Good luck to Hillary! Health and Human Services Secretary?

Hopefully he wants it…

Did I miss some development where he is no longer for healthcare?

nevermind.

I’d second Hill as HSS, though since she is standing by her proposal, I think she’d be more useful in the Senate overcoming Repuke and Blue Dog objections.

Now this is good news!

I would like to put in my nomination for Elizabeth Edwards

unity is unity. means the party will work together to advance the platform of the party or? Certainly good news as we are in desparate need of healthcare reform in this country but I don’t see it so adversarial.

seconded

Great point. I totally missed the significance of Hillary’s comments about universal coverage. Thanks.

OT

This article tells is nuclear power will not effect the cost of oil one bit because it is used for electricity not for gasoline.

Energy for Dummies: The GOP’s Secret Weapon is a Clueless Media

The six-word banner above the CNBC logo said it all.

“AMERICA”S OIL CRISIS: THE NUCLEAR OPTION,” framed a bogus media narrative and a phony Republican talking point. A couple of clueless reporters pushed it further.

Enrin Burnett: “We do get nearly 20% of our power from nuclear, so in a sense we are more of a nuclear nation than many people realize.”

CNBC Political Correspondent John Harwood: “We are, but I do think that policy is drifting in that direction now that people are paying $4 a gallon for gas and increasingly are concerned and aware that we have spent a whole lot of time spinning our wheels and not breaking that addiction to foreign oil. Obviously, the question especially for Democrats is what do you do about the waste. You’ve got the whole Yucca Mountain issue, which has been tied up for a long time.”

But “nuclear power versus imported oil” isn’t a stereotype. It’s a lie. If we built more nuclear power plants, the impact on our oil imports would be zero. Yes, nuclear reactors and oil are both types of energy, just as apples and vodka both types of calories. No one in the real world — the oil business and the utility business — considers one to be an economic substitute for the other.

I don’t mean to come down harshly on CNBC and John Harwood, for whom I have great respect. This is meant as a wake-up call to all newsrooms across the country. Invest a few hours in a tutorial on the basics of how energy is produced and how the energy industry works. Whenever a politician suggests that nuclear energy will make a serious dent in our reliance on foreign oil, he’s perpetrating a fraud. It’s as much of a fraud as if he were suggesting there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11. And any journalist who reports those claims at face value is not doing his job.

If you read McCain’s speeches closely, he never actually says that nuclear power can reduce oil imports. (Most of the time, White House speechwriters were careful to never actually say that Saddam was connected with 9/11.) But he clearly tries to conflate the two:

…

…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..21248.html

Universal health care. His plan is not universal and he has, in the past, dissed the idea.

That’s a pretty limited point of view. Electricity generating plants burn a lot of gasoline and/or diesel fuel to turn the turbines. It’s either oil or coal, if it isn’t nuclear.

I’m assuming the “mandate” is the difference that’s being highlighted by Hillary? If so, the mandate issue is very deceptive IMO. It allows them to confuse the issue between “universal” and “single-payer,” which are not the same.

I do not believe that FORCING those of us who do not practice and believe in what much of the Medical Industrial Complex shoves down our throats (literally) is beneficial. So the theory is that the extra people that are forced to partake in flawed system, and thereby all the standardized treatments, will magically make the various companies lower their prices? I don’t think they will very much, or at all. The mandate is the Medical Complex’s wet dream.

Now, I’m happy to have the joys of modern Medicine available when major health problems arise and use the system at those very rare times, but the system wants people to keep coming back for more and more, and doesn’t really want people to learn or do preventative measures. The more people come to doctors and use often unnecessary drugs, the more they all make.

I would love a Canadian-style single payer system where you can take it or leave it when you need it. In my very brief reading of these plans, I support Barack’s plan over Hillary’s and other “mandaters” because it’s a step in the right direction without forcing me to partake in flawed system.

There is no sign here of any kind of looking to the future. If electric cars are in our future there would be a need to increase elect. supply. I am leery of nuclear power from safety and waste standpoint as well as cost.

Events will overtake both Clinton’s and Obama’s plans, I believe. Teddy Kennedy will have a universal, evolved-to-single-payer, public pool plan ready for Barack Obama to sign in 2009.

Ian…I thought that Obama’s position was that universal health care was not, in the current instance, attainable. His position was that any program would have to be incremental, initially covering more of the young and elderly, and those who are currently uninsured but at risk of catastrophic health crises.

I don’t recall Senator Clinton ever sponsoring ANY Universal Health Care legislation while in the Senate. Her approach there was also incrementalist. Both Obama and Clinton supported expanding SCHIP, for example.

And during the campaign I recall that Hillary attacked Obama for suggesting that there be penalties for those who “opt out” of a program…but she never suggested any mechanism that would allow Universal Coverage without penalizing “cheaters”. She seemed very careful not to broach the idea of “single-payer”…the ONLY system that seems viable if one is to achieve any sort of Universal or near Universal coverage. Apparently she grabbed that “third-rail” back in 1994 and doesn’t want to go near it again.

Interesting points. I always learn soemthing new here *g*

From a legislative strategy point of view, you might end up with mandates, but you don’t start out demanding them. Of all people, Hillary C. should know this.

The healthcare industry is one fifth of the American economy. You’re not going to turn it on its head overnight.

Universal coverage is not universal health care.

I heard Obama say that all of us should have the same coverage he has in the Senate. But coverage, again, is not health care.

I understand Obama’s camp wanting to control their message at the convention but it sounds like they have went way to far when President Carter leaves with out even making a speech. Ahh, but their not editing Former President Clinton’s speech.

Obama tightens grip on podium speeches

By Betsy Rothstein
Posted: 08/26/08 08:15 PM [ET]

http://thehill.com/leading-the…..08-26.html

Well I don’t see how we get true medical care reform without stripping the insurance companies out of the equation.

The Republicans all talk about “free market!” “free market!”
Where’s the free market in the United States Health careless system?

OT
btw, the Convention just convened.
CSPAN 1
Howard Dean presiding?

thanks for the heads up. I can’t watch the crock o crap from the pundits

That sounds good, I sincerely hope Ted is able steer it through the Senate.

I thought that Obama attacked HRC for her mandates and penalties for those that did not take out ins.. I forsee a compromise where medicare is expanded and people could opt out and get private ins. to placate the ins. industry.

Pelosi is starting the nominations for those interested.

Wobbly, I always watch the conventions on CSPAN, I have no patience for commercials and edited coverage. Like most everyone else, I can think for myself.

Then again I may stick with MSNBC. Hell with all that has been erupting over there, it just may finally come to blows *g*

You are a smart man.

how long do the nominating speeches last?

thanks. have been avoiding it today, but don’t want to miss the whole thing.

Obama was not gonna take any chances on President Carter coming out with his views on the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Doesn’t suit the corporate agenda. Obama is not keen on cutting the “health insurance” industry out of the health care equation, hence his “health coverage” rather than health care. We’ve got a long way to go for real health care reform.

I like this. Hill telling her supporters hey, thanks, I didn’t make it to the white house but I can still work on this important issue. Fantastic.

Oooh, I’m really hoping that delegates walk out on Blue Dog BS. A girl can dream?

Indeed “healthcare” is probably as you say 1/5 of our economy but 1 out of every 3 dollars spent on “healthcare” stays with the insurance industry. “Healthcare” costs have been actually crippling the economy.

Natural Gas is used to manufacture electricity and can also be used to power cars…if nukes are used to make electricity- and more natural gas is used for powering cars- and (most importantly) if the electricty made by nukes is used to power plug in hybrids and (eventually) electric cars, then nukes will be supplanting oil usage.

(bows) Konnichiwa, Wobbs, Elliott

New Hamsher upstairs on the Real Battle in Denver

bom dia SouthernDragon

How are you and the tigers?

weebits is back with me for three weeks while my aunt is out of the country.

Rather sooner than later, all has-been politicians sound like broken records.

Same old, same old, worse than a backseat preacher.

We be fine. Weebits back with The Mom. Sweeeeet.

Lost our primary yesterday so it’s back to full time activist. Much more fun. Don’t like having to watch every word I say.

Weebits is gonna be a really socialized tiger. *g*

Yesterday’s Fresh Air on NPR had a Dr Oberland who wrote an analysis of Obama’s and McCain’s Healthcare reform proposals for the New England Journal of Medicine. The radio interview has been archived at: http://www.npr.org/templates/s…..d=93975730 It is sooooo worth a listen.

Sorry about the loss but keep pushing forward. It’s a job we all have to do…get more people involved in local politics to elect better dems *g*

Yeah, weebits is running around here batting a toy around. The dog was following her but is now back on her pillow asleep

Good post, Ian, but here’s the way I see it: I don’t particularly care for either of their plans. Both are too watered down to suit me, sort of stripped down versions of what I would like, and that won’t change until we take the profit motive out of health care and quit letting bean counters make decisions that affect the health of real live people. IOW, I want a single payer system. To mean this means the greatest group rates because you’re dealing with all the people, sick and healthy, and in the case of a nationwide program, mostly healthy. This would produce the greatest cost control opportunities. Let the insurance companies play the role that they currently pay for medicare and medicaid.

Now, since we probably will not get a single payer system through Congress, at least not yet, and maybe not within my lifetime, does that mean that I don’t think Hillary should pursue just what she can get in the Senate? Of course not! She has some ideas, most of which are pretty good. Maybe she could work with Elizabeth Edwards, and between the two, and by enlisted the many people in the country that want this to help convince other members of Congress to pass a bill, well, that’s what the Congress does. That’s what they are expected to do. They legislate; that’s their function. Then they take it to the President, who gets to sign or not sign the bill. If anyone thinks for a minute that President Obama would not sign a good bill because it’s more inclusive or more effective than his bill, then he should not be the candidate. But the chief executive does not necessarily initiate legislation. He approves or disapproves. Let’s let our government function the way it is supposed to, for a change.

Not gasoline. Natural gas (which is mostly methane, with other ‘anes’ included).

She goes from one house to another with no apprehension. That’s really cool. You’ve done a marvelous job. Bravo Zulu.

1,747 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Ian Welsh and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Thanks for the post…this issue along with Social Security and Medicare must be addressed in the first 100 days as part of a comprehensive budget restructuring. Maybe what we see beginning here is a political remodeling within the Democratic Party to solidify leadership not jest on issues but institutionally. It has been my belief that universal health care must be initiated politically from inside the Congress (read Senate) from a coalition of senior people, hopefully of BOTH parties but not necessary. It only makes sense to work health care reform through the existing Medicare structure and that’s where a comprehensive political budget restructuring comes in that includes eliminating the millionaire tax cuts, increasing the number of upper brackets beyond $250,000, lifting the Social Security cap ENTIRELY, and initiating universal health care by extending Medicare to all from birth to 18 years old and allowing a “buy in” for those at 55 years old.

Maybe, especially with the eminent loss of Ted Kennedy, the leadership realignment will offer Mrs. Clinton a larger place for her ego and force her to develop a recognizable politics to leverage with her national political base. I have not been a Clinton fan for the last 8 years but if she has any character or personal assets beyond ambition, there certainly seems to be a place for her in a New Deal-like program that mobilizes the new Democratic majorities in response to the social and economic reconstruction that must take place over the next several decades.

Again, thanks for the post, I really appreciate your work.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THERE IS STILL A LOTTA FIGHTIN’ TA DO!!

obrigada

Roll call starting now
The Great State of Alabama!

(bows) Konnichiwa

weebits?

what did I miss?

Are you talking natural gas? If not, could you be?

weebits is back with me for three weeks

Start upthread where I said hello. Wobbs with the latest Weebits adventure. Where else can you find a continuing story of a kitten? *g*

Oh! weebits is the weeny teeny rescue wobbly nursed
I just love kittens.

i am not allowed to collect them, else I be …

She isn’t so little anymore (4.4 pounds) hearty appetite and a little whirling dervish

Got two females about 4-5 months hanging around. Luckily the cat lady next door feeds them and will eventually catch and spay them. Beautiful little tortie, though. Amazing colouring. No more ferals for me (it says here in fine print.)

lol

SD and wobbly, it is soooo hard to turn down a rescue, just had to last week,
*sniff*

and I am so partial to torties, calicoes, and gray tabbies.
And on cue, my youngest just showed up for a snuggle ! *s* What a pill he was last night, was doing wind sprints down the length of the bed from the windowsill to the computer desk to the windowsill to the computer desk to the …

that’s not really a complaint.

awwww

I’ve told my vet that I’ll be happy to take an older animal if they get one that needs a new home. I could go to Friends of Strays or the SPCA but I would prefer the animal cross my path rather than the other way round.

My big boy, Ptah (P is silent), races through the house late every evening. Nothing is safe. I hear crashes and thuds and cringe, not wanting to go look. Never has broken anything but the place looks like the heat turned it.

edit – turned tossed it

Did Hillary say that she was cutting the insurance industry out of the picture? I guess I missed that as being part of her plan. I thought her model was actually using the insurance industry. Didn’t see that she was planning on eliminating it.

Even Canada’s single-payer system of universal health care doesn’t do that.

AFAIK, internists and general practitioners aka family physicians, the low end of the physician food chain, have already signed off on being in favor of universal health care. It’s the rest of the physicians, the majority who are “specialists,” who are fighting it.

Deepest apologies to many of the fine FDL physicians, I am intending no disrespect in these comments.

IMHO, advocates of universal health care need to continue on the macro levels, but also need to start advocating in terms of specialties. What will universal health care mean for surgical patients and those physicians, hospitals and technologies who service that sector? Surgery is such a huge area, it will definitely have to be broken down even further. I think a similar approach has to be applied to all other specialties.

OT, I think plastic surgeons and dermatologists are a good place to start, because so much of their revenue can (it doesn’t always) comes from meeting cosmetic needs. AFAIK, medical school tuition is subsidized by the taxpayers. For that portion of their income that is not contributing to public health (but solely to cosmetic needs), maybe they should pay back something more of their medical school tuition beyond what other physicians do?

I didn’t see it today so can’t answer your question.

Hillary has the goods on Obama on this topic and he knows it. So do the voters, African Americans most of all. It’s the number one pre-occupation of Americans after Bush’s wars. It affects those who have jobs and those who want them or who’ve given up looking for them. It affects the elderly, children, the poor, the young, even the wealthy. It certainly affects big donors, even Democratic ones. But it’s probably a lot more “change” than Obama wants to take on.

Solution? Establish a new cabinet post with responsibility to make it happen. Give it to Hillary. Let her make a universal, single-payer system in America a reality, one small step in helping America catch up with the rest of the developed world. Make it her pot at the end of the rainbow and the welcome price for her permanent seat on the Supreme Court.

If she fails because of Gooper opposition, Obama and the legion of “Democratic” consultants can blame her; when she succeeds, they can take the credit, but we’ll know who really did it. We’ll all be better off. And insurance companies can go back to bookmaking or selling insurance, and stop practicing medicine.

I thought that Obama attacked HRC for her mandates and penalties for those that did not take out ins.. I forsee a compromise where medicare is expanded and people could opt out and get private ins. to placate the ins. industry.

I remember this. And it points out just how much people can hear without listening.

This is where Hillary attacked Obama for pointing out that his more limited “first step” program involved “penalties” for those that opted out. Indeed Obama had specified this in his plan, Hillary didn’t.

Obama said that her program, if it was truly “mandated” must also involve penalties, that they were necessary for ANY “mandated” program to work. Hillary claimed it wasn’t. She basically talked about this for about 15 minutes in one debate…but never specified how her plan would work without penalizing those that opted out. And unless one has a single-payer system there will be opportunities to evade obtaining insurance…and throw the burden back on the public health system. Short of telling the evaders who can’t pay the huge “private” costs that they will have to forego treatment there is no other option.

This is indeed the problem with both their plans. One must have a system of punishment unless it is single payer. Obama’s plan seems to be expanding the coverage of those most vulnerable to deficiencies in coverage…increasing SCHIP to all dependant children, prenatal and post-natal coverage, reducing the age for Medicare. Payment would come from the government. The source of payment would be the Federal budget.

Hillary’s plan expands “mandated” private insurance…small (even family run) businesses and private individuals would be required to obtain coverage for employees and their families that met specific basic criteria. This would be supported by Federal tax credits.

Just to throw in a third plan…McCain’s. He suggests giving every one a $3000 tax credit for health care…to be used in any gol’ dern way one wishes. The wealthy, who already have great coverage, could use this for their yachts…reducing the stress that they have worrying about the hoi-polloi.

Let her make a universal, single-payer system in America a reality, one small step in helping America catch up with the rest of the developed world.

Hillary’s plan doesn’t entail a “single payer” system. She tried that, once. The HMO’s, Insurance Industry and Republicans called her a “socialist” (and accused her of cutting out their advice in secret cabals) and she went down in flames. That was in 1992-3 and she never went near the issue again.

Don’t entirely disagree, in fact. Neither plan is that good. But Clinton’s plan was better, because of the cost savings,which are substantial. She’s absolutely right about this.