Since I began serving in the U.S. Senate, I have consistently heard how our broken health care system affects Americans. I have heard about sky-rocketing premium increases that small business owners are paying in order to continue providing health care to their employees … I have heard from people with “pre-existing conditions” who simply can’t get coverage … And I have heard absolutely heart-breaking stories from retirees who have had to sell the family farm or other assets to pay for medical procedures for themselves or their loved ones.
The stories I hear are reflected in national polls that show the majority of American people support health care reform, and also support making health care available to the approximately 47 million people in this country who are without health insurance. Fully 72% of Americans polled in a recent New York Times/CBS poll favor the creation of a “public health care option."
We can take an important first step toward that kind of system immediately by demanding a strong public option and making sure it is included in the bill that we send to President Obama by this fall.
I want to thank everyone here at Firedoglake for your efforts in pressuring members of the House to support a strong public option. Thanks also to Democracy for America and Open Left for pressuring me and my colleagues in the Senate. (See my response to their questionnaire here.) Please keep it up.
Insurance industry executives and special interests shouldn’t rule the debate, and they shouldn’t rule decisions about the kind of health care your family needs. Every letter or email you write, every phone call you make, every person you get to do the same makes all the difference. You may not hear everything you want to hear every day on this issue from Washington, even from Democrats, but know that it is working. This public option would be nowhere if you had not exerted the pressure that you have over the last few weeks.
You can join me in helping to overhaul our current health care system with one that guarantees affordable, quality health care for all Americans, and includes a strong public option. Please visit my website and pledge your support for real reform. Take action in support of a strong public option and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Keep the pressure on!
I’ll be here for the next hour and look forward to taking your questions.
Related posts:
- Sherrod Brown: “We’re Going to Have a Strong Public Option”
- Feingold: No Public Option “A Very Strong Reason Not To Support” A Health Care Bill
- Bingaman “Supports a Strong Public Option”
- DeFazio Will Vote Against Bill Without Strong Public Option
- Surprise! Redux: AMA Folds Half-Way On Its Opposition to Public Plan Option; Obama Keeps Up Pressure
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Welcome, Senator. Thank you for taking the time to join us today, and thank you for sticking up for strong public option.
Hello everybody. I’m just back from Washington and eager to hear from you about the health care debate or anything else you’d like to talk about.
Sen. Feingold, any thoughts on the climate bill? Seems like a tough ask to support legislation on climate change that does nothing to rein in big coal.
I’d like to thank you, Senator Feingold, for being the first Senator to answer our questions on the public health insurance option. I’ve got the rest of the answers we’ve collected up here:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6243
Any way you can ask your colleagues to give us a nice, straight answer for themselves?
WELCOME SENATOR!!!
here at the lake you have been one of our MOST favorite law makers, we REALLY wanted you running
now we are proud you are holding the obama administration’s feet to the fire regarding the expanse of unitary power just as you did the previous and we want you to know
KEEP IT UP!!!
Thanks for your position on public option and welcome.
Thank you Senator Feingold for supporting S.1352 The Lyme and Tick-Borne Disease Prevention, Education, and Research act. I’m one of your constituents in Monroe county and my father is almost totally disabled due to chronic Lyme’s Disease. Is there anything we can do to rally support for this cause ?
Senator Feingold
As a fellow Midwesterner, I’m particularly concerned that if we don’t get a good health care bill all the efforts to bail out the auto industry will fail because the US manufacturers are still uncompetitive bc of health care against the Japanese.
Why aren’t more corporations speaking out about their need for healthcare to remain competitive? (Aside from Jeff Immelt, I should say).
After many listening sessions in WI, it is clear that we must both address global warming in a serious way and be sure that states like WI are not treated unfairly. It is way to early to give up on getting a strong bill.
Welcome, Senator Feingold – a real honor to have you here.
Welcome to the Lake, Senator Feingold.
How can the ordinary citizen fight back against the juggernaut of the insurance industry?
Sen. Feingold, thank you so much for your support and work in the area of health care. You have my support in return. :)
Sen. Feingold, thank you for being here.
I perceive a concerted attempt to conflate the public option w/ an “all-or-nothing” single-payer plan. I understand why the ins. lobby would do this, but why so little push-back on the public option from more knowledgeable Senators?
And would you care to handicap the likelihood of a public option in the final mark-up?
Hello Senator Feingold, nice to see you. What kind of opposition are the Republicans giving you about Health Care Reform?
Thanks for being here, Senator Finegold. I hope we can make people understand that ‘holding feet to the fire’ is supportive, not destructive.
It looks to me that $1.4 million a day in legal bribery is going to count more than 72% popular opinion.Will it have to get passed in reconciliation?
welcome senator feingold.
do you think that we have a chance of getting a strong public option with no trigger that is available to all on day one or are we the people going to get screwed again?
Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to be here today, Senator.
Given the lobbying power exerted by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, how can we get our elected officials to remember who it is they actually represent?
Thanks…hopefully, we can get a better bill out of the Senate or via Conference. Thanks for taking the time to come here.
Jason – I cannot tell you the number of meetings that I have attended in Washington where it was necessary to push my colleagues to mention and advocate for the public option. It is no exaggeration that if not for the pressure from you and others, we would be nowhere on this. The only way to get a straight answer from your representatives is to keep asking until you get one.
Senator Feingold, I have a question. When I call progressive representatives to ask them to pledge to veto any bill that does not contain a public option, I am often told by aides that the congressman has not seen the legislation yet. That seems like a silly answer to me. If you know in your conscience what the right thing to do is, why can’t a person say what they will support and what they won’t support. Why all the hedging on a public option??
I’d also like to mention support of government transparency in S.604 for auditing the federal reserve, and opposition to S.1261 the Pass Act which seems very much like the Real ID Act….we just dont need this type of legislation.
Thank you, Senator Feingold.
My question is whether you have a sense of how solidly the President will stand regarding a public option. We hear quite a lot of less than encouraging “everything’s on the table” type talk from him and from Rahm. Do you believe when the GOP inevitably has a fit over a strong public option (joined sadly by a few of your colleagues on the Democratic side), the President will weigh in firmly with what he wants and insist on one, or do you think these mixed messages from the WH reflect less than solid support?
Hi Sen. Feingold, Danine Spencer from Rhinelander, WI, here.
From what I can tell, the HELP committee bill will significantly expand Medicaid. Having been on Medicaid for 4 years, that seems like a disastrous idea. It’s a difficult program to get off of, due to income limits. From my perspective, it seems like it will keep millions in or near poverty.
Why is this is a good idea? (If you can’t tell, I think it’s a horrible idea, lol.)
now on topic;
it’s obvious to me corporations are allowed to buy our law, we’ve seen this under the republican plurality and now we are seeing it again under democratic majority
the health industry is buying our lawmakers and our law and THAT is the problem
I really wish someone would sponsor a bill that rescinds the non existant “person hood for corporations” that never existed in the first place but there we are giving corporations the same rights as people
we also need to get public funded campaigns, and lobby reform
I propose that corporations are not people and do NOT enjoy the right to petition for redress, I also suggest that only people and not for profit organizations be given that right
it is really bizarre, once the republicans insisted private industry does everything more efficient then government, now they argue the reverse, that private industry cannot possibly compete
which is simply not true
private industry competes against public schools with private, public parks with resorts, public beach clubs with cabana clubs, public tennis courts and other fields with arenas, police with security guards and the list goes on
the public option keeps them efficient and keeps us from funding billion dollar retirement parachutes for ceo’s
Senator Feingold, thank you for your service to Wisconsin and to the United States of America.
We are told that health care lobbying is costing the forces of the status quo about a million and a half dollars every single day. As a sitting US Senator, can you please tell us what that lobbying looks like at the pointy end of the spear, and what specific steps we can take to help our Senators overcome its influence? (I’m in CA).
Thank you for chatting today.
Thank you Senator!
Just last week, my 100% disabled veteran brother sustained a very serious eye injury while at our house (no, not fireworks). We rushed him to the VA Med Ctr (DC, North Capitol Street). He had his VA ID card.
1. Checked in, no ques re insurance.
2. Triaged immediately
3. Waited 15 minutes for 1st physician assessment
4. Neuro, cardio workup – 1 hour
5. 5 visits by the ER doc
6. Opthalmology consult
Home: It took 5 hours. No bill. “Thank you for your service to our country,” from every doc and RN.
Now, THAT’s a public option!
As one of your constituents, can I just say thank you, Sen Feingold.
Senator Feingold, thanks so much for being with us today. We really appreciate all of your wonderful work and leadership.
I feel like we’re the prisoner of a CBO score here, and that number is just a crap shoot. Why are we talking about money for health care when for $30 billion more per year we could do it right? We won’t actually be saving anything by cutting resources — just pissing people off.
And on the other end, we’re being told (surprise) that we need more stimulus money. As Dean Baker says, why can’t we make health care the stimulus?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..41254.html
This is a terrific example of how important the listening sessions that I hold are to my ability to do my job. I have known about these diseases from ticks for decades. What I didn’t realize is how alarmed people are about them at this time. It was because of the listening sessions that I co-sponsored this bill and you should urge the entire WI delegation to do the same.
Hi, Senator, I don’t have a question but want to thank you for continuing this fight. I do wonder how it is that members of the House and Senate really don’t get how bad things are. I am 57; lost my job last year, and have been working since as a freelancer with no benefits. This freelance work ends in September. I don’t know what I’m going to do next and need all the help I can get with health insurance. Thank you.
Thank you for all you efforts Senator, and not just healthcare but toward the ending of the state secrets ruse too.
It looks to me like the fix is in on healthcare. No one apparently can even get a request in to CBO to cost out a single payer plan. As I count it, only about 10 members out of Congress’ 535 members have taken a firm stand on even the weaker public option plan, and no one again has any real idea what the public option will contain. Insurance companies, Big Pharma, and the medical industry look to be the winners in this, the uninsured, under-insured, and ordinary Americans in general not so much. We seem to be props to justify a massive transfer of wealth to insurance companies and further solidify their stranglehold over the healthcare system.
Welcome to the Lake, Senator Feingold.
One of your democratic colleagues, Senator Bayh, recently expressed reluctance or unwillingness to vote for cloture on a health reform bill if there are provisions which he objects to, thus in effect supporting a Republican filibuster. What is being done to address this, should this scenario occur?
Welcome to FDL this afternoon Senator.
A couple of weeks ago, I received an email that contained a link to the stories gathered by the Obama Administration on the Health Care problems experienced by folks. The vast majority of these stories related to insurance companies, denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, insurance companies refusing to pay for coverage, insurance companies booting folks from coverage after one claim, and folks who supposedly had insuance coverage but were still bankrupted due to the areas where the companies would not pay.
How can your colleagues, in light of these stories, still try to put the insurance companies in the driver seat for any reform? Are they incapable of reading and comprehending where the problem lies or are they so in thrall to the contributions the insurance companies give that they just can’t begin to see that the insurance companies ARE the problem?
(Given this, I would think your campaign finance reform efforts would be able to link the two issues as they are in fact linked)
Actually, one of the things that makes this effort at health care reform different from 1994 is that auto companies and other corporations did begin to identify some of the extreme competitive disadvantages it causes. Obviously more companies speaking out right now would be a big help. The worm has turned on this issue and big corporations are no longer dead set against real reform.
Senator, One of the posters here asked about Republicans blocking a public options. It seems to me that this is not the real problem, but it’s Democrats that continually block progressive legislation. We only need to look to EFCA and todays news about healthcare reform. What is it going to take to get your fellow Democrats to actually keep their promises and pass both of these pieces of legislation.
Senator, I represent a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Trustee. Every docket we have several people who were driven under by the current health care system.
One factor is that many people get credit cards to pay their doctor bills, and then bankrupt on the credit cards.
Credit cards are being used almost like insurance, spreading the cost of health care to the community of borrowers.
Bankruptcy dockets are a great place to look for horror stories. I hope you will be able to get some of those into the public record.
I’m wondering if it really is possible to garner enough public support to fight the insurance corporations – as long as they can financially contribute to those legislators who go along with them, and financially oppose (by backing an opponent) those who will not play ball, it seems almost impossible to overcome. People who have been impoverished by one illmess do not have the resources to gain a congressman’s ear…
Senator Russ: How can I make the citizens of Sauk county realize this fight for health care reform must involve each and every one of them (and not just the elected officials in D.c.)? Thanks, Donna
When I hear people say “I wish there was more bipartisanship,” what I think they mean is “I wish the folks in DC could get along well enough to get something done.” It’s not bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship, but bipartisanship as opposed to obstructionism.
Given the clear GOP preference for “all obstructionism all the time”, what will it take to get the Democrats in the House and Senate to place “reforming health care” above “seeking bipartisanship”?
(Dawn Johnson’s stalled nomination to head the OLC at Justice is another example. Any idea how much longer she’ll have to wait?)
Senator Feingold:
We health care reform activists here in Eau Claire, including my JONAH Health Care Task Force, thank you for pushing for a strong public plan. Many of us would much rather have a Single Payer system but realize a strong public plan could work — if it is indeed a strong one, not a toothless one that just requires everyone to have insurance and helps the insurance and health care corporations add profits. I am concerned that Medicare and Medicaid will experience losses along with this. Instead they should be expanded to include a broad range of lower-risk people so the insurance companies don’t get the cream of the crop. I could go on but have given much to answer here already. Thanks much for being a good listener, unlike Baucus, who wouldn’t even include single payers in his discussion. Jackie Christner
Much of this lobbying is shrouded in private offices and the kinds of social events that I don’t attend in Washington, so I don’t see it directly. But the impact is obvious. That members can be elected as Democrats to the Congress after repeating over and over again their commitment to health care for all Americans and then oppose a public option suggests that these influences are still too powerful in Washington.
Like Wal-Mart, for example?
GREAT to hear
I would like to know when the democrats are going to begin demonstrating the same marketing skills as the republicans
using the term “tax the wealthy” is a non starter
using terms like “reclaim investments that have proven to give a negative return”
tax burden has shifted to the middle and lower class for far too long, giving middle class assets to the wealthiest people on the planet could not possibly be a good investment and that has been demonstrated by the decline in middle class earnings since reagan redistributed tax burden
those “tax deductions” were marketed as “stimulous”, that stimulous did not work and cost far more then we invested
that investment must be reclaimed
we also need to educate americans
those in the middle and lower class spend almost 100 percent of their wage, thus their entire wage is re-taxed after the federal level, to state, local and useage tax
the wealthy who spend a fraction of their wage are obviously not retaxed on that portion of wage
even with a progressive federal tax model the middle and lower class pays more to tax then the wealthy, I beleive the figures are close to 50 percent the middle and lower class pay overall, close to 25 percent the wealthy pay
the democrats really need to make their case in these terms rather then “we’re going to tax the wealthy”
Senator Feingold:
Any chance of your submcommittee pressuring the State Dep. to pressure the dictatorship in Ethiopia to open up the Ogaden?
We should make it clear to all Democrats that the time for excuses is over. We have 60 Senators organizing with the Democratic Caucus in the Senate. It would be best if in addition to that we had Republicans. It would be more than appropriate however, to ask that all 60 members of the caucus be on board for this important aspect of health care reform.
Thank you for answering my question, sir.
Do you think that if a rotten health plan passes and people see how awful it is, there will be any impetus to true campaign finance reform?
I have a very good friend who is a dentist and a progressive. However, when it comes to the issue of a public option, he is convinced that his practice will be financially eviscerated under such a plan. (He’s using Medicare as a benchmark, and expecting to get 40-50% of his normal (not unreasonable) fee for treatments.) How do we convince doctors, dentists and other members of the medical establishment that such is not the case? Moving this segment of the population would do a lot to advance the cause.
Senator Feingold:
Welcome.
Switching gears…What is your position regarding the kind of “indefinite detention” for Gitmo prisoners/defendants that the DOJ is currently promulgating?
TIA
Ralph
Senator Feingold, bet our friend Mike Stark would love to attend some of those events with you ;D
ok, maybe not.
Big Central Texas Feingold fans here – am willing to bet a huge chuck of that 76% wanting a public option would settle for what Senators have.
thanks so much for your time here with us today
Welcome Senator Feingold!!
Can Harry Reid effectively get a Public Option through the US Senate without it being “watered down” by bluedogs?
Senator Feingold,
An unexpected pleasure to see you at Jane’s place, I’ll be sure to mention it to my friend blueeyedace.
I personally want to thank you for keeping up the pressure on the Constitutional issues.
It’s not any more Constitutional now that Obama is President.
Hello Senator Feingold, It is hateful for law makers to deny healthcare to 47 million Americans. What will you say to these blue dog Democrats to get that point across?
Senator,
I’m a resident of rural Northcentral Wisconsin. How do you see a national health care system impacting some of the biggest employers in the area?
Ethiopia is an important ally of the US but we can not simply tolerate some of the electoral and human rights abuses that have occurred in that country. It is unfair to the Ethiopian people and also destabilizes the Horn of Africa.
Sen. Feingold:
Thank you for visiting us here at the Lake.
The political climate in the US is the best it has ever been for totally overhauling our abysmal system of health insurance.
Why won’t our leaders in Congress and the White House take some real initiative to create the change we all voted for in 2008?
According to this AP story:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin…..nuses.html
AIG Financial Products unit employees will likely receive $235 million in bonuses. Goldman Sachs is set to make record profits, and the record bonuses that go with them. The housing bubble burst nearly 2 years ago. The government and Fed have already funneled $6.788 trillion into the financial system and yet nothing has been done to change how Wall Street does business.
Senator Feingold I understand paying for the bill is important and yet we have “loaned” the financial industry so much. Why don’t we have a transaction tax or eliminate the ability of corps to write off salaries in excess of say a million dollars.
Thank you Russ for being a true progressive and voice of the people.
I have been deeply concerned about the proposals from the Obama Administration for so called “prolonged detention.” I realize they have not finalized their proposals but I held a hearing on this matter because this raises serious Constitutional problems and may create new image problems for the United States similar to those caused by Gitmo.
So happy you have this open forum. I support you on the public HC option and hope it emerges to allow the independents like me, a freelance inventor, to get coverage. To aid in improving HC, I am launching, hopefully with a bucket of ARRA funds for IT medical input, to give the patient the opportunity to input his or her information into the HC decision making process. Medical Urgency Preparation Service serves all US residents and covers their healthcare input worldwide. It will begin Sept. 8 with new hires. Sales in each US Congressional District adds to staffing and job creation.
Please keep the public option in the works and know that IT Medical can come from hospitals and medical clinics, but it is incomplete without the patient’s own input giving details neither of the care giving groups can know.
Senator Feingold, a report was released with regards to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. How many new revelations are we looking at?
President Obama has pledged that if people are comfortable with their current health care plan, they should be able to keep it. If done right this should mean that effective employer plans will not be compromised but that people who have no health insurance or are unhappy with their plan will have an alternative. Moreover, meaningful health care reform should help constrain overall costs to the benefit of those same employers.
Thank you for responding. I would argue that it is more important to simply pass Health Care reform, and let the Republicans get on board later (or not) Too many Americans suffer everyday and we simply don’t have the time to wait until there is a bipartisan bill. We need it now. In face, we really need single payer but if Democrats can’t even support a public options, we’re not going to see single payer any time soon.
Steve
I can’t be sure but it reminds me of when the illegal wiretapping program was unveiled. In my frustration that the Bush Administration was disregarding the law and the Constitution I criticized the TSP program and blurted out “and whatever else you’re doing stop it”. Its amazing that we’re still finding out the breadth of the Bush Administration’s attack on the Constitution.
Thank you so much for your constant service to our country and to WI. I wish we had 59 other Russ Feingolds in the Senate!!
Do you think that Obama will get rid of Summers and Geithner before the economy totally collapses or do you think he will wait until after that happens?
And why is it that nobody in Congress or the Obama Administration seems to have a clue about what is going on in the economy or what to do about it? We don’t have your resources out here, but many of us have been predicting correctly what has been happening. We have records of being right. Yet the Executive and Congress keep going with the people, and their ideas, who have been consistently wrong on the economy throughout.
Sen. Feingold, what do you think the final health care reform bill will look like?
Welcome Senator. Thank you so much for coming.
Senator Feingold, thank you for being here.
What, in your opinion is the source of the “disconnect” between Senators and Representatives, and the people they represent? Do they not understand how frustrated and angry people are about the state of health care in the US? Do they not care? Are they in thrall to the lobbyists, and big money contributions from insurance companies? Does the DC bubble simply such a form of “reality” for them that they just can’t understand ordinary life? etc. (not directed at you, Sir, but asking for insights about your less honorable colleagues).
empty wheel has pointed out quite a few already, for instance we now know as a fact George Bush PERSONALLY Sent Card and Gonzales to Thug Up Ashcroft when he was on what looked like his death bed
I feel it from the private conversations that have been reported to me as well as the President’s public posture, he is dead serious about making sure there is a public option. He will have to ratchet up the pressure even higher to have this happen, but I believe it means a great deal to him.
Senator Feingold, I am eager to take advantage of this open blog environment to raise an important question about Healthcare. We are all
aware of the exponential inflationary rise in health care cost, in
premiums, in taxes, and in the effect this cost bubble is having on the
US economy. What I have never heard is a really good explanation of why
the costs are going up. Public option and single payer supporters generally blame the HMO system which cost everyone through the middleman
expense of insurance companies. Insurance companies and drug companies
are blamed because they are run for profit and for the stockholders benefit. The answer is a public system like Medicare for everyone.
However, Atul Gawande in “The Cost Conuyndrum, The New Yorker, June l,
2009, makes an analysis of the broken health care system which makes me have less faith in a public system alternative. He points out, through the example of McAllen, Texas, that presently WHETHER PAYMENT IS BEING MADE BY PRIVATELY OWNED INSURANCE COMPANIES OR BY A PUBLIC SYSTEM LIKE MEDICARE, the system is being exploited for the income of those health providers whose objective is income not service to the patient. For example, if someone comes in with heart palpitations there are two medical models for a response. One model is to see the patient as a “cash cow” who can be exploited for the maximum coverage available through tests and surgery, and prescription. In the second model, the non-profit model described by Gawande, the Mayo Clinic, for example, the objective
of care is to find, through diagnosis, through interview, through background with the patient, the best solution for the patient.
In the McAllen, Texas example, even though the cost is more than twice that of other cities of similar size, or El Paso for example, the resulting care at high cost is no better than the care at low cost. So, one asks, what is going on here and what is the solution?
One then looks to see what the debate in Congress is. It appears, from what I read, that the discussion is all about how to pay for the health care that’s breaking to back of the country, whether through taxes or insurance premium, or second mortgages; how to tinker with the taxation system to pay for the health care we all need. Gawande persuades me that neither option or a combination of options is going to help, IF THERE IS NO REGULATION TO DEAL WITH “waste, fraud, and abuse” (as some used to like to talk about welfare), if we don’t have oversight, oversight, oversight
in whatever system emerges from this debate.
Well it’s certainly relieving for us to know that we do have some good people in Washington who realize that upholding the constitution is the fabric of our democracy….so Thanks !!!
Thank you for taking the time here, Senator.
1. For the public plan to exert pressure on private insurers, then people who are currently insured through work (and their employers) must be allowed to choose the public plan. Yet isn’t it true that the HELP Committee draft excludes people currently covered through their employer? Do you support that?
2. For the public plan to help lower costs, then it must demand changes in the incentives providers receive — which means changing how doctors and hospitals are paid, not just how much. What measures is the Senate including to ensure this model is part of the definition for the public plan — and do Senators agree/recognize that this is one of the keys to lowering costs throughout the system?
Thanks for visiting the MREA Renewable Energy Fair in Custer, WI a few weekends ago. What stuck with you the most from all the booths and presentations?
Yeah, good luck with that. The one thing that none of the, let’s face it, bogus plans currently being considered does is constrain costs. They are all giveaways to the insurance companies with weak pleas to not gouge us so badly in the future.
Senator Feingold, I’m really not shocked at the length of the Bush administration’s attack on the Constitution. But, would you support a revealing, with the individual American’s targets permission, of a release of the names of those individuals targeted and the reasons why the Bush administration had them under surveillance in the first place, with the name of the member of the Bush administration who authorized that surveillance?
How do you answer those who worry that if we have a public option then their employers will simply refuse to cover employees?
Senator Feingold: Thank you for taking questions.
Despite operating under the auspices of ‘consumerism’ (aka raising copays/deductibles), employee-based health plans couldn’t be farther removed from a free market model. (Not that I agree this model should even apply to health care).
But private insurance companies have undisclosed reimbursement rates that effectively manipulate the market and prevent consumers from making rational consumer decisions based on price and quality.
Both insured and uninsured alike are facing surmounting medical collections, bankruptcies and bad consumer credit ratings – albeit ironically – as these are supposed to be indicative of an undisciplined consumer.
What is being said about transparency, regulating reimbursement rates, or preventing non-elective medical services from taking their receivables to collections?
Thank you Senator.
You make an excellent point and in fact enacting meaningful health care reform will stimulate the economy both over the short and long term.
Clearly, an hour is just not enough time for so many sincere, important, and pressing concerns. Thank you for taking the time to listen and exchange. Please do more of these sessions.
Senator,
I have 3 topics of concern:
1) Originally, you encouraged states to develop plans so that approaches to health care reform got off the ground. Sen. Wyden in S.391 proposed that each state have a program, which has options available to all. What is your take on Sen. Wyden’s approach. (I listened to his presentation on the Senate floor over the lunch hour today.) Is there a way that it could be integrated with an overall federally funded public option within each state?
2) I saw yesterday that the President is now suggesting that Guantanamo prisoners, who have been acquitted still would not be freed? How can our system of justice allow us to continue to retain individuals, who have been acquitted? Some of these were only 12-14 year old “child” soldiers when they were picked up–Can we really say that they are too dangerous to be freed when they have been acquitted? You always seem to be on top of Constitutional issues for which I am tremendously grateful.
I also watched the C-Span videotape of your “Indefinite Detention” Senate hearing and can’t thank you enough for your jumping right in and getting feedback for the President. Your letter to him on the topic was also a work of art–exceptionally diplomatic but also right on target!
3) I have done some research on Judge Sotomayor and am especially concerned about the large number of reversals of her 61 district court decisions. She does not follow the rule of law. Just think about how many decisions that she made that didn’t get appealed because of attorneys who are too timid or whose client don’t have the financial resources to appeal. This clearly is of grave concern. We need a competent judge.
I shudder to think about her being the swing vote on major decisions. We just got the Writ of Habeas Corpus turned around. I am very supportive of having another woman and a Hispanic judge on the Supreme Court–but much more importantly we need someone who understands Constitutional Law and is willing to follow the rule of law rather than improvising. The Hearing next week and your vote on this may be the most important vote you cast this year.
Thanks for all of your dedication and service to us your WI constituents.
It does include the DC bubble and the influence of special interests in Washington, but it also relates to Democratic Senators who come from very conservative states such as AR, NE, and ND. For some of these Senators there is a tremendous amount of pressure from their constituents.
I really enjoyed spending time at the renewable energy fair. I was struck by how many different places the visitors came from, and the growth of cooperation between traditional progressives and many elements of the business community that now see the value of renewable energy.
Senator Feingold: Another issue that has bothered me is the evident lack of knowledge of the depth and breadth of the problem on the part of so many of our legislators, as well as their evident lack of curiosity about how other civilized nations do it with such success, efficiency, and lower costs. Frontline on PBS did a nice comparison of some of the systems on a program called “Sick Around the World.” I would think that all Congresmen would be required to see that and, in other ways, inform themselves. Then I would expect that they (especially the leaders of the committees) travel to several other countries and actually investigate and learn what makes them successful, and take the best of each to include in our reforms. I know they have much to learn about lots of issues, but this is the number one issue of our country, and they should be willing to learn, adapt, and solve this problem! Jackie Christner
No offense, but I have never heard of McAllen, Texas until now. There are costing problems in Medicare but it does a much better job given Congressionally mandated constraints on limiting those costs than private plans. But it seems very strange to build a healthcare system based on a single treatment regimen in a town that most people have never heard of.
It is for your daughter Melissa…
Thank you so much to everyone at Firedoglake for having me here. I look forward to doing this again.
Senator Feingold, thank you so much for the answer.
If I interpret it correctly, you are saying that there is pressure from AR, NE and ND constituents NOT to support a public plan or single payer, and that they are fine with the way things are?
I can understand if you are speaking more generally about legislation in general, but I am surprised that this relates specifically to health care.
I am not questioning your take, simply surprised.
Thank you again.
Thank you so much for coming — and listening
Thank YOU, Senator!
Thanks for coming Senator Feingold. You are truly one of the stand up senators in the Senate.
Please come back! I think you’re something of a local hero around FDL.
Some of us would even be interested in meeting you.
Hi Hugh, Please read all the way through my comment. McAllen, Texas is
the BAD example of what happens when there is no OVERSIGHT in any
healthcare program. My concern is that Congressional debate is all about how to pay for the system, not how to control costs through oversight
whatever the system.
Joining very late. Great fan of yours, Senator. Always wanted to ask you why one out of your district can’t email you directly? Don’t we all as citizens deserve to have our feedback to all our reps considered, especially considering the committee work you all do which impacts the entire nation.
How can public option not end up with all the sickest and poorest and the costliest procedures while profit plan reaps the money and less sick clientele? Also public option would mean employer to insurance provider relationship, and patient/client at the mercy of that relationship, not making direct choices once again?
Why can’t we go for universal single payer? Sorry this has been asked I am sure.
Thank you, Senator Feingold, we are so happy you took the time to join us today.
I personally will never again vote for another person who has not voted for a strong, strong public plan or, even better, a single payer system. There are so many good reasons for single payer, and nobody there wants to even learn about it and see what sense it makes. I traveled to River Falls with some friends last night to listen to Kip Sullivan, author of “The Health Care Mess: How We Got Into It and How We’ll Get Out of It,” and he presents such a good argument, as do so many others, for single payer. Our Congressmen need to be better learners and listen to people like this instead of profiteers. Jackie Christner
Actually, McAllen exists and has real people living there. Gawande’s study does not look only at McAllen but is based on studies performed all over the country; he uses McAllen to illustrate the contracts between different systems in different cities/regions. The New Yorker article is a must read.
wrt to his conclusion about public vs private, if you look at his final paragraphs, you’ll see that the incentive system he favors is more easily applied using the public plan as a model — hence it’s importance. Moreover, if we went to a single payer system, we’d want it to follow the same preferred model. So the points he raises seem powerful; he just didn’t want this main argument to get bogged down in the public vs private debate, because it transcended that.
Exactly.
OT but …
Last time I was in Rhinelander, was when I went fishing in Upper Post Lake – caught a couple ’sunnies’
I lived in Appleton at the time
Thank you for your time, Senator, and for answering our questions today. We’d sure like to see this debate turn out the right way for America, and would like to do the right things to make that happen. Put out the call when you need us for something specific, please, and we will answer it.
Interesting- Kip Sullivan? Might this be Kip Sullivan Pomona College class of ‘69? I will have to google.
Well, I think that was the key response in Feingold’s visit. It says that he has not talked to Obama directly about a public option. Nor has Obama led on the issue of a public option. Only that he has supported it by means of his “public posture” whatever that means. It is always important in evaluating Obama to look at what he says and compare it to what he could say. So Obama really wants a public option but has left the content of that option essentially empty. Again what does that mean? If he were exercising leadership on this issue he would be telling us and Congress what his bottomline is on a public option. He has done nothing of the sort. It means a lot to him but he hasn’t exerted sufficient pressure to make it happen, even this late in the process.
What this tells me is that we probably will get a public option and that it will be a very bare bones one.
Thanks Senator! And thanks for the earlier answers.
Hugh, this is a serious problem. You can read the article here. See also, this article by David Leonhart in the New York Times on treatments for prostate cancer.
One important feature of any plan has to be a serious and fully funded effort to identify a set of best practices and refusing to pay for more expensive treatments unless there is a compelling reason.
Hi Senator, former res of WI here
You said:
If you don’t mind, and if Obama is truly serious about real reform, he needs to change this frame
What people really want, is to keep their doctors – not their insurance
People are comfortable with their doctors
The doctors are who they have a personal relationship with
Senator Feingold, a great honor to have you here at FDL.
Welcome senator Feingold, I live in wisconsin and I also Appreciated your stance on the federal budget. Costs are important and a view of the future needs to be in focus in any bill even if the present people in office will not have to deal with the benefits or consequences of legislation. I believe health care reform is necessary but not by looking at who should pay for it. That is treating a symptom when the problem lies in what makes the costs so high to begin with. Just as investments in infrastructure of many kinds increase efficiency and productivity, I believe the same could be done with Health Care instead of playing around with number and who actually pays and how much. Can this become a larger focus as opposed to overhauling a whole system which in and of itself will be very costly?
It is true that costs are what take people to bankruptcy, even those with insurance. Medicare Part D is a good example. It was put together by Republicans in cahoots with with the big pharmaceuticals and insurance companies to mainly insure their huge profits. I hope Part D disappears and medications get covered by Medicare negotiating with the pharms, not by insurance companies.
Agree, So with the employer hook-up to choose the provider, the employee relationship with particular doctor is often totally dependent on keeping the job with that employer. Would be nice to have a public plan that set up a direct relationship between the taxpayer and doctor without the triangle with employer. Considering the rocky world of employment, too, this should be reformed to expand for more universal coverage.
I take your point. This is actually something that I have found missing completely from the current debate. There needs to be real discussion of what best practice protocols should be for many of the basic presentations that physicians most often see. There are already such protocols in place for initial assessment and treatment of your example of an MI. But what happens next depends a great deal on what a patient’s insurance is and where the patient happens to be. If the patient has good insurance, he/she is likely to be sent to be cathed pretty fast. If they don’t, they may be cathed or a more conservative treatment regime could be instituted. Now as people have been saying for years is that cathing someone does not increase longevity but does decrease symptomotology. In addition, something like a quarter of stents placed during a cath may block up within 3 months. So there really needs to be some serious rethinking about catherizations in terms of what they do and do not do, and whether we should be doing as many of them. It is an important tool but it is also definitely overused.
This gets me around to my point about location. If you present with a possible MI at a hospital which is also say a tertiary care center. Not cathing and taking a wait and see approach is likely to land the treating physician with a big fat malpractice suit. Rather than risk this the physician will get the cardiac consult and the cardiologist will recommend the procedure, not because either expects a better outcome but because neither wants the hassle of being sued.
Defensive medicine also know as medico-legal aspects of a case are major drivers of over testing and treatment. Clearer best practices guidelines based on evidence based medicine could reduce these tests, procedures, and associated costs. It makes a lot more sense to do this in a public program where the public good and health of the individual are priorities than in a private driven one where profit is the main driver.
That sounds like the time frame when he would have been in college.
Law does not deny them…. in that figure are illegal aliens and people who have the means but Choose not to get insurance. Not to mention that number used to be 50 million and it’s going down before reform has taken place…. wierd
I back you up on that point. At Kip Sullivan’s lecture/discussion last night, we talked about that very point. We do not need all these insurance comopanies. They are on their way out more so than GM, and we do not need to throw them any bailouts. They deserve to go down, and so do all of the profiteers who have done this to our health care. They are the ones who made this mess. Most people don’t care who their insurer is or they wouldn’t choose Medicare when it is time but stick with a privat insurer at very high prices, if that is even possible. What they care about is the ability to choose providers/doctors.
Why is Congress defying the public will to such an incredible extent? 3/4 of taxpayers want universal single payer.
From Joel Hirschhorn:
http://informationclearinghous…..e22915.htm
Yep! Him! I just spoke with him on the phone! We are both Pomona class of ‘69.
Amen to that! We need a strong plan that controls costs, which really means limiting profits or taking out profits entirely. Profits don’t belong in health care anyway. Even non-profits overcharge and just build a new “healing garden” or parking ramp with their profits. Controls are the answer, and a single-payer system does that best.
And those are the guys contributing big bucks to our Congressmen and women’s reelections if they cooperate and vote down single payer or a public plan.
As I read the Gawande article about McAllen, Texas, it re-inforces my point that it is a very atypical place and should not be used as any model even a negative one for healthcare reform. You don’t go to the most extreme, least representative place in the country to look for answers. Gawande’s point that there are regional variations in treatment plans is valid however and that is where clearer “best practices” protocols would be most useful. These would also be useful if there were real policing of “greedy” physicians. But the “greedy” physician syndrome is hardly so widespread I think to rate the space Gawande devotes to it in his article.
As for his positive examples, Mayo and Grand Junction, these depend on structural changes in how medicine is done and administered. But both require retraining of physicians and hospital staffs. If you have smart, committed people, this works. But physicians are no better and I might argue they are worse than the general population. You are not going to be able to replicate Mayo like results without Mayo quality people. So what we are looking at are administrative and organizational changes that would improve what is there. It will not be up to Mayo standards but it won’t be McAllen, Texas either.
Hope you have a happy reunion! Also, I hope he is happy I plugged him and his book at this session. Jackie
I saw your appearance on the Ed Show Psycho Talk….about being a cancer survivor. I’m an unemployed senior citizen, medicare, whose cancer medication has caused the ‘donut hole’ to happen in April. This is Private Medicare Part D. It’s difficult when the medication you need to prevent a recurrance costs $680 a month and you don’t have it, nor will your insurance plan cover it. If that isn’t an argument for the public option, I don’t know what is. Three years ago it cost $240/month, now $680. This is wrong.
There’s a really good article in the NY Review of Books that says something about the failure of the healthcare for-profit economic models that reinforces what you said
finding the link …
brb
Here the author explains why healthcare isn’t like any other industry
A lot more at the link
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22798
Jackie- I sent him a link to your comment, and also encouraged him to leave a comment on the thread. He was in the midst of a bunch of stuff, so that may not happen. But, what a way to re-connect!
Here’s the Amazon link to his book,
http://www.amazon.com/Health-C…..038;sr=1-1
BAM!
THAT’S what I’m talking about! *G*
Thanks and bless ya, Senator Feingold!
WOOT!!!
Valley Girl called me tonight and urged me to jump into this discussion after hearing about me from Jackie. Thank you both.
I’m a single-payer advocate who is extremely concerned about the know-nothing campaign that has been waged by the “public option” (PO)movement over the last two years. The PO movement, led by Health Care for America Now, has resolutely refused to describe the PO they have in mind. Their literature and petitions all resemble Sen. Feingold’s post — the phrase “public option” appears over and over, unadorned with a single detail about what the PO is supposed to look like.
Sen. Feingold states several times we need “a strong public option,” but he doesn’t describe what a “strong” PO is, as opposed to a weak one or any other type. How in the world do citizens hold activist groups and members of Congress accountable when we haven’t the faintest idea what we’re being asked to support? HCAN, Howard Dean, Moveon.org,the AFL-CIO, SEIU and the other advocates of a “robust public option” might as well have asked us to support the Robust Flying Spaghetti Monster. You never saw one? No problem, please sign this petition for the RFS Monster anyway.
The mushy PO bumper-sticker campaign is now reaping what it has sowed — bad results from Congress and, at this late date, almost no way to hold Congress accountable for such horrendous results. I’ll comment on just the handiwork of the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee which released a second draft of its “reform” bill last week. We are going to get worse results from the Senate Finance Committee (the other committee with jurisdiction over health care reform in the Senate)in a week or two, and we’ve already gotten awful results from the House where three House committee chairs (Waxman, Rangel, and Miller) have drafted a “tri-committee” bill.
The PO contained in the Senate HELP committee draft legislation is so weak that the Congressional Budget Office predicts it will be unable to set its premiums below those of the insurance industry and, not surprisingly, will have no effect on cost and may not even be able to attract customers. (Does everyone understand that the PO is supposed to be a government-run health insurance company that sells health insurance to the non-elderly in competition with the 1,300 or so insurance companies already hustling to sell health insurance to the non-elderly?) In a July 2 letter to Sen. Kennedy (who chairs the HELP committee), the CBO said:
“The new draft also includes provisions regarding a ‘public plan,’ but those provisions did not have a substantial effect on the cost or enrollment projections, largely because the public plan would pay providers of health care at rates comparable to privately negotiated rates—and thus was not projected to have premiums lower than those charged by private insurance plans….” (see page 3) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104…..ELPltr.pdf
Were the advocates of the PO surprised? Are they upset? Do they plan to ask Americans to support some specific criteria that will actually turn the HELP committee’s pathetic little PO into something that could actually kick some insurance company butt? Who knows. The leadership of the PO movement is on autopilot. They have one mantra “Tell Congress we want a robust public option.”
What’s at stake here is not merely the serious blowback the Democrats will suffer when “the heart” of their bill (as PO advocates are wont to say) turns out to be a cute little bauble that accomplishes nothing. What’s at stake here as well is the wellbeing of the entire universal coverage movement, including the single-payer movement. The PO provision in the Democrats’ bill is going to be used by progressive members of Congress as the fig leaf they need to vote for the funneling of hundreds of billions of tax dollars to the insurance industry, the most fervent foe of single-payer legislation in America. Strengthening the insurance industry at a time when, if they were not subsidized, they would begin to die on the vine is the last thing Democrats should be doing.
The insurance industry is the problem, not the solution. It is a parasite on the US health care system. If you’re trying to get rid of a parasite, you don’t feed it. You cut it out, and if you haven’t got the nerve to cut it out, you starve it. You sure as hell don’t feed it the rich diet Democrats are proposing to feed Aetna, Prudential and the other bloated insurers that suck up hundreds of billions of dollars that should be going to patient care. The Democrats’ “reform” bills are, in essence, a huge insurance industry bailout, probably to the tune of $1 trillion over the next decade.
I have just been invited to debate a PO advocate on Pacific Radio Sunday morning. As soon as I get the details, I’ll pass them on. I’m also finishing up a paper on the PO bumper-sticker campaign which I’ll try to remember to announce here when it’s done. In the meantime, you might want to read a piece I wrote for the blog maintained by Physicians for a National Health Program entitled “Democrats’ hype about health care reform will hurt them.” The last third of that paper addresses the incredible hype we’ve all been subjected to about the PO.
http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2009/…..hurt-them/
The next time that Sen. Feingold or anyone else asks you to promote a PO sight unseen, say, “No thank you. When you show me a blueprint for a PO that can set its premiums below those of the insurance industry, solicit me again. Till then, please don’t clutter up the Web with talk of a ‘robust’ public option.”
Kip Sullivan
Kip,
This is an excellent SANE AND SIMPLE animation of the SANE AND SIMPLE universal single payer plan.
http://www.grahamazon.com/sp/whatissinglepayer.php
45 million people are presently without health insurance today, 25 million are under-insured
60 people die each day from lack of insurance in this country
18,000 die each year from lack of health insurance
45% of all personal bankruptcies are due to health insurance costs.
One person goes bankrupt every 30 seconds in America due to health care costs
($90,000 went to the Dems from insurance/pharmaceutical companies last election; $65,000 to Repubs)
We deserve and have the RIGHT to a universal single payer plan.
libby
http://www.alternet.org/health…..e_industry!/
According to Karen Dolan Physicians for a National Health Program report with the Single Payer universal non-profit plan “The potential savings on paperwork, $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying more than we already do.”
Dolan explains that most healthcare advocates would agree that the single payer plan would be the most profound remedy for the U.S. health crisis. But they will also claim it is not politically possible. She uses the word “dead” to describe its status and encourages the teaming of both camps of progressives to work together, those wanting the single payer and those pragmatically pushing the public option, i.e., both public and profit systems combined.
So the political and business elite are so powerful that the admittedly best program for the common good is not seriously “on the table” and the pitfalls of a compromise, which is not even guaranteed, are discouraging.
Kip- thanks so much for stopping by and putting some of your expertise in a comment. You probably won’t get too many responses, but people do read the comments and the threads later.
I found this resonated a lot of truth from your article and link, Mr. Sullivan. Thank you.:
“Public option” vs. single payer does sound like pseudo-change it is seriously hard to believe in, smoke and mirrors we as a citizenry know so well, Lucy and the football. I have been calling Congresspeople and encouraging single payer plan and then adding, please if you can’t go that far, a “robust public plan,” but as Mr. Sullivan points out, the structure of a plan with profit-making in it sabotages its “common-goodness” and puts non-profit portion at the bottom again, setting up yet one more time the blueprint of a two-tiered America, the two Americas John Edwards spoke of oh so long ago.
BTW- I just read your article- it is excellent in explaining in very clear terms what is going on in terms of the “double speak”
Democrats’ hype about health care reform will hurt them
http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2009/…..hurt-them/