Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Clyburn Offers More Questions Than Answers at Healthcare Forum

Posted by Will Moredock on Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 1:02 AM

Dr. Peter Kfoury, chairman of the healthcare committee for the Charleston Continue the Change Action Group (The Good Fight, June 16, 2009) posted the message below on the Charleston County Democratic Party website following Congressman Jim Clyburn's Healthcare Forum at ILA Hall on Saturday. The message was soon taken down because, as Kfoury was informed, it was too one-sided. Perhaps it is one-sided, but sometime you have to step off the fence and take a side. With that in mind, here is what Dr. Kfoury had to say about the congressman's appearance:

The Health care Forum with Rep. Jim Clyburn on Saturday yielded a disappointing but not unexpected result. Mr. Clyburn is an impressive man with an easy speaking style. I believe that he is genuinely concerned about this issue but as a politician, the art of compromise often trumps that of leadership.

There were probably about 300 people in attendance, including several of our committee members. Jackie and Steve videotaped the event. Thank you to all who came, handed out flyers, got petitions signed, etc. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. After an intro by his staffer, Mr. Clyburn gave a half hour or so talk on what is happening with health care legislation. Then there were 8 or 10 pre-registered speakers who were limited to 3-4 minutes each. Some represented small businesses unable to afford health care insurance for their employees, or attract good talent due to a lack of benefits. Several related heart rending stories of service to family and community, only to be shut out when their own health deteriorated. This group (which we did not know about in advance) was followed by an open mike session, where 8 or 10 more folks (including Dr. Carolyn Thiedke and myself) were allowed 2 minutes to speak. At the end, Mr. Clyburn answered questions.

There were several questions and comments about single payer. Interestingly, when I got a chance to speak and said that our group represented those in favor of single payer, the whole room broke into applause. This was the only such occurrence, and indicated to me that if a public vote was held tomorrow, single payer would win hands down...and I said this directly to Mr. Clyburn. I also indicated that if the people were calling the shots and not the insurance companies, we would go that route without question. This was definitely reflective of the sentiment in the room. Several other speakers mentioned that if all the European countries took care of their people, why can't we? I pointed out that the single payer system was the only one that would address every question being asked today.

At the end Mr. Clyburn got up to answer the questions raised during the public forum. Several times, he looked directly at me...especially when he forgot which bill it was exactly that had the most single payer traction (HR 676 of course, of which he was an original sponsor). Although disappointing, at least he was honest and direct, and here's what he said:

"There is NO chance of single payer passing at this time...maybe a few years down the road...HR 676 has 'topped out' at around 100 sponsors, and it would need 218. The House will NOT pass a bill without a public option, and the Senate will not pass a bill WITH one. (he then explained the legislative process that would move the Senate to a situation where only 51 votes would be necessary, but I'm not clear on it exactly) We will have an affordable public option that will create competition in the marketplace".

Unfortunately, this leaves many questions unanswered. For example, what is "affordable" if you're unemployed? How does this change pre-existing clauses and the drag of having health care insurance tied to a job? What about cost control? Will it be mandatory to have some coverage and therefore be somewhat close to universal, or will many still be left out?

It doesn't look good for our side, but I really believe that not only should we stick with this position through the whole process, but that people will look back in a few years as costs continue to rise, and realize that we missed a golden opportunity for true change. See you at the next meeting on July 21.

  |  

Comments (3)

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

The product of health insurance is to provide you with medical coverage when you need it.
Unlike other businesses that need to provide you with their product in order to make any money, health insurance companies actually make more money for themselves when they restrict and do not pay claims.
In other words, they make more money when they do NOT provide the product that you have paid them for.

Read the 50 to 70 pages of your health insurance contract.
Pay particular attention to the section entitled “limitations and exclusions”.
People’s health is not a product that needs to be left to the whims of money motivated CEO’s and stockholders.
If that is your thinking, you might as well have your police and fire department protection based on insurance premiums you pay.
Then you can go to the police and fire protection insurance page for ‘limitations and exclusions’ on whether or not the police or fire department would come out to your house in the event of an emergency.

The point is, you would never think of discriminating against another citizen if he was the victim of a fire or crime.
So why would you be ok with health insurance companies discriminating against fellow citizens who have pre-existing medical conditions?

report   
Posted by scottgreene on July 14, 2009 at 4:45 PM

Let's see, other companies that the government basically runs:

Postal Service - Bankrupt and shutting down > 3,000 branches since they don't know how to compete.

AmTrak - Government financed and keeps coming back for more, morally and financially bankrupt.

VA - Noone would want to accept this level of care. See latest news reports on hepatitis and AIDs exposure across the country due to poor OR and ambulatory surgery oversight.

Medicare - Should be out of money in the next 8-15 years.

Social Security - Almost there.

FDA - Can't keep up with food and drug safety needs.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - Have you been in a cave the last 18 months.

Need I say more, because I can.

report   
Posted by schcnut on July 14, 2009 at 10:07 PM

The only single payer system that will work is the one that requires the recipient of a service (health care or any other) to make a decision as to what costs they are willing to accept for said service. Got cancer and don't have sixty grand for treatment? Too bad, you'll probably die. No entity on earth can guarantee everything completely. The false belief that government can do so has been a proven failure everywhere it has been tried. Why not eliminate all forms of "insurance" altogether? We have managed to humanely care for our pets without intervention from either big business or government for years, and the standard of care and treatment available to pets in the US is arguably better than what most Americans receive. Just as the insurance companies have an interest in cuttings costs, so will the government.

report   
Posted by I P Yuengling on July 15, 2009 at 2:06 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
By Email
With RSS
Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

Classified Listings
{ more } Recent Comments
{ more } Reader Reviews

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2012, Charleston City Paper   RSS