Saturday, February 11, 2012 2:30pm EST
Make this your Home Page | RSS 
Obama's health care reform is under intense scrutiny
Staff Reporter | Posted July 20, 2009 12:30 PM
As skepticism about the president's health-care reform effort increases on Capitol Hill, the Obama administration has launched a new phase of its strategy aimed to drastically increase public pressure on Congress.
Late Friday, the Congressional Budget Office delivered an assessment of one of the House versions of the health care bill, which said it would add $239 billion to the deficit if passed. "We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount and, on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs," the CBO's director Douglas Elmendorf said last week.
Elmendorf said long-term costs would rise at an unsustainable pace even if the legislation doesn't add to the federal deficit immediately. In his effort to reshape how Americans receive health care, Obama refuses to accept a tax on high-cost health insurance plans as part of the overhaul.
The Obama administration officials promptly took to the airwaves refuting the claims saying that the evaluation is premature. On Sunday White House officials defended Obama's health care proposals, emphasizing that Congress has not written the final draft of legislation, and urges skeptics to wait for the final bill. "At the end of the day, we'll have significant cost controls," said Presidential adviser David Axelrod.
Critics of the reform say the cost and timing are too problematic to get the votes needed to pass the president's legislation. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele lashed out today at President Barack Obama's efforts to reform the national health care system."The President tells us he doesn't want to spend more than we have ... he doesn't want to live off borrowed money, but he also told us he didn't want to run an auto industry," Steele said. "President Obama justifies this spending by saying the devil made him do it. He doesn't want to spend trillions we can't afford and then he says he just can't help it."
Conservative Democrats in the House have said they will vote against the reform in its current state. They are preparing several amendments, including measures that reduce the effort's long-term cost. And many on Capitol Hill continue to urge the president to abandon his rapidly approaching demand for passage of bills in the House and Senate by Aug. 7.
"I don't think we should be bound by a timetable that isn't realistic," Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine), a key swing-vote on health care, told Obama last week reminding him that President Lyndon B. Johnson took 1 1/2 years to pass Medicare. "I think it would be prudent of the president to be patient and allow us the opportunity to work."
Stuart Rothenberg of The Rothenberg Political Report thinks making the deadline is near impossible. "There's going to be some sort of reform, I think most people believe, but in terms of the dramatic program, policy changes that the president wants, the longer this lasts the less likely that something dramatic is going to truly be passed and be signed," said Rothenberg.
The president's top health adviser said Congress has not settled on an outline for health care legislation and reiterated Obama's push for a bipartisan approach. There's a lot more work to be done. "This is a work in progress and I think the House and Senate leaders share the president's goal that cost also come down," Kathleen Sibelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Despite scrutiny, the House Democrats received an endorsement of their legislation from the American Medical Association, saying the bill "includes a broad range of provisions that are key to effective, comprehensive health system reform."
To keep Obama's health-care legislation moving in the House and Senate committees, Senior White House aides pledge "an aggressive public and private schedule." Health care reform is expected to be the number one topic this week as Obama pushes back hard. The president's advisers say he will do a number of interviews this week to increase the narrative and gain more support for the bill.
Private meetings with lawmakers are said to become more frequent and urgent. Increased visibility is high on the administrations list, including an interview on PBS, a prime-time news conference on Wednesday, a trip to Cleveland, and extensive use of Internet video to broadcast his message.
A few weeks ago, the president invited Americans to go to his Web site and post personal stories about their experiences obtaining health care in the current system. Obama will now "take the baton" and may go as far as navigating social networking sites. "I don't know whether he will Twitter or tweet," said senior adviser David Axelrod. "But he's going to be very, very visible."
Articles written by a Staff Reporter are unsigned reports from a member of the staff.
-
NEWS UPDATES
- Marja Vongerichten Talks Kimchi Chronicles (0 comments)
- ( comments)
- ( comments)
- ( comments)
- ( comments)
-
Carley Latham commented on White sorority wins $100,000 step show award and sparks controversy:
Your this nice sharing has resolved the issue of getting backlinks. I think many of us can use any ...
-
Dominque Tognazzini commented on The Daily Voice Debate on Obama (Part I):
My computer warning to open your site. Are you sure it is viruses free?...
-
Arnette Kerper commented on Video: Pastor prays for Obama to "die and go to hell":
I have just tested this method alone with a completely new site and have to say that it worked for ...
-
Marylee Wurzbacher commented on Is America ready for a Black First Lady?:
I will test this with a new page I am building... I'll use ONLY this method for the first week and ...
-
Anette Coogen commented on When ignorance leads to murder:
Throughout the years, marketing has changed. Blogging is nowadays a must when it comes to branding ...
Mark Allen
John Amaechi
Maya Angelou
Crystal McCrary Anthony
Patricia Arnold
Algernon Austin
Randall Bailey
Rick Blalock
Kola Boof
Keith Boykin
Mario Brossard
Michael Brown
Theresa Caldwell
Clay Cane
Jasmyne Cannick
Charisse Carney-Nunes
Audrey Chapman
Gordon Chambers
Staceyann Chin
Mark Corece
Gilda Daniels
Yvonne R. Davis
Terrance Dean
Marcia Dyson
Damon Evans
M. Franklin
Lenora Fulani
Ron Glover
Keli Goff
Peter Gomes
Deondray Gossett
Kia Gregory
Zulema Griffin
Malcolm Harris
Marc Lamont Hill
Alicia Hines
Dennis R. Holmes, M.D
Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Jessica Ingram-Bellamy
Jacqueline Jackson
Avis Jones-DeWeever
Quincy Lenear
Carl Lewis
Rae Lewis-Thornton
Shannon J. Love
Rod McCullom
Terry McMillan
M.W. Moore
Alphonso Morgan
Nicholas Nelson
Clarence Nero
Charles Ogletree
Spencer Overton
Shirley Parker
Deval Patrick
Charles Pugh
Anwar Robinson
Eugene S. Robinson
Rashad Robinson
Mark Sawyer
Tara Setmayer
Rev. William Sinkford
Alexander Smalls
Basil Smikle
Nadine Smith
Doug Spearman
John Stanley
Jamal Story
Ronald Sullivan
David Dante Troutt
Omar Tyree
Linda Villarosa
Dorian Warren
Isaiah Washington
Robin Washington
Diane Weathers
Reg Weaver
Marcia J. Williams
Nathan Hale Williams
Jeff Winbush
Kai Wright



MySpace
flickr
YouTube

2009-07-20 15:44:33
Insurance companies have a formulary and will not pay for any prescribed medication that is not listed in their formulary. Similarly, they will not pay for any procedure that they do not approve. Insurance company pen-pushers, who may have no more than a high-school diploma, regularly tell doctors how to treat their patients. So, exactly how would it be worse if a federal agency came between doctors and patients and limited the medications and treatments available?
2009-07-21 01:09:36
2009-07-21 04:34:16
2009-07-21 19:22:50
2009-07-22 17:50:02
I am not saying that two wrongs make a right. I am merely discrediting one argument made against a government-funded health care system. There may be legitimate arguments against a government-funded system, but not all of the arguments are valid.
Depending on the details, a government-funded health care system could be either a huge mistake or a considerable improvement over what we now have. I really do not care whether we have a system which is government or privately funded, as long as it works well and is efficient and fair.
Openminded,
Your concern about rushing through a health care system without sufficient analysis is perfectly valid, and I share your concern. In my opinion, we should examine the health care systems in all of the developed countries and take their experience into consideration before developing a system of our own. If one were enacted by the end of August, it would probably be the result of rushing it through without adequate examination. On the other hand, surely it would not be reasonable to delay it for a few more decades just because of politics.
Where economics is concerned, I tend to be conservative. But surely it is unreasonable that people should be going through bankruptcy or suffering because of lacking access to adequate medical care in a prosperous country such as ours. The challenge is to design a good system that will meet the needs of the people efficiently and fairly. And, it appears that we are getting less for our health care dollar than are other prosperous countries, a situation which should be rectified.
I suspect that ONE of the reasons that U.S. businesses have trouble competing with businesses in other countries is that in many countries, businesses are not burdened with providing health insurance for their employees. Thus, if our businesses are to compete on an equitable basis with foreign businesses, we must find a way to provide adequate health care without burdening our businesses.
2011-05-19 20:13:08
To see your comment, wait approximately two minutes, then simply refresh the page.
Report issues/abuses to suggestions@thedailyvoice.com