question of the dispensers of anti-Public Option talking points over and over again, with no response.

Once again, where is Kucinich wrong ON THE ISSUES. I'm not interested in the personalities of politicians, only in their policies, so leave out the personal attacks and address the issue of the Democrats refusing to include a PO at this point.

[pundaint]

47. Wiener grandstands, Kucinich exhibits principle.

If you observe it's a bad bill, and you explain why, and you are supporting what the People want, then you vote NO to the bad bill - you are only working for the People.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

79. Can you tell me just how Weiner grandstands? He authored the Medicare for All bill.

...and gave very logical, rational reasons for why Americans should have it.

Doesn't sound like grandstanding to me.

[Enthusiast]

54. suzie grandstands--

Dennis speaks the truth with no aggrandizing.

[elias7]

59. You sadly mischaracterize Kucinich

You must not be that familiar with him.

[Individualist]

61. DLC sucks

[NorthCarolina]

83. +1

[liberation]

64. ... there is also some distance between that argument and intellectual honesty

How is Dennis Kucinch actually grandstanding on this issue?

He is voting No and he is giving the reasons as to why his vote came to be a nay. Since you are completely ignoring the arguments for the negative vote, and have gone to attack his character instead. I guess it is safe to assume you have nothing based on facts or logic to counteract his points and reasons for his negative vote on this bill. Right?

[Action]

53. Oh yea

Dennis can speak all he wants, while AMERICANS ARE DYING!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fascisthunter]

55. we die with or without this bill

If ya really gave a damn, you'd demand medicare for all, or a public option... not trying to guilt us all into a fascist policy.

[juno jones]

73. Perhaps you would like to elaborate?

You'll still not get healthcare even with insurance. The premiums and co-pays will eat you alive.

Have fun.

[babylonsister]

3. So no bill will leave Americans less vulnerable? What about those w/o

health insurance or pre-existing conditions?

[bluestateguy]

14. Oh that's easy. Don't you see?

If the House rejects this bill, surely they will just pick right up and then seamlessly pass a single payer bill.

:sarcasm:

That's the kind of fantasyland the Kucinich crowd lives in.

[mmonk]

32. Or the fantasyland that the public option will be looked into at a later date.

That's the fantasyland supporters of the Bill live in. Just like the fantasyland that the administration said it favored or wanted an exchange with a public option.

[Roland99]

35. Bingo! Why is the inclusion of a Public Option/Medicare Buy-In so politically venomous??

The only answer is that corporations own ALL Republicans and many of the Democrats.

[pundaint]

51. It is not a choice between this or Nothing, they are bluffing and you are folding.

[wildbilln864]

4. +1!

[flvegan]

5. Off to the Greatest!

[ProSense]

6. "The amendment waived the application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act " Kucinich just

wants his way. He seems to be so stuck on getting his way that he refuses to support a superior provision.

[Oregone]

8. Are you passionate about Single-Payer health care, or just smearing Kucinich the Democrat?

Perhaps Ive misunderstood you, but Ive seen you trashing single-payer advocates for the last year just as much as you've been trashing Kucinich. Maybe Im wrong, but it seems like this single-payer issue is but just another political football you are tossing around to make a cheap argument on the internet. Once I get over that hump, itd be easier to comment on the actual content of what you say.

[ProSense]

11. Do you support Bernie Sanders' provision? n/t

[Oregone]

13. Do you answer questions with only questions?

[Dr.Phool]

38. There's a reason the moran is on ignore.

They just infest threads and hijack them. They add nothing of value to the argument,

[xocet]

46. So It would seem....

I think that that is exactly ProSense's game. This individual lives to trash Kucinich for whatever reason. I have not yet seen a debate of substance in which ProSense has been involved, but I don't typically follow ProSense's postings. However, with all of the denigration of Kucinich that ProSense has been spouting of late, it has been difficult to avoid those postings.

[juno jones]

75. The one with the 'Community Clinics".

Have fun with that.

As someone who's used them for years, they have their flaws, to say the least. Of course it would be really convient for some if all working poor were 'covered' by some system, no matter how ghettoized and second-tier.


I have also never had any questions answered regarding the actual administration of those proposed clinics. Maybe you can answer. IS IT GOING TO BE ANOTHER FUNNEL FOR FAITH-BASED FUNDING? I'm somehow doubting in this climate that any 'public' clinic is actually going to be run by Uncle Sam and not some private or religious instution.

If they wind up being faith-based, watch out for a whole new attack on all those issues that keep coming up as regards healh care and our rights and choices within it.


edit to add parentheses around "public" because it is rare as the dodo in these parts.

[kenfrequed]

45. I keep running into his name too.

Last time he was running a false analogy comparing this bill to social security and medicare in terms of it being imperfect now but open to improvement. After that point I had trouble believing any of his arguments.

[NorthCarolina]

84. I think the answer to your question is obvious. eom

[nightrain]

50. I think Kucinich would recognize a "superior provision"/bill--HR 676

[ProSense]

7. "the bill that the president is proposing is a step in the wrong direction" Yet

Congressman Grayson states the exact opposite.

[sabrina 1]

42. Those are not Grayson's words. That is what it says it is

'The president's proposals'.

I think this was already pointed out to you.

[LWolf]

9. k & r for the best Democrat standing, bar none. nt

[bluestateguy]

10. No one is interested in overintellectualized explanations anymore

All I care about anymore is are you a Y or an N.

Are you with Alan Grayson and Bernie Sanders or are you with Michelle Bachmann and Jim DeMint?

[nightrain]

22. that's waaay too simplistic.

[Raineyb]

36. What do you expect from simplistic people?

There's a good number of people who are under the impression that their thinking processes (such that it is) are more sophisticated than that of the Republican. But as it painfully obvious by what's been going on when it's a D in power they show themselves to be just like the Republicans. They want everyone to vote in lockstep in order to get a win with little if any regard to whether or not the bill itself will actually do more harm than good.

[pundaint]

52. I'm not down with the reasoning power of Michelle, given the choice between two evils I demand

another choice. Why don't you?

[earthboundmisfit]

12. "While many Americans don't have health insurance at all, "

"many more Americans have health insurance that doesn't pay for care when they get sick or injured."

And soon ALL Americans could be mandated to "have health insurance that doesn't pay for care when they get sick or injured."

I'm with you, DK

[lib2DaBone]

15. Dennis is a voice in the wilderness... thanks Dennis.. keep it up..

Big Insurance wrote the Health Care Bill.. Big Pharm wrote the Part D law...

[NC_Nurse]

16. No bill leaves more of them with NO insurance at all. How is that better?

[EFerrari]

24. It's not better for the insurance companies, that's for sure.

[salguine]

25. You wanna know how? Right now millions have no health insurance. For that,

they pay nothing. Under this pile of shit bill, they will still effectively have no insurance because the premiums, deductibles and co-pays will be so goddamned high they won't be able to afford them. For this they are expected to pay a MINIMUM of $200 a month, and for some it will be a lot higher.

No health care at no cost to to them, or no health care for hundreds of dollars a month. All things considered, any sensible person will take the former.

You people have got to start understanding that having insurance doesn't mean jack shit. Insurance doesn't mean CARE. The vast majority of medical bill-related bankruptcies in this country are incurred by people WITH HEALTH INSURANCE. When, when, WHEN are you going to GET IT?

[unapatriciated]

37. sadly they will never get it.

"The vast majority of medical bill-related bankruptcies in this country are incurred by people WITH HEALTH INSURANCE. When, when, WHEN are you going to GET IT?"

I have tried to explain it over and over again, based on my own personal experience with my Insurance Co. in 1991-2005.
I just get rhetoric about Federal regulations (ones with no real penalties).
I have given links regarding how long California took to act on abuse by the insurance companies on state regulations and the only answer I get is it will be different at Federal level.
Links on how nothing was recovered for those that endured the abuse from Insurance Companies for almost twelve years that resulted in financial ruin, disabilities and death for their insureds (California settled out of court leaving many like myself out in the cold).
This gave the Insurance Companies involved twelve years of illegal profits. They will play the same game and we will be forced to buy in.
Some think the DOJ will prosecute the Insurance Companies who ignore or get around the federal regulations, when there is no such language nor penalties in this bill to guarantee it.
I have asked that they post a link where the bill states this will be done and am still waiting

[juno jones]

76. You are right.

It is like yelling at the wind. As unco-operative and mindless.

They will never listen because either they are good-hearted but so sheltered as to never have had to deal with things on this level...or...

They have their own agendas that do not really include fair and equitable universal healthcare for the people of this country.

[stillwaiting]

41. They will get it after the bill passes and with the passage of time.

When people are still declaring bankruptcy, being denied treatments, being dropped due to "fraud", etc. they will be in shock that it's still happening.

The insurance companies will continue to abuse insured policyholders (especially on the individual market) and they will find even new ways to do so that I'm sure I can not even imagine at this point in time.

This legislation further empowers and entrenches a DEEPLY corrupt and amoral industry and that is why I oppose it.

[pundaint]

48. There is a great deal of eagerness to leave this topic behind. As soon as a bill passes reform will

become secondary to a very long list of pressing issued. The People will get one bill passed because it must happen. If THIS bill is it, we're screwed for the next 10 years.

If THIS bill goes down, they'll have to expand Medicare to save their political life.

How about some Power Politics for People.

[endless october]

17. Kucinich hits another home run. nt

[tabasco]

18. Yes, let's do nothing !

That'll teach those insurance companies!

Kucinich is an idiot.

[progressoid]

30. That's hardly what he's saying.

I'm not a Dennis cheerleader but it's disingenuous to imply that he wants to do nothing.

[sabrina 1]

44. If we do nothing it very likely will teach the Insurance Corps

a lesson. They are failing to make the profits they became accustomed to as they are losing customers for several reasons. This is why there is so much urgency to bail them out, to provide them with more customers. They are 'too big to fail' like AIG and Goldman Sachs.

Let them collapse and go out of business. They are nothing but a costly burden on our healthcare system not to mention corrupt.

They have spent hundreds of millions on this legislation to keep a PO out of the bill and to get people like you on board to keep them raking in profits. Money apparently that was worth spending.

Kucinich is one of the few voices trying to inform the people of what the ramifications of this bill, dressed up in weasel words, will be for the American people.

[mzmolly]

19. How are people left vulnerable under the new legislation?

I'd like specifics on the supposed loopholes vs. rhetoric. Anyone?

See Frenchiecat's thread here >>> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=222416&mesg_id=222416

It seems to me this legislation addresses many previous abuses by the industry.

[Vinca]

28. As an older person with a pre-existing condition, my premium

will be tripled. That's one of the loopholes. My best estimate is that it will cost $200 more than the last (unaffordable) quote I got. This bill will definitely help some, but life could get even worse for people like me since I will have to pony up a fine that I might have spent for medical care. The subsidies are based on income, not the price of the policy.

[mzmolly]

39. I think you're one of the people who will benefit the most Vinca.

You are charged whatever insurance companies wish to charge you currently. And, that's IF they even accept you. Also keep in mind there is a hardship waiver if you can't afford the penalty or the insurance.

Have you checked the subsidy calculator? http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx I'd check the "Obama Proposal" option and see how you come out.

Let me know...

:hi:

[no limit]

60. Lol, you think that Vinca will be helped? What makes you say that

the poster just told you they will have to pay around $200 above what they were already quoted, a quote the poster currently can't afford.

The amount of indifference to people that will be hurt by this bill here on DU is disappointing.

[mzmolly]

72. So we're not hurt by no limits on premiums and the ability to deny coverage?

Yet we're harmed by a 3 X limit MAX and the removal of denying coverage?

Again there are hardship waivers if people prefer to remain without insurance.

[no limit]

78. What do you have to do to qualify for a hardship waiver?

[mzmolly]

89. I would imagine you have to demonstrate you can't

afford the premiums. Here is an existing waiver from Massachusetts.

http://www.compartners.org/pdf/news/2009-03-18_msp_hardship_expenses.pdf

[no limit]

100. That doesn't explain what you have to do to qualify at all

it's just a sign up form detailing all your income. So people like me that won't be able to afford the insurance we will be forced to buy are supposed to go in on faith?

[Vinca]

71. I don't think my husband and I will qualify for a subsidy

substantial enough to compensate for a tripled premium. This is the one provision of the bill that really has me fuming. The people who need medical care the most are the ones who won't be able to afford to buy in unless they are pretty well off. In addition, people of average means will most likely wind up in policies with minimal coverage in the best case scenario. For the life of me, I don't see why single-payer is such a horrible option. Collect money via taxation and everyone has access to good quality medical care.

[mzmolly]

77. I'm not convinced that the worst case scenario

will apply to every person. And, I certainly hope that it will not apply to you and yours Vinca. I hope the hardship waiver will be of help if people can't afford coverage.

I'm not opposed to single payer, in fact I'd prefer it. However the Netherlands has a similar system (to the new US health care reform legislation) and it's working very well for them. In fact, they rank higher than the Canadian system according to the WHO. That is of comfort to me personally as we proceed.

Peace

[Raineyb]

94. That's the problem. One should always expect the worse and hope for the best

It's the best way to keep people from being screwed. You refuse to take the potential screwing into consideration then are annoyed by those of us who do.

[mzmolly]

97. I disagree.

The best way is to have a mechanism in place to deal with abuse.

[Schema Thing]

82. why do you keep saying "a tripled premium"?

Where does this bill institute a tripled premium for you?

[Vinca]

99. The loophole that allows tripled premiums for older people

and people with pre-existing conditions.

[Schema Thing]

104. I won't say that I like it that age is allowed to be a factor in cost

but the bill certainly doesn't cause your premiums to rise from what they would be without it, and, it does at least cap it at 3x.

You seem to have taken what is a positive, albeit not a big enough positive, and are preaching it as a negative.

[kurtzapril4]

80. Vinca, I hear you.

I'm an "older" person, too. I get adverts to join AARP all the time.

I also have no insurance and a pre-existing condition. And a part time job. I am not eligible for SSI or Medicaid..I am not handicapped enough. I made all of $2,920 last year!

How is this bill going to help people like me? If I recall correctly...you cannot be denied insurance, but neither will there be caps set on the price. I will be mandated to buy something that will cost more money than I make in a year. The upside is that I guess I would be eligible for food stamps....

I commend DK for standing up against this excrable sham. I don't blame him for voting no. It's a giveaway to the insurance companies.

[flyarm]

23. K&R for Dennis!!! eom

[Desertrose]

26. Go Dennis! K&R

:hi: G_j Good thread :)

[G_j]

27. --

[Echo In Light]

29. k/r

[AzDar]

31. K & R

[SlingBlade]

33. Why do corporate democrats hate America ?

Dennis Kucinich KNOWS that this fairy tale of fixing this bill later
on his a pile of steaming bull shit straight out of the ass of Rahm and
company and peddled by Durbin.

Fuck 'em.
This is the same old Bill Clinton type of NAFTA sell out

[Echo In Light]

40. Gore Vidal's bit on the US having only one political party w/two right wings...nuff said

[SlingBlade]

58. Yea, But one of 'em uses vasaline

[liberation]

66. ... and says "pretty please" which makes all the difference

[SlingBlade]

69. And we get a big kiss and hug from uncle Joe !

[Eyerish]

34. K&R

[xocet]

49. +1 for Kucinich n/t

[fascisthunter]

56. Bravo...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

57. As all of you know, I'm very left (and not ashamed to say so) but

this bill gives me the creeps.

I don't give a damn whether "Obama has a much-needed victory" or not.

I care about what this bill does, and its few advantages do not outweigh its corporate welfare aspects.

It's an attempt to hold the insurance industry together with scotch tape. It's an industry that NEEDS to collapse.

Did you know that insurance companies are THE REASON that uninsured people are charged more than insured people? Ask a doctor to explain it to you sometime.

[liberation]

67. Sincerely, anyone who claims to be a liberal or on the left and does not get creeped by this bill

They are either in deep denial or they are being incredibly dishonest regarding their true ideological standing.

Honestly, this bill would be considered too reactionary even by most moderate conservative parties/politicians in any other democracy in the industrialized world. How the DLC et al feels entitled to the support of liberals for this piece of corporate excrement of a bill is beyond me.

[ecstatic]

96. I am liberal left. As is Obama. Your position is driven by a strong

distaste for corporations, so much so that you would rather keep 30 million americans uninsured than give another dime to insurance companies. That's your position and you're entitled to it, but that is not necessarily a liberal position (although many liberals hold it, many don't).

My position is more practical. I dislike corporations but understand that in this country we have to deal with them (and hopefully lawmakers will keep them somewhat in check). Your blind hatred of corporations does NOT make you more liberal than I am.

From wiki:

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, "of freedom"<1>) is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights.<2><3> Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, free trade, secular society, and the market economy.

[Individualist]

62. K&R

[upi402]

63. Good parts could've been in seperate legislation

This isn't reform, it's conscription to prescriptions

[spanone]

65. and we're not now?

[Hamlette]

68. Dennis for god, but for gawds sake, get him out of Congress. Worst Congressman period.

voted against health care, the hate crimes bill, the budget, the cap-and-trade bill, and financial regulation

Dennis doesn't add anything to the debate. He just opposes. I know many here appreciate him because he is pure but at this point its pure bullshit.

[beardown]

90. Below all the repubs?

Below the blue dog types?
Below the corporate shills who have jumped on board the mandatory insurance reform?

You sure value one heck of a lot of rightee type congressman that probably make up more than half of the congress. That's where hyperbole type declarations can put you or at least that's what it sounds like when you try and tag Kucinich with worst congressman period. A little objectivity can go a long way sometimes in getting your message across.

[suzie]

92. +1

[Nikki Stone1]

70. Dennis is quite right.

.

[Jefferson23]

74. K&R for Kucinich

[deaniac21]

81. He is about the only congress critter that isn't bought.

[suzie]

93. What does that mean--he isn't bought?

Because he's the Number 1 most corrupt guy in the entire Congress.

[deaniac21]

102. He doesn't stay bought

[G_j]

103. he accepts ZERO corporate $$ - nt

[NorthCarolina]

85. K&R for America's Congressman. eom

[cali]

87. He's not my congressman. He's fine, but I like my congressman better

[ramapo]

88. Bullshit on Dennis

I don't disagree with him, and I'm certainly not in love with this bill, but he is doing nobody a favor by voting no (except the Republicans). Is he so foolish to think there will be a do over if this goes down to defeat? Of course there will be no do over. The corporatists will have won once again and we'll just be left to suck it up for another few decades until maybe somebody gets the guts to try again.

Kucinich can be as bad as my totally useless "representative" Scott Garrett NJ-5. Garrett wouldn't vote for the ban on ending the anti-trust exemption saying it would cause insurance premiums to rise. This from a "free market" guy.

So Kucinich will deep six the ban on pre-existing conditions and the other undeniably good parts of this bill just because it isn't good enough. Well not good enough is as good as it is going to get. Screw him if he won't put his head up in the air and realize that for all the faults of this bill, many people are going to be better off with it.

After it passes, he can work towards fixing, replacing, or improving upon what hopefully gets signed into law. Failure to help pass it is just an exercise in ego and hearing himself talk. Enough is enough.

[ecstatic]

95. And no bill leaves Americans vulnerable to bankruptcy nt

[Raineyb]

98. This bill still leaves Americans vulnerable to bankruptcy.

That hasn't changed.

[Odin2005]

101. The Kooch speaketh the truth!

+1