It was little surprise that Sarah Palin’s first visit to our home and native land (of public health care and gay marriage) would be in Calgary. It also shouldn’t be surprising that she was able to curry favour with the local crowd by speaking at length and with much authority about the Alaska government’s process of securing TransCanada for the Alaska Pipeline Project.
What was fascinating about the ever-fascinating Sarah Palin’s speech was another of her Canadian connections. One that didn’t involve hockey.

“My first five years of life we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse (180km away. see map). Believe it or not – this was in the ‘60s – we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse. I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse and I think, isn’t that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada.”

Given all the politician-turned pundit’s warnings about the ills of expanding government role in U.S. health care (see: panels, death), this was, yep, pretty ironic-sounding. Now in fairness, she was born in Idaho and them moved to Alaska as an infant in 1964, two years before the Medical Care Act that established national medicare came to Canada. Several years after universal coverage came to acute hospital care like burns, mind you. But then, it’s not exactly anybody’s political choice where they receive medical attention when they’re less than five years old, to say nothing of the political ideologies one doesn’t really develop around that age.
SOURCE

Harkin: Reconciliation is a go

Sen. Tom Harkin told POLITICO that Senate Democratic leaders have decided to go the reconciliation route. The House, he said, will first pass the Senate bill after Senate leaders demonstrate to House leaders that they have the votes to pass reconciliation in the Senate.

Harkin made the comments after a meeting in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office including Harkin and Sens. Baucus, Dodd, Durbin, Schumer and Murray.

When asked whether the leaders had made the decision, Durbin said: “We are moving ahead with a version of the health care reform bill that we believe has a good chance of passing both the House and the Senate.”

He then put the onus on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to signal whether she can provide enough votes to pass the Senate bill, followed by a package of fixes through reconciliation.

“The first step is with Speaker Pelosi and so I will let her decide what it takes in the House,” Durbin said.

SOURCE

“Reconciliation is a legislative process in the United States Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster. Introduced in 1974, reconciliation limits debate and amendment, and therefore favors the majority party. Reconciliation also exists in the United States House of Representatives, but because the House regularly passes rules that constrain debate and amendment, the process has had a less significant impact on that body. “SOURCE

President Obama closed the meeting with a statement that basically boiled down to….. if we can come to some agreements, that’s great, but if not, the Democrats will move ahead and we’ll let the American people decide in the next election how they feel about health care reform.

I’m sure there is much in the health care reform bill that I would disagree with.  I personally think we would be a lot better off with universal single payer health care, BUT, I know there are others who are facing life without any health insurance and no means to get health care.  These are the Americans that have been caught in the pre-existing conditions exclusions or who have found themselves not only without health insurance but jobs.

I heard a lot of talk from Republicans about the free market and “choices” for consumers and frankly I think it’s a bunch of bullshit.  What choice does someone have currently if the insurance company says they won’t cover that person because of a pre-existing condition?  What choice do we really have when year after year the insurance industry raises our rates?  The only thing free about the market is the free ride the health insurance industry has had for years, including an exemption to the laws governing monopolies.  What I think the Republicans are really worried about is keeping the health insurance companies profitable because they have health insurance industry stock in their portfolios.

It’s time for regulation and it’s time to do away with the exemption from the monopoly laws the health insurance industry has enjoyed.

Well, bravo.  This was just an attempt to use Health Care Reform to undermine Roe v. Wade.  I wish these guys would get their religion out of our government.  Abortion is legal and it’s a health care issue and thus should be covered as health care.

WASHINGTON — The Senate has rejected an effort to stiffen abortion restrictions in the health care bill.

The vote was 54 to 45.

Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah wanted to ban any insurance plan that gets taxpayer dollars from offering abortion coverage. The stronger restrictions mirrored provisions in the House-passed health care bill.

The Senate bill currently allows insurance plans to cover abortions but tries to separate private funds from federal money. It specifies that abortion coverage can only be paid for with private dollars.

Majority Leader Harry Reid said the legislation is about access to health care, not abortion.

Rest of Article

Shatner: If you have money, you’re going to get health care. If you don’t have money, it’s more difficult.

Limbaugh: If you have money you’re going to get a house on the beach. If you don’t have money you’re going to live in a bungalow somewhere — that’s — that’s…

Shatner: Right, but we’re talking about health care.

Limbaugh: What’s the difference?

Shatner: The difference is we’re talking about health care.

Limbaugh: No…

Shatner: Not a house or a bungalow.

Limbaugh: You’re assuming that there’s some morally superior aspect to health care than there is to a house or a bungalow.

Shatner: No, not moral at all. I want to keep the subject for the moment on health care.SOURCE

Bill Kallio

Kallio lives in Richmond and is the state director for AARP Virginia.

AARP has been fighting for affordable health care for older people for 50 years. We want to thank Rep. Tom Perriello for his vote in favor of better health care for every Virginian by voting in favor of H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. The House bill takes a large step toward making health care more affordable and accessible for everyone.

[snip]

There has been much discussion about the various components of the bill. Some well-intentioned people also are spreading some misinformation about the proposal that AARP endorsed.

AARP is fighting for legislation that protects traditional Medicare benefits and holds down out-of-pocket costs. Removing waste and inefficiency from Medicare is critical to saving Medicare money and making sure it is financially sound for future retirees.

[snip]

The House health care reform bill includes Medicare savings measures supported by the nation’s largest hospital associations. The other providers are nursing homes and home health agencies, which traditionally enjoy high profit margins and still benefit from yearly pay raises.

By tying these pay raises to the productivity increases in the economy overall, these providers will still get billions more in funding over the next 10 years. The House reform plan would continue to allow people to receive the services they need, without padding excessive profit margins.

For example, Medicare is paying billions of dollars in subsidies to private insurance companies that cover some Medicare patients in Medicare Advantage plans, costing the government 14 percent more per patient. When these subsidies were created, they were supposed to be temporary — private insurance companies said that over time, they could “do more with less” than traditional Medicare. Instead, the subsidies increased. We can save Medicare billions of dollars and make sure patient care isn’t taking a back seat to insurance companies by reducing these subsidies.

The House plan would provide $502 billion in savings by cutting fraud, abuse and waste in the Medicare program. While this seems like a large cut, it represents only 7.1 percent of Medicare spending over the next 10 yea

REST OF ARTICLE

I’ve said all along that while I support the idea of health care reform, I would withhold judgment on the specific plan until I saw the plan.  I’m not sure I can support a plan that makes it harder for medicare beneficiaries to get home health care.

(Thanks for the link Sky.)

WASHINGTON — Snowflakes swirled around the Capitol on Saturday, whipped by wintry winds, but on the Senate floor inside, a heated debate raged as Democrats and Republicans traded jabs over legislation to achieve President Obama’s goal of near-universal health insurance coverage.

By a vote of 53 to 41, the Senate on Saturday rejected a Republican effort to block cutbacks in payments to home health agencies that provide nursing care and therapy to homebound Medicare beneficiaries.

Republicans voted against the cuts, saying they would hurt some of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. Most Democrats supported the cutbacks, saying they would eliminate waste and inefficiency in home care.

The Democrats’ health care bill would reduce projected Medicare spending on home care by $43 billion, or 13 percent, over the next 10 years. The savings would help offset the cost of subsidizing coverage for the uninsured.

[SNIP]

“We are reducing overpayments,” Mr. Baucus said. “We are rooting out fraud. We are getting the waste out. The savings go back in Medicare and extend the solvency of the trust fund.”

REST OF ARTICLE

The Senate voted on party lines Saturday night to end a Republican filibuster and bring a bill that would overhaul the nation’s health-care system to the Senate floor.

After days of indecision, the two final holdouts — Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) — voted with all 60 members of their caucus to support a procedural motion to begin debate. Though strictly parliamentary, the vote marks a milestone in the quest for health-care reform reignited by President Obama’s election.

The vote set up weeks of debate. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is aiming for final passage before Christmas.

REST OF ARTICLE