'After Weeks of Health Care Madness, Public Support for Reform Drops... Somewhat'

From Brian Beutler at TPM here.

As predicted, August did not go quietly. But after a month of wild-eyed freak outs over death panels, and death books, and death wishes, and death threats, how much has the state of public opinion on health care really changed?

The answer probably depends on how you look at it: too much if you support reform, too little if you oppose it. Given just how raucous the last several weeks have been though--relative to over-the-top rhetoric comparing Obama to Hitler and health care reform to Nazism--the real change has been surprisingly modest. . . .

None of this is to suggest that Obama and Congressional leaders have an easy job ahead of them. Overall support is clearly lower than Democratic leaders would like, and much of the loss in support appears to have come from the independent voters that vulnerable Dems might need if they're to be re-elected in 2010. But still, the reality doesn't map at all on to the news coverage, which made it seem as if health care reform was under siege.

Credit Default Swaps, illegal before 2000, caused financial crisis

So much for unregulated capitalism. Actually, we learned this lesson over 100 years ago, in the wake of a stock market crash, and then forgot it (although the opportunists on Wall Street didn't forget it). A few years ago, Wall Street snookered the Congress into letting it regulate itself (again). The old "betting parlors" were back open on Wall Street. Look what's happened.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Sunday evening

Back from gym and store. Just warmed up chili for dinner.

Bought some cubed steaks at Publix (on sale) and had one of them later. Made some for work also.

[Later] Watched "Design Star" tonight. Definitely the right person (Torie) was kicked off tonight. She messed up with the money, but Dan also messed up with approving the $10,000, boring gazebo. Couldn't the gazebo have been scaled down once they became aware of the budget problem? We don't know.

Torie also lacks hosting skills (but of course those can be learned, as David Bromstad has demonstrated). But her design abilities aren't strong enough to overcome that deficit. Antonio is an able and talented designer and a strong workhorse, but I don't see him hosting a show on HGTV. He comes across as surly and crude. I like Lonni, but she's the "one-trick pony" with her accent walls, although she very capably designed all the landscaping tonight (including a living accent wall). I predict Dan will win the competition, however. He's been the most creative so far and I think has the charisma necessary to host a show. But we'll have to wait to see what happens.

So looking forward to my vacation next week. The cats won't like it, however. But they'll be OK, I hope.

'Until Medical Bills Do Us Part'

Nicholas D. Kristoff's column is here.

Critics fret that health care reform would undermine American family values, not least by convening somber death panels to wheel away Grandma as if she were Old Yeller.

But peel away the emotions and fearmongering, and in fact it is the existing system that unnecessarily takes lives and breaks apart families.

My friend M. — you’ll understand in a moment why she’s terrified of my using her name — had to make a searing decision a year ago. She was married to a sweet, gentle man whom she loved, but who had become increasingly absent-minded. Finally, he was diagnosed with early-onset dementia.

The disease is degenerative, and he will become steadily less able to care for himself. At some point, as his medical needs multiply, he will probably need to be institutionalized.

The hospital arranged a conference call with a social worker, who outlined how the dementia and its financial toll on the family would progress, and then added, out of the blue: “Maybe you should divorce.”

“I was blown away,” M. told me. But, she said, the hospital staff members explained that they had seen it all before, many times. If M.’s husband required long-term care, the costs would be catastrophic even for a middle-class family with savings.

Eventually, after the expenses whittled away their combined assets, her husband could go on Medicaid — but by then their children’s nest egg would be gone, along with her 401(k) plan. She would face a bleak retirement with neither her husband nor her savings. . . .

The hospital told M. not to waste time in dissolving the marriage. For five years after any divorce, her assets could be seized — precisely because the government knows that people sometimes divorce husbands or wives to escape their medical bills.

“How could I divorce him? I loved him,” she told me. . . .

So M. divorced the man she loves. I asked him what he thought of this. He can still speak, albeit not always coherently, and he paused a long, long time. All he could manage was: “It’s hard to say.”

Long-term care constitutes a difficult and expensive challenge in any health system. But the American patchwork, full of cracks through which people fall, has a special problem with medical expenses of all kinds bankrupting couples.

A study reported in The American Journal of Medicine this month found that 62 percent of American bankruptcies are linked to medical bills. These medical bankruptcies had increased nearly 50 percent in just six years. Astonishingly, 78 percent of these people actually had health insurance, but the gaps and inadequacies left them unprotected when they were hit by devastating bills.

M. still helps her husband and, quietly, continues to live with him and care for him. But she worries that the authorities will come after her if they realize that they divorced not because of irreconcilable differences but because of irreconcilable medical bills. There were awkward questions from friends who saw the divorce announcement in the newspaper. . . .

The existing system doesn’t just break up families, it also costs lives. A 2004 study by the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences, found that lack of health insurance causes 18,000 unnecessary deaths a year. That’s one person slipping through the cracks and dying every half an hour.

In short, it’s a good bet that our existing dysfunctional health system knocks off far more people than an army of “death panels” could — even if they existed, worked 24/7 and got around in a fleet of black helicopters.

So, for those of you inclined to believe the worst about President Obama, think it through. Suppose he is indeed a secret, foreign-born Muslim agent who is scheming to undermine American family values while killing off as many grandmothers as possible.

If all that were true, why on earth would he be trying so hard to reform our health care system? We already know how to prod families into divorce and take a life unnecessarily every 30 minutes — all we need to do is reject reform and stick with exactly what we have.

See here too.

'Majority Rule on Health Care Reform'

"[I]nsurance reforms are enormously popular." Full NYT editorial here (recommended reading).

The talk in Washington is that Senate Democrats are preparing to push through health care reforms using parliamentary procedures that will allow a simple majority to prevail in their chamber, as it does in the House, instead of the 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster that Senate Republicans are sure to mount.

With the death of Senator Edward Kennedy, the Democrats do not have the votes just among their 57 members (and the two independents) to break a filibuster, and not all of these can be counted on to vote in lock step. If the Democrats want to enact health care reform this year, they appear to have little choice but to adopt a high-risk, go-it-alone, majority-rules strategy.

We say this with considerable regret because a bipartisan compromise would be the surest way to achieve comprehensive reforms with broad public support. But the ideological split between the parties is too wide — and the animosities too deep — for that to be possible.

In recent weeks, it has become inescapably clear that Republicans are unlikely to vote for substantial reform this year. Many seem bent on scuttling President Obama’s signature domestic issue no matter the cost. As Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, so infamously put it: “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.” . . .

Clearly the reconciliation approach is a risky and less desirable way to enact comprehensive health care reforms. The only worse approach would be to retreat to modest gestures in an effort to win Republican acquiescence. It is barely possible that the Senate Finance Committee might pull off a miracle and devise a comprehensive solution that could win broad support, or get one or more Republicans to vote to break a filibuster. If not, the Democrats need to push for as much reform as possible through majority vote.

Governors Island, NYC

Saturday night

Drove up to Sunrise Cinemas to see "Julie & Julia." Superbe! I pretty much agree with the review below, but actually I did find the Julie sections interesting, as they were about (among other things) blogging. And, of course, cooking from recipes, too. I've made quite a few Julia Child recipes myself, and I know what that entails. I, too, have made her Boeuf Bourguignon (which Julie calls "boof").

Even the author of The Joy of Cooking, Irma Rombauer, made an appearance in the movie (i.e., played by an actress). And The Joy of Cooking was prominently displayed in Julie's bookcase, right by the phone. (That's still the one cookbook I use the most.)

Apparently Julie had never heard about SiteMeter, since, at the beginning at least, she never knew if anyone was reading her blog.

I got to the theater a little early to buy my ticket for the 4:30 show. (I'd not been to a movie since before B. left here, which has been a year and a half now.) Then had a giant slice of pizza with everything on it at a little pizza joint in the shopping center there. (I didn't realize how hungry I was -- I'd had a hamburger at home for lunch.) My timing was perfect. Drove through an intense thunderstorm on the way home (about 10 minutes away) and the truck got washed. It had been getting a little dusty sitting in the garage. Then, after the rain stopped, I walked over to Starbucks for some coffee. The air was fairly cool at that point. It's been a hot month, and my electric bill shot up considerably (from the A/C).

TGIF

Got to work early today. The bus flew right through the bottleneck. Also got home at the usual time.

I'll be glad to get out of town week after next. For one thing, the cats are driving me crazy with their pickiness about their food. Maybe I should stop giving them canned food altogether. (I don't see why not--I'll do some research.) They just get more and more demanding. If the food sits too long, they refuse to eat it and want fresh. (And it's not hot in here.) I've opened two cans of food since I got home from work, and now they expect more. They've hardly touched what they have (they take a few bites and lick the gravy up). I'm over the constant nagging and begging. It really irked me tonight when Bootsy was lying in the kitchen, waiting for more food, when there were 8 paper plates of food sitting all around him (four of which were from tonight). Fortunately, they do eat the dry food. They're going to have to eat more of that.

Anyway, looking forward to getting out of here for four nights.

This weekend I think I'll go see "Julie & Julia." It's playing nearby.

Tonight I found this on "Yahoo! Answers":

My cat loves canned food?

I only started giving my cat canned food once a day but that is all he wants. Every time I go into my room he sits by his bowl and I feel bad so I give him some and then throughout the day I give him so much. He has had diarrhea a couple of times and I feel bad. I want to start weaning him away from it so that I am back to just once a day, any suggestions would be GREAT!

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

You are so lucky that your cat loves canned food and is not addicted to dry food! It will be so much better for his health. Any change in a cat's diet should be done gradually to avoid digestive upsets. Unless the canned food is really poor quality like 9-Lives, Special Kitty, or other store brand by-product based food, it is the best diet for your cat and should protect him from many serious health issues such as urinary tract illness, diabetes, obesity, and even kidney failure. Cats need protein and moisture in their diet. They are obligate carivores who naturally get their moisture from the prey they consume. Dry food is dehydrated and contains too many grains and carbs for cats.Try upgrading to a better quality canned food and use it as the staple of his diet. Good quality dry food (meat - not by-products or grain- as the first ingredient on the label ) can be offered for snacking.

I'll do more research. Right now, I'm feeding them Friskies, plus the dry food.

Meanwhile I'm keeping the phones turned off while I'm in bed this weekend. No more disruptions.

Ted Kennedy: Public Option 'Vital' To Health Care Reform

From Big Tent Democrat here.

In his last published piece on the subject of health care reform, Senator Ted Kennedy wrote on July 18, 2009:

I long ago learned that you have to be a realist as you pursue your ideals. But whatever the compromises, there are several elements that are essential to any health-reform plan worthy of the name.

. . . To accomplish all of this, we have to cut the costs of health care. . . . [O]ne of the most controversial features of reform is one of the most vital. It's been called the "public plan." . . . This will foster competition in pricing and services. It will be a safety net, giving Americans a place to go when they can't find or afford private insurance, and it's critical to holding costs down for everyone.

(Emphasis supplied.) Don't let the Third Wayers like Ezra Klein and Steve Pearlstein tell falsehoods about what Ted Kennedy thought about the public option. His words speak for themselves.

And there's this too.

Senator Kennedy . . . is not an easy compromiser on health care reform. In 1994, I [Lawrence O'Donnell] was in the room when he told the president that he believed the strategy should be a Democrats-only strategy and that we should not be trying to reach out and get Republican votes.

(Click on the image of Pres. Clinton and Big Tent Democrat (Armando Llorens) to enlarge.)

'Beware "inside sources" who say the public option is dead'

"When people inside the Beltway want to feel important, they repeat rumors. And rumors can become self-fulfilling." Robert Reich here.

Aug. 28, 2009 | Washington, D.C. is an echo chamber in which anyone who sounds authoritative repeats the conventional authoritative wisdom about the "consensus" of inside opinion, which they've heard from someone else who sounds equally authoritative, who of course has heard it from another authoritative source. Follow the trail to its start and you often find an obscure congressional or White House staffer who has seen some half-assed poll number or briefing memo, but seeking to feel important hypes it to a media personality or lobbyist who, desperate to sound authoritative, pronounces it as truth. In any other place on the planet it would be called rumor, gossip, or drivel. In our nation's capital it's called "inside information." The process would be harmless except that it creates self-fulfilling prophesies. Since most of our elected representatives would rather not stick their necks out lest they lose their heads, they tend to rush toward whatever consensus seems to be emerging -- which, of course, is based on authoritative reports about the emerging consensus.

In the last few days authoritative sources have repeatedly told me that the public option is dead, that the President won't be able to get a comprehensive healthcare bill, and that the White House and congressional leadership already know the best they'll be able to do now is move incrementally -- starting with insurance reforms such as barring insurers from using someone's preexisting health conditions to deny coverage -- with the hope of more reforms in the years ahead. The rightwing media fearmongers and demagogues have won.

Don't believe it. The other thing about Washington is how quickly conventional authoritative wisdom changes, especially when the public is still in flux over some large matter. Rightwing fearmongers and demagogues thrive only to the extent the mainstream media believes they're thriving. Although polls continue to show that while most Americans like the healthcare they're getting, they also dislike their insurance companies, worry that they or their families will be denied coverage, and are anxious about the increasing co-payments, deductibles, and premiums they're facing. Most are still eager for reform.

In addition, we've come to the point where healthcare incrementalism won't work. To be sure, the health-insurance industry is powerful and will fight reforms that threaten their profits. But they won't fight if they know their profits will be restored when everyone is required to have health insurance. (This isn't just conventional authoritative wisdom; it's political fact.) Obviously, in order to require everyone to have health insurance, tens of millions of Americans will need help affording it. The only way the government can possibly pay that tab is to raise taxes on the rich while also getting long-term health-insurance costs under control. And one of the surest ways to get long-term costs under control is to force private insurers -- which in most states and under most employer-provided plans face very little competition -- to compete with a public insurance option that can use its bargaining clout with drug companies and medical providers to negotiate lower prices.

In addition, we've come to the point where healthcare incrementalism won't work. To be sure, the health-insurance industry is powerful and will fight reforms that threaten their profits. But they won't fight if they know their profits will be restored when everyone is required to have health insurance. (This isn't just conventional authoritative wisdom; it's political fact.) Obviously, in order to require everyone to have health insurance, tens of millions of Americans will need help affording it. The only way the government can possibly pay that tab is to raise taxes on the rich while also getting long-term health-insurance costs under control. And one of the surest ways to get long-term costs under control is to force private insurers -- which in most states and under most employer-provided plans face very little competition -- to compete with a public insurance option that can use its bargaining clout with drug companies and medical providers to negotiate lower prices.

When you go through the logic, it starts to look a lot like comprehensive reform.

Years ago, as the story goes, Britain's Parliament faced a difficult choice. On the European continent drivers use the right lanes, while the English remained on the left. But tunnels and fast ferries were bringing cars and drivers back and forth ever more frequently. Liberals in Parliament thought it time to change lanes. Conservatives resisted; after all, Brits had been driving on the left since William the Conquerer's chariot. Parliament's compromise was to move from the left to right lanes -- but incrementally, on a voluntary basis. Truckers first.

Lest anyone in Washington repeat this story authoritatively, it's a joke -- but with a kernel of truth. Sometimes reform has to occur in a big way, everything or nothing, if it's to happen at all. That's the way it is with healthcare reform at this stage. Every moving piece is related to every other one. That's also why a public option is necessary.

So forget the authoritative sources. Mobilize and organize. We can get comprehensive, meaningful healthcare reform if we push hard enough. And we must.

(Emphasis added.)

Contact Bill Nelson

Here. I wrote this (but see here too).

Dear Sen. Nelson:

According to a recent article in The New York Times, "the United States had the most expensive health care in the world, yet was in last place among industrialized countries in preventing deaths through timely and effective medical care." Meanwhile, average premiums paid to large U.S. health-insurance companies have increased 87% since 2002; the profits of the top ten insurance companies have increased 428%; and the chances that an American bankrupted by medical bills has health insurance are 7 in 10 (Harper's Magazine).

As one of your constituents, I strongly urge you to vote for health care legislation that includes a strong "public option" -- an "option of good conscience" -- to help put a brake on the excesses of the health insurance companies. It's bad enough that medical costs themselves are spiraling out of control (but are also being addressed in the legislation).

I really don't think an "incremental approach" is affordable, either in monetary terms or in terms of our nation's health. We need strong legislation at this critical time.

Thank you for your attention and for the work you do for Florida.

Sincerely,

'Healthcare Reform Named After Ted Kennedy Must Not Suck'

Rachel Maddow's "headline of the day," from a Huffington Post article by Bob Cesca here. (Good article, too.) I was going to say, if they're going to name the program after Kennedy, then it better have a public option.

See Big Tent Democrat here.

What Kagro said:

The temptation to name the health care reform bill after fallen health care champion Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) is as understandable as it is overwhelming. But with the bill currently still at the mercy of players who are, shall we say, not as clearly dedicated to a product that offers the kind of help Kennedy envisioned, I suggest that we not offer them the opportunity to attach his name to anything less than a bill he would have fought for.

So while it's undoubtedly in that spirit that the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and others have begun their drive to honor Kennedy's memory by demanding that the HELP Committee's bill be passed and named after him, I suggest that it serves us and the Senator's memory better if our essential element -- a strong public option -- carries his name instead.

To name the weak tea "reforms" endorsed by the Third Way (read Ezra Klein) as the Kennedy Health bill would be a travesty.

And speaking of cats, I knew it...

From the latest "Findings" in Harper's Magazine:

Researchers found that domestic cats use special "soliciting purrs," which contain urgent high-pitched cries, to get humans to do their bidding.

I then found this.

'Cat Outta The Bag'

From TPM here.

Kansas Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) says the GOP must find its "great white hope" to lead the party back to power in Washington.

Health insurance reality check

From the latest Harper's Index:

Percentage change since 2002 in average premiums paid to large U.S. health-insurance companies: +87

Percentage change in the profits of the top ten insurance companies: +428

Chances that an American bankrupted by medical bills has health insurance: 7 in 10

Portion of its membership that Washington State's subsidized health plan intends to lose this year: 1/3

Average percentage by which it is raising premiums in order to do so: 70

Wednesday night

Back from gym and store.

I slept well last night without the cats in the bedroom. I'd also taken an extra melatonin right before bed.

The cell phone rang while I was taking a brief nap before heading out tonight. This is usually one of B.'s nights off and I'd feared he might be calling after some kind of boozy altercation with the BF (they frequently go to Flanigan's on Wednesdays and have been known to stay for hours). (I often see the car parked there (out front in the handicapped space) on my way home from work and later when I go to the gym.) Fortunately, the call turned out to be a wrong number. But I was up. I'm glad I wasn't really tired to begin with. From now on, I'll turn the cell phone off before I take a nap. (I would normally ignore it, but not since the mess two Sundays ago.)

The traffic coming home tonight wasn't as bad as it was yesterday, i.e., it took a shorter time to get through the one-lane bottleneck. I was home almost at my regular time. I guess (hope) some of the motorists have decided to take other routes north. Also, I was only 7 minutes late to work. I emailed TPTB about the construction project and my supervisor said it's OK to make up time at the end of the day, when it's usually busier anyway. (Ordinarily I get to work a little early.)

Ted Kennedy R.I.P.

Tuesday night

They've started up another road project on my bus route. I was 15 minutes late to work and it took me 1 1/2 hours to get home (including waiting for my bus). There was a sign along the road giving a phone number to call for information on the project and also a website. I went to the website (fdotmiamidade.com) and found this:

Biscayne Boulevard [US 1] / Biscayne Boulevard Way / U.S. 1 / State Road 5 . . .
All southbound travel lanes will be closed daily from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Sunday through Saturday [?], 9:00 p.m. to 5:30 a.m. Sunday through Thursday and 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday along the west side of Biscayne Boulevard from NE 35th Street to NE 28th Street and will remain this way for approximately six months while workers install temporary barrier wall, reconstruct the roadway, install drainage structures at various locations and replace sections of sidewalk and curb ramps. Traffic will be shifted over to the northbound traffic lanes and one lane of traffic will remain open in both directions at all times. . . .

Six months?! I hope some of the car drivers will take another route for a while. The bottlenecks are pretty bad (especially northbound).

I've lived through quite a few of these projects on US 1 already -- much longer ones, even.

I may start wearing a face mask on the bus. Anderson Cooper reports that up to 150 million Americans may be infected with swine flu this season. I wash my hands a lot as it is. Just located a bottle of Germ-X and threw it in my briefcase.

Finally got the medicine for Bootsy's ears from EntirelyPets.com. Administered it tonight. I'm going to give him a nice bath before I go on vacation.

Why they're crazy

See Firedoglake here.

Conservative media sources, including Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Matt Drudge, have been persistently misleading people about health care reform proposals. As a result their listeners, as the experience of a Georgia couple illustrates, have become victims of unjustified fear and needless anxiety, fed by the false impression that the federal government is planning to deny or ration their health care. [Link added.]

These conservative media efforts are provably dishonest, but despite having the facts repeatedly corrected and the distortions denounced by numerous experts, the conservative media continue to repeat the false information, leaving those Americans who rely on the sources even more anxious and confused.

Of course the health insurance companies are behind this whole phenomenon. See here.

Poll: More Arkansans Trust Limbaugh Than Obama

Are these people crazy? See TPM here.

Only 40% approve of President Obama's job performance, with 56% disapproving -- matching up pretty closely with John McCain's 59%-39% victory here in 2008. In addition, only 45% say Obama was born in the United States, with a strong 31% saying he was not, and 24% unsure. Among Republicans in Arkansas, the Birther question comes up as 23%-49%-28%.

On health care, only 29% support Obama's plan, with 60% against it. In addition, respondents were asked whether Rush Limbaugh or Barack Obama has the better vision for America: Limbaugh 55%, Obama 45%. And keep in mind that this is a state where Dems have both Senate seats and three out of four House members. . . .