not that our elected leaders really care to vote on behalf of their constituents but good news on this front IMO...
WASHINGTON, July 20 (Reuters) - Public support for President Barack Obama's handling of healthcare reform, the pillar of his legislative agenda, has fallen below 50 percent for the first time, a Washington Post-ABC News poll released on Monday said.
Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress have run into stiff opposition this month as they try to pass legislation to restructure the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare industry through the creation of a government-run health insurance program.
Republicans and some fiscally conservative Democrats argue the plan, with an estimated cost of more than $1 trillion, could hurt small businesses, add to budget deficits and reduce the quality of medical care for many Americans.
Those concerns may be having an impact on the public, according to the poll, which showed 49 percent of respondents approving of Obama's stand on the issue compared to 57 percent in April.
Those saying they disapproved rose to 44 percent from 29 percent during the same period.
Obama and the White House have gone on the offensive to drum up support for the plan, which would compete with private insurers, provide cover to many of the 46 million uninsured and try to stem runaway medical costs.
With time running out to pass a bill in Congress this year, the battle is shaping up as a major test of Obama's presidency.
WASHINGTON, July 20 (Reuters) - Public support for President Barack Obama's handling of healthcare reform, the pillar of his legislative agenda, has fallen below 50 percent for the first time, a Washington Post-ABC News poll released on Monday said.
Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress have run into stiff opposition this month as they try to pass legislation to restructure the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare industry through the creation of a government-run health insurance program.
Republicans and some fiscally conservative Democrats argue the plan, with an estimated cost of more than $1 trillion, could hurt small businesses, add to budget deficits and reduce the quality of medical care for many Americans.
Those concerns may be having an impact on the public, according to the poll, which showed 49 percent of respondents approving of Obama's stand on the issue compared to 57 percent in April.
Those saying they disapproved rose to 44 percent from 29 percent during the same period.
Obama and the White House have gone on the offensive to drum up support for the plan, which would compete with private insurers, provide cover to many of the 46 million uninsured and try to stem runaway medical costs.
With time running out to pass a bill in Congress this year, the battle is shaping up as a major test of Obama's presidency.
of course this is the most important number, or should be when discussing healthcare reform
85% of Americans are happy with their own healthcare.
Americans are being told everybody else is suffering
Comments | Recommended Print
RSS
Yahoo! Buzz
Steve Blow
Archive | Bio
E-mail
Only hope for our ailing health care system is real reform
12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, July 19, 2009
I'm pained to confess that I got my first demand letter from a debt-collection agency.
It's painful because I'm old fashioned enough to see such a thing as a stain on your character and reputation.
It's also painful because I don't think any of this past-due payment mess is my fault.
I blame the U.S. health care system.
To make a long story short, my wife left my group health insurance plan this year and went on her employer's plan. We could save some money on premiums that way.
But let me tell you, the additional cost in hassle and aggravation has been enormous.
Lori had a couple of medical tests shortly after the first of the year. And we started getting notices that insurance wasn't paying because they were deemed "pre-existing medical conditions."
Lori protested that these were tests, not treatment for anything. Her new insurance company launched an investigation into her medical history and sent a packet of forms for her to fill out.
She had to provide information on every doctor she has seen.
"Should I list the dentist?" she asked me one evening as she filled out the form.
"No!" I scoffed. "They don't need your dentist."
"It says every doctor," Lori-the-rule-follower replied, as of course she put down the dentist's name.
So this thing drags on and on. We keep getting bills from doctors and labs and so forth.
When Lori would call them, some clerk would tell her not to worry about it, that it's just the usual insurance snag, etc., etc.
This went on for months. Lori finally called her insurance carrier and was told that things were in limbo.
"Your dentist hasn't responded yet," the phone clerk said.
Arghhh.
Lori's disputed tests had been a colonoscopy and a breast screen.
No teeth involved!
On and on, it dragged. Each day the mail brought more bewildering statements. I couldn't tell if I was supposed to be paying, waiting or crying.
After the snotty letter from the collection agency arrived, I called the insurance carrier last week to see if I could sort through this mess.
Only after we had talked awhile did the phone clerk say something like, "Oh! So your wife was on your policy last year? Well, then the pre-existing condition limits don't apply."
Say what?
Yep. Just by faxing a certificate from my insurance company showing that Lori was previously covered, she was suddenly exempt from the rigmarole and the steep limitations on pre-existing conditions.
Well, that was a happy outcome for us. But wait. Consider the absurdity of this!
If Lori had been one of the millions of unfortunate Texans without health insurance last year, her new policy would pay only a pittance for any existing medical problem she might have.
Cancer? Bad heart? Sorry, she's out of luck.
But because she was among the lucky ones with insurance, jackpot! Everything is covered!
Yes, the rich get richer, and the poor do get poorer.
We're in the midst of a great debate over reforming our health care system. And I know that change is scary.
But frankly, I'm not that big a fan of what we've got now.
This whole system of depending on employers to provide health insurance is outdated and dying. And letting private, profit-motivated insurance companies dictate medical decisions is just scary.
Let's not let fear of change condemn us to more of the same.
Count me as ready to experiment with some real reform.
RSS
Yahoo! Buzz
Steve Blow
Archive | Bio
Only hope for our ailing health care system is real reform
12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, July 19, 2009
I'm pained to confess that I got my first demand letter from a debt-collection agency.
It's painful because I'm old fashioned enough to see such a thing as a stain on your character and reputation.
It's also painful because I don't think any of this past-due payment mess is my fault.
I blame the U.S. health care system.
To make a long story short, my wife left my group health insurance plan this year and went on her employer's plan. We could save some money on premiums that way.
But let me tell you, the additional cost in hassle and aggravation has been enormous.
Lori had a couple of medical tests shortly after the first of the year. And we started getting notices that insurance wasn't paying because they were deemed "pre-existing medical conditions."
Lori protested that these were tests, not treatment for anything. Her new insurance company launched an investigation into her medical history and sent a packet of forms for her to fill out.
She had to provide information on every doctor she has seen.
"Should I list the dentist?" she asked me one evening as she filled out the form.
"No!" I scoffed. "They don't need your dentist."
"It says every doctor," Lori-the-rule-follower replied, as of course she put down the dentist's name.
So this thing drags on and on. We keep getting bills from doctors and labs and so forth.
When Lori would call them, some clerk would tell her not to worry about it, that it's just the usual insurance snag, etc., etc.
This went on for months. Lori finally called her insurance carrier and was told that things were in limbo.
"Your dentist hasn't responded yet," the phone clerk said.
Arghhh.
Lori's disputed tests had been a colonoscopy and a breast screen.
No teeth involved!
On and on, it dragged. Each day the mail brought more bewildering statements. I couldn't tell if I was supposed to be paying, waiting or crying.
After the snotty letter from the collection agency arrived, I called the insurance carrier last week to see if I could sort through this mess.
Only after we had talked awhile did the phone clerk say something like, "Oh! So your wife was on your policy last year? Well, then the pre-existing condition limits don't apply."
Say what?
Yep. Just by faxing a certificate from my insurance company showing that Lori was previously covered, she was suddenly exempt from the rigmarole and the steep limitations on pre-existing conditions.
Well, that was a happy outcome for us. But wait. Consider the absurdity of this!
If Lori had been one of the millions of unfortunate Texans without health insurance last year, her new policy would pay only a pittance for any existing medical problem she might have.
Cancer? Bad heart? Sorry, she's out of luck.
But because she was among the lucky ones with insurance, jackpot! Everything is covered!
Yes, the rich get richer, and the poor do get poorer.
We're in the midst of a great debate over reforming our health care system. And I know that change is scary.
But frankly, I'm not that big a fan of what we've got now.
This whole system of depending on employers to provide health insurance is outdated and dying. And letting private, profit-motivated insurance companies dictate medical decisions is just scary.
Let's not let fear of change condemn us to more of the same.
Count me as ready to experiment with some real reform.
"and paraplegics would be walking by now if Al Gore won"
John Edwards, 2004 Presidential campaign
that find a victim nonsense is pathetic, we can find just as many victims (actually more) in socialized medicine nations.
it doesn't mean we need to change everything we know about a healthcare system that the overwhelming majority of people are happy with to implement a bureaucratic plan that increases costs and increases deficits. The majority of people in the healthcare industry argue that it will also diminish the quality of healthcare.
Now go find another victim, that'll change everything
LOL
John Edwards, 2004 Presidential campaign
that find a victim nonsense is pathetic, we can find just as many victims (actually more) in socialized medicine nations.
it doesn't mean we need to change everything we know about a healthcare system that the overwhelming majority of people are happy with to implement a bureaucratic plan that increases costs and increases deficits. The majority of people in the healthcare industry argue that it will also diminish the quality of healthcare.
Now go find another victim, that'll change everything
LOL
what would it cost under Obama's plan?
not true, the overwhelming majority of Americans that are covered are part of some group plan, no cherry picking involved
as for problems some individuals have, fill in the holes.
we don't need a federal bureaucracy to fuck up healthcare while increasing costs and increasing the deficit.
There has not been one plan ever put forth that decreases costs and decreases the deficit, the argument you often fall back on. There's some sort of disconnect going on here be financial analysis and talking points.
Did you get this out of the same poll that 85% of Americans were 'happy" with their lives?
Nov 29, 2007
33 excellent & 50 good = 83%
+ 12 fair = 95%
but there are 3% unhappy :lol:
When I decided to chance making it to 65 without insurance (3years away at that time) my bill was 675 per month and they had never paid a claim. They had increased it 3 times in 1 year. Shortly after that they did the same with my wife (she is a year younger). They did have to pay claims on her, however, she had back surgery.
Did you get this out of the same poll that 85% of Americans were 'happy" with their lives?
CBS /NYT 6/20/09
can't cut and paste
77% satisfied
stupid argument?
what's stupid is saying a plan that increases costs and increases the deficit according to any and all financial analysis "is going to be more fiscally responsible"
what's stupid is pointing to some microscopic fractional of a problem that may exist in this country while ignoring the timing, selectivity and long waits found in socialized systems.
what's stupid is believing you can
1) cover more people
2) somehow reduce the costs
3) while creating a new and largest bureaucracy in the country
4) and reducing the income of medical professionals
5) and reducing the investment incentives in pharmaceuticals
6) while having a whole new set of laws and regulation and fines and penalties and taxes
7) is going to IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF HEALTHCARE
8) while stimulating the economy to boot
actually, that's not stupid, it's ridiculously retarded
