that IMS Health, a respected research and consulting firm, forecasted in October that, because of provisions in the healthcare
reform bills, the drug industry could experience an average annual growth of 3.5% between 2008 and 2013. Back in March, when the bills' details were still murky, their projection was zero or negative growth.
Nov 11, 2009 9:30 amPhysicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), which advocates for a single-payer system, reports that Harvard Medical School researchers estimated over 2200 veterans died last year because they lacked health insurance.
The article explains why veterans don't necessarily receive care from the VA (quoting from the 2007 testimony before Congress by Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, professor at Harvard Medical School):
"While many Americans believe that all veterans can get care from the VA, even combat veterans may not be able to obtain VA care...As a rule, VA facilities provide care for any veteran who is disabled by a condition connected to his or her military service and care for specific medical conditions acquired during military service.
"Veterans who pass a means test are eligible for care in VA facilities, but have lower priority status (Priority 5 or 7, depending upon income level). Veterans with higher incomes are classified in the lowest priority group and are not eligible for VA enrollment."
The article also contains (scroll down to the bottom of the page) a table showing the number of uninsured veterans. In the 55-to-64 age group, it's as high as 450,000, representing 10% of all uninsured in this age group.
Nov 10, 2009 9:00 amPosted by Ming Shem Lu
One provision in BOTH the House bill and the upcoming Senate version has received little attention but could have far-reaching consequences. It's the 12-year market protection for high-tech drugs used to combat cancer. When a group of us visited Senator Arlen Specter's office, even his aide acknowledged that he knew little about it (and referred us to the legislative aide, who wasn't around).
Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake.com has written about the disastrous effects this could have on breast cancer survivors. She also points to "an 'evergreening' clause that grants drug companies a continued monopoly if they make slight changes to the drug (like creating a once-a-day dose where the original product was three times per day)." In other words, it's possible those high tech drugs will never become generics.
Representative Anna Eshoo, Democrat of California--whose legislation granting a 12-year protection was chosen by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over a tougher 5-year protection advocated by Representative Henry Waxman--denied that there is this evergreening clause. Read Hamsher's reponse here.
Nov 10, 2009 8:00 amPosted by Ming Shem Lu
Whether you think the issue of abortion is important in the healthcare reform debate (or not), you'll be interested in the President's stance. In an interview with ABC News, he seems to want to have it both ways--again! "I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test--that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions," Obama said, "but, on the other hand, that we're not restricting women's insurance choices."
Sam Stein of The Huffington Post sees this as "an implicit rebuke to the House for passing an amendment that could considerably restrict women's access to abortions. The president said that he doesn't want to change 'the status quo' one way or another." Yet, if you read his full reply to the interviewer's question, his position is much more ambiguous. It all depends on what the President means by "status quo." If that means no public funding should pay for abortion, then the amendment can be seen as an extension of that principle. If Obama is referring to women's right to choose insurance plans that pay for abortion, then the amendment is a restriction on that choice.
Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports that former President Bill Clinton will speak to Democratic Senators on healthcare reform. Clinton, whose own attempt in 1993-94 failed, knows how high the political stakes are. Is he going to rein in the Blue Dogs? Or is he going to help further water down the public option? Most significantly, is the former President doing what the current President is unable, or unwilling, to do?
Nov 9 2009 2:00 pmThe Washington Post reports that Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado, has collected 40 signatures from House Democrats vowing to oppose any final bill that includes the anti-abortion amendment (see Nov 8 posting below).
The WP article also contains comparisons between the House bill and the Senate version (still to be unveiled), pointing to the difficulties that the Conference commitee might face when it tries to reconcile the two bills.
Read a working copy of Representative DeGette's letter here.
Nov 9, 2009 11:00 amRead this column by Dick Polman in The Philadelphia Inquirer, on Saturday's vote tally: "Next year, it's a cinch bet that the Republicans will target most of the 31 red-district Democrats who voted No on health reform. Even though those Democrats voted with the GOP, they won't get a pass from the GOP attack team...[They] are likely to realize, sooner rather than later, that they have failed to insure themselves against attack. They have been denied coverage, simply because they are Democrats. Call it their pre-existing condition."
Nov 9, 2009 10:00 amDemocratic Senators such as Evan Bayh of Indiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, who are still on the fence regarding public option, come from states where a majority supports it and may have trouble getting re-elected in 2010.
Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) released polls showing that in Indiana voters favor public option 52% to 42% (and as high as 59% to 33% among Independents), in Arkansas 56% to 37% (57% to 32% among Independents).
Democratic voters, in particular, said they would be less likely to vote for Bayh and Lincoln in the primaries if they joined Republicans in a filibuster.
Read more here.
Nov 8, 2009Before the historic vote, the House approved an anti-abortion amendment stipulating that the public option does not cover abortion and, when a woman receives government subsidy to buy insurance through the exchange, she cannot choose a private plan that covers abortion; she will have to purchase, with her own money, a separate "insurance rider" for that coverage.
Introduced by Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan, the amendment was
supposedly instrumental to getting conservative Democrats on board for the actual bill--64 of them voted for the amendment. Jane Hamsher, founder of Firedoglake.com, bemoans how the inaction of pro-choice politicans and advocacy groups had allowed this to happen.
Nov 7, 2009 11:20 pm
House passes healthcare reform bill 220-215.
See video here.
29 Democrats voted "no," while 1 Republican, Representative Ahn Joseph Cao of Louisiana, voted "yes." The Washington Post has a vote tally, with each representative's campaign contributions from health industry and the percentage of people in that district without insurance. The New York Times has an interactive map so you can tell where the districts are.
Daily Kos puts it best: "Now the really hard work: the Senate."Nov 7, 2009 6:00 pmAs the nation awaits for the House vote, Representative Patrick Murphy, Democrat of Pennsylvania, a self-identified "fiscally conservative Blue Dog," has spoken out in support of healthcare reform. In an op ed he wrote for The Huffington Post, he reminds us, "It has been 16 years since Congress' last attempt...Since then, over 700,000 people have died because they lacked access to affordable healthcare coverage. Every day, 500 Pennsylvanians--and 14,000 people across America--lose their health insurance. We simply can't afford to fail again."
Nov 7, 2009 9:00 amThis is the day...
Nov 6, 2009Posted by Ming Shem Lu
On this day overshadowed by the tragic event at Fort Hood, our thoughts and prayers are with the loved ones of those killed or injured, also the killer's family who is in shock, and with the Muslim community as they brace themselves for possible backlash.
Those of us who believe in peace and interfaith understanding must actively walk our talk
--reach out but also boldly face the realities of conflict and strife.
Meanwhile, as the House is getting ready to vote on the healthcare reform bill tomorrow, here are some of the sound and the fury, and backroom maneuverings, surrounding this historic occasion:
- Representative Alan Grayson, Democrat of Florida, reads the names of those who died because they didn't have health insurance.
- Right-wing "Tea Partiers" storm the capital and the halls of Congress.
- Negotiations continue with moderate Democratic senators who have withhold their support for Senator Harry Reid's bill.
YOU can still have your say by contacting your Representative and Senators--and, don't forget him, the President! Visit our What Can One Person Do? page for details.
Nov 5, 2009The House will vote on the healthcare reform bill this Saturday. This article in Detroit Free Press reports that progressives may be allowed to introduce a single-payer amendment; it also has some interesting details about last-minute debates on abortion.
The CBO has released its report on the Republican bill. Read this New York Times article for details. It will extend coverage to 6 million, leaving 52 million uninsured, and will reduce the federal deficit by $68 billion over the next 10 years, compared to the Democratic bill's $104 billion, while costing $61 billion compared to the other's $1.1 trillion price tag.
The House Republican leadership has said that one of the bill's primary goals is to reduce premiums, and it might--by about 3% in large group markets, where 80% of Americans get their health insurance.
The Republican bill does not ban insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing condition.
Nov 4, 2009Click here for House Republicans' version of healthcare reform bill.
Nov 3, 2009Go Vote!
The Wall Street Journal reports that the House Democrats want to bring the bill to the floor as soon as Friday and to vote on it before the Nov 11 Veterans Day weekend.
Meanwhile, they are still tackling with hot button issues such as: "Can illegal immigrants participate in the exchange?" (according to WSJ, the House bill "leaves open the possibility" as long as they pay their own premiums) and "Does the bill pay for abortions?" (the House bill prevents the use of public money, but it does stipulate that the exchange offers at least one plan that covers abortion and one that doesn't).
Click here for a more detailed article on the same topic in the Washington Post.
The House Republicans are preparing their own healthcare reform bill--it's being scored by the CBO right now. The bill contains the four core ideas that House Minority Leader John Boehner outlined in last Saturday's weekly address, including allowing people to buy insurance across state lines and letting states enact their own reform to lower costs. It doesn't, however, require health insurance companies to drop pre-existing condition as a reason to deny coverage.
Read more about the Republican plan here.
In the Senate, the healthcare debate seems to be several weeks away.
Oct 31, 2009Here's a really useful step-by-step guide to the legislative process, what the healthcare reform bill has to go through before the President signs it into law. The guide is put together by Health Care for America NOW! We are at Step 4: "Congress Passes Legislation." Be sure to read "What You Can Do to Help."
Oct 30, 2009Read this article in Talking Points Memo on the pros of having the public option tied to Medicare rates (the House bill's version isn't). The CBO, in its analysis of the bill, concludes that the 6 million expected to enroll in the public option may end up paying higher premiums than people buying private plans.
Oct 29, 2009 11:00 pmSenator Harry Reid is doing what President Obama is not--urging the progressive grassroots to contact our representatives in Washington and "push hard" to make sure public option is included in the final bill. Read more here. (For context, check out the
Oct 26 postings below.)
Oct 29, 2009 11:00 amPosted by Ming Shem Lu
To download full version of the House healthcare reform bill, HR 3962 "The Affordable Health Care for America Act," click here. NOTE: Unless you want the whole 1990-page document, DO NOT click on it!
A summary of the bill can be found on the website of the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Click here for a comparison between the bill as it was first introduced by the 3 House committees (HR 3200) and its current form (HR 3962).
Click here for The Huffington Post's article on details of both the House and Senate bills.
As expected, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi didn't get enough votes to support the most "robust" form of public option, tied to Medicare rates. Rather, "the consumer option," as Pelosi is calling it now, has to negotiate reimbursement rates with providers just as private insurance companies do. The Blue Dog Democrats want this, arguing that Medicare rates are unfairly low in rural states.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has issued a preliminary cost estimate of the House bill. It costs $894 billion--under President Obama's $900-billion ceiling--and is projected to reduce the deficit in both the first ten years and the second ten years after enactment. Read more here.
The New York Times paints a less rosy picture of the bill's costs: "By the most commonly used yardstick, the bill would cost $1.05 trillion over 10 years, roughly $150 billion more than President Obama had said he wanted to spend on the legislation." It's unclear what that "most commonly used yardstick" is. Read more here.
The bill is expected to provide coverage for 36 million of the current 50 million uninsured.
Oct 28, 2009House Democratic leaders will unveil their healthcare reform bill tomorrow at 10:30 am.
Oct 27, 2009Posted by Ming Shem Lu
Talking Points Memo has a good article, "End Game: So When Will Health Care Really Happen," outlining what we might expect in the next few weeks, or months, as well as--most importantly--how advocacy groups can continue to put pressure on moderate Democrats whose opposition to public option may still tank it.
Senator Joe Lieberman, now an Independent, already said he would join a Republican filibuster. When asked whether "the heavy concentration of the insurance industry in Connecticut [is] influencing his vote," Lieberman replied, "It has nothing to do with it."
Oct 26, 2009 3:30 pmPosted by Ming Shem Lu
Senator Reid announced that the "opt-out" public option will be in the Bill he brings to the Senate floor. Read more here.
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said this resulted from pressure by progressive Democratic senators. The Huffington Post reports, "For many years, it's been centrist and conservative-leaning senators who have been scoring legislative victories by digging in their heels, so this represented a quite dramatic turnabout. It is difficult to remember the last time that progressives won a legislative victory by laying down firm demands and sticking to them."
Oct 26, 2009 11:30 amPosted by Ming Shem Lu
The whole healthcare reform drama is so fluid right now, every day there are news and leaks--we're all eager to find out what's happening behind closed doors.
The latest: Senator Harry Reid almost has the filibuster-proof 60 votes for a public option that allows states to opt-out. But when he presented that to Obama and his aides, the President seemed lukewarm and didn't offer Reid full-fledged support. The Administration still prefers the "trigger" version, thinking that would keep Senator Snowe's vote, which is
--the way the Administration sees it--crucial to keep the sheen of bipartisanship and the Blue Dogs on board.
Jonathan Cohn of The New Republic has a written a pretty good summary of the most current developments--please DO read it.
Many have pointed out the irony that Reid seems to have taken a more progressive--and stronger--stance than President Obama.
But perhaps it's not so surprising after all. Reid is coming up for re-election, and his poll numbers are not encouraging. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) has recently fundraised successfully to put a TV ad in Nevada targeting Reid and questioning whether he's strong enough. That could very well have made a difference.
Conventional wisdom is that politicans only listen to their constituents--if you don't live in someone's state or district, they just won't listen to you. However, in this internet age, there are easy ways of showing your support other than votes. You can give money to campaigns that will challenge their chances.
PCCC has moved on from Reid and now is trying to put out an ad reminding President Obama of his campaign promises and WHO helped him get elected. It's a good ad--please check it out on PCCC's home page.