Categories

Archives

Does The Public Option Lead To Something Better?

Michael Moore in the latest Rolling Stone:

If a true public option is enacted – and Obama knows this – it will eventually bring about a single-payer system, because the profit-making insurance companies won’t be able to compete with a government plan and make the profits that they want to make.

Mikey gives Obama too much credit throughout the article. Everything coming out of the White House and Congress indicates that the ‘public option’ will be a severely handicapped one – you can thank bipartisan compromise and that $1.4 million a day in insurance company lobbying for that. Significantly, Obama’s recent mention of the US Postal Service during a town meeting on healthcare portends a far more likely future for the ‘public option’ than leading to single-payer.

The option to purchase a public plan within a market of private health insurance plans would merely provide one more player in our inefficient, dysfunctional, fragmented, multi-payer system of financing health care, that is if the public option even survives the political process. It would leave in place the deficiencies that have resulted in very high costs with the poorest health care value of all nations (i.e., overpriced mediocrity in health care).

Those who believe that the people of this nation would have the wisdom to drop their private plans and join the government program are ignoring history. When Congress authorized private plans to compete with our existing public program, Medicare, many enrollees did just the opposite. One-fifth have left the traditional Medicare program and joined the private plans.

So why should we care? Why shouldn’t they have the right to choose private plans if they want them? We know that those private plans are wasting money, both in their own costs and the administrative burden they place on the delivery system, but what all too many don’t realize is that we are all paying for that waste because of the inherent structural deficiencies in our financing system. Plus we are being deprived of the reforms needed in our health care delivery system that our own single payer monopsony would bring us.

Further reading: Comparing single-payer with the ‘public option’
And for those confused between single-payer and OMFGOSH SOCIALISM…

Martin Feldstein, Harvard professor, talking about stuff he doesn’t understand

Obama has said that he would favor a British-style “single payer” system in which the government owns the hospitals and the doctors are salaried but that he recognizes that such a shift would be too disruptive to the health-care industry. The Obama plan to have a government insurance provider that can undercut the premiums charged by private insurers would undoubtedly speed the arrival of such a single-payer plan.

FiveThirtyEight >> Not All Socialist Countries are Alike

canada =/= UK

Siiiiicko.

Welp, I finally got to watch Sicko tonight. I’d have to say it was one of the better (if not best) Moore movies.

If you go by some of the forums and blogs out there, you’d think everyone either idolizes or demonizes Moore. But, as par the course, those are just the loudest reactionaries on both sides of the fence. Moore is an excellent polemicist, and that draws out the worst in people.

I don’t particularly care for Moore, but I don’t spend time micro-analyzing his movies hoping to catch some sloppy editing. Sicko was not meant to be a comprehensive review of healthcare systems, whether in the U.S. or the four other countries he travels to. Similar to his prior works and any documentary or movie, really, it presented the debate in the filmmaker’s framework. Generalizations are necessary in a 2 hour film. Hopefully no one would take away everything in Sicko as the gospel truth, just as no one should do the same with a press conference or 60 Minutes report.

The oddest part of the film was the bit where he mails a check to some nutjob writing for an “anti-Moore” blog. Its connection to healthcare was tenuous at best. Obviously it was meant to rile the nutjobs (similar to many of the special features on the DVD).

And that it did. I did a quick Google, found the site. Spent too much time (read: 5 minutes) reading a few of the posts responding to said part of the film. I thought briefly of commenting, but appealing to the irrational is a pretty futile exercise. Do you pet rabid dogs? Same concept. :idea:

People’s Choice Awards – Too Late.

Surprise win for anti-Bush film
Michael Moore’s anti-Bush documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 has won best film at the US People’s Choice Awards, voted for by the US public.

Nominees for the People’s Choice Awards were picked by a 6,000-strong Entertainment Weekly magazine panel, and winners were subsequently chosen by 21 million online voters.

Fahrenheit 9/11 director Michael Moore dedicated his trophy to soldiers in Iraq.

His film was highly critical of President George W Bush and the US-led invasion of Iraq, and Moore was an outspoken Bush critic in the 2004 presidential campaign in which Democratic challenger John Kerry lost.

“This country is still all of ours, not right or left or Democrat or Republican,” Moore told the audience at the ceremony in Pasadena, California.

Moore said it was “an historic occasion” that the 31-year-old awards ceremony would name a documentary its best film.

If only we could have voted online, November, 2nd. :rolleyes:

Article On The DLC & Michael Moore

As usual, the Democratic leadership is trying to pin the blame on someone else, rather than their own putrid efforts. Today it’s (surprise, surprise) Michael Moore. Here’s an interesting article on Commondreams.com. An excerpt:

No More Moore: The DLC Joins the Witch-Hunt

According to the last data I could find, Moore recently made a movie that was seen by tens of millions of people around the world and has grossed nearly $120 million in the U.S. alone. Furthermore, it was, according to exit polls, a much better demographic success than the actual Democratic party. A Harris poll conducted in July found that 89 percent of Democrats agreed with Fahrenheit 9/11, along with 70 percent of independents. That means Moore outperformed John Kerry among independents by about 19 points, if we are to go just by the data presented by bum-licking power-worshipper Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times at the DLC roundtable.

Moore’s revenues come from millions of ordinary people paying 10 bucks a pop to see his film. In contrast, only about 200 people a year visit the DLC at the box office—only they pay thousands of dollars per ticket, and they all have names you’d recognize: Eli Lilly, Coca-Cola, Union Carbide, Occidental Petroleum, BP and so on.

The article takes digs at a one “Will Marshall” who is the president of the”Progressive Policy Institute” – thinktank for the DLC.

In addition to his duties as the president of the PPI, Marshall kept himself busy in the last few years. Among other things, he served on the board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an organization co-chaired by Joe Lieberman and John McCain whose aim was to build bipartisan support for the invasion of Iraq.

Marshall also signed, at the outset of the war, a letter issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) expressing support for the invasion. Marshall signed a similar letter sent to President Bush put out by the conservative Social Democrats/USA group on Feb. 25, 2003, just before the invasion. The SD/USA letter urged Bush to commit to “maintaining substantial U.S. military forces in Iraq for as long as may be required to ensure a stable, representative regime is in place and functioning.”

How much more conservative can the Democratic Party move, for chrissakes?

:sigh: