Image 01

Posts Tagged ‘Health Care Summit’

Unreported From Health Summit: Obama Says “Obamacare” for First Time

Monday, March 1st, 2010

President Barack Obama Used the Term "Obamacare" for the First Time during Thursday's Health Care Summit

One interesting development went completely unreported during or after the festivities at the health care summit last Thursday: for the first time, President Barack Obama referred to his own signature comprehensive health care reform initiative as “Obamacare”. Obama used the term Obamacare at the very end of the health care summit in his closing remarks. Here’s the Washington Post transcript of the history-making moment when Obama uttered Obamacare for the first time:

OBAMA: An interesting thing happened a couple of weeks ago, and that is a report came out that for the first time, it turns out that more Americans are now getting their health care coverage from government than those who are getting it from the private sector. And you know what? That’s without a bill from the Democrats or from President Obama. It has nothing to do with, quote-unquote, “Obamacare.”

Some on the left have attacked centrists and conservatives for using the term Obamacare, with some left wing bloggers going so far afield as to declare that Obamacare is the “new N word.” Others on the left claim that using the term Obamacare “demonizes” Obama somehow and is a personal attack on Obama. Urban Dictionary has several interesting definitions of Obamacare, one of which focuses on the allegedly inappropriate nature of the term:

obamacare

1. n. A term invented by impoverished, dumb-ass neocons to apply negative connotation to the bi-partisan, congressional health care plan.

2. n. A term created to align this struggling bill–being impeded by billion-dollar insurance industries and represented by “the people” organized by Fox News in a “grassroots” movement–with President Barack Obama.

3. n. A term used by dumb shits who watch Glenn Beck and oppose government-run healthcare and are more likely to follow a 7th-Day Adventist ideology over SOCIALISM!!!!

As no one in the mainstream media, popular political blogs or even little tiny blogs like this one has reported on Obama’s use of the term Obamacare for the first time Thursday,  many on the far left who attack anyone who use the term are probably unaware that Obama used the term himself on Thursday at the summit. The term appears in the transcripts, but in no articles of any kind on the internet.

Hopefully, this post will serve as a starting point to reporting the news that Obama actually used the term Obamacare for the first time on Thursday and perhaps avoid continued hostility and attacks by those on the far left who (wrongly) view the term Obamacare as a slur. Indeed, if Obama himself used the term Obamacare to describe his plans on health care, it makes little sense to argue that the term itself is somehow an offensive slur.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Voter Approval of Obama’s Presidency Reaches All-Time Low of 43% Post Health Care Summit

Saturday, February 27th, 2010

Democratic President Barack Obama, pictured here in his 20's, faces a majority of voter disapproval of his Presidency (55%) and an all-time low in overall job approval of 43% in the aftermath of Thursday's health care summit

With two days of polling completed after Thursday’s health care summit, President Barack Obama’s overall job approval fell to the lowest level of his Presidency amongst likely voters today, just 43% approval, with only 21% strongly approving of the President’s job performance. Strong disapproval of the President, conversely, has risen to a near all-time high of 43%, meaning that the President’s strong and soft supporters combined are now equal in number to his strong detractors amongst likely American voters. Overall, 55% of likely voters are either strong or soft opponents of the President as of today. The intense focus on the comprehensive health care reform package being pushed by Obama and Congressional Democrats appears to be taking a toll on the President’s support, similar to the prior low in support reached around the time of the Senate’s passage of Obamacare right before Christmas 2009:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that 22% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21. That matches the lowest Approval Index rating yet recorded for President Obama.

The only other time the Approval Index was this low came in late December as the U.S. Senate prepared to approve its version of health care reform (see trends). Most voters continue to oppose the proposed health care plan.

The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook.

Overall, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That is the lowest level of total approval yet measured for this President. Fifty-five percent (55%) disapprove. The President earns approval from 76% of Democrats while 86% of Republicans disapprove. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 38% approve and 61% disapprove. The President earns approval from 37% of men and 49% of women.

Data for these updates is collected via nightly telephone interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, just two-thirds of the interviews for today’s update were collected following the President’s health-care summit. Tomorrow morning (Sunday) will be the first update based entirely upon interviews conducted after the summit.

Today’s all-time low of 43% in likely voter approval of Obama’s Presidency can perhaps be explained in part by the Obama/Democrat strategy to push ahead strongly with their Democrats-only comprehensive health care proposal in the face of universal GOP opposition. About 60% of American voters disapprove of that tactic as only 34% agree with the President that the comprehensive health care bill should move to final passage without any GOP support. The President also faces a twenty point net deficit in approval of his specific handling of the health care issue (Fox News poll:37%/56%; NYT/CBS poll: 35%/55%), and those polls were taken before the disappointing health care summit. CNN also found that a nearly three quarters (73%) of Americans want the President and Congress to either start from scratch on health care reform (48%) or stop work altogether (25%). Interestingly, CNN’s initial release on of these numbers omitted this critical finding, and CNN noted this finding only three days after the release of their numbers in the context of a preview of the already-taped Sunday show interview of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:

Washington (CNN) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is dismissing Republican claims that recent polls support their opposition to the current health care proposals, countering that the real problem is that the American people don’t have a bill to judge.

“When we have a bill, which we will in a matter of days, then that is the bill that we can sell,” Pelosi told CNN’s Candy Crowley in an interview Friday. She added that the final legislation will settle differences between the House and Senate bills, and that Americans will be more supportive once the bill is released.

“I feel very confident about what’s in there,” she said.

The latest CNN/Opinion Research poll shows that nearly three quarters of respondents believe Congress should either start over on a new bill or drop health care reform altogether.

Earlier Friday, Speaker Pelosi told reporters she’s asking the Senate to “act upon” reconciliation to move forward, a legislative procedural tool that allows bills to pass with a simple majority.

Editor’s Note: Watch Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s interview with Candy Crowley on State of the Union this Sunday at 9am ET.

Further, Gallup’s daily tracking numbers released today confirm a downward slide in approval and surge in disapproval post-summit, with 49% of all adults (not likely voters as measured by the Rasmussen polling noted above) approving of the Obama Presidency while 45% disapprove. It should be noted as well that Gallup’s surveys are done during the day, while Rasmussen’s are done only in the evenings, meaning Gallup’s numbers today are only showng one day of impact from the summit, while Rasmussen’s show two days worth. Overall, the RCP (47.2%/47.1%) and Pollster.com (48.1%/46.8%, not including today’s Gallup/Rasmussen updates) averages of all Obama job approval polls show the President at about 47%-47% approval/disapproval. Finally, the overall voter approval of the health care plans before Congress stands at approximately 40%.

It could be that at times of intense focus on the Democratic plan to pass comprehensive health care reform, President Obama’s approval numbers tend to slide towards the level of public support that exists for Obamacare. Today, President Obama issued yet another Saturday message on Obamacare, keeping the public’s focus on this issue, this time imploring Americans and Congress with “lets get this done.” Considering the overall unpopularity of his comprehensive health care reform plan, and the findings of the CNN, NYT/CBS, Rasmussen, Fox and Gallup polls listed above, it appears that Americans may disagree.

UPDATE: Ed at Hotair covers the Saturday morning Obama message of “so lets get this done” on Obamacare, and notes Obama’s odd usage of Olympic spirit in support of his unpopular bill:

I … did not see this coming. But after a thousand speeches and interviews on this subject, it stands to reason that he’s running low on material. So here’s his entry, I guess, in the local junior-high “What the Olympics Mean to Me” essay contest. Hope you win those Miley Cyrus tickets, champ. For bonus fun, try to imagine the left’s reaction if Palin had touted the Games as inspiration for the Dems to, say, abandon reconciliation. Oh, those simple-minded, pandering teabaggers…

It’ll be sweet watching him back away from this hosanna to national unity next week after he gives the order to nuke the GOP’s filibuster. (One of Pelosi’s top aides claims they’re “reasonably confident” they can get a bill through the House if Reid can get 50 in the Senate.)

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Appoints SEIU Union Boss Andy Stern to Deficit Commission

Friday, February 26th, 2010

SEIU union boss Andy Stern Snags an Appointment from President Barack Obama to the newly created Deficit Commission

In a move that is sure to result in increased partisan acrimony, President Barack Obama today appointed longtime political ally and SEIU union boss Andy Stern to the new deficit commission that Obama created by executive order a few weeks ago.    The new media left is predictably ecstatic about the Stern appointment, and the appointment is serving as a good pick-me-up after yesterday’s disappointing health care summit. Early leaks that Stern was in the running were met with consternation by many in the new and old media, and today’s announcement of the Stern appointment is sure to stir controversy about Stern’s qualifications to sit on such a board and questions as to whether the Stern appointment is simply a political payoff to the SEIU, a critical ally of the President who endorsed him in February 2008 at the height of the primary battle with Hillary Clinton.

Politico reports on the Stern appointment and OBama’s accompanying statement:

President Obama has appointed four members to the bipartisan deficit commission he established last week, an administration official said. The appointees are: Andy Stern, the president of SEIU; David Cote, the Honeywell International CEO; former Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Alice Rivlin; and Ann Fudge, a former Young & Rubicam Brands CEO.

Obama said in a statement: “For far too long, Washington has avoided the tough choices necessary to solve our fiscal problems. I am proud that these distinguished individuals have agreed to work to build a bipartisan consensus to put America on the path toward fiscal reform and responsibility. I know they’ll take up their work with the sense of integrity and strength of commitment that the American people deserve and America’s future demands.”

Service Employees International Union (“SEIU) boss Andy Stern was the most frequent outside visitor to the White House, with 22 visits, as of the October 2009 visitor logs released by the White House. Conservative journalists have long attacked Stern as a corrupt operator at the head of the SEIU. Stern has also come under fire for inflammatory comments regarding the use of brute political force such as:

We’re trying to use the power of persuasion. And if that doesn’t work we’re going to use the persuasion of power.

Obama has previously unequivocally declared his strong ties to Stern and his reliance on SEIU to craft his agenda on such issues as health care:

Your agenda has been my agenda in the United States Senate. Before debating health care, I talked to Andy Stern and SEIU members.

With today’s appointment, Obama is demonstrating unequivocally that he considers SEIU and Stern one of his top political allies. In a political environment where the public’s approval of unions has sunk to historical lows, it will be interesting to see what effect, if any, the Stern appointment to the deficit commission will have on Obama’s standing with the American public.   The Hill and Wall Street Journal notes early criticism of the Stern appointment:

Mr. Stern’s appointment to the panel triggered quick criticism from a conservative group. Katie Packer, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute, said in a statement that putting Stern on the panel “doesn’t pass the laugh test.”

“It appears we have moved from the state of the surreal to the land of outright insanity if our leaders are now taking advice from Big Labor bosses who have run their own programs into the ground,” Ms. Packer said.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mainstream Media Consensus on Health Care Summit: Tie Goes to the GOP

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

President Barack Obama Had a Tough Day Today at his Health Care Summit as the GOP had the "best day they've had in years"

The same journalists who cheered Candidate Barack Obama on to victory in 2008 and engaged in mainly fawning coverage of the Obama Presidency in 2009 tonight appear to be turning on their hero, declaring that today’s summit was either a win for the the GOP or at best for Obama it was a tie, and a tie goes to the GOP because Obama needed a big win to build momentum for the monumental task ahead of pushing Obamacare through the House and Senate once again. Politico’s Obama-loving writer Glenn Thrush outlines the building media narrative:

Seven thick hours of substantive policy discussion, preening and low-grade political clashes had Hill staffers nodding at their desks, policy mavens buzzing — and participants declaring the marathon C-SPAN-broadcast session a draw.

But in this case, the tie goes to Republicans, according to operatives on both sides of the aisle — because the stakes were so much higher for Democrats trying to build their case for ramming reform through using a 51-vote reconciliation tactic.

“I think it was a draw, which was a Republican win,” said Democratic political consultant Dan Gerstein. “The Republican tone was just right: a respectful, substantive disagreement, very disciplined and consistent in their message.”

The White House and Hill Democrats had hoped congressional Republicans would prove themselves to be unruly, unreasonable and incapable of a serious policy discussion — “the face of gridlock,” as one Democrat put it hours before the summit.

Obama clearly failed to gain a clear advantage over the GOP, like he did a few weeks ago at the House Republican retreat in Baltimore. Thrush also notes that the Democrats tended to talk about stories they’ve heard on the campaign trail about health experiences, as opposed to actually defending the legislation they were there to discuss:

Obama wasn’t able to dominate them like he did last month during an encounter with House Republicans in Baltimore, when he delivered zingers high above the GOP from a conference room podium.

All of this makes it tougher — though not impossible — for Democrats to make the case that they need to abandon talks with the GOP and immediately proceed with a plan to ram health reform through the Senate using a 50-vote reconciliation tactic.

“He didn’t create the predicate for passing this through reconciliation,” said a senior Senate GOP staffer.

That’s not to say the gathering of 40 House and Senate members wasn’t a shaggy, bumptious, sometimes testy affair. Democrats were less eager to discuss legislative process than present case stories of constituents denied coverage by health insurers — often without explaining how their own bill would benefit those people.

Chris Cilizza of the Washington Post, also a well-known Obama sycophant, managed to rationalize the naming of Obama as his #2 winner on his winners/losers list, despite the fact that the entire Obama strategy, to make the GOP look clueless and obstructive so as to justify the use of reconciliation, completely failed today. Of course, Cilizza did not address the overall strategy coming into the summit nor the effect of the summit on that strategy in his article, instead choosing a simplistic winners/losers formula so as to avoid what he must know is the truth – today was a very bad day for President Barack Obama. Indeed, Cilizza seemed more interested in whether CSPAN or the cable networks “won” today than the effect of the summit on Obamacare’s chances of passage.

Across the cable and network dial, and in the new media on the internet, even strongly left-leaning folks admitted that today was a total bust for the Obama Reconciliation Strategy and a veritable disaster for the Democrats who are facing reelection in 2010. For instance, leftist John Dickerson at Slate, while also in denial regarding the disaster today was for his hero Obama personally, admits in his writing that the GOP looked very good and fence-sitting Democrats facing the 2010 electoral buzzsaw saw nothing that would encourage them to jump off the cliff with Obama on Obamacare:

Republicans came out ahead for the same reason: They did not look like hell-bent obstructionists….

This is why it wasn’t a good day for congressional Democrats. According to strategists involved in 2010 races, fence-sitting Democrats needed to see Obama change the political dynamic. He needed to show how health care reform could be defended and how Republicans could be brought low. He did neither. White House aides and the president himself said he was going to press Republicans for how their plans would work, but he did that only twice—and mildly. There was no put-up-or-shut-up moment.

Yet another Obama-worshipping journalist, Marc Ambinder, again couldn’t bring himself to admit the GOP beat Obama today – instead also calling the summit a tie, and adding that “that’s good news for the GOP” in his report for CBS News:

The political world watched the proceedings at Blair House looking for theatre: instead, a policy fight broke out. This time, both sides came armored, and there was no referee. It was a wash — and the tie goes to the Republicans.

The key question on the table was not whether Democrats and Republicans could come up with ways to compromise; it was whether the White House could move public opinion in a way that helps Nancy Pelosi get the votes she needs to pass the Senate bill in the House. That’s unlikely.

All told, the old halcyon days of “Hope and Change” in 2008, when “journalists” like Thrush, Ambinder, Cilizza and Dickerson could freely cheer lead for their hero Obama without any concern about appearing in the tank for Obama because the entire media was providing Obama with unerringly positive coverage at that time, are gone. Now, with Obama on year two and his signature initiative Obamacare on life support, these Obama sycophants are now being forced to admit that the momentum behind Obama’s agenda has completely collapsed. The failure of Obama to produce a GOP “gotcha” moment for his crew of “journalist” sycophants to write about tonight, combined with the steady and professional GOP performance, could be the death blow to the “last best chance” to pass Obamacare via reconciliation. An objective journalist would be outlining those possibilities in their piece tonight, it is unfortunate the American media is so enamored with Obama and the Democratic establishment that they have to be pulled kicking and screaming by indisputable facts, such as the GOP’s clear win in today’s summit, into reporting anything even approaching the facts on the ground.

Other, less biased, mainstream media sources stated with absolute clarity that today was an indisputable victory for the GOP, not least of which was CNN’s centrist analyst David Gergen, who blunted declared that for the GOP, this was “the best day they’ve had in years.” Gergen went on to explain that the GOP got tons of airtime today to show the public they have solutions in health care and are not obstructionist, perhaps undercutting the Democratic talking point of “Party of No” to some degree. Somehow even James Carville managed to praise the performance of GOP Senators today, and Politico also chimed in on the afternoon session by noting that “by the afternoon, however, both sides took a more substantive approach that played to the Republicans’ benefit, given Democratic attempts to portray them as unreasonable and partisan.”

While we quoted Gergen extensively already, this David Gergen quote from the halftime proceedings perhaps best sums up the total disaster today was for Obama and the Democrats:

CNN’s DAVID GERGEN: “The folks in the White House just must be kicking themselves right now. They thought that coming out of Baltimore when the President went in and was mesmerizing and commanding in front of the House Republicans that he could do that again here today. That would revive health care and would change the public opinion about their health care bill and they can go on to victory. Just the opposite has happened.” (CNN’s “Live,” 2/25/10)

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CNN: Dems got 70% of Speaking Time; David Gergen on GOP: “Best Day They’ve Had in Years”

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

At Today's Health Care Summit, President Barack Obama Alone Spoke for More Time (122 Minutes) than All Republicans Combined (111 Minutes) While Other Democrats Racked Up Another 135 Minutes Today, According to CNN

CNN reports that the Democrats used 70% of the overall speaking time, more than double (257 minutes) the speaking time afforded to the Republicans (111 minutes), as the GOP speakers came in at under two hours of total time while the Democrats totaled over four hours.   CNN reports its findings on speaking time at the Health Care Summit:

Washington (CNN) – Thursday’s health care summit at Blair House was billed as an opportunity for members of both parties to share their proposals for reform, but one party had far more time to put forth their ideas.

A CNN analysis of the meeting shows that Democrats – including President Obama, who helmed the meeting – were granted more than twice the amount speaking time as Republicans.

Democrats spoke for a total of 135 minutes while President Obama spoke for 122 minutes, for a total of 257 minutes. Republicans, meanwhile, spoke for just 111 minutes, about 30 percent of the total speaking time.

The lack of equal time was an issue early in the health care summit when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) complained about the lack of balance in speaking time and Obama quipped that his speaking time “doesn’t count” towards the equal division of time “because I’m the President”.  That dustup between McConnell and Obama over equal time at the summit may form part of the media narrative in the post-summit environment.

CNN’s David Gergen, a centrist who has advised four Presidents of both parties, had glowing praise for the GOP, stating that today was the “best day they’ve had in years” and explained that the various claims that the GOP had no ideas or policy knowledge were put to rest today as new blood in the GOP, such as House Rep. Paul Ryan, performed very well in the debates with Obama and the Democrats. Gergen concluded his remarks by stating that while the Democrats had done better in the afternoon, the GOP “evened the score and kept it even.” If mainstream media coverage follows the lead of centrist analysts like Gergen, the health care summit may end up being the day that Obamacare died but for the time being Democrats have set a new deadline for passing Obamacare by the end of March.

NOTE: CNN has updated their numbers on the minutes for each party, and that update was reflected in changes to this article.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Health Care Summit Ends with No Bipartisan Deal

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

The Head Table at the Health Care Summit Today, Which Ended With Little Hope of a Bipartisan Deal on Centrist Health Care Reform

Over six hours of debate and discussion between Republicans and Democrats, with Democratic President Barack Obama moderating and commenting frequently, ended just now with little indication that a deal between the GOP and Obama over health care reform is forthcoming.   Obama himself stated that he is unsure that “gaps can be bridged.” The parties essentially talked past each other for hours, reciting their respective scripted commentary and talking points regarding health care reform, with the GOP generally favoring a smaller, incremental health care plan while the Democrats favored a large, comprehensive health care plan.

Media reaction has been generally favorable for all involved, with an interesting surge in praise for the Republican performance from mainstream news sources such as CNN and MSNBC.   For instance, CNN’s centrist commenter David Gergen, who has advised four Presidents from both parties, stated as follows this afternoon:

CNN’s DAVID GERGEN: “The folks in the White House just must be kicking themselves right now. They thought that coming out of Baltimore when the President went in and was mesmerizing and commanding in front of the House Republicans that he could do that again here today. That would revive health care and would change the public opinion about their health care bill and they can go on to victory. Just the opposite has happened.(CNN’s “Live,” 2/25/10)

CNN’s left-leaning commentator Gloria Borgen also praised the GOP’s performance, stating that “the Republicans have been very effective today. They really did come to play. They were very smart.” (CNN’s “Live,” 2/25/10). Considering the scolding the GOP took after the last live-TV encounter with Obama at the House Republican retreat from the media, such positive reactions are surprising but indicative of a much more polished and substantive performance by the GOP today. Another commentator, centrist reporter A.B. Stoddard from The Hill, also had kind words for the GOP:

THE HILL’S A.B. STODDARD: “I think we need to start out by acknowledging Republicans brought their ‘A Team.’ They had doctors knowledgeable about the system, they brought substance to the table, and they, I thought, expressed interest in the reform. I thought in the lecture from Senator John McCain and on the issue of transparency, I thought today the Democrats were pretty much on their knees.” (Fox News’ “Live,” 2/25/10)

Ace rounds up analysis from conservative journalists who argue that the GOP “suckered” Obama into believing they were lifeless dupes at the House Republican Retreat encounter, and that Obama’s skills did not mesh well with the negotiated format today. Obama also appeared to be the lone effective Democratic participant, with other Democrats focusing more on anecdotal stories about individual health care stories instead of doing the hard work of defending and selling the legislative language.

In what may become the most memorable exchange of today’s affair, GOP House Leader John Boehner sparred with President Obama over why the Administration would not accept a bipartisan deal over incremental health care reform legislation on issues such as medical malpractice reform, insurance reforms and the allowance of interstate competition between insurance companies. Obama responded in non-committal fashion as follows:

“John, you know, the challenge I have here, and this has happened periodically, is every so often we have a pretty good conversation trying to get on some specifics and then we go back to the standard talking points that Democrats and Republicans have had for the last year and that doesn’t drive us to an agreement on issues.”

All day long, the Democrats attempted to downplay the issue of the use of reconciliation, as epitomized by Harry Reid’s obviously untruthful statement that “nobody is talking about reconciliation” in his opening comments. Obama also danced around the issue, asserting that the American people are not that interested in the “procedures inside the Senate”:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “You know, this issue of reconciliation has been brought up. Again I think the American people aren’t always all that interested in procedures inside the Senate. I do think they want a vote on how we’re going to move this forward.” (President Obama, Health Care Summit, 2/25/10)

Obama’s comments run counter to several polls released in the last few days, including Fox’s finding that 59% reject moving forward with Obama’s Health Plan unless a deal is reached with the GOP and Gallup’s finding that 52% of the American public reject the use of reconciliation by the Senate to pass Obamacare, while only 39% are in favor.

Nancy Pelosi’s final speaking period was marked by a sour note of attacks on John Boehner (about abortion funding in the Senate bill) and Dave Camp (about the over $400 Billion in Medicare cuts), repeating herself several times while claiming both GOP congressmen were essentially liars.

Obama’s closing argument focused initially on advocacy of strong new federal regulation of insurance companies with a sprinkling in of references to anecdotal stories of individual health outcomes. Obama also defended the national exchange idea as “not a government takeover” but failed to mention that all policies offered on the exchange would have to meet stringent federal benefits requirements and report to a new federal bureaucracy.

Another theme Obama returned to several times was his claim that his plan would provide coverage to all Americans along similar lines as Congress receives, which is a dubious claim at best considering the gold-plated nature of Congressional members’ health care coverage On selling insurance across state lines, Obama agreed in principle with GOP ideas there but his “philosophical concern” with that proposal is a “race to the bottom” that Obama claimed would result if interstate insurance sales were allowed. Obama again stressed his “pilot programs” for medical malpractice, however, as former Kansas Trial Lawyer Association Chief and now HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in charge of the effort, it is unlikely to make a serious dent in trial lawyer profits.

Obama continued in his concluding remarks by claiming that he put forward “substantial” policies that were previously put forward by Republicans, used the term “Obamacare” to refer to the comprehensive health care plan and discussed the “fair share” that employers must pay via the new employer taxes in Obamacare, while repeating that his plan is “consistent with a market based approach.” Obama then claimed that his Medicare cuts are a “Republican idea” and stated that “he will end by stating” that “I suspect that if the Democrats and the Administration were willing to start over and then adopt John Boehner’s bill, we’d get a whole bunch of Republican votes. I don’t know how many Democrat votes we’d get….the concern…on the Democratic side…after five decades of dealing with this issue, starting over, they suspect, means not doing much.” Obama then tweaked Republicans to “do a little soul searching” to find the inner strength to support his plans, and then quickly stated that “I dont know frankly if we can close that gap.”

Obama then moved towards the end of his final remarks with more anecdotes about how folks he talks to don’t want him to wait and that they can’t “afford to wait another five decades.” Obama partially recognized the unpopularity of his health plans by stating “I dont need a poll to know that most of Republican voters are opposed to this bill” and regarding the GOP’s demand to start over, “if we saw significant [GOP] movement, then you wouldn’t need to start over because essentially everyone here knows what the issues are.” The President than set a “a month or six weeks” deadline for additional talks with the GOP and implied that without progress by then, the President would proceed to attempt to push the present version of the Obama Health Plan through Congress and after that have the People decide via elections. On the way out the door, Obama told reporters it was a “terrific conversation” today. Politico sums up the summit as follows:

Thursday’s health care summit wound down with President Barack Obama making clear he couldn’t sign on to the Republican plan for reform, wouldn’t abandon reconciliation and had no intention of scrapping his own plan – capping the six-plus-hour session with a dig at Republicans for pitching a bill that covers just a fraction of the uninsured.

“Those steps don’t get you to the place people need to go,” Obama said of the Republican plan.

Republicans said the same thing in their closing comments that they said at 10 a.m. – start over. Obama won’t.

So the parties walked out of Blair House almost exactly the way they walked in – completely at odds over the best way to fix the health insurance system. That means Democrats are almost certain to go ahead with plans to short-circuit Senate rules to try to pass the bill with a 51-vote majority, as early as next week.

In the post-summit environment, it appears that Obama did not score a huge victory that many claimed he needed to keep the Administration’s plan to pass the Senate bill through the House and then pass another Senate bill via reconciliation to “fix” the problems with the prior Senate bill. Politico and others are reporting that Obama intends to discard any pretense of bipartisanship early next week and work on pushing Obamacare through both houses of Congress. The WSJ and others are reporting that Obama intends to scale back his present $950 Billion Dollar plan to a $250 Billion Dollar plan in the wake of the summit in order to get a win of some kind on health care. Furthermore, Obama appeared to set a new deadline by the end of March for passing a deal with the GOP before passing Obamacare via reconciliation.. The next few days are sure to be exciting as the fate of the Democratic attempt to pass the largest health care bill in American history hang in the balance.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Fox Poll: 59% Say Scrap Bill if No Deal with GOP; 56% Disapprove of Obama on Health Care

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

President Barack Obama, shown here with his key White House advisors Jim Messina (left) and David Axelrod (right), faces an uphill struggle to push through his comprehensive health care plan as the health care summit winds down without a deal with the GOP

Fox News just released new polling done on Tuesday and Wednesday of this week which shows the lowest approval (37%) and highest disapproval (56%) of Obama’s handling of health care than ever before, a 19% net deficit. The only other issue in which President Obama scores worse with the public than his handling of health care is Obama’s handling of the federal budget deficit, where Obama faces a thirty point deficit (31% approve, 61% disapprove) with the American public. Obama’s 19% net American public disapproval on his handling of health care in the new Fox poll is matched by the 20% net deficit in public approval of Obama’s handling of health care (35% approve, 55% disapprove) found by the latest CBS/NYT polling on the subject. Finally, 59% of the public think that Obama and the Democrats should scrap the health care bill and pass nothing if a bipartisan deal is not reached with the GOP while 34% believe Obama should push through his plan without GOP support:

If President Obama is unable to reach a deal with Republicans at the summit, 59 percent think he should start from scratch later. Some 34 percent think he should go ahead and try to pass the current bill without Republican support.

By a 50 to 40 percent margin, more voters think the health care summit is a “sincere effort” on the president’s part to work out a compromise than think it is “just for show.”

Nearly seven out of 10 voters feel “fed up with” the health care debate, including most Republicans (82 percent) and most independents (70 percent), as well as half of Democrats (50 percent).

The national telephone poll was conducted for Fox News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from February 23 to February 24. For the total sample, the poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

More voters than ever now disapprove of the job President Obama is doing on health care — 56 percent. That’s 19 percentage points higher than the 37 percent who approve.

Furthermore, on only one other issue does the president receive lower ratings than on health care — his handling of the federal deficit (31 percent approve and 61 percent disapprove).

….

If a compromise isn’t achieved at the summit, by a two-to-one margin Democrats think the president should still try to pass the bill without Republicans. Even so, 31 percent think the president should start over in this scenario.

For independents, it’s just the reverse, by more than two-to-one they support dropping the current bill and starting over. An overwhelming majority of Republicans say the current bill should be dropped if the health care summit fails to find bipartisan agreement.

The new Fox poll also found Obama’s overall job approval at 47%/45%, and interestingly found by a 62%/17% margin that President Obama is better at campaigning than governing, and half of the American voting public believes that the Obama Administration does not “get it” regarding voter anger at DC:

The consensus among American voters is Barack Obama is better at campaigning for the job than at doing the job, according to a Fox News poll released Thursday. In addition, half of voters say the Obama administration doesn’t “get it.”

As the president’s approval rating remains in the high forties, the poll finds that voters by a wide 62 to 17 percent margin think Obama is better at campaigning than at governing.

It isn’t surprising most Republicans feel this way (83 percent). What may surprise the White House is that nearly seven out of 10 independents say they feel the president is better at campaigning than governing, and so do more Democrats (albeit by a thin 6 percentage-point edge). More than one out of five Democrats was unable to choose between campaigning and governing and volunteered a “both” response (22 percent).

On Wednesday there were reports, dismissed by the administration, the White House is starting to make plans for its 2012 re-election campaign.

While 47 percent of voters approve of the job President Obama is doing, almost as many — 45 percent — disapprove.

Earlier this month the president received his lowest job ratings to date when 46 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved (February 2-3, 2009).

Vice President Joe Biden recently said the administration understands why American voters are angry and bluntly stated, “We get it.” Nearly half of voters agree with Biden (45 percent). Yet half — 50 percent — say no, the administration doesn’t get it. That includes over one of five Democrats (22 percent).

More than half of independents (52 percent) think the administration doesn’t “get it,” while 44 percent agree with the vice president that it does.

Finally, American voters disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy by a 56%/40% margin, while also disapproving of Obama’s handling of job creation by a 52%/41% margin. Hotair points out that the latest Gallup polling show similar problems for Obama regarding the public’s approval of continuing with a comprehensive plan if he cannot reach a deal with the GOP. With these grim new personal approval numbers, all double digit net negative, on the key issues of the day such as the economy, job creation, the deficit and health care, Obama faces an uphill struggle in gathering the needed 218 Democratic House and 50 Democratic Senate votes to push through his comprehensive health care plan.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Halftime at Health Summit as Obama Declares “Legitimate Philosophical Disagreement” Exists

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

President Obama Giving Opening Remarks at Today's Health Care Summit

Halftime (three hours in) has been reached at the much-hyped health care summit, and the first half mainly focused on the GOP and Obama going back and forth, mainly talking past each other than to each other as both sides recited their prepared scripts and talking points, with GOP Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tn.) declaring that “We believe we have a better idea” on health care reform. At this point, neither side appears to have gained an upper hand from the proceedings, although the issue of comprehensive health reform (Democrats) versus incremental health reform (Republicans) has been made explicitly clear. Obama summed up the proceedings to the press on the way to lunch by stating that “legitimate philosophical differences” were exposed in the first half of the summit as reported by ABC’s Jake Tapper:

The president said that he believes there are areas where they are finding agreement, but did not out right answer a reporter’s question if he believes the first half of the summit had made progress yet.

“”I think we’re establishing that there are actually some areas of real agreement. And we’re starting to focus on what the real disagreements are,” Obama said, “ If you look at you know the issue of how much government should be involved, you know the argument that republicans are making really isn’t that this is a government takeover of health care but rather than, we’re insuring or we’re regulating the insurance market too much.”

The president called this a “legitimate philosophical disagreement” that he hopes to explore more in the afternoon sessions.

As noted earlier, a minor dust up over equal time between Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-Ky) and President Obama culminated in an Obama quip that his time doesn’t count towards the equal division between the parties “because I’m the President.” Vice President Joe Biden interrupted Obama mid-sentence at one point to contradict the President and House Member Eric Cantor (R-Va) and argued that no serious philosophical difference existed between the parties over federal insurance regulation. GOP Senator John McCain (R-Az) got in a few rhetorical shots at the odious process around Obamacare to date, pointing out a few of the backroom deals between special interest groups and the President as well as deals with individual Democratic Senators. Obama reacted testily and scolded McCain, at one point advising the Senator that “the campaign is over” in reference to Obama’s victory over 2008 GOP Presidential nominee. An early dispute between Obama and Alexander over whether Obamacare would cause premiums to rise appeared to be a draw, with both sides making arguably accurate arguments based on the same data.

Obama also introduced two new talking points during the first half: analogies of health insurance to car insurance and health insurance regulation to the government’s regulation of food safety.

Finally, before the meeting began, Obama gave a cryptic response to a reporter’s shouted question, do you have a “Plan B”, which may have been in reference to the WSJ story last night which claimed the White House is preparing a scaled down, approximately 250 Billion Dollar plan (as opposed to the 950 Billion of the present Obama Health Plan). The AP reports the exchange:

A month after the Massachusetts election that cost Democrats their Senate supermajority and threw the health legislation in doubt, the White House has developed its own slimmed-down health care proposal so the president will know what the impact would be if he chooses that route, according to a Democratic official familiar with the discussions. That official could not provide details, but Democrats have looked at approaches including expanding Medicaid and allowing children to stay on their parents’ health plans until around age 26.

The slimmer backup plan was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Obama himself hinted at a Democrats-only strategy. When asked by reporters as he walked to Blair House if he had a Plan B, he responded: “I’ve always got plans.”

The Politico is also reporting that Obama intends to abandon all bipartisan negotiations on Monday of next week, so it may be that the WSJ was false and Obama intends to attempt to push his comprehensive plan through the Senate via reconciliation after the summit.

UPDATE: Ed at Hotair finds an interesting tidbit from Harry Reid this morning, saying on camera in his initial speech that “no one has talked about reconciliation.” Even the left wing new media site TPM called Reid’s statement “obviously not true.”

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama on Speaking Time Imbalance: “Because I’m the President”; UPDATE: Video Added

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

President Barack Obama Appears Bored as He Listens to Members of Congress Recite Scripted Speeches in the First Hour to Today's Health Care Summit

The health care summit between the Congressional GOP, President Obama and Democratic Congressional Leadership is off to an entertaining but generally unsubstantive start, with scripted speeches the norm and a few interesting interactions. Sadly, it appears that actual negotiations over a incremental centrist health care reform bill appears to be out of the question so far as all the Democrats are condemning any talk of an incremental approach while focusing on anecdotal examples of individuals who are without health care instead of the legislation under debate, despite stated agreements over the Medicare fraud sanctions database and enforcement (see #5 of OPINION piece) concept and the stated agreements about the need for substantial medical malpractice reform (see #2 of OPINION piece). At least for now, the Democrats, led by President Obama, are sticking to the “big bill” gameplan and we expect the remainder of the summit to proceed as the first hour did: scripted speeches and a few testy interactions but little substantive progress on a bipartisan deal.

One interesting testy interaction that just occurred was between President Obama and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) over the issue of the time allotted to each party. McConnell noted that the GOP had received a fair amount less time than the Democrats so far, and the President agreed that there was a time imbalance and quipped that it is “because I’m the President” and his speaking time didn’t “count” toward the pledged equal division of time between parties. Politico reports on the exchange:

McConnell interrupted the discussion at Blair House Thursday, over an hour after it began, to note that Republicans had only spoken for 24 minutes compared with 52 minutes for the Democrats.

“I don’t think that’s quite right, but I’m just going back and forth here, Mitch,” Obama said. “I think we’re just trying to go back and forth, but that’s okay.”

A few moments later, Obama noted the session was running long and acknowledged – with an explanation – that Republicans hadn’t spoken for quite as long.

“You’re right that there’s an imbalance on the opening statements, because I’m the president,” Obama said. “I didn’t count my time in terms of dividing it evenly.”

Such quips from Obama are sure to rile the GOP, who considered the equal time pledge by the White House binding.

Another interesting talking point Obama continues to return to is the comparison of shoddy car insurance to what Obama claims is shoddy health insurance as sold now without the benefit of the federal regulations that Obamacare would impose. House Member Paul Ryan (R-Mi.) made the point that conservatives and moderates are rejecting the Obama Health Plan because of disapproval of the increased federal regulatory power and mandates that will be imposed if Obama’s comprehensive plan is passed. Obama used his car insurance analogy to respond to Ryan’s point, claiming that the federal health rules are necessary to stop shoddy health insurance from being sold. However, there are no federal car insurance regulations, such regulations are handled by state governments, as are regulations over health insurance policy terms as of today. Obama’s proposal envisions bringing another set of regulations over all health insurance policies on top of the current state health insurance regulations, in essence creating a federal insurance commissioner on top of the already-existing 50 state insurance commissioners.

UPDATE: Realclearpolitics posts the video clip of the McConnell-Obama exchange.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

OPINION: What America Needs: Centrist Health Care Reform

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

CentristNet Offers Its First Opinion Piece Regarding the Elements of Centrist Health Care Reform That President Barack Obama and Congressional Republicans Can Agree Upon at the Health Care Summit

As the hours count down to the beginning of the vaunted health care summit in Washington, in our opinion, there are many areas in which President Barack Obama and Congressional Republicans can agree to move forward with significant, yet incremental reforms to the American health care system.    Most, if not all on the left argue that only a comprehensive, federal government-centered health care plan, like Obama’s Health Plan as released Monday, can reduce the cost of health insurance, reduce the number of uninsured, improve patient outcomes and contain projected massive federal deficits from present health entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid.   Indeed, as President Obama and many Congressional Democrats repeatedly state, a comprehensive federal health care reform plan has been the ultimate goal of the left for many decades. Some, but not a majority on the right argue that there is no need for health care reform at this time. The views of the left and the right, as outlined above, are incorrect and an pivot from the present trajectory of health care debate towards centrist health care reform is the appropriate policy choice, as we will detail below.

As the developments this week make clear, with President Obama planning to use reconciliation to push through his left-leaning Obamacare and Congressional Republicans calling for a fresh start to the bill writing process on a blank piece of paper, the prospects for a bipartisan deal from tomorrow’s summit look slim.  The just-leaked smaller Obama plan, if the leak proves accurate, could run into similar troubles, as a key concern of many Americans is the increased federal bureaucracy envisioned by each of his plans. Indeed, the actual overall cost of the Obama Health Plan and the various arguably misleading claims made on Obamacare’s behalf have not inspired confidence in President Obama’s handling of health care, which fell to a mere 35% approval (and 55% disapproval) in the last CBS/NYT poll. Instead of giving into pressures from party ideologues on both sides, we hope that President Obama and Congressional Republicans put aside partisanship and the zero-sum calculus of political warfare to actually consider some centrist health care policies that can be quickly passed, this year, with bipartisan support.

Obama’s present strategy to use reconciliation to pass Obamacare through the Senate after passing the present Senate bill through the House of Representatives has no guarantee of success considering the present bills’ massive unpopularity with the American public and the reluctance of House Democrats to make a career-ending vote for Obamacare.   Further, a new entitlement passed without bipartisan support would be difficult to maintain in years to come and could poison American politics for a generation.   With all that in mind, we offer several straightforward centrist policy prescriptions that the GOP and Obama can agree on. Each centrist incremental federal reform could be worked out between the parties in a matter of weeks, perhaps by fast-tracked policy commissions with an equal split in members between the parties and tasked with producing preliminary reports two weeks from the end of the summit.

1.  Federal Incentives To Encourage States to Decrease the Number of Involuntarily Uninsured Americans.

A large part of the issue that many Americans have with Obamacare is the central role of the federal government in the regulation and operation of the American health care industry, with numerous new federal bureaucracies, and attendant federal health bureaucrats to be added to the payroll, that is at the heart of the design of Obamacare.   We believe that instead of creating a giant new federal government structure, federal policy should focus on incentivizing the states into experimenting with new measures to reduce cost and the involuntarily uninsured.    New federal mandates to states, as are included in Obamacare, would inappropriately constrain the states and hamper the great “laboratory of democracy” from properly operating as it has throughout American history.

While we don’t agree with everything, or even most, of what the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (“RWJF”) advocates, RWJF’s recent report on the health care “State of the States” appropriately highlighted the key role of the states in finding health care solutions:

States play a critical role in advancing coverage expansions and other health reforms by testing new ideas, both politically and practically.  Because health care delivery is largely local, states are closer to the action when it comes to implementing some of the delivery and payment systems changes that are needed to truly transform the health care system. This proximity and flexibility in system redesign is a key strength for states.  In addition, states have first-hand knowledge of their local landscape and relationships with the stakeholders that will be necessary to change the system. Much of the work related to implementing insurance reforms, delivery system redesign, and public health strategies traditionally have been led by states.

Some say that the Massachusetts health care plan was a failure because health care costs are rising faster in that state than nationally since the reform passed, the cost overruns regarding projected state spending and the lack of attainment of true universal coverage. However, the State of Massachusetts passed a bipartisan plan with Republican Governor Milt Romney, a 90% Democratic Massachusetts legislature and a cheerleading Teddy Kennedy present for the signing of the bill by Romney. If Massachusetts desires to change or reverse its programs, the people of Massachusetts will make that happen. Every other state in the Union should have the same opportunity to decide how to proceed regarding its health care systems and the federal government should not straight jacket the states into a one size fits all federal mandate via Obamacare. Federal incentives could also be accessible to several states who wish to forum a regional health care system with uniform rules – but the decisions effecting Americans health care should not be left to a faraway bureaucrat in Washington, D.C.

By maintaining the flexibility of states to engage in policy innovation, the probability increases that a health care policy that is proven to work by empirical evidence will emerge and spread around the country once the benefits of such policy are made clear by results. Creating a huge federal bureaucracy with many new mandates on state governments regarding health care policy will stifle this state innovation and risk damaging the present high quality of care provided by American medical professionals across the land. As 70% to 80% of Americans approve of their present health care arrangements, federal health policy must follow the medical maxim of “first do no harm” and avoid the risk of reducing the present quality of care with too much federal government control over states and medical professionals.

2.  Reform Medical Malpractice Laws:

There is no serious dispute over the need for substantial medical malpractice reform, or tort reform, on the federal level. Some on the right advocate Texas-style tort reform, which involves caps on damage awards and limiting “jackpot justice”, while some on the left wholly reject any tort reform and others advocate a system of specialized health care courts to replace the present courts of general jurisdiction that handle medical malpractice cases. Both policy approaches have pluses and minuses, and to that end the federal health reform effort should provide incentives to the states to attempt either systemic change. It may be that in the long term, specialized health courts, similar to the workers compensation system, are the better choice, but the states should be free to choose how to design their system, as they are in the workers compensation arena. The left-leaning Progressive Policy Institute outlines some benefits of health care courts:

A Better Way: Health Courts

There are many proposals for health care reform that are focused outside the medical justice system. All are well intentioned and some may be practical, but without legal reforms none will likely succeed in containing costs. Clearly, we need major reform, and we can achieve it in part by instituting a network of specialized health courts to replace the current medical justice system.1

Under health courts, malpractice cases would no longer be heard in civil courts. Instead, they would be handled in an administrative system overseen by the states. The system would be similar to the state-run workers’ compensation system. It would give more injured patients access to quicker and less expensive justice.

….

Health court rulings would establish new standards of practice to cover medical circumstances for which common standards have not previously been settled. The health court system would thus yield an essential benefit that our current system of medical justice fails to provide: consistent, rational rulings that send clear signals to health care providers about what constitutes good medical practice. In so doing, it would help eliminate the legal uncertainty that encourages doctors to practice defensive medicine and the silence among practitioners and patients that very likely contributes to medical errors.

It is possible that if even a few states chose to institute health care courts based on incentives in an incremental, centrist federal health reform plan, the benefits of such specialized courts could become empirically proven in a few years. Once proven successful, such a system may become the standard throughout the country; however, as far as a federal policy is concerned, a state should be free to try traditional tort reform, health care courts or any other solution they can create. A federal plan to incentivize the states in the tort reform arena could not be seriously opposed by either party and legislative language could be worked out relatively quickly by bipartisan negotiators.


3. Create a Federal/State/Insurance Companies Mechanism for Covering the Uninsurable with Preexisting Conditions:

The American public believes by a large majority that some federal action should be taken to assist those Americans who cannot obtain health care insurance because they have an uninsurable preexisting condition. Indeed, logically speaking, requiring an health insurance company to provide insurance to an individual that faces certain, and substantial, medical expenses is similar to requiring a car insurance company to provide insurance to an individual with an already wrecked car. It is simply not economically feasible for the private sector insurers to insure against an already existing condition. Because of this, federal government intervention in the health insurance market is appropriate in the instance of uninsurable individuals.

A centrist proposal to deal with uninsurable individuals is to set up comprehensive high risk pools jointly funded by federal and state governments to enable uninsurable individuals to purchase health insurance and a supporting, pro bono role for health insurance companies in administering the program. 31 States presently have high risk pools, and the inclusion of the federal government and insurers into a comprehensive risk pool policy could reduce the cost to the uninsurable while providing folks with care they otherwise would not have received. Both parties already support the use of risk pools, and the Senate version of Obamacare provides for high risk pools between now and 2013. Health insurance companies should be required to participate in this program as a consequence of the federal law, perhaps conditioning a continued exemption from antitrust laws on cooperation by the insurance companies with the risk pool program. This will be an expensive proposition, and many on both sides of the aisle could object to the high cost and some on the left are sure to argue that a comprehensive health care reform plan would be a cheaper alternative. However, as noted earlier, there is no chance of a bipartisan agreement on a comprehensive health care reform plan this year, but neither party could seriously oppose a serious risk pool program for uninsurable individuals and again, the details of this policy could be worked out in a matter of weeks.

4. Create Bipartisan Commission to Study Medical Billing Reform:

Anyone who has reviewed medical bills as provided by doctors and hospitals and then reviewed the payments actually made, and their variance, between insurance companies, government entities and cash-paying individuals knows that the present medical billing system needs substantial reform. Unfortunately, this issue has gotten little attention in the health care reform debate and does not figure prominently in the Obama Health Plan. A single procedure can be billed at $10,000.00 by a hospital to an individual, yet the same procedure could bring in only $4,000.00 from an insurance company and either more or less from a government entity. Greater transparency is needed in medical billing, and health care consumers need to be more involved and aware of what procedures cost and their various choices to create a more efficient and effective medical billing system. While this policy prescription may not be amenable to a quick bipartisan agreement on legislative mandates, neither party could seriously oppose the creation of a Bipartisan Commission to study the medical billing problem and issue recommendations for negotiations between the politicians in a few months.

5. Create a Medicare/Medicaid Sanctions Database and Act to Reduce “Waste, Fraud, and Abuse” in Medicare and Medicaid:

One provision proposed by the Obama Health Plan on Monday was originally proposed by the Republican Study Committee:

The President’s Proposal establishes a comprehensive Medicare and Medicaid sanctions database, overseen by the HHS Inspector General. This database will provide a central storage location, allowing for law enforcement access to information related to past sanctions on health care providers, suppliers and related entities. (Source: H.R. 3400, “Empowering Patients First Act” (Republican Study Committee bill))

Republicans will also likely sign off on some of the other provisions listed on this page by President Obama in his Health Plan, as some are geared towards cracking down on wrongdoers who abuse the payment procedures of Medicare and Medicaid. A good first step, and one that neither party could seriously object to, is the creation of the sanctions database to make sure wrongdoing individuals cannot continue to defraud the government under any circumstances. Again, bipartisan negotiators could work out legislative language on this issue in a matter of weeks.

Many seniors are understandably nervous about what exactly it means for them if Obamacare passes and over 400 Billion Dollars in reductions in Medicare spending occur over the next ten years. A more sensible, bipartisan policy would focus intensely on increasing efficiency in Medicare/Medicaid while reducing waste, fraud and abuse in this programs instead of cutting whole programs like Medicare Advantage, a program relied upon my millions of seniors. Another constructive step would be for President Obama to appoint a Medicare administrator to report to him and Congress about what kind of cuts are feasible or desirable beyond eliminating the improper, fraudulent spending via the sanctions database and stepped up enforcement.

CONCLUSION

The five point plan listed above is no panacea, and will not solve all the problems in the American health care system. However, these above-enumerated centrist health care reforms could not be seriously opposed by either party and compromise legislative language could be worked out in a matter of weeks. Instead of acrimony about Obama’s planned use of reconciliation and the GOP’s obstructionism, one can only hope that the participants in today’s health care summit put aside the pressures of party ideologues on both sides and decide to forge real consensus where it is actually possible: centrist, incremental health care reform.

Update: The initial speeches by President Obama, GOP Senator Lamar Alexander, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Harry Reid show little sign of true bipartisan negotiations.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,