Specter repeats public option support.. but again, what about EFCA?

Sen. Specter repeats support for public option to packed PA health care forum in DC .. good, but.. Ahem.. Employee Free Choice... ahem

Specter Comes Out for Public Option

OK, give the senator credit where credit is due. Via PoliticsPA, June 22:

Specter said he supports Sen. Charles Schumer’s health care reform proposal, which includes a public health plan, the central part of Democratic reform efforts. Specter, who initially wavered on his support of the public option after switching parties, touted Schumer’s plan to make the government-backed insurance subject to the same rules as private insurers.

Now, what about the Employee Free Choice Act?

TPM's Josh Marshall cuts through industry spin against public option

Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: Public option only a 'threat' to private health insurance if it's better

More Marshall on public option: lower premiums, lower administrative costs, no need to produce profits -- "these 'problems' sound remarkably like 'the point' of the whole exercise."

Krugman and doctors' study make case for public option

NY Times' Krugman Thursday on health care reform: "Don’t trust the insurance industry." Says we need public option to keep them honest.

Report from Thursday (Amer. Journal of Medicine via Reuters): Medical bills involved in over 60% of U.S. personal bankruptcies; over 75% of these bankrupt families had health "insurance" but "still were overwhelmed by their medical debts." (The study's authors support single-payer, which pretty much everyone says won't happen this year, but public option can and should.)

Health care: Obama re-emphasizes he wants public option included

You can read the full text of today's letter from President Obama to Congress at this page on the White House site.

Jonathan Cohn has an interesting take on it at the New Republic's "The Treatment" health care blog.

Karen Tumulty's take at Time's "Swampland" blog is also worth a read.

In related news, the New York Times reported today that (surprise) the health insurance industry is balking at including the small business market in health care reform:

In other words, policy analysts and others say, unless the insurance industry is willing to give some of the same ground to small businesses that they have ceded to individual policy holders, a big part of what is wrong with the nation’s health care system may not get fixed.
More than 40 percent of the private American labor force works for companies with fewer than 100 workers. Leaving small businesses out of the federal effort to overhaul health care would be “a big hole in any reform proposal,” said Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit health care research group that advocates significant changes to the current system.

As the president re-emphasized today, for-profit insurers need real competition from a public plan. Otherwise that kind of nonsense will continue.

More reasons we need public option in health care

From Saturday's New York Times, here's more evidence why we need a public insurance option in health care reform, to keep the insurance companies honest and provide real competition for them --

IS your medical insurance bad for your health? If you have a high-deductible plan, the answer may be yes.
The investment firm Fidelity recently surveyed employees at various companies who had opted for a high-deductible health plan linked to a health savings account. About half of those workers said they or a family member had chosen not to seek medical care for minor ailments as many as four times in the last year to avoid paying the out-of-pocket expenses.
As any doctor will tell you, small health problems left untreated can become big problems, warns Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy at the health care advocacy group Families USA. “This is just one of the many high-deductible pitfalls consumers need to watch out for,” Ms. Stoll said. ...
low-income families don’t benefit from the tax breaks associated with health savings accounts the way middle- and high-income earners do.
Even if you can afford the costs, the loopholes that insurers often weave into these plans to reduce premiums can mean that even after your deductible is met, you may not have the coverage you need to handle a serious illness or accident.

The article goes on to describe other charming features like caps on lifetime coverage, caps on doctor visits, and this beaut - caps on hospitalization costs -- for example:

Mr. Claxton has seen policies that so severely restrict hospitalization that they will not pay for the first day you are admitted. “That’s the day when you’re most likely to have the most costs,” he said. “Think of it: You’re admitted to the E.R., you have surgery and you spend the night in the I.C.U., and none of it is covered.”

As I've blogged about before, including competition from a public option (think Medicare for people under 65) is one of the biggest things we can do to rein in out-of-control health care cost inflation. And it would actually COVER people. What a concept!

In Senate race punditry, Pa. pundits Madonna and Young give their take on Sestak running for Senate.

Mystery solved? 'PrimaryArlenSpecter' site expands

Note that the posting (excerpted below) that's on DailyKos today doesn't actually say Evan Miller and his New Argument co-founder are responsible for the anonymous site, but it suggests that. (Here's my initial post about this, from Thursday.)

TAKE ACTION: Tell Specter to give cancer research money back!
by evandmiller [Subscribe]
Share this on Twitter - TAKE ACTION: Tell Specter to give cancer research money back!

Sat May 09, 2009 at 11:24:54 AM PDT
Adam Green did great work coining the term cancer-gate to describe Arlen Specter tricking the public into thinking they were funding cancer research when really they were funding his 2010 reelection campaign.
It seems that Specter will do anything to get reelected.
Join myself and Andrew Perez, founders of The New Argument in demanding that Specter give that money to its rightful recipients - an organization that actually works to advance medical research.
Sign the letter at CancerGate.PrimaryArlenSpecter.com.
While you there, go to PrimaryArlenSpecter.com to tell specter to support a public healthcare plan!

Health care - HHS secretary makes clear: It would be a public OPTION, not a takeover

From the Los Angeles Times:

Obama backs public and private healthcare insurance
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius tells Congress that the administration wants to create a government-run program to encourage competition.
...
The Obama administration's senior healthcare official Wednesday flatly rejected the idea of taking overthe nation's medical insurance system, saying the federal government did not want to assume management of healthcare coverage....
Sebelius responded that states for years had offered their government employees a choice between a public insurance program and a private plan for healthcare coverage.
"It can work very effectively, and does work very effectively," she said, indicating that such arrangements could be a model for overhauling insurance markets nationally.

Also, from the Associated Press today:
Sources: Senators weigh 3 government health plans

President Barack Obama and many Democrats say a government option would serve as a check to keep the private insurance industry honest. ...

The three approaches being discussed are:
_Create a plan that resembles Medicare, administered by the Health and Human Services department.
_Adopt a Medicare-like plan, but pick an outside party to run it. That way government officials would not directly control the day-to-day operations.
_Leave it up to individual states to set up a public insurance plan for their residents.

And this part jumps out at me -- boldface added:

If the public plan were open to all employers and individuals — and if it paid doctors and hospitals the same as Medicare — it would quickly grow to 131 million members, while enrollment in private insurance plans would plummet, the study found.
By paying Medicare rates the government plan would be able to set premiums well below what private plans charge. Employers and individuals would rush to sign up.

UPDATE:

And here's a quick check of where major Democratic PA Senate candidates or potential candidates stand on the public option:

Senator Specter: Opposed (for now)

Congressman Sestak: Reportedly 'unsure'

Joe Torsella: We're awaiting his response

Daily Kos poll of PA Senate race; Roundup of other developments

If you haven't seen it yet, Daily Kos commissioned a PA poll and two key findings are:

... only 37 percent of Democrats are definitely committed to Specter.

Specter (D) 55 Toomey (R) 31
Sestak (D) 37 Toomey (R) 32
Torsella (D) 35 Toomey (R) 33
Even the guys who no one has ever heard of are beating Toomey.

No wonder the White House is reportedly concerned.

You've probably also seen that Ridge decided not to run. Smart move.

One more "in case you missed it": Politico reports some are questioning the propriety of Sen. Specter's other campaign site that's named "Specter for the Cure." (Of course, cancer patients would also benefit from having a public option in health care.)

Who's behind mystery 'PrimaryArlenSpecter' site that focuses on health care reform?

I received an e-mail today letting me know about a "Primary Arlen Specter" site that is collecting names and e-mails of people who support including a public option in health care reform. The site says the following:

When we reach 5,000 signatures, we will hand deliver this letter to the office of Senator Arlen Specter.

It doesn't say who's behind it. I ran a whois search, but the site's registration is private.

(Oh, and I've saved two screen captures of the page in case it were to disappear.)

(And I'm not anonymous -- see this post from yesterday. :-)

Phila. Daily News editorial outlines the case for public option in health care reform

Senator Specter and challengers, listen up! :-)

An editorial in today's Philadelphia Daily News does a good job making the case for a public option in health care reform:

So at the least, Americans should have a choice between private insurers and what has been dubbed a "public option" - a Medicare-style program or even something along the lines of the federal employees' insurance system, which is administered through private insurers but paid for by the government.
The key is to provide a program that doesn't divert significant amounts of premiums to CEO salaries, administrative costs, shareholder dividends - and financial incentives to deny you care.

It's fascinating to watch private insurers scramble to head off actual reform: Now, they promise, they will be good: They will no longer discriminate against people because of pre-existing conditions. They won't charge women higher premiums. Regulate us, they plead, just don't make us compete. But private insurers would have to be regulated in ways never seen before to repair the system. Competition might force changes no politician could.

Sestak Unsure on Public Option in Health Care Reform

This has the potential to be a BIG deal. From Talking Points Memo:

...there may not be much daylight between Specter and Sestak on at least one of these issues. Sestak says he's still unsure whether he supports a public health insurance option as an element of comprehensive health reform. He plans to discuss the issue further with SEIU president Andy Stern and others and come to a decision in the coming weeks, but if he ultimately comes down against that policy, he'll be in just about the same camp as his new rival, who came out against a public option over the weekend. Obviously that means less in the House (where Sestak serves) than it does in the Senate (where Specter potentially wields enormous influence), but no less a figure than Howard Dean has said that comprehensive health reform requires a public option.
Last night, Stern told ABC news that "[i]t is hard to imagine any union supporting a candidate in the Democratic Party for the US Senate who doesn't have strong positions on both healthcare and Employee Free Choice."...

Here's part of a Specter Watch post from Sunday about public option in health care reform:

This is one of the biggest issues of the year and a priority for President Obama (and it's good policy, too, by the way). Including competition from a public option (think Medicare for people under 65) is one of the biggest things we can do to rein in out-of-control health care cost inflation.