Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
It's nothing we didn't know, but once in a while it has to be spelled out in the newspaper of record.
The US spends more than any other country on health care, but ranks 49th in life expectancy. If I had a dollar for all the times I've heard we have "the best health care in the world", I wouldn't have problems paying my bloated premiums.
Researchers at the Mailman School for Public Health at Columbia University compared the US to Australia, Austria, Belgium, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland. Besides focusing on costs, they focused on 15 year survival rates for people at 45 and 65. They got their data from the World Health Organization and looked at the years from 1975 to 2005. Interestingly, that period of time saw the deregulation of many industries in the US, the loss of our manufacturing base, lower union membership, and, in my opinion, the dismantling of the middle class in this country.
In 1975 the United States was close to the average in health care costs, and last in 15-year survival for 45-year-old men. By 2005 its costs had more than tripled, far surpassing increases elsewhere, but the survival number was still last - a little over 90 percent, compared with more than 94 percent for Swedes, Swiss and Australians. For women, it was 94 percent in the United States, versus 97 percent in Switzerland, Australia and Japan.
The numbers for 65-year-olds in 2005 were similar: about 58 percent of American men could be expected to survive 15 years, compared with more than 65 percent of Australians, Japanese and Swiss. While more than 80 percent of 65-year-old women in France, Switzerland, and Japan would survive 15 years, only about 70 percent of American women could be expected to live that long.
Many claim our national ill health is due to obesity, smoking, etc., but any visitor to Paris knows that they smoke and drink us under the table. And the Swiss? Fondue, anyone?.
Peter Muennig, one of the study's authors (bold mine)
"Smoking and obesity are still major risk factors for an individual's health," he said. "But they are sapping life expectancy in all countries. Whereas in the U.S. we have a highly inefficient health system that's taking away financial resources from other lifesaving programs."
Quick--let's spend our time nullifying health care reform in New Hampshire.
2011-H-0072-R title: requiring that New Hampshire join the lawsuit challenging federal health care reform legislation, and repealing the authority for state implementation of federal health care reform.
Sponsors: (Prime)Steve Vaillancourt
When Bill O'Brien and his Gang exempt New Hampshire from the new health care law, how much will it cost the state in working families with pre-existing conditions who move away?
Bonus Question: will the economic toll taken on New Hampshire be greater than that already exacted by Lieberman and Friends when they ended the public option?
The American people speak to Frank, Charlie, and Kelly, according to a new PPP poll:
Just 28% of Republican respondents said that new anti-reform members should take their federal benefits, while a whopping 58% said they shouldn't. Among independents -- who voted for the GOP in big numbers on Nov. 2 -- 56% say politicians who made health care repeal a cornerstone of their campaigns should deny themselves their government benefits. Only 27% said they should take them.
...Overall, the poll shows the electorate is not interested in paying for health care benefits for politicians who opposed government-funded health care on the campaign trail. Just 33% said anti-health care politicians should take their government benefits, while 53% said they should burn their government care cards.
Uh-oh. All three of our shiny new GOP winners ran on repealing RomneyCare "ObamaCare." Looks like another job for Mystery Bank Accounts.
In related news from a different polling outfit, a majority of Americans favor either keeping or expanding the new health care law.
This makes perfect sense to me - and it would save Joe Taxpayer a bit of money too:
A group of House Democrats has released a letter to Republican congressional leaders calling on them to announce which of their members will be forgoing their congressional benefit health insurance (which is subsidized by the government) in light of their party's opposition to health care reform overhaul legislation.
"If your conference wants to deny millions of Americans affordable health care, your members should walk that walk," four Democrats write in the letter,
Here's a new member of that congress - from Frank Guinta's issue page:
"Health care needs reform - not a government takeover."
Frank Guinta opposes the government-run health care scheme that requires government to write a blank check it can't cover and threatens the quality of our care.
Given the multiple bank accounts worth between $250,000 and $500,000 Congressman-Elect Guinta insists are his, he can likely afford health care that isn't a "government-run scheme."
In the aftermath of the elections, I've got one more thank-you to give to New Hampshire's Democratic federal delegation, both ongoing and otherwise. And that is one more note of thanks for getting the health care bill passed.
Enough has been said about the specifics of the bill itself, and some people will no doubt comment snippily that it was a health insurance bill rather than a health care bill. I want to thank New Hampshire's Democrats in Congress for helping pass this bill in the face of a hostile and partisan media that says things like this:
Gallup: Four in 10 Americans Believe Healthcare Law Goes Too Far
They could have said this instead:
Gallup: 49% of Americans Believe Healthcare Law Does Not Go Too Far
Kelly Ayotte wants to repeal the private health insurance reform law for you and me, but when it comes to getting health care from the government, she's down with that.
If it's for her, I mean:
Ayotte would vote to repeal President Barack Obama's health care law and replace it with free market insurance reforms such as letting insurers sell coverage across state lines, letting businesses pool their coverage and placing limits on damages from medical malpractice lawsuits.
But while working for the state as Gov. Craig Benson's legal counsel, Ayotte was on the taxpayer-subsidized New Hampshire health plan.
"It sounds so good, and it's such a warm message to say we're not gonna deny anyone from a preexisting condition," Huckabee explained at the Value Voters Summit today. "Look, I think that sounds terrific, but I want to ask you something from a common sense perspective. Suppose we applied that principle [to] our property insurance. And you can call your insurance agent and say, "I'd like to buy some insurance for my house." He'd say, "Tell me about your house." "Well sir, it burned down yesterday, but I'd like to insure it today." And he'll say, "I'm sorry, but we can't insure it after it's already burned." Well, no pre-existing conditions."
I know we are in the height of mid-term election fever right now. Nonetheless, I think it's important to document the monstrous things the POTUS wannabes say, especially for a blog that calls the First-in-the-Nation Primary state its home. At some point soon he'll be here smiling and glad-handing.
Sometimes stories happen because of planning; other times serendipity intervenes, which is how we got to the conversation we'll be having today.
In an exchange of comments on the Blue Hampshire site, I proposed an idea that could be of real value to unions, workers...and surprisingly, employers.
If things worked out correctly, not only would lots of people feel a real desire to have unions represent them, but employers would potentially be coming to unions looking to forge relationships, and, just to make it better, this plan bypasses virtually all of the tools and techniques employers use to shut out union organizers.
Since I just thought this up myself, I'm really not sure exactly how practical the whole thing is, and the last part of the discussion today will be provided by you, as I ask you to sound off on whether this plan could work, and if so, how it could be made better.
It's a new week...so let's all put our heads together and rebuild the labor movement, shall we?
Did you know that the new health care law that Carol Shea-Porter worked so hard to pass (despite it being a less progressive bill - with a public option - than she would have wanted) will allow for no cost preventive care in some instances? (email)
Washington, D.C. - Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter today released the following statement regarding the announcement from the Department of Health and Human Services that new health care plans must cover preventive services at no cost to the patient.
"The health care reform package enacted in March is already helping Granite Staters," said Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter. "These newly enacted provisions will allow patients to receive free preventive care, which lowers medical costs and helps Americans lead healthier lives."
Depending on age and health risks, the types of preventive services that will be available without a deductible, co-pay or co-insurance under these new provisions include:
Blood pressure, diabetes, and cholesterol tests;
Many cancer screenings;
Routine vaccines for diseases such as measles, polio, or meningitis;
Flu and pneumonia shots;
Counseling, screening and vaccines for healthy pregnancies; and
Regular well-baby and well-child visits, from birth to age 21.
This is a no-brainer. If people can afford to go to the doctor for preventive care, they will spend far less later. And of course the larger point: early detection is key to better health and longevity.
It's CSP Week on BH. Learn more here about it. Get involved, and give what you can.
If you're on Medicare, the federal health program for people 65 and older and the disabled, and you've fallen into the prescription-drug coverage gap known as the doughnut hole this year, the U.S. government is putting a $250 check in the mail for you starting Thursday. You don't have to apply for your check because Medicare tracks your drug costs. The agency will send you your $250 check automatically as soon as you reach the coverage gap this year, experts from AARP said during a conference call Tuesday.
Can you hear it? That's the sound of Bush's deficit-laden Medicare Part D donut hole being filled. And it doesn't end there with that quick fix. The new deficit-reducing health care reform bill slowly fills that hole so that seniors don't get dumped into the political ploy W. pushed on them back in the day.
The closing of the Medicare Part D donut hole is a major achievement brought to you by the Democratic party, over unbending opposition from Republicans.
But what you may not know is the the critical role Carol Shea-Porter played in this aspect of the health care bill. Back in December, she was leading the charge:
And when the Senate was threatening to water down the closing of the donut hole, Carol Shea-Porter stood firm. January:
While we applaud the Senate's efforts to shrink the donut hole in 2010, it would not be completely eliminated. The House language provides for similar immediate relief, but continues to make additional progress in the following years until the coverage gap is fully closed in 2019. Efforts to partially alleviate the financial burden caused by the gap are important, but they must be accompanied by a long-term approach that provides for the complete elimination of the donut hole. The House-passed language achieves precisely that.
Others may disagree, and they are many hands that went into this critical piece of the health reform bill, but I consider Shea-Porter's leadership on this to be her signature achievement in her time in congress so far. She never backed down, and as a result we have a deficit-reducing bill that makes will significantly improve the lives of seniors.
It's CSP Week on BH. Learn more here about it. Get involved, and give what you can.
Earlier this morning, after a great pancake breakfast with more than 200 supporters, I officially filled out the paperwork to become a Democratic candidate for the US Senate.
I want to thank those of you who joined me this morning at the Statehouse. Not only was it a truly humbling show of support for Peggo and me, but it was also a great sign of things to come as we get close to November 2.
(Too bad Jeb Bradley and Kelly Ayotte and every NHGOPer in-between have already gone whole hog into the repeal fringe. - promoted by Dean Barker)
There is a very funny article in the Washington Post today that shows how far and how fast Republicans are backpedaling on "repeal":
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...
Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, the poster boy for the conservative insurgency, said on Monday that he wasn't sure whether he'd support overturning the health care law, calling moves to do so "a little premature." As ThinkProgress notes, Rep. Phil Gingrey told CNN that he "does not want" to throw out everything in the bill, noting that there are many provisions - including health insurance exchanges, electronic medical records, greater coverage for dependents, expanded Medicaid, and increased consumer protections - that he supports.
So in about 12 hours, the GOP's position has gone from "repeal this socialist monstrosity that will destroy our final freedoms" to "there are some things we don't like about this legislation and would like to repeal, and there are some things we support and would like to keep."
At this rate, they'll be running on expanding the bill come November.
Question for New Hampshire Republicans: will they jump off the "repeal" bandwagon, reading the same tea leaves that Brown, et al, are reading now that the people are learning about exactly what is in this bill? Or will they go off the "repeal" cliff?
Concord -- New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley issued the following statement on the historic vote in the House to pass comprehensive health insurance reform:
"The House passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act brings our country another step closer to guaranteeing comprehensive health care for all Americans. This legislation reins in the insurance companies' worst practices while extending coverage to 36 million Americans and cutting the deficit by more than $100 billion in ten years.
"In the Granite State alone, more than 140,000 people are uninsured, and the number grows daily as rising premium costs make it more difficult for middle class families to afford quality health insurance. Earlier this year, WellPoint Insurance announced that premiums for New Hampshire residents would increase 12 to 13%.
"This landmark reform could not have been possible without the hard work of New Hampshire's Democratic congressional delegation - Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Congressman Paul Hodes, and Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter.
"Specifically, the legislation includes four key cost savings provisions that Senator Shaheen authored, including measures that will help Americans access more affordable prescription drugs, prevent costly hospital re-admissions, improve the coordination of care, and protect access to comparative effectiveness research so that patients and doctors can make more informed decisions.
"The bill also includes provisions that prevent insurance companies from cutting important coverage for women. Congressman Hodes refused to stop fighting until mammograms, mastectomy stay coverage, direct access to OB/GYNs, and maternity care coverage could not be cut from the plans currently held by 80% of New Hampshire's insured women.
"And thanks to the effort led by Congresswoman Shea-Porter, the Affordable Health Care for America Act will fully close the Medicare 'donut hole.' Eliminating this coverage gap is long overdue, and will alleviate the financial burden placed on thousands of senior citizens in the Granite State, many of whom are on a fixed income and rely on their Medicare coverage to survive."
(Posted by Harrell Kirstein, deputy press secretary for the New Hampshire Democratic Party.)
Senate Finance Chair Lou D'Allesandro (D-Manchester) is unsure about his own party leader's approach toward controlling health care costs would actually work, but was certain that the Senate already had enough to do.
"[Hassan's proposal S.B. 505] is a huge undertaking," D'Allesandro said in an interview. "I am dealing with budget deficits, dealing with the LLC tax and gaming. My plate is full and her effort is Hurculean and doesn't have a lot of time for discussion."
Too busy with gaming to control health care costs.
If I wanted Senate leadership to pay more attention to my pet issue, I probably wouldn't try to negotiate horse trading via the "Senatoring is Hard" narrative. But that's just me.
LANGUAGE WARNING: Today's story is uncharacteristically blunt, and from this moment forward we will be using lots of inappropriate language in making our points.
Gentle Reader, you have been officially...warned.
With that in mind, if you take offense when confronted with language strong enough to knock a fuckin' buzzard off a shitwagon, please stop reading now.
It is by now fairly well known that Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's White House Chief of Staff, had a bit of a blow-up with liberals who were ready to start running ads against "blue dog" Democrats who were working very hard to shut down the health care reform effort.
Now we're not gonna get in the middle of that argument today; instead, since we're finally getting a chance to talk, I figured me and Rahm could get a few other things out of the way that have been on everyone's mind for the past year or so.
Reading various recent posts from some of our libertarian friends (deliberately using small "l" here to give all of them the benefit of the doubt) led me to start wondering if there were any examples of successful political systems in the world that embodied these principles. A little research revealed that while there were none that are totally libertarian in all senses, there were some exemplars pointed to by those of the libertarian persuasion, one list can be found here. To save you some time, the top 10 of these were as follows:
1. Estonia
2. Ireland
3. Canada
4. Switzerland
5. Iceland
6. Bahamas
7. UK
8. US
9. Cyprus
10. New Zealand
The arch-conservative Heritage Foundation has a similar list based solely on "economic freedom", their top ten are:
1. Hong Kong (wait a minute, isn't this now part of the PRC???)
2. Singapore
3. Australia
4. New Zealand
5. Ireland
6. Switzerland
7. Canada
8. US
9. Denmark
10. Chile
Looking at those countries in either list above the US, it's interesting (but no surprise) to note that ALL OF THEM have robust public health care options (I checked). It should be noted that Switzerland's model is a little different than some, but nonetheless guarantees health care for all citizens. These countries recognize that while individual freedoms may be paramount, free markets alone do not provide viable health care, and thus government has some responsibility in regulating health care and managing costs.
By the way, all of the top seven have some form of government managed pension or social security as well.
I have always been interested in Obama's early work as a community organizer, probably because I came to realize that I have done some of that as well, organizing a Democratic town committee, persuading people to work on town committees, helping to start the farmers market, etc. I never really thought about the ones who got involved because they had an agenda quite different from those who really wanted to accomplish a particular goal, maybe because they usually disappeared after the second or third meeting when they realized they were outnumbered, but I was taken by this argument about what Obama is doing with the health care meeting he is convening on the 25th.
I was supposed to begin the long-delayed series of PTSD stories I've been planning, but before we begin, I need to tell y'all about something that just happened in my house.
For us it wasn't a matter of life or death, but it is the kind of story that explains, perfectly, why we need to reform the health care system we have today-and for that matter, it's also a great explanation of why a single-payer system would be a giant step forward for everyone in this country, whether you're insured today or not.
It's also hilarious and sad and frustrating, all at the same time-which makes today's story a pretty good allegory for the current American way of doing health care.
So follow along, have a good laugh...and at the same time, take a minute to consider what could be, and how much less irritating things should be.
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."
- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
I see three paths:
* Pass a health care bill now (House votes for Senate, plus reconciliation).
* Have another round of Kick the Football with President Snowe Lucy.
* Walk away from the American people.
