Robert Reich: An Open Letter to Harry Reid on Controlling Health Care Costs

These ideas make a lot of sense to me. And I emphatically support one of Robert Reich's last statements to Harry Reid:

"Your responsibility isn't just to pass whatever will muster 60 votes and that the President and Dems can later call "health care reform." It's to do the right thing by the American people and bring down future health-care costs. Don't cave in to Lieberman or Nelson or the drug companies or the private insurers or the AMA or anyone else. Lead the charge."

But I would add that this is not just Harry Reid's responsibility, it's everyone's. As citizens, call on your elected representatives and demand real reform. Thanks and best wishes!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

A different idea in the healthcare debate

So I just read an article on HuffPost called: "Public Option Plan Will Cover Few Americans, New Statistic Reveals." A quote from one comment on how the public option should have been:

"Here's how it should have been: Open up clinics for citizens who don't have health care insurance. Require proof of citizenship for access. Done. It really is that simple. And no one should have a problem with that. I could have written the bill for this in ten days and it would have nothing to do with the insurance industry..."

I think the person who commented is on to something here to provide access to everyday health service needs, especially with the public option sounding as watered down as it is... Further suggestions for improvement would be to include legal immigrants (who have to file taxe returns like citizens do) in the ability to access services and include preventive care as services provided.

Study after study shows that preventive care reduces costs across the system, yet our current system is not based on any preventive care incentives. Instead, it's based on reactionary care... fixing things after they've gone wrong instead of focusing on wellness.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Leaderless: Senate Pushes For Public Option Without Obama's Support

I am so frustrated with the idea of a trigger. "Trigger" is typical politicalese for "we are telling you we're going to do it, but we're not really going to do it" kind of reform. A trigger does nothing but allow the status quo, which is definitely not working, to continue. The only way a trigger of some kind could work is if there is a strong tracking and enforcement mechanism built into the trigger option... something I've not heard a thing about. If anyone can enlighten me, I'd appreciate it.



I don't often agree with Harry Reid, but I very much prefer his idea of the opt out public option. This would provide the states who want it the chance to have it. Those who don't, don't have to and the residents of both will be able to see the differences between the two healthcare ideas.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Grayson Not Backing Down: "I Apologize To The Dead"

I'm glad to see someone standing up for We the People instead of the big corporate interests involved in the health care bill! Thank you, Rep. Grayson!
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Phoney protests are baloney!

When will this country be able to have a real debate on the pros and cons of the health care reform issue instead of being overwhelmed with propaganda and fear tactics? Here's another story about health care protests being funded by people who are heavily connected with the insurance industry:

More than 70 percent of the American public agrees that a public option for health care is a good idea. That fact is terrifying to insurance companies that have hustled billions of dollars out of a dysfunctional health care system for decades. The insurance industry is so worried that they now have phonied up protest groups showing up at town hall meetings to disguise the fact that 70 percent of Americans want a choice between private insurance and a government run plan.

When did greed (whether it be corporate or personal) become the prime motivating factor in doing business?

What happened to quality products and services for fair prices?

What gives?!?!?!?!?! Wait, I know... the economy, that's what... and it's given until it's plain tuckered out. Sigh.

Stepping off the soapbox now and would really like others' opinions on this one.

Freedom of Information: Debate of facts vs. fiction in healthcare

This morning I planned to discuss how the current debate on health care in our country seems to be a farce versus a real discussion of the actual facts. But before I waxed indignant about it, I discovered that my friend Chuck already had on his TERRIBLEMINDS site:

Let’s see. It’s early. I’m only halfway through my coffee. I can’t quite herd my stray thoughts into a straight line.

Perfect time for a spirited debate about health care!

Except, the debate has been rigged. Public opinion against the public option is a paper tiger, yet it’s a paper tiger that we’ve been led to believe has real teeth and an angry roar. We believe this because we’re at least a little bit stupid, and because the media has approximately zero interest in doing its job.

I recommend you give him a full read, but be warned, he's a lot more raw on this topic than I would have been. I think it's a necessary intensity, though, in this frustrating stage of the non-issues debate, and I'm glad he was able to go where my manners wouldn't have let me. Here's another point he made as an example:

Hitler? Hitler. Hitler?! Really? Comparing Obama to Hitler is easily, handily, totally the most ludicrous goddamn notion this side of a faked moon landing. Actually, it’s worse. You’d be smarter thinking that you can eat dog shit for dinner and poop out pennies. I don’t even want to refute it, because then I feel like I’m somehow giving the argument credence.

How on earth people can actually believe that Obama is like Hitler is beyond me. I have tried, but I just can't wrap my head around it. I don't know whether to be sad, completely outraged, or laugh at the complete hypocrisy of those who are behind this imagery. When the comparison was first made, I just shook my head and thought "Wow, that's too crazy for anyone to take seriously." And then it was.

When did we become a nation of sheep to be led around by our noses by people who don't know what the words honor or truth really mean?

There was a long time in our nation's history in which your word was your bond and having a reputation for honesty meant something. I think that all changed the moment that journalism became a business for shareholders instead of a business to give people real news. Now it seems we've returned to the good ol' days of the robber barons and yellow journalism.

When are we ever going to learn from our history instead of repeating it?

Freedom of Information: About Your Doctor!

Patrick Malone and I must be on the same wavelength... His article on HuffPost captures exactly why it is so very important that we as consumers be able to learn more about our doctors.

I know I've mentioned some of my family's experiences about unnecessary doctor visits, misdiagnoses, etc., in previous posts. For anyone in Atlanta, let me know if you're investigating neurologists, there's a couple out there who are absolutely horrible, and I'll happily share their names with you offline so you don't have to bother seeing them.

But getting back to the article at hand... Malone makes a great point about something he calls:

"no patient left behind" -- a simple report card system to give patients a heads-up about their doctors' credentials and safety record, something almost impossible to get now.

I think I've finally found a good neurologist for my family, (fingers and toes crossed), but in order to do so, I had to:

• get lucky enough to find a very caring employee at my insurance company who went through the entire doctors' list looking for the information that they had on the doctors... where they went to school, when they graduated, where they did their residency training, etc.
  
• call all the offices to see which were accepting new patients
• talk with people who worked there to get a feel for how skilled the doctor was, would the staff actually go see him/her for their problems, etc.
  

All in all it took me a few days to get all this researched. And even so, there are no guarantees. So I'm in a wait and see mode at the moment. Here's hoping that our doctor who trained at Emory lives up to the hospital's reputation.

As for Malone's "no patient left behind" idea. I think it makes nothing but common sense. We can all go online and look up reviews on lots of different products and services that we may or may not need. For something as important as our personal health and well being, we should at least be able to look at a safety record.

I think the reason I am most passionate about this idea is that I lost my Gram to an unsafe doctor a few years ago. Her mom (my great-grandmother) had died just a couple of years earlier, so based on my family's health history, I honestly expected her to be with us for at least another decade. Unfortunately, the doctor did not follow Mom's instructions (she had medical power of attorney for Gram). The end result was that Gram had to live the last year of her life suffering from the effects of stroke and congestive heart failure. And just when we thought she was going to get better, she didn't.

I have missed one of my truest and best friends ever since.

If we had had access back then to more information about her doctor, including his safety record, Mom and I would have known to take Gram to a completely different doctor, instead of the one who made such bad decisions about her care.

Now I know that some who read this post may say that knowing more info about the safety records may lead to more malpractice suits... but I think it would actually cause the opposite to occur.

If we knew the skills and abilities of our doctors, then supply and demand suggests that we would go to the better service... given that those doctors are in our insurance networks. Those better doctors would probably have more accurate diagnoses, resulting in prompt treatment of conditions and fewer unnecessary visits to a whirlwind of specialists. Bottom line, health care and malpractice suit costs would be reduced, not increased.

Your thoughts?