Walgreen’s Is The Answer To All Of Your Healthcare Needs

Seriously, this shit pisses me off.

Two people who have never, ever used Planned Parenthood’s services telling people who need Planned Parenthood’s services that they don’t really need Planned Parenthood’s services.

A couple weeks ago I wrote a post titled “Top Signs Your Healthcare System Is Broken.” Looks like I missed a couple. This Fox News BS is one.

The other was in today’s newspaper, tragically in the obituary section. A 48-year-old chess champion, who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia for 20 years, and now another sad case study of a failed healthcare system that won't change because some people are just making too damned much money keeping it broken. His family writes of his suicide:

Our family's sadness is compounded by the lack of effective, vital mental health treatment. The state's TennCare cuts caused Scotty's ineligibility for the Helen Ross McNabb PACT (Program of Assertive Community Treatment) program which successfully kept Scotty, and others, out of the mental hospital for years. Without accessible and affordable Case Management treatment and prevention services, families like ours will continue to suffer tragic outcomes.

These are the death panels that already exist in our broken healthcare system. Everyone keeps telling us American healthcare is the best in all the world, except if you can't access it, it might as well not even exist. I mean how can these idiots not get that? It doesn't matter if our healthcare is the best or second best or even 37th, if your system excludes millions of people it's a failure. End of discussion. And if your politics refuses to recognize that then it, too, is a failure.

I know we just went through hell and back to pass the Affordable Care Act, but could we please stop cutting things like Medicare and Medicaid (and now Planned Parenthood) at every single budget impasse? Please? Because there are real consequences to these cuts. Just ask the family of Scotty Zingheim.

And while we’re cutting funding to women’s health clinics and tossing people off of the public Medicaid system, WellPoint CEO Angela Braly took home $13.4 million last year. Why? What did she do to deserve her bloated salary -- and her Bush tax cut -- while we're balancing our state and federal budgets on the backs of the sick and poor? This is the most immoral, shameful thing I've ever seen. I just can't imagine that it's come to this. Our country would rather give Angela Braly a tax cut than give poor women access to pap smears or get a case manager for a suicidal paranoid schizophrenic.

This is a disgrace.

UPDATE: More on Scotty Zingheim here.

Top Signs Your Healthcare System Is Broken

5- SPAM e-mail for cheap pharmaceuticals from Canada. Don’t suppose people in Canada get those, do ya? Long ago I wrote about buying a $6 prescription in Norway. With drugs that cheap, it kinda makes spamming people for cheap drugs pointless.

4- Tip jars and fundraisers to pay medical bills. Note to Americans: they don’t have to go begging from friends and neighbors in countries with a functioning healthcare delivery system.

3- This. Note that virtually all of the buyers are connected to healthcare in some way, either as doctors or executives. And we wonder why our healthcare costs keep rising!

2- Medical Tourism. The very existence of an “industry” which exploits the low healthcare costs overseas (and which basically outsources our healthcare) tells you the system is broken. If our system functioned we wouldn’t need to go to Indonesia or Thailand, would we?

(Note the irony that Arthur Laffer, inventor of the infamous “Laffer Curve,” is on the board of one such company.)

1- The Revolving Door. Healthcare executives becoming politicians who then enact public policies that benefit their healthcare companies. Nothing to see here, folks, move along .... it’s true that this fish rots from the head down, which is why there’s such push back on even modest reforms.

Here’s the Tennessee version.

Too many people are getting far too rich off of our current system. American healthcare no longer serves the majority of its customers. Which is precisely why nothing will change without a huge fight.

Capitalism is good for some things, it's good for a lot of things, but it's not good for healthcare and it's not good for prisons. The result is more sick people and more people locked away for no reason. That's just not right.

Freedom Is Not Our Healthcare Problem, Access Is

Yesterday Tennessee’s Republican-dominated legislature passed a bill allowing Tennesseans to opt out of the federal Affordable Care Act. Amendments Democrats put forth such as allowing children to receive health insurance despite pre-existing conditions were voted down by the Republicans. How very pro-life of them.

Bill sponsor Terri Lynn Weaver explained:

"This bill is simply about liberty and freedom of choice," she said. "Tennesseans do not want the government telling them their business about health care."

In this NewsChannel 5 video Weaver says of the federal government’s Affordable Care Act:

"It sets a precedent," she said. "Getting involved in health care and making decisions for me and my family is just a no-no.  And we sent that message to Washington.  Tennesseans do not want that mandate or that iron hand, so to speak."

Of course, the Affordable Care Act doesn’t do any of those things. It doesn’t make any decisions for you or your family, it doesn’t mandate any decision at all -- not even the decision to have health insurance. If you don't want health insurance you pay a fee (or call it a tax if you prefer.) No one can predict their future healthcare needs and the uninsured are some of the most expensive to care for because they usually enter the healthcare system when it's an emergency. And they inevitably pass their healthcare costs on to everyone else, so if that is your choice, then the fee/tax covers that cost. That strikes me as a very conservative, Republican approach. Personal responsibility and all that. Oh well. We all know most uninsured are not that way by choice.

The Affordable Care Act doesn’t say you must have insurance or that you can or cannot have this or that procedure (though where abortion is concerned that is debatable). That, as we all know, is what insurance companies do under our current system by denying people coverage because of pre-existing conditions or cutting people out of the system because premiums are not affordable. So Tennessee’s Republicans, as usual, are not making any sense.

The reason the so-called "mandate" is in there, the reason Republicans like Bob Dole and Mitt Romney first embraced the idea of an insurance mandate, is because the insurance companies said they needed that if they were going to stop denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Otherwise nobody would buy health insurance until they got sick. So the deal was, everyone had to buy it, or pay a fee. So that’s what Republicans and Democrats did. And now the Republicans are suddenly shocked -- shocked -- that anyone would do such a thing.

Okay so I just have one question for Terri Lynn Weaver and the rest of the Tennessee Republicans in our legislature and Republicans everywhere around the country: what is your solution? I get that you no longer like the idea of a health insurance mandate, but the fact is, the mandate is not the problem. The problem is that there are millions of people denied insurance around the country. There are 800,000 uninsured people in Tennessee. Millions of people depend upon a government-funded insurance program like Medicaid, TennCare, CoverKids, BadgerCare in Wisconsin, etc. The very same programs you're now defunding because you say the state/nation is broke and we can't afford it.

So what is your suggestion for all of those people who cannot access the health insurance system you use?

As Republicans in state legislatures and on the federal level start cutting away at these programs under fiscal austerity schemes, I’d like to point out one very simple fact: the mere existence of this problem is proof that our private, for-profit, capitalistic healthcare system has failed. The mere existence of millions of people denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions or because their high-risk status makes premiums unaffordable indicates our system does not work. The fact that 60% of all U.S. bankruptcies are due to medical debt proves that capitalism has failed healthcare.

Every time you see that jar by the chekout stand bearing a cute kid’s picture asking for donations to cover an operation, or every time you hear of a fundraiser to help pay for someone’s medical bills, the real message is that our private, for-profit health insurance has failed these people. These are healthcare consumers, people who have been forced to go begging because their need has overwhelmed the capacity of the system to provide it. If capitalism worked in this scenario, wouldn't some company have started up to provide these people with affordable insurance? Wouldn't some charity be in existence to fill the need?

So why hasn't it? Doesn't this tell you that government needs to be in the healthcare business? Certainly no one else is doing it. I mean, the only other solution is for people to do without. Is that what Terri Lynn Weaver and the rest of the Republicans are suggesting? That people just do without healthcare? Is that it?

There are millions of potential healthcare consumers in this country who cannot access the system because they cannot afford it, or the nature of their illness makes them too risky for the private system to cover them and still make a profit. Clearly capitalism cannot function in a scenario where there is no profit. That leaves charity. Why are rich assholes like the Koch brothers funding cancer research at MIT, not some non-profit that provides healthcare for the poor? Why is it that those charitable organizations which do exist are completely overwhelmed by the demand?

Why is that?

In short: if capitalism worked in healthcare, then why isn't it working? Why so many in need?

It seems to me that where healthcare is concerned the mere existence of millions of people left uninsured is proof that the system doesn’t work and needs to be changed. And frankly, Republicans, I’m not hearing any ideas from you. Or wait, scratch that: we did hear an idea from you, we implemented it, and now you’re saying you don’t like it.

So ... your move. Unless of course your big idea is to have people suffer. Is that it? Just ... no healthcare for you? That’s the plan?

Health Insurance Is NOT The Same As Auto Insurance

I’m getting really tired of explaining to people why the health insurance mandate is different from state auto insurance mandates. I keep hearing that argument all the time, as if a state’s auto insurance mandate somehow justifies the federal government’s health insurance mandate. It doesn’t.

Look, transportation and healthcare/life are not comparable. I rewind back to 8th grade Driver's Ed class where we had "driving is a privilege not a right" drilled into our heads. You don’t have to drive a car. But you DO have to live. There are other ways of getting where you need to go. You can walk. You can ride a bike. You can hitchhike. Or, you can take advantage of the public option: buses, subways and other forms of public transportation. So it is possible to live and function in America without buying auto insurance. Millions of people do.

But you cannot access healthcare in any affordable way without health insurance.

On top of that, auto and health insurance operate completely differently. The auto insurance market does adhere more closely to the general premise of insurance, which is to pool risk. Health insurance does not pool risk because the riskiest patients (the poor, the elderly, people with pre-existing conditions, etc.) are left out of the pool from the get-go.

So please, liberal friends. Stop using state auto insurance mandates as a justification for the healthcare law’s mandate. The mandate was always, in my mind, Constitutionally suspect. As I wrote in November 2009, government-run healthcare is not fascism, but the Affordable Care Act technically is. I simply don’t see how it passes Constitutional muster for the government to force you to do business with a private, often for-profit, corporation, without providing a public alternative.

Yes, I get why the insurance companies wanted the mandate to begin with. I get why Republicans originally suggested a health insurance mandate waaaay back in the ‘90s (they were for it before they were against it, don’tcha know). The failure to secure the Public Option was the biggest fail of healthcare reform because it left the mandate vulnerable to a court challenge, and without the mandate a major part of the entire bill unravels. The public option made the mandate Constitutionally acceptable, at least that’s how I see it. I’m not an expert in Constitutional law and if there are any out there reading this blog I’d love to hear you explain to me why I’m wrong.

In the meantime, the Democrats screwed themselves on their signature achievement by caving on the one element that may have allowed the healthcare bill to pass muster in the courts.

So.

Whining All The Way To The Bank

I’m playing the world’s tiniest violin for the CEO of healthcare giant UnitedHealth Group, who turned a conference call about the company’s staggering profitability into a whine about new federal healthcare legislation. The business press, for the most part, ate it up:

Steven J. Hemsley said during a Tuesday conference call to discuss the company's third-quarter performance that UnitedHealth expects "some level" of an operating earnings and net earnings per share reduction next year, when insurers will be required to meet minimum medical loss ratios (MLRs) or provide refunds to consumers.

MLRs measure the percentage of customers' premiums that insurers spend on medical claims.

Oh whaah. The poor dears, why they are completely oppressed by Big Mean Government! How will they ever survive if they can no longer rob their customers blind? Indeed, the CEO’s dire warnings about 2011 profitability caused the stock to drop 3%, for about half a second. But no worries:

THE SPARK: The insurer's stock price fell about 3 percent Tuesday even after the insurer reported a 23 percent hike in third-quarter profit to $1.28 billion, or $1.14 per share. Other managed care stocks dropped as well.

UnitedHealth shares then rallied Wednesday as part of a correction to Tuesday's overreaction to the CEO's comments, Miller Tabak analyst Les Funtleyder said.

THE BIG PICTURE: UnitedHealth also said Tuesday its third-quarter revenue rose 9 percent to $23.67 billion. Its performance trumped expectations on Wall Street. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters forecast earnings of 84 cents per share on about $23 billion in revenue.

THE ANALYSIS: Funtleyder said UnitedHealth had a "terrific" quarter. He added that the MLR guidelines shouldn't have a big impact on such a large and diversified company like UnitedHealth.

Thank you, United States Congress, for delivering 40 million new customers to these assholes. Steven Hemsley and UnitedHealth’s board of directors and WellPoint and all of the rest of these assholes should be on their fucking knees thanking Congress and President Obama for not just keeping these greedy grubbers in business but actually giving them more customers. Instead we got whining and moaning and political donations to Republicans and all manner of false claims about what “Obamacare” really is.

It’s really hard to find any sensible conservative who can articulate a valid opposition to the healthcare legislation. Once the lies about death panels and socialized medicine have been stripped away, what you usually end up with is some kind of baseless fear that the Affordable Care Act is just a “first step” toward single payer. And God, how I wish it were true. But it’s just not. It’s the exact opposite. In fact, it entrenches our failed, private, for-profit insurance system more deeply into American healthcare. And this is why a whole bunch of Americans don’t like the healthcare bill.

I’m always amused when I see this Diane Black ad on TV. She reminds us that she’s a nurse, and she “led the fight against TennCare’s unsustainable growth.” In short, she’s reminding us all how she helped deny tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Tennesseans -- the poor, elderly and disabled -- their access to healthcare, by denying them insurance. She’s proud of this. And our clueless Tennessee Democrats have their thumbs up their asses and aren’t calling her on it.

People like Diane Black never have any ideas to offer on how to get people access to healthcare. It’s all “repeal healthcare reform” and “no government spending,” but what you are really saying is that you think things are just peachy the way they are. You think it’s fine for people to keep paying escalating insurance premiums while UnitedHealth, WellPoint, BlueCross BlueShield and the rest rake in ginormous profits.

You think our old system was fine. You think it’s perfectly OK for someone to pay insurance premiums on time every month and still get denied the care they need because of “pre-existing conditions” and lifetime caps. In short, you’re saying there isn’t a problem.

And you’re dead wrong, lady. We all know our system is broken. The Republicans haven’t offered any ideas to solve it, while the Democrats’ brilliant idea was to keep the current failed system and just force insurance companies to stop being dicks. Meanwhile, health insurance companies are whining all the way to the bank.

It’s absolutely insane. So, sorry UnitedHealth Group. You just got a profit of $1.28 billion for the third quarter alone. Profit, people. That’s net. That’s after expenses. That’s ... pretty fucking huge. I’m not going to rally in the streets on your behalf complaining about how oppressed you are. That’s just stupid.

Quit your whining, Mr. Hemsley. America's healthcare system is still horribly broken and you're still making money hand over fist off of the misery of millions.

Hey TN: Who’s Looking Out For You?

It seems Republicans in the Tennessee legislature are bending over backwards to do the corporate world’s bidding, none more so than Diane Black, who has gone to unprecedented lengths to make sure the ALEC-written anti-healthcare reform bill bypasses the committee process and makes its way to the floor. Something about sick Tennesseans no longer being denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions really burns people like Diane Black; guess she thinks free market fairy dust will help people like Demitrie Maralescu.

As I mentioned yesterday, ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) is the corporate lobby working to repeal healthcare reform across the land through state legislative efforts:

These state-based efforts to repeal reform may be supported and championed by the Tea Party movement (like the Ohio Liberty Council), but they’re being orchestrated and organized by the American Legislative Exchange Council [ALEC], a “business-friendly conservative group that coordinates activity among statehouses.” The Council is currently pushing model legislation to protect “the rights of patients to pay directly for medical services” and prohibit the individual mandate. At least 35 states are using the legislation as a model for their own repeal efforts, including Ohio and Alabama.

ALEC is no fan of health reform or health, for that matter. “For years the tobacco industry has been one of ALEC’s chief underwriters” and has generally been used as a vehicle by which large corporations advance their agenda in state legislatures The National Resources Defense Council reports that “the tie that binds is money, and ALEC’s major underwriters have included the now-disgraced Enron Corporation, as well as the American Nuclear Energy Council, the American Petroleum Institute, Amoco, Chevron, Coors Brewing Company, Shell, Texaco, Chlorine Chemistry Council, Union Pacific Railroad, Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America, Waste Management, Philip Morris Management Corporation, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and many other of the nation’s major corporations and trade associations.”

If ALEC succeeds in repealing health care reform, some corporations may benefit, but the residents who live in these states certainly won’t. As a new Center for American Progress Action Fund report concludes, thousands in Ohio, Alabama and the other states considering repeal would lose access to expanded Medicaid coverage and affordability subsidies.

Note to Demitrie Maralescu and everyone else for whom pre-existing conditions makes getting affordable health insurance an unreachable dream: if the Tennessee Legislature takes away the relief the Federal government just gave you, go ahead and thank Diane Black, the Tennessee Republican Party, a handful of Tennessee DINO’s, and most of all, the corporations at PhRMA who dominate ALEC.

A look at ALEC’s “model legislation” is an eye-opener: these boiler plate bills, crafted by corporations and sent down the conveyer belt to state houses via ALEC’s state chairmen (Hello, Rep. Curry Todd!) is a Tenther/free market freak show. Out with the minimum wage! Out with limits on ATM fees! In with charter schools! Out with the EPA enforcing the Clean Air Act! In with guns on campus! And, not surprisingly: Out with ACORN! Yes, state defunding of ACORN is here too. In fact, quite a few of these bills look familiar.

Meanwhile, considering dirty energy’s considerable presence in ALEC (Koch Industries, Exxon Mobil and Peabody Energy have reps on their “private enterprise board”) I found this turn of events interesting. If bypassing the committee process is good enough for Diane Black to yank back healthcare reform, Sen. Andy Berke thinks it should be good enough to ban mountaintop removal mining:

In response to the move, Democratic Sen. Andy Berke of Chattanooga said he'll seek to revive the mountaintop mining bill (SB1398) through the same process on Saturday.


"If they don't want to use the committee system, then we should allow votes on overwhelmingly popular items like mountaintop removal," Berke said.


Ramsey said he doesn't see why the mountaintop removal bill should get a new hearing.

Of course he doesn’t!

The Lowden Plan

Poor Sue Lowden! She really stepped her foot in it.

Now we have a handy-dandy Medical Chicken Calculator. Find out just how many chickens that heart bypass surgery will cost!

Yeesh.

Party Of No Progress

Dear What’s Left of the Republican Party:

What century are you people living in? Bring a chicken to the doctor? Meet Nevada Republican Sue Lowden, running for Harry Reid’s seat:

Interviewer: Most people walk into a doctor’s office and the first thing they ask you for is your insurance card.

Sue Lowden: Yes they do.

Interviewer: When you make an appointment ...

SL: And as soon as you say you don’t have one, "can I speak to the doctor. Can I speak to someone in charge."

Interviewer: ...they want that insurance card before you get past go.

SL: Yes of course they are used to doing that, but let’s change the system and talk about what the possibilities are. I’m telling you that this works. You know, before we all started having health care, in the olden days our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor, they would say I’ll paint your house. I mean, that’s the old days of what people would do to get health care with your doctors. Doctors are very sympathetic people. I’m not backing down from that system.

Watch it here:



Lowden is just begging to be made fun of by the DSCC.

But I’m going to be fair to Sue Lowden and say she’s not actually telling people to bring a chicken to the doctor. She’s talking about “the old days” of what people did, and she’s trying to be all self-empowerment and “change the system” and “yes we can in a compassionate conservative way” and the reason it’s a huge fail is she doesn’t seem to know what people are already doing to get healthcare. They are filing for bankruptcy. They are cashing in their IRAs and 401(k) funds. They are filing lawsuits. They are raiding their kids’ college funds.

And of course the tried-and-true community fundraiser. The benefit concert. Or, for those not fortunate to have friends who are musicians, the pickle jar by the convenience store cash register. Such things are rare in countries not America; here, they have become so ubiquitous no one bothered to mention this staple of American life during the recent healthcare debate.

Change the system? Yeah I think we just did tried that. Your side didn't want to play along. Now instead of no ideas, we find out your grand idea is to take the country back to the Great Depression? WTF? How do you "negotiate" on an $80,000 bill? A $150,000 one? How much is that in chickens? In house painting? For crying out loud, lady, have you looked at a hospital bill lately?

[Post updated to reflect what several commenters pointed out which is that no, we did not change the system, though many of us wanted to.]

For more insight on this story see Athenae and Atrios.

Republicans Are Rubber, Democrats Are Glue

Rep. John Shaddegg, R-AZ, says he supports single-payer:

When Shuster accused Republicans of supporting insurers, Shadegg balked.

"No we don't! You guys keep saying that, but I'm not the guy pushing the bill that says we should compel people to buy insurance from the for-profit guys. That's the Democrats," he said.

Then, after some back and forth with Shuster: "I would support single-payer."

"You would support a government-run medical system?" Shuster asked.

"Absolutely," Shadegg said. "I would support forcing American insurance companies to compete. Right now they have a monopoly."

Shaddegg is lying, of course: last fall he likened healthcare reform to “full on Russian gulag, Soviet-style gulag health care”. It doesn't matter though. It doesn't matter that he's shamelessly confused single payer with the public option. It doesn’t matter because he’s just repeating the new talking point, which is this:

“I'm not the guy pushing the bill that says we should compel people to buy insurance from the for-profit guys. That's the Democrats."

So this is how it’s going to be. Democrats get pwned again by the Republican message machine. Only this time, the Democrats are going to find it awfully hard to counter the pro-health insurance company label because it is correct. If this healthcare bill passes (and I suspect it will), Democrats will force people to buy insurance from private, monopolized, for-profit health insurance companies, without competition from the public sector. It's true.


So expect to hear more of this line in the ensuing months and years. Shaddegg was first out of the box but I guarantee you, he won’t be the last. We live in a nation of amnesiacs, where constant repetition of talking points in the echo chamber rewrites history on a daily basis. Now we hear that 9/11 happened on Clinton’s watch and the economic decline happened on Obama’s watch. And now the Democrats have been pwned by the right wing message machine once again.

It doesn't matter that the Republicans were being really mean and shouty people with racist signs showed up at town hall meetings and elites on the Washington Post and New York Times editorial pages had big sads and things like single payer and the public option were called "socialized medicine" and "communist" and "fascist" all at the same time. No one will remember that, all they will remember is that we were forced to eat a shit sandwich and don't think for a moment that the Republicans won't make Democrats own it.

By trying to do what was expedient, instead of fighting for what was right and what would actually work, the Democrats have saddled themselves with the “pro-health insurance company” label. They have forgotten (if they every knew it to begin with) that when it comes to the message wars, Republicans are rubber and Democrats are glue. Whatever Republicans say about Democrats sticks.

By refusing to put single payer on the table, we never got to have that debate (though as I’ve said, we’ve been fighting anti-single payer arguments with the Tea Shouters and their “no socialized medicine” messaging). Now Democrats have the pro-health insurance company albatross hanging around the necks--health insurance companies, probably the most universally reviled business in this country.

Way to go, guys.

(h/t, Kleinheider)

We Get Mail

So yesterday’s mail finally brought a letter from BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee. It reads:

On Monday, October 5, 2009 at 10:00 a.m., BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, Inc. employees discovered a theft of computer equipment at a network closet located in our Eastgate Town Center office location in Chattanooga, TN. The theft occurred Friday, October 2, 2009 at approximately 6:13 p.m. BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee has established that the items taken include 57 hard drives, containing data which was was encoded but not encrypted.

I wrote about this data theft waaaay back on November 25. The letter we received yesterday was dated December 24.

The theft occurred October 2. That’s two and a half months between when the theft occurred and when we were notified. And I’ve known about it for a month.

You know, when computers were stolen from the Davidson County Election Commission, we knew about it right away. Guess the private world doesn’t work that way.

Moving on:

The hard drives contained encoded audio and video recordings of member and provider eligibility and coordination of benefits calls to BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee’s Eastgate call center. As a current or former member, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennesee has identified that some of your information was stored on the hard drives and potentially could be accessed. The information potentially at risk includes your name, address, member ID, diagnosis code, Social Security number and/or date of birth.

Well that’s just lovely. Thanks for waiting two and a half months to let me know.

This is the second data breach for BlueCross/Blue Shield this year, it appears. Also in October, a laptop containing sensitive physician information was stolen:

This is the second reported insurance company data breach this year involving thousands of physicians. The other came to light in October when BlueCross BlueShield-affiliated plans across the country began notifying physicians that a laptop belonging to an employee of the Chicago-based BlueCross BlueShield Assn. was stolen in August.

An unencrypted file containing identifying information for every Blues-contracted physician in the country -- about 850,000 physicians in total -- was saved on the laptop. So far there's been no evidence the data have been misused, but state regulators have been critical of the Blues for allowing the breach to happen and for taking months to report it.

Taking months to report it, huh? Where have we heard that before?

So, we’re being offered Kroll’s “ID TheftSmart™” program to monitor us for identity theft for one year. Kroll is one of those major business intelligence/security firms that always scare the crap out of me, sort of like a privatized NSA. I think I’d rather stay off their radar, thank you. And I always get suspicisious when one giant corporation that knows too much about me wants to sign me up with another giant corporation that knows too much about me. Something doesn’t smell right here.

Anyway, I’ve seen local news reports on this BlueCross BlueShield hard drive theft, but I haven’t seen anything in the national news about it, which I find puzzling. Has there been some kind of news blackout? After all, it's affected tens of thousands of customers all around the country.

Seems to me this kind of stuff is happening with increasing frequency. HealthNet lost a drive with information on its members and physicians, and waited a full six months to tell anyone.

That just isn't right. If we're forced to do business with you people, as a government mandate, then there needs to be some kind of penalty when you folks twiddle your thumbs while customers' Social Security numbers and other private information is out there loose in the world, waiting for anyone to snap up. I don't think they take our privacy very seriously, and I think waiting six months or even two months to notify customers shows you were more concerned about covering your own asses than your customers' protection. Also, I don't think one years' worth of "identity theft protection" is going to make anyone feel better. What happens in two years? Three?

Anyway, just a thought. The media coverage of this has been a big fail (no surprise there) and I get the sneaking suspicion that BlueCross BlueShield is hoping no one will really notice.

A Message To Our State Legislature

Dear Rep. Susan Lynn & TN State Legislators:

I understand you are considering legislation that would allow Tennessee to “opt out” of any federal law the state doesn’t like, with the pending healthcare reform bill the first on your kill list.

Setting aside for the moment the dubious constitutionality of such legislation, I’d like to ask what your alternative healthcare plan for Tennessee might be.

A few things for you to consider (stats via Families USA & THCC and TN’s Small Businesses & Factors Influencing Health Insurance Coverage):

• For 2007-2008, 32.4% of Tennesseans under the age of 65 were uninsured.

• 74.7% of them were members of working families.

• 45% of Tennessee’s small businesses did not offer their employees insurance, with cost listed as the most common reason why.

Please tell me what your solution is for these problems. I understand you don’t like Congress' pending bill--I don’t like it either (for reasons completely different from yours). But I’ll take it over what we’ve got now.

Which is:

• We have the nation’s highest infant mortality rates.

• We’re the fourth fattest state in the nation.

• Medical bankruptcy is a growing problem in the state.

• We rank third in the nation for deaths from stroke and Cerebrovascular disease.

• We rank fourth in the nation for cancer deaths.

Even conceding that some of these figures are a couple of years old, there’s no denying the obvious: We’re not the healthiest bunch, and it’s affecting everyone’s pocket book. So, what’s your grand idea?

Healthcare has been the number one topic occupying the nation for the past year. So I’d like to know what you’ve done to get Tennesseans access to affordable health insurance in the past few months. Frankly, I think y'all should be ashamed of yourselves. Every year our state budget is slashed, cutting more people from the state’s health insurance program and slashing benefits. Every year. Next year looks worse.

What did you people do with your time in the legislature? You passed a bill cutting $1.1 million in state funds from Planned Parenthood. You passed SJR 127, the anti-abortion bill. And we had the guns-in-bars and guns-in-parks bills.

But anything to actually help people access health insurance or get healthcare or make them healthier in general? Bubkis.

So, since you’ve made clear that you don’t like Congress' pending plan, and you’ve done absolutely nothing to help Tennesseans access affordable health insurance, I can only assume you’re happy with the status quo. You think the healthcare situation in Tennessee is just fine the way it is, and all of those people dying of strokes and cancer and the newborn babies dying because of lack of prenatal care and the mentally ill who are unable to get treatment because the clinic was closed ... well, I guess that’s all just fine with you. Is that right?

If not, I’d like to hear your alternative plan to what the U.S. Congress is close to passing. How are we going to get people the insurance they need to access healthcare?

I'll be waiting.

Love,

Southern Beale

I’ll Show Ya Some Sweetheart Deals

I’m playing the world’s tiniest violin for Republicans crying about how Sen. Harry Reid larded up the healthcare bill with so-called “sweetheart deals” to “buy” support. It’s been all over Fox, conservative blogs, “the Twitter” etc. Bill Kristol even called them “sleazy.”

Y’know, one way to have avoided that was if you’d dropped your filibuster threat. Then the Democrats would have had 51 votes, and we wouldn’t have needed to cut any deals to pass this legislation.

C’mon, admit it, y’all are just pissed you got outmaneuvered and you’re walking home to your states empty-handed.

But let’s take a look at these “sweetheart deals,” shall we?

The “Louisiana Purchase,” as it is being called, a provision for Senator Mary L. Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana, who obtained an extra $300 million in Medicaid funds for her state.

Eh, I don’t have a problem with that. Louisiana is struggling, the money is going to help low-income people needing medical care. Too bad Tennessee couldn’t get in on that deal; guess that’s what happens when you’re represented by the Party of No in the U.S. Senate. Once again, our Senators Alexander and Corker show themselves to be absolutely useless.

It’s those “sweetheart deals” that benefit no one save the insurance industry that make me nuts. Look what Sen. Ben Nelson brought home to Nebraska:

Insurance giant Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Nebraska, for instance, would pay between $15 million and $20 million less in fees under the Senate bill than it would have without a change the Nebraska Democrat helped broker, according to Nelson's office. Another insurer, Mutual of Omaha, won't have to pay taxes on so-called Medigap insurance that buttresses Medicare insurance used by the elderly.

Unlike the Blue Cross/Blue Shield deal, that tax break will be extended to other companies. Mutual of Omaha spokesman Jim Nolan said he didn't "have a figure to share" about how much the company may save.

So Nelson brokers a tax break for BlueCross/BlueShield and Mutual of Omaha. That’s what I call a “sweetheart” deal!

And really, the dollar value of all these “sweetheart deals” pales in comparison to the massive amounts of moolah thrown around by lobbyists trying to influence reforms. It’s on tap to beat last year’s record:

Washington’s influence industry is on track to shatter last year’s record $3.3 billion spent to lobby Congress and the rest of the federal government — and that’s with a down economy and about 1,500 fewer registered lobbyists in town, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.

[...]

And the lobbying expenditure figures don’t include the heaps of cash interest groups are throwing at advertising, coalition-building, grass-roots and Astroturf outreach — all of which don’t get reported in the figures. Advocacy groups have spent almost $200 million on ads on the health care issue so far this year, according to Campaign Media Analysis Group.

How much of that was spent on derailing the healthcare bill? That’s hard to say: the New York Times, quoting the Center for Responsive Politics, says for the first nine months of this year, healthcare lobbyists spent $396 million. That’s on top of the $486 million the healthcare lobby spent last year, in anticipation of this year’s big legislative issue.

But wait, there's more:

But even those figures do not give the full picture of the cash funneled into lobbying on health care in 2009.

For example, the center’s health care figures do not include lobbying by the insurance industry. Mr. Levinthal said the center could not isolate the amount the industry spent only on health insurance, as opposed to other forms of insurance.

Nor do the figures include spending by groups like the United States Chamber of Commerce, which has multiple issues pending before Congress but led the effort to kill the public option.

And they do not include the $170 million that all sides have spent so far this year on television advertising.

It’s obvious looking at this sham “reform” that lobbyists’ efforts have paid off in a big way. I have far less problem with Senators taking home a few hundred million dollars to expand their state Medicaid programs than I do these corporate handouts. I’m sure the folks at BlueCross/BlueShield and WellPoint are high-fiving each other right now.

So, Merry Christmas everyone. I won’t go so far to say the American people got handed lumps of coal; we got a few crumbs. But I think we deserve so much more.

How They Do It In Ireland

Too bad something like this would never work here:

OVER 40,000 people have cancelled their private health insurance following pay cuts and insurance premium hikes.

Some 2pc of the 2.27m people with health insurance have stopped their payments because of the growing pressure on their incomes, an Oireachtas committee heard yesterday.

The story goes on to say that the majority of those cancelling their private insurance policies are under the age of 40, and this will burden the public healthcare system. And the insurance companies are whining that their costs are going up as a result. Well, maybe they need to look at lowering their premiums then.

Of course, this would never work here in the State because unlike Ireland, we do not have a public healthcare system to fall back on. Here in the States, if you don’t have insurance you don’t have healthcare (or you pay two or three times as much for it as you cannot take advantage of the “repricing” agreements insurance companies have with providers.)

So American consumers are basically slaves to our broken system. Because of the insurance monopoly, consumer choice is limited, and when you limit choice, you stifle our voice. Neat how that works out.

Something that seems to be pretty unique in the world is our system of benefit events to raise funds for a family’s medical expenses. Who hasn't seen that tip jar at the gas station cash register with the photo of the adorable little boy or girl needing an operation? Who hasn't heard stories like this:

BETTENDORF, Iowa - Friends and family of a Davenport infant who died less than a month ago came together to help his mother pay for medical expenses.

That just breaks my heart. There is a strong moral component to our healthcare debate that never seems to get into the conversation. Our system is broken, and corporate-tool obstructionist Republicans and Democrats need to fix it or there will be consequences.

Screw Healthcare Reform & The Horse It Rode In On

On the crap sandwich we are being presented that is supposed to represent healthcare reform, Atrios nailed it yesterday:

Once it passes they will own all of it, not just the reforms. Republicans will turn every health insurance horror story in a story about how the Dems' HCR is a tremendous awful horrible failure, whether or not it has anything to do with specific reforms enacted.

This is exactly right. So I am absolutely, completely befuddled as to why anything that represent real reform is being blocked by Senate Democrats.

I simply don’t understand this apparent determination to gut healthcare reform at all costs. The two biggest problems with our current healthcare system--high cost and lack of access for millions of people--are being gutted right and left:

• Importation of drugs from overseas, which would lower costs? No way. Pharmaceutical companies don’t like it, so it’s a no-go.

• Eliminating caps on insurance benefits? Of course not! Someone facing a catastrophic illness like cancer or severe brain injury--something requiring loads of expensive hospitalization and rehab--should still face bankruptcy and financial ruin under the “new” rules.

• Real competition for insurance companies in the form of a “public option”? That’s crazy talk! Insurance companies must be allowed to maintain their monopoly to provide whatever service it is they perform -- and I’m still unclear as to what that is, since they no longer pool risk but seem to exist simply to skim their profits off the top.

• Repealing the antitrust exemption insurance companies have enjoyed since 1945, limiting competition and keeping costs high to consumers? Not yet! We’re still holding out on that one, though.

Listen, the healthcare bill sucks. It’s worse than bad because near as I can tell, it’s nothing more than a big handout to insurance companies, which in my opinion is an industry that has outlived its usefulness. Listen, insurance folks: You’re supposed to pool risk and keep costs low. You aren’t doing that, in fact, you’re doing the opposite. You’ve become a little scam fleecing hardworking people of their life savings. And you act as if you are completely unable to change your most egregious policies yourself, begging Congress to come in and pass a law against them.

What the hell?

Anyway, Democrats need to get a fucking clue. What they are expending so much time, energy, money and effort on sucks. Not because it’s “socialism” or “government-run healthcare” but because it doesn’t change a damn thing. And we’re going to come out of this nine months of town brawls and hanging Congress critters in effigy and divisive political angst and agita with a healthcare system that is still broken. I'm absolutely dumbfounded.

And excuse me, but the Republicans are no better, in fact, they're worse. They're throwing up roadblocks right and left, even trying to tell us that the system we have now is just super, in fact, is so much better than what people in other countries have. How stupid do you think we are?

Republicans and Democrats alike have come at it from opposite directions but they seem to have arrived at the same place: keep the broken system we have now. A privileged elite are making far too much money off the scam to change it.

If you ask me, it’s better to have no healthcare bill at all right now. Because it’s not worth the paltry “reforms” we’re being presented. I’d rather not have an individual mandate forcing people to buy costly private health insurance when that health insurance still caps benefits, is exempt for any competition, and the only piece of candy we’ve been presented is eliminating pre-existing conditions. Nice but not worth it.

So everyone who is asking me to call my Senator asking them to support the healthcare bill: No. My Senators are Republicans and they are not going to support it anyway. They aren’t supporting it for all the wrong reasons but we at least have arrived at the same place.

Democrats: you screwed up. BIG time.

“Government-Run” Healthcare Is Not Fascism (But This Bill Might Be)

Yesterday I was forced to debunk a right wing talking point near and dear to the hearts of the tea bag set which continues to go unchallenged by our punditry: namely, that the healthcare reform package is “government-run” healthcare.

Excuse me? True government-run healthcare is one in which the doctors are government employees and the hospitals, clinics, etc. are all government-owned. You know, like our VA. This healthcare reform package doesn’t do anything close to that. All it does is rein in some abusive health insurance company policies and provide access to health insurance for those who can’t afford it.

Indeed, while we do have a government-run healthcare system in this country, you must be in the U.S. military or a veteran to take advantage of it. And one might ask the tea bag set why a true government-run healthcare system is fine for our soldiers and veterans but not fine for the rest of us.

With that in mind I headed over to one of my favorite bloggers and saw that he, too, is discussing the “government takeover of healthcare” thing. So before I retreat back to my bat cave for another week of hard-core creativity, I thought I’d point people to The Search For Integrity for an interesting perspective on healthcare reform and why we need the public option.

The Reverend points out some very inconvenient truths about this healthcare reform package. For example:

One complaint is that a public option will have to be paid for with taxes, or, more directly, that the premiums paid toward such a plan amount to a tax. Sure. But at least those tax dollars go to the government, which is ultimately responsible, however unwieldy our system is, to the people. I can vote the decision-makers in and out of office, raise a public outcry to persuade people to join such a cause. Clearly Congress has the power, constitutionally, to raise taxes. But does Congress have the power to require people to put money directly in the pockets of private corporations? Money that is required by law to be paid out of people’s incomes is a tax, any way you cut it. Why should my tax dollars go, not to my government, run (however imperfectly) by people I can vote for or against, but to a company, whose primary motivation is profit, which has every incentive to provide denial of service to its customer (me), and which lives in a culture that thinks it is just fine to pay its executives millions or billions of dollars, and feels it must do so in order to retain such “talent”?

Directly taxing the people in order to enrich corporations is fascism. That’s what an individual mandate without a public option would bring us to.

Now, of course, it won’t be called a tax, it will be called a premium. I think that’s kind of funny, really. If it’s a payment required by law, it’s a tax, and if it’s a tax, it should go to the government. If instead of going to the government it goes to a private corporation, what does that say about who is really in charge here?

Someone needs to ask Senators Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Olympia Snow, Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker and all the rest why they support fascist healthcare system in this country. I thought they were against that sort of thing.

Anyway, I urge everyone to read The Reverend’s entire post over there because there’s a lot of good stuff and a lot of great food for thought.

Stupak Stupidity

You know, I thought conservatives--Blue Dog Democrat and Republican alike--were against government interference in private enterprise.

Or a government bureaucrat coming between doctor and patient.

Yet it seems that is exactly what they are doing by jumping on board the Stupak bandwagon:

Sixty-four Democrats voted for Stupak’s amendment, without which the House healthcare bill would not have won final passage in a 220-215 vote.

Stupak’s language not only prohibits abortion coverage in the public insurance option included in the House bill. It would also prevent private plans from offering coverage for abortion services if they accept people who are receiving government subsidies.

Gosh, where’s the free hand of the market when you need it? I wonder if the Tea Partiers are concerned about this gross government intrusion into private enterprise? Aw, who am I kidding!

You know, I love it when my lady parts are turned into a political football. It makes me feel so very special. So much like ... gosh, what is the word I’m looking for? Oh yeah: chattel. Frankly, I’m a little creeped out Congressman Stupak is even thinking about my lady parts in a bill that does so much more to overhaul health insurance. It’s a little pervy.

Yes, this royally pisses me off. But you know, a reality check, people. Being a woman has been a pre-existing condition since, you know, forever. As I pointed out when I wrote about this last month, gender rating is widespread in health insurance markets (that’s where women pay more than men for identical plans). So, you know, what’s a little inequality among friends? We’ve only been allowed to vote for, what, 90-something years? Surely you didn’t think you’d have equal access to health services by now, too?

Here’s the thing. Abortion is still legal. Try as they might, the anti’s have yet to outlaw it, and they probably never will. We won that battle.

All they’ve got left are rather empty gestures like the Stupak Amendment, which applies to insurance coverage of abortion--something which, according to the Guttmacher Institute, only paid for 13% of abortions (or thereabouts) in 2001. And Stupak also only applies to insurance plans on the exchange, which itself affects a small percentage of people.

So, this all looks like a lot of hoo-hah over an amendment that would affect a relatively small number of women. Unfortunately, those women are the poor, the ones who need reproductive choice the most. Yes, it sucks. But since when does Congress care about the poor, anyway? Is anyone really surprised?

Take heart. If Stupak becomes law, you can still buy an insurance plan that covers abortion services. You just can’t be poor, or receive government assistance. And those more well-off can always pay for their abortions themselves, without a health insurance plan.

I’m trying to see how much has changed. Abortion services available for the well off, but not the poor. How is this different from what we have now? From what we’ve ever had?

Make no mistake: they’ve done a really shitty thing to women, treating us like second class citizens who aren’t entitled to the same health insurance options as penis-Americans. Am I pissed off? Yes.

But abortion is still legal. We can still get low-income women the reproductive health services they need in other ways. Start by donating to NARAL or Planned Parenthood, if you are able.

Is the Stupak Amendment worth scuttling healthcare reform over? I don’t think so. But it has been a tremendous reality check. It has shown us who within the Democratic Party thinks it’s their business to decide what insurance plans should be available to women.

Got that? Good. Now use that information.

When Conservatives Come Between Me & My Doctor

I guess we women should be used to crap like this by now:

Approximately 40 House Democrats are prepared to block healthcare reform legislation from coming to the floor should the bill include federal subsidies for abortions, said Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) Friday.

Abortion has been the elephant in the room on the healthcare debate: the Right has been desperate to trot out its most favorite wedge issue; knowing this, the Left won’t touch the topic with a 10-foot pole. But it was inevitable that abortion would come up as part of the debate over the public option, so here ya go, folks.

Let the games begin!

Nothing demonstrates women’s inequality better than the use of abortion as a wedge issue to derail healthcare reform. The reality is, abortion is legal; most private insurance policies cover the procedure to some degree, just as they would cover any medical procedure involving lady parts. And it’s ludicrous to think a public health insurance option shouldn’t cover the same medical procedures as any private health insurance policy. We’re talking about insurance here, people; insurance is not healthcare, as I’ve said ad nauseum.

And trying to equate a public health insurance plan that covers abortion as anything close to “government funded abortions” is wildly off the mark and incredibly dishonest, preying on people’s ignorance and their fear. Insurance is not healthcare! Oh wait, I already said that.

I don’t get why this is so hard for people to understand or even controversial. Even more ironic is that it’s usually the same people harping about how “Obamacare will put a government bureaucrat between you and your doctor” who are trying to insert themselves between me and my doctor.

You don’t see me sticking my nose into their healthcare decisions, do you?

But this just highlights the vast inequality between men’s and women’s healthcare. I love it when pharmacists with a “conscience” think it’s okay to deny women birth control pills but have no qualms about filling Cialis and Viagra prescriptions for men.

Here’s a news flash: private health insurance is a discriminatory system! Insurance companies routinely treat women differently from men; “gender rating” (charging same-aged women and men different premiums for the same coverage), is widespread.

The National Women’s Law Center first looked at the issue in 2008; one year later, they’ve found little has changed:

• Gender rating remains rampant in the individual health insurance market and among bestselling health plans. NWLC examined the best-selling plans (generally the top 10) in each state capital and found that 95% practice gender rating, compared to 93% of such plans in 2008.

• Using the same random sampling methods as in 2008, NWLC found even more egregious examples of gender rating among 25-year-olds in 2009. At this age, women are charged up to 84% more than men for individual health plans that exclude maternity coverage.

• Despite the bleak landscape, two states made improvements since the Center issued its Nowhere to Turn report in 2008. In April 2009, Arkansas passed a law expressly prohibiting health insurance companies from using a woman’s status as a domestic violence survivor to deny coverage, and in October 2009, California became the eleventh state to ban gender rating in the individual health insurance market.

• New research revealed that, in most states, it is common for a female non-smoker to be charged more than a male smoker in the individual insurance market simply because she is a woman. [...]

• Maternity coverage remains largely unavailable in the individual market, with virtually no improvement in access. In 2009, 13% of the health plans available to a 30-year-old woman across the country provide maternity coverage, compared to 12% in 2008.

It seems some people are so accustomed to this kind of inequality that they think it's okay (and it takes folks like Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow to point out the obvious to troglodytes like Republican Sen. John Kyl.)

So now we have an interesting case where we have an unfair private insurance system that penalizes women because of their gender, charging them more for no reason and not covering certain services. And a group of conservatives want to build that same inequality into the public insurance system by having just some procedures covered for women, whereas all procedures will be covered for men.

Umm, no. The main point of the public option is to rein in the unfair and abusive practices of the private insurance industry (NOTE: On reflection that was a huge brain fart. The main point of the public option is to lower costs. But reigning in abusive insurance industry practices would be a nice ancillary effect.) You just can’t do that if your corrective element is going to be just as unfair and abusive and discriminatory.

The reality is, no one involved in this debate gives a crap about abortion or gender discrimination. They’re trying to kill healthcare reform. They’re using their favorite wedge issue to do it, and conservative Democrats are playing along.

Let's Hear It For The AHIP Singers

Billionaires For Wealthcare, those brave activist souls with some pretty good singing pipes, literally let their voices be heard at a recent AHIP meeting. Watch it:



**applause**applause**applause**applause**applause**!!

In Search Of Justice From An Unjust System

Via Huffington Post comes the tragic story of the Sarkisyan family, who traveled from California to Philadelphia to confront the CEO of CIGNA, Edward Hanway, over the death of their 17-year-old daughter Nataline. Nataline was denied a liver transplant by CIGNA in 2007. The family and a group of nurses accompanying them were escorted off the premises by police, after a CIGNA employee tried to claim he could not discuss the case because of HIPAA laws.

As they left the building another CIGNA employee heckled them from a balcony above.

Watch it here:



Although the family tried to sue,

The Sarkisyan family's wrongful-death suit was thrown out of court because of a 1987 Supreme Court ruling that shields employer-paid health care plans from damages over their coverage decisions.

The Sarkisyans say the law needs to be changed to allow people to sue health insurers for these kinds of decisions.

"If you don't sue, you can't make changes," Hilda Sarkisyan said. "It's not about the money. It's about the principle. They are just going to keep denying people care if we don't stop them."

Yet conservatives want to not only protect companies like CIGNA, but also enact even stricter “tort reform” to prevent people from seeking justice in the courts.

When will the scales be tilted in favor of the people?

You Say Choice, I Hear Big Fucking Hassle

I caught some of Bill Frist’s walkbacks on healthcare reform on MSNBC this morning, just enough to catch the usual claptrap about “consumer choice”, yada yada.

This is a popular catchphrase in the healthcare debate but let me say right now: when it comes to healthcare, I don’t want “choice.”

Or, to be more precise, I don’t want a “choice among insurance plans.” That is absolutely the last thing I want to deal with right now. You think I have the time or energy to research a whole nations’ worth of insurance plans to find the one right for me? Who wants to deal with that?

And you know what comes with the “free market”? Advertising.

Look, I’ve got enough hassles in my day to day life right now. I can assure you, the very last thing I want is to be inundated with more spam e-mail, magazine advertising, spam-Tweets, direct mail pieces, billboards, telemarketing phone calls, TV ads, etc. etc. about this or that insurance plan.

I do not want that. Indeed, I want you people to leave me the fuck alone.

When some Republican says “choice” what I hear is right-wing speak for free markets and de-regulation and free market fairies. Woo hoo. But every other time we’ve been offered that what we get is a huge fucking hassle. And that’s not what I want.

I do not want a free market solution. All I want--all I want--let me repeat, loud and clear, ALL I WANT--is to be able to choose my own doctor and not be reamed through the checkbook in the process.

Can we do that? Just those two little things?

Ya think?