WHILE CONSERVATIVES HAD MANY allies in the private sector during
the last health-care fight, this time around they may find
themselves more alone than Gary Cooper in High Noon. Many
businesses struggling with high health care costs are happy to have
the government step in, while doctors and insurers have their own
issues with the current system and have put out reform
proposals.
The American Medical Association, for instance, was once a
leading opponent of efforts to expand the federal government’s role
in the health care system. Ronald Reagan famously recorded an LP on
the group’s behalf in 1961 titled “Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against
Socialized Medicine” to protest the creation of Medicare. But the
AMA is now promoting its own universal health care plan, and
expects to work closely with the Obama administration to help
reform the system. (Daschle reached out to the group shortly after
the election.)
“The status quo is not good,” said Nancy Nielsen, president of
the AMA. “It’s not good for patients and doctors are not happy.
Doctors are discouraged, they’re dispirited, sometimes they’re
angry, and it just isn’t working well for anybody.”
Specifically, Nielsen explained that doctors are irritated by
the difficulty of getting reimbursements and frustrated by the
“hoops they have to jump through to get the care they think their
patients deserve.”
She said that all the parties involved share the goals of making
sure that everybody has health insurance and that medical care is
affordable, but the debate will be over how to get there. The AMA
does not favor a government-run health care system, she repeatedly
said, and the group’s own plan—which would move away from
employer-based health care and toward individual tax
credits—actually has a lot more in common with the one offered by
John McCain during the campaign than it does with Obama’s. At the
same time, the nation’s largest physicians’ group sees health care
reform as inevitable, and it wants to be part of the process,
because doctors will have to work within whatever system gets
created.
“The important thing for us is that we are part of the
solution,” she said. “If we are on the outside looking in and just
complaining without being part of the solution, that’s not a good
place for physicians to be.”
The last time around, the insurance industry played a crucial
role in derailing Clinton’s health-care proposal, and its efforts
are epitomized by the “Harry and Louise” television ads featuring a
typical American couple living in a health care dystopia ushered in
by the legislation, struggling to make sense of the changes. But
America’s Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance industry
trade organization, has recently stated that it would be willing to
offer coverage to those with pre-existing conditions as long as
there was a mandate requiring all Americans to purchase health
insurance, thus ensuring that healthy people get brought into the
risk pool.
“Our industry is taking a drastically different approach than it
did 15 years ago,” said AHIP spokesman Robert Zirkelbach. “[We]
play an integral part of the health care delivery system and we
felt we had a responsibility this time around to put forth
solutions and contribute to the health care discussion.”
Expressing a sense of urgency that echoed Obama’s, Zirkelbach
said, “We cannot afford to not take action. We have got to address
the health care concerns that are facing the nation.”
WHILE DASCHLE AND OBAMA may consider health care an emergency,
the reality is that any plan to overhaul the nation’s health care
system will take some time to put together.
In a December conference call sponsored by the liberal group
Institute for America’s Future, Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), who serves
as chairman of the health subcommittee of the House Ways and Means
Committee, said that Democrats were unlikely to vote on a
comprehensive health care reform proposal until early in 2010.
Stark said that there was still a lot of “deferred maintenance” on
the current health care system that would have to be completed
prior to a total overhaul, including expanding SCHIP, dealing with
Medicare compensation for doctors, and promoting health information
technology.
Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ), one of the few well-versed Republicans
on Capitol Hill when it comes to health care, expressed optimism
about the position of conservatives going into what he acknowledges
will be a difficult fight.
“I see this shaping up as a tremendous opportunity for
Republicans to make clear their vision of the future versus the
Democrats’ vision of the future and to do it on very favorable
turf,” Shadegg said. He insisted that Republicans can win the fight
by articulating that they are in favor of giving choice to
consumers and patients, by, among other things, extending the
tax-preferred treatment enjoyed by employers to all Americans so
that they can pick the plans that they want.
The government-run aspects of the Democrats’ plans will be
exposed once it is opened up to more scrutiny, according to
Shadegg. “I don’t think that Americans are going to base their
views of the health care proposals in Congress in the next two
years on the debate that went on during the last election,” he
said.
Specifically, Shadegg said that it would become pretty obvious
to most Americans that the health care exchange that is a feature
of standard Democratic proposals does not represent genuine
choice.
Michele San Pietro| 2.1.09 @ 1:32PM
If in a democratic country like America there is no universal healthcare coverage, it's because most Americans don't want it, it's that simple. You have no idea with how paranoia America haters mention alleged lack of free healthcare for everybody in the United States in order to justify that America is an absurd country that should not exist. Next time I go to America, I won't take out any traveling insurance policy about healthcare: I prefer to run the risk of having to pay a high sum for being treated medically rather than siding with the scoundrels from whom I have always been discriminated against and insulted.
Jim O'Brien| 3.10.09 @ 8:56PM
Obama's plan for socialized medicine will result in poor quality care, fewer doctors and hospitals, more fraud, fewer new drugs and innovative procedures which come from private competition, long waits for treatment, billions more in non-productive bureaucratic expenses, and most importantly, lack of individual choice - Freedom. It seems that Obama and many Congressmen have learned absolutely nothing from the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Socialism doesn't work.
Pingback| 4.30.09 @ 7:53AM
The Facts on Fascism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.30.09 @ 6:08PM
Capital Research Center: links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.9.09 @ 12:05PM
The Facts on Fascism - Curiosity Blog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
yuy| 11.23.09 @ 8:16PM
TOD Converter Mac,
TOD File Converter Mac
fgdsg| 1.7.10 @ 9:26PM
SWF Converter Mac is excellent SWF conveting software for Mac users. This versatile Mac SWF converter can convert between SWF and all the popular video. In addition, the best swf file converter for Mac can also extract audio from video file and convert video to MP3, AC3, and AAC…as you want.
DVD Converter for Mac
fdg| 2.21.10 @ 10:18PM
CDG Converter
guo | 7.1.10 @ 5:07AM
www.wmvconverterformac.com
Sophie | 11.30.11 @ 2:57AM
How to convert flv to swf on mac? FLV to SWF Mac program is a real FlV to SWF converting program for Mac users. It provides the best and easiest way to convert between flash files, convert FLV to SWF on Mac and also MOV(QuickTime), M4V, 3GP, MP4, AVI, WMV, MPG, FLV, HD video, AVCHD, Flip video, Camcorder video, etc. Besides, Embedding SWF in HTML webpage is also supported.
FLV to SWF Mac