Good news, at least here. Have a happier Fathers Day. -Ed
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll.html?ref=us
In Poll, Wide Support for Government-Run Health
"The national telephone survey, conducted from June 12 to 16, found
In Poll, Wide Support for Government-Run Health
"The national telephone survey, conducted from June 12 to 16, found
72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered
insurance plan - something like Medicare for those under 65 - that would
compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they
were opposed. "
By KEVIN SACK and MARJORIE CONNELLY
Published: June 20, 2009
By KEVIN SACK and MARJORIE CONNELLY
Published: June 20, 2009
Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care
system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals
Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with
private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so
everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could
do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Across a number of questions, the poll detected substantial support for a
greater government role in health care, a position generally identified with
the Democratic Party. When asked which party was more likely to improve
health care, only 18 percent of respondents said the Republicans, compared
with 57 percent who picked the Democrats. Even one of four Republicans said
the Democrats would do better.
The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found
that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered
insurance plan - something like Medicare for those under 65 - that would
compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were
opposed.
Republicans in Congress have fiercely criticized the proposal as an unneeded
expansion of government that might evolve into a system of nationalized
health coverage and lead to the rationing of care.
But in the poll, the proposal received broad bipartisan backing, with half
of those who call themselves Republicans saying they would support a public
plan, along with nearly three-fourths of independents and almost nine in 10
Democrats.
The poll, of 895 adults, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus
three percentage points.
system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals
Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with
private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so
everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could
do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Across a number of questions, the poll detected substantial support for a
greater government role in health care, a position generally identified with
the Democratic Party. When asked which party was more likely to improve
health care, only 18 percent of respondents said the Republicans, compared
with 57 percent who picked the Democrats. Even one of four Republicans said
the Democrats would do better.
The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found
that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered
insurance plan - something like Medicare for those under 65 - that would
compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were
opposed.
Republicans in Congress have fiercely criticized the proposal as an unneeded
expansion of government that might evolve into a system of nationalized
health coverage and lead to the rationing of care.
But in the poll, the proposal received broad bipartisan backing, with half
of those who call themselves Republicans saying they would support a public
plan, along with nearly three-fourths of independents and almost nine in 10
Democrats.
The poll, of 895 adults, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus
three percentage points.
***
From: Cate Engel, MSW
What: Sing out for Single Payer: A musical ChauTauqua on Health Care
What: Sing out for Single Payer: A musical ChauTauqua on Health Care
Who: ANNE FEENEY & Friends
The woman that Utah Phillips calls the "best labor singer in North America"
When: Thursday, July 2nd @ 7:30 pm
Where: Professional Musicians Local 47
817 Vine St., Los Angeles 90038
(just north of Melrose - free on-site parking available)
Suggested Donation: $10
(no one turned away for lack of funds)
For more information: (213) 252-1351
Sponsored by: Labor Task Force for Universal Healthcare, The Ash
Grove/Beyond November, California Alliance of Retired Americans,
California Physicians Alliance/PNHP, Health Care for All,
Professional Musicians Local 47, Musicians' Interguild Credit Union,
Labor Campaign for Single-Payer Healthcare
http://annefeeney.com, anne@annefeeney.com
Hellraiser Anne Feeney In Concert
Pittsburgh-based agitator Anne Feeney performs music that she says is
designed to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." Not many
women have chosen to walk the path of Woody Guthrie, but Feeney has
made a career of it for the past 35 years. She has lived her life on the
frontlines - performing at thousands of rallies, picket lines and
demonstrations over the years - including the WTO demonstrations in
Seattle, Solidarity Day in Washington, DC, and for 1.5 million at the April
25, 2004 March for Women's Lives.
Feeney's bottomless songbag draws on Irish, bluegrass, traditional,
labor, pop, folk and contemporary material. She's as likely to sing a
traditional song or an obscure gem by one of her many friends in the
singer/songwriter circuit as she is one of her own awardwinning songs.
Feeney's anthem, "Have You Been to Jail for Justice?" is featured on
Peter, Paul and Mary's CD, "In These Times," and also on "Carry It On,"
their 5 CD boxed set. That song was also featured in "Get Up/Stand Up:
The History of Pop and Protest," a documentary featuring the greatest
protest songs of all time, which aired nationally on PBS, and worldwide.
Her latest release is "Dump the Bosses Off Your Back." The fifteen song CD
includes six new songs from Feeney as well as musical contributions from
Commander Cody, the Austin Lounge Lizards, Emma's Revolution and an
allstar cast of Pittsburgh musicians.
While Feeney may prefer the excitement of performances at rallies and
demonstrations, she knows that many of her fans prefer pepper-spray free
environments to listen to the songs and stories that make up her sometimes
caustic, sometimes hilarious, always inspiring show.
Cate Engel, MSW
Administrator & Projects Coordinator
Labor Task Force for Universal Healthcare
213.252.1351, cengel@USC.edu
The woman that Utah Phillips calls the "best labor singer in North America"
When: Thursday, July 2nd @ 7:30 pm
Where: Professional Musicians Local 47
817 Vine St., Los Angeles 90038
(just north of Melrose - free on-site parking available)
Suggested Donation: $10
(no one turned away for lack of funds)
For more information: (213) 252-1351
Sponsored by: Labor Task Force for Universal Healthcare, The Ash
Grove/Beyond November, California Alliance of Retired Americans,
California Physicians Alliance/PNHP, Health Care for All,
Professional Musicians Local 47, Musicians' Interguild Credit Union,
Labor Campaign for Single-Payer Healthcare
http://annefeeney.com, anne@annefeeney.com
Hellraiser Anne Feeney In Concert
Pittsburgh-based agitator Anne Feeney performs music that she says is
designed to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." Not many
women have chosen to walk the path of Woody Guthrie, but Feeney has
made a career of it for the past 35 years. She has lived her life on the
frontlines - performing at thousands of rallies, picket lines and
demonstrations over the years - including the WTO demonstrations in
Seattle, Solidarity Day in Washington, DC, and for 1.5 million at the April
25, 2004 March for Women's Lives.
Feeney's bottomless songbag draws on Irish, bluegrass, traditional,
labor, pop, folk and contemporary material. She's as likely to sing a
traditional song or an obscure gem by one of her many friends in the
singer/songwriter circuit as she is one of her own awardwinning songs.
Feeney's anthem, "Have You Been to Jail for Justice?" is featured on
Peter, Paul and Mary's CD, "In These Times," and also on "Carry It On,"
their 5 CD boxed set. That song was also featured in "Get Up/Stand Up:
The History of Pop and Protest," a documentary featuring the greatest
protest songs of all time, which aired nationally on PBS, and worldwide.
Her latest release is "Dump the Bosses Off Your Back." The fifteen song CD
includes six new songs from Feeney as well as musical contributions from
Commander Cody, the Austin Lounge Lizards, Emma's Revolution and an
allstar cast of Pittsburgh musicians.
While Feeney may prefer the excitement of performances at rallies and
demonstrations, she knows that many of her fans prefer pepper-spray free
environments to listen to the songs and stories that make up her sometimes
caustic, sometimes hilarious, always inspiring show.
Cate Engel, MSW
Administrator & Projects Coordinator
Labor Task Force for Universal Healthcare
213.252.1351, cengel@USC.edu
***
From: Brad Parker
Subject: Re: [PDLA] INSURERS PUT ON BLACK HAT and take off
the gloves with politicians__PASS IT ON
On Jun 18, 2009, at 12:11 AM, Linda Sutton wrote:
For those who have any doubts about whether we should have SINGLE PAYER or a PUBLIC OPTION, the for-profit insurance corporations have provided you with the evidence that they intend to steer our country into an even more catastrophic health care disaster going into the future...IF our politicians continue supporting them.By refusing to stop the cancellation of policies for sick policyholders, they have thrown down the gauntlet and dared politicians to do anything to stop them. No one has a clue how many people have already died because of delayed treatment or suffered needlessly through denial of tests and treatments.Now politicians who have been at the trough taking all of the insurance lobbyists' "contributions" are given the opportunity to align themselves WITH the INSURANCE INDUSTRY and allow them to continue, OR to come on board and support a SINGLE PAYER system that will give EVERYONE ACCESS to health care.Take HEED, because if you do have insurance that has worked for you in the past, you are only ONE DAY away from a time when you are canceled WHEN YOU NEED IT MOST!!!There is NO REASON that we should accept the Washington talking point mantra that "it can't pass this year." Our elected representatives are to be representing US. Call, e, and fax until they start listening and remembering their constituents as they make these life and death decisions.////Linda SuttonPDLA, Co-Chair
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-rescind17-2009jun17,0,3508020,full.story
From the Los Angeles TimesHEALTHCARE: ROADS TO REFORM
Health insurers refuse to limit rescission of coverage
Lawmakers ask three executives if they'll stop dropping customers except where they can show "intentional fraud." All say no.By Lisa Girion
June 17, 2009
Executives of three of the nation's largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive.
The hearing on the controversial action known as rescission, which has left thousands of Americans burdened with costly medical bills despite paying insurance premiums, began a day after President Obama outlined his proposals for revamping the nation's healthcare system.
An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.
It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.
"No one can defend, and I certainly cannot defend, the practice of canceling coverage after the fact," said Rep. Michael C. Burgess (R-Tex.), a member of the committee. "There is no acceptable minimum to denying coverage after the fact."
The executives -- Richard A. Collins, chief executive of UnitedHealth's Golden Rule Insurance Co.; Don Hamm, chief executive of Assurant Health and Brian Sassi, president of consumer business for WellPoint Inc., parent of Blue Cross of California -- were courteous and matter-of-fact in their testimony.
But they would not commit to limiting rescissions to only policyholders who intentionally lie or commit fraud to obtain coverage, a refusal that met with dismay from legislators on both sides of the political aisle.
Experts said it could undermine the industry's efforts to influence healthcare-overhaul plans working their way toward the White House.
"Talk about tone deaf," said Robert Laszewski, a former health insurance executive who now counsels companies as a consultant.
Democratic strategist Paul Begala said the hearing could hurt the industry's efforts to position itself in the debate.
"The industry has tried very hard in this current effort not to be the bad guy, not to wear the black hat," Begala said. "The trouble is all that hard work and goodwill is at risk if in fact they are pursuing" such practices.
Rescission was largely hidden until three years ago, when The Times launched a series of stories disclosing that insurers routinely canceled the medical coverage of individual policyholders who required expensive medical care.
Sassi said rescissions are necessary to prevent people who lie about preexisting conditions from obtaining coverage and driving up costs for others.
"I want to emphasize that rescission is about stopping fraud and material misrepresentations that contribute to spiraling healthcare costs," Sassi told the committee.
But rescission victims testified that their policies were canceled for inadvertent omissions or honest mistakes about medical history on their applications. Rescission, they said, was about improving corporate profits rather than rooting out fraud.
"It's about the money," said Jennifer Wittney Horton, a Los Angeles woman whose policy was rescinded after failure to report a weight-loss medication she was no longer taking and irregular menstruation.
"Insurers ignore the law, and when they find a discrepancy or omission, they rescind the policy and refuse to pay any of your medical bills -- even for routine treatment or treatment they previously authorized," Horton said.
She and others from around the country accused insurers in testimony of gaming anti-fraud laws to take policyholders' premiums, only to drop people who developed serious illnesses. They testified that they or a deceased loved one had had policies canceled over innocent mistakes and inadvertent omissions on their applications.
A Texas nurse said she lost her coverage, after she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, for failing to disclose a visit to a dermatologist for acne.
The sister of an Illinois man who died of lymphoma said his policy was rescinded for the failure to report a possible aneurysm and gallstones that his physician noted in his chart but did not discuss with him.
The committee's investigation found that WellPoint's Blue Cross targeted individuals with more than 1,400 conditions, including breast cancer, lymphoma, pregnancy and high blood pressure. And the committee obtained documents that showed Blue Cross supervisors praised employees in performance reviews for rescinding policies.
One employee, for instance, received a perfect 5 for "exceptional performance" on an evaluation that noted the employee's role in dropping thousands of policyholders and avoiding nearly $10 million worth of medical care.
Committee members took turns, alternating Democrats and Republicans, condemning such practices.
"When times are good, the insurance company is happy to sign you up and take your money in the form of premiums," said Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.). "But when times are bad . . . some insurance companies use a technicality to justify breaking its promise, at a time when most patients are too weak to fight back."
"I think a company does have a right to make sure there's no fraudulent information," said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.). "But if a citizen acts in good faith, we should expect the insurance company that takes their money to act in good faith also."
Late in the hearing, Stupak, the committee chairman, put the executives on the spot. Stupak asked each of them whether he would at least commit his company to immediately stop rescissions except where they could show "intentional fraud."
The answer from all three executives:
"No."
Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said that a public insurance plan should be a part of any overhaul because it would force private companies to treat consumers fairly or risk losing them.
"This is precisely why we need a public option," Dingell said.
Proponents of a public plan seized upon the hearing, saying it showed why access to healthcare cannot be left to private insurance companies.
"This could reshape the debate," said Jerry Flanagan, a patient advocate with Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog.
"When insurance companies go under oath and admit they are canceling innocent patients when they get sick, it makes it very difficult for lawmakers to pass a law that requires every American to buy a policy or face a tax fine. It opens the way for a public option to hold the companies in check."
Rescission has fueled consumer outrage, particularly in California, where lawmakers are considering legislation to limit the practice to cases of intentional misrepresentation. It has also led to a flurry of lawsuits.
In November 2007, The Times reported that insurer Health Net Inc. paid bonuses to employees based in part on their involvement in rescinding policies. According to internal corporate documents disclosed through litigation, Health Net saved $35 million over six years by rescinding policies.
The disclosures in part led an arbitration judge to levy $9 million in damages against Health Net in a case involving the company's rescission of the policy of a woman diagnosed with breast cancer.
At the time, Blue Cross told The Times that it did not link employee performance reviews to rescission. Blue Cross also said at the time that it had conducted audits to ensure that claims reviewers were not given any "carrots" for canceling coverage.
The company reiterated that position Tuesday in spite of the committee's disclosure of two employee performance evaluations from 2003 discussing rescission levels and savings.
In a statement, WellPoint spokesman Jerry Slowey said the company had "no policy to factor either the number of rescissions or the value of claims not paid in the evaluation of employee performance or when calculating employee salary or bonuses."
Last year, while reviewing documents for the committee, two employee reviews from 2003 were discovered "that made reference to savings in a section of the review that contains many other factors," Slowey said.
"Once we discovered this reference, more than 100 other individuals' reviews were reviewed, and no other such references were found."
"The fact that two out of more than 100 individuals handling possible rescissions points to the fact that this was just two associates in the same area recognizing the work done that year to uncover fraud and abuse," he said.
lisa.girion@latimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment