TPMDC
Obama Takes Dr. Barrasso To Medical School (VIDEO)
President Barack Obama
Share
Send to a friend!
It could become an iconic moment in a six-hour health care summit that was at times a sleepy affair: President Obama debating Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)--a medical doctor--on whether guaranteeing catastrophic coverage is a sufficient answer to the country's health care woes.
"Would you be satisfied if every member of Congress just had catastrophic care--you think we'd be better health care purchasers?" Obama asked Barrasso. "I mean, is that a change you think we should make?"
"I think actually we would," Barrasso responded. "We'd really focus on it. We'd have more, as you say, skin in the game. And especially if they had a savings account--a health savings account--they could put their money into that, and they'd be spending the money out of that."
Obama's retort left Barrasso speechless:
"Would you feel the same way if you were making $40,000. Or if that was your income. Because that's the reality for a lot of folks," Obama said.
Comments (180) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Powkat
February 25, 2010 4:29 PM
Where has this guy been for the past year?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 4:38 PM in reply to Powkat
What guy are you talking about? Obama's been here all along. So if you are inferring he's been absent, then you are wrong.
You haven't been paying attention apparently.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
February 25, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to lousgirl84
He has been busy ensuring retroactive immunity to AT&T extending the Patriot Act, increasing the war in Afghanistan, dropping predator missiles in 4 different countries, and doing back room deals with Big Pharama.
Pretending to get tough on the Israel extermination of Palestinians, pretending he has a solid alternative energy plan, doing deals with Karen Ignangi of AHIP, and wasting everyone's time with this bi-partisanship pipe dream.
He also has passed a watered down credit card reform bill, empowered Goldman Sachs to write actual foreign policy, and still does business with Blackwater.
I'm sorry I have been paying attention where have you been?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JC Aevaliotis
February 25, 2010 5:12 PM in reply to rbeats
You're right. He's George W. Bush. Let's abandon ship. There's no difference between the Dems and the GOP, so let's give up on the whole thing. I mean, the chances of reforming the health care system are probably about the same once the GOP regains power, right? US engagement with the world community won't be any different under the GOP, right? We haven't gotten what we wanted in the first year of Obama's presidency, so let's reset the clock to 2004. Won't make any difference? Right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
happycozy
February 25, 2010 5:16 PM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
Good point
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Docb
February 26, 2010 12:15 PM in reply to happycozy
JC--spot on..what BS the trolls are ranting about..Obama, Cooper , Becerra and more took the liars to school on many points! Now it is just up to us to correct the media when they show their bias..like CNN pushing the repubs and taking all the breaks when Dems were speaking ---cnn.com/feeback--Let them have it!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
February 26, 2010 12:45 PM in reply to Docb
The link you provided doesn't seem to be working. I would love to give CNN a piece of my mind. They've been doing this whole 'broken government' thing all week long while accepting no responsibility for themselves. Someone made the point in the comments yesterday that they were trying to watch the health care summit live but the CNN bobble heads kept interrupting to explain what we had just heard.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Powkat
February 25, 2010 5:43 PM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
Not what I said. I was approving of the sharp tone - I think he is by nature a mediator, which is an admirable quality, but he called bullsh*t on this clown and I was admiring his response.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Decider
February 25, 2010 5:51 PM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
I like to think of him as the black me!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Max Thrax
February 25, 2010 6:16 PM in reply to The Decider
The US is toast. Nothing BHO or any President, or a Justice League of the Greatest Presidents of All Time could do to fix this thing. We're used up. He's the best this country has in terms of Presidential material, and I say that as someone who has been disappointed in a lot of what he's done, or rather hasn't done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FebM
February 25, 2010 7:55 PM in reply to Max Thrax
You are right, "we are used up", Obama has no counterparts, but the fact of the matter is our culture, lifestyle, everything is expiring, reaching its "sell by date" scary!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dnegri
February 25, 2010 7:54 PM in reply to JC Aevaliotis
Wrong (if you weren't being sarcastic, that is).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:14 PM in reply to rbeats
You have a gift for focusing on shit that matters to you and the seven people on FDL.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
February 25, 2010 6:02 PM in reply to FreeRider
Yes, those dead villagers in Afghanistan were part of the Firedoglake crowd. Fuck'em.
Sorry...shit like the right to privacy, due process, health care and torture matter to a lot of people.
The Senate Health Care bill is a Republican wet dream. They oppose it reflexively, because they have to to get back to power. But it's a huge corporate giveaway that extends unaffordable insurance to millions, and leaves millions uninsured.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 6:05 PM in reply to Tanjaoui
How does it feel when you throw a hissy fit and everybody yawns?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LiesPrevail
February 25, 2010 6:26 PM in reply to FreeRider
How does it feel to be a condescending prick every chance you get?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 6:34 PM in reply to LiesPrevail
Really, really great!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gharlane
February 25, 2010 11:48 PM in reply to LiesPrevail
FreepRuder is more than a condescending prick. He's a serial liar of Palinesque stature who, when confronted with mountains of evidence of his lies, complains that the mountains of evidence contain Too Many Words and continues to say LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU. And then he puts some lame sound bite on repeat-forever, using it to respond to every comment destroying more of his lies and evasions. Straight out of the Palin playbook.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
February 25, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to FreeRider
Better than when I have to read DNC troll posts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 10:43 PM in reply to Tanjaoui
There are DNC troll posts here? Wow. It's exciting to know that the shit we post here is so important, the DNC pays people to troll here.
(You people and your delusions of grandeur. LOL.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:28 PM in reply to rbeats
As Harry Reid said to Lamar Alexander you have your right to your opinion, but you don't have a right to misrepresent the facts.
You are a total asshole. Always have been and you will never change. Go troll somewhere where someone cares what you have to say.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:34 PM in reply to lousgirl84
You tell him, Lousgirl! F these firebaggers!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:42 PM in reply to FreeRider
Hi friend. You are looking mighty handsome as usual. (smile)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
February 25, 2010 6:04 PM in reply to lousgirl84
You're really pathetic. And boring. Everyones a troll and now rbeats is an asshole, excuse me, total asshole, for saying mean (but true) things about louisgirl's President.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 6:52 PM in reply to Cornelius
Shut your pie hole, you wanker!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 7:31 PM in reply to Cornelius
Honey, make no mistake about it, I am not boring. If you don't like what I have to say to other folks in here, either don't read it or shut the fuck up. I wasn't talking to you because you aren't worth the effort. So take your sister act somewhere else where they give a shit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 7:33 PM in reply to Cornelius
And yes he is my President and yours too asshole so get over it. We won this fucking election and we get to make the rules.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SocialJusticeForAll
February 25, 2010 6:31 PM in reply to lousgirl84
http://www.lifenews.com/nat6050.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 26, 2010 7:50 AM in reply to SocialJusticeForAll
Keep your right wing websites to yourself. I am not interested in some right to life website calling Nancy Pelosi a liar. She is not a liar. There is no funding for abortion in the health care bill and you can post all the right to life websites you want. When have these folks ever told the truth.
Facts and truth mean nothing to these folks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SocialJusticeForAll
February 26, 2010 9:44 AM in reply to lousgirl84
My friend, YOU used the word lie, I did not.
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=5564
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuro
February 25, 2010 6:11 PM in reply to rbeats
Oh, you mean he has been leading our country? Yeah, that's what we hired him to do...He is the guy we picked to make the tough choices. You sound like another ideologue, who is more interested in ideology than reality.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
February 25, 2010 8:15 PM in reply to rbeats
Yawn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
onecrappyusername
February 25, 2010 5:28 PM in reply to lousgirl84
...or he's referring to Barrasso. Why don't you wait for a clarification before talking smack?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:30 PM in reply to onecrappyusername
Fuck you. I don't remember addressing you., I know who rbeats is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
February 25, 2010 5:34 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Obama? He may have "been here all along" in some alternate universe. Here in the real world, though, he's been nowhere to be found.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:36 PM in reply to EastWest
You wouldn't know the real world if it crawled up your heiney hole and died.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:40 PM in reply to EastWest
The only ones in an alternate universe are you firebagger idiots. Maybe if you got your heads out of your asses long enough you'd be able to see the light - better yet just keep it buried in your ass - you look a lot better, trust me
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:42 PM in reply to lousgirl84
You're killing me today, Lousgirl! LOL!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:55 PM in reply to FreeRider
I am sick to death of these lying fucks. It is impossible to have a conversation with them because just repeat the same fucking talking points because they;'ve got nothing. Just like these idiots thugs at the Summit. They knew damned well their asses would be handed to them so they kept trying to anul the process by going back to the same fucking topic that had already been covered so as to ensure the rest of their bogus claims wouldn't be exposed.
Well I am not an unbiased viewer, but it certainly looked to me like the Dems came out the winners. It was as obvious as the nose on your face which side the Thugs are on. Anthony Weiner was right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aikbay
February 25, 2010 5:54 PM in reply to EastWest
What you don't understand is that Obama's playing 12 dimensional chess with flying kings, spinning bishops and hopscotching queens with coded messages and the use of extinct languages.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
February 25, 2010 8:31 PM in reply to aikbay
Which is why you haven't a clue about what's going on: it's all a game to you. Unfortunately, the game you confabulate has been made so overcomplicated by you that you no longer know what's going on with it.
Meanwhile, back at reality, you've turned yourself into a figment of only your own fancy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
February 25, 2010 4:49 PM in reply to Powkat
He's been here, but he's delegated too much power to Congress. Obama needed to be more hands-on with this from the beginning, given the people he was dealing with. Not to the extent that Bill Clinton got involved, but not nearly as laid back as Obama was.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:41 PM in reply to jdb316
Delegate too much stuff to Congress. Maybe you should figure out how the process works first before making such a stupid remark.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
February 25, 2010 8:34 PM in reply to jdb316
The Executive isn't in charge of the other two branches of gov't, therefore has no "authority" to delegate "authority" to either Congress or the Judiciary.
What he has done is not pretend that he is in charge of Congress, and has a vote in Congress that would make everything all better for the unbalanced and oversimplifiers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
February 25, 2010 5:29 PM in reply to Powkat
He's been juggling snakes and spiders. Pay attention.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
February 25, 2010 8:21 PM in reply to Powkat
You mean Barrasso? He's been so habitually talking Republican I-have-mine/fuck-you horseshit, that he wasn't prepared for reality slamming him upside both sides of the head, and between the eyes, all at the same itme.
Perfectly timed and worded, President Obama!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
P White
February 26, 2010 7:12 AM in reply to Powkat
Where has this guy been. This was no phony populism that we see from time to time when he has a town hall. He didn't have to drop his g's to sound folksy. There was none of the 'understanding' that Wall Street needed to make a profit. This was a real, empathetic, and reasonable man who GOT IT! Where ever this guy's been, I hope his advisers recognize that it was his serious and commanding 'realness' that garnered new respect. We don't need 'folksy'...we need to know a very bright, well-informed grown up is talking straight to us. He showed real awareness yesterday and it certainly didn't fall on deaf ears.
I don't know where this guys been, but I'd like to see him way more often.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 25, 2010 4:30 PM
Ok, who won the "debate"? I haven't been able to watch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
February 25, 2010 4:31 PM in reply to Michael A
C-SPAN DOT MF ORG
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 25, 2010 4:44 PM in reply to mcc
I haven't been able to watch that either. I am working my a** off to pay my medical bills.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 4:52 PM in reply to Michael A
And working to make sure that 31 million others remain uncovered.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GOPinNYC
February 25, 2010 5:19 PM in reply to FreeRider
You figures are false. You should do a bit of research before you make false remarks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
benjoya
February 25, 2010 5:20 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
thank god someone is here to stand up for the poor insurance companies!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:40 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Your entire existence is false. You should try living as a human being instead of a turd blossom before pontificating about things that impact humans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LinusToo
February 25, 2010 5:45 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Yeah, do it like the GOPers do it: Do the research, fudge the data and twist the results, and THEN lie…some more.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
i said GOOD DAY sir
February 25, 2010 6:07 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
It's true. There aren't 31 million uninsured.
There are 46 million uninsured. Courtesy of fox news:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/10/number-uninsured-rises-million/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GOPinNYC
February 26, 2010 5:05 AM in reply to i said GOOD DAY sir
I don't watch Fox but rumor is they aren't always correct. I'm not going to bother with watching the clip but I'd willing to wager those numbers are based on the information put out by the Census Bureau. These numbers have been proven repeatedly to be inaccurate.
1. Approximately 10 million in this data are illegals immigrants. They should be here so they shouldn't get it.
2. The Census Bureau counted anyone who had been without insurance for any length of time. Even if that time was one day. One study done in 2003 done by the Congressional Budget Office showed the number of people who had been without insurance for a year at less than half the Census Bureau's data.
3. In 2003 another study estimated that about 14 million of the uninsured were already eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP but never bothered to enroll.
4. In 2007 an article published by the Pacific Research Institute noted that 17.6 million of the uninsured had annual incomes of more than $50,000. More than half of them made more than $75,000.
5. And let us not get into the very obvious reason that the 18 million under the age of 34 might have skipped on getting it.
So as you can see that number being thrown around is VERY misleading. And in fact rather wrong. But hey if you want to continue to call me a liar I'm sure I can dig up more info to make you look like an ass.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
February 25, 2010 4:54 PM in reply to Michael A
No one is winning. It's been the last year of debate in a 6 hour time period. No progress was made. Except now the GOP will whine about the time issue (inequality) at the summit.
Oh, and now democrats are arguing against incrementalism.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
February 25, 2010 5:39 PM in reply to Michael A
I am sorry, I was jokingly referring to this video.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:24 PM in reply to mcc
Thanks for the link -- that video is a riot!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 6:53 PM in reply to mcc
That's may be the funniest thing I've ever seen...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
February 25, 2010 5:31 PM in reply to Michael A
Dems 69 Repubs 7. I watched the whole thing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brownbagger
February 25, 2010 5:34 PM in reply to Michael A
Go to http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/02/six-hours-at-the-table-what-to-expect-at-white-house-health-care-summit.php#comment-3808737
and see the play-by-play.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
February 25, 2010 4:43 PM
I don't get the question. Would catastrophic coverage be sufficient? Of course it would, if free or nearly free, and/or for the uninsurable.
Barrasso was likely just non-plussed by the inanity.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
February 25, 2010 4:48 PM in reply to shooter242
Huh? You are delusional. Of course it is not sufficient. Part of the point to reduce costs is to get everyone healthy and medical care before the situation gets "catastrophic." That will bring costs down substantially. You people are nuts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 25, 2010 4:55 PM in reply to Michael A
But see, if that person making $40k/year would just put away $20k/year in a health savings account, then if he had, say, a heart attack, he could choose whether to keep that money or go to the hospital and have it treated. Or instead of a heart specialist he could go to a veterinarian instead and save himself a bunch of money. It's all about choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fpie
February 25, 2010 5:06 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
I have often wished I could go to my dogs' vet. Veterenarians always seem more engaged than GPs and seem to find sollutions. They actually care about their patients' well being.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 7:35 PM in reply to fpie
Thank you. We appreciate your comment because sometimes we really don't feel as if the public respects us.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
February 25, 2010 5:43 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
SCORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:51 PM in reply to FreeRider
Co-sign
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 5:47 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
ding ding ding ding
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
farnsworth
February 25, 2010 7:38 PM in reply to Michael A
Shooter is stupid.
Shooter is a liar.
Responding to him as if he has anything to say is just a waste of time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
runfastandwin
February 25, 2010 4:48 PM in reply to shooter242
"I don't get the question."
Now THERE'S a big surprise.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 5:49 PM in reply to runfastandwin
He doesn't "get" how HE could possibly make only $40K per year. THAT's the part of the question he doesn't get. He thinks it's a hypothetical. Nobody HE knows makes $40k per year. In ReThuglican think, that translates to "The American people don't make $40k per year."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spiffarino
February 25, 2010 4:52 PM in reply to shooter242
What's not to get about the question? If you are an average person who makes $40,000, you probably won't want to pony up say, $10,000 or more a year to fill a health savings account. You might rather spend that on food, gas, a mortgage, pants, shoes, etc., etc., etc.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
runfastandwin
February 25, 2010 6:17 PM in reply to Spiffarino
Ah who needs pants, between that and insurance I will choose insurance every time...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 6:56 PM in reply to runfastandwin
Agreed. The best disinfectant is sunshine, after all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
February 25, 2010 4:56 PM in reply to shooter242
catastrophic insurance is not free, or nearly free. It's just cheaper.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
February 25, 2010 5:33 PM in reply to Indie Pro
Surprisingly, catastrphic health insurance is not really cheap either. My employer offers a health savings account, which I believe is a catastrophic policy plus the ability to contribute to the HSA. My premium would be $708 plus whatever I choose to put in the HSA. A PPO is $888. I don't think the difference, $180, in my HSA would cover a checkup. My employer kicks in about $3K in addition to what I pay. If catastrphic insurance plus a HSA was so cheap it would solve national healthcare problems, I'd expect my employers $3K would make catastrophic care free, not just $180 cheaper, that only saves $15/month, and gets expensive real fast if you actually see a doctor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ohyeathatsright
February 25, 2010 5:02 PM in reply to shooter242
Single-payer universal catastrophic coverage is an initiative I can get behind. It's just the rest of that money...where's that going to come from?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
onecrappyusername
February 25, 2010 6:02 PM in reply to shooter242
widespread adoption of catastrophic insurance would mean millions of people who don't get preventative care, and wind up going to ERs with heart attacks and cancer who could have been treated more effectively and cheaper if they had comprehensive care.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LinusToo
February 25, 2010 6:04 PM in reply to shooter242
Just what part of "catastrophic insurance" do you not understand? It only protects against a catastrophe; it does nothing to keep you healthy. Routine doctor's visits and prescriptions are still expensive and are paid out-of-pocket. Those who don't have the pocket to pay out of go without. Catastrophic insurance works only if you're healthy and can stay that way without the need for any medical attention. Out ER system is a form of catastrophic coverage for the uninsured. Only problem is they have to be critically ill, i.e., a medical emergency, before they qualify for care. That's not a healthy care system — not unless you consider having a tow truck and an auto body repair shop on speed dial to be a legitimate form of brake maintenance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 6:59 PM in reply to LinusToo
Actually, to be precise, it doesn't protect against catastrophe, it just helps pay for catastrophe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:16 PM in reply to Official A
Or, in free market parlance, it incentivizes catastrophe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 7:29 PM in reply to shooter242
You're right. You didn't get the question. Free catastrophic insurance wouldn't even get you in the door of the doctor's office. About twelve years ago I went to look for a doctor because I needed a physical for a job. The first one I went to wanted $100 just to make an appointment. Anything he did would be on top of that. What is he charging now? How in the name of all that is holy can a normal person afford that kind of care?
What would it cost to have a doctor sew up a six inch cut in your leg? Could you afford that and car payments at the same time? Most people couldn't. What about going to the doctor with a respiratory infection? That'll run you several thousand when the x-rays and the radiologist are paid along with any treatment you may get. To imply that catastrophic insurance is all you need is a thought from an alternate universe where prayer is effective.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
February 25, 2010 8:20 PM in reply to shooter242
One of the problems with our current health care system is that we tend to spend a lot losing the battle of a persons final, fatal illness. If everybody had catastrophic coverage rather than real health care, it would tend to make that situation even worse; we won't do sh!t for you while you are relatively healthy; when a dose of antibiotics or setting a bone could greatly enhance your life and productivity; but in your final illness, as soon as doctors determined they could spend enough to qualify for catastrophic, we would pour it on in your final few days.
I think there is actually a good argument to be made that we should pay for all the normal, run-of-the-mill stuff like pre-natal care, checkups, and visits for strep throat; and back away from the catastrophic; particularly if you take the Republican people-are-only-units-of-production stand.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
runfastandwin
February 25, 2010 4:47 PM
Here's the email I just sent the honorable Senator from Wyoming:
Dear Senator, I just heard you say you would be happy if all members of Congress had employer paid catastrophic health insurance only (actually you didn't exactly say employer paid but I just sort of assumed it). I think this is a great idea and would save taxpayers a ton of money. When do you plan to introduce legislation to accomplish this? You can count on me for a donation once you do so.
If I get a reply I will post it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
teabagger
February 25, 2010 4:56 PM
The Bamster defines anyone who makes $40K as poor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
destor23
February 25, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to teabagger
Well, that's $10,0000 less than median income so yes, it's poor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rcs1975
February 25, 2010 5:05 PM in reply to teabagger
And McConnell defines anyone who makes $69K as not making a lot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:15 PM in reply to rcs1975
Republicans have different notions of rich and poor than most of us. A person who works for a living is rich and taxed at 25%, 28%, 33%, or 35%. But the poor idiot who inherited a lot of money can only afford to pay 15% on their dividends and capital gains. Such is the world post-Bush.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JZ
February 25, 2010 5:06 PM in reply to teabagger
Certainly anyone with a family. Unless you live in Fort Worth, where houses cost $5. Not sure he called them poor, just that if they followed Barrasso's wishes they'd be SOL.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
February 25, 2010 5:18 PM in reply to teabagger
No, that was the imaginary Obama who lives in your head who said that. What Obama actually said was a question: ""Would you feel the same way if you were making $40,000. Or if that was your income. Because that's the reality for a lot of folks." He didn't say people making that were "poor." Instead, he suggested that the whole "health care savings account" + catastrophic care was a great idea for the rich and not so much for everyone else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Zell
February 25, 2010 5:23 PM in reply to teabagger
I heard where he said "$40,000". Now can you please point out where he said "poor"?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
February 25, 2010 5:32 PM in reply to Zell
That's not going to happen. He heard in his head so it must be true.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DaveW
February 25, 2010 5:34 PM in reply to teabagger
Are you incapable of saying anything without lying? Show us where he said anything about "poor". The point was that the "health savings account" is a scam solution for people making that kind of money. That too complex for you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnnieW
February 25, 2010 5:02 PM
A family of 4 that lives on $40,000 a year is not going ot be able to afford health insurance. And no that isn't poor, but they still cannot afford to insure their family.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GOPinNYC
February 25, 2010 5:22 PM in reply to AnnieW
Sure they can. They just have to be more responsible with the choices they make in life. Not everyone needs a cellphone, cable tv, broadband access, sex cokes a day, Nike shoes,....
I see people spending money on stupid shit everyday and then complain they can't afford the basics. I really don't think we need to alter a the system as much as the liberals want it to be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
drhgl19
February 25, 2010 5:27 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
What in the world are "sex cokes"?
My best guess is it's something Mark Foley offered his pages, but I'm not sure.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 25, 2010 6:12 PM in reply to drhgl19
And where can I get some?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CehNehDeh
February 25, 2010 8:43 PM in reply to drhgl19
I hesitate to intrude as you all seem so smart (well some not so much:)but I have lurked for four to five years, oh shit it's six anyway, and had to sign up to say to drhgl19 your comment made me laugh OL and I'm still laughing. Great!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GOPinNYC
February 25, 2010 11:34 PM in reply to drhgl19
Obviously it is a typo of sorts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ramona
February 25, 2010 5:31 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
What nonsense. They should go without normal things like cable TV and cell phones in order to satisfy the greed of insurance companies? How would that help their health care?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
February 25, 2010 5:36 PM in reply to Ramona
Not to mention what it will do to the economy if Insurance Companies continue to grab a larger share of the GDP for less coverage. We all will be giving our entire paycheck to the insurance companies eventually if we follow GOP's reasoning to its logical conclusion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
counter coulter
February 25, 2010 5:43 PM in reply to Ramona
Obviously you don't get it. According to the Reaganites, people should be living in unheated hovels and living off of tap water and peanut-butter (generic brand of course) sandwiches o give their money to insurance companies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:19 PM in reply to counter coulter
Ketchup. You forgot ketchup.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
counter coulter
February 25, 2010 9:51 PM in reply to Official A
Good point. How could I have forgotten about Reagan's magical "vegetable".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:35 PM in reply to Ramona
Indeed. Cell phones and even cable television have become basic necessities in this society. Living without either would mean that you were living poorly, indeed.
There is no shame in being poor, but you shouldn't have to live poor just to pay the insurance companies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ramona
February 25, 2010 7:53 PM in reply to slb
Exactly. How about they try "living poor" for a change? Maybe make their profits in the millions instead of billions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
counter coulter
February 25, 2010 5:38 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Exactly right! It's not that health care is un-godly expensive (you ever see a COBRA statement?), it's that people are buying luxurious things like Coke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stretch, PhD
February 25, 2010 5:41 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
"Not everyone needs a cellphone, cable tv, broadband access, sex cokes a day, Nike shoes,.... "
Oh...I see. Everyone who makes under $40K a year should be restricted to landlines, shouldn't be able to watch quality programming on cable channels, can't do any internet-dependent work at home, and should wear cheap-o generic brand clothing. *slow clap*
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:38 PM in reply to Stretch, PhD
Basically shouldn't be able to watch *anything*, now that all television broadcast has gone digital. The converter boxes don't always work, and even then, you are pretty much limited to the sad fare the Big Three networks see fit to give you. (That is, mostly lame reality shows.)
And these days, being cut off from television means being cut off from much of contemporary culture.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
February 25, 2010 5:45 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Spoken like somebody who has never supported a family on $40K/year.
Try spending no more that $3,333/month next month on EVERYTHING, and get back to us. It takes a lot of economizing to squeeze a $1000 premium out of a $3000 budget. Try living on just $2,333 next month, and then remember there are many making less that $40K, too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
counter coulter
February 25, 2010 5:48 PM in reply to condew
Actually, you're being really generous with $3.3K. After taxes, etc. it'd be more like $2.3K.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
February 25, 2010 5:57 PM in reply to counter coulter
Agreed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:42 PM in reply to condew
And in addition to the premium, you would want to be setting aside money in the HSA for medicine, checkups, and other routine medical expenses.
I guess you could always give up eating a couple of days every week...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:41 PM in reply to counter coulter
Most people making $40k a year are paid weekly and most months only earn four weeks pay. FICA and Medicaid taxes take almost 8% (until the tax break kicks in at $106,800), so with no other expenses or withholding this person will have only $2,841 a month to live on. How much should this person with a family of four put aside in a healthcare savings account each month? $400 a month seems reasonable to me. Lets add $200 a month for catastrophic coverage for the family. $2,241 a month left over. That's about $18 per day per person. Surely that's enough to take care of rent, food, clothes, diapers, basic utilities, transportation, retirement savings, and the other necessities. And those extra four paychecks a year...heck, why not invest that in the stock market?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
innocence is a lie
February 25, 2010 5:50 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
In order to afford health insurance I would have to cut out:
1 of 2 vehicles
change full coverage on the one left to bare minimum coverage
drop my life insurance
get rid of my prepaid cell phone
get rid of my basic cable and internet
that pays roughly 1/3 of the monthly premium... so then I could...
switch to eating only hot dogs and ramen noodles
drink only water
never eat out ever again
wash my clothes half as often
shower twice a week
cut my own hair (and my wife's)
get rid of my wife's life insurance
tell my elderly parent to kick rocks and go live off their $1000 a month in SSI
set the family dog free
that would get me close to being able to afford the premiums...now to fill that HSA...whatever.
Easier choice is to realize that I can roll the dice, and if I lose, just declare bankruptcy and stick some good god-fearing republicans with the tab. In bankruptcy I can keep my vehicles, home and personal possessions, so why should I worry?
God bless America.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 5:55 PM in reply to innocence is a lie
You're almost right. Thanks to our corporatist overlords, you can NOT shield your home in bankruptcy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:44 PM in reply to Cal Gal
I think that depends on state law, doesn't it?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aikbay
February 25, 2010 6:06 PM in reply to innocence is a lie
You know you could live off rice and beans. Also too, do you really need 2 showers a week? You can also give up soap,laundry detergent and dish soap. Also start walking to work. It's good exercise. Just because your work is 12 miles away, you just have to start earlier in the day. You don't need the car. Also on the eating out thing - Mcdonalds has dollar deals. About the dog, I hear the chinese have dog food for sale, cheap, and it's not dog food made from dogs, it's food for dogs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnnieW
February 25, 2010 5:51 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Last year, the cost to insure an average family of 4 was $12,000, and that's average...which includes some pretty crappy plans, not just "cadillac" plans. It's gone up since then, too.
So do the math. Assume about 75% take home pay...so now it's roughly $2500 a month. Now minus $1000 a month for health insurance alone and that family is to live on $1500 a month. After all the frills of school supplies, car insurance, rent, used car expenses, food, heat, gas for transportation to work only, etc. that family should both be saving in their HSA accounts (tax exempt, woohoo, BFD), investing in their 401K for their retirement program and saving for their kid's future.
If you have a kid with asthma, diabetes, cerebral palsy, Down's Syndrome, etc. if you are lucky enough to find an insurer, the cost would be such that you can forego living on your own (maybe the grandparents can take in your family of 4) if you ONLY took home $2500 a month. WHICH IS NOT POOR!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 25, 2010 5:51 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
"They just have to be more responsible with the choices they make in life. Not everyone needs a cellphone, cable tv, broadband access, sex cokes a day, Nike shoes,...." food, clothing, shelter...
Let's add it up, shall we?
Unless they live in a cardboard box, shelter is going to cost at minimum $10,000/year for a small apartment, more likely $14k or more for reasonably sized digs to accommodate a family of four.
Income (state and federal) payroll and sales taxes come to another $8,000 or so.
Food, clothing and other necessities for a family of four probably come to another $12,000/year, and that's living pretty cheaply.
Then you've got transportation, school fees and other education costs, and a whole host of stuff that just comes up. Figure $2000/year, conservatively.
Add it all up and it comes to...$36,000/year...and they haven't saved a dime, bought anyone Christmas presents, gone out to McDonalds or anything else. Notice what's missing from this list? No cell phones. No HDTV. No Air Jordans. Oh yeah, and no health insurance. An absolute bare bones policy for a family of four costs $8000/year, which is more than they can afford, not to mention the copays and deductibles that such a policy would include.
In short, you are delusional, and emblematic of an entire class of opposition to this kind of reform. Basically, you've got yours, so tough shit for anyone else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boidster
February 25, 2010 6:14 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
I am not giving up my sex cokes. Nothing like a frosty cold post-coital Coca-Cola to wash the taste out of your mouth.
...
What?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
February 25, 2010 6:43 PM in reply to Boidster
Oh...god.
Yep. I'm gonna remember that one. Probably just as I'm taking a sip of my next Coke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 5:53 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
What's the average rent there in NY for an abode suitable for a family of 4, Gooper? Eh? Do you even KNOW? What does it cost to ride the subways these days, huh?
You're an ultramaroon if you think a family of 4 can SELF insure just by cutting out on "frivolous" stuff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joe Bob
February 25, 2010 7:11 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
That's the most asinine thing I've read all day. Pretending for a moment you aren't completely detached from reality anyway - lets tally up your luxury items.
Cell phone: $60
cable/internet: $100
'sex' pack of cokes every day: $60
pair of Nike shoes (for the sake of argument let's pretend they buy a pair every month): $75
That comes to $295. That, and another $700, will buy you a month of health insurance for a family.
In other words, said family could live in a darkened room, listen to a transistor radio for entertainment and walk around in flip-flops - and it would still be fucking impossible to afford health insurance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
farnsworth
February 25, 2010 7:44 PM in reply to GOPinNYC
Does it get tiring lying all the time?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
February 25, 2010 5:02 PM
The problem with a health savings account is that you can't save fast enough. It's not like purchasing insurance where you're liable for a fixed amount every month, and are guaranteed healthcare upon payment (at least until they dump you). With healthcare savings accounts, you couldn't gain access to healthcare that exceeds your savings. So, unless you're saving a considerable sum of money every month, you're basically out of luck should you need a visit to a specialist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 5:59 PM in reply to jsdc007
Not to mention that according to ReThuglican theory, you're supposed to INVEST the HSA to grow it until you need it.
We HAVE an HSA, and just like our invested retirment accounts, it dropped by about 40% in the last year of the Lil' Bush Administration.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ann Arbor
February 25, 2010 7:16 PM in reply to Cal Gal
And then -- and this is the scam for the wealthy -- if you don't need the money for health care, you can roll it over from year to year and essentially turn your HSA into a tax-deferred retirement plan.
It's a great thing for the 1% or so of the population who make enough that they're already maxing out their contributions to their 401(k)s and Roth IRAs and looking for another tax break. Not so great for the rest of us.
When was the last time the Republicans pushed something that would not disproportionately benefit the wealthy?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 7:46 PM in reply to Ann Arbor
1865?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rcs1975
February 25, 2010 5:25 PM
Exactly, @jsdc007. HSA's really do offer an excellent healthcare option -- if you're generally healthy and have significant savings or a hefty income when you sign up.
My previous company switched from regular health insurance to only offering an HSA. If your cost exceeds the amount in your HSA account, you're paying out of pocket. It was such a hardship on the vast majority of employees, that they had to offer a healthcare credit card to people to pay for their healthcare. Nothing like robbing Peter to pay Paul...
Oh yeah, to add insult to injury, money came out of your HSA every month to pay administrative fees to the HSA provider.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
February 25, 2010 5:42 PM in reply to rcs1975
HSAs are a great option but they're not right for everyone. I had an HSA for awhile and it was great. Then my family's health care situation changed. Suddenly it wasn't great, it was ruinous. Okay, so I switched to a PPO. The problem is the Republicans seem think EVERYBODY should be on HSAs, they don't want HSAs to just be an option people should have access to, they want it to be the One True Solution to Everything.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 6:55 PM in reply to rcs1975
It was such a hardship on the vast majority of employees, that they had to offer a healthcare credit card to people to pay for their healthcare.
Oh, God. Talk about owing your soul to the company store!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim_treglio
February 25, 2010 5:34 PM
I generally agree with all the comments, but I have a quibble with the title. Dr. Barrasso wasn't schooled by Obama, he was pwned. Oh, and HSA's work only when used by people who use the word "pwned," and don't have chronic conditions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DaveW
February 25, 2010 5:37 PM
Why did TPM cut off the clip? I wanted to see what Barrasso said back, or at least his reaction. Anybody have a link to the extended clip?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bill
February 25, 2010 5:40 PM
It is beyond despicable when Nancy Pelosi implies the Democrats move away from single payer was to placate Republicans. Democrats sacrificed American citizens' best interests, in order to assure the insurance industry that they would have a guaranteed 'customer base' and, if things got difficult for the insurance companies, they would get taxpayer subsidies.
Here’s what the people wanted when the Democrats started:
“A mere seven months ago (that would be around June 2009), The New York Times/CBS poll found that 72% of Americans ‘supported a government- administered insurance plan—something like Medicare for those under 65— that would compete for customers with private insurers.’”
From then until now, Obama has:
1. Rejected single payer;
2. Stiff-armed the government option;
3. Mandated individuals and families pay premiums to private sector insurers;
4. Assured billions in tax payer subsidies for private sector insurers;
5. Stipulated actual health care service at 80 cents of every dollar, while insurers can spend 20 cents of every premium dollar on lobbying, ‘sympathetic’ candidates, CEO bonuses, ‘administration’, fighting claims for treatment and, now we can add, participating on the new Federal ‘rate review’ Board.
The substance of the President’s proposal is the current costly, inefficient and ineffective insurance system on Federal steroids.
What the Democrats are trying to pass off as 'reform' is simply a plan to keep the current system in place, while supplementing it with taxpayers’ money in the form of mandated premium payments and Federal ‘subsidies’. That’s no reform at all.
And it is beyond despicable for Nancy Pelosi to imply the move away from single payer was anything more than corporate pressure to sell out the American people to corporate private for-profit institutions who can use our money (both premiums and taxes) to fight against our welfare ......... Despicable and dishonest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
condew
February 25, 2010 5:53 PM in reply to bill
I get annoyed with President Obama. But today, I think I find people who spam the blogs with copy-and-paste even more annoying.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
innocence is a lie
February 25, 2010 5:53 PM in reply to bill
100% agree. Despicable, dishonest collaborators.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 6:35 PM in reply to innocence is a lie
I think you're lost. The free republic called and wants you back over there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuro
February 25, 2010 6:17 PM in reply to bill
Single payer is a pipe dream. The public does not want it. Wake up from la la land. Quit blaiming Nancy and Obama. We just dont want single payer here in America. Friggen progressives are more trouble than they are worth...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 7:51 PM in reply to Kuro
Once more with feeling. You are allowed to have your own opinion but you can't make up your own facts.
Polls show that single payer of some kind or another (Medicare for all) is favored by way over half the respondents for any straightforward, nonpartisan poll.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kuro
February 26, 2010 12:02 AM in reply to Texas Aggie
That's bullshit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
runfastandwin
February 25, 2010 6:18 PM in reply to bill
Yeah since Boehner's plan is so much better. Let's go with that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Agateman
February 25, 2010 5:41 PM
There are an awful lot of people in the United States who are making 40-50K a year. A hell of a lot more than the Congressman would believe. But then again, he's a doctor...isn' he?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 5:43 PM
I want to know why all these fucking republican doctors are senators instead of practicing medicine. If they were as good at practicing medicine as they are as being senators, I think I just answered my own question.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
innocence is a lie
February 25, 2010 5:54 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Because you can make more money with less effort as a senator.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Gal
February 25, 2010 6:01 PM in reply to innocence is a lie
Unfortunately, you can't sue a Senator for malpractice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Measure for Measure
February 25, 2010 5:47 PM
Policy-wise, a large share of health care costs are spent by a small share of the population. So if those with HSAs shop around to find a cheaper dentist, it isn't going to make that much of a difference.
HSAs might be a good thing (or not). But they certainly aren't a serious way of addressing the slow breakdown of our health care system.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
flounder
February 25, 2010 6:01 PM
He should have asked if Barrasso's wife would still be alive if they had to use a medical savings account to pay for her breast cancer treatment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jthdane
February 25, 2010 6:03 PM
Except for a copuple of trolls, this was a good discussion. HSAs are a typical GOP scam. 1. It primarily benefits high income earners. 2. It generates fees for processing the accounts and investing the funds 3. It is moralistic because in theory it makes people (especialy those who consume sex cokes) think twice about whether they need certain medical treatment. Of course, what will happen is that people will defer preventative medical care to save a few bucks, only to end up in the emergency room with a life-threatening condition requiring care their HSA is too puny to cover.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
February 25, 2010 6:22 PM in reply to jthdane
That's a refreshing dose of reality. Thank you!
Down with sex cokes!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MyMy
February 25, 2010 6:08 PM
Thank you, Obama!
The real problem is that Republicans live in an "I am rich and nothing sick or loathesome can touch me.'
Pawlenty has just said that the way for the government to save money is to get rid of the federal law mandating ER care for anyone who needs it. He isn't imaging the filthy plagues that could lead to and that could definitely touch him and his family.
I guess you cannot teach someone not to be blind after they've been taught how smart it is to be blind to others.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Max Thrax
February 25, 2010 6:18 PM in reply to MyMy
No the real problems is that the Democrat Party can't do a goddamn thing with all the ammunition the GOP has handed them. Why oh why hasn't that cowardly party drummed the phrase 'country club conservative' into the public discourse? Infuriating. Really, really simple stuff and they can't or WON'T do it. Makes you wonder.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 6:32 PM in reply to Max Thrax
Another idiot heard from.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 7:55 PM in reply to lousgirl84
You've got a problem with calling people like Barrasso "country club conservatives?"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joshua the Teacher
February 25, 2010 6:17 PM
POTUS FTW!
HSA's are nothing more than an excuse to not provide insurance. The GOP wants to phase it in as a substitute for Medicare, whose elimination is their crown jewel. HSA's are to conservatives what single-payer is to liberals.
One works vastly better for working people, and the other is for those who can afford out-of-pocket emergency care in Hawaii when his heart groans under extreme stress.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bibimimi
February 25, 2010 6:17 PM
I'm staying away from the news 2day. The whole thing is making me ill.
A ROBUST PUBLIC OPTION---NOW!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
February 25, 2010 6:30 PM
Or they were such incompetent doctors they had no choice but to choose another profession. I can't imagine having one of these fools for my doctor.
My good friend has Anthem Blue Cross here iin So Cal. She said they already raised the rates 6 months ago under the radar. She has Lupus. She and her husband and daughter have a private policy. He's an architect and made good money but there are no new housing starts here and times have been tough. As of now they are paying $3600 a month for health insurance $2700 for she and her daughter and another $900 for her husband. So more than $40,000 a year in just health insurance premiums - more than their mortgage. They have depleted their entire savings account yet they are trapped in this plan because of her pre-existing conditions.
This is totally fucked.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Economides
February 25, 2010 7:11 PM in reply to lousgirl84
He should do everything in his power to get a federal government job. FEHB saves lives.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:01 PM
There was a lobby who had a doc,
Bare Ass O was his name-o.
(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-O
(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-O
(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-(clap)-O
Bare Ass O was his name-o.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim43
February 25, 2010 7:02 PM
Obama wins the day with his final remarks challenging Republicans to do "soul searching" and come up with simple ways that they can compromise on a health care bill. He laid out where he would drop some of his priorities and asked the same of the opposition. This is a request most Americans will see as perfectly reasonable and refreshing, but which the GOP will, of course, fail to deliver on. It summed up the day...
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cuchulain
February 25, 2010 7:03 PM
This is typical right wing Marie Antoinette garbage. What a greedy, selfish bastard. Let them eat cake and die. Let them put enough money away in a savings account to afford health care? You self-centered, out of touch piece of shit!
If people are out of work, or work at a low-paying job, how in hell are they supposed to save enough to pay for hospitals and doctors or medicine? What planet does Embarasso live on? Has he checked the price of basic medicines lately? They run up into the hundreds of dollars a month, even with insurance.
Or a four week round of chemo? That costs $28,000 where I live. And Barrasso thinks poor people can save up enough for that?
Damn, I despise right wingers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
February 25, 2010 7:46 PM in reply to cuchulain
What do medicines cost? About the same as one slip torn off a prescription pad and a few squiggles of ink, I'd say.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 7:09 PM
I don't understand this whole idea that people will consume too much health care unless they have to pay stiff amounts of money for it. I mean, I'm sure there are some few hypochondriacs that would hit the doctor's office regularly for any trivial imagined symptom if the visit were free, but would most people really be looking for excuses to park themselves in the waiting room of a doctor's office unless they were pretty sure they needed to be there? I know that I wouldn't--I can't imagine that too many others would.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
February 25, 2010 9:29 PM in reply to slb
Ask any doctor - people who wait TOO LONG to get treated are far more numerous and a far bigger problem than people who get treated when they don't need it. The Republican idea is to get people to use less health care resources (i.e. wait longer). This is like saving money by not changing the oil in your car.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
February 25, 2010 10:12 PM in reply to slb
It's real. It's actually been a serious problem with some union and pension administered self-insured plans that charge nothing for any service or medication. Serious as in "money going out of the plan faster than it's going in." But adding in some fairly modest co-pays seems to bring it back under control pretty quickly. People who have the 40k per year Cadillac plans that charge no co-pays or deductibles have the same problem, but the insurers just pass the cost on to the people who don't have them.
And yet, it doesn't seem to be a problem in places like Canada or Britain. Whether it's just that people in those countries have a better sense of social responbility (which they unquestionably do) or whether they find ways to make going to the doctor just that teensy bit unpleasant enough to deter it without undermining support for the system as a whole is unclear to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Weiwen Ng
February 25, 2010 7:59 PM
well, let's assume that Rep/Dr Barasso, as well as Drs Boustany and Coburn know medicine well. What Obama did is that he really took them to school on policy. Those folks should have stuck to medicine.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
February 25, 2010 8:14 PM in reply to Weiwen Ng
Good point. But, I wouldn't have any of those assholes as my doctor either!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
drjackanapes
February 25, 2010 8:08 PM
So, after reading this thread, and all of the vile name-calling, I'm more convinced than ever that as a country, we're FUBAR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ethan
February 25, 2010 8:15 PM
Did Sen. Barrasso come to the summit stoned? WTH was with that anecdote he made about: "At our first week of medical school, they gave us a stephoscope to listen to our patients, to care for them as if they were our own children."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PhilipTaylor
February 25, 2010 9:00 PM
Republicanism is an ideology based on Civic Virtue. Civic Virtue = Community Good!
It seems that have forgotten the "Community Good" in favor of the ones who pay for their Reelection.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Number6
February 25, 2010 9:05 PM
News flash -- Boehner announces that the GOP Health Care Plan is really the cornerstone of their solution to the illegal immigration problem. It'll not only make illegal immigration worthless but will force the riff-raff to emigrate to third world countries like Canada and the Netherlands.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ParallaxView
February 25, 2010 11:53 PM
The problem is you don't want to combine the private industry with government because that's where you get lobbyists lobbying for money for the private sector.
Brittan has a completely socialized system and it costs less than half per person than it does here in the US. Contrary to way people are told in the US, people in Brittan can have any sort of hair brained health care they please and it still costs less than half per person
http://www.examiner.com/x-11437-Salt-Lake-Independent-Examiner~y2009m7d29-British-health-care-system-covers-placebos
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joekuh
February 26, 2010 12:12 AM
I'm still laughing @ sex cokes..I created this name just to say that!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rose1990
February 26, 2010 12:17 PM
I love watching all of you argue about what you would have to live without in order to have an HSA. Try living on Social Security Disability (which I PAID for by working my ass off from age 14) at $1470. a month. Out of that comes my rent -- 44%. Then my Medigap premium and my Part D premium -- 19%. The four-out-of-six medications I take that Medicare will not cover, plus copays, medical equipment and other out-of-pocket medical expenses -- 22%. My nutrition is so poor, I'm getting sicker and sicker, resulting in two VERY expensive hospitalizations and two emergency room visits requiring ambulance transportation. Every time I see my PCP with a problem, he refers me to a specialist, even for things that could easily be ruled out with a blood test or an x-ray. Who's paying for all this? You are. And the disabled, as far as I can tell, have not even been a part of the conversation. We are invisible. Ghosts. Social Security and Medicare just crossing their fingers that we will die soon. And it's a good bet, because a pretty fair portion of us do die, either waiting the 5 months for SS approval, the 2 years and five months for Medicare, or as a result of trying to live on nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tosh
June 6, 2010 3:02 AM
Most people making $40k a year are paid weekly and most months only earn four weeks pay. FICA and Medicaid taxes take almost 8% (until the tax break kicks in at $106,800), so with no other expenses or withholding this person will have only $2,841 a month to live on. How much should this person with a family of four put aside in a healthcare savings account each month? $400 a month seems reasonable to me. Lets add $200 a month for catastrophic coverage for the family. $2,241 a month left over. That's about $18 per day per person. Surely that's enough to take care of rent, food, clothes, diapers, basic utilities, transportation, retirement savings, and the other necessities. And those extra four paychecks a year...heck, why not invest that in the stock market?
m65 kamagra
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?