Wyden's Health Plan Getting Attention
National Public Radio gave some exposure to Ron Wyden's Healthy Americans Act, the Senator's initiative to insure all Americans:
The bill would basically end the current system in which most Americans get health insurance from their employers. Wyden says that is happening anyway — he describes the employer-based system as "melting like a popsicle on a summer sidewalk." Instead, individuals would buy their own coverage — with financial help for those who cannot afford it. . . .
Wyden says American businesses are competing against people around the world who essentially get health care for free; governments in other countries subsidize those workers' health care.
"It's almost like our businesses are spotting the foreign competition 17 to 18 points on the very first day. We can't sustain that," he says.
The piece gives a nice overview of Wyden's career and history with health care, and there's a transcript on the NPR site with additional info, stats, and graphs. You can also listen to the segment here or go to Stand Tall For America to learn more about Wyden's plan.
Discuss.
|
April 16, 2007
Posted in in the news 2007. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Apr 16, '07
Senator Wyden introduced his plan last week at TPM Cafe (link), and stated that it was based on a set of principles that he and a bipartisan group of Senators had agreed on, one of which was "ensuring that every single American has affordable, quality, private health coverage".
Notice the word "private". The Healthy Americans Act mandates that all citizens purchase health insurance from a private health insurance company. No competition between private and public health insurance providers (as included in the John Edwards plan) is allowed.
The Healthy Americans Act ensures that private, for-profit health insurance companies will make lots of money off of you and me. It does not ensure access to affordable health care. Senator Wyden, we can do better.
(Click here for a more detailed and better-written crique of the Wyden plan.)
Apr 16, '07
Senator Wyden’s ballyhooed health care reform is simply another sellout to the insurance industry, and his suggestion that Americans deserve the same plan members of Congress have is disingenuous at best. Federal workers have a single payer plan administered by private insurance companies. If we were covered under their system, we would still be subjected to the preexisting condition, the deductible, and the caps BS we have already. How can the Senator claim this is an improvement?
What we really need is a single payer Medicare-for-all program. The United Steelworkers Union and the AFL-CIO support just such a program. One might ask, is the Senator with us, or against us? Like his trade votes, Whden’s health care proposal is sadly anti-worker and pro big business.
Apr 16, '07
From Katu.com re Paralyzed Bend Teen. 'His mother, Sue Eklund said, "Right away the doctor told us he'll never breathe on his own, and he'll never move his arms." The Eklunds own a small janitorial business and said they don't have health insurance, only a medical savings account that they weren't able to put much money in. They estimate medical bills are running at $30,000 to $40,000 a day. They hope to get care for their son at a facility such as the Shriners Hospitals for Children in Sacramento, Calif.'
This is why we need coverage for EVERYONE. Why should this Oregon family have to have to depend on charity for the care of their child? This boy should have health care as a right-because he is an Oregonian. So whether it is Sen Wyden, Ben Westlund, or Gov. Ted. GET ON WITH IT! We can not afford to wait any longer.
8:12 p.m.
Apr 16, '07
Randy is right. There's absolutely no reason to wait any longer for universal health care.
We need to ensure the 47 million Americans that don't have health insurance - and do it right now. And we need to create portability for everyone else who gets it through their employers - so that they're not stuck in jobs they don't want, or terrified that they'll lose their job. And we need to decouple health care and employment, so that cutting health care isn't a viable business strategy (i.e. Wal-Mart).
Speaking for myself, I think single-payer sounds excellent. I have no love for the insurance industry. But here's my challenge to Robin and other single-payer absolutists: Name 40 members of the US Senate that support it today. (Keeping in mind that it'll take 60 votes to pass anything.)
The question that Senator Wyden has put before us is this: What's more important? Ensuring that all Americans have affordable, comprehensive, generous, nondiscriminatory health care? Or punishing the insurance companies?
Are we going to walk away from a viable universal-health care proposal - simply because it's got a financing scheme that maintains a role for the insurance industry?
Rest assured: The choice is not between single-payer and Wyden's plan. Rather, the choice before us is universal health care or more of the same.
And a note for Bruce, who said "we would still be subjected to the preexisting condition"... That's not correct. Wyden's plan is nondiscriminatory -- it specifically forbids insurance companies from cherry-picking the healthy people and using pre-existing conditions to deny people or raise their rates.
Full disclosure: My company is managing Wyden's website, Stand Tall For America, but I don't speak for the Senator or his staff. I invite you to learn more about the health care plan (or sign up to learn more) at STFA.
Apr 17, '07
ACORN is working on attaining affordable health care for all among other social justice issues. Their campaigns can be found at www.acorn.org.
Apr 17, '07
Kari,
Please note that I am not a "single-payer absolutist". The only alternative proposal that I specifically mentioned in my comment was John Edwards' plan, which allows private and public plans to compete. While this may eventually lead to single-payer, it does not start out as single-payer, making it unacceptable (I assume) to single-payer absolutists.
I'm not out to "punish" insurance companies, as you suggest. I support any solution that makes health care universal and does not give private health insurance companies a monopoly over most health care access. Private health insurance companies should have to compete with public alternatives (may the best provider win!).
I don't agree that Wyden's plan is the best we can do. I also don't agree that it is more politically acceptable than other plans (such as John Edwards' plan). We may have to wait until there are more votes in the Senate, and a Democratic President. But come 2009, we're likely to have achieved both those goals. Let's not kid ourselves about what can be accomplished before then, and let's not sell ourselves short about what we can achieve at that time. We can pass Universal Health Care without mandating that all Americans pay their health care tax directly to a small cabal of for-profit health insurance companies.
Robin
9:59 a.m.
Apr 17, '07
Sorry, Robin. It seems I misunderstood your "absolutism" (well, lack thereof) on the single-payer question. I've been batting those balls back over the net all over the place.
The plan from Senator Edwards is a fascinating one - and I'd love to be in the room to watch a President Edwards and Senator Wyden sort out the details. That could be a historic Oval Office chat.
Apr 17, '07
Whuddya know - we've got a plan right now here in Oregon that folks can work on!
We Can Do Better
10:07 a.m.
Apr 17, '07
It's also worth mentioning, in the spirit of transparency, that I posted this item, not Kari.
Apr 17, '07
Kari,
Thanks for the clarification. And I'm very much looking forward to that Oval Office chat myself.
Robin