Another day.
Another day without health care reform. Another day of ever higher costs for my friends and family.
A friend just got a notice that her health insurance rates are going up 9%. She doesn't know how she'll afford it. Her wages have been cut.
Still, the Republicans continue to mislead the public and block efforts to reform the system.
I find in hard to believe that each and every Republican agrees with the party line propaganda. But, like a good cult, the Republicans keep their members in line.
Even the former Maverick, John McCain, has been forced to tow the Republican party line.
During the Presidential campaign, Senator McCain corrected a supporter in a town hall meeting who claimed Barack Obama was an "Arab." More recently, he declined to disavow Sarah Palin's claim that the Health Care Reform bill included a provision for "Death Panels." (Note to Fox Newz - not to be confused with any real news organization - viewers, there's no such provision. There never was.)
It's a shame when a once honorable politician must ignore the truth in order to satisfy the most extreme members of his party.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Health Care Reform Opposition
I see that the US Chamber of Commerce, is again running ads against health care reform. They want citizens to call the targeted legislator to encourage him or her to "stand up for jobs" and vote against health care reform as it's "a health care bill we can't afford."
The US Chamber of Commerce is the lobbying arm for Big Business. They're anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-consumer, and anti-employee. While claiming to represent businesses of all sizes, and now, apparently, legions of the unemployed, they only really represent large business interests.
So, why would large companies (Big Business) want to continue with the current costly and unsustainable health care system? After all, Big Business was quick to abandon traditional pension plans when they were deemed to be too costly. They were quick to cut wages, and lay off millions of employees when the employees were deemed to be too costly.
Yet, for some reason, Big Business doesn't want Health Care Reform. They, have fought hard to prevent any reform from passing. They, and their Republican allies, have used every lie and distortion imaginable to deceive and frighten the American public. Some of these have included:
- It's a Government take-over of Health Care. We can't allow Government to take-over 1/6th of our economy.
- The Government will appoint "death squads" to deny critical care to dying people.
- The Government won't allow you to see the doctor of your choice.
- Health Care will be rationed.
- A bureaucrat will stand between you and your doctor.
- They're going to cut Medicare. Too bad, old folks.
- The reform bill is too big. There are too many pages to read. Stop, then take smaller steps toward reform.
Distortion. Lies. Lies, upon lies, followed by more lies. It's been a full force Marketing blitz, complete with the obligatory political sound bites. It's been designed to confuse the American people, while scaring them into believing that health care reform is a bad thing. Meanwhile, big business goes on as usual while health care costs continue to rise, and more and more people become uninsured.
A Big Business marketing campaign is a powerful thing. Most are designed to convince millions of otherwise smart people that they can't possibly do without the product being advertised, no matter what it is ("Doctor, I need that new drug, "Snake Oil," which I saw on TV. Tell me what it does.").
Advertising convinced millions of people to smoke. For years the tobacco companies swore smoking was safe and they made billions of dollars selling their harmful products to unsuspecting consumers.
Effective marketing, and the 24/7 cheer-leading by Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization), stoked public opinion to support starting two costly, and unnecessary, wars. In fact, the marketing was so successful that about 25% of the population still believes that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
Today, due to another effective marketing misinformation campaign, a similar percentage of the population believes that the entire national debt was caused by the Democrats. They seemingly have forgotten that it was Republicans that started two costly wars while refusing to pay for them. It was the first time in history that taxes were not raised to pay for a war. They also forget that it was (Big Business) corporate greed along with lax oversight by a Republican administration which nearly toppled the World's economy. Yet the Republicans continue to call for more tax cuts as the nation falls deeper into debt.
But, I digress.
Why does Big Business want to keep the country's health care system as it is today?
One might make a good argument that providing health care insurance to their employees is a valuable Profit Center for large companies (Big Business).
Let me explain.
According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 89% of workers employed in firms of 5,000 or more employees (read Big Business) were covered by a self-insured health care plan offered by their employer. And, overall, 55% of all workers with health insurance are covered by a self-insured plan offered by their employer. The data is from 2008.
In a self-insured plan, the employer in effect becomes the insurance company. The employer decides what benefits to offer, how much those benefits are worth, and how much to charge their employees. In turn, they typically hire another company (often an insurance company) to administer their plan. In many cases, their employees don't even know that they're covered by a self-insured plan, believing instead that the plan administrator is the insurer.
To limit their risk, many self-insured companies have put caps on annual, or lifetime, benefits. Once an employee reaches one of the limits, they are no longer covered under the plan. Other companies buy blanket insurance policies which kick-in to cover any expenses which exceeded a given amount. Either way, the self-insured employer's risk is limited. Making a profit is almost guaranteed.
Offering self-insured health-care provides a number of advantages to large companies. The plans typically are exempt from state insurance regulations and mandates. The companies can offer different plans to different groups of employees (for example, offering the best coverage to the executive group). And, as the insurer, the employer is entitled to review the medical records of their employees.
Insurance companies have tended to be quite profitable. Is it unreasonable to think that self-insured plans have also been quite profitable for large (Big Business) employers?
It's also quite possible that self-insured companies attempt to tilt the odds in their favor, just like traditional insurance companies do, by eliminating high risk or high cost patients from their plans.
In fact, it's much easier for self-insured employers to eliminate high risk patients from their plans. An insurance company must figure out how to drop coverage for a patient without causing regulators to become suspicious. All the employer has to do is fire the employee, with no reference made to the cost of providing health care. It's simple. When an employee is diagnosed with an expensive chronic illness, or any condition which is predicted to require significant expenditures in the future, the company can quietly fire the employee in the midst of a "strategic corporate realignment" combined with a few "targeted layoffs."
So, I guess can understand why Big Business, the US Chamber of Commerce, and their Republican allies want to fight health care reform. The current system is profitable for Big Business, while providing extraordinary control over their employees. The fact that it stinks for everyone else is irrelevant. If it's good for Big Business it's good for the country. So sayeth the US Chamber of Commerce and the Republicans.
God Help Us.
The US Chamber of Commerce is the lobbying arm for Big Business. They're anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-consumer, and anti-employee. While claiming to represent businesses of all sizes, and now, apparently, legions of the unemployed, they only really represent large business interests.
So, why would large companies (Big Business) want to continue with the current costly and unsustainable health care system? After all, Big Business was quick to abandon traditional pension plans when they were deemed to be too costly. They were quick to cut wages, and lay off millions of employees when the employees were deemed to be too costly.
Yet, for some reason, Big Business doesn't want Health Care Reform. They, have fought hard to prevent any reform from passing. They, and their Republican allies, have used every lie and distortion imaginable to deceive and frighten the American public. Some of these have included:
- It's a Government take-over of Health Care. We can't allow Government to take-over 1/6th of our economy.
- The Government will appoint "death squads" to deny critical care to dying people.
- The Government won't allow you to see the doctor of your choice.
- Health Care will be rationed.
- A bureaucrat will stand between you and your doctor.
- They're going to cut Medicare. Too bad, old folks.
- The reform bill is too big. There are too many pages to read. Stop, then take smaller steps toward reform.
Distortion. Lies. Lies, upon lies, followed by more lies. It's been a full force Marketing blitz, complete with the obligatory political sound bites. It's been designed to confuse the American people, while scaring them into believing that health care reform is a bad thing. Meanwhile, big business goes on as usual while health care costs continue to rise, and more and more people become uninsured.
A Big Business marketing campaign is a powerful thing. Most are designed to convince millions of otherwise smart people that they can't possibly do without the product being advertised, no matter what it is ("Doctor, I need that new drug, "Snake Oil," which I saw on TV. Tell me what it does.").
Advertising convinced millions of people to smoke. For years the tobacco companies swore smoking was safe and they made billions of dollars selling their harmful products to unsuspecting consumers.
Effective marketing, and the 24/7 cheer-leading by Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization), stoked public opinion to support starting two costly, and unnecessary, wars. In fact, the marketing was so successful that about 25% of the population still believes that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
Today, due to another effective marketing misinformation campaign, a similar percentage of the population believes that the entire national debt was caused by the Democrats. They seemingly have forgotten that it was Republicans that started two costly wars while refusing to pay for them. It was the first time in history that taxes were not raised to pay for a war. They also forget that it was (Big Business) corporate greed along with lax oversight by a Republican administration which nearly toppled the World's economy. Yet the Republicans continue to call for more tax cuts as the nation falls deeper into debt.
But, I digress.
Why does Big Business want to keep the country's health care system as it is today?
One might make a good argument that providing health care insurance to their employees is a valuable Profit Center for large companies (Big Business).
Let me explain.
According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 89% of workers employed in firms of 5,000 or more employees (read Big Business) were covered by a self-insured health care plan offered by their employer. And, overall, 55% of all workers with health insurance are covered by a self-insured plan offered by their employer. The data is from 2008.
In a self-insured plan, the employer in effect becomes the insurance company. The employer decides what benefits to offer, how much those benefits are worth, and how much to charge their employees. In turn, they typically hire another company (often an insurance company) to administer their plan. In many cases, their employees don't even know that they're covered by a self-insured plan, believing instead that the plan administrator is the insurer.
To limit their risk, many self-insured companies have put caps on annual, or lifetime, benefits. Once an employee reaches one of the limits, they are no longer covered under the plan. Other companies buy blanket insurance policies which kick-in to cover any expenses which exceeded a given amount. Either way, the self-insured employer's risk is limited. Making a profit is almost guaranteed.
Offering self-insured health-care provides a number of advantages to large companies. The plans typically are exempt from state insurance regulations and mandates. The companies can offer different plans to different groups of employees (for example, offering the best coverage to the executive group). And, as the insurer, the employer is entitled to review the medical records of their employees.
Insurance companies have tended to be quite profitable. Is it unreasonable to think that self-insured plans have also been quite profitable for large (Big Business) employers?
It's also quite possible that self-insured companies attempt to tilt the odds in their favor, just like traditional insurance companies do, by eliminating high risk or high cost patients from their plans.
In fact, it's much easier for self-insured employers to eliminate high risk patients from their plans. An insurance company must figure out how to drop coverage for a patient without causing regulators to become suspicious. All the employer has to do is fire the employee, with no reference made to the cost of providing health care. It's simple. When an employee is diagnosed with an expensive chronic illness, or any condition which is predicted to require significant expenditures in the future, the company can quietly fire the employee in the midst of a "strategic corporate realignment" combined with a few "targeted layoffs."
So, I guess can understand why Big Business, the US Chamber of Commerce, and their Republican allies want to fight health care reform. The current system is profitable for Big Business, while providing extraordinary control over their employees. The fact that it stinks for everyone else is irrelevant. If it's good for Big Business it's good for the country. So sayeth the US Chamber of Commerce and the Republicans.
God Help Us.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tiger Woods News?
Not long ago, there was a brief dust-up between Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization) and the White House after Fox declined to interrupt its entertainment programming to cover a White House event live.
The real news organizations covered the event. They then offered some brief, fair, balanced, analysis and commentary. Then, they went back to their entertainment offerings.
Contrast that to this morning.
The Tiger Woods (non-news) apology was covered live by the real news organizations AND Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization). Fox interrupted their entertainment programming to cover the Tiger Woods apology live.
Such is the sorry state of news reporting these days. News organizations pander to the public's obsession with celebrity, while failing to deal seriously with major issues of the day. And, one pseudo news organization panders to an ideology, often refusing to report real news.
It's no wonder this country is in trouble. Far too many tend to believe everything they hear, yet listen to only one source. We do not think. They do not question.
Only if we attempt to balance the sources we listen to, open our minds, think and question, will we once again return to the ideals of our forefathers.
The real news organizations covered the event. They then offered some brief, fair, balanced, analysis and commentary. Then, they went back to their entertainment offerings.
Contrast that to this morning.
The Tiger Woods (non-news) apology was covered live by the real news organizations AND Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization). Fox interrupted their entertainment programming to cover the Tiger Woods apology live.
Such is the sorry state of news reporting these days. News organizations pander to the public's obsession with celebrity, while failing to deal seriously with major issues of the day. And, one pseudo news organization panders to an ideology, often refusing to report real news.
It's no wonder this country is in trouble. Far too many tend to believe everything they hear, yet listen to only one source. We do not think. They do not question.
Only if we attempt to balance the sources we listen to, open our minds, think and question, will we once again return to the ideals of our forefathers.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Norm Coleman on the Radio
He was in rare form.
He criticized the partisanship and lack of civility in Washington. Both were traits which eluded him when he was in office - but he seemed happy to criticize his failings in others.
He also criticized the Democrats for "ignoring" the public rage expressed in last summer's town hall meetings.
After all, populist anger must be listened to. The "public" is happy with their current health insurance. They don't want any government mandated changes.
Norm followed this up by criticizing President Obama for listening to the public anger and attacking the banks.
Populist anger must not be listened to. At least not when it would lead to punishment of Big Business.
Political "Norm Speak" in action. Hogwash.
At least Norm still reads and adheres to the Republican "Talking Points." Ordinary middle class citizens must not be listened to. Big Business, the wealthy, and their supportive Republican drones are the only ones who count.
It's true. He heard it (constantly) on Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization).
Norm followed this up by criticizing President Obama for listening to the public anger and attacking the banks.
Populist anger must not be listened to. At least not when it would lead to punishment of Big Business.
Political "Norm Speak" in action. Hogwash.
At least Norm still reads and adheres to the Republican "Talking Points." Ordinary middle class citizens must not be listened to. Big Business, the wealthy, and their supportive Republican drones are the only ones who count.
It's true. He heard it (constantly) on Fox Newz (not to be confused with any real news organization).
Friday, January 8, 2010
Fox Newz Shows its Stripes Once Again
Fox News (aka Faux News or Fox Newz) has shown its true stripes once again.
Yesterday, President Obama held an afternoon news conference to talk about airline safety and the failure of the nation's intelligence and homeland security communities to prevent an attempt to blow up an aircraft on Christmas Day. As with the failures of 9/11, there was a failure to "connect the dots."
I would have preferred that President Obama be more honest with the American Public. The truth is that any determined individual, or group, can bring down any airliner, or commit any other act of terrorism, and the government can do little to stop them. But, I recognize why he couldn't say so.
What did strike me about the news conference, however, was that the three major news organizations (ABC, CBS, and NBC) interrupted entertainment programming on their networks to cover it live. Fox (Faux) News chose to ignore it. Their regular programming ran without interruption.
I enjoy Fox News. I sometimes watch it for its entertainment value. But, more often I watch it to learn what Big Business, the Republican Party, the wealthy, and their Anti-Tax lobby are doing to brainwash the public in support of their agenda.
It would be a real hoot, if the ramifications for the country weren't so serious.
Yesterday, President Obama held an afternoon news conference to talk about airline safety and the failure of the nation's intelligence and homeland security communities to prevent an attempt to blow up an aircraft on Christmas Day. As with the failures of 9/11, there was a failure to "connect the dots."
I would have preferred that President Obama be more honest with the American Public. The truth is that any determined individual, or group, can bring down any airliner, or commit any other act of terrorism, and the government can do little to stop them. But, I recognize why he couldn't say so.
What did strike me about the news conference, however, was that the three major news organizations (ABC, CBS, and NBC) interrupted entertainment programming on their networks to cover it live. Fox (Faux) News chose to ignore it. Their regular programming ran without interruption.
I enjoy Fox News. I sometimes watch it for its entertainment value. But, more often I watch it to learn what Big Business, the Republican Party, the wealthy, and their Anti-Tax lobby are doing to brainwash the public in support of their agenda.
It would be a real hoot, if the ramifications for the country weren't so serious.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
RIP Deborah Howell
Deborah Howell was one of the last great newspaper editors. She held the position before Rupert Murdoch, and the Faux News organizations of the world, destroyed the profession.
Ms. Howell did a marvelous job at the St. Paul Pioneer Press, before moving on to other challenges.
She was reportedly struck and killed while crossing a street in New Zealand.
May she Rest in Peace.
Ms. Howell did a marvelous job at the St. Paul Pioneer Press, before moving on to other challenges.
She was reportedly struck and killed while crossing a street in New Zealand.
May she Rest in Peace.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Cell Phones, Traffic Deaths, and Politics
I note that under a "Freedom of Information Act" request, the New York Times forced the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to release a copy of a 2003 report on cell phones and "Distracted Driving."
Supposedly, it was Congress (this time) which "ordered" that the report be withheld, not the science hating Bush Administration. I'd like to see some names. Who was involved, and was their "debt" to the cell phone industry so great that they "pushed" the NHTSA to suppress the scientific evidence?
Were the same forces at work over at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in their examination of the facts and their conclusions regarding the collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis? Was the lack of a public hearing to examine the facts done to avoid embarrassing Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, a Republican "star?" After all he vetoed money for road maintenance in Minnesota.
All politicians seem to lack a certain amount of candor and honesty. Republicans just seem to have taken dishonesty to entirely new levels.
I find it entirely plausible that Republicans might have "ordered" the suppression of research which might have "damaged" the cell phone industry while saving lives. Republicans have a long history of supporting big business at the expense of ordinary citizens.
I hope that news organizations continue to research the issue. The people who "ordered" the suppression of potentially life saving research to support the cell phone lobby should be named and asked to account for their actions.
And, now that the secret's out, how about publishing a clean copy of the report on the NHTSA web site, and formally submit it to Congress for review?
Supposedly, it was Congress (this time) which "ordered" that the report be withheld, not the science hating Bush Administration. I'd like to see some names. Who was involved, and was their "debt" to the cell phone industry so great that they "pushed" the NHTSA to suppress the scientific evidence?
Were the same forces at work over at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in their examination of the facts and their conclusions regarding the collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis? Was the lack of a public hearing to examine the facts done to avoid embarrassing Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, a Republican "star?" After all he vetoed money for road maintenance in Minnesota.
All politicians seem to lack a certain amount of candor and honesty. Republicans just seem to have taken dishonesty to entirely new levels.
I find it entirely plausible that Republicans might have "ordered" the suppression of research which might have "damaged" the cell phone industry while saving lives. Republicans have a long history of supporting big business at the expense of ordinary citizens.
I hope that news organizations continue to research the issue. The people who "ordered" the suppression of potentially life saving research to support the cell phone lobby should be named and asked to account for their actions.
And, now that the secret's out, how about publishing a clean copy of the report on the NHTSA web site, and formally submit it to Congress for review?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Palin - "I am not a Quitter"
Sarah Palin has granted limited interviews to selected press organizations.
Contrary to the evidence at hand, she claims she's not a quitter.
Like far too many politicians these days - she seems to lack a firm grasp on reality. It's unfortunate that Republican extremists insist upon treating her as if she were the new Messiah.
Yes, she can draw a crowd. But, so can any natural disaster.
The country deserves better than what the Republicans are offering.
Constructive problem solving rather than blind ideology and delusional spin would go a long way.
Contrary to the evidence at hand, she claims she's not a quitter.
Like far too many politicians these days - she seems to lack a firm grasp on reality. It's unfortunate that Republican extremists insist upon treating her as if she were the new Messiah.
Yes, she can draw a crowd. But, so can any natural disaster.
The country deserves better than what the Republicans are offering.
Constructive problem solving rather than blind ideology and delusional spin would go a long way.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Goodbye Sarah Palin
Unbelievable news today.
In a rambling statement, using words reminding one of a Tina Fey parody, Governor Palin announced she would not seek reelection as Alaska's Governor. And, further, she will resign the office.
The explanation given for her pending resignation sounded lame. One wonders what she is really thinking. Did the (mostly justified) criticism of her finally get to her? Is she really thinking of higher office? Did the governor of South Carolina "vacation" in Alaska? Is there some as yet undisclosed scandal yet to be reported? Time will tell.
I hope Alaska's Lieutenant Governor is more qualified than Minnesota's Lieutenant Governor. If not, the State of Alaska is in for even more pain than they've endured since Ms. Palin's failed Vice Presidential folly.
I note that news organizations are still trying to obtain copies of Ms. Palin's email messages. As I recall, they were originally told they'd have to pay - in some cases tens of millions of dollars - to see these public documents. One can only imagine why the state wants to continue to stonewall such requests. My take is that the release would further embarrass Ms. Palin and subject her to further (justified) criticism.
So much for Ms. Palin's promise of honest and transparent government.
I found myself chuckling that the State of Alaska says that its systems are so bad that her email messages aren't readily available. If the state's systems are truly that bad - and I doubt it - perhaps they should contract with the Republican's "beloved" private sector to provide the service. I hear that Google provides reliable email service with loads of disk space.
The State of Alaska has also indicated that if and when they provide the requested copies of the email messages, they must do so on paper. It reminds me of at least one major Minnesota company's response to periodic visits from government auditors. They would print reams of paper reports. Box upon box of computer printouts would be delivered by forklift to a conference room and stacked against the walls for use by the auditors. When a young employee asked why the data wasn't provided electronically, the answer was "We don't want to make it easy for them."
It would appear that Governor Palin has attempted to run Alaska as if it were a business.
In a rambling statement, using words reminding one of a Tina Fey parody, Governor Palin announced she would not seek reelection as Alaska's Governor. And, further, she will resign the office.
The explanation given for her pending resignation sounded lame. One wonders what she is really thinking. Did the (mostly justified) criticism of her finally get to her? Is she really thinking of higher office? Did the governor of South Carolina "vacation" in Alaska? Is there some as yet undisclosed scandal yet to be reported? Time will tell.
I hope Alaska's Lieutenant Governor is more qualified than Minnesota's Lieutenant Governor. If not, the State of Alaska is in for even more pain than they've endured since Ms. Palin's failed Vice Presidential folly.
I note that news organizations are still trying to obtain copies of Ms. Palin's email messages. As I recall, they were originally told they'd have to pay - in some cases tens of millions of dollars - to see these public documents. One can only imagine why the state wants to continue to stonewall such requests. My take is that the release would further embarrass Ms. Palin and subject her to further (justified) criticism.
So much for Ms. Palin's promise of honest and transparent government.
I found myself chuckling that the State of Alaska says that its systems are so bad that her email messages aren't readily available. If the state's systems are truly that bad - and I doubt it - perhaps they should contract with the Republican's "beloved" private sector to provide the service. I hear that Google provides reliable email service with loads of disk space.
The State of Alaska has also indicated that if and when they provide the requested copies of the email messages, they must do so on paper. It reminds me of at least one major Minnesota company's response to periodic visits from government auditors. They would print reams of paper reports. Box upon box of computer printouts would be delivered by forklift to a conference room and stacked against the walls for use by the auditors. When a young employee asked why the data wasn't provided electronically, the answer was "We don't want to make it easy for them."
It would appear that Governor Palin has attempted to run Alaska as if it were a business.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Thank God it's Over
Minnesota's long running 2008 Senatorial contest has - finally - come to an end. Norm Coleman has - finally - admitted defeat. Al Franken has - finally - been declared as the winner.
I can't say I'm sorry to see Norm go.
I know Norm Coleman once tried to be an honorable man. But, somewhere along the line he changed.
I hope he can find gainful employment outside the public sector where his misguided views will not have such a negative, divisive, impact on the long suffering citizens of Minnesota.
For Senator Franken, let's hope that he's able to maintain perspective. People do matter - more so than special interest groups. And, certainly more than how one politician fares in the next election.
I can't say I'm sorry to see Norm go.
I know Norm Coleman once tried to be an honorable man. But, somewhere along the line he changed.
I hope he can find gainful employment outside the public sector where his misguided views will not have such a negative, divisive, impact on the long suffering citizens of Minnesota.
For Senator Franken, let's hope that he's able to maintain perspective. People do matter - more so than special interest groups. And, certainly more than how one politician fares in the next election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)