0 to 60

Emmy and I are back in DC.

(I have yet to unpack. She refuses to unpack herself.)

Once I'm mostly caught up, I'll fill you in on the health care front. In the meantime, a couple of notes to kick off the week -

Krugman's got a blurb on the new CBO report that's pretty good.

And I caught this write in the Miami Herald this morning. Infuriating stuff:

Top Florida lawmakers are balking at Congress' plans to help more poor people get healthcare, though they've protected an entitlement of their own: free insurance premiums.

Taxpayers have been stuck with covering the premiums -- at a cost of about $45 million a year -- even while lawmakers pledged to scrimp as they grappled with three straight years of budget shortfalls.

Florida doesn't limit the subsidies to statewide officeholders like Gov. Charlie Crist and Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink, or to legislators like Senate President Jeff Atwater and House Speaker Larry Cretul. About 27,479 state employees -- many of them high-level bureaucrats and political appointees -- also get the break. So do their families.

(...)

The governor plans to add his wife of nearly one year, wealthy businesswoman and philanthropist Carole Crist, as well as her two daughters from a previous marriage to his health plan on Jan. 1. The girls attend an all-girls private school in New York and live with their father, who owns a jet-rental company.

"There is not a residency requirement for coverage,'' explained Crist spokesman Sterling Ivey.

Sunshine Flaws?

Happy Thanksgiving! I should have given warning days ago that I was going to be out of pocket for a couple. But between traveling (with a cat in tow) and wrapping up some loose work ends, I forgot. Oops.

But no worries. All's good. I am down in South Florida where I heard the following on the radio...twice:

"Men. Size matters. If it didn't matter, why do you think a major cable network has a hit show dedicated entirely to a man's size. It's not about length. It's about width and thickness." [It gets worse. I'll spare you the details.]

I was expecting a punchline. I thought it was all a euphemism. Nope. They're really advertising male enhancement supplements on FM radio. (That cable show they're referring to is clearly Showtime's "Hung.")

I remember when I came back here for grad school, almost every other commercial on TV was for plastic surgery with a noticeable emphasis on breast enlargement. So I suppose turnabout is fair play. But it still caught me off guard to hear such a blatant pitch on the air.

Makes you wonder if anyone's buying the scam...or the product. Did I mention it comes with a free measuring tool? No joke.

This is Thanksgiving break - Miami-style.

Q and Eh?

Via HuffPo, here's a little Q and A with Palin supporters standing in line at her book signing in Columbus, Ohio. It's all disturbing, but I'm particularly fond of the guy in the Steelers jacket who says Palin's state ("The state that she did govern") is right across the street from Russia. That gem's at about 4:55 in:

Seriously?

The takeaway from last night is this? The appropriate morning headline is about how it could all go horribly wrong?

Wtf is wrong with the media? Unreal.

Yay!

Now that is how you take advantage of being the majority party. Thank you, Democrats (and Independents).

We're moving ahead. Excellent news.

Away We Go

Senate debate starts today on health care legislation. You can watch it on C-SPAN online or C-SPAN 2 on TV. At the very least, the Republican bloviating should be entertaining.

And by the way, I think it's interesting how the Republicans keep talking about how many pages are in the House and Senate health care bills like that's a bad thing.

We're fixing health care. In Congress. What do they want, a pamphlet?

Fluff and Stuff

With her diet failing, Emmy decided this morning it was time to hitch a ride to the gym.

Actually, she curled up and fell asleep in the bag and was not a happy camper when I had to move her to pack up my stuff.

Today's been a little busier now that we have a Senate health care bill to review. Our official statement went out this morning. You can read it here. And if you're interested in learning more about the legislation itself, click here for a whole slew of summaries and fact sheets prepared by the Senate.

If you want to see how this bill stacks up compared to the one passed about two weeks ago, the NYT compares the House and Senate bills here and the Washington Post does it here.

We Have A Bill

Senate Leadership released its health care bill tonight. The official event's tomorrow at noon, but they've put the text up online already. You can download it from here.

People I Dislike

Women who sell out other women. From SEIU's blog:

Women in Colorado who purchase insurance on the individual market currently pay up to 59 percent more than men for coverage that doesn't even include maternity care. Now, a group of agents and insurance company representatives in their state are trying to keep it that way.

(...)

Justifying their stance on "gender rating" and maternity care, CSAHU spokesperson and lobbyist Cindy Sovine-Miller accused the Colorado legislators of being "[...] more about fairness than math." Funny, that's not what others say. "At our hearings this summer, the insurance industry provided no justifiable data or reason for their charging women from 9 percent to 50 percent more for the same policy," wrote Democratic State Rep. Sue Schafer of Wheat Ridge. "Even men who smoke are charged less than women who do not smoke. Just being female is considered a pre-existing condition."

(...)

Another Colorado group, the Professional Independent Insurance Agents of Colorado (PIIAC), doesn't want to get all mucked up in the details. Instead, they're justifying their position on "gender rating" with a lesson on anatomy:

"The bottom line is this," said the group's executive VP Barbara Fidler. "As crude as it sounds, we women are more costly relative to our health care. Our plumbing -- I don't mean to sound crude -- the gender differences are clearly related to how we're different... I'm not saying that it's fair for women to be rated why they are. I think it's just important to understand."

Democrats who sell out their party...and women. From The Hill:

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) pledged on Tuesday morning to defeat healthcare reform legislation if his abortion amendment is taken out, saying 10 to 20 anti-abortion-rights Democrats would vote against a bill with weaker language.

"They’re not going to take it out," Stupak said on "Fox and Friends," referring to Senate Democrats. "If they do, healthcare will not move forward."

Stupak's amendment prohibits any insurance plan on a potential healthcare exchange from accepting federal subsidies if it covers abortion. Pro-abortion-rights lawmakers say that language is too broad and would drastically reduce access to abortion.

Fair Financing

We think the best way to pay for health care reform is with a surcharge on the rich. So does a majority of the public, according to a new Associated Press poll. The chart's on page 11. The question reads:

If the government does things to reduce the cost of health insurance for some Americans or to help more people get health insurance, it would cost the government money. The government could get the money to pay for this in a number of different ways. Next, I’ll read you a list of some ways the government could get the money. After I read you the whole list, I’ll read them one at a time so you can tell me whether you would favor or oppose each one. Here’s the list...

Increasing income taxes paid by people who earn more than $250,000 a year:

Total Favor 57 (Strongly favor 37. Somewhat favor 20)

Neither favor nor oppose 6

Total Oppose 36 (Somewhat oppose 11. Strongly oppose 25)

HCAN released a new report today showing just how many people would have to pay a little more and how many people would gain health insurance as a result. The numbers are astonishing. We even raised the income level from $250,000 to $500,000 for individuals ($1 million for couples) because that's what's in the House health care bill now.

Bottom line: About 420,000 people nationwide pay a little more in taxes and more than 29 million people get health coverage. That's less than 0.4% of the population that would be asked to kick in a bit extra. And as our report points out,

[t]he surcharge will raise $460.5 billion over 10 years—considerably less than the $700 billion in tax cuts these households received over a 10-year period (2001 to 2010) from President George W. Bush.

It's got a state-by-state breakdown so check out where your state stands here.

An American Lie

Can someone please make the moron go away?

I don't care that she "wrote" a book. I don't care about the alternate reality she's created in her head. I don't care how she thinks the President's doing (MSNBC should have known better than to indulge that one).

Everyone - from Winfrey to Walters to the interchangeable talking heads on cable TV - please stop giving her a platform for her delusion.

I blame the McCain campaign for creating a monster, but now it's totally the media's fault for feeding it and keeping it alive.

Btw - I know why the title of her work of fiction is called "Going Rogue," but just take a second and look up the definition of rogue. The first definition.

n.
1. An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person

adj.
1. Vicious and solitary.

Just saying.

Chamber of Not-So-Secrets

We got to have a little fun with the Chamber of Commerce today.

Here's where the story starts (from The Washington Post - emphasis mine):

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an assortment of national business groups opposed to President Obama's health-care reform effort are collecting money to finance an economic study that could be used to portray the legislation as a job killer and threat to the nation's economy, according to an e-mail solicitation from a top Chamber official.

The e-mail, written by the Chamber's senior health policy manager and obtained by The Washington Post, proposes spending $50,000 to hire a "respected economist" to study the impact of health-care legislation, which is expected to come to the Senate floor this week, would have on jobs and the economy.

Step two, according to the e-mail, appears to assume the outcome of the economic review: "The economist will then circulate a sign-on letter to hundreds of other economists saying that the bill will kill jobs and hurt the economy. We will then be able to use this open letter to produce advertisements, and as a powerful lobbying and grass-roots document."

Thanks to CAF, we've already got the 'hundreds of other economists' the Chamber's looking for, and they've all already signed on to a letter. Unfortunately for the Chamber, it's a letter expressing support for health care reform. An excerpt:

We, the undersigned economists, business leaders, and health care experts, urge the new President and Congress to reform America's health care system—to move boldly to cover all Americans with health insurance, to bring down health care costs and create improved quality and value within the health care system for families, businesses, and taxpayers.

Some have argued that we cannot afford health insurance coverage for all because of the economic crisis. But solving America’s big health care problems is essential to economic recovery. We need to cover everyone now as part of comprehensive reform to rebuild our economy and restore prosperity. Affordable coverage with good benefits will give cash-strapped lower and middle-income Americans greater financial security – and the ability to pay their mortgages, start small businesses, save for college, pursue new job opportunities, and make other choices that will benefit our economy. And it will help business owners to insure their workers. Ensuring health security for all will allow workers to move to those jobs that fit them best, not just those that provide health insurance, promoting entrepreneurship and labor market productivity.

The rest of the letter is here. It was sent to the White House and Congress in June. Today, we pushed out a press release with the following quote:

“Since the Chamber has put out a help wanted ad, we thought we could be of some assistance,” said Richard Kirsch, National Campaign Manager, Health Care for America Now. “If the Chamber would like the phone number of any of these economists or business leaders, we would be happy to provide it to them.”

The whole release is here.

Praying for Joe

Last night, 500 people held a prayer vigil for Senator Lieberman. The Stamford Advocate has the full story and photos:

Quietly holding candles, hundreds of clergymen, congregants and reform advocates lined the sidewalks outside Independent U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman's Stamford home Sunday night in a show of support for universal health care.

"When we heard not only would he vote against it, but he'd use his power, his position as a swing vote ... to block it from coming to a vote, we had to send a message so he knows people who vote overwhelmingly favor the public option," said Rabbi Stephen Fuchs, of Congregation Beth Israel in West Hartford.

(...)

The vigil began at Stamford High School, Lieberman's alma mater, and ended at the senator's home, the Hayes House, across the street.

"In some sense, it's poetic," said Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, who attended the vigil. "The place where Sen. Joseph Lieberman received his high school education, the place he visited upon his announcement to seek the vice presidency, a place where his run for the presidency began -- and it just so happens, a place across the street from where he lives."

The Hour's got a good write too.

Image credit: Hour photo / DAVID ESPOSITO

Gold Crush

Sam Stein front and center on HuffPo:

A Goldman Sachs analysis of health care legislation has concluded that, as far as the bottom line for insurance companies is concerned, the best thing to do is nothing. A close second would be passing a watered-down version of the Senate Finance Committee's bill.

Now why would the insurance industry be dumping money into opposition behind the scenes? I wonder.

I hope Karen "We're all for reform" Ignagni is having a fun Friday.

Quote Of The Day

"I think this is a good recipe for your level."

- Levana commenting on ridiculously simple instructions for "fried apples" I found online in my quest for a way to turn a whole bag of gala apples into something cooked or baked and edible.

The Games They Play

I had to call my health insurance company yesterday for preauthorization.

Interesting concept really. I pay for coverage. That coverage includes certain benefits. But in order to get those benefits paid for, I have to get my insurance company's ok in advance. Who exactly at that insurance company has the knowledge or expertise to say yes or no to a service or treatment my doctor and I decide I need? I know the woman who took my call yesterday isn't a medical professional. She's a customer service representative. In the preauthorization department. She inputs data and doles out codes. She is not in any way, shape, or form qualified to make medical judgments.

That all said, getting the approval I needed yesterday was easy enough, but there's an interesting catch clearly designed to trip up customers and save the insurance company money.

Here's how it works. You can get preauthorized for SOME of the service or treatment you need but not all. You have to check in after a certain amount of time and get their ok for the next batch of benefit allotment. And if you don't call in at just the right time and there's any gap between your last approval and your next approval, tough luck. You have to cover the interim claims out of pocket. Even though you've already paid for the right to the service or treatment as part of the benefits package you've bought.

In the immortal words of the Connect Four kid, pretty sneaky sis.

Wow

TVNewser:

Lou Dobbs Leaving CNN

By Kevin Allocca on Nov 11, 2009 06:34 PM

BREAKING: TVNewser has heard from multiple sources that Lou Dobbs will announce he is leaving CNN on his program tonight at 7pmET.

A CNN spokesperson could not confirm nor deny that Dobbs would make an announcement about his future at CNN or that he will be leaving the network.

Dobbs originally joined CNN in 1980.

We will be watching and updating.

Update: The NYTimes confirmed with an executive that Dobbs will "announce his resignation," which is "effective immediately," and that the show tonight "will be his last on CNN."

Update: At 7:05ET, Dobbs says:

This will be my last broadcast here on CNN, where I've worked for most of the past 30 years, and where I have many friends and colleagues whom I admire deeply and respect greatly. I'm the last of the original anchors here on CNN and I'm proud to have had the privilege to helping to build the world's first news network. I'm grateful for the many opportunities that CNN has given me over the many years. I've tried to reciprocate with a full measure of my ability and my energy.

Over the past six months it's become increasingly clear that strong winds of change have begun buffeting this country and affecting all of us, and some leaders in media, politics, and business have been urging me to go beyond the role at CNN and to engage in constructive problem solving as well as to contribute positively to the great understanding of the issues of our day. And to continue to do so in the most honest and direct language possible. I've talked extensively with Jonathan Klien, he's the president of CNN, and as a result of those talks, john and I have agreed to a release from my contract that will enable me to pursue new opportunities.

At this point, I'm considering a number of options, and directions, and I assure you, I will let you know when I set my course.

What's your best guess? Fox? Congress?

UPDATE: Chez says Fox. You should check in with Chez whenever news breaks on this one. He's bound to have the funniest stuff around.

In The Mix

I have no good excuse for not posting anything yesterday other than being busy and losing track of the fact that I hadn't contributed until I was too tired to care anymore.

How's that for blunt?

Anyway, for your reading pleasure today, here's a cool TPMDC post on six big players in the health care debate. HCAN gets some love:

Health Care for America Now

There are more pro-reform groups working to pass a bill--unions and consumer groups and health care issue organizations and so on--than a single journalist could possibly describe. Some have played the inside game (the Service Employees International Union), others have been less beholden to the White House's line (AFL-CIO) but dozens of them, from across the spectrum, aligned under HCAN's wide umbrella. HCAN has spent millions of dollars on a campaign for a comprehensive health care bill. To the extent that liberals and reformers have a single basic understanding of what constitutes a public option, it's because HCAN defined it and helped organize around it. HCAN's efforts haven't been as punchy as some of the more liberal groups would have liked, or as passive as the Obama administration might have preferred. But the group has the ear of the White House and key players in Congress, and has used that access at times to great effect.

Neat, huh?

Back on CNN

This time it's radio, and I'm not the interviewer but the interviewee. Click here and scroll down.

The article accompanying my interview is about HCAN's new ad campaign. Below is one of the 20 'thank you' spots we'll have up on the air starting tomorrow:

Victory and Defeat

We passed health care legislation through the House late Saturday night. That's a big step for the cause:

The Representatives who voted ‘yes’ sided with the American people and not the big insurance companies that have been working overtime to try and kill meaningful health care reform. Tonight members of Congress stood up to the insurance lobbyists, voted to stop insurers from denying people health care when they need it most, and finally brought true choice and competition to the health insurance marketplace by creating a national public health insurance option.

But it's a touch bittersweet b/c it included one rotten step for women. The Stupak amendment is not about federal funding for abortion. It is much broader than that. It prevents millions of women from getting coverage that is widely available now - insurance that covers abortion services.

The core premise of health reform is that if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. Yet for the millions of women whose current insurance plans include coverage for abortion care, that promise will be broken if this becomes law. NYT:

Abortion rights advocates charged Sunday that the provision threatened to deprive women of abortion coverage because insurers would drop the procedure from their plans in order to sell them in the newly expanded market of people receiving subsidies. The subsidized market would be large because anyone earning less than $88,000 for a family of four — four times the poverty level — would be eligible for a subsidy under the House bill. Women who received subsidies or public insurance could still pay out of pocket for the procedure. Or they could buy separate insurance riders to cover abortion, though some evidence suggests few would, in part because few plan for unintended pregnancies.

That last point is very important. Under the Stupak amendment, the millions of women who will get coverage through the Exchange, from private or public insurance, will not be able to get coverage for abortion services. But most private insurance plans now cover abortion services. And it does not make any sense to say that women will still be able to buy coverage for abortion outside of the Exchange. Abortion is a difficult decision that women make for an unplanned pregnancy. It’s not something that you buy insurance for.

If you're pro-choice and haven't gotten involved in the fight for health care reform yet, now would be your call to action.

Tea Minus...

Dana Milbank on yesterday's spectacle at the Capitol:

More ominously, a man standing just beyond the TV cameras apparently suffered a heart attack 20 minutes after event began. Medical personnel from the Capitol physician's office -- an entity that could, quite accurately, be labeled government-run health care -- rushed over, attaching electrodes to his chest and giving him oxygen and an IV drip.

(...)

By the time it was over, medics had administered government-run health care to at least five people in the crowd who were stricken as they denounced government-run health care.

It drives me nuts that ill-informed, easily manipulated people are being whipped up into a frenzy to rally against their own best interests.

I Heart Andy

As if I needed another reason to adore Andy Cobb, his new video takes on the health insurance industry:



If you don't recognize Andy from his days shilling for BlueCross BlueShield, you may remember him from this HCAN original which debuted July 2008:

Referendumb

Voters told exit pollsters their local votes yesterday were just that... local... and yet news reporters on TV this morning are insisting on discussing whether yesterday's results in NJ and VA were a referendum on the President.

If ever you needed evidence agenda trumps truth, there you have it. Not that there is some big network conspiracy at play, but rather once producers and reporters get hooked on a storyline or theme, it's virtually impossible to shake them loose, even if the facts point to the contrary.

Maybe the TV peeps should pay more attention to the online peeps. CNN Political Editor Mark Preston:

Democratic losses of these two governorships should not be interpreted as a significant blow to President Obama.

(...)

56 percent of Virginians said that the president was not a factor when it came down to their vote. In New Jersey, that number increased to 60 percent of the people who went to the polls on Tuesday.

Perhaps this was the problem for Virginia Sen. Creigh Deeds and New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine. Neither Democratic candidate was Obama; neither was a great spokesman for "change;" and Democratic strategists and grassroots activists said each candidate failed to give independents a reason to support them.

Still, in the coming days a storyline will develop that this was a referendum on Obama and his policies.

Bad Policy Is All Politics

I'll have our rundown of everything wrong with the House GOP health care plan in a little while, but for now, see Ezra:

On the bright side, the Republican bill would allow insurers to base themselves in whichever state has the weakest regulatory standards and then sell policies built around those rules nationwide. If you've ever thought that your insurance was too comprehensive, too straightforward, and contained too few loopholes that you didn't learn about until you feel terribly ill, then this is the plan for you!

(...)

Republicans have not released a plan to reform the health-care system. They have released a plan (pdf) to have people stop bugging them about releasing a plan to reform the health-care system. The two are not the same thing.

(...)

You don't get to save time by producing a bill that wouldn't solve any problems and doesn't hang together and then also get to whine about how no one is covering the legislation you introduced on Nov. 3 when you can't even say how many people will be covered under your bill! This isn't serious legislation. It's a really long press release.

The whole write is here. Read it. It's perfect.

UPDATE: Here's our take.

Fox Snooze

As if I needed another reason to dislike Fox News, a booking producer called my cell at 7:30 this morning.

Unless someone is dead or dying, 7:30am is unacceptable.

Having been in TV news for a long time, I understand people in the business tend to forget that A. TV news is not the most important thing in the world and B. Regular people don't keep TV news people hours.

However, A. it isn't and B. they don't so calling at that ridiculous time to ask if someone wants to come on today at 10:30am to talk about health care reform and small business is a surefire way to get yourself a definitive no.

The kicker is they called Richard too. And emailed me on top of the call. All before 8am.

Monday Stuff

How was your Halloween? Two friends and I settled on a group costume. We went as "three of a kind" and dressed as the queens of diamonds, spades, and clubs. As you can see in the photo, I was clubs. (Levana was a badass roller derby chick. Her costume rocked.)

We had other good ideas, but some of the necessary props were seasonal. Like being "three sheets to the wind" complete with handheld fans. Awesome idea, right? Good luck finding a fan in DC in October. Even CVS - which is notoriously chock full of crap no one needs - is fan-free this time of year.

Now with the holiday behind us, it is back to all health care all the time. Couple of writes to point out this morning.

First, Davis Lazarus in the LA Times:

Listening to business leaders sputter and whine about a public option is about as convincing as listening to the insurance industry serve up repeated predictions of medical doom, all the while salivating over a government requirement that nearly all Americans buy their product.

The only opinion that matters here is that of the millions of people who can't afford or obtain health insurance, or who have found their coverage wanting when they need it most.

And Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar who writes for the AP has the aha! moment I've been pushing for months:

What's all the fuss about? After all the noise over Democrats' push for a government insurance plan to compete with private carriers, coverage numbers are finally in: Two percent.

That's the estimated share of Americans younger than 65 who'd sign up for the public option plan under the health care bill that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is steering toward House approval.

(...)

Some experts are wondering if lawmakers have wasted too much time arguing about the public plan, giving short shrift to basics such as ensuring that new coverage will be affordable.

Some experts? We've been making this point all along. The public health insurance option is an essential part of reform because it's the only way to lower costs and force the insurance companies to clean up their act (They'd finally really have to compete for your business.) But it's not the only essential part of reform. Affordability, comprehensive coverage, and fair financing versus taxation of benefits are all equally important issues deserving much more attention than they've received both in Congress and in the press.

Yes, media peeps, YOU have blown the public option way out of proportion.

And though I like Ricardo, his closing line is atrocious:

If Congress passes a public plan that's not much of a sensation, Democrats might have reason to regret all the time and energy they invested in it.

If by sensation he means "not covering a lot of people," he's missed the mark. It doesn't have to cover a lot of people. It has to be strong and national and available on day one in order to compete with the private health insurance behemoths. People will have a choice - one choice - that's not profit-driven and beholden to Wall Street. That alone is enough. If by sensation he means it's too weak to make a dent in health insurers' business as usual, then there still won't be regret over time spent. There will be regret that Members of Congress weren't strong enough to stand up to the health insurance lobbyists who've set up camp on the Hill.

Republicans, health insurance companies, and other right wing opponents of reform made the public option the centerpiece of their anti-reform campaign because it was an easy target. It wasn't well-defined so it was easily manipulated into this huge "government takeover" bogeyman. Democrats and other reform advocates fought back to protect it because they understand WHY it's so critical to have in the mix. It didn't start as ideological on the left, and it's not ideological on the left even today. For Democrats, it's practical and good policy.

How much of the media has stopped and thought about WHY the insurance industry opposes the public option so vehemently? We know it's not because it will drive them out of business. And we know it's not because they won't be able to compete.

It's because it will work. Really work. And insurance companies will have to change the way they operate or lose business. They will have to be transparent. They will have to give you what you pay for. They will have to play fair. And if they don't, you will finally - FINALLY - have somewhere else to go.

That's why I say even if you have private health insurance and want to keep it, you should be fighting like hell to make sure we get a public health insurance option in the exchange.

I'm annoyed it took this long for a story like Ricardo's to come out, but I'm glad it finally has. Better late - really late - than never, I suppose.